It is the to Stand Up

8/3/2019 It is the to Stand Up

1/9

The Chief Minister Punjab Dated: 28 th December, 2011

Subject: Wrong Rehabilitation Project (Subsidiary weir and divide walls)

going to be constructed at Jinnah Barrage, that costs more than

a new barrage to the Nation, endangers Jinnah Barrage itself;

poses serious threat to Mianwali and the surrounding areas

Project Management Organization (PMO) misleads Chairman

Human Right Cell, the Honable Chief Justice of Pakistan, Chief

Minister Punjab and Authorities by submitting incorrect

statements.

Sir,

A mega project naming Jinnah Barrage Rehabilitation and Modernization Projectis at its implementation stage. A subsidiary weir is to be constructed downstreamof Jinnah Barrage. World Bank has sanctioned a loan of US$ 145 million for thispurpose.

This weir is conceptually wrong and shall reduce the discharge capacity of Jinnah

Barrage by at least 25%. The experts of MMP (JV) unanimously rejected its

construction. Latter on the Consultants/PMO (Project Management Organization)

amended the design reports and proposed the subsidiary weir again. However, the

name of Dr Zulfiqar Ali was kept as Originator and Checker in the reports. Theissue of fake design reports and the misuse of Dr Zulfiqar Ali s name have been

raised at appropriate forums.

The rejection of subsidiary weir was not acceptable to those involved as

their chance to benefit would be hampered and the already constructed

subsidiary weir at Taunsa barrage would be exposed.

The issue of fake design reports and wrong rehabilitation report was brought to the

knowledge of Worthy Chief Minister Punjab. A meeting of Panel of

Experts/Advisory Group was held on August 4, 2009 and Dr Zulfiqar Ali was called

under the instructions of Chief Minister Punjab. In the meeting none of the

members except Engr Munsoob Ali Zaidi (Designer of Taunsa Subsidiary Weir)

advocated the subsidiary weir construction d/s of the Jinnah barrage. But the


2/9

project got approved and subsequently World Bank sanctioned US$ 145 million for

this purpose.

The issue was brought to the knowledge of the Chairman Human Rights Cell,

Honorable Chief Justice of Pakistan. Chief Sectary Punjab on behalf of PMOsubmitted to the Honorable Chief Justice of Pakistan that;

Having giving patient hearing to the petitioner (Dr Zulfiqar Ali), majority of the

members of the group considered petitioners proposal h ypothetical and

impracticable. Those who opposed the proposal included Dr. Abdul Sattar

Chairman Civil Engineering Department, University of Engineering &

Technology Lahore; the in-charge of the petitioner.

Note: Instead of such vague statement they should have defended the projectto be implemented at the Jinnah Barrage (Subsidiary Weir & Divide Walls).

It is not clear whether the Panel of Experts/Departmental Advisory Group is

recommending the project or not.

The Chief Sectary also assured the Honorable Chief Justice that there will be an

independent review of the hydraulic design of the subsidiary weir by the Project

Implementation Consultants (PIC) the Joint Venture of ACE, NESPAK & SMEC.

Statement submitted on behalf of PIC is; "Project Implementation Consultants

(PIC) have submitted design review report showing satisfaction on the

hydraulic design of Jinnah Barrage Rehabilitation Project".

Whereas, Design Review Report Executive Summary (page 1, Annex -E) states;

"Hydraulic Design stands verified through two physical model studies; we

believe that the design is already approved by the Client and therefore, our

comments mainly cover the issues related to Tender Stage Design; ---- to

make it fit for construction."

On Page 2, the report further states "Value of 100 years return flood has

substantially increased after the recent flood event and therefore reservoir water

levels and design parameters of the scheme need to revised/modified. Under the


3/9

circumstances a fresh study is needed to ascertain the revised and modified

design parameters and to evaluate the performance of energy dissipation

system."

It is very clear that PIC has not reviewed the hydraulic design of the subsidiaryweir; rather they raised serious concerns about its hydraulic functioning.

In fact this project is not recommended by Key Hydraulic Specialist and Model

Expert and also not approved by the Panel of Experts/Departmental Advisory

Group. In spite of all this; a weir and divide walls downstream of Jinnah Barrage

are going to be constructed.

Worthy Chief Minister it is highly disturbing that incorrect/misleading statements

have been submitted to the Honorable Chief Justice of Pakistan and the ChiefMinister Punjab. This is fraud of highest nature and a national loss. Nation is

looking up to you to save this national asset and bring the criminals to justice.

Regards

Prof Dr Zulfiqar Ali

Professor Hydraulic Engineering,

Key Hydraulic Specialist, Jinnah Barrage Rehabilitation Project

P10, Staff Colony, UET Lahore

Cell # 0333-4547180


4/9

IT IS TO TIME TO STAND UP

Prof Dr Zulfiqar Ali (Civil Engineering Department, UET Lahore)

In the current era when countries are progressing and stabilizing their economies and

working for the prosperity of their people we have started a journey that instead of leadingus forward has hastened our return to the age of the caveman.

PIA, Pakistan Railway, Pakistan Steel are on their last legs. WAPDA, Punjab Irrigation andcountless other departments are on the brink of destruction and devastation. To me it feelsas if we as a nation have failed mainly because of our failure to stand up to what is wrong.Our assets are all on the verge of bankruptcy because everything we do is for us and ourimmediate family and not for the country.

We also have a lamentable habit of borrowing without taking into account the fact thatwhat we borrow is not ours but merely something that will have to be given back with

interest. Then there is the fact that each and every one of our institutes is in the hands of morally corrupt and unworthy people who consider their duties as an opportunity to furtherfill up their already full family coffers.

In the year 2004 the Punjab Irrigation Department initiated a mega project funded by theWorld Bank to rehabilitate and modernize the barrages of Punjab. Project ManagementOrigination (PMO) was established to finalize and execute the rehabilitation works. Sinceits creation the PMO is on the pay-role of the World Bank.

Billions of rupees worth of structures are being Proposed/Constructed. A chosen number of high-flying Consulting Firms (National and International) and a few retired irrigation

engineers are leading these projects. The same people are made a part of the DepartmentalAdvisory Group. Some of them also happen to be the members of Inquiry Tribunals.

In 2007 the Rehabilitation and Modernization of Taunsa Barrage was completed with theexpenditure of above 11 billion rupees. A weir/wall was constructed at a distance of approximately 800 ft from the barrage. The project was completed under the banner of Emergency Rehabilitation of Taunsa Barrage . The weir and the barrage collectivelyraised upstream water level during the 2010 floods. And because of this the Left MarginBarrage (LMB) could not stand up to the pressure of the water. And alas DistrictMuzafargarh drowned.

The point to be pondered upon is that why a flood which passed through Jinnah andChasma barrages could not pass through Taunsa barrage even though its length andcapacity is 500 ft and 150000 cusec more than that of the Jinnah barrage?

This construction of a weir on an already existing barrage is conceptually wrong as provedby nature in the form of the 2010 flooding but as the designer of the weir on Taunsa was amember of the Flood Inquiry Tribunal this fatal mistake was somehow swept under the rug.


5/9

Jinnah Barrage Rehabilitation Project i s somewhat similar to Taunsas RehabilitationProject. In other words, a weir will be constructed 600 ft downstream of Jinnah barrage.The existing divide walls are to be extended from the barrage to the weir. This subsidiaryweir/wall is 6 ft and 8ft high in front of weir and undersluices sections of the barrage,respectively and is 3800 ft long. Its constructing cost will be more than the cost of constructing a new barrage. The World Bank has approved US$145 million for theconstruction of the weir.

This weir will decrease the capacity of Jinnah barrage by about 25%. There will be anincrease of 9.5 ft in the water level comparable to the existing level at the discharge of 1100000 cusec. In short it is bound to destroy Jinnah barrage and the district of Mianwali.Its design reports are bogus and carry the name Dr Zulfiqar Ali as Originator andChecker even though he considers the construction of such a structure to be unnecessaryand highly destructive.

Mega projects are also being planned for the eastern rivers. India is storing water in itsdams and the eastern rivers flowing in Pakistan have been transformed into dry beds. TheProject Management Organization for Punjab barrages, Departmental Advisory Group, IRIand the Consultants are considering the construction of Spillways to increase the capacityof Sulemanki and Islam barrages. By and large spillways are being constructed on emptyriver beds while subsidiary weirs are being constructed on the Indus River having heavywater flow. These pointless projects are capable of impairing the irrigation system of Punjab beyond repair.

And because Pakistan is the land of the rich and the powerful and the influential the voiceof the common man is unheard. But it is my belief that it is time we stood up to protectwhat is ours.


6/9

A wrong rehabilitation project that will reduce the discharge capacity of Jinnah Barrage and may drown Mianwali

Prof Dr Zulfiqar Ali

Civil Engineering Department, UET Lahore

Hydraulic Specialist, Jinnah Barrage Rehabilitation and Modernization Project

Jinnah Barrage Rehabilitation and Modernization ProjectTerms of Reference for Consulting Services for the Supervision of Construction of Works for Rehabilitation and Modernization of Jinnah Barrage includes;

the construction of a 2807 ft long subsidiary weir 600 ft downstream from the barrage axis

with its top at EL 676 ft, and two dentate undersluices of subsidiary weirs in left and right

undersluices with top EL 675 ft (width of left undersluices is 462 ft and right under sluices is

435 ft- both with slots) each in front of the undersluices portion in line with subsidiary weir

(Figure 1). Barrage works associated with the subsidiary weir include construction of

navigation separation wall, left and right guide banks extension, fish ladders and extended

divide walls and replenishing stone apron downstream of the existing barrage.

Jinnah BarrageCrest EL678

Subsidiary Weir

Crest EL676

Left Divide Wall

Left UndersluicesCrest EL675

Subsidiary WeirCrest EL675

Figure 1 proposed subsidiary weir and associated works at the Jinnah Barrage.


7/9

Who Designed this ProjectThe project mentioned above has already been approved by the Punjab IrrigationDepartment, ACNIC and the World Bank and is at implementation stage. The proposedproject is a complete wastage of money and human resources and shall have serious

hydraulic consequences. I, the Key Hydraulic Specialist (Dr Zulfiqar Ali) am categoricallydenying the recommendation of this project, whereas my name is written as Originatorand the Approver for the Project. Model Expert (Abdul Shakoor) mentioned that he hasnot recommended the project; as the subsidiary weir failed on physical model in protectingloose stone apron. The issue of fake design reports was brought to the knowledge of HeadPMO (Punjab Barrages) and a legal notice has also been given to the Consultants.

In spite of bringing this matter to the knowledge of the Secretary Irrigation & Power, TheChief Minister Punjab, Honorable Chief Justices of Lahore High Court and SupremeCourt and Flood Inquiry Tribunal (Punjab) the PMO has appointed Supervision

Consultants for its construction. Detail Design Consultants Reports negate the Construction of Subsidiary Weir at the Jinnah BarrageAlternative Report (Final) April 2008, Page 79

Subsidiary weir with crest EL676, EL675 at about 800ft from centerline of existingstructure, raise water levels upstream of the subsidiary weir and subsequently of theupstream of the barrage and reduce discharging capacity and endangers upstreambreaches. Subsidiary weir structure is massive and expensive as compared to the existingbarrage structure. More O & M cost for maintaining two independent structures.

Design Report (Final) May 2009 (page 11-12)

The material on the bed of river will start moving and deposit in the U/S side of structureproposed to be constructed about 600ft downstream of the barrage for the Q>779000cusec. Below this discharge the structure is safer against bed load deposition. The materialis likely to deposit in the undersluices portions between two structures as the crest level of the barrage is lower by 3ft comparing with the main weir .

Dr Zulfiqar Ali in his published work noted that the proposed project ishaving serious hydraulic consequences:

The Jinnah Barrage rehabilitation project - prospects and concernsDam Engineering Volume XX ISSUE 3 by Dr Zulfiqar Ali

(International Papers of Technical Excellence)

A subsidiary weir either at 600ft or 800ft would not have any hydraulic/structuralsignificance; instead it could result in further launching of loose stone. An extension of


8/9

divide walls will develop three channels between barrage and subsidiary weir andconstruction would be challenging as deep scour pits already exist. Failure of divide wallscould be catastrophic, as repair work would be very difficult.

Trepidations of proposed subsidiary weir at Jinnah barrage in

supper floodsInternational Conference on Water Resources and Management (March 2011) by Dr

Zulfiqar Ali

Jinnah Barrage is in good health and its hydraulic design is adequate. Doubling shallreduce the discharge capacity of Jinnah barrage by at least 25%. Jinnah barrage shallfurther lose its discharging capacity due to the deposition of gravelly material upstream of the proposed weir. After doubling, the increase in flood level u/s of barrage shall be about3.6ft, 5.5ft and 9.5ft at the discharge of 950000 cusec, 1000000 cusec and 1100000 cusec,respectively. Doubling of Jinnah barrage poses serious threats to the Jinnah barrage and

the inhabitants of Mianwali district. Weir Construction D/S of a Barrage is Conceptually Wrong

The barrages/weirs divert water from rivers to the canals. They also cause obstruction tothe normal flow and may endanger upstream breaches/flooding if not designed properly.Width and crest height of a barrage/weir is selected cautiously so that the flood waterpasses easily. If specific discharge is more; the crest height is kept low and water level isregulated by gates called a barrage.

Doubling of a barrage is the construction of a second weir on its downstream . Boththe structures are at a reasonable distance and there is a normal river bed (erodible) inbetween. As mentioned earlier, a weir downstream of Taunsa barrage has been constructedand a similar weir is being proposed at the Jinnah barrage.

Doubling increases the dissipation of energy between the two structures by raising tailwater depth. Just downstream of the barrage maximum energy dissipates; consequentlythe river bed scour deep and a pool develops. The loose stone apron at the end of abarrage launches more after the Doubling.

At low discharge, there is sedimentation between the two structures which raise river bedand consequently the water level. The increase in water level badly effects the functioning

of undersluices and silt excluders. Drowning ratio at the barrage increases and differentialhead decreases. This reduces the discharge capacity of a barrage that is a Nationalcrime.

Barrages are low head hydraulic structures. The velocity remains low (less than 40 ft/sec)and there is hardly a chance of cavitations. Therefore the structural damage to thestilling basin floor, glacis and blocks remain unchanged with and without theDoubling.


9/9

Taunsa ExperiencesTaunsa barrage discharge capacity is about 1.1 million cusec which is higher than thecapacities of Jinnah and Chashma barrages. Exceptionally high flood of Year 2010 passedJinnah and Chashma barrages easily whereas uncontrolled breach in the left marginal

bund at Taunsa barrage and exceptionally high level flood that drowned the districtMuzaffargarh, has alarmed every one. News papers reported What went wrong at theTaunsa Barrage and the Failure of a World Bank Funded Project.

It is to be noted that a subsidiary weir has already been constructed downstream of theTaunsa barrage to raise tail water level. It is yet not clear whether the 8ft high subsidiaryweir raised the water level upstream of the barrage and the left marginal bund breached.The causes for the breach should be established before constructing a similar weir at theJinnah barrage.

Supreme Judicial Commission Findings (Taunsa Barrage)

As was the fact that, with a critical but controversial change in design, the LMB had beenarmored by Stone Pitching under multi-billion rupee WB project executed in 2004-2006and 2008-2009, disregarding professional reservations about structural innovations thusenforced at a cost to public and nation. Additionally the construction of a weir had alsoreportedly contributed to intensified pressure on the LMB

Flood Inquiry Tribunal (Punjab) Findings

At Jinnah Barrage the u/s and d/s water levels at various discharges are given as under;

Year U/S Water Level (EL) D/S Water Level (EL) Discharge (cfs)

1992 692.5 688.4 8464040

2010 692.5 689.4 936453

2010 693.0 689.5 870000

Tail water levels are quite ok and are not showing any retrogression as reported in theFeasibility Study. Further, increase of tail water level by constructing a weir looksunjustified and shall reduce the discharge capacity of Jinnah barrage.

With complete responsibility I state that the construction of weir D/S of a barrage is conceptually wrong and therefore cannot be justified. The weir construction at Jinnah barrage shall be anengineering blunder and this poor Nation cannot bear the

consequences.

Documents

It is the to Stand Up