Progress of Kimathanka - 16!09!2019

Kimathanka Arun HEP
Sankhuwasabha District,Nepal
BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION
AUGUST 2019
1. Introduction:
The Project:
Kimathanka Arun Hydroelectric Project (KAHEP) is a project undertaken by Vidhyut Utpadan

Company Limited (VUCL) and is located in Sankhuwasabha District of North-Eastern Nepal. The
contract for the project’s Detailed Engineering Study work has been awarded to NEA Engineering
Company (NEC) by VUCL. In the present power shortage context of Nepal, KAHEP aims at
contributing to the social and economic development of the country through increasing the
electricity generation capacity of the country. With Arun river’s perennial flow, the implementation
of this project will help to meet the increasing load demand on Nepal’s integrated electric grid
system, especially during the dry season.
Location and Accessibility:
The proposed project is located in the Bhotkhola Rural Municipality-2, Sankhuwasabha District,
Province number 1 of Nepal. The project is located near Nepal-China (Tibet) border near
Kimtahnka. At present, there is no direct road access to the project area. The nearest settlement
with road access is at Gola, Sankhuwasabha. Presently, the Department of Road is opening the
road track from Gola to Kimathanka – a town bordering with China – as part of the 390 km
Biratnagar-Khandbari-Kimathanka trilateral trade route. Plans for expanding the road network to
towns/settlements close to the project area are underway. The major economic hubs near the
project sites are Khandbari (located 70.7 km from Gola), Tumlingtar (located 82 km from Gola) and
Dhankuta (located 158 km from Gola). Of these towns, Tumlingtar has an airport with connecting
flight to Kathmandu.Khandbariis the district headquarters.
Major roadways connecting the project region are as follows:
 Koshi highway (Basantapur-Chainpur-Tumlingtar-Khandbari-Num)
 Leguwa-Tumling road
 East-West highway
The roadway from Tumlingtar to Khandabri is black topped and in good condition, while the
seasonal road connecting Khandbari to Arun 3 HEP headworks is nearing completion. Arun 3
headworks– Num – Gola track is open but is not suitable for heavy vehicles in its current form due
to very sharp hairpin bends and narrow width. As of early monsoon, 2019, opening of a motorable
track from Gola to Chyamtang is on completion.
The project site can be accessed through Gola, which can be reached by two ways: using road all
the way from Kathmandu or by plane to Tumlingtar and then by road to Gola. From Gola, the
Project site can be accessed by a foot trail. Alternatively, a helicopter can be chartered from
Kathmandu to the villages in the project area. The time to reach the site via a helicopter is about
50 minutes.
Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 1

Summary of the Options Studied:
In the inception phase of the study, four main layout options considering different headwork and
waterways and powerhouse were studied. These options are shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Layout options considered for the inception phase study
The options studied were as follows:
Option A: Headworks at upstream of Khyokma Village
Option B: Headworks near KhyokmaVillagewith waterways and powerhouse options at right bank
Option C: Headwork between Khyokma and Chumsur village. Waterways and powerhouse options at both
right and left banks
Option D: Headworks at downstream of the Chumsur Village, waterways at right bank, and powerhouse
options at right bank
The alternative options A and B were envisaged as a ROR projects whereas option D was planned
to be a PROR project. Option C was studied as both a ROR and PROR project.
A comparison of the options was made based on:
 Available topographical constraints and topographical features

 Geological constraints and conditions

 Hydraulic constraints and hydraulic structural settings
 Benefits and costs
 Environmental and social impacts
Based on the comparison between the different options, Option C (PROR) was found to be the
most suitable project alternative.
Consequently, the Option C has been selected for detailed project study and is targeted to be
completed by 2019 including Detailed Project Report.
2. Hydrological Study
Arun basin is located in northeast part of Nepal and south part of Tibet on Arun River, within
Saptakoshi Basin of Nepal as shown in figure 2. Arun River originates at a glacier on the Northen
slope of Mount Xixabangma in Tibet and the river is called Pum Qu in Tibet. The catchment area of
the Arun Basin at Uwagaon outlet point is 26,132.79 km2 and at Kimathanka outlet point (project
site) is 24,835.58 km2 . The annual average distribution of rainfall over the catchment area is
found to be 565 mm for China side area sub-basin and 2645mm for Nepal side area sub-basin.
Figure 2 Google Earth image of the Kimathanka Catchment
Meteorological Stations and Precipitation Data
The meteorological stations around the project and the catchment area as identified in the Upper
Arun Hydroelectric Project Report (Morrison-Knudsen Engineers Inc et al., 1991) are shown in
Table 1
Table 1 Meteorological stations available for the project study
SNo Station Name Station No Basin Lat. Long. Elevation Data Period
1 Chepuwa 1317 Arun 27°46' 87°25' 2591 1959-88
2 Num 1301 Arun 27°33' 87°17' 1497 1959-88
3 Dingla 1325 Arun 27°22' 87°09' 1190 1957-88
4 Tumlingtar 1321 Arun 27°17' 87°13' 303 1977-88
5 Chainpur 1303 Arun 27°17' 87°20' 1329 1948-88
6 Bhojpur 1324 Arun 27°11' 87°03' 1595 1954-88
7 Leguwaghat 1305 Arun 27°08' 87°17' 412 1947-88
8 Pakribhas 1304 Arun 27°03' 87°17' 1677 1976-88
9 Munga 1306 Arun 27°02' 87°14' 1317 1947-88
10 Machuwaghat 1322 Arun 26°58' 87°10' 158 1948-88
11 Dhankuta 1307 Arun 26°59' 87°21' 1160 1947-88
12 Tribeni 1309 Arun 26°56' 87°09' 143 1948-88
13 Dingri (Tibet) - Arun 28°38' 87°05' 4320 1959-87
14 Nie-la-mu (Tibet) - Arun 28°10' 85°59' 3810 1965-88

Figure 3 Rainfall Station within Kimathanka Catchment
Hydrological Data
The hydrological stations used in the study provides the following data:
 Average monthly discharge
 Yearly discharge
 Extreme discharges
 Maximum monthly discharges
 Minimum monthly discharges
 Daily discharges
The details for the stations relevant to the project are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 : Hydrological stations used for project study
Station Data Years

Station Name District Lat. Long. Elev.
No Period of Data
Uwagaun 600.1 Sankhuwasabha 27°35’21’’ 87°20’22’’ 1294 1985-06 22
Turkighat 604.5 Sankhuwasabha 27°20’00’’ 87°11’30’’ 414 1975-06 32
Simle 606 Bhojpur 26°55’42’’ 87°09’16’’ 152 1986-06 21
Chepuwa
- Sankhuwasabha - - 1580 1976-90 15
(Upper ArunDamsite)
Weather Data
The weather data that are necessary for carrying out hydrological balance by the model are daily
precipitation in mm, minimum and maximum air temperature in degree Celsius, relative humidity in
percentage, wind speed in m/s and daily solar radiation in MJ/m 2/day. Dingri, Nielaer and Laziare
the three meteorological stations in the vicinity of Arun River basin at Kimathanka. Dingri station is
located inside Kimathanka catchment boundary. These observed data can be downloaded from
the Third Pole Environment Database (http://en.tpedatabase.cn/portal/index.jsp) website. Climate
Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR), Global Weather data (https://globalweather.tamu.edu) and
Aphrodite's Water Resources (http://www.chikyu.ac.jp/precip/english/downloads) are two popular
sites from where gridded climate data sets can be obtained for Tibetan region of Arun River basin.
A comparison of annual precipitation data was made between CFSR and Aphrodite weather data
sources with respect to observed meteorological station at Dingri and shown in Table 3
Table 4 Comparison of annual precipitation an Dingri station from various sources
S. Weather Annual Precipitation(mm) Avg. ppt Remarks

No. data (mm)
source
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
1 Third Pole 383. 429. 400. 288. 307. 264. 345. 209. 328.6 Dingri Station
9 3 6 9 3 7 4 1
2 CFSR 345. 465. 331. 293. 313. 372. 240. 237. 325.0
8 7 7 3 1 2 1 7
3 Aphrodite 422. 439. 498. 354. 365. 361. 373. 325. 392.4
2 5 3 4 0 7 0 3
Establishment of Gauging Station

Since no hydrological station is present in the project area or immediate vicinity, discharge
measurement is undertaken for comparing the estimated river discharge to the actual discharge at
the project site. Therefore, a stage gauge has been installed just downhill of Chyamtan village,
near an existing suspension bridge on mid-January, 2018 (shown in Figure 4). The gauge location
was selected in a river stretch with uniform river flow and easy access, and is representative of the
project area.
Figure 4 Location of installed staff gauge
Figure 5 Installed stage gauge
Moreover, an automatic gauge has also been installed at the same location for the automatic
monitoring of the water level (Figure 6). Data recording is being continued from 17th of May 2018 till
date.

Figure 6 Automatic Gauges Installed at KAHEP Project Site
Installation of Automatic Rain Gauge
Since there were no meteorological stations nearby the project area, an automatic rain gauge has
been installed near KAHEP project site. The automatic rain gauge was installed at Guthigumba
Village, Bhotkhola VDC, Sankhuwasabha considering stable mobile network around the gauging
station. The coordinate of the location of the Rain gauge is 27°45'39.51"N latitude and
87°25'19.23"E longitude. The data is being recorded from 15th August 2018 till date.
Figure 7: Location of installed Automatic Rain Gauge

Figure 7: Installed Automatic Rain Gauge Station at KAHEP Project Site
Ongoing discharge measurements
Currently the measurement of discharge of Arunrivr near headwork location is ongoing. The details
of the measured discharges till date is shown in Table 4
Table 4 : Measured Discharge of Arun River at KAHEP Project Site
Observed Observed Observed

Date Date Date
Discharge(m3/s) Discharge(m3/s) Discharge(m3/s)
12-Jan-18 74.26 1-Aug-18 535.96 31-Jan-19 48.58

6-Mar-18 69.1 8-Sep-18 359.44 14-Feb-19 69.58
31-Mar-08 49.68 1-Oct-18 219.38 27-Feb-19 85.43
15-Apr-18 71.16 30-Oct-18 130.62 14-Mar- 112.62
19-Nov- 19
30-Apr-18 65.66 71.94 29-Mar-19 106.98
18
30-Nov-
15-May-18 68.61 61.97 12-Apr-19 150.16
18
31-May-18 86.61 12-Dec-18 56.6 29-Apr-19 194.35
15-Jun-18 156.39 28-Dec-18 50.56 15-May- 163.19
19
26-May-
24-Jul-18 330.35 18-Jan-19 49.17 215.68
19

Estimation of Daily Discharge
The response of the basin has been monitored at Uwagaon station 27.72km downstream of the
headworks site. The basin is very large and most of the contributing areas lie in Tibet. Since there
is distinct abrupt changes in topography and climate between southern and northern flanks of
Himalayan ridges, estimation of daily discharge using distributed hydrological model is sought. The
parameters of such model calibrated at Uwagaon station will thus be used to simulate at
headworks site. The average percentage daily differences between model simulated discharges at
Uwagaon station and headworks site will then be deducted from the long term observed discharge
at Uwagaon station to arrive estimation of daily discharge at the headworks site.
For the purpose of daily flow estimation with the objective discussed in above para, Soil and Water
Assessment Tool (SWAT) developed by USDA has been selected. SWAT (Arnold et al., 1998) is a
semi-distributed, time continuous watershed simulator operating on a daily time step. It is long term
load model, which uses daily average input values. The model is semi-physically based, and
allows simulation of high level of spatial detail by dividing the watershed into a large number of
sub-watersheds.
Physical characteristics, such as slope, reach dimensions, and climatic data are considered for
each sub basin. For climate, SWAT uses the data from the station nearest to the centric of each
sub basin. Calculated flow, sediment yield, and nutrient loading obtained for each sub basins are
then routed through the river system. Channel routing is simulated using the Variable Storage or
Muskingum method.
Figure 8: DEM of the Kimathanka Catchment

For the Calibration of the model, Discharge records of Station No. 600.1 (Uwagaon) along Arun
River was used since it is the nearest station in the lower reach of the river from the headworks
site. The calibration period was chosen to be 1998-2001 with 2 years of warm up period. In the
model, the sub basin at the end of the river reach within the basin was sub basin number 26.
Hence the discharge from sub basin 26 was used in calibration processes. Daily discharge data
was utilized for calibration.
3000
Uwagaon_Simulate
2500 d
Kimathanka_Simula
2000 ted
Discharge(m3/s)
1500
1000
500
0
98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 01 01 01 01 01 01
/19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /19 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20 /20
3 3 5 5 6 5 5 6 5 7 8 8 7 8 8 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1
1/ 2/2 4/1 6/ 7/2 9/1 11/ 2/2 2/1 4/ 5/2 7/1 9/ 0/2 2/1 2/ 3/2 5/1 7/ 8/2 0/1 12/ 1/2 3/2 5/1 7/ 8/2 0/1 12/
1 1 1 1 1
Date
Figure 9 Simulated Discharge at Uwagaon and Kimathanka
Summary of average monthly discharge at headworks site has been estimated and presented in
Table 5
Table 5: Daily estimated discharge (m3/s) at KimathankaHeadworks site
Month/da Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
y
Average 60.0 56.2 54.2 48.0 78.2 237.1 523.8 562.5 404.1 184.8 98.1 70.0
8 2 8 1 0 7 0 2 3 2 0 6
The adopted flow duration curve at KAHEP dam site is shown in Figure 10

1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
Discharge (m3/s)
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%
Probability of Exceedence
Figure 10: Adopted Flow Duration Curve at KAHEP Dam Site
Estimation of Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)
For the estimation of Probable maximum flood, SWAT model is applied and run for the period from
Aug 15, 1999 to Sept 15, 1999. For this run 3 day estimated weighted PMP over the sub-basin are
equally divided as rainfall during August 26, 27 and 28 1999 since on 27 August 1999 historically
highest instantaneous discharge had been observed at Uwagaon station and other weather data
and parameters remain unaltered. The daily output hydrographs at Headworks site (fig. 6.1) and
tailrace site (fig. 6.2) have peaks at2,843 m3/sec and 3,798 m 3/sec m3/sec respectively. Since the
observed maximum instantaneous peak at Turkeghat station is 2.34 times the observed daily
discharge on the same date, PMF is estimated to be 6,652 m 3/s and 8,887 m3/s for Headworks and
tailrace sites respectively.
3000
2500
Estimated Discharge(m3/sec)
2000
1500
1000
500
0
ug ug ug ug ug ug ug ug ug ep ep ep ep ep ep ep
-A - A -A - A -A - A -A - A -A 2-
S
4-
S
6-
S
8-
S -S -S -S
15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 10 12 14
Date
Figure 11: PMF at Headworks site

4000
Estimated Discharge(m3/sec) 3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
ug ug ug ug ug ug ug ug ug ep ep ep ep Se
p ep ep
-A -A -A -A -A -A -A -A -A 2-
S
4-
S
6-
S
8-
S - -S -S
15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 10 12 14
Date
Figure 12: PMF at Tailrace site
Estimation of Peak Flow
The Arun River has been gauged at Uwagaon (600.1) and Turkeghat (station 604.5). Since the
Instantaneous peak discharges at Turkeghat station are available for more years than with
Uwagaon station peak flow estimation is calculated using Turkeghat station data. Table 6
represents these observed instantaneous annual maximum and minimum discharges at Turkeghat
station. The frequency analysis for these observed events are carried out. The return period of
corresponding observed annual maximum discharges are then calculated for the observed period.
For the same annual series of observed maximum discharges Gumbel’s, Log-normal and Log-
Pearson’s distributions are fitted.
Table 5: Estimated peak discharges of various return period at headworks site
Return Turkeghat Station design Turkighat to Kimathaka Kimathanka Station design

Period, flood (m3/sec) Station(m3/sec) flood (m3/sec)
Year
Log-Pearson Type III Snyder's Method
2 2,781.5 1,546.7 1,234.7
5 3,608.7 2,115.2 1,493.5
10 4,177.3 2,491.2 1,686.1
15 4,505.9 2,703.2 1,802.7
25 4,921.7 2,966.1 1,955.6
30 5,071.3 3,059.4 2,012.0
50 5,495.8 3,320.0 2,175.8
100 6,087.5 3,674.2 2,413.2

200 6,701.4 4,031.5 2,669.9
1000 8,232.4 4,881.4 3,351.0
10000 10,738.0 6,167.5 4,570.5
GLOF Study
At present, supra-glacial and moraine-dammed lakes are far more common in Nepal than glacier-
dammed lakes as their development is favored by the overall atmospheric warming and glacier
wastage. In Nepal ice-dammed lakes are either only present in very small numbers if at all, or their
existence has escaped notice. Among the river basins in the Himalayas, the Arun river basins is
the most concentrated areas of glacial lakes. The location details of potentially dangerous glacial
lakes in Arun basin are shown in Figure 13
Figure 14: Potentially dangerous glacial lakes in the Arun Basin
The possible maximum discharges of GLOF estimated by models are 20745 and 16095 m3/s for
G4 glacial lake. Since that lake is 125 km upstream of the headworks site, the peak discharge will
get attenuated more than half when arrived at the headworks site. Therefore, the maximum
possible discharge during GLOF event will be less than that during PMF.
3. Sediment Study
In general, the sediment concentration is low in the upper part of the catchment of the Nepalese
rivers (except for catchment with Tibetan Tethys formation) due to the availability of higher

Himalayan crystalline rock mass. As the geology of the lesser Himalayas and Siwalik is less
competent and more fragile compared to that in the Higher Himalayan settings, the sediment
concentration gradually increases towards mid hill and Terai. This might be also related to high
rainfall and flash flood in the mid mountain range.
Sediment Sampling and Testing
The sample collection works is being done by point sampling method. Samples are retrieved from
the bank of the river at locations with turbulent flow where the sediments are assumed to be well
mixed and fairly evenly distributed over the depth and width of the flow. Regular sediment
sampling is being carried out at gauging site from three locations (Left, Center and Right).
Sediment Concentration Analysis
The collection of sediment samples is ongoing until now. The concentration analysis of the
sediment samples is also being done continuously which can be seen in the Monthly Progress
Reports of Sedimentation Studies. Up till February a total number of 843 sediment samples have
been collected for sediment concentration analysis. Maximum measured sediment concentration at
Arun river during study period is found to be 6574 ppm. The measured mean monthly
concentration for the headworks site of KAHEP during the current study is shown in Table 7
Table 6: Adopted Mean Monthly Concentration of Sediment at KAHEP Headworks Site
Month Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb
Avg Sediment
999 2122 2244 617 353 134 92 71 676
Concentration (ppm)
Particle size distribution
Particle size of sediment is main factors governing erosion potential of sediment. All size range of
sediment particles do not reach turbine and erosion rate is directly proportional to particle size of
sediment. So, during sediment analysis, PSD of sediment is carried to identify critical sediment
size that reaches turbine and erode turbine material. The measured particle size distribution for the
headworks site of KAHEP during the current study is shown in Figure 15

Figure 16: PSD curves of mixed samples
Around 75% of the suspended sediments are finer than 0.2mm size and more than 50% of the
suspended sediments are finer than 0.1mm size.
Petrographic and Mineral Content Analysis

The Mineral content analysis have been completed for the samples till November 2018.The
measured mineral content for the headworks site of KAHEP during the current study is shown in
Figure 17.
Figure 186: Mineral Content of the Sediment
It was observed that, about 76 percent of the mineral grains in the sediment contain minerals with
hardness greater than 5 in Mohs hardness scale which are Quartz, Feldspar, Tourmaline, Garnet,
and Hornblende. However, in general it was noted that most of the feldspar grains have ‘sub-
angular’ shape which makes them not as abrasive as quartz grains which are ‘angular’ to ‘very-
angular’. Remaining 24 percent of material comprises mica, carbonate minerals, clay lumps, etc.
which possess hardness lower than 5 in Mohs scale.
4. Geology and Geotechnical Study
Project Geology
Regional Setting
The area falls in the Arun Tectonic window that consists rocks of both the Lesser Himalayan Unit
and Higher Himalayan Unit. In general, Quartzite, orthogneiss and augen gneiss are the rock unit
of the Lesser Himalayan while schistose gneiss and banded gneiss are predominant constituents
of the Higher Himalayan rock sequence.

Figure 17 Google Image showing project Area along with the major villages
The geological map of the project area is shown in Figure and as shown, the Main Central Thrust,
which forms the boundary between the Higher and Lesser Himalayan Units, is expected to pass
within the project zone.
For long, many researchers have defined the MCT by different criteria, including by lithology that
differs between the hanging wall and the footwall, by metamorphic grade changes from the
hanging wall to thefootwall, by the different Uranium-Lead (U-Pb) detrital zircon ages, by the
different Neodymium isotope compositions, by different strain, etc. Some of these criteria have
also been combined. However, none of these criteria are reliable if they are used by themselves
(Searle et al., 2008). Meanwhile, these all criteria are not satisfied together (Yin,2006). The
dominant problems are:
 Lithology and stratigraphy have not been completely investigated and understood;
 Metamorphic grades across the MCT shear zone are continuously changing, thus any one
particular isograd is not reliable for determining the location of the MCT;
 Strain magnitude cannot be determined as most of the fabrics of the MCT that resulted
from shearing, have disappeared because of strong heating and deformation
 Some geologists do not believe that the whole shear surface was active at the same time
because they think that the MCT ductile shear zone is caused by finite strain deformation

In the present study, MCT is interpreted as the stratigraphic boundary separating the rock units
typical of the Higher and Lesser Himalayan Unit, and was observed as a sharp contact during the
mapping.
Headworks
Headworks area predominantly comprises of well foliated, medium banded, dark grey, coarse
grained banded gneiss (Figure 19). The exposure forms a vertical cliff and slight to moderately
weathered. The pegmatite vein consists of nearly 5 mm thick, 2.5 cm long mica book, 0.5x1.5 cm
long tourmaline and recrystalized quartz (Figure 20). The attitude of foliation plane is N20E/40oSE.
The intake site is proposed in a narrow valley with moderate to steep slope at both banks. The hill
slope is covered with thin slope scree that ranges upto 50 cm and mostly covered by sparse
vegetation. The exposed rocks are banded gneiss and are fresh to slightly weathered with
occasional moderately weathered rock. Highly persistent foliation plane is predominant while joint
planes are low to medium persistent. Some open joints are filled with sand, silt and clay. The rock
mass is strong. Individual thickness of gneiss bands ranges from a few centimeters to 1.5 meters
and 2 to 3 meters in some places. The alluvial deposits found on the river bed are composed of
boulders and gravels of gneiss, schist, amphibolite and a few quartzites. The clasts are generally
sub-rounded to round in shape. The alluvial deposit comprises boulder, cobble and pebble having
more than 75% gneiss, less than 10% schist and 15 % others (based on visual observation). The
debris in the river also consists of large tree trunks. The debris is about 10 m thick. The maximum
size of boulder found has the diameter more than 2.0 m. At the left bank, colluvial fan rests over
the alluvial deposit. The angular clasts in the colluvial fan is composed of gneiss.
Likewise, at the right bank of the Arun river, near to the proposed site of the dam, at the confluence
between the Arunriver and Chemadengdeng kholsa, there exist a recent landslide. The kholsa is
filled with landslide debris in which boulders and gravels are exclusively of gneiss. Huge tree
trunks and plant remains are also common. The debris consists of huge boulder. Nearly 2 m
diameter boulder is frequent with average size ranging upto 0.5 m diameter. Clay content is
relatively low.
Overall, the quality of rockmass in the headworks area indicates that the site is suitable for the
construction of the proposed dam. However, the orientation of the foliation plane is unfavorable
and indicates that extensive seepage control measures may be necessary. The ongoing core
drilling and Lugeon tests will provide a better indication of the potential seepage issues.

Figure 18 Geology of the project site. Project layout shown is for reference only.
HRT Alignment
The proposed waterway alignment (including the approach tunnel and desander) passes through
banded gneiss (2215 m), augen gneiss (2900 m), schistose gneiss (1735 m) and small portion
through weak or shear zone. Most portion of the tunnel alignment is oblique to the strike of foliation

plane while a few section is aligned parallel to the foliation plane. Generally, the bed dips towards
southeast.
The initial part of the tunnel alignment (nearly 200 m) from intake is proposed along an azimuth of
205 degrees whereas the remaining downstream portion (1500 m) is oriented at an azimuth of 170
degrees. The two alignments make nearly angle of 140 degrees. The initial tunnel alignment will be
oriented almost parallel to the foliation plane while the second stretch makes nearly 65 degree with
the foliation plane. At some places it is even less. In addition to this, 2500 m long stretch towards
powerhouse has an azimuth of 170 degrees that makes an angle of about 60 degree with the
foliation plane and much less in some section. Beyond this point, towards powerhouse, around
1050 m section uptosugre tank has an azimuth of 175 degree. The section alignment is oblique
with foliation plane making angle much less than 60 degree.
Surge Shaft
The surge shaft lies below the hill ridge of Chyamtang Village, at about 500 m uphill of the
proposed powerhouse area in the right bank of the Arun River. Geologically, the proposed surge
tank area lies on the rocks of the Higher Himalaya and is composed of banded gneiss with
occasional occurrence of schist band. The ridge consists of thick residual to colluvial deposits
consisting boulder, silty-clayey soil. The material is medium dense to loss in nature. exposed rock
along the hill top and downslope have made rock cliff. The rock mass is strong and jointed with
opening ranges up to 7 mm and more in some places that are filled with sand, silt and clay. Joints
with iron staining are also seen in some places. Joints are dry to damp. Seepage from the interface
of rock and soil is also present. The soil thickness in this area is more than 5 m but the thickness
gradually decreases along the edges. The downhill slope, below the rock exposure, is covered by
thick colluvial and is sparsely to medium densely vegetated. The colluvial consists of clay size to
boulder size. The eastern hill slope shows the sign of terrace farmed. The lower section of the
terrace farmed is saturated with water.
Completed drilling suggests that the bedrock is situated at 6 m from the surface with minor
seepage estimated during construction. The present geological investigations support the
proposed surge tank design. Assessment of rockfall hazard for the structure is under study.
Powerhouse and Tailrace
Geologically, these project components lie in the rock unit of the Higher Himalayan and
predominantly consist of schistose gneiss. The gneiss reveals well developed schistosity (Figure
25). On the way to Chyamtang from Lingam, fresh to slightly weathered, well foliated, massive,
blocky and medium to coarse grained deformed gneiss is exposed (Figure 26). Moderately to
highly weathered, jointed, coarse grained schistose gneiss is also well exposed in tailrace (Figure
27). The attitude of foliation plane is N40E/45oSE.
Similarly, at the down slope of Lingam and Chyamtang village, massive, moderately jointed,
slightly weathered, coarse grained schistose gneiss is present. A few quartz veins parallel to
chevron fold axial plane is also visible (Figure 9). The attitude of foliation plane is N670E/41 o
SE.Likewise, downhill of the Chyamtang village, at the Khaktok Kholsi, the exposure consists of

slight to moderately weathered, well foliated, jointed, medium to coarse grained, schistose gneiss
that consist nearly 2 m thick biotite gneiss. The attitude of foliation plane is N35E/34oSE.
Downslope of Chymantang village, further downhill of the end of the cultivated terrace, the
exposure forms series of vertical cliff with spectacular series of water fall (Figure 10). The
exposure consists of fresh to slightly weathered, moderately weathered in some places, medium to
coarse grained, strong schistose gneiss with pytmatic folds along with boudinage. The attitude of
foliation plane in this section is N30E/64oSE.
Investigation plan
The major items of the geological and geotechnical study are presented in the following table
Table 8 Investigation Details and Status
Investigations Details Current Status

Geo-mapping Regional geological map, project area map Geo-mapping for all locations,
(1:25,000 scale) and detailed engineering except for dam site left bank
geological maps (1:1000 scale). (which became accessible only in
mid-March), is completed.
Core drilling 1380m linear length of core drilling is planned at Total 575m drilling has been
and in-hole the location of major structures, and other critical completed.
tests. area. In-situ tests including permeability tests (in
soil), Lugeon test (in rock), and SPT/DCPT (in soil)
are being performed.
ERT Survey 8000m of investigation lines planned. Completed.
SRT Survey 4000m of investigation lines are planned. Completed.
MASW Survey 20 points of 1D MASW at critical locations are Completed.
planned
Construction Identification of borrow quarry areas for The survey is ongoing.
Material construction materials. In-situ and laboratory tests
Survey investigating material’s suitability.
Laboratory Laboratory tests including rock and soil mechanics Cores and samples are being
Testing test are planned. collected at site.

Figure 19 Banded gneiss in Headwork's area, Right bank Figure 20 Micabook, tourmaline and recrystallized quartz in
of the Arun River pegmatite vein, Right bank of the Arun River

Figure 21 Photograph showing rock mass along the left Figure 22 Banded Gneiss and ~30 cm black gneiss,on the
bank of the dam axis, Arun river way towards Chumsur Village from Chyamtang Village
Figure 23 Rockmass near potential desander portal area Figure 24 Rock Overhang in Powerhouse Area
(photo facing upstream)

Figure 25Schistocity in Powerhouse Area Figure 26Deformed Gneiss in Powerhouse Area

Figure 28: Schistose Gneiss exposed in cliff, downslope
Figure 27Schistose Gneiss in Tailrace (Photo facing of the Chyamtang Village (upstream of tailrace portal)
downstream)
Figure 29Quartzite Bed in Schistose Gneiss, On the way Figure 30Banded Gneiss, On the way towards Chumsur
towards Chumsur Village from Chyamtang Village Village from Chyamtang Village

Summary of Completed Investigations
Core Drilling
The following table provides the general summary of the exploratory drill hole completed and
continued.
Table 9 Summary of completed drill holes
Drill Total
Depth to
hole Location Drilled Easting Northing Remarks
bedrock,m
No Depth,m
Surge Tank,
SS1 90 542817.6 3071401 6 completed
Chyamtang
Surge Shaft,
SS2 70 542845.5 3071338 9 completed
Chymtang
completed,
Headworks,R/B
DR1 36 541734.3 3077477 N/A artesian formed
Arun River
and stopped
Headworks,R/B
DR2 45 541740 3077469 1 Completed
Arun River
PH4 Powerhouse site 50 542768 3071165 36 Completed
PH2 Powerhouse site 159 543010.2 3071094.8 Continued
Headworks,L/B Ongoing, paused
DL2 60 541849 3077456 N/A
Arun River due to monsson
TL1 Tailrace Site 65 542832 3071038 35 Completed
5. Project Description and Design
General Arrangement of Project Components
Kimathanka Arun Hydroelectric Project utilizes water from Arun River to generate 450 MW of
electricity. The main civil structures of the Project are roller compacted concrete (RCC) dam,
power intakes, upstream (U/S) and downstream (D/S) coffer dams, diversion tunnel, headrace
tunnel, surge shaft, pressure shaft, underground powerhouse, underground transformer cavern
and tailrace tunnel.
All the structures of the project are proposed along the right river bank. All structures are of
underground type except the diversion dam. U/S and D/S coffer dams have been proposed about
400 m and 350 m from dam axis, respectively. The headworks consists of 68 m high (from river
bed) RCC Dam with two overflow spillways with radial gates and three sluice spillways designed to
safely spill the design flood and the PMF. (Core drilling work is being carried out at the dam site to
ascertain the rock foundation.) Two power intakes consist of four openings of width 6.0 m each on

the right bank of Arun River. Four numbers of vertical gates of size 6 m X 6 m are proposed for
Intake structure.
From the power Intake, there are twin approach tunnels of length 885 m and 935 m with finished
diameter of 6 m up to the bifurcation to desanding basin. Four tunnels each of length 140m with
finished diameter of 4m connect the approach tunnels to the desanding basin. There are 4 number
of underground desanding basin chambers each of 200m length, 20 m width and 15m depth. After
the desanding basin, four tunnels of 130m length 4m finished diameter tunnel connect with twin
tunnels each of 267m length and finished diameter of 6m to the headrace tunnel of 4410m with
finished diameter of 8mtill surge shaft. A surge shaft with finished diameter of 16m and 75m height
is proposed at the end of headrace tunnel. After surge shaft, steel penstock tunnel of length 620m
with finished diameter of 6.25mconvey the discharge to the turbines. An underground power
station with 157.0 m length and 18.5 m width cavern with total height of 35 m will accommodate six
Pelton turbines. A 700 m long tailrace tunnel of finished diameter 10 m will discharge water coming
out of the turbines back to the Arun River.
Description of Project Components
Reservoir Volume Curve
The reservoir volume curve at the dam location is given in Figure 31. The live storage volume with
full supply level at 2035 and minimum drawdown level at 2025 is 3.2 MCM.
Storage Area (ha)

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
2060
2040
2020
Elevation (masl)
2000
1980
1960
1940
1920
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0
Storage Volume (MCM)
Storage Volume Storage Area
Figure 31 Reservoir Stage-Volume Curve

Headworks
Main Dam
A Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) gravity dam with crest length of 190 m is proposed. Existing
river bed level at the dam site is 1968 masl.
Deck level of dam is 2038 masl with freeboard of 3 m from full supply level (FSL) 2035 masl.
Height of the dam at non-overflow dippiest section from the dam assumed rock foundation is 98 m.
Two overflow spillway radial gates of size 12 m X 10 m have been proposed with maximum
discharge capacity of 1494 m3/s. Crest level of the overflow spillway is at 2025 masl. Two breast
wall spillways of size 10 m X 14 m are also proposed whose bottom level is at 2008 masl. The
cross-section of the dam will have a vertical upstream face and a 0.8H: 1V downstream face. Two
2.5 m X 2.5 m sized mid-level outlets at 1990 masl have been proposed near the intake opening
for passage of the sediment.
Energy dissipater
Flip bucket type energy dissipater has been proposed at end of spillway and is designed to
dissipate energy of upstream water. The design flood is adopted to be 10,000-year return period
flood i.e. about 4570.5 m3/s. A flip bucket is chosen due to high flow and high velocity at the end of
spillway. The total width of flip bucket is provided to be 36 m for overflow spillway and 42 m for
sluice spillway. The lip velocity and throw distance are calculated to be 32 m/s and 110 m
respectively.
Coffer Dam and Diversion Tunnel
To enable river diversion during construction of dam, two rock fill cofferdams with central
impervious cores have been located at approximately 400 m upstream and 350 m downstream of
main dam axis. Upstream coffer dam shall be 30 m high with top elevation 2015 masl and
downstream cofferdam shall be 15 m high with top elevation 1980 masl. Top width of the dam has
been proposed as 6 m. Overtopping of the upstream coffer dam is not permitted during
construction period.
Diversion scheme has been designed to pass flood of 15 years return period which is estimated to
be 1802.7 m3/s representing a peak flood event. Single tunnel has been proposed to divert flow to
downstream of river during construction.
Intake
Side intakes have been proposed to divert required flow to headrace tunnels from reservoir. Side
intake has been provided which are designed to pass the design discharge of 151.6 m3/s. The
intake is proposed to be operated by vertical lift gates. The number and size of trash racks are
provided to be 4 and 7.6m X 8.4m (B X H) respectively whereas number and size of gates are
provided to be 4 and 6m X 6m (B X H).

Approach Tunnels
Twin approach tunnels are proposed to convey water from intake to Desander Basin. Two number
of approach tunnels have been proposed. The tunnels start from intake and end at inlet bifurcation
and have been proposed to be D shaped finished and fully concrete lined. The tunnels are
designed to carry design discharge of 87.4 m 3/s each. The optimum diameter of the tunnels is
estimated to be 6m and the total lengths of the two tunnels according to component layout drawing
is estimated to be 885 m and 935 m. After the twin approach tunnels, each tunnel bifurcates into
140m length D shaped finished diameter of 4m and fully concrete lined till the inlet transition of
Underground Desanding Basin.
Underground Desanding Basin
Four Underground Desander Basin Chambers are proposed to settle 0.2mm size sediment particle
with at least 90% efficiency. Number and size of desanding basin are 4 and 200 m X 20 m X 15 m
(L X B X H). The flushing channel of 1.5m X 1.5 m size is provided at the center of basins. The
transition of 10o angle is provided at the inlet of the basin. An adit tunnel will be provided to assist
during the construction and operation phase of the project. After the desanding basin, four tunnels
of 130m length 4m finished diameter tunnel connect with twin tunnels each of 267m length and
finished diameter of 6m to the headrace tunnel.
Headrace tunnel
A Headrace Tunnel (HRT) is proposed to convey water from desanding basin to the surge shaft.
The tunnel start from junction point of twin tunnel after desander and ends at surge shaft inlet and
has been proposed to be horseshoe shape finished and fully concrete lined. The tunnels designed
to carry design discharge of 151.6 m3/s. The optimum diameter of the tunnels is estimated to be
8m and the total length of the tunnel according to component layout drawing is estimated to be
4410 m. Design velocity in the tunnel will be 3 m/s. Invert level at the start of the tunnel is
1996.8masl and at the end of the tunnel will be 1981masl.
Surge Shaft
Surge protection structure is designed to dampen sudden upsurges and down surges which occur
during operation of power plant. A circular restricted orifice shaft of finished diameter of 16 m and
75 m height is proposed as a surge shaft. The surge shaft is open to sky at the top and at 16 m
towards right of the flow direction. The restricted orifice is circular section with diameter of 3.45m.
The diaphragm connecting the headrace tunnel with surge shaft is also of circular section with
diameter of 3.45m.
Pressure shaft
Pressure shaft consists of three sections i.e. upper horizontal section, vertical shaft and lower
horizontal section. Entire conduit is proposed to be circular in shape, steel lined and 6.25 m in
finished diameter. The total lengths of upper horizontal portion, vertical shaft and lower horizontal
portion are 165 m, 295 m and 160 m. Manifolds are provided at the end of the pressure shaft

which will convey discharge to each units of turbine. The main pressure shaft is branched out into
six smaller manifolds. The diameter of these small manifolds is 2.6 m.
Powerhouse Cavern
The main powerhouse cavern is 18.5 m wide, 35 m in height and about 157 m long. There are
mainly three floor levels in the powerhouse cavern situated at different elevations. The machine
floor level is at 1664masl, the generator floor level is at 1660masl and the turbine floor level is at
1655masl.
Transformer Cavern
The transformer hall will be reached through an access tunnel branching off from the main access
tunnel. The size of the main transformer cavern will be 17 m wide, 18.5 m high and 190 m in
length. The floor elevation will be same as that of the main machine floor at the power station.
Tailrace tunnel
The outlets from six turbine units will be connected to tailrace manifold tunnels which will be further
merged to one tailrace tunnel. The length of the tunnel is estimated to be 700 m and length of the
manifolds for the tunnel will be 18 m. The tailrace tunnel will be horseshoe shaped with 10m
finished diameter.
Adit and Access Tunnels
One construction adit tunnel of D shape with finished diameter of 4 m is designed to provide
access and assist the works in headrace tunnel. One adit tunnel is also proposed for the
assistance of work in surge shaft. Whereas, the main access tunnel is proposed above the tailrace
portal for the construction of work in powerhouse cavern. There will be different sized access
tunnels, with inverted D-shape, to different locations at powerhouse complex.
The salient features of the project is shown in Table 10.
Table 7 Salient features of KAHEP

Ground Elevation of 1970masl
Headworks
Full Supply Level 2035 masl
Deck Level 2038 masl

400kV Arun HUB at Haitaar (Sub-station proposed
Connection Point
by Rastriya Prasharan Grid Company Limited )
15 Access Road
Length 30 km

Figure 32 Layout of the finalized project alternative
6. Project Cost and Evaluation
The financing terms and schedules are based on construction plan of the company with required
proportion of equity and debt contribution. The project schedule reflects the provision of completion
to satisfy the COD date as per estimated plan. The following parameters form the basis while
concluding the project financial projections:
Table 8 Parameters for Financial Projection
Installed Capacity 450MW

Loan Equity Ratio (With IDC) 75:25
Construction/disbursement Period 5 Years
Bank Loan Interest 11%
Bank Loan arrangement Fees 1%
Revenue is increased by 3% for 8 years as per PPA policy
Operation & maintenance cost yearly increase by 3%
Income Tax (20%) but (Holiday for 10 years- 50% holiday for 5 years)
Discount Rate 11%
Depreciation rate Straight Line over life time 30 years
Total Cost As per Updated Feasibility Study Report, March 2019
Total Revenue As per Energy Table estimation with Posted date

Estimating Methodology
The estimates are mode based on the following procedure of calculation.
 The costs are prepared in different headings based on details at each heading. The
quantity estimates are prepared based on preliminary drawings and those items which are
not detailed yet are put on lump sum based on experience on conservative side so that it
will suffice during detailed planning.
 The Rate Analysis are made from basic rate of construction materials, machines,
equipment, tools and plants with the help of norms referred for the quantity of manpower. A
10% physical contingency is added on each of the surface works items and 15% for
underground works. In addition, that there is a provision of price contingency each items of
heading except preliminary and IDC.
 The BoQ is prepared with the quantity and rate prepared from Rate analysis to find the
base cost of the construction in this date.
 There will be applicable VAT and Tax as per the rule of GoN. for the applicable items.
Those to be completed by company will not have VAT and tax
 In the total cost the insurance and Misc. cost is based on % basis to cover-up the required
reliability on the costing.
The cost obtained from the details analysis is referred as construction capital cost without
financing. There will be further financing cost to be added on the estimate to find the final cost of
the project at the time of commercial operation date (COD).
Capital Cost
Table 9 Total Capital Cost and details
S.N. Particulars Amount in Million USD Per %

1 Pre- Operating Expenses 8.75 1.03%
2 Civil Construction Cost 394.34 46.46%
3 Metal works Cost 61.56 7.25%
4 Plant and Machinery Cost 162.2 19.11%
5 Transmission Line and Switchyard 2.98 0.35%
6 Land Purchased and Development 18.17 2.14%
7 Site Office Building 10.9 1.28%
8 Vehicle Cost 8.88 1.05%
9 Infrastructure Development Cost 13.3 1.57%
10 Environment/ Social Mitigation Cost 3.58 0.42%
11 Project Supervision/ Management & Engineering 50.38 5.94%
15 Interest During Construction 113.76 13.40%
Total with Financing 848.80 100%
Project Evaluation
Kimanthanka Arun Hydroelectric Project is found to be attractive project for financing with
installed capacity of the project 495 MW. Project cost is found to be 1684.59 $/kW after
financing considered as 75:25 debt equity financing @ 11% interest rate. The Project Cost
and Financial indicators shows the B/C ratio 1.22, IRR of 13.36 and the project can pay
the loan and interest on 12 year.
Table 10 Project Evaluation
Assumptions
1 Installed Capacity 450 MW MW
4 Construction Period (Loan drawdown Period) 5 Years
2 Loan Equity Ratio (With IDC) 75% : 25% Ratio

3 Loan Repayment Period Quartly Basis 12 Years
4 Bank Loan Interest 11.00% PA
5 Bank Loan Arrangement Fees 1.00% % On Total Loan
6 Dry Season Rate (Off Peak) NRs 8.40 Per Unit
7 We Season Rate NRs 4.80 Per Unit
9 Peak Period Rate (Dry) NRs10.55 Per Unit
8 Price Increment in energy rate for 8 years (after 3% On base rate
COD)
9 Operation & maintenance cost yearly increase by 3% Yearly
10 Royalty on Capacity for 15 Years NRs.200 Per KW
11 Royalty on Capacity after 15 Years NRs.1500 Per Kw
12 Royalty on Revenue for 15 Years 2% On Revenue
13 Royalty on Revenue after 15 Years 10% On Revenue
14 Staff Bonus Provision 2% On Net Profit
15 Income Tax -(100% Holiday for 10 years- 50% 20% Holiday If COD with in
holidays for 5 years) 2080.
16 Discount factor (As per Current Scenario) 11%
17 Depreciation rate is as per Life of Project 30 Years Project Life
18 Total project cost without finance 82,320,630.95 Rs,000
Basic Data Amount in Million USD
1 Total Project Cost (With IDC) 848.77
2 Total Loan (75%) 636.58
3 Total Equity (25%) 212.20
4 Net Revenue (After Loss provision) for First year 149.15
5 Net Revenue (After Loss provision) for Ninth year 184.94
6 Yearly O& M Cost 14.90
8 First Year Royalty (At the starting) 3.87
9 Yearly Royalty After 15 years 25.13
Results
1 IRR (Internal rate of return) 13.36%
2 EIRR / ROE (Return on Equity) 19.44%
3 NPV (Net Present Value) in USD 128,542.56 Amount in ,$000
4 Cost per MW (1 US$=114) 1,684.59 Amount in $000
5 BC Ratio (benefit Cost Ratio) 1.22 Ratio
6 Payback Period -Simple 6.05 Years
7 Payback Period - Discounted 9.95 Years
9 Cost Sensitivity (Increment up to ) 21.93% Maximum

10 Revenue sensitivity (Decrease up to) 16.14% Maximum
11 DSCR (Debt Service Coverage Ratio) In 12 Years 1.56 Times
Average
12 Loan Repayment As per sch Amount in ,000
13 Revenue Per MW in USD 296.02 Amount in, $000
14 Capital Cost Per MW in NPR 192,043.82 Amount in ,000
15 Cost per kWh in NPR 5.83
Conclusion
From the present level of study Kimathanka Arun Hydroelectric Project is technically and financially
feasible. However, the cost- benefit will be finalized after completion of total study.
As the project structures are mostly underground type the environmental impacts are limited. The
Environment Impact Assessment is also being carried out at present.

Progress of Kimathanka - 16!09!2019

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Progress of Kimathanka - 16!09!2019

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kimathanka Arun HEP

BRIEF PROJECT INFORMATION

Kimathanka Arun Hydroelectric Project (KAHEP) is a project undertaken by Vidhyut Utpadan

Location and Accessibility:

Major roadways connecting the project region are as follows:

 Koshi highway (Basantapur-Chainpur-Tumlingtar-Khandbari-Num)

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 1

Figure 1 Layout options considered for the inception phase study

The options studied were as follows:

Option A: Headworks at upstream of Khyokma Village

A comparison of the options was made based on:

 Available topographical constraints and topographical features

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 2

Figure 2 Google Earth image of the Kimathanka Catchment

Meteorological Stations and Precipitation Data

1 Chepuwa 1317 Arun 27°46' 87°25' 2591 1959-88

2 Num 1301 Arun 27°33' 87°17' 1497 1959-88

3 Dingla 1325 Arun 27°22' 87°09' 1190 1957-88

4 Tumlingtar 1321 Arun 27°17' 87°13' 303 1977-88

5 Chainpur 1303 Arun 27°17' 87°20' 1329 1948-88

6 Bhojpur 1324 Arun 27°11' 87°03' 1595 1954-88

7 Leguwaghat 1305 Arun 27°08' 87°17' 412 1947-88

8 Pakribhas 1304 Arun 27°03' 87°17' 1677 1976-88

9 Munga 1306 Arun 27°02' 87°14' 1317 1947-88

10 Machuwaghat 1322 Arun 26°58' 87°10' 158 1948-88

11 Dhankuta 1307 Arun 26°59' 87°21' 1160 1947-88

12 Tribeni 1309 Arun 26°56' 87°09' 143 1948-88

13 Dingri (Tibet) - Arun 28°38' 87°05' 4320 1959-87

14 Nie-la-mu (Tibet) - Arun 28°10' 85°59' 3810 1965-88

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 4

 Average monthly discharge

 Maximum monthly discharges

 Minimum monthly discharges

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 5

Station Data Years

Uwagaun 600.1 Sankhuwasabha 27°35’21’’ 87°20’22’’ 1294 1985-06 22

Turkighat 604.5 Sankhuwasabha 27°20’00’’ 87°11’30’’ 414 1975-06 32

Simle 606 Bhojpur 26°55’42’’ 87°09’16’’ 152 1986-06 21

Table 4 Comparison of annual precipitation an Dingri station from various sources

S. Weather Annual Precipitation(mm) Avg. ppt Remarks

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 6

Figure 4 Location of installed staff gauge

Figure 5 Installed stage gauge

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 7

Installation of Automatic Rain Gauge

Figure 7: Location of installed Automatic Rain Gauge

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 8

Ongoing discharge measurements

Table 4 : Measured Discharge of Arun River at KAHEP Project Site

Observed Observed Observed

12-Jan-18 74.26 1-Aug-18 535.96 31-Jan-19 48.58

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 9

Figure 8: DEM of the Kimathanka Catchment

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 10

Figure 9 Simulated Discharge at Uwagaon and Kimathanka

Table 5: Daily estimated discharge (m3/s) at KimathankaHeadworks site

Kimathanka Arun HEP | Brief Project Information | August 2019 Page | 11

Figure 10: Adopted Flow Duration Curve at KAHEP Dam Site

Estimation of Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)

Figure 11: PMF at Headworks site

Figure 12: PMF at Tailrace site

Estimation of Peak Flow

Table 5: Estimated peak discharges of various return period at headworks site