Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 2758-IN

INDIA

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

March 20, 1978

South Asia Project:s DepartmentAgriculture Division C

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

US$1.00 = Rupees (Rs) 8.40

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (METRIC SYSTEM)

1 meter (m) = 3.28 feet (ft)1 kilometer (km) = 0.62 miles (mi)1 hectare (ha) 3 = 2.47 acres (ac)1 million cubic meters (Mm ) = 810 acre-feet (ac-ft)1 thousand million cubic 3

feet (TMC) 28.32 MT1 cubic foot per second (cusec) = 0.028 3m Is1 liter per hectare (1/ha) 14 ft /1,000 ac1 ton = 1,000 kilograms (kg)

2,205 pounds

ABBREVIATIONS

AO - Agricultural Officer

ARDC - Agricultural Refinance and Development CorporationAS - Agricultural SupervisorATS - Auto Transformer StarterCD - Department of Community DevelopmentCP - Cooperative ProgramDA - Department of AgricultureFAO - Food and Agriculture OrganizationGOI - Government of IndiaGOUP - Government of Uttar PradeshHP - Horse PowerHYV - High Yielding VarietiesICB - International Competitive BiddingJE - Junior Engineer

LCB - Local Competitive BiddingM&E - Monitoring and EvaluationOD - Outer DiameterO&M - Operation and MaintenanceSGD - State Groundwater DirectorateTDC - Terai Development CorporationTW - Tubewell Wing

VLW - Village Level Worker

GLOSSARY

Kharif - wet season: June to SeptemberRabi - dry season: October to May

FISCAL YEAR

GOI, GOUP - April 1 - March 31

1/ Until September 24, 1975, the Rupee was officially valued at a fixedPound Sterling rate. Since then it has been fixed against a "basket"of currencies. As these currencies are floating, the US Dollar/Rupeeexchange rate is subject to change. Conversions in this report havebeen made at US$l to Rs 8.40.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Table of Contents

Page No.

I. PROJECT BACKGROUND ...................................... 1

Introduction ............................................ 1Agriculture in India ..................................... 2Irrigation in India ..................................... 2

II. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH .............................. 4

A. An Overview ......................................... 4General ............................................ 4The Economy ........................................ 4Employment and Rural Poverty ....................... 5Public Services .................................... 5

B. The Agriculture Sector .............................. 6Climate ............................................ 6Topography and Regional Division 6.................. 6soils .............................................. 6Land Use ........................................... 7Farm Size and Land Tenure .......................... 7Crops and Cropping Pattern ......................... 8Agriculture Production Trends ...................... 8

C. Irrigation and Power ................................ 9Water Resources and Utilization .................... 9General Trends in Irrigation Development .... ....... 10Power Supply and Demand ............................ 11

III. THE PROJECT AREA ........................................ 12

General ................................................. 12Topography, Soils and Climate ........................... 13Groundwater Resources ................................... 13Land Holdings ........................................... 14Agricultural Situation .................................. 14

This report is based on the findings of a Bank mission which visited Indiain August/September 1979, comprised of: Ms. M. Nguyen, Messrs. J. Vivasand J. O'Brien (IDA); Mr. W. Barber (Consultant); and Mr. D. Campbell (FAO/CP). Mr. J. Lindt (IDA) also participated during pre-appraisal mission inFebruary 1979.

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

- ii -

Table of Contents (Cont'd)

Page No.

IV. PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC TUBEWELLS ......................... 15

General ................................................. 15

Past Performance ........................................ 15

Project Formulation and Objectives ...................... 16

V. THE PROJECT ............................................. 18

Project Components ...................................... 18

Description of a Tubewell System ........................ 18

Planning Criteria ....................................... 20

Design Criteria ......................................... 21

Operation and Maintenance Criteria ...................... 23

Project Costs ........................................... 24

Financing ............................................... 26

Procurement ............................................. 26

Disbursements ........................................... 27

Accounts and Audits ..................................... 27

VI. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT ............................. 28

The Tubewell Wing of the Irrigation Department ... ....... 28

Organization Within a Tubewell Command Area .... ......... 29

Monitoring and Evaluation ............................... 29

Progress Review and Reporting Equipment .... ............. 30

Training ................................................ 30

Cost Recovery ........................................... 31

VII. AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT ................................ 34

Cropping Patterns ....................................... 34

Crop Yields ............................................. 34

Agricultural Production ................................. 34

Water Supply and Demand ................................. 35

Agricultural Supporting Services ........................ 35

VIII. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION .............................. 37

General ................................................. 37

Income Effect ........................................... 38

Returns and Costs of Water .............................. 38

Economic Evaluation .................................... 39

Sensitivity Analysis .................................... 39

Project Risk ............................................ 39

Environmental Effect .................................... 40

IX. RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 40

- iii

Table of Contents (Cont'd)

ANNEX 1 - Supporting Tables and Charts

T-1 - Agricultural PerformanceT-2 - Climatological Data

T-3 - Water Balance Summaries for Project DistrictsT-4 - Summary of State Tubewell PerformanceT-5 - Performance of Existing and Experimental TubewellsT-6 - Cost Estimates for Well Construction and DevelopmentT-7 - Cost Estimates for Pumping UnitsT-8 - Cost Estimates for Energization of Pumping UnitsT-9 - Cost Estimates for Distribution SystemsT-10 - Cost Estimates for BuildingsT-11 - Cost Estimates for Principal Materials for Tubewell ConstructionT-12 - Cost Estimates for Equipment and VehiclesT-13 - Estimated Schedule of ExpendituresT-14 - Proposed Allocation of CreditT-15 - Estimated Schedule of DisbursementsT-16 - Cropping Patterns and YieldsT-17 - Rates of Water Supply for the Irrigated AreaT-18 - Farm BudgetsT-19 - Estimates of Project RentT-20 - Economic Cost and Value of WaterT-21 - Economic Cost and Benefit Streams

C-1 - Typical Well Design

C-2 - Regulating TankC-3 - Schematic Layout of the Distribution SystemC-4 - Implementation Schedule

C-5 - Organization Chart - Tubewell Organization

ANNEX 2 - Monitoring and EvaluationANNEX 3 - TrainingANNEX 4 - Assumptions for Financial and Economic AnalysisANNEX 5 - Selected Documents and Data Available in the Project File

LIST OF MAPS

IBRD 14639 - Project DistrictsIBRD 14640 - Soil Types

IBRD 14641 - Annual Rainfall

INDIA

IJTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Staff Appraisal Report

I. BACKGROUND

Introduction

1.01 The State of Uttar Pradesh (UP), located in the northeastern partof India, is well endowed with water resources. However, in spite of the richwater resources, large public investments in surface and tubewell irrigationas well as rapid private groundwater development, only about two-fifths ofthe cropped area is irrigated. Consequently, the Government of Uttar Pradesh(GOUP) has placed great emphasis on the acceleration of irrigation in recentFive-Year Plans. Since groundwater is the quickest and most assured source ofirrigation, and the present statewide extraction is only about one-half ofthe total resources, GOUP gives priority to groundwater development.

1.02 The Bank Group has been involved in the financing of both privateand public tubewells in UP. Private groundwater development in UP, financedthrough the lines of credit to three Agricultural Refinance and DevelopmentCorporation Projects (Cr. 540-IN, 1975; Cr. 715-IN, 1977; and Cr. 947-IN,1979) are mostly shallow tubewells, each commands about 3 to 5 ha. Publictubewells, each commands about 100 ha or more, are normally constructed inareas where gravity irrigation is not feasible and where the potential forconstruction of shallow tubewells is limited due to the deep aquifer. Fromthe equity point of view, public tubewells are desirable to overcome theunderutilization of groundwater resources in certain areas where fragmentedand small holdings make the cost of tubewells prohibitively high and thusunattractive to small farmers. Results from a Farm Benefit Survey for theProject Completion Report of the Uttar Pradesh Agricultural Credit (Credit392-IN) showed that, even with great efforts to reach small farmers statewide,about 66% of the borrowers for private tube wells were small farmers (below 3ha) and 34% were medium and large farmers. However, 91% of the total holdingsin the state is below 3 ha. This implies that, proportionally, more mediumand large farmers in the state can afford to borrow for private tubewells thansmall farmers. Furthermore, since proper spacing of private tubewells isdifficult to enforce, the increased use of public tubewells in groundwaterdevelopment, if properly constructed and managed, is desirable to preventexcessive extraction of the groundwater resources.

1.03 To support these endeavors, the Bank Group financed the construc-tion of 800 public tubewells in UP between 1961 and 1964 (Cr. 8-IN, US$6 M).While the physical implementation of the construction program was satisfactory,the post-project operation has fallen short of the expected agricultural andeconomic benefits. The poor performance has been caused by (a) incomplete andpoorly constructed distribution systems which resulted in excessive losses of

-2-

water; (b) overly large command areas in relation to well capacity; (c) inade-quate operation and maintenance which led to frequent breakdowns, delayedrepairs and interruptions of services; (d) uncertain delivery of water,particularly to cultivators located distant from the outlets; and (e) inade-quate power supply.

1.04 Problems facing public tubewells are partly due to inadequatemanagement and partly due to poor planning and design. Nevertheless, forreasons described above (para 1.02), they remain attractive sources of irri-gation. Furthermore, in comparison with the surface irrigation schemes,they have a shorter gestation period and more flexibility in operation. TheGovernment of India (GOI) has requested IDA assistance to finance the con-struction of about 500 public tubewells in UP. The proposed project wouldintroduce significant changes in technical design and operational stanclardsused in the construction and management of public tubewells. These newstanclards are aimed at improving the utilization of groundwater resourceswhich so far has returns that are significantly below the potential.

Agriculture in India

1.05 India covers some 3.27 million km of which 49% is cultivable andabout 15% irrigated. India's population of about 650 M is growing at anannual rate of 1.9%. National income has grown at about 3.4% per annumsince 1960 and the per capita GNP reached US$150 in 1977. Although averageper capita income has increased, in general, there has been limited progressin the improvement of the living standards of the urban and rural poor whocomprise some 330 M people with annual incomes below the poverty line ofUS$75 per capita. Accordingly, GOI's development plans give priority toalleviating poverty and creating employment, especially in rural areas.

1.06 Agriculture is the dominant sector of the Indian economy and con-tributes about 45% of GNP. It engages about 70% of the labor force and pro-vides the base for about 60% of India's exports. During the last decade,GOI development plans have emphasized agriculture and sought to raise food-grain production by increasing the use of fertilizers, plant protectionchemicals, and improved seed varieties. In support of this, GOI has modern-ized and expanded its agricultural credit institutions and accelerated thedevelopment of irrigation.

1.07 Despite these endeavors and the impressive results of the GreenRevolution in some areas such as the States of Punjab and Haryana, the annualoverall growth rate in foodgrain production over the last 15 years was onlyabout 2.3% or slightly above the population growth. Furthermore, India's

agriculture remains heavily dependent on the weather since only about 31%of the net cultivated area is irrigated. Major factors in reducing thisdependence would be an expansion of the irrigated area and better use of

existing irrigation facilities.

Irrigation in India

1.08 Up to 1964/65, the irrigated area increased at a rate of only about2.1% per year, of which approximately two-thirds was from surface water

- 3 -

resources and one-third from groundwater. Since then, the rate of increasehas about doubled, maimly through an accelerated program of groundwater devel-opment. At present, tlae irrigated area is some 50 M ha, about three-fifthsof which is surface irrigated and two-fifths served by groundwater.

1.09 The pace of surface water development remained relatively constantat about 0.5 M ha per year until the end of the Fourth Plan (1969/70-1973/74).During this period, the physical plan targets set by GOI for a more rapiddevelopment of surface irrigation were never fulfilled. A major problem wasthe pressure, mainly political, in the States to start as a large number ofprojects as possible. Because of limited financial resources, this policyresulted in long construction periods for projects and delayed benefits. Inrecent years, however, budgetary allocations have grown and the authoritieshave made concerted efforts to complete ongoing projects. As a result, thesurface irrigation potential created in 1976/77 was 1.1 M ha, more than twicethat achieved in any single year before the start of the Fifth Plan in 1974/75.

1.10 Actual utilization in many completed irrigation projects remainssignificantly lower than the potential created. Some reasons for this are:(i) water losses from the distribution systems are significantly higher thanwhat is normally assumed when the irrigation potential is calculated; and(ii) construction of watercourses and field channels below irrigation outletswas left to farmers and often built to low standards. The Command Area Devel-opment (CAD) programs, introduced in the early 1970s, attempted to improvethis situation by providing technical advice, organizational support, andinstitutional finance to farmers in the command areas. Unfortunately, thestandards of water distribution still remained inadequate even under CADbecause costs of construction of watercourses and field channels are kept toa minimum to encourage farmers to pay for these communal works. The vestedinterests of farmers who, at present, benefit from inequitable water distri-bution have also severely interfered with the CAD process. During recentyears, some States in India have adopted improved measures of irrigationdevelopment, including: (i) construction of public irrigation systems downto individual farms, or in the case of small holdings, as near as possibleto the farm; (ii) conveyance of water from the source to the farm outlet inlined canals; and (iii) provision of controls in the system -- operated bythe project authority -- to enable a reliable and timely water supply to eachfarm.

1.11 Groundwater development had been accelerated in the northwesternpart of India and in some States in the Deccan Plateau and in the South(Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Tamil Nadu). The potential created increasedfrom 0.5 M ha per year by the end of the Fourth Plan (1968/69-1973/74) to1.1 M ha in 1977/78. At present, net groundwater extraction is about one-half of the mean annual recharge. Levels of development vary widelybetween States, from a small portion of recharge in Assam (5%) to as highas 75% in Tamil Nadu. The bulk of future groundwater development willoccur in the Eastern Region where only about one-third of the ultimatepotential has been developed. Demand for tubewells is relatively strongin this region. Of the 3.5 M ha of groundwater developed during the FifthPlan (1973-78), about 2.2 M ha, or 62%, were in the Eastern Region. Thegrowth rate of area irrigated by groundwater in the Eastern Region duringthis period was 6.5% per annum compared with 3% in the rest of India.

- 4 -

1.12 Groundwater development through private tubewells is not subjectto most of the water efficiency problems encountered with major and mediumsurface schemes. Storage is provided naturally; conveyance from well tofield is over short distances; water can be tapped and delivered to farmers'fields quickly; and it is always timely, being under the complete control ofindividual farmers. Even then, there is considerable scope for improvement,particularly in the design and implementation standards for pumping equipment.Public schemes for groundwater development, including augmentation tubewellsand direct irrigation tubewells, face similar problems as surface irrigationsystems. Public tubewells, however, are easier to manage due to smallercommand areas and more flexibility in irrigation delivery.

II. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

A. An Overview

General

2.01 The State of Uttar Pradesh (UP) is the most populated State in India.It has a population of about 100 M (1979), accounting 2for 15% of total Indianpopulation, whereas its geographical area (298,000 km ) covers only 9% of the2count:ry. The population density is thus extremely high at 340 persons per kmand about two-thirds of all farm holdings in UP are below one hectare, comparedto about 50% for the nation.

The Economy

2.02 The economy of UP is predominantly agrarian, with agriculture con-tributing about 55% of the State income and employing about 78% of the workingforce. Between 1960/61 and 1976/77, the rate of growth of the primary sector,incluiding agriculture, forestry, fishing and mining was only 1.7% per annum(p.a.) compared to an all-India average of 2.0%. Similarly, the secondarysector, including manufacturing, construction, electricity, gas and watersupply, (15% of the State income) only grew at 2% p.a., which was half thenational rate of 4%. The performance of the tertiary sector, includingtransport, trade, finance and services, (30% of the State income) fared betterat 4%, growth p.a. However, since tertiary sector activities started from arelatively small base and were concentrated mostly in the urban areas, theirrapid growth only contributed marginally to the majority of population (85%)living in the rural areas.

2.03 As a result of the poor performance of the primary and secondarysectors, State income only grew at an annual rate of 2.2% p.a., well belowthe national rate of 3.1%. Per capita income only increased by 0.5% p.a. andwas one of the lowest in India (Rs 870 in 1976/77 compared to the nationalaverage of Rs 1,015). Since agriculture is the main activity in the State,and it has close links to other sectors, economic progress is largelydependent on the removal of constraints to further agricultural growth,particularly through the expansion of irrigation.

-- 5

Employment and Rural Poverty

2.04 The labor force constitutes about 30.9% of the UP population. Itsparticipation rate is significantly higher in rural areas (31.4%) than inurban areas (27.7%). Cultivators and agricultural laborers account for 65.7%and 22.8% of the rural labor force, respectively. Because of the slow growthof agriculture and manufacturing, productive employment has failed to keeppace with population growth. An attempt was made in 1978/79 to quantify theunemployment rate as follows: 1/

No. ofUnemployed % of Rural % of Urban % of Total'000 jobs Labor Force Labor Force Labor Force

Rural 2,381 9.0 - 7.8Urban 272 - 6.6 0.9Total 2,653 9.0 6.6 8.7

2.05 The poor performance of the agricultural sector also resulted in asharp rise in the proportion of rural population living below the poverty line(US$75 per capita per annum) from 41.6% in 1960/61 to 63.6% in 1970/71. 2/According to the National Sample Survey in 1973/74, at least about two-thirdsof the rural population lived below the poverty level. Agricultural laborersaccount for a substantial part of the poor. It is estimated that 90% of theagricultural laborers in Uttar Pradesh lived below this poverty level. 2/A series of programs have been created to raise standards of living of thisgroup, including measures to secure tenants rights, land redistribution andpublic works program. These programs so far have been largely unsuccessfuldue to faulty planning and poor implementation.

2.06 Public Services. By most traditional indicators, UP is one of theleast advanced States in India. The literacy rate, 21.8%, is lower than thenational average of 30%. The number of doctors and health centers per 1,000persons is the lowest in India. Although the State is well connected to therest of India, through national highways, railways and airways, the intra-Statecommunication is inadequate. In 1975/76, the road length per 100 km2 wasonly 24 kms compared to the national average of 36 kms. The provision ofsafe, potable and adequate drinking water has been slow. At present, watersupply schemes are being implemented in about 20% of the villages with noadequate source of drinking water. The Bank Group has supported GOUP in watersupply schemes through the ongoing Uttar Pradesh Water Supply and SewerageProject (Cr. 550-IN, US$40 M).

1/ See Planning for the Development of Uttar Pradesh, State PlanningInstitute, Uttar Pradesh, 1978/79.

2/ See Nayyar, Rohini: "Wages, Employment and Standard of Living ofAgricultural Laborers in Uttar Pradesh" in Poverty and Landlessness inRural Asia, International Labor Organization, Geneva, 1977.

- 6 -

B. The Agricultural Sector

Climate

2.07 Uttar Pradesh has a tropical monsoon climate but there are great

variations in temperature in accord with changes in altitude. On the Gangetic

plain, the average temperature ranges from a minimum of 3-4 C in January to

a maximum of 43-45 C in May and June. The Himalayan region of the State ismuch cooler with snowfalls from December through March, The mean annual

rainfall ranges from about 700 mm in the western part of the plain to about

1,200 mm in the east. It exceeds 1,800 mm in the Himalayan foothills (Map

No. 14641). About 87% of the rainfall occurs during the June-September period.

However, there are considerable variations in both amounts and distribution.

Variability is directly related to the mean annual precipitation; thus the

eastern part of the Gangetic plain is subject to the greatest variation (+30-35% of mean annual rainfall). The times of onset and end of the monsoon areuncertain and long dry spells may occur within the rainy season. Uncertaintyregarding amount and distribution of rainfall makes irrigation a pre-requisite

for successful crop production even during the monsoon season.

Topography and Regional Division

2.08 The State divides naturally in three physical regions; the Himalayas,the Gangetic plain and the Central Indian Plateau. The Himalayan region is of

rugged topography with high mountains intersected by deep valleys. A large

proportion of the land is not suitable for agriculture. The Gangetic plainis an area of subdued topography which slopes to the south east. This is the

most heavily populated and cultivated area of the State. The southern edge of

Uttar Pradesh rises on to the Central Indian Plateau. This is an area of lowhills and plateau lands; part of the region is unsuitable for agriculture dueto the undulating topography and thin soils. All the major rivers originatein the Himalayas and flow south eastwards across the Gangetic plain in deeply

incised channels. Only some of the minor tributaries of the Yamuna River and

Ganges River originate in the Central Plateau.

2.09 For planning purposes, the State is divided into five regions:

the Hills comprising mainly the Himalayas; the Western region consisting of

a small strip of sub-Himalayas and the western part of the Gangetic plain;

the Central region covering the central Gangetic plain; the Eastern region

extending over the eastern part of the Gangetic plain; and the Budelkb.andlying in the Central Indian Plateau.

Soils

2.10 A wide variety of soils occurs in different parts of the State(Map 14640). The soils of the Himalayan region are generally thin, occur in

pockets or along valleys and are absent on steep slopes. They are usuallyimmature and exhibit many of the characteristics of the parent rocks. The

soils of the Gangetic plain are alluvial of different ages. The western part

of the plain is characterized by shallow loams and sandy loams. The west

central plain has thick, heavy loam soils while the central area and easternplain have loam or sandy loam soils. The soils of the Central Plateau regioncategorize mainly into black or red varieties. The former are heavy andcalcareous occurring mainly on the valley floor. The red soils are lightand occur on the plateaux tops and on the upper slopes of hills. Thicknessof soil profile is variable and soils may be absent on steeper slopes. Someareas of saline soils occur on the Gangetic plain but alkalinity is not acommon problem. Fertility levels are low to medium.

Land Use

2.11 About 18.2 M ha (61% of the reporting area for land utilization inthe State of 29.8 M ha) is under cultivation. The forest area of 5.1 M ha(17%) is less that what is required to maintain a healthy ecological balance.About 3.4 M ha (11%) are either barren, uncultivable or put to non-agriculturaluse. Cultivable waste land accounts for 1.5 M ha (5%). The remaining 1.7 Mha (6%) are either fallow or used as permanent pastures and groves. Since1960/61, the net cultivated area has remained stagnant and there is littlescope for increasing it in the future.

Farm Size and Land Tenure

2.12 The average farm size in UP is 1.2 ha, but there are large varia-tions from one region to another. As noted below, the farm size distibutionis largely determined by local agro-climatic conditions as well as populationdensity:

Annual Population % of Farms in Size Group (ha) AverageRegion Rainfall Density 0-1 1-3 3-5 5-10 10+ Size

(mm) (no/km2) ----------------…% ……---------- (ha)

Hill 1600-1800 85 68 26 4 1 1 2.0Western 700-900 428 59 29 8 3 1 1.4Central 900-1000 381 66 27 5 2 1 1.1Eastern 1000-1400 424 75 19 3 2 1 0.9Bundelkhand 1200-1400 164 37 34 12 10 4 2.7Uttar Pradesh 334 67 24 5 3 1 1.2

2.13 The smallest average farm size is in the Eastern region, where rain-fall is relatively high and the area is densely populated. In contrast, inother high rainfall regions in the Hills and Bundelkhand, the average size ofholdings are larger, about 2.0 to 2.7 ha. This is due to sparse population,difficult topography and infertile land.

2.14 A variety of land tenure arrangements exist. In the early 1950s,an Act was passed abolishing intermediate tenancy and providing security oftenure to erstwhile tenants. In 1961, a second Act imposed a ceiling on rurallandholdings, with the specific aim of achieving greater equality in the land-holdings of individual cultivators. However, the existence of legal loopholes,coupled with ineffective enforcement, resulted in a complete failure of thisAct to achieve its objective. In 1971, the land reform issue was reopened,but so far, has remained unresolved.

-8-

Crops and Cropping Patterns

2.15 Cropping intensity for the whole State (133%) has not changed since1970/71. The intensity is generally high in the Hills, Western and Easternregions and low in the Central and Bundelkhand (para 2.09). T>-e Hills have ahigh cropping intensity (157%) due to high rainfall and adequa.e soil moisture.Western UP is well provided with irrigation facilities and agricultural tech-nology is better developed here than elsewhere in the State. Consequently,the cropping intensity is as high as 140%. The high intensity in the easternUP plain (135%) is mainly in response to the high pressure of population oncultivable land in the e areas. These districts are densely populated, with400-500 persons per km and a large majority of the population depends onagriculture for its sustenance. The less developed state of agriculture inthe Central and Bundelkhand regions results in low cropping intensity (129%and 109%, respectively).

2.16 Cereals -- paddy, maize, bajra and sorghum in the kharif season andwheat and barley in the rabi season -- account for two-thirds of the croppedarea. Pulse crops whiich occupy about 12% of the cropped land include pigeonpeas (ahhar), moong and moth in the kharif and gram, peas and masur in therab:i. Non-food crops are grown only on 22% of the crop land. Various typesof oilseeds occupy about 15% of the cropped land, followed by sugarcane (6%).The remaining 1% is under miscellaneous crops such as fruits, vegetables,fiber crops, green manure and condiments.

2.17 Cropping pattern varies with the changing conditions of physicaland social ecology in different parts of the State. In the Western region,particularly in the upper Ganga-Yamuna Doab (Map 14641), sugarcane and foragecrops are the important crops in the kharif season. Bajra, maize and rice aremore dominant in the Central Region. Further east, with the increase inprecipitation, rice becomes the main crop. Maize and millets are importantcrops during the kharif in the Hills Region and jowar in Bundelkhand. Duringthe rabi season, wheat occupies most of the land in all regions, followed bygram and barley.

Agricultural Production Trends (Annex 1, Table T-1)

2.18 From the commencement of the First Five-Year Plan (1950/51), upto 1977/78, foodgrains production only grew about 2% p.a., barely keeping pacewith the population growth. Rice and wheat production accounted for most ofthis growth while coarse grains remained stagnant and pulse production de-clined. The performance of non-food crops such as oilseeds, sugarcane andpotato fared better at 3.1%, 3.5% and 5.5% growth p.a., respectively. However,since these crops only occupy a small portion of the total cropped area (para2.16), their rapid rates of growth do not significantly affect the overallperformance of the agricultural sector.

2.19 The early years after Independence were characterized by both areaexpansion and yield increases for most crops. Between 1950/51 and 1960/61,production of foodgrains grew at a rate of 1.6% p.a. due to a 0.9% increase

- 9 -

in cropped area and a 0.7% increase in yields. Both rice and wheat produc-tion, major cereals in the State, grew at respectable rates of 5.2% and 4.8%p.a. respectively. In the sixties, the agricultural scene changed signifi-cantly. Increases in production of most crops during this period were largelythe result of rising yields. Rice production, however, stagnated while wheatproduction grew at a rate of 9.9% p.a. and maize 9.7% p.a. Whereas oilseedsand sugarcane production only grew at 3.7% and 1.0% p.a., respectively, thegain in potato production was spectacular. It grew at a rate 10% p.a., result-ing from both area expansion (4.3% p.a.) and yield increases (5.6% p.a.). Theimpressive performance of most crops, except rice and sugarcane, during thisperiod was largely due to the introduction of improved high yielding varietiesand accelerated develolpment of private tubewells in the latter part of thesixties.

2.20 The agricultural transformation in rice crops seemed to lag a fewyears behind wheat. From 1971/72 to 1977/78, rice production improved sig-nificantly, growing at a rate of 4.7% p.a., slightly above wheat production(4.1%). Areas under other major cereal crops such as maize and barley suffereda major setback, and their production showed a declining trend. Cash cropsstill performed well, growing at a rate of 4-5% p.a. Production of oilseedsand sugarcane improved significantly, growing at 4.2% and 4.4% p.a., respec-tively. Potato production maintained its earlier momentum, growing at a rateof 9.5% p.a. Area expansion under this crop slowed down, however, to at arate of 1.6% p.a. compared to 4.3% during the sixties. Greater use of highyielding potato seeds resulted in an overall yield increase of 8.0% p.a.

C. Irrigation and Power

Water Resources and Utilization

2.21 Surface Irrigation. Uttar Pradesh lies within the catchments offour great tributaries of the Ganges river system. These are, from west toeast, the Yamuna, Upper Ganga, Ghagara and Gandak Rivers. Most of the streamswhich feed these rivers have their sources in the Himalayas, though right bankfeeders to the Yamuna and to Ganges below the confluence with the Yamuna ori-ginate on the Central Plateau. The Himalayan streams are fed by both run-offfrom monsoon rainfall and by snow-melt during the spring through fall period.The streams originating on the plateau are fed only by monsoon run-off. Theriver reaches within tlhe Gangetic plain are generally deeply incised into theregional water table and function as a drainage line for groundwater. Thecombination of run-off from snow-melt and groundwater drainage ensures peren-nial flows in the main river courses. However, there is a marked range ofdischarge rate between early spring (before the onset of snow-melt run-off)and during the height of the monsoon. Though no proper survey has been under-taken, it is estimated that the total water resource of the Ganges basin isabout 510,000 Mm per annum. Approximately 70% of this passes throughUttar Pradesh. The ultimate irrigation potential 1/ in UP is estimated at

1/ This is expressed in terms of gross irrigated area.

-10 -

12.4 M ha. At present about 6.2 M or 50% of the resources available to theState has been utilized. Thus, there is ample scope for further development.

2.22 Groundwater. The Gangetic plain is underlain by a rich aquifersystem formed of alluvial deposits. The alluvial deposits form a singlethough heterogeneous, aquifer system which exceeds 1,000 meters in thicknessin some parts of the plain. Aquifers are formed by beds of sand which inter-finger with beds of silt, clay and kankar. The aquifer system is rechargedmainly by infiltration of rain falling on the area or collected by localrun--off into pools and lakes. Another important source of recharge is deeppercolation of canal and on-field losses from surface water irrigation sys-tems. Parts of the plain are subject to flooding by river water in some yearsand infiltration of flood water forms an important source of recharge in suchareas. Discharge is by seepage to the main natural drains which are deeplyincised and form line-sinks for groundwater drainage, evaporation from shallowwater tables and extraction by wells. Underflow under the regional hydraulicgracdient forms a relatively small part of the water balance.

2.23 The State Groundwater Directorate (SGD) of the Ministry of i;rriga-tioII in UP has estimated a mean annual net recharge availble to the State at58,000 Mm . 3Net extraction by various types of tubewells and dugwells amountedto 29,000 Mm in 1976/77 or about 50% of the groundwater resources. Thus,the prospect for further groundwater development.in UP is good and demandsfor tubewell water appear to be strong.

General Trends in Irrigation Development

2.24 The State is well endowed with water resources. Nevertheless, onlyabout 8.3 M ha or 46% of the total net cultivated area of 18.2 M ha was irri-gated in 1976/77. Between 1950/51 and the onset of the Green Revolution,surface and groundwater development contributed equally to the expansion ofirrigated areas in UP. However, since 1965/66, groundwater development hasaccounted for virtually all the increase in net irrigated area. In 1976/77,about 4.8 M ha, or 58% of the total net irrigated area, was supplied withgroundwater, compared to 34% provided by the surface irrigation schemes. Theremaining 8% is served by storage tanks or by pump lift schemes of varyingscales. Progress of irrigation development in terms of net irrigated area inthe State since 1950/51 is shown below.

Increase1950/51-1976/77

1950/ 1960/ 1965/ 1970/ 1976/ Total in % Yearly51 61 66 71 77 M ha Increase

--------------Million ha------------

Major andMedium 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.8 +1.0 +1.7

Tubewells 0.3 0.5 0.9 2.3 3.6 +3.3 +11.5Dugwells 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.2 -0.7 -1.3'Others 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 -0.2 -1.7

Total 4.8 5.0 5.9 7.2 8.2 3.4 +2.1

-11 -

2.25 The significant increase in areas irrigated by tubewells after1965/66 was mainly due! to private groundwater development. Tubewells alsoreplaced many traditional dugwells. This stemmed from the introduction ofhigh yielding varieties (HYV) which required higher and more reliable watersupply and the increasing availability of rural electrification. However,most of the private groundwater development during the Green Revolution periodoccurred in the western part of the State where farmers were more progressiveand familiar with irrigation provided by surface canals. At present thereare about one million private tubewells and about 15,000 public tubewells inoperation in the State. GOUP plans to accelerate the development of bothsectors at rates of 100,000 private tubewells and 1,000 to 1,500 public tube-wells per annum. Progress of development of private and public tubewellssince 1960/61 is illustrated below:

Increase1950/51-1976/77

1960/ 1965/ 1970/ 1976/ Total in % Yearly61 66 71 77 M ha Increase

-Net Irrigated Area in '000 ha-

public tubewells 495 721 809 859 0.4 3.5Private tubewells 48 184 1,522 2,707 2.6 28.7

Private groundwater development has been rapid and at present about threequarters of the areas served by tubewells are irrigated by private tubewells.

2.26 About 40% of the gross cropped area (24.8 M ha) is presently irri-gated. Wheat has accounted for the largest share of the expansion of theirrigated area since Independence. The general trend for the major crops inirrigated areas was:

% ofTotal Crop AreaUnder Irrigation

1950/51 1960/61 1965/66 1970/71 1976/77 1976/77---------Area Irrigated in '000 ha---------

Wheat 1,627 1,780 2,223 3,988 5,270 80Paddy 409 502 614 745 982 21Maize 36 68 150 251 201 15Gram 402 369 547 433 355 21Mustard 25 21 35 65 131 47Sugarcane 693 874 965 902 1,099 75Potato 77 100 135 152 173 95

Power Supply and Demand

2.27 Present Situation. The State of Uttar Pradesh is well endowed withnatural resources for generating power. The Himalayan rivers in the northernregion of the State have a hydro-power potential in the order of 20,000 MWand the recently developed Singrauli coal fields in the southern part can offera thermal power potential of about 10,000 MW. Due to the lack of financial

- 12 -

resources, the State has only installed about 2,982 MW of which about one-third is provided by hydel schemes and the balance by thermal stations. Theener,gy is transmitted through 31,000 km of main transmission and sub-transmission lines of 33 to 400 KV. There is, in addition, an extensive 11KV network dispersed throughout the State.

2.28 Per capita generation of electricity was about 100 Kwh in 1976/77compared to an all-India average of 144 Kwh. Per capita consumption of elec-tricity rose from 7 Kwh at the commencement of the First Five-Year Plan (1951)to 86 Kwh by 1976/77. This still lagged behind the national average of 119Kwh per capita. Agriculture accounts for about 30% of the total consumption.The progress of rural electrification has been slow and presently only aboutone-third of the villages has electric power. To assist GOUP in its drive toincrease the standard of living of the rural population, the Bank Group issupporting rural electrification in UP through a line of credit to the RuralElectrification Corporation.

2.29 Future Situation. Under the Sixth Five-Year Plan (1978-83), anadditional plan for 2,394 MW has been approved and is under construction. Ifthe targets of the plan are achieved, the total installed capacity in 1983would be 5,376 MW. Improvement of the transmission in accord with the addi-tional generation capacity is also planned. This would increase the totallength of main transmission (132-440 kV) by 10,581 km and of sub-transmission(37.5/33-66 KV) by 15,160 km. This would bring the total length of transmis-sion in the above capacities range to about 56,700 km by 1983. The Bank Grouphas participated in augmenting power supply in UP through the First SingrauliThermal Power Project (Cr. 685-IN) and the second project is being negotiated.

2.30 The power supply and distribution should be relatively satisfactoryif the targets of the Sixth Plan are achieved. However, given historic growthrates and the latent demand for energy, it may not be possible to avoid somerostering during peak demand periods for years to come.

III. THE PROJECT AREA

General

3.01 The tubewell irrigation systems to be constructed under the projectwill be distributed in 12 administrative districts out of the 56 districtswhich comprise the State of Uttar Pradesh (Map 14639). In general terms, thedistricts are distributed about equally in the western, central and easternparts of the State and the number of system units are similarly divided.

- 13 -

Region District No. of Systems

Western Saharanpur 45Aligarh 40Etawah 40Mainpuri 40

Central Lucknow 40Lakhimpur 40Hardoi 45Faizabad 45

Eastern Azamgarh 40Varanasi 40Ghazipur 40Allahabad 45

3.02 The selected districts are therefore representative of the range ofclimate and agronomic c:onditions found on the Gangetic plain of Uttar Pradesh.Rural population density ranges from 280 to 600 persons per km2, the lowestdensities occurring in the northern and western parts of the State and thehighest in the east.

Topography, Soils and Climate

3.03 The project area lies within the Gangetic plain which slopes tothe southeast (para 2.08). The topography is gently graded and of low relief.The 12 districts are intersected by natural drainage ways which are meanderingand widely spread. The soils are light in texture, varying from silty loamsto sandy loams.

3.04 Climatological data for the 12 districts is given in Annex 1, TableT-2. Mean annual rainfall ranges from 700 mm per annum in the southwesterndistricts to 1,200 mm in some of the eastern districts. About 85-90% of therain occurs in the kharif season (June-September). Rainfall variability ismuch higher in the eastern districts (30-35%) than in western districts(20-25%). These factors make irrigation necessary for stable yields in thekharif and imperative for successful crop growth in the rabi season (October-May). Temperature patterns are similar throughout the project area with meanmonthly maxima at 20-23 C in January and 39-42°C in May.

Groundwater Resources

3.05 In all districts, the rich aquifers are formed by sand beds con-tained within the Gangetic plain alluvial sequence. Groundwater balancesbased on data provided by the SGD are summarized in Annex 1, Table T-3. Thesebalances, which are regarded as conservative estimates, indicate that thewater consumption by the project expressed as a proportion of the unexploitedgroundwater resource inL each district ranges from 0.7 to 3.7%. Thus, atdistrict level, project requirements of groundwater resources would be morethan covered.

- 14 -

3.06 Most of the water contained by the alluvial aquifer system has lessthan 1,000 parts per million (ppm) dissolved solids. There are considerableareas of better quality water with dissolved solids fallings as low as 250ppm. A few pockets of water with high chloride concentrations (in excess of250 ppm CO) o, ur in Aligarh, Mainpuri and Saharanpur, but their localitiesare fairly well defined and will be avoided for project wells.

Land Holdings and Land Tenure

3.07 The average farm size in the project area is about 1.1 ha, slightlysmaller than the State average of 1.2 ha. In districts located in the WesternRegion, the average farm size is about 1.3 ha. Small holdings below 2 haaccount for 80% of the number but only about 40% of the total area. Averagesize of holdings is smaller in districts of the Central and Eastern regions,1.2 ha and 1.0 ha, respectively. About 85% of the total holdings are below 2ha, accounting for one-half of the total area in the Central region, whereasin the Eastern region, the percentages are 90% and 50%.

Agricultural Situation

3.08 The State is divided into nine major crop zones. These crop zonesare identified by the crop proportion in the total cropped area in the State.The project area falls into five major crop zones: (a) wheat, sugarcane, foragemaize; (b) wheat, bajra, maize; (c) wheat, rice, gram; (d) rice, wheat, gram,barley and (e) rice, barley, wheat. The average cropping intensity,is about133%, varying from 129% in the Eastern region to 131% and 140% in the Centraland Western regions, respectively. There is a wide variation in irrigationintensity. About 60% of the total cropped area is irrigated in the Westernregion whereas only one-third is under irrigation in the Central and Easternregions.

3.09 Crop yields also differ among the districts. In general, for mostmajor crops such as wheat, rice, maize, barley and sugarcane, yields are muchhigher in the Western region as illustrated below:

Average Yield (t/ha)

Region Wheat Rice Maize Barley Sugarcane

Western 1.58 1.11 0.84 1.24 43.64Central 1.30 0.94 0.72 1.09 33.62Eastern 1.23 0.82 0.52 1.13 35.18State 1.36 0.93 0.73 1.14 40.50

3.10 Regional contrasts can also be demonstrated by the past performanceof different regions in respect of production and yields of total foodtgrainsfrom 1950/51 to 1975/76:

- 15 -

Annual Growth Rate (%)

Region Area Production Yields

Western 0.50 2.56 2.05Central 0.29 1.42 1.14Eastern 0.29 1.52 1.22

IV. PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC TUBEWELLS

General

4.01 The public tubewells program in UP was initiated in 1931/32. At thebeginning of the First Five-Year Plan (1950), some 2,000 public tubewells werein service, increasing to 10,000 by 1970. At present, about 15,000 publictubewells are in operation. They are distributed in all administrative divi-sions on the Gangetic plain within Uttar Pradesh. During the Sixth Five-YearPlan (1978-83), GOUP plans to construct about 1,000 to 1,500 new tubewells peryear. In general, public tubewells are installed in areas not commanded bysurface irrigation schemes and where the water table is too deep for the cen-trifugal pumps commonly used for private wells or in backward areas whereprivate development is unlikely to take place within a reasonable time.Although investments in public tubewells are socially attractive and generallyviable, poor utilization of these facilities has become a matter of concernin recent years.

Past Performance

4.02 The number of operating hours and irrigated areas serve as usefulindicators of the performance of public tubewells. Statistics on the state-wide performance of public tubewells are summarized for the years 1966/67(the earliest year for which records were available) through 1978/79 in Annex1, Table T-4. Though there have been some fluctuations in annual utilizationwhich is related to high or low rainfall years, the general trend has been fora decrease both in hours of operation and area irrigated per tubewell. In1966/67, the average hours of utilization was 3,355 per well and this wasexceeded in only one year in the recent record (3,457 hours in 1968/69).In 1978/79, the average utilization was 1,508 hours per well with a range of634 to 2,557 hours. Average irrigated area per tubewell fell from 150 ha in1966/67 to 65 ha in 1978/79. Thus, though the number of tubewells increasedfrom 8,401 to 14,772 during the tabulated record period (an increase of 76%),the total area irrigated by public tubewells systems decreased from 1.28 mil-lion ha to 0.96 million ha (a fall of 26%).

4.03 Outstanding among the reasons for poor performance of existingpublic tubewells are:

- 16 -

(a) the water conveyance systems are incomplete. Water ispresently supplied through 1.0 to 1.5 km of brick-linedchannel and 2 km of earth channel in a command areaof about 150 to 200 ha. These channels, built by theGovernment, are poorly constructed and maintained.Consequently, there are excessive water losses in thesystem. There are also no control structures at the out-lets. Farmers are expected to construct their own channelsto lead water from the formal distribution system totheir own fields. However, there are no effective orga-nizations to help farmers with the design and imple-mentation of these works. Furthermore, there are noright-of-way rules to allow farmers located at a distantfrom the formal distribution system to take water throughfields of farmers located near the outlet;

(b) the power supply has not met increasing demand. Rationingof power is in effect and posted a fortnight in advance.However, unscheduled short outages and voltage dropsoccur frequently due to overloading of feeder lines;

(c) water allocation procedures are inadequate. The Ziledar(Revenue Officer) works out a rotational schedule forgroups of farmers, particularly in the peak demandperiods. Irrigation is rotated among farmers belongingto a thok. However, the group is formed arbitrarilywithout consideration to the command of an outlet.The thokdar (leader of a thok) would distribute wateramong farmers belonging to the group in an arbitrarymanner. In some cases, the tubewell operator woulddecide on the water allocation depending on his judge-ment of water requirement on farmers' fields. Be-cause of the disorganized water allocation, coupledwith unreliable power supply, the designed rotationalschedules are not observed. Consequently, irrigationdeliveries are unreliable and inequitable;

(d) delay in repair of unserviceable motors. The divisionalworkshops do not carry sufficient spares. This, coupledwith inadequate communication and poor transportationfacilities, delays bringing a system back into operationwithin a reasonable period; and

(e) each tubewell is operated by a tubewell operator, whomust be present to start the pump when power is availableand water is required. The required level of coordinationis often absent, particularly during the off-peak nighthours when power is more readily available.

Project Formulation and Objectives

4.04 Review of the existing situation with regard to public tubewellsystems revealed that several of the constraints on better utilization of

- 17 -

the facilities could be relieved by a change in technical and operationalstandards. The improvements to be introduced under the project are aimed at:

(a) reducing water losses to a minimum by conveying water inunderground pipes to outlet valves commanding about 3 to 5 ha;

(b) providing facilities to protect pumps and motor from fre-quent electrical breakdowns;

(c) providing facilities for automatic operation of the systemand thus increasing the security of water supply to individ-ual cultivators (except when power is not available);

(d) improving water allocation procedures to ensure reliablewater supply to each individual cultivator through betterorganization of operational staff and farmers' groups;

(e) providing facilities for better preventative maintenanceand emergency repairs of the water points; and

(f) speedy construction of each tubewell system (about 6 monthscompared to 2 years at present) which would be feasible byminimizing land acquisition problems.

4.05 The project introduces several innovations to the design and opera-tion of public tubewell systems. The relative effectiveness of the proposedchanges have been established, a priori, based on theoretical calculations.However, there is only limited experience of field operations and, thus, theproposed changes have not yet been fully evaluated based on actual performancedata. For these reasons, a relatively limited project, in terms of the numberof facilities to be constructed, has been formulated. The project would beexecuted by the Tubewell Wing of the Irrigation Department (para 6.01).During a two year period (1980-82) 500 tubewell systems would be constructedand operated in 12 selected districts of the State. Monitoring, evaluationand training would be essential for achieving project objectives.

4.06 During the course of project preparation, with the assistance ofthe FAO/CP staff, GOUP constructed three experimental tubewells to testvariols design improvements. The capacity of each tubewell was about150 m /h, serving a cultivable command area of about 120 ha. The conveyancesystem was either unlined, lined channels or PVC or concrete pipes, and wasextended to 3-5 ha outlets. Two tubewells were in operation in kharif 1979(June-September). At the time of appraisal, preliminary results show that:

(a) water losses are considerably less in experimentaltubewells than existing tubewells located in areaswith similar agro-climatic characteristics;

(b) the proportion of the command area that is irrigatedis about twice as much in the experimental tubewellsthan in existing tubewells; and

- 18 s

(c) the PVC pipes proved to be less susceptible to leaks,

easier to convey and the cost per tubewell is slightly

less than for concrete pipes.

Data on the performance of experimental and existing "control" tubewells is

presented in Annex 1, Table T-5. The heavy power rostering, resulting from

the exceptionally severe drought in kharif 1979, should be taken into account

in assessing the actual utilization of tubewell systems.

V. THE PROJECT

Project Components

5.01 The proposed project would finance:

(a) construction of, over a two year period, 500 tubewells

equipped with electric motor driven turbine pumps:

(b) vehicles, workshop equipment and monitoring equipment

to be used by the construction, operation and main-

tenance staff;

(c) monitoring and evaluation studies;

(d) staff training; and

(e) funds for preparing future tubewell projects.

Description of a Tubewell System

5.02 Most of the water points constructed for public tubewell irrigation

systems in Uttar Pradesh over the past 50 years have been designed for dis-

charges of 150 m /h. An innovation of the p5oject is to increase the design

discharge of ssme tubewells to 225 and 300 m /h. Moreover, the command

areas of 150 m /h water points is to be decreased from the present norms of

150-200 ha to 75-100 ha. The same ratio between the size of discharge and

the command area would be applied to water points of 225 and 330 m /h capa-

cities. This is aimed at changing the present concept of extensive irrigation

as a protection against drought to intensive irrigation to meet the demand of

improved agricultural technology. The life of each tubewell is expected to

last about 20 to 30 years

5.03 The Water Point. The water point would consist of the well, pump,

prime mover, switch gear, starter and protection relays and electrical

power supply. The unit would be housed in a brick-built pump house. The

wells would range in depth from 100 to 260 m and be fitted with electric

turbine pumps. All pumps would have foot valves to prevent the possibility

of reverse flow causing motors to spin backward when power cuts occur.

5.04 Other changes from the currently standard design of water points

involve the switch gear, starter relays and ancillary electrical equipment.

These include:

- 19 -

(a) fitting level operated switches at the regulating tank(para 5.05) to permit automation of the controls ofthe prime mover which obviates the necessity fora pump operator to be present to start the pumps;

(b) provision of a capacitor in the electrical systemto protect the motor against voltage fluctuations;

(c) provision of a single phase preventer in the starterrelay for motor protection;

(d) fitting of electronic hour meters on all pumpingunits to facilitate monitoring of operation of thepumps. About 20 of the water points would be equippedwith graphic recorders to monitor actual time andduration of operation. Monitoring devices would alsobe installed to record the availability of powersupply in the 11 kV line.

5.05 Regulating Tank. An essential feature of the proposed system wouldbe the elevated regulating tank with about 10 minutes of storage capacity.It would have the following functions:

(a) maintaining the operating head in the piped distributionsystem;

(b) permitting automation of the pumping unit by means oflevel operated switches which activate according to thelevel in the tank responding to water use from the dis-tribution system;

(c) permitting the distribution system to be operated at lessthan the discharge rate of the pump without spillage bymeans of the level operated switches and float valves; and

(d) ensuring equal division of the water into two, three orfour streams depending on the 3design capacity of thewater point (150,225 or 300 m /h).

5.06 Distribution Chamber. Elevated distribution chambers would befitted on about 10% 1/ of the tubewells constructed under the project as alter-natives to the regulating tanks. The purpose of including the distributionchamber is to test the cost effectiveness and practicality of the regulatingtank (para 5.05). The chamber would maintain head in the piped distributionsystem and would ensure equal division of the water to two to four streams bya system of V notches. It would not be equipped with no-float switches forautomatic operation of the pumping unit and therefore cannot prevent spillageif only part of the discharge from the pump is being used. Thus, attendanceof the pump operator would be necessary.

1/ This proportion may be changed pending on monitoring results and fieldobservations during project implementation.

- 20 -

5.07 Piped Distribution System. The piped conveyance would consist ofconcrete/PVC feeder pipes from the regulating tank or distribution chamberto closed loops of PVC pipe. Thus, any distribution outlet on a loop may be

simultaneously supplied with water flowing from two directions which reducesflow velociti s and head losses. Each loop would serre an area of 37-50 ha.

Thus, a 150 3m /h system would have two loops, a 225 m /ha system - 3 loops,and a 300 m /ha system - 4 loops. The regulating tank or distributionchamber would ensure equal division of the pump discharge to each feedeS

pipe and its pipe loop. The discharge to each loop would be about 75 m /h.

5.08 Distribution Outlets. Alfalfa type valves would be provided as out-lets to areas of 3-5 ha on each of the loop sub-systems. Thus, each loop

sub-system would have 10 to 15 outlets and each outlet would typicallyserve about 5 farmers. Only one outlet on elch loop would be operated at

any time, thus providing a discharge of 75 m /h to the outlet command.

5.09 Earth Channels. A properly designed and laid out earth channelconveyance system would be constructed to deliver water from the outlet dis-tribution boxes to the individual plots within the outlet command.

Planning Criteria

5.10 Selection of Sites. The tubewell irrigation command areas will beselected where:

(a) the construction of private tubewells is difficultbecause of the drilling depth necessary to achievea satisfactory yield (greater than 45 m); and/or

(b) areas are economically backward and private well con-struction is very slow to develop.

In aLll cases:

(c) there is sufficient unirrigated land in a particularlocation, and sufficient demand for public tubewellwater to ensure that a cluster of at least 15 wellswill be drilled within a 2-3 year period;

(d) the groundwater and soil is of suitablequality;

(e) the area is not submerged during heavy floods;

(f) there are no other public sources of irrigationsupply; and furthermore;

(g) priority is given to those areas in which landconsolidation has been carried out.

5.11 Survey and Design. The preliminary works for the design and con-

struction of a tubewell irrigation system will include:

-- 21 -

(a) the preparation of a contour map with 30 cm intervalswhich will be superimposed on the 1:4,000 scalevillage cadastral maps;

(b) a semi-detailed soil survey of the proposed commandarea to establish the irrigability class; and

(c) a detailed design will be prepared for each tubewellirrigation system at scale 1:4,000.

Design Criteria

5.12 Wells (Annex 1, C-1). The wells will be drilled using either directrotary or reverse circulation drilling rigs. Drilling diameters will be 500-600 mm and total depths of wells will be in the range of 100 to 260 metersaccording to the design discharge and the following schedule:

CultivableDesign Average Command

Discharge (m3/h) Depth (m) No. of Wells Area (ha)

150 100 300 75-100225 200 150 120-150300 260 50 150-200

5.13 Well casing and screen will be of mild steel. The pump chambercasing will be of 350 mm oiter diameter (OD) in the case of wells with designdischargss of 150 or 225 m /h and 400 mm OD for wells with design dischargeof 300 m /h. The average length of the pump chamber will be 40 meters.The production string will be of 200 mm diameter and will consist of slottedpipe covering aquifer material and blank pipe covering non-produc ive beds.Average lengths of pSoduction string will be 100 meterS for 150 m /ha wells,160 meters for 225 m /h wells and 220 meters for 300 m /h wells. Thewell will be gravel packed.

5.14 The wells will be initially developed using a compressor, andfinally developed with a diesel driven vertical shaft turbine pumping unitof capacity at least 50% higher than the design discharge. The wells willbe test pumped for 24 hours, the first half of period being in the form of astep-draw-down test in four steps, the final discharge rate will then bemaintained for the balance of the test pumping period.

5.15 Pumping Units. The pumps will be mainly electric submersible type.Vertical shaft turbine pumps may be installed in areas where they may be tech-nically more appropriate. The starter relay will be of Star Delta type formotors of less than 30 HP capacity and of Auto Transformer Starter (ATS) typefor motors of 30 HP or greater. A single phase preventer will be included inthe relay. The switch gear will be automated through a level operated controlat the regulating tank. A capacitor will be provided for power factor correc-tion and current regulation. An electronic hour meter will be fitted tomonitor the operation of the pump.

- 22 -

5.16 Power Transmission and Transformation. The 11 kv line will lbemounted on reinforced concrete posts. An 11/0.4 kva transformer of appro-priate capacity will be provided for each water point.

5.17 Pumr -quse. The pumphouse will be a brick-built structure and willbe fitted with an I girder support for chain pulleys to facilitate removal ofthe pump for maintenance.

5.18 Regulating Tank (Annex 1, C-2). The regulating tank will be a rein-forced brick and concrete structure, elevated on pillars and providing about10 minutes of storage against the discharge of the pump. It will be equippedwith float valves and will maintain a maximum head of about 5 meters at theintake to the piped distribution.

5.19 Distribution Chamber. This will be a brick-built structure whichwill maintain a head of about 5 meters at the intake to the piped distributionsystem. It will also ensure equal division of the discharge from the pumpunit to each sub-system of the piped distribution by a system of V notches.

5.20 Distribution System (Annex 1, C-3). The main distribution will bein buried pipes. Concrete feeder pipes of 30 cm diameter or PVC pipes of 20 cmwill convey the water from the regulating tank or distribution chamber to PVCdistribution pipes of 15 cm diameter. So far as possible, the PVC pipes willbe laid in closed loops to reduce friction losses and maintain the same dis-charge at each outlet. Each loop will serve an area of 37-50 ha. Averagelengths of conveyance of each of the planned water point discharge capacitiesare:

CultivableWater Point Command Average LengthsDischarge Area Feeder Pipe Distribution Pipe(m /ha) (ha) (m) (m)

150 75-100 200 3,400225 120-150 300 5,100300 150-200 400 6,800

5.21 Distribution System Outlets. The pipe outlets will be alfalfa typevalves which will be located to provide gravity command to areas of 3-4 ha,the limits of which will be defined by plot boundaries. The valves will be

sized to deliver 75 m /h under the prevailing head and will discharge tooutlet boxes which will be gated to deliver water in several directions. Themost distant plot in an outlet command will not be greater than 150 m fromthe outlet.

5.22 Other Distribution Elements. Other elements of the piped distri-bution system include standpipes (about 2 to 3 per loop), properly designedand laid out earth channels to convey water from the valve outlets to theplots. Average lengths of earth conveyanse for each of the planned3waterpoint capacities ari about 6 km for 150 m /h system, 9 km for 225 m /hand 12 km for 300 m /h.

*- 23 -

5.23 Roads. A low cost, unsurfaced access and service track will beprovided from the nearest government road to the water point.

Operation and Maintenance Criteria

5.24 The following are the main criteria for operation of the irrigationsystem:

(a) water will be allocated according to the size of thelandholdings within the tubewell command;

(b) the outlet command area will be the unit by which waterdeliveries are scheduled and quantities delivered willbe defined by the size of the command area;

(c) only one outlet on a loop sub-system will be open at anyone time, thus fixing the rate of flow and permittingthe quantity delivered to be defined on a time basis;

(d) a rotational system between outlets will be designed bythe Junior Engineer in charge of the tubewell; and

(e) the farmer group within each outlet command will, withthe assistance of the Junior Engineer, organize waterallocation within the command according to the size ofthe landholding of each farmer.

5.25 The main criteria for emergency and preventative maintenance are:

(a) each tubewell cluster of about 20 wells under a JuniorEngineer will have the continuous services of a skilledmechanic plus helpers who will tour the water points foremergency maintenance;

(b) each Operation and Maintenance Division (para 6.02) willhave a properly equipped workshop for maintenance ofpumps, prime movers and switch gear, plus adequatetransport according to the following schedule:

Type No.

Light weight diesel trucks 3Tractors and trolleys 3Jeeps 5

(c) the Operation and Maintenance Division stores will hold 10%spares against pump turbines, prime movers and ancillaryelectric equipment;

(d) pump discharges will be checked at half yearly intervalsand turbine impellors will be replaced if low dischargesindicate wear; and

- 24 -

(e) well discharges and drawdown will be checked half yearlyand the well will be rehabilitated if the discharge-drawdownrelationship indicates deterioration of well performance.

5.26 Agreements have been reached with GOUP that: (a) it -,-uld selectcommand areas, as well as design, construct, operate and maintain projecttubewells according to these criteria; and (b) it would cause the StateElectricity Board to energize the tubewell pump units within two monthsafter the completion of the piped distribution system.

Project Costs

5.27 Total project costs are estimated to be US$37.7 million equivalent,including US$1.7 million in taxes and duties. The foreign exchange componentwould be US$2.2 million or equivalent to about 6% of the total project cost.Estimated costs are based on price levels prevailing in September 1979.Physical contingencies on civil works averaging about 8% of the base cost havebeen included. Expected price increases are taken as 16% in 1979/80, 10% in1980/81 and 7% in 1981/82. Project costs are detailed in Annex 1, Tables T-6to T-i12 and are summarized below.

- 25 -

Summary of Project Cost

% ofLocal Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Total---------Rs M-------- ---------US$M--------

1. Land Acquisition 3.2 - 3.2 0.38 - 0.38 1.0

2. TubewellsWater point /a 68.0 3.6 71.6 8.10 0.43 8.52Distribution System

and AssociatedWorks 105.3 8.6 113.9 12.54 1.02 13.56

Power Transmissionand Transformation 16.8 1.0 17.8 2.00 0.12 2.12

190.1 13.2 203.3 22.64 1.57 24.20 64.2

3. Buildings 6.0 0.1 6.1 0.71 0.01 0.73 2.0

4. Vehicles and EquipmentVehicles 6.0 0.4 6.4 0.71 0.05 0.76Workshop Equipment 0.4 - 0.4 0.05 - 0.05

Monitoring Equipment - 0.3 0.3 - 0.04 0.04

6.4 0.7 7.1 0.76 0.09 0.85 2.3

5. Monitoring andEvaluation 1.0 - 1.0 0.12 - 0.12 0.3

6. Training 0.1 - 0.1 0.01 - 0.01 -

7. Administration andEngineering 18.4 - 18.4 2.19 - 2.19 5.8

8. Preparation forStage II 0.1 - 0.1 0.01 - 0.01 -

BASE COST 225.3 14.0 239.3 26.82 1.67 28.49 75.6

Physical Contingency /b 16.4 1.0 17.4 1.95 0.12 2.07 5.5

Price Contingency 56.6 3.3 59.9 6.74 0.39 7.13 18.9

TOTAL PROJECT COST 298.3 18.3 316.6 35.51 2.18 37.69 100.0

Project Cost LessTaxes and Duties 284.1 18.3 302.4 33.82 2.18 36.00

/a Water point includes well, pumping unit and ancillaries.

/b Physical contingency is taken as 10% of distribution system, powersupply and buildings, and 5% of water points (including wells, pumpingunit and ancilliaries.

26

Financing

5.28 The proposed credit of US$18 M would finance 50% of the totalproject costs net of taxes and duties, including all foreign exchange costsand about 45% of local costs. The balance would be contributed by GOUP, whichwould include a GOI contribution. An agreement has been reached with GOIthat it would miake the proceeds of the credit available to GOUP on GOI'sstandard terms and arrangements for development assistance to the states.An agreement has been reached with GOUP that it would promptly provide fundsto execute the project in accordance with the implementation and expenditureschedule for the two-year project period (Annex 1, C-4).

5.29 In order to ensure meaningful and reliable monitoring results atthe end of the project period, a number of tubewells should be completed inthe first three month period of the project and be ready for operation. Theconstruction of tubewells would be seasonal (para 5.31) and it would beadvantageous to drill tubewells and to install the pipes during the dryseason. For this reason, retroactive financing would be provided fromSeptember 15, 1979 which is after the date of appraisal to the date of creditsigning for (a) works completed in the construction of tubewells and (b)vehicles required for staff to carry out field operations. The amount ofretroactive financing is not expected to exceed US$1.0 M.

Procurement

5.30 Civil works would consist of drilling of bore holes and constructionof well distribution systems, access roads and buildings (i.e., pump houses,workshops and storage facilities, and quarters for operations and maintenancestaff). Drilling (US$3.7 million 1/) would be carried out by the TubewellWing, which has an established, technically competent staff capable ofdrilling the 1,500 wells in its annual program, of which IDA-financed wellswould form only a part. The remaining civil works (US$4.3 million 1/) wouldbe small and scattered and thus unsuitable for international bidding. Theseworks would be carried out by local contractors selected after competitivebidding, according to procedures satisfactory to the Association, withmaterials provided by the State Government.

5.31 PVC and steel casing pipes valued at US$11.8 million 2/ would berequired for project wells and the associated distribution systems. Thesematerials would be procured through international competitive bidding (ICB),with the exception of an initial supply of up to US$2 million worth of PVCpipes, which would be procured through the State's usual local procurementprocedures in order to permit an early start on the first year's well con-struaction program. Remaining building materials (e.g., steel bars, bricks

1/ Net of materials costs and price contingencies.

2/ Net of taxes and price contingencies.

- 27 -

concrete, cement, timber; totalling US$3.8 million 1/ would be required insmall amounts throughout the project area and would be unsuitable for inter-national procurement. These materials would be procured through localcompetitive procedures, which are satisfactory to the Association. Inview of the need to maintain an adequate supply of spare parts throughout theproject area, pumpsets and accessories (US$1.8 million) would also be procuredlocally on the basis of competitive bidding. Field vehicles (US$0.8 million)would be purchased in small quantities over a period of two years and wouldbe widely dispersed over the project area. As adequate maintenance of thesevehicles would require a good network of servicing and spare parts facilities,these vehicles would be procured through local competitive bidding accordingto existing Government procedures. Finally, monitoring equipment (US$40,000)would be purchased in small orders of US$3,000 or less by prudent shoppingthrough normal trade channels.

Disbursements

5.32 Disbursements under the credit would be made against (i) 100% offoreign costs or 70% of local expenditures for monitoring equipment; (ii) 100%of ex-factory costs or 70% of expenditures on locally procured vehicles;(iii) 100% of expenditures on training; and (iv) 50% of expenditures incurredon completed tubewells. Disbursement for completed tubewells would be madeagainst certificate of expenditures submitted by GOUP, itemized by majorcomponents. The disbursement request would also include a certified statementby the Superintendent Engineer in charge that (i) all works on the tubewellhave been completed in accordance with the agreed planning and design criteria;(ii) the command area of each tubewell is proportional to the discharge duringthe drawdown test; (iii) the discharge of each tubewell is not less than 70%of the design discharge; and (iv) the tubewell has been electrified. Dis-bursement for training and for payments of less than Rs 150,000 for equipmentand vehicles would also be made against certificate of expenditures submittedby GOUP. Documentation of these works would be retained by GOUP and madeavailable for inspection by IDA during project review mission. The estimatedschedule of expenditure, the proposed allocation of the proceeds of the creditand the semi-annual disbursement schedule are presented in Annex 1, Table T-13to T-15. It is expected that disbursements would be completed by December1982.

Accounts and Audits

5.33 The Tubewell Wing of the Irrigation Department (para 6.01) would besubject to normal Government control and auditing procedures which are satis-factory to IDA. Agreements have been reached with GOUP that: (i) it wouldmaintain separate accounts on project expenditures; (ii) these accounts wouldbe audited by the State auditor; (iii) audit summaries would be submitted toIDA nine months after the close of the fiscal year together with the auditor'sreports; and (iv) it would make available complete accounts and financialstatements to IDA during supervision mission.

1/ Net of taxes and price contingencies.

- 28 -

VI. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

The Tubewell Wing of the Irrigation Department

6.01 Existing Structures (Annex 1, C-5). Construction, operation andmaintenance of public tubewells are the responsibility of the TubewellWing (TW) of the Irrigation Department. The TW is directly managedby two Additional Chief Engineers with responsibility for Eastern (includingthe Central region) and Western Uttar Pradesh. The TW is sub-divided into14 Circles, each covering several administrative districts and controlled bya Superintendent Engineer. Each Circle includes 4 to 6 Divisions underExecutive Engineers. One Division is responsible for workshops and stores,one for drilling of tubewells and the remaining Divisions for the constructionof pump houses and distribution systems, installation of pumping equipment andoperation and maintenance of the tubewell systems. Divisions are furtherdivided into 4 Sub-divisions under Assistant Engineers. Each Sub-divisioncomprises about 3 to 4 Sections, headed by Junior Engineers (JE). Under thecharge of each JE, there are Tubewell Operators (one per tubewell) and/orMechanics (one for 15 to 20 tubewells). In general, a Section is responsiblefor O&M of 30 to 40 tubewells, a Sub-division 100 to 125; and a Division forabout 400 to 500 tubewells.

6.02 Proposed Organization (Annex 1, C-5). To construct and operate the500 project tubewells, two Circles within the existing TW would be responsiblefor implementing the project. In view of the greater amount of engineering(design and supervision.of construction) and strengthened O&M required underthe project, the O&M functions would be separated from construction.

6.03 Under the proposed structure, a Circle would have a drilling Divi-sioII, 3-4 construction Divisions and one O&M Division. Each Division wouldbe headed by an Executive Engineer who would supervise 4 Assistant Engineersand 12-16 Junior Engineers. The drilling Division would be responsible forwel:L construction and development. The construction Division would be incharge of constructing pump houses and delivery tanks, installing pumpingequipment and laying out the pipelines to 3-4 ha outlets. The O&M divisionwould be responsible for assisting farmers in constructing field channelsfrom outlets to fields, for designing and supervising the rotational systemof water distribution in the tubewell commands and for maintenance of work-shop. Within the O&M Division, a Junior Engineer would supervise O&M of upto 20 tubewells.

6.04 Agricultural services under the project would be closely coordinatedwith the activities of the Operation and Maintenance Division. There would bean Agricultural Officer (AO) with each O&M Division assisted by 10-12 Agri-cultural Supervisors. The Agricultural Supervisors (ASs) would be paired withthe Junior Engineers in charge of operation and maintenance Sections in orderto assist farmers in better utilization of irrigation provided by tubewells.The AOs and ASs would be deputed from the Department of Agriculture (DA) inthe State and would be technically supervised by the Director of Agriculture.

- 29 -

Organization Within a Tubewell Command Area

6.05 At present, the cultivators within a command area are organizedinto thoks for distribution of water. The deficiency of this organizationis described in para 4.03. Under the project, it is proposed that the con-cerned Junior Engineer and Agricultural Supervisor in charge of a group oftubewells would assist in organizing farmers. Farmers within each outletwould form a committee and elect a leader to supervise water distributionwithin one outlet as per schedule. Leaders of the outlet committees wouldelect 5 representative farmers to form a Tubewell Committee for each tubewell.The Tubewell Committee would have a President and a Secretary and would beresponsible for coordination and cooperation among outlet committees, solvingdisputes, and advising the concerned Junior Engineers in working out therotational schedule.

Monitoring and Evaluation

6.06 Staff Requirements. The Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (M&E) wouldform part of the headquarter staff of the Additional Chief Engineers. Theprofessional staff of the unit would comprise an Executive Engineer, twoAssistant Engineers, two Agricultural Officers and a Statistician. Theywould be assisted by six Junior Engineers, four Agricultural Assistants andthree Assistant Economists.

6.07 Activities. Monitoring and Evaluation activities are discussedin detail in Annex 2. In summary, monitoring would consist of collectionand analysis of the following data:

(a) actual investment cost of each construction alternativein terms of system cost; cost per hectare of commandarea and cost per hectare of actually irrigated area;

(b) actual cost per unit of water delivered at the plotboundaries;

(c) actual supervision, administration, operation andmaintenance costs for each construction alternative;

(d) measurement of water use and losses for existing tube-well systems and for each construction alternative;

(e) hours of power availability of the 11 kVA substationsand at the well site;

(f) running hours of each pumping unit;

(g) areas irrigated in each season in each tubewell system;

(h) farmers' reaction to the water allocation procedures;

(i) pre-project and post-project yields for each region;

- 30 -

(j) number, amounts and times of irrigations for major cropsin each region; and

(k) well yield and drawdown relationships and water tablefluctuations through time.

The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) unit would coordinate its works closelywith the construction and the operation and maintenance Divisions and withthe DA for the collection of the data.

6.08 A base line study and an evaluation study would be made at the begin-ning of and towards the end of the project, respectively. These activitieswould be sub-contracted to an independent, suitably qualified organization,satisfactory to IDA.

Progress Review and Reporting Requirements

6.09 Progress reports would be prepared by the M&E unit and be submittedto IDA within three months of the end of each irrigation season. Each reportwould include brief descriptions of the main events of the period including(a) construction progress; (b) expenditures incurred; (c) project staffingstatus; (d) tender, evaluation and award of contracts; (e) irrigation poten-tial created; (f) actual areas irrigated; (g) operational hours of waterpoints; (h) power supply situation; and (k) farmers' reaction to water allo-cation procedures. An agreement has been reached with GOUP that it wouldsubmit to IDA a project completion report no later than six months after theclosing date of the project.

Training

6.10 Staff training would be required in two respects: (a) training indesign and layout of the proposed pipe distribution systems; and (b) trainingin supervision of the operation of the tubewell systems and their associatedcommand areas. Item (a) is necessary because the pipe systems to be installedare unfamiliar to the engineering staff who would be responsible for theirlayout. The training in this instance would be "in-service," directed bysenior TW officers. A pre-requisite to the training program would be thecompilation of a design manual covering various design situations. The manualwould be prepared by Departmental officers with assistance from FAO/WorldBank CP staff. CP staff would also assist GOUP in technical training duringproject execution.

6.11 The trainees in the second category would be officers from the O&MDivisions. Training responsibilities would be contracted to the State G.P.Pantnagar University of Agriculture and Technology located in the Nainitaldistrict. Junior staff would be trained at the university for three weeks andsenior staff for one week. The courses would include lectures, discussions,case studies, and field trips covering O&M of the pump and pipe system, designof field channels, land preparation for irrigation, water management at thefield level, cultivator organization and basic cultivation practices forprincipal crops to be grown in the tubewell commands. In addition, prior to

- 31 -

the acceptance of O&M responsibility of a cluster of tubewells, each JuniorEngineer would be required to live in the command area of at least one publictubewell for one month to familiarize himself with problems facing the farmersusing tubewell water. This experience would assist him to manage his clusterof tubewells more efficiently. Details of the training program are providedin Annex 3. An agreement has been reached with GOUP that it would engageO&M staff in training programs acceptable to IDA.

Cost Recovery

6.12 Capital and O&M Costs. The capital costs of p5oject tubewells,in financial terms, range3from Rs 3,300 per ha for 330 m /h capacity toRs 3,900 per ha for 150 m /h. Recovery of these costs over 20 years at6% 1/ would require annual repayments ranging from Rs 290 to Rs 340 per ha,with a weighted average of Rs 320 per ha. The O&M costs, including a flatcharge on the use of electricity (§s 480 per installed horsepower pir year),range from Rs 140 per ha for 300 m /ha tubewell to Rs 170 for 150 m /htubewell, with a weighted average of Rs 160 per ha. Thus, the total averageannual charge necessary to achieve full cost recovery would amount to Rs 480per ha.

6.13 3 Water Charges. The existing charge is Rs 1 3er 16,000 gallons(73 m ) in the kharif and Rs 1 per 6,000 gallons (27 m ) in the rabi. Ingeneral, about one-third of the total water pumped per year is used in thekharif and two-thirds in the rabi. At prevailing rates, the annual chargesper ha, at different levels of operation, are estimated as follows:

Running Hours 2,000 3,000 3,500 4,000-----------Rs/ha of CCA-----------

Kharif 14 20 24 27Rabi 71 110 131 148

Total 85 130 155 175

Thus a tubewell needs to run between 3,500 and 4,000 hours per year to coverO&M costs alone at the prevailing rate. Under the project, it is expectedthat the average running hours would reach 3,500 hours. At this operatinglevel the cost recovery index at current water rates would be 32%.

6.14 Other Related Charges. Land revenue varies by district and typeof crop grown. On average, the difference between the rates levied on irri-gated and unirrigated lands is about Rs 25 per ha. If such incrementalrevenue is taken into account, the level of cost recovery per tubewellunder the project increases to 38%. If other incremental revenues stemmingfrom changes in production permitted by irrigation, such as the purchase taxon sugarcane are taken into account, cost recovery per tubewell would be about39%. This would imply that about 61% of total costs would be met from theGovernment budget.

1/ Borrowing by Government would be at this interest rate in Uttar Pradesh.

- 32 -

6.15 Evaluation of GOUP's Cost Recovery Policy. From the point of viewof promoting efficient use of water, the present policy of charging for theuse of water from tubewells on a volumetric basis, and of having differentrates for kharif and rabi seasons is sound. In the kharif, water supply fromtubewells is underutilized because of the relatively high rainfall. Conse-quently, water charges in the kharif need to be sufficiently lc to provideeconomic incentives to farmers to use water. Furthermore, experiences else-where in India show that early planting of paddy would allow early planting ofwheat and thus increase wheat yields. Thus, a high charge in the kharif couldbe counterproductive, since many farmers would tend to wait for the rain and,therefore, delay planting of paddy and wheat.

6.16 Because of the low standard in the distribution systems of existingpublic tubewells, the water supply to most tailend farmers is highly unreli-able and their benefits from irrigation are fairly low. Consequently, waterrates are presently set at a low level in order to give tailend farmers suffi-cient incentive to use irrigation water, even though the upper-reach farmersmay be able to pay substantially higher charges. Discriminatory charges wouldnot be feasible due to difficulties in measuring the benefits accruing to eachindividual farmer as well as the administrative difficulties in collectingdifferent rates. The improved technical standards introduced under theproject are designed to ensure that every farmer would receive a reliablewater supply. This would make it possible to collect a higher volumetriccharge from all participating farmers.

6.17 Cost Recovery Proposals. The effect of various levels of watercharges on cost recovery and project rent is as follows:

Other CostWater Related Recovery RentCharges Charges Index (%) Recovery

Alternative (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) O&M Capital Index (%)

I. Present Water Rates 155 30 100 8 22-27II. Raise Present Water

Rates to ReflectHigher Efficiency 210 30 100 25 28-35

III. Full Cost Recovery 450 30 100 100 56-71

This indicates that, at present water rates, there is some scope for increasingwater charges. Full cost recovery, however, would stretch project farmers,capalcities to pay, particularly those of poor farmers. On the basis of preli-minary results for experimental tubewells and experiences elsewhere in Indiaon water savings from improved distribution systems, it is estimated that thebenefits per ha under the project tubewell would be about 35% higher thanthose under existing tubewells. If the water rates are raised to meet thisobjective, water and water related charges would cover all O&M costs and about25% of the capital costs. This would be within the project farmers' abilityto pay.

- 33 -

6.18 While it is believed that participating farmers will be able to payhigher water charges, it is proposed that significant increases in watercharges should be made only when: (i) the technical efficiency and adminis-trative arrangements for the operation of project developed tubewells, inparticular, their ability to provide an assured and timely water supply, hasbeen clearly demonstrated; and (ii) reliable data on the actual benefitsaccruing to project participants has been obtained. Given the poor effi-ciency of existing public tubewells, it is impractical to expect eitherfarmers to commit themselves to pay higher rates or GOUP to promulgate higherwater charges until the benefits of the new project technology have beenestablished clearly.

6.19 Against this background, agreements have been reached with GOUPthat (i) by March 31, 1981 it would review the water charges on the tubewellsin the State; and (ii) based on the recommendations arising from the review andafter paying due regard to the Association's comments, it would implement anappropriate system of water charges to ensure recovery of annual O&M costs, andto the extent possible,, the capital costs of public tubewells. In establishingthe level of charges, due consideration would be given to incentives for andpayment of farmers.

VII. AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

Cropping Patterns

7.01 Cropping patterns for the three regions (Western, Central andEastern) would generally follow the present practices. Wheat, sugarcane andfodder crops would be the main crops in the Western region; wheat, paddy andbarley in the Central; and paddy, wheat and gram in the Eastern part. Inthe kharif, paddy would be the main crop to receive irrigation whereas in therabi, most crops would be irrigated. Availability of irrigation would encour-age farmers to grow more of the early varieties of paddy (100 to 120 daysduration) in June. This would clear the field for earlier planting of wheatresulting in higher wheat yields. In addition, high value pulse crops suchas mung would be grown in the hot months with irrigation (March to May) whenthey would be less affected by pests than when grown in the kharif. Areasunder cash crops such as oilseeds, sugarcane and potato would also increasedue to irrigation. Details of the cropping patterns for the three regionsare presented in Annex 1, Table T-16.

Crop Yields

7.02 At present, yields of most crops are low due to unreliable rainfalland the minimal application of modern inputs. Reliable irrigation supplyunder the project would increase crop yields significantly. In view of thestagnant yields of rainfed crops during the last decade, it is assumed thatthere would be no change in yields under "future without project" situation asin the rainfed crops grown under "future with project" conditions. Based onthe data from agricultural statistics and farm management surveys, the pro-jected yields of major crops are estimated as follows:

- 34 -

Present = Future Without Project Future With Project--------------------------tons/ha…--------------…-------

Paddy /a 1.0-1.2 2.4-3.0Wheat /a 1.0 2.0-2.2Maize 0.8 1.8Barley 0.8 1.8Gram 0.5 1.0Sugarcane 30.0 55.0

/a Early and late crops.

Agricultural Production

7.03 Present agricultural production reflects the uncertain rainfall.With reliable irrigation, agricultural production would increase significantlyas a result of the adoption of more intensive year-round cropping patterns andincreased yields. Expected total incremental agricultural production at fulldevelopment (4 years after commencement of irrigation delivery in each tubewellcommand area) is shown in detail in Annex 1, Table T-15 and summarized below:

Incremental Production per Tubewell Total Incremental

150 m /h 225 m /h 300 m h Production…---------- tons--------------- ----1000 tons----

Foodgrains 102.7 154.0 205.4 64.2Oilseeds 3.4 5.1 6.8 2.1Sugarcane 128.3 178.2 237.6 80.2

Water Supply and Demand

7.04 The potential irrigation supply from public tubewells depends onthe availability of electricity. Based on the records of the electricitysupply in a normal year and improved outlook in the future, it is assumedthat, under the project, electric power would be avlilable for 16 hours perday. On avera§e, the potential supply from a 150 m /h tubewell would beabout 72,000 m per month.

7.05 The crop irrigation requirements, estimated according to the modifiedPenman method, are presented in detail for a command area of 100 ha in item B.7Project File and summarized below:

Region Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul 3 Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total…i--------------------------------- in '000 m -------------------…-----------

Western 59 73 28 57 57 66 23 6 19 71 53 59 571Central 58 63 21 35 30 54 27 0 12 67 43 54. 464Eastern 51 47 14 16 17 72 52 11 24 24 42 46 462

- 35 -

This shows that sufficient water would be available for the projected croppingpatterns of the three rejions (Annex , Tables T-15 and T-17). Tubewells withhigher discharges (225 m /h and 300 m /h) would 5 ommand larger areas (150 to200 ha), but in the same proportion as the 150 m /h tubewell. Consequently,the above analysis could be applied to the larger capacity tube.wells.

Agricultural Supporting Services

7.06 Agricultural Research. The State has three Agricultural Universitieswhich have been assigned responsibility for basic and applied research withintheir operational areas. These are: G.P. Pant University of Agriculture andTechnology at Pantnagar, G.S. Azad University of Agriculture and Technology atKanpur and N. Deo University of Agriculture and Technology at Faizabad. Pre-sent research programs cover all branches of agriculture including AgriculturalEconomics. Adaptive research remains the responsibility of the DA which atpresent has ten regional agricultural testing and demonstration stations.Plans to establish further two main stations and seven sub-stations are under-way. The State also maintains an Irrigation Research Institute at Roorke anda Horticultural Research Station at Saharanpur. Central Government ResearchInstitutes for sugarcane, grasslands and soil conservation are located atLucknow, Jhansi and Dehra Dun, respectively. Since existing research facil-ities are adequate for project purposes, no provision would be necessary underthe project.

7.07 Agricultural Extension. Technically, agricultural extension is theresponsibility of the DA. However, the primary contact with the farmers--themultipurpose village level worker (VLW)--belongs to the Department of Commu-nity Development (CD). He works under the administrative control of the BlockDevelopment Officer of the CD. On technical matters, he receives guidancefrom the Assistant Development Officer, Agriculture and the District Agricul-ture Office who are employees of the DA. In general, there are about 10 VLWsper block covering-about 25,000 to 30,000 ha. This staffing pattern providesone VLW for every 3,000 farm families. In some blocks covered under specialschemes such as Small Farmers Development, Command Area Development andDrought Prone Area Development, the ratio is about 1 VLW for every 1,500families.

7.08 The present extension system is inadequate, as: (a) extensionservices are poorly planned and supervised; (b) VLWs have too many responsi-bilities and are assigned to cover too large an area; (c) linkages withresearch and training are weak; and (d) VLWs suffer from restricted mobilityand inadequate housing. GOUP has recognized the problems and it is attempt-ing to improve extension services. The concepts of the Training and Visit(T&V) extension system, such as an intensive staffing pattern, frequenttraining, better linkages with research, and the use of contact farmers todeliver relevant messages are being tried out in the command areas of a numberof surface irrigation systems. The results of this experiment should assistGOUP to formulate improvements for its statewide extension services.

- 36 -

7.09 The proposed new tubewells would have attractive rates of return(para 8.07) without T&V. While the application of the T&V system in theproject area would improve returns on investments in public tubewells, theintroduction of the system would be administratively difficult under thnisprojiect. Project tubewells would be dispersed throughout the State, and T&Vwould have to be introduced to at least 12 districts of the stU a. This couldnot 'be done during the project period of two years. Consequently, under theproject, Agricultural Supervisors would be assigned to a cluster of tubewells(para 6.04), who would work with both Junior Engineers and existing VLWds toadvise farmers in better utilization of tubewell water.

7.10 Agricultural Inputs. There is a well developed system for distri-bution and sale of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides throughout the State.The requirements of HYV seeds is met by the National Seed Corporation, TeraiDevelopment Corporation (TDC) and by the State Multiplication Farms. Seedsproduced by these agencies, particularly by TDC are distributed, not only toUP, but also to Bihar, West Bengal and Assam. Fertilizer distribution isshared equally between private and public sectors. Of the 50% under thepublic sector cooperatives, 10% is handled by sugarcane cooperatives, one-third by the Provincial Cooperative Federation and the rest by the Agro-Industries Corporation.

7.11 Agricultural Credit. Institutional credit organization follows thenormal pattern for India. The cooperative banks, which provide short andmedium term loans mainly for agricultural inputs at an annual rate of 12-13%,are organized on a three tier basis with the State Cooperative Bank at theState level and 55 central banks at the district level. There are a largenumber of primary cooperative credit societies located in some 112,000villages in the State. Overdues of cooperative banks are presently aboutone-quarter of the demand. The State Cooperative Land Development Bank ishandling the long term credit (up to 15 years) at a rate of 9.5% to 10.0%through 226 branches in the whole State. At present, the recovery performanceis normal at 76%. Commercial banks with 2,800 branches in the State, alsohave a major role in agricultural lending (about 15%).

7.12 Marketing, Processing and Storage. Marketing in UP is regulatedunder the Agricultural Produce Market Act (1964). At present, marketablesurplus is traded in about 250 main wholesale markets and 365 sub-yards.About 40 new market yards are under construction. In general, the provisionof marketing facilities is well responded to the increasing production. Mostprocessing facilities in UP are privately owned. Some cooperatives (about 57)have also been involved in processing, particularly oilseeds. Sugar factoriesare numerous but about half of them need modernization. In general, there areno serious constraints to the present system of processing.

7.13 At present, UP has a storage capacity of about 2.8 M tons. Thiscapacity is provided by three main agencies: the State Warehousing Corpora-tion; the Central Warehousing Corporation; and Marketing Federation. Inaddition, some cooperatives also have go-downs. In response to the increasingpotato production in recent years, about 50 cold storages with capacity of85,000 tons have been established. The Bank Group is presently financing astorage development project (Cr. 747-IN, US$107 M) in UP (among other Statesin India) and another one is being financed by the European Economic Community.

- 37 -

VIII. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION

General

8.01 The proposed project would expand the area under irrigation inUttar Pradesh. Through this mean, it would increase the production of food-grains, oilseeds and sugarcane and provide additional year-round employmentopportunities to small farmers.

8.02 The design and operational standards proposed under the projectwould increase the efficiency in groundwater utilization through both tech-nical changes suited adaptable to local conditions as well as improvementsin the organization of human resources. If successful, the project wouldbe eminently replicated to rehabilitate 15,000 existing public tubewells inUttar Pradesh but also in other areas of Gangetic plain.

8.03 The overall impact of the proposed project can be summarized asfollows:

Directly benefiting farm families (nos.) 62,000Increase in irrigated area (ha) 60,000Increased foodgrain production (tons/year) 64,000Increased oilseed production (tons/year) 2,100Increased sugarcane production (tons/year) 80,200Net foreign exchange savings (US$/year) 10 MValue added to the local economy (Rs/year) 80 MGenerated farm employment (jobs) 30,000

Income Effect

8.04 At present, virtually all benefiting farmers have no access toirrigation. Two farm models for each region have been examined to assessthe impact of irrigation on farm incomes: a 1 ha farm model representingabout at least three-quarters of the benefiting farmers and a 3 ha model forthe remaining beneficiaries. Estimates of farm incomes are based on farmsurveys, district statistics, and the projected financial prices of inputsand outputs. Detailed analyses of farm budgets are given in Annex 1, TableT-18. The results are summarized below:

----------Net Farm Incomes (Rs)----------1 ha Farm 3 ha Farm

Region FWO FW FWO FW

Western 720 3,090 1,690 7,120Central 530 1,950 1,380 4,810Eastern 550 1,800 1,480 4,560

FWO: Future Without ProjectFW : Future With Project

- 38 -

8.05 In calculating farm incomes, cash payments for needs such asfertilizer, plant protection, rental charges of animal and tractors andirrigation costs are included in production costs. With irrigation providedunder the project, net farm incomes would increase three to four-fold.

Returns and Costs of Water

8.06 The economic value of the water depends on the level of agriculturaldevelopment and the water supply situation. Based on the estimated croppingpatterns, yields, inputs, utilization for the three regions (Annex 1, TableT-16), the average economic return per unit of water used ranges from Rs 0.34to Rs 0.40 per m per year at the water point (Annex 1, Table T-20). On theother hand, the cost of producing per unit of water at the water point, takinginto account both investment and O&M costs, is estimated about Rs 0.13 toRs 0.22 per m for various sizes of tubewells and different running hours(Annex 1, Table T-20). Thus, the returns would be about twice as much as thecost of producing per unit of water from public tubewells.

Economic Evaluation

8.07 The assumptions used for the economic evaluation are detailed inAnnex 4. All costs and benefits have been applied by the appropriate conver-sion factors to make them comparable at world market prices. The incrementalnet economic benefits resulting from irrigation would range from Rs 1,700 inthe ]Eastern region to Rs 2,200 in the Western region with an average ofRs 1,900 per ha of CCA. The economic co t of tubewell investment would rangefrom Rs 2,13Q for large tubewells (300 m /hr), to Rs 2,540 for smaller tube-wells (150 m /hr), with a weighted average of about Rs 2,420 per ha of CCA.The O&M cost would average at Rs 460 per ha. Assuming a four year build-upperiod, the economic rate of return of this project is estimated at 36%(Annex 1, Table T-21).

Sensitivity Analysis

8.08 Sensitivity analysis is used to determine the variables which couldbe crucial to the viability of the project. The measure of sensitivity used,the "'critical value" is the value of the variable tested for which the presentvaluie of the project's net incremental benefits discounted at 12% (the esti-mated opportunity cost of capital in India) is zero. The results are presentedbelow:

- 39 -

Appraisal Critical Change fromValue Value Appraisal Value

Number of Running Hours (hrs) 3,500 /a 1,225 /b - 65%Assumption of All Crop Yields

at full Development - - - 33%

Assumption of All Output Prices - - - 51%Standard Conversion Factor 0.8 1.4 + 75%Operation and Maintenance Costs (Rs/ha) 460 1,343 + 192%Construction Costs (Rs/ha) 2,420 7,960 + 229%Delays in Farmers' Response (years) 4 10 +6 years

/a Equivalent to about 16 hours per day during the peak demand of water./b Equivalent to about 6 hours per day during the peak demand of water.

Project Risk

8.09 The results of the sensitivity analysis indicate that only large(and unlikely at the magnitude required) deviations from the basic projectassumptions could turn this project to be economically unviable. A possiblerisk would be the underutilization of public tubewells. In the past, the lowrunning hours and small areas irrigated from public tubewells were caused byinadequate power supply, absence of tubewell operators, frequent mechanicalbreakdowns and incomplete distribution system. The technical and operationalstandards introduced under the project are designed specifically to protectagainst underutilization due to the latter three of these factors. As forpower supply, the GOUP and GOI, with Bank Group assistance, are activelyengaged in an investment program designed to increase power availabilityin Uttar Pradesh by approximately 80% by 1983, with particular emphasis onexpansion of the supply network in rural areas. At present, power avail-ability during peak agricultural season averages about 12 hours per day.Since the critical value is about 6 hours per day, the project is stilleconomically viable even if tubewells are operated at the present rate ofpower availability. Consequently, the risk associated with this project isacceptable.

Environmental Effect

8.10 The water delivery through buried pipes proposed under the projectwould greatly reduce the hazards of malaria which is normally encountered inareas with surface canals. However, the introduction of irrigation to therainfed areas is often accompanied by an increase in the incidence of waterrelated diseases. An agreement has been reached with GOUP that it wouldtake all measures considered necessary to minimize the hazards of malariaand other water related diseases in the command areas of project tubewells.

IX. RECOMMENDATIONS

9.01 An agreement has been reached with GOI that it would make theproceeds of credit available to GOUP on GOI's standard terms and arrange-ments for development assistance to the state (para 5.29).

- 40 -

9.02 Agreements have been reached with GOUP that:

(a) it would select command areas as well as, design, construct,operate and maintain project tubewells in accordance withthe criteria agreed with IDA (para 5.27);

(b) it will cause the State Electricity Board to energize thetubewell pump units within two months after completion ofpiped distribution systems (para 5.27);

(c) it would promptly provide funds to execute the project inaccordance with the agreed implementation schedule for thetwo-year period (para 5.29);

(d) (i) it would maintain separate accounts on project expen-ditures; (ii) these accounts would be audited by theState auditor; (iii) audit summaries would be submittedto IDA nine months after the close of its fiscal yeartogether with the auditor's reports; and (iv) it wouldmake available complete accounts and financial statementsto IDA during supervision missions (para 5.34);

(e) it would submit to IDA a project completion report no laterthan six months after the closing date of the project(para 6.09);

(f) it would engage O&M staff in training programs acceptableto IDA (para 6.11);

(g) it would undertake a review of water charges on the tube-wells in the state by March 31, 1981 (para 6.19);

(h) based on the recommendations of the review and after payingdue regards to IDA comments it would implement an approporiatesystem of water charges to ensure recovery of annual O&M costsand to the extent possible, the capital costs of public tubewells.In establishing the level of charges, due consideration would begiven to incentives for and payment capacities of farmers(para 6.19); and

(i) it would take all measures considered necessary to minimizethe hazards of malaria and other water related diseases inthe command areas of project tubewells (para 8.10).

9.03 With the above agreements, the proposed project would be suitablefor an IDA credit of US$18 M on standard IDA terms. The Borrower would be theGovernment of India.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PRWOECT

Agricultural Performance

1950/51 - 1977/78 1950/51 - 1960/61 1961/62 - 1970/71 1971/72 - 1977/78Area Yield Production Area Yield Production Area Yield Production Area Yield Production------------------------------------------------------------------------ % per annum-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rice 1.0 1.9 2.8 1.5 3.6 5.2 0.3 -0.3 -0.1 0.9 5.0 4.7

Wheat 2.6 2.1 4.8 2.6 2.1 4.8 4.5 5.0 9.9 1.6 2.5 4.1

Bajra -0.1 0.7 0.3 -0.2 -3.6 -3.7 0.8 3.9 4.9 -0.4 3.0 2.7

Maize 3.3 0.0 2.0 2.8 -1.8 1.0 4.6 3.3 9.7 -0.3 2.9 -0.5

Barley -2.3 1.0 -2.2 -0.7 -0.8 -1.5 -2.3 2.1 -0.4 -3.5 2.3 -1.3

Cereals 0.9 1.8 2.6 0.9 0.6 1.5 1.7 3.0 4.8 0.2 3.8 4.1

Arhar -0.9 0.0 -0.8 -0.2 1.1 0.9 -0.8 5.7 4.6 1.3 2.9 4.4

Gram -1.6 0.6 -0.8 0.9 0.4 1.4 -2.4 2.8 0.4 -3.9 0.4 -3.4

pulses -1.6 0.5 -0.9 0.8 1.1 2.0 -2.6 3.0 0.4 -3.2 1.7 -1.5

Foodgrains 0.4 1.6 2.0 0.9 0.7 1.6 0.7 3.1 3.9 -0.3 3.6 3.3

Groundnut 5.7 -2.1 4.0 9.1 -3.6 5.2 3.5 -4.1 -0.7 5.6 -0.8 4.8

Mustard 3.1 1.3 5.6 0.0 0.9 1.1 4.5 3.9 6.9 3.7 2.2 5.9

Oilseeds 2.5 0.6 3.1 3.1 -0.2 3.0 1.1 2.8 3.7 0.3 3.9 4.2

Sugarcane 1.3 2.1 3.5 2.4 1.8 4.2 -0.5 1.6 1.0 2.8 1.6 4.4

Potato 3.5 1.9 5.5 3.4 -0.7 2.6 4.3 5.6 10.0 11.6 8.0 9.5 '

ANNEX I42 Table T-2

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Climatological Data

Mean Annual Rainfall Temperature °CRegion District Rainfall Variability Mean Monthly Maxima

(mm) % January May

Western Saharanpur 1/ 800-1200 25-30 20 39

Aligarh 700-800 30-35 22 41

Elawah 700-800 25-30 - -

Mainpuri 700-300 25-30 23 42

Centra:L Lucknow 900-1000 30-35 23 41

Lakhimpur 1/ 1000-1200 30-35 22 40

Hardoi 800-1000 30-35 22-- 41

Faizabad 1000-1200 25-30

Eastern Azamgarh 900-1000 25-30 23 41

Varanasi 1000-1200 20-25 23 42

Ghazipur 1000-1200 20-25 - -

Allahabad 900-1200 20-25 24 42

1/ Northern district showing orographic rainfall effect of prozimity to theHimalaya.

43ANNEX 1Table T-3

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Water Balance Summaries for Project Districts

Net Net Net water demandrecoverable Unexploited water demand by as a percentage of

District recharge balance 1-4-78 project wells 1/ Unexploited balance(MCM/annum) (MCM/annum) (MCM/annum)

Sahasanpur 1,286 622 23 3.7

Aligarh 1,300 681 17 2.5

Etawah 2,474 2,098 17 0.8

Mainpuri 1,407 981 17 1.7

Jucknow 745 579 18 3.1

Jakhimpur 1,420 936 19 2.0

Hardoi 1,073 629 21 3.3

Faizabad 1,833 1,189 20 1.7

Azamgarh 3,139 2,494 17 0.7

Varanasi 1,345 844 18 2.1

Ghazipur 1,573 1,153 20 1.7

Allahabad 1,087 632 23 3.6

1/ Assumes an average operation of 3,500 h/annum and return flows togroundwater of 30% of gross extraction.

INDIA

~~~ T~~~~TTBT Tf' IrT'7fL-T.TL-TQ PT~pUTTA PRADES'n PJLIC TTJEUELTS PP,OJECT

Summary Statement of State Tubewell Performance

No. of Average Range of Utilization Average Irrigated Area Total Irrigatedwells Annual Min Max Rabi Kharif Total Area

in State Utilization (h) (h) (ha) (ha) (ha) by (PT)Year (PT) (h) (av. district level) (ha)

1966-67 8,401 3,355 767 5,920 - - 150 1,282,245

1967-68 8,750 2,530 472 4,464 - - 121 1,054,503

1968-69 9,013 3,457 846 5,065 - - 133 1,176,342

1969-70 9,301 2,420 490 4,462 - - 104 971,157

1970-71 9,715 2,305 505 3,266 - - 90 876,804

1971-72 10,262 1,580 374 2,636 57 18 75 769,650

1972-73 11,123 2,014 539 3,493 51 29 80 889,840

1973-74 11,855 1,284 38 15 53 628,315

1974-75 12,782 1,321 358 2,332 44 15 59 754,138

1975-76 13,409 1,811 60 14 74 1,002,598

1976-77 13,861 2,297 993 3,428 57 19 76 1,067,382

1977-78 14,079 1,569 49 16 65 928,250

1978-79 14,772 1,508 634 2,557 49 16 65 960,511

PT: Public Tubewells

I-gH

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Performance of Existing and Experimental Tubewells(kharif 1979, records to 8/25/79)

Distribution System Proportion

Lined Unlined Well Area Hours Water Water of CCA

Well No Channel Channel Piped CCA Discharge Irrigated Operated Pumped Pumped/ha Utilized

(km) (kin) (km) (ha) (m-5/h) (ha) (h) (mi ) (%)

16MG* 1.2 1.8 0.2 130 167 15.8 536 89,512 5,665 12.2

1MG* 2.0 1.0 0.2 132 123 17.0 525 64,575 3,799 12.9

31MG 2.2 2.0 1.8 126 123 24.7 488 60,024 2,430 19.6

33MG - - 4.8 122 167 38.4 716 119,572 3,114 31.5

* Typical existing schemes.

ANNEX 146 Yable T-6

Page 1

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Cost Estimates for Well Construction and Development

I. General Formulae for Costs of Wells

Unit TotalNo. Description Unit Cost Quantity Cost

(Rs) (Rs)

A. Well. with 350 - diameter pump chamber (D = total depth in meters)

1. Mobilization of rig and ancillaryequipment and transport of materials Sum 3,000 - 3,000

2. Interest & depreciation on plant &equipment (see Table 5) Sum 33,900 - 33,900

3. Drilling to total depth at 500-600 mmdiameter m 90 D 90D

4. Supply & installation of 350 mmdiameter casing m 375 40 15,000

5. Sockets for 350 mm casing unit 200 7 1,400

6. Supply and installation of 200 mmdiameter casing (60% of productionstring) m 177 0.6(D-40) 106D-4,248

7. Supply & installation of 200 mmdiameter screen (40% of productionstring) m 215 0.4(D-40) 86D-3,440

8. Sockets for 200 mm diameter produc- D-40tion string unit 110 5 22D-880

9. Centering guides for production D-40string unit 60 D-40 4D-160

10. Specials-reducer, bail plug, clamp,well cap sum 1,000 - 1,000

11. Pea gravel (0.3 m3/m of well depth) m3 180 0.3D 54D

12. Polyphosphate for development kg 7.5 50 375

13. Development by compressor hr 105 30 3,150

14. Development & testing by pump hr 40 50 2,000

General formula for well cost = Rs 362D + Rs 51,097

Adjusted for 2% failure at drilling = Rs 364D + Rs 51,895

B. Wells with 400 mm diameter pump chamber (D = total depth in meters)

Substitute for 350 mm in No. 4, 400 mm casing at Rs 430/meter.

General formula for well cost = Rs 362D + Rs 53,297

Adjusted for 2% failure at drilling = Rs 364D + Rs 54,095

47 ANNEX ITable T-6Page 2

II. Interest and Depreciation on Well Drilling and Testing Equipment

(Interest @ 6% per annum)

Item Description No. Unit Cost Total Cost Life I and D(Rs) (Rs) (yr) (Rs)

1. Direct circulation rigs 16 800,000 12,800,000 7 4,608,000

2. Reverse circulation rigs 6 600,000 3,600,000 7 1,296,000

3. Medium compressors 11 540,000 5,940,000 8 1,901,000

4. Small compressors 11 250,000 2,750,000 8 880,000

5. Test pumps (500 m3/ha x 35 m) 3 300,000 900,000 6 360,0003

6. Test pumps (300 m /ha x 35 m) 19 200,000 3,800,000 6 1,520,000

7. Pump set with 500 m line 44 25,000 1,100,000 5 528,000

8. Tractors with trolley 22 110,000 2,420,000 6 968,000

9. Trucks (diesel) 44 130,000 5,720,000 6 2,288,000

10. Jeeps (diesel) 12 65,000 780,000 6 312,000

11. Rig tools and small plantsets 22 60,000 1,320,000 4 766,000

12. Diesel powered welding sets 22 45,000 990,000 6 396,000

13. Electric loggers 2 200,000 400,000 6 160,000

14. Tents and fly sheets sets 22 40,000 880,000 2 968,000

TOTALS 43,400,000 16,951,000

Average I and D cost for 500 wells = Rs 33,900 per well

ANNEX 1Table T-6Page 3

III. Summary of Cost Estimates for Well Construction and Development

No. of Well Average AverageWells Discharge Depth Unit Cost Total Cost

(m3/ha) (m) (Rs) ('000 Rs)

300 150 140 103,000 30,900

150 225 200 125,000 18,750

50 300 260 149,000 7,450

TOTAL 57,100

49ANNEX 1Table T-7Page 1

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Cost Estimates for Pumping Units

I. Pump Capacities and Costs

Average Well Level Friction Tank Dynamic Theoretical Installed No of UnitDistrict SWL Drawdown Fluctuation Loss Level Head HP HP Units Cost 1/

---------------- m------------------Rs--

Well Discharge 150 m 3/ha

Saharanpur 14.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 25.5 14.0 25.0 20 14,450Aligarh 8.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 19.5 10.7 20.0 30 12,600Mainpuri 11.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 21.5 12.3 22.5 25 13,525Etawah 11.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 21.5 12.3 22.5 30 13,525Kheri 5.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 16.5 9.0 15.0 25 10,750Hardoi 7.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 18.5 10.1 17.5 25 11,675Lucknow 9.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 -20.5 11.2 20.0 25 12,600Faizabad 9.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 20.5 11.2 20.0 20 12,600Allahabad 9.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 20.5 11.2 20.0 20 12,600Ghazpur 9.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 20.5 11.2 20.0 25 12,600Azamgarh 9.5 3.0 2 1.0 5 20.5 11.2 20.0 30 12,600Varanasi 11.5 3.0 2 -1.0 5 22.5 12.3 22.5 25 13,525

300

WEIGHTED MEAN 12,739

Adjusted for 20% V.S.T. pumps = 15,300 2/

Well Discharge 225 m /ha

Saharanpur 14.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 26.5 21.8 37.5 15 19,075Aligarh 8.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 20.5 16.8 30.0 10 16,300Mainpuri 11.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 23.5 19.3 32.5 15 17,225Etawah 11.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 23.5 19.3 32.5 10 17,2251heri 5.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 17.5 14.4 25.0 15 14,450Hardoi 7.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 19.5 16.0 27.5 15 15,375Lucknow 9.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 21.5 17.7 30.0 10 16,300Faizabad 9.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 21.5 17.7 30.0 10 16,300Allahabad 9.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 21.5 17.7 30.0 15 16,300Ghazpur 9.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 21.5 17.7 30.0 15 16,300Azamgarh 9.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 21.5 17.7 30.0 10 16,300Varanasi 11.5 3.5 2 1.5 5 23.5 19.3 32.5 10 17,225

150 _

WEIGHTED MEAN 16,516

Adjusted for 20% V.S.T. pumps = 19,800 2/

Well Discharge 300 m 3/ha

Saharanpur 14.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 26.5 29.0 50.0 10 23,700Kheri 5.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 17.5 19.2 32.5 10 17,225Hardoi 7.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 19.5 21.4 37.5 5 19,075Lucknow 9.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 21.5 23.5 40.0 5 20,000Faizabad 9.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 21.5 23.5 40.0 5 20,000Allahabad 9.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 21.5 23.5 40.0 10 20,000Varanasi 11.5 4.0 2 1.0 5 23.5 25.7 42.5 5 20,925

50

WEIGHTED MEAN 20,185

Adjusted for 20% V.S.T. pumps = 24,200 2/

1/ Estimated from general formula for electric submersible pump cost = Rs 5,200 + 370 HP.

2/ Adjusted using general formula for vertical shaft turbine (V.S.T.) pump with electric motor cost = Rs 9,800 + 815 HP.

ANNEX 150 Table T-7

Page 2

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

II. Cost estimates for pumping units and ancillaries including spares

Item Description 150 m /h 225 m /h 300 m /h

unit unit unit(Rs) (Rs) (Rs)

1. Weighted mean cost of pump, primemover and rising main 15,300 19,800 24,200

2. Pump starter, controller andswitchgear 3,700 7,400 9,400

3. Capacitor 670 1,200 1,540

4. Hour operation meter 945 945 945

5. Delivery pipe 1,600 1,800 2,000

6. Electric wiring 500 600 700

7. Transportation of equipment andmaterials to site and installation 700 700 700

8. 10% spares on items 1, 2, 3, 4 2,062 2,935 3,609

Totals 25,477 35,380 43,094

Cost of 300 x 150 m 3/h units 7,024,500

Cost of 150 x 225 m3/h units 5,307,000

Cost of 50 x 300 m 3/h units 2,154,700

Total cost of 500 pumping units and ancillaries and spares 14,486,200

51ANNEX 1Table T-8

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Cost estimates for energization of pumping units(11 kv line and transformation)

Item Description No. Unit Cost Total Cost

(Rs) ('000 Rs)3

1. Energization of 150 m /h units 300 33,640 10,092.00

32. Energization of 225 m /h units 180 38,475 5,771.25

3. Energization of 300 m 3/h units 50 38,675 1,933.75

Total 17,797.00

52 ANNEX 1Table T-9

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Cost Estimate for Distribution System

Item Description 150 m 3/ha 225 m3/ha 300 m3/h…---------- Rs/Unit----------------

A. Preliminary and Land

1. Preliminary 400 600 8002. Permanent Land 5,020 5,020 5,0203. Temporary Occupation and Crop

Compensation 800 1,000 17200

SUB-TOTAL A 6,220 6,620 7,020

B. Works and Materials

4. Point WorksEL) Pump House 5,100 5,100 5,100b) Regulatory Tank 9,470 12,740 15,980

5. I)istribution Systema) Stand Pipe (3 per loop) 4,200 6,300 8,400b) Draining and Flushing Valve 2,260 3,390 4,520c) Feeder Pipe (concrete 12 in) 25,200 37,800 50,400sl) Distribution Pipe (PVC 6 in) 91,575 131,535 177,322e) Laying of Concrete Pipe 8,000 12,000 16,000f) Laying of PVC Pipe 11,550 16,590 22,635g) Siphons _ 3,350 5,030 6,710h) Alfalfa Valves with Chambers 21,100 31,650 42,200i) Field Channels 3,150 4,500 6,750

6. Othersa) Service Road 920 1,370 1,830b) Direction Board 150 150 150

SUB-TOTAL B 186,025 268,155 357,937

TOTALS A + B 192,245 274,775 364,957

Cost of 300 x 150 m 3/ha units 57,673,500

Cost of 150 x 225 m 3/ha units 41,216,250

Cost of 50 x 300 m 3/ha units 18,247,850

TOTAL cost of 500 units 117.137,600

53 ANNEX 1Table T-10

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Cost Estimates for Buildings

Item Description No. Unit Cost Total Cost(Rs) ('000 Rs)

A. Housing

1. Executive Engineer's Residence 2 91,960 183.922. Assistant Engineer's Residence 8 91,960 735.683. Tubewell Magistrate's Residence 2 91,960 183.924. Divisional Accotmtant's Residence 2 38,500 77.005. Junior Engineer's Residence 28 19,250 539.006. Agricultural Supervisor's Residence 24 19,250 462.007. Head Clerk's Residence 2 28,160 56.328. Draftsman's Res'!dence 2 28,160 56.329. Ziledar's Residence 6 28,160 169.9510. Stenographer's Residence 2 28,160 56.3211. Cashier's Residence 2 28,160 56.3212. Amin's Residence 40 14,080 563.2013. Mistri's Residence 40 14,080 563.2014. Tubewell Operator's Residence 20 14,080 281.6015. Canal Magistrate Clerk's Residence 2 14,080 28.1616. Driver's Residenice 10 7,040 70.4017. Workshop Mechanic's Residence 12 7,040 84.4818. Peon's Residence 18 7,040 126.7219. Chowkidar's Residence 10 7,040 70.40

SUB-TOTAI A 4,364.91

20. Workshop and Central Stores 2 250,000 500.0021. Inspection House and Buildings 2 200,000 400.0022. Administrative Offices 1 500,000 500.0023. Executive Engineer's Office 2 25,000 50.0024. Canal Magistrate's Office 2 25,000 50.0025. Ziledar's Office 6 25,000 150.0026. Godowns 2 50,000 100.00

SUB-TOTAI B 1,750.00

TOTAL A + B 6,115.00

54 ANNEX 1Table T-ll

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Cost Estimate of Principal Materials for Tubewell Construction

A. WATER POINTS

Unit TotalItem Description Unit Cost Quantity Cost

(Rs) (Rs '000)

1. 400mm mild steel casing 1/ m 430 2,000 8602. 350mm mild steel casing 1/ m 375 18,000 6,7503. 200mm mild steel casing 1/ m 177 39,000 6,9034. 200mm slotted casing 1/ m 215 26,000 5,5905. Sockets for 400mm casing unit 250 400 1006. Sockets for 350mm casing unit 200 3,150 6307. Sockets for 200mm casing and screen unit 110 13,000 1,4308. 400/200mm reducer unit 350 50 189. 350/200mm reducer unit 300 350 10510. Centralizers unit 60 4,350 26111. Well cep, bail plug, clamp, etc. m3 1,000 500 50012. Pea gravel m3 180 25,500 4,590

TC)TAL 27,737

US$3.3 M

B. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

1. 150mm steel pipes for pumphouse, elevatedtank, sluice valves and outlets mt 160 12,200 1,952

2. 150rmm flanged steel pipe Mt 80 12,500 1,0003. 200nmm steel pipes for pumphouse-tank mt 200 1,600 3204. 200nmm PVC feeder pipes 1/ mt 54 70,000 3,7805. 350mm steel start pipes 11/ mt 375 4,500 1,6876. 160mm PVC pipes for distribution pipeline

(loops) and standpipes 1/ mt 33.30 2,200,000 73,2607. 200/160mm and 160mm PVC Tees for standpipes

and outlets l/ un 300/204 18,200 5,460/3,7138. Radial valves and floats for the elevated tank

and pipeline un 250 500 1259. Sluice valves (150mm) for the elevated tank

and pipeline un 450 1,750 78810. Alfalfa valve for outlets un 150 12,500 1,875

TOTAL 90,247

Us$10.7 M

1/ Materials suitable for ICB.

55

Table T- 12

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWTELLS PROJECT

Cost Estimates for Equipment andVehicles to be Purchased Under the Project

Item Description No. Unit Cost Total Cost(Rs) ('000 Rs)

A. Construction Divisions

1. Heavy Duty Trucks (diesel) 10 13O9000 193002. Jeeps (diesel) 42 65,000 2,7303. Heavy Duty Tractor with Trolley 10 85,000 850

SUB-TOTAL A 43880

B. Operation and Maintenance Divisions

4. Light Duty Trucks (diesel) 6 65,000 3905. Jeep (diesel) 10 65,000 6506. Light Duty Tractor with Trolley 6 30,000 1807. Workshop Equipment Sets 2 200,000 400

SUB-TOTAL B 1,620

C. Offices of Add. Chief Engineer, Supt. Engineers and Monitoring Division

8. Staff Car 3 50,000 1509. Jeep (diesel) 3 65,000 195

10. Monitoring Equipment - Various 300

SUB-TOTAL C 645

TOTAL A + B + C

56 ANNEX 1Table T-13

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Estimated Schedule of Expenditure

…-------- -CGOUP Fiscal Year------------1980/81 1981/82 Total

…___________---…Rs '000…--------…----

PrelimLnary 2,020 1,000 3,200

Well Construction and Development 1/ 39,322 20,624 59,946

Provis:Lon and Iihstallation ofPumping Units 2/ 7,300 7,910 15,210

Distribution System 2/ 48,630 76,702 125,332

Power Transmission andTransformation 2/ 7,675 11,903 19,578

Buildings 1/ 2,017 4,709 6,726

Vehiclies and Equipment 5,359 1,786 7,145

Monitoring 150 150 300

Evaluation Studies 300 500 700

Training 50 50 100

Administration and Engineering 9,172 9,178 18,350

Preparation of Future Project 100 100

Base Cost 122,175 134,512 256,687

Price Contingencies 3/ 23,189 36,735 59,924

TOTAL PROJECT COST 145,364 171,247 316,611

6,518 7,678 14,196

PROJECT COST LESS TAXES AND DUTIES 138,846 163,569 302,415

1/ Including physical contingencies of 5%.

2/ Including physical contingencies of 10%.

3/ 16% in 1979/80, 10% in 1980/81 and 7% in 1981/82.

57

ANNEX 1Table T-14

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Proposed Allocation of Credit

% ofProposed Allocation Expenditures

Category of Credit to be Financed(US$ million)

1. Completed Tubewells 16.40 50%

2. Vehicles 0.85 100% of local expenditures(ex-factory) and 70% ofother local expenditures.

3. Monitoring Equipment 0.05 100% of foreign expendi-tures and 70% of localexpenditures.

4. Training 0.01 100%

5. Unallocated 0.69

TOTAL 18.00

ANNEX 1Table T-15

58

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Estimated Schedule of Disbursement

DisbursementIDA Fiscal Year and Semester Semester Cumulative

--- (US$'000 equivalent)…

Fiscal Year 1981FirstSecond 1,000 1,000

Fiscal Year 1982First 1,500 2,500Second 4,000 6,500

Fiscal Year 1983First 4,000 10,500Second 7,500 18,000

59

ANNEX 1ablae T-16

INDIA Page 1

UTTAR PhWESH PUBdLIC TL'8EWELLS PROJECT

Cropping Patterns and Yields for a 100 ha Command Area

WESTERN REGION CENTRAL REGION

Irri- Irri-gated Rainted gated Rainfed

Area Yipld Produntion Anea liild Producteon Area Yield Production Area Yield Production Area Yield Production Area Yield Prodoctiom-ha- -ta--000 tons- -ha-- -t/ha- -'000 tons- -- ha--- -t/ha- -'000 tn- -ha- -t/ha- -'000 tns- -ha-- -t/h- -'000 tns- -- h--- -t/ha- -'000 inns-

Early Paddy 7 1.0 7.0 7 2.4 16.8 - - 16 1.0 16.0 8 2.4 19.2La.t Paddy 7 1.2 h.4 7 3.0 21.0 - 9 1.2 10.8 10 3.0 30.0 10 1.2 12.0

Ma.,e 12 0.8 9.6 7 1.S 12.6 5 0.8 4.0 7 0.8 5.6 4 1.8 .2 4 0.8 3.2Spnghun 3 0 8 2.4 - - 3 0.8 2.4 6 0.8 4.8 - _ 6 0.8 4.P

Millens 14 1.0 14.0 - - 14 1.0 14.0 6 1.0 6.0 - - - 6 1.0 i.0lames -- - - - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-- - 6 0.4 2.4-

Fndder 10 20.0 200.C 5 30.0 150.0 10 20.0 200.0 - - - -Sab-tatal 53 26 32 44 28 29

Early Whet 15 1.0 15.0 27 2.2 59.4 - - - 18 1.0 18.0 30 2.2 66.0 -

Latet Whet - - - 10 2.0 20.0 - - - - 15 2.0 30.0 -

Barley 4 0.8 3.2 4 0.8 7.2 - _ 10 0.8 8.0 7 1.8 12.6

ara 8 0.5 4.0 8 1.0 8.0 7 0.5 3.5 18 0.5 9.0 2 0.0 2.0 18 0.5 0.0

Pa.. 4 0.8 3.2 - - - 4 0.8 3.2 6 0.8 4.8 2 1.4 2.8 6 0.8 4.0M-stard 8 0.8 6.4 8 1.2 9.6 - - - 3 0.8 2.4 2 0.2 2.4 2 0.6 2.4Potata - - - 3 12.0 36.0 - - - - - - 2 12.0 24.0Fodd-r - - - 10 25.0 250.0 - - - - - -

Sub-natal 39 71 11 55 TO 27

PERENNIALsug-reane 8 30.0 2M0.0 10 55.0 550.0 - - 6 8 30.0 180.0 6 55.0 330.0 -

Total CrapA.rea (ha. 00 107 43 105 94 51

Nst Crop 100 10 100 100Aeoa (ha) IPo Y00 ICY 100 100 100

Irr igat io

Intennity (°2) 0 107 0 0 94

CroppingIntenaity 15.5 100 150 105 150

EA8TERN REGION----------- F6'O --------- --------------------------- FW---------------------------- v

Irrigated RlainfedArea Yield Pr-dnctlin Anna Yield Produation Area Yield Pr-daction-ha- -n/ha-- 000 t _ --- 'CO tans -- …-'000 tnn-

KHARIFECly Paddy 26 1.0 26.0 15 2.4 36.0CLate Paddy 18 1.2 21.6 15 3.0 45.0 10 1.2 12.0Mtaize 8 0.8 6.4 - - 8 8.8 6.4songhum 2 1.0 2.0 - 2 0.8 1.6

Millets 9 1.0 9.0 _ _ 10 1.0 1E.0talses - - - 2 0.4 0.8 -

Fodd-r - _ _ _ _ _ _

Oab-total 63 32 30

RABI Early Wheat 15 1.0 15.0 14 2.2 30.8 -Late Whetn - - 16 2.0 32.0 -Barley 11 0.8 8.8 10 1.8 08.0 5 0.8 4.0Gara 10 0.5 5.8 5 0.0 5 0.5 2.5Peas 6 0.8 4.8 3 1.4 4.2M-soard 2 0.8 1.6 5 1.2 6.0Potate - - - 2 12.0 24.0Podd-r _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _

8ub-itel 44 55 10

PEREMNIALSugaecane 3 30.0 90.0 3 55.0 16.0 -

TEotl Crap Area (ha) 110 90 40Not Crop Area (ha) 000 I00 l00Irrigation Intensity (7) - 9o 40Cropping Intetsisy (2) 110 130

FW = Future With Pr-ej-t; FWO F utu Without Prnjeet

ANNEX 1Table T-16

60 Page 2

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Total Production of the Project

Future FutureWithout WithProject Project Incremental------------------…000 tons…-----------------

Rice 1/ 12.2 26.0 13.8Maize 4.5 7.0 2.5Sorghum 1.9 1.8 -0.1Millets 6.0 6.3 0.3Wheat 10.0 49.6 39.6Barley 4.2 8.7 4.5

Cereals 38.8 99.4 60.6

Gram 3.8 6.3 2.5Peas 2.7 3.1 0.4Others - 0.7 0.7

Pulses 6.5 10.1 3.6

Total Foodgrains 45.3 109.5 64.2

Oilseeds 2.2 4.3 2.1Sugarcane 106.2 186.4 80.2Potato - 17.5 17.5Fodder 41.6 125.0 83.4

1/ Convert from paddy at ratio 65%.

61 ANNEX 1Table T-17

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Rates of Water Supply for the Irrigated Area(in a 100 ha gross command in the peak month)

Regions Unit Western Central Eastern

A. DEMAND

Month and Season of Peak Demand 3 Feb Oct JuneMaximum Demand m /month 73,000 67,000 72,000Irrigated Area ha 81 66 32Gross Water Allocation m3/ha 901 1,015 2,250Net Water Allocation 1/ m3/ha 649 731 1,620

B. RATE OF SUPPLY 2/

Pumping Houses Required h 487 447 480Rate of Supply (during 16 h/day) m3/h/ha 1.85 2.27 4.69Rate of Supply (during 16 h/day) or 1/sec/ha 0.51 0.63 1.30Rate of Supply (in 24 hours) 1/sec/ha 0.34 0.42 0.87

C. ROTATION SCHEDULE 3/

Time to Irrigate 1 ha h 12 13.5 30Time to Irrigate 5 ha h 60 67.5 150

D. CRITICAL PADDY FLOODING 4/

Time to Irrigate 1 ha h 40 40 40

1/ Considering an over-all efficiency of 0.72.

2/ Constant discharge of 150 m3/h (40 1/sec) from a well during 16 h/day or 480 h/month.

3/ Time that an outlet of 20 1/sec should be kept opened to irrigate 1 and 5 hectares.

4/ The demand for puddling, flooding and planting rice is 3,100 m3/ha in the threeregions, in the month of July.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Farm Budget for 1.0 ha Farm

Western Region Central Region Eastern Region------FWO------ -------FW --- - FWO---- - FWO…------ ------- FW ------Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated(ha) (%) (ha) (M) (ha) (%) (ha) (M) (ha) (%) (ha) (X)

Kharif

Paddy 0.2 0 0.2 50 0.3 0 0.5 80 0.5 0 0.5 80Maize 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.1 0 0.1 0Sorghum 0.2 0 0.2 0Millets 0.1 0 0.1 0Pulses

0.1 100Fodder 0.2 0 0.1 0

RabiWheat 0.3 0 0.5 100 0.3 0 0.4 100 0.4 0 0.4 100Barley 0.1 0 0.2 0 0.2 50Gram 0.2 0 0.2 0PeasMustard 0.3 33 0.1 100Potato 0.1 100 0.1 100Fodder 0.1 100

PerennialSugarcane 0.1 0 0.2 100

Total Cropped Area (ha) 1.0 0 1.5 1.1 1.1 0 1.5 1.0 1.2 0 1.4 1.0Net Cultivated Area (ha) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Cropping Intensity (%) 100 0 160 110 110 0 150 100 120 0 140 100Gross Production Value (Rs) 1,500 5,240 1,170 3,740 1,290 3,120Farm Production Cost (Rs)Hired Labor 80 250 70 240 80 200Other Inputs 700 1,900 570 1,550 660 1,120 b 3Total 780 2,150 640 1,790 740 1,320

Net Farm Income (Rs) 720 3,090 530 1,950 550 1,800

OD.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Farm Budget for 3.0 ha Farm

Western Region Central Region Eastern Region

--- G--- -- --- FWO ------ ------- FW ---- -- ----FWO --- FW------

Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated Area Irrigated

(9-5 ( (ha) (%) (a (ha) (%) (%) (ha) M%)

Kharif

Paddy 0.5 0.5 40 0.8 0 1.0 60 1.0 0 1.0 70

Maize 0.2 0.2 0 0.5 0 0.5

Sorghum 0.3 0 0.3 0

Millets 0.2 0 0.2 0

PulsesFodder 0.3 0.3 0

Rabi

Wheat 1.3 1.8 100 1.2 0 1.5 100 1.2 0 1.5 100

Barley 0.2 0.2 0 0.5 0 0.5 60 ON

Gram 0.6 0 0.5 80 w

PeasMustard 0.5 40 0.3 67 0.1 100

Potato 0.2 100 0.1 100

Fodder 0.2 100

Perennial

Sugarcane 0.2 0.3 100

Total Cropped Area (ha) 2.7 0 4.2 3.0 3.0 0 3.9 2.7 3.3 0 3.6 2.7

Net Cultivated Area (ha) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Cropping Intensity (%) 0.9 0 140 100 100 0 130 90 3.3 0 120 90

Gross Production Value (Rs) 3,870 12,470 3,320 8,590 3,540 8,210

Farm Production Cost (Rs)Hired Labor 200 610 190 520 220 520

Other Inputs 1,980 4,690 1,750 3,260 1,840 3 130

Total 2,180 5,300 1,940 3,780 2,060 3,650

Net Farm Income (Rs) 1,690 7,120 1,380 4,810 1,480 4,560 X w

0-

ANNEX 1

64 Table T-19

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Estimates of Project Rent(at full development)

1.0 ha Farm 3.0 ha Farm -FWO FW FWO FW-_________-------Rs--------------------

1. Expected Gross Value of Production 1,320 4,000 3,580 9,760

2. Certainty Equivalent of (1) 2/ 920 3,400 2,860 8,780

3. Production Cost 720 1,750 2,000 4,240

4. Family Labor 3/ 300 820 920 2,350

5. Net Returns (2)-(3)-(4) - 100 830 - 60 2,190

6. MaLnagement 4/ - 80 - 220

7. Implicit Land Rent - 100 750 - 60 1,970

8. Project Rent 850 2,030

9. Project Rent per ha 850 680

NWO = Future without projectFW = Future with project

1/ Tle average value of the three regions.

2/ Some studies of farmers' behavior, show that a simple approach can be adopted totiake into account the farmers' risk aversion by estimating a certainty equivalentvalue (CE) of the expected value (EV). The formula used is:

CE = EV - n x s

where s = the standard deviationn = a factor that expresses the farmers' risk aversion

The studies indicate that the farmers' choice of cropping pattern and productiontechniques can be predicted for values of "n" in the interval 1 to 2 and that "n"decreases when farm size increases. For this analysis, it is assumed that n = 1.5for 1.0 ha farm and n = 1 for 3.0 ha farm. The variation of the gross returns areassumed to be within 20% of the average values under "future without project"conditions and 10% under the project.

3/ Valued at average market wage rate.

4/ The reward for special skills that farm management requires and is assumed to varywithin 10% of the net returns.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Economic Cost and Returns to Water

A, COST OF WATER

150 .3/h 225 m

3/h 300 s,

3/h

Total Annual Total Annual Total Annual

I. Investment Cost Life Cost Cost 1/ Cost Cost 1/ Cost Cost 1/

(yrs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs) (Rs)

Survey 6,220 - 6,620 - 7,020

Well Construction 20 103,000 13,790 125,000 16,750 149,000 19,960

Pump Units 6 23,415 6,110 35,380 8,600 43,095 10,470

Distribution System 20 172,290 23,000 248,065 33,240 331,400 44,410

Electric Transmission 45 33.640 4_060 38,475 4,640 38,675 4_670

Total (Financial) 338,570 47,050 453,550 63,230 569,190 79,510

A. Total (Econo.ic) 2/ 253,930 35,290 340,160 47,420 426,890 59,630

II. 048 Cost 3/ 150 m3

/h 225 _3Ih 300 m

3/h

2_000 3,000 3,500 4 0 2,000 3,000 _3500 4,000 2,000 3,000 390 4,000

(hrs) (hrs) (hrs) (hrs) (hrs) (hrs) (hrs) (brs) (hrs) (hrs) (hrs) (hrs)

_ixed Cost (Rs)

Staff 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200

Works 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,960 2,960 2,960 2,960 3,600 3,600 3,600 3,600

Variable Cost (Rs)

Energy 4/ 23,100 34,450 40,190 46,200 34,450 51,680 60,290 68,900 45,940 48,900 80,392 91,S8

B. Total (Ra) 29,700 41,050 46,790 52,800 41,610 58,340 67,450 76,040 53,740 75,980 88,190 99,880

C. Water Pumped(m

3/yr) 300,000 450,000 525,000 600,000 450,000 675,000 787,500 900,000 600,000 900,000 1,050,000 1,200,000

Cost per m 3/yr

(C ) (s) 0.22 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.20 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.19 0.15 0.14 0.13

B. VALUE OF WATER(for a 100 ha command area)

Western Central EasternUnit F140 FW NWO F14 FWO 8

Net Value of Production (at full development) 5/ Rs '000 111.4 327.9 105.2 289.0 104.9 264.1

Incremental Value (FW - FWO) Rs '000 216.5 183.8 .2

Water Requirements at Pump per annum 6/ '000 m3

571.0 464.0 462.0

Vaiue of Water Rs/m3 0.38 0.40 0.34

ol5n

1/ At 12% which is the opportunity cost of capital il India.

2/ By applying construction conversion factor (Annex 4) of 0.75 to the financial cost.

3/ These are economic costs, the standard conversion factors have been applied to the financ-al coal.

4/ Estimated economic cost of prodocing electricity at pump Rs 0.77/kwh. See Staff Appraisal Reporl of Rural Electrification Corporat-on Project II.

5/ Net Value of Production c Grons Value of Production sinus economic cost for labor (inicluding both family and hired labor), fertilizers, plant protection,

bullocks and seeds.

6/ See pars 7.04.FWO - Future without project.FW - Future with project.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Economic Cost and Benefit Streams

333150 m /h 225 m3/h 300 m3/h Weighted AverageCapital O&M Incremental Capital O&M Incremental Capital O&M Incremental Capital O&M IncrementalSize of Tubewell Cost Cost Benefits Cost Cost Benefits Cost Cost Benefits Cost Cost Benefits

Year -------------- __-_--------_-_------_-_------------------- Rs/ha----------------- - -----------------------------Year -- -R/a-

1 2,540 0 0 2,270 0 0 2,130 0 0 2,420 0 402 0 235 475 0 225 475 220 220 475 0 230 4753 0 350 950 0 340 950 0 330 950 0 345 9504 0 470 1,425 0 450 1,425 0 440 1,425 0 460 1,4255 0 470 1,900 0 450 1,900 0 440 1,900 0 460 1,900 a6 0 470 1,900 0 450 1,900 0 440 1,900 0 460 1,9007 1/ 235 470 1,900 235 450 1,900 215 440 1,900 230 460 1,9008 - 12 0 470 1,900 0 450 1,900 0 440 1,900 0 460 1,90013 1/ 235 470 1,900 235 450 1,900 215 440 1,900 230 460 1,90014 - 20 0 470 1,900 0 450 1,900 0 440 1,900 0 460 1,900

Economic Rate of Return 34% 38% 40% 36%

1/ Replacement of motors and accessories.

qH

fn 7

ANNEX 1Chart 1

INDIAUTTAIR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Typical Well Design

Clamp and Girder Support Concrete Plinth

350 mm OD Casing for600mm Diameter Drilled Hole 225 m3

/h wells, 400 mm

' OD Casing for 300 m3 /h wells

40 m __.:. 7 . ~ Reducer 350 or 400/250 mm

500 mm Diameter Drilled Hole 2 D S C

_ .. l4 . ~ 250 mm OD Slotted Casing(about 40% of 250mm string)

o z ~ 250 mm OD Blank Casing

Gravel Pack *

Central i zers o n 15 m Centers

Sand Sump . /

Bail Plug

140-260 m

World Bank - 20943

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECTREGULATING TANK

(FPr 100 h. Sylt.m)

520 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A A- 3 m [~~~~~~~~~~0 - [^

I L.A X r f ; B D ETA I L D F VA LV E BLOCK AN D VALV E O

_______ At1 r L = -

------ - - -0

SECTION A-A SECTION B-B 0

SECTION C-C

69

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECTSCHEMATIC LAYOUT FOR A DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ANNEX I

For a Comand of 75 to 100 ha Chart 3

=Vo~I B, . 288. A

Aorl Bank BS0881

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Implementation Schedule1980 1981 1982 Total

GOUP Fiscal Year A M J Jl A S 0 N D J F M A M J J1 A S 0 N D J F M A M

1. Drilling Nos. of wells 16 16 16 16 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 40 500

2. Pipelines - ditto - 16 16 16 16 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 40 500

3. Field Channels - ditto - 16 16 16 16 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 40 500

4. Energization - ditto - 16 16 16 16 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 40 500

5. Operation - ditto - 48 196 1 500

6. Training People 25 .25

7. Base Line No. __I

Study

8. EvaluationStudy

9. Preparation _

of FutureProject

rt

Z P

INDIAUTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Existing and Proposed Organization of a Circle in the State Tubewell Organization

LEVEL ..................... .......... EXISTING ORGANIZATION .................................. .................................. DRGANZIATION.....................................................

STATE

Add-tional Chitf En,en Additionl Chief Enginer Dir .. Agriuu

Design Cell Monitoring and~n De-g,, C,,ll

CIRCLE Evau_io

CIRCLE U Sueteintt dent Z l ltendent

I Engineer nlte

DIVISIONE nuIV E-onunr- EXcoti E.e....u hEcu-rue

En-ner E,gi,ro- En,gine-niee,nire EecuiutE-eu-,ue F-nu-iv Ecu-it- E-neunuAge lu

igWorlish.P CunstrutO C-ntrucniori C-ntncnneEnine Enginer Engine- En,ginee E,,ren Agiufua

1 8,0 ~ ~~~~~~ O&M & O&M &GMRi Connun- n Cntructi-nCone-c-n &MOtie

SUE-DIVISION I 5

4 Assin- | 4 A-ttitan 4 Assrsn|ri 4 A-4 An- 4 Asre- Assistant | 4 Assist-nt 4 Assistant 4 Assstan | 4 As-ietant

Engines Eu-e-Enier nier Eng-n-ers EngineersE,gine,,- En,g-n-sEnier Engineers

SECTION

| 12--EJunior 12 16J 1 1 Junior 2-1S Junior 12-161J5ir- t-2-tE Junior 12-16Juorn | 12-16Junior | 12.-iJunior 10-12 u

Engineers Engm;ers, Engineers l Enieet Engineers Engineers Engineers -Engieers Engineers Engineers Suceruisors

TUBEWELL300-400 Tuheuel St 0 ueul 0-0 uenl ehnc 5-0 Tu.u.l .1

Drillers Mechanics Dzoett Gortr Gortr DrillaersC Wokto Goeato

FARM |

L T Com-,tee l

- - -- Line of Command Comttee i -

- ~- -- Coordination l commlttt 1

72ANNEX 2Page 1

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Monitoring and Evaluation

General

1. The purpose of monitoring and evaluation under the project would beto provide feedback information from the fields and to assess the perf'ormanceof alternative well sizes and conveyance systems. The Government of UttarPradesh (GOUP) and IDA would jointly review the results of monitoring andevaluation studies at the end of the second year of the project implenienta-tion. Based on the outcomes of the review, design and operational criteriawould be established for future projects.

Monitoring and Evaluation Activities

2. Construction Costs of Various Alternatives. The SuperintendentEngineers of Circles under the project would be responsible for monitoringconstruction costs. Actual costs should be compared to estimates made priorto construction. If actual costs differ significantly from estimates, statethe reasons for the deviation. The proposed format for reporting construc-tion costs is presented in Proforma 1. The proforma should be preparedquarterly for tubewells completed during the period and made available forIDA's supervision missions.

3. Operation and Maintenance Cost of Various Alternatives. The Execu-tive Engineer who would head an O&M division would be responsible for moni-toring the O&M cost. The proposed format for reporting O&M costs is presentedin Proforma 2. The proforma should be prepared at the end of each irrigationseason (kharif/rabi) and made available for IDA's supervision missions.

4. Flow Measurements. In order to assess the efficiency of irrigationdelivery of various types of tubewells, flow measurements of each tubewellshould be carried out twice a year by the Junior Engineer in-charge. In addi-tion to measure flows of project tubewells, 10 existing tubewells per districtshould also be selected as a control group for the measurement exercise. Theresult would assist planners in quantifying the efficiency of old and newtubewells. The following measurements should be carried out: (a) dischargesat the delivery tank; (b) discharges in selected outlets along the distributionsystem; and (c) discharges at the end of the field ditches. (a) could bemeasured by the V-notch, (b) and (c) by portable parshal flumes. A format forpresenting results is proposed in Proforma 3. The proforma should be preparedsemi--annually and made available for IDA's supervision mission.

73

ANNEX 2Page 2

5. Power Supply' and Demand. The junior engineer should also be respon-sible for monitoring and availability and reliability of power supply. Heshould compare the hours of power available recorded by the t .ewell operatorat the well site to the records of the sub-station serving that particulartubewell. He should also compare the power rostering schedule with therecords of sub-stations and tubewell operators. Proposed format is presentedin Proforma 4. The proforma should be prepared monthly to submit to theExecutive Engineer (EE) in charge. If there is any discrepancy between theposted schedule of power rostering and the records at sub-stations as well asat tubewell sites, the EE should inform the State Electricity Board.

6. Monitoring and Watertable. Observation pipes should be installedin selected tubewell systes'l to monitor the depth of water from ground leveland to provide early warning of over-pumping or waterlogging hazards. Staticand pumping water levels will also be measured in all wells at 6 monthintervals. The JE would be responsible for the measurements. Recordsshould be kept and made available for IDA's supervision missions.

7. Junior Engineer's Monthly Journal. At the initial stage of theproject, each junior engineer would be responsible for about 20 wells. Heshould visit each well twice a month, supervise daily activities of tubewelloperators, check on the water allocation/distribution and to assist tubewelloperators/farmers. At the end of each month, he would make a monthly reportof the operational progress using records maintained by the tubewell operator.The report should include rainfall in the command area (rainfall measured ata station close to the tubewell command could be used), running hours, areasirrigated, areas of major crops irrigated, hours of closure and reasons forthe closure, and the average number of waterings. Format for a journal ispresented in Proforma 5. The proforma should be prepared monthly by thejunior engineer and submitted to the Executive Engineer in charge.

8. Performance Review. The monthly journals from the Junior Engineerwould be sent to the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit. The staff of this unitwould analyze the data of each tubewell under operation and summarize monthlyresults at the end of each irrigation season. The performance report shouldbe presented to the Chief Engineer and attached to the progress report (para10 below) to be sent to IDA. Suggested format for this report is describedin Proforma 6.

9. Impact Studies. The staff of the Monitoring and Evaluation Unitto be established in the Tubewell Organization would carry out impact studiesat the end of each season. The studies would be on stratified sample basisand cover:

(a) areas under irrigated crops and rainfall crops in thecommand areas of selected tubewells;

(b) crop cutting experiments for major crops to determineyields of both irrigated and rainfall crops;

74

ANNEX 2Page 3

(c) time of sowing, planting and harvesting of major crops; and

(d) time of irrigation and number of irrigations for major crops.

The data should be compiled and analyzed at the end of each irrigation seasonand results submitted to IDA along with the progress report.

10. Progress Report. Progress reports would be prepared by the staffof Monitoring and Evaluation Unit and submitted to IDA at the end of eachirrigation season. Each report would contain brief descriptions of the mainevents during the period including: (a) construction progress; (b) expendi-tures incurred; (c) status of project staffing; (d) tendering, evaluationand award of contracts; (e) irrigation potential created during the period;(f) actual areas irrigated during the period; (g) average running hours pertubewell operated during the period; and (h) farmers' reaction to water allo-cation procedures.

11. Baseline Study and Evaluation Study. An agro-economic survey ofthe area where tubewells would be constructed would be carried out prior toconstruction. The study should be on a stratified sample basis and coverbeneficiaries' holdings, cropping patterns, yields, input requirements, useof hired labor, farm capital owned, credit utilization, existing irrigationfacilities and their utilization. Three years after the baseline study,an evaluation study would be carried out in the same area with the samecoverage to determine changes in the agricultural scene due to availabilityof tubewells. The study would also survey existing tubewells as a controlgroup for comparison purposes between existing and improved designs. Bothstudies should be contracted to Universities in UP or other economic develop-ment institutes in India. The baseline study should be completed one yearafter credit effectiveness and the evaluation study one year after projectcompletion.

12. Completion Report. Towards the end of the second year of theproject implementation, based on the baseline study, monitoring results andimpact studies, staff from the Monitoring and Evaluation Unit would prepare acompletion report to be used in the discussion between GOUP and IDA. Thereport should at least include:

(a) actual investment costs and O&M costs of each alternative;

(b) actual investment costs and O&M costs per ha of commandarea of each construction alternative;

(c) actual investment costs and O&M costs per ha of actualirrigated area of each construction alternative;

(d) actual cost per unit of water at plot boundaries;

(e) average seasonal running hours (kharif and rabi) orpower supply from feeders serving tubewells constructedunder the project for each district;

75

ANNEX 2Page 4

(f) average seasonal running hours (kharif and rabi) ortubewells constructed under the project for eachdistrict;

(g) average seasonal areas (kharif and rabi) of each alter-native for each district;

(h) average yields of major crops for each district;

(i) irrigation efficiencies of each construction alternative;

(j) farmers' reaction to various water allocation procedures;

(k) comparison of tubewells constructed under the project withexisting tubewells with respect to running hours and areasirrigated cropwise; and

(1) extent of closure of tubewells constructed under the proj-ect in each district:

- due to power rostering- due to non-demand- due to mechanical defects.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Quarterly Report - Construction(for completed tubewells)

Size of Length of Number

Tubewell Date of Date of Discharge Command Distribution of

Sr. No. Location Commencement Completion of Well Area System Outlets

1.

2.

3.

Quarterly Report - Cost Estimate

as

Tubewell Well Construction Pump Set & Distribution Overhead

Sr. No. & Development Accessories System Cost

Actual. Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate Actual Estimate

1.

2.

3.

Cost per ha of CCA

Tubewell Cost perSr. No. ha of CCA

Actual Estimate

1. "h 0

2.

3. e

NOTE: If actual costs differ significantly from estimates, state reasons.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Monitoring of O&M Costs(at the end of each irrigation season)

Season:

Division:

Executive Engineer in Charge:

District:

Preventive

Tubewell Running Electricity Depreciation Maintenance Special Grand

Sr. No. Hours Charges Establishment Charges (Routine) Repairs Total -

Direct Indirect Civil Mechanical Civil Mechanical

Charges Charges Works Works Works Works

------ in Rs----------------- -------- ---------

1.

2.

3.

o X

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I1

Totalver

Average:

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Semi-Annual Report - Flow Measurements

A. Project Tubewells

District:

Junior Engineer in Charge:

Length of Discharges atTubewell Soil Pump Distribution Command Date of Discharges at Discharges at the end of selectedSr. No. Zype Capacity System Area Measurement Delivery Tank Selected Outlets Field Ditches

1. O4

2.

3.

B. Control Tubewells

District:

Junior Engineer in Charge:

Length of Discharges atTubewell Soil Pump Distribution Command Date of Discharges at Discharges at the end of selectedSr. No. Type Capacity System Area Measurement Delivery Tank Selected Outlets Field Ditches

2. t-Ih

3.

79 Annex 2Proforma 4

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Monitoring of Power Supply and Demand

(Monthly Report)

District:

Junior Engineer in Charge:

Month:

Availability of Availability of Actual PumpingTubewell Feeder Posted Power Actual Power HoursSr. No. (Name) (Hours/Months) (Hours/Months) (Hours/Months)

1.

2.

3.

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Monthly Journal

Division:

Junior Engineer in Charge:

Month:

Hours of Closure (hr)Due to

Tubewell Running Area Areas Under Due to Due to Mechanical XSr. No. Rainfall Hours Irrigated (ha) Major Crops (ha) Rostering Non-Demand Defect °

(mm) (hr) Actual Watering Sown IrrigatedArea Area

1.

2.

3.

1h (Do X

Ln

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Performance Review

District:

Season:

Hours of Closure (hr)Irrigated Due to

Tubewell Running Areas Areas Under Due to Due to Mechanical

Sr. No. Rainfall Hours Irrigated (hr) Major Crops (ha) Rostering Non-Demand Defect

(mm) (hr) Actual Watering Sown Irrigated X

Area Area

1.

2.

3.

0H

i xON

82

ANNEX 3Page 1

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Proposed Syllabus for Training Programs

1. For Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers

Topic

1. Soil Water Plant relations

2. Intensive cropping pattern in irrigatedagriculture and agronomic aspects of watermanagement

3. Consumptive use and irrigation schedulingof different crops

4. Surface Irrigation Methods for efficientapplication of water

5. Land Levelling-Design aspects

6. Agricultural Machinery for land preparation

7. Underground irrigation conveyance system

8. Drainage of irrigated land

9. Selection and installation of pumps fordeep tubewells

10. Economics of tubewell irrigation

Panel Discussions

1. Field practices in water management

2. Land irrigability classification andscheduling of irrigation

83

ANNEX 3Page 2

Case Study

Planning and design of irrigation and drainage systemsfor a given area.

Field Visits

1. Visit to crop Research Center of the University.

2. Visic to >1ield demonstrations on water managementlaid due under university extension program onfarmers' fields.

II. For Junior Engineers and Agricultural Supervisors

1. Soil-Water-Plant relationship

(a) Soil moisture constants, soil moisturemeasurement and infiltration theory andmeasurement.

(b) Water-Plant relations, rooting characteris-tics and moisture use of crops, evaporation,transpiration and consumptive use.

2. Water requirement of crops, irrigation scheduling,irrigation efficiencies and determination of commandarea of tubewell using consumptive use technique.

3. Application of irrigation water, planning, design anddesign and layout of surface irrigation methods.

4. Soil survey and land irrigability classes.

5. Irrigated agronomic aspects of main crops and croppingpattern in irrigated agriculture.

6. Design, layout and maintenance of underground irrigationconveyance system.

7. Drainage of agriculture land.

8. Chemical control of weeds in the channels.

9. Economic aspects including crop aspects of tubewellirrigation.

10. Agricultural equipment for land preparation ofirrigation.

11. Operation and maintenance of pumps and motors.

84

ANNEX 3Page 3

Panel Discussions

1. Survey, planning and layout of irrigation anddrainage methods.

2. Water management in tubewell command areas.

3. Farmers participation and extension.

Case Studies (Tutorials/Practicals)

1. Soil moisture and infiltration measurement andanalysis.

2. Planning and design of irrigation methods.

3. Measurement of hydraulic conductivity for drainage.

4. Flow measurement and installation of measuring devices.

Field Trips (including special lectures)

1. Visit to land development sites, different types of wellsand pumps and underground irrigation conveyance systems atthe university farm and Water Management Research plots atCrop Research Center of the University.

2. Visit to university extension work on water managementdemonstrations at farmers' fields.

3. Visit to newly constructed wells around Lucknow.

85

ANNEX 4Page 1

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Assumptions for Financial and Economic Analysis

Official Exchange Rate (OER)

1. Until September 24, 1975, the Rupee was officially valued at afixed Pound Sterling rate. Since then it has been fixed against a "basket"of currencies. As these currencies are floating, the US dollar/Rupee ex-change is subject to change. Conversions of financial prices have been madeat US$1 to Rs 8.40, which represents the projected exchange rate over thedisbursement period of the credit.

Standard Conversion Factor (SCF)

2. The benefits of the project components are evaluated at worldmarket prices which measure what India would have to pay for imports orreceive for exports. Most of the costs, however, are for items that are nottraded on the world market. Tariffs and trade restrictions introduce a dis-tortion in the price relationship between traded goods (valued at world marketprices) and non-traded goods (valued at local prices). Thus, the costs arenot directly comparable with the benefits. In order to make them comparable,an SCF is applied to the price of non-traded goods and consumption. In theabsence of trade restrictions, the SCF can be approximately calculated usingthe formula:

SCF = X +M 1/X + S + M + T

x m

For the period since 1970, this calculation gives an SCF of 0.86. However,since this estimate does not take into consideration quantitative restrictions,it provides only an upper limit for the SCF. The Indian Planning Commissionrecommends for the evaluation of industrial projects the use of conversionfactors for foreign exchange and for untraded goods that implicitly give aSCF of about 0.75. Because of the approximate nature of this estimate, aSCF of 0.8 has been used in the economic analysis.

1/ X = fob value of exports at the official exchange rate (OER); M = cifvalue of imports at OER; Sx = export subsidies; Tm = import duties.

86

ANNEX 4Page 2

Prices of Agricultural Outputs

3. The economic prices of major traded agricultural outputs such asrice, wheat, maize, sorghum, oilseeds and sugarcane are derived from the IBRDprojected 1985 world market prices expressed in 1979 currency value writhappropriate ajustments for freight, handling and processing. The domesticcost component) i.e., local transport and marketing charges) are adjusted bythe SCF of 0.80. The economic prices for non-traded foodgrains such as mil-lets and pulses are derived by applying the historical price ratios betweenthese outputs and wheat to the economic price of wheat. Fodder has beenvalued at its market price (adjusted by SCF) less the economic cost of bring-ing them to the market. Detailed derivation of the economic prices for majortraded goods is described in Table 1. The financial prices of agriculturaloutputs are projected on the basis of their historical price trends. A sum-mary of all projected economic and financial prices is presented in Table 1.

Prices of Agricultural Inputs

4. Fertilizers have been valued at the projected world market price.Tractor power, pesticides and insecticides have been assumed to be traded,and prices are adjusted for taxes and duties. The financial prices of camelshave been multiplied by the SCF to express them in economic terms. Analysisof farm labor supply and demand in various Indian irrigation projects typic-ally give an economic shadow wage rate for farm labor in the range of one-halfto two-thirds of the average financial wage rate. In view of the existenceof a larger number of agricultural laborers in UP compared to other States inIndia, a shadow wage rate of 60% of the market wage has been assumed for theanalysis of this project.

Construction Conversion Factor (CCF)

5. The construction of project components would be carried out byequipment., skilled and unskilled labor. For the economic analysis, the con-struction conversion is estimated as follows:

% of theConversion Factor Construction Cost

Traded component 1.00 10Skilled labor 0.80 35Unskilled labor 0.60 45

Total 100Weighted Average 0.75

Application of Estimated Conversion Factors

6. In the calculation of the project economic rate of return, allconstruction costs are multiplied to the CCF, establishment cost for O&M tothe SCF since they mostly consist of non-traded goods, and the traded com-ponents to the OER to express them in terms of border prices.

ANNEX 487 Table 1

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Financial and Economic Prices

Crop Unit ------ Prices-

Paddy Rs/ton 1,000 1,700

Wheat Rs/ton 1,300 1,750

Maize Rs/ton 1,100 1,200

Sorghum Rs/ton 1,100 1,200

Millets Rs/ton 1,200 1,400

Barley Re/ton 1,150 1,300

Gram Rs/ton 1,800 2,200

Peas Rs/ton 1,900 2,300

Mustard Rs/ton 3,000 3,500

Mung Rs/ton 2,400 3,000

Potato Rs/ton 600 500

Sugarcane Rs/ton 150 200

Kharif Fodder Rs/ton 70 60

Rabi Fodder Rs/ton 80 70

Input

Labor Rs/md /a 5 3

Bullock Rs/apd /b 15 12

Nitrogen (N) Rs/ton 4,600 4,800

Phosphate (P) Rs/ton 4,300 4,100

Potash (K) Rs/ton 1,700 1,700

/a md: man-day

/b apd: animal pair/day

Table 288

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Financial Crop Budget

Yields GVP Hired Labor Cash Inputs NVP(t/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha)

Early E'addy rf 1.0 1,000 100 470 430irri 2.4 2,400 250 925 1,225

Late Paddy rf 1.2 1,200 115 545 540irri 3.0 3,000 265 995 1,740

Maize rf 0.8 880 100 280 500irri 1.8 1,980 200 710 1,070

Sorghum rf 0.8 880 75 285 520

Millets rf 1.0 1,200 75 345 780

Early Wheat rf 1.0 1,300 50 820 430irri 2.2 2,860 150 1,220 1,490

Late Wheat irri 2.0 2,600 125 1,205 1,270

Barley rf 0.8 920 25 475 420irri 1.8 2,070 100 775 1,195

Gram rf 0.5 900 25 300 575irri 1.0 1,800 50 420 1,330

Peas rf 0.8 1,520 25 265 1,230irri 1.4 2,850 50 445 2,355

Mustard rf 0.8 2,400 65 370 1,965irri 1.2 3,600 85 600 2,915

Mung irri 0.4 720 50 235 435

Potato irri 12.0 7,200 325 4,025 2,850

Sugarcane rf 30.0 4,500 200 1,890 2,410irri 55.0 8,250 300 2,330 5,620

K. Fodder rf 20.0 1,400 75 425 400irri 35.0 2,450 110 500 1,840

R. Fodder rf 20.0 1,600 75 515 1,010irri 25.0 2,000 100 565 1,335

89 ANNEX 4Table 3

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Economic Crop Budget

Yields GVP Hired Labor Cash Inputs NVP(t/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha)

Early Paddy rf 1.0 1,700 225 500 975irri 2.4 4,080 360 905 2,815

Late Paddy rf 1.2 2,040 240 565 1,235irri 3.0 5,100 375 975 3,750

Maize rf 0.8 960 240 260 460irri 1.8 2,160 330 625 1,205

Sorghum rf 0.8 960 240 260 460

Millets rf 1.0 1,400 270 315 815

Early Wheat rf 1.0 1,750 210 755 785irri 2.2 3,850 330 1,160 2,360

Late Wheat irri 2.0 3,500 315 1,150 2,035

Barley rf 0.8 1,040 180 470 390irri 1.8 2,340 240 755 1,345

Gram rf 0.5 1,100 110 280 710irri 1.0 2,200 150 440 1,610

Peas rf 0.8 1,840 150 250 1,440irri 1.4 3,220 210 445 2,565

Mustard rf 0.8 2,800 195 340 2,265irri 1.2 4,200 255 585 3,360

Mung irri 0.4 880 150 255 475

Potato irri 12.0 7,200 600 3,840 2,760

Sugarcane rf 30.0 6,000 390 2,035 3,575irri 55.0 11,000 480 2,445 8,075

K. Fodder rf 20.0 1,200 240 370 590irri 35.0 2,100 285 545 1,270

R. Fodder irri 25.0 1,750 240 505 1,005

90

ANNEX 5

INDIA

UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Selected Documents and Data Available in the Project File

A. General Document

1. UP Statistical Diary, 1977, 1978

2. Agricultural Atlas of Uttar Pradesh, G.B. PantnagarUniversity, 1973

3. Report of the Expert Committee on Integrated Developmentof Surface and Groundwater

4. Agricultural Production Program, Uttar Pradesh, Five YearPlan, 1978-1983

B. Documents Related to Public Tubewells

1. Draft Preparation Report of Uttar Pradesh Public TubewellsProject, FAO/World Bank Cooperative Program, 1979

2. Survey of Allahabad Pilot Project, 1977

3. Groundwater Hydrology and Tubewell Design and Construction,W. Barber, October 1978

4. Groundwater Resources in the Project Area, W. Barber, September 1979

5. Notes on Technical Features of Layout and Operation, UttarPradesh Public Tubewells, FAO/World Bank CP, 1979

6. Power Supply and Demand Situation in UP, FAO/World Bank CP, 1979

7. Water Requirements, Working Papers, November 1979

8. Disbursement Procedures Against Certificates of Expenditure,Subramanian (NDO), September 1979

IBRD 14639W ~~~~~~~~~~~~78' hO ' h0

Th -a fp oeeo prop-red bt the World Stho stBlt-eact-tfo-- to, toe cow-,tetce . . p9 of the,naderJSofrfle report to rhuh;St, z AttaChed aThe hettooma1tnsroto hoed Oto Othe

0c' °? > .- t<. C H I N A

) b~~~~~~oohn r/essJhowm an th,s tmfs h o not top/t oo tmoe pant of toe Wtorldheo/taand, ltJ t? r < , /oh

r 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~af,t,ate 2. eanvrdsmentAn o the/east otatho of ear tototor votAn so dorteotoototr-Hi//144ACHAL PRADESH f -hr i;pacOJcb-ud,rieJ 0

:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A thhtPs 7'A ' N'-..

UTTARKASHI C H I A / ... Eesh\ t J r +.

k |~~~~~~ Utkash'O:J ... 2,I to oh

CHAMOLI ho, / oopo.'

'K".- EHJ RA "- TEHRI-GARHWAL .-

_30. %9 )t6Xw f °aurl . u h ~~~~PITHORAGARH \ \ <v

HARYANA etto 2 THGARHWAL -. o .N

SAHARANPUR 1 L Sffhho , OO toheth arI INDIA

0IAAR -. Not9oto UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC0 MEERUT & > NAIN!TAL TUBEWELLS PROJECT

Mott_ O M eent . % g >PROJECT DISTRICTS/ Mtradsbet RAMPURPRJC O.RITTo GHAZIABAD

PRe/ st

IRAMA i-S kDEZ MORA D ABAD . 3 Pl ilbhit 0 DISTRICT HEADQUARTEPS

0%>03uandshahrat ./\ B\t)AREILLY PILIBHIT . \ / STATE CAPITAL

} BULANDSHAHR V[ .-- -. -< 0\ ) ,xrj L', + NATIONAL HIGH ArS

HARYANki$;, \' t BROAD GAUGE RAILROADS

-2V RVERS BUDAUN . A f % h/hSOS RIVE-

>@ tJ < \wAIIEAre 3<P Budaun t~~~~~~~~~~~~ v r KHERI n \ ~~1 DISTRICT BOUNDAR ES

8 >7 , \\ ' < _2 Shahlah>_ LeWhtmpurO ,8 b > -~~~~uk.... - STATE BO.UNIDARIES 2S'-

;MATHURA a ALIGR\ ETAH R\.S4JHNU > K > AHRAICH - - INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES

W,h th[iet

LAUTPUBd \ i N UR GONDA

-9< -<,f <gz + % t \ /FARRUKHABAD @ >,<A / 8 RAAN CGo,d. BASTI GORAKHPUR

<~~~~~~~~~~~NA 3-khp5 ,LCN DEORIA L/)

MAOHEYA PRA DESH i Unnao 9 sW FA ZB tSJ raw

NP t5 JALANP UR t _ E 3AR.LI lh -\) N 197/

gS .^ >,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ pu AZMGRH BLI 2eV-6 /7 9 gf FAT~~~~~~EHPUR<r ANU 9>

i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 I UN R 1 IRAU

\tz~~~~~~~~~~~HMRU J-LlU GliAZ PUR

HANS .24 NJ j_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~b

DA0 1° 10 12 y 4KlLOMETERS~~~~~~~~~

7S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BH aoRhtp~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~NVME 1979A RA ES

IBRD 14640

Th,s ap has been ptepa-d by theWorld Banks staff eoclcs,ce/y for IN D IAthe convenrence of the readers sfthe repsa to wh,ch ,t to attached.The d,-enmsti-n -sd and thebsc-*ie shows so te mapdo sot mpty, O thbe pan of the UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECTWorld Bask and to affiliates. any

dg-et -on the legali tatts ofaoy tem,,tory or any endorsement SOIL TYPESs_anceptance of -uch boundarie

SOIL TYPES:

- ,' .,- J BROWN HILLS MEDIUM BLACKH/MACHAZ PRADESH,c- T T'" ~~~et(y rrnnolrconli ~~TARAI MIXED RED AND BLACKL / .\A'VX\ CALCAREOUS ALLUVIAL RED SANDY

ALLUVIAL RED AND YELLOW

,,7-s8nx'-t,v5''t;.>\ ) ' > - -- STATE BOUNDARIES INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES

hO' 90,HARYANIfARYA',,,, of Cou C H I N A

PAKIbTA> ~~~ BHUTAN 3'-

"'''* ''..., ',,''', '", /W 1 [S,,\-,,, \\ ,1_,DIA_\ 'BURM

'' *r n , (. ) ...... ..... .... AKo.,

-j o.: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m -10, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~100-

A NA

RAJA ' ' '.'' ' ..... \'" ... 1979

TANA --X

... ... .... 4 . , ....... ... .. ... ........... , .,, ........ .t .... -'' '' ' ' ° °...................

/ ~~ < . :'.-...: . ---,. .', ': ', m..' ~~~~~~. ...... .'' ':"

MADHYA~MAHY PR.ADE.- H

PRADfSH ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ 40' 8' 1'2'' 0'' '''''''''' '''

., ,,, ,-., ,, -. , :., ,:I,,OM,.ETER:S

d~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N VM E 197

IBRD 14641

INDIA

HIMulACHAL UTTAR PRADESH PUBLIC TUBEWELLS PROJECTH/MACEHA ) NORMAL ANNUAL RAINFALLPA'AVESH

ANNUAL RAINFALL (cm): -180- ISOHYETS (cml

< jz~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=--- RIVERS1001 F 7,g@ X9A/ _ . 140 0 CITIES

___ STATE BOUNDARIES

-. -- E B0_INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES

E,0. 900

,] LXi 1 ~50 of CaisfialC H I N A

f A B X + \ r HUTAN 30'

20 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0

INiI \A |0URMA

4. t \ MONTH \ 8ooy of ergo/

DIR HX io<t Arobera\ /

LANKA

700~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

TANA

PRADESH A .RADESH

S ' \ X l,.:,,, KI'OMT RS ,

< m -<< . L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .......

- |- ( n ~~~~~MADHYA PRADESH ?- t/42z0,72 O, ~~~~~4,0 8,0 120

KILOMETERS , g

This mep has bhes prepared by the Wor/d Bank,s staff -e-e-s,vely for the convenie-caof the readers of the repor t0 which It is attached. The denom- atins -sd d thebo-ndar,- ehown on this e ep do -ot imply. on the Parn of the Word Back asd itsaflates, anyudonent on the lodsi stat, s of soy tery or anr eodor-ee- ora_eeptan.c of -uch bhendarieO

NOVEMBER 1979