project rehabilitation report of votehole dam,
TRANSCRIPT
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
i | P a g e
Project Rehabilitation Report
of Votehole Dam, Karnataka Water Resources Department
Doc. No.: CDSO_DSR_PRR_ KA06HH0154_KaWRD_v1.0
July 2019
Central Water Commission
Ministry of Jal Shakti
Department of Water Resources,
River Development & Ganga Rejuvenation
Government of India
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
iii | P a g e
Quality Control:
Version Date Writers/Contributors Checked by
1 31/07/2019 Dr. Hadush S Hagos (HSH) Pankaj Kumar Awasthi (PKA Anil Kumar Verma (AKV)
Rajiv Kumar Sawarn
Issued/Copied to:
I/C Date Name Organisation
Issued 31/07/2019 Shri. Pramod Narayan Central Water Commission
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
v | P a g e
Abbreviations
DRIP Dam Rehabilitation & Improvement Project
CWC Central Water Commission
CPMU Central Project Management Unit
CSV Construction Site Visit
SPMU State Project Management Unit
IA Implementation Agency
PIC Project Identification Code
DSRP Dam Safety Review Panel
PST Project Screening Template
DFR Design Flood Review
MSL Mean Sea Level
FRL Full Reservoir Level
MWL Maximum Water Level
TBL Top Bund Level (Top Level of Dam)
MDDL Maximum Draw Down Level
LSL Lowest Sill Level
DSL Dead Storage Level
U/S Upstream
D/S Downstream
El. Elevation
L/B Left Bank
R/B Right Bank
PMF Probable Maximum Flood
SPF Standard Project Flood
CD Works Cross Drainage Works
VRB Village Road Bridge
WBM Water Bound Macadam
NDT Non Destructive Testing
DHARMA Dam Health And Rehabilitation Monitoring Application
O & M Operation and Maintenance
EAP Emergency Action Plan
ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
vi | P a g e
E & S specialists Environmental and Social Specialists
HM Works Hydro-Mechanical Works
EM Works Electro-Mechanical Works
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System
DG Set Diesel Generator Set
MW Mega Watt
MU Million units
Ha Hectare
MCM Million Cubic Metre
Deg. Degree
Min. Minute
Sec. Second
CM Construction management
QC Quality control
m meter
m3 Cubic meter
m3/sec Cubic meter per second
Km2 Square kilometre
Mcm Million cubic meter
TNWRD Tamil Nadu Water Resource Department
TANGEDCO Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation
KWRD Kerala Water Resource Department
KSEB Kerala State Electricity Board
MPWRD Madhya Pradesh Water Resource Department
UJVNL Uttarakhand Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited
DVC Damodar Valley Corporation
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
vii | P a g e
DRIP Component Wise Project Cost
KaWRD Initial/Revised Projects & Cost
BACKGROUND
In April 2012, the Central Water Commission
(CWC) with assistance from the World Bank,
embarked upon a six year Dam
Rehabilitation and Improvement Project
(DRIP) at a preliminarily estimated initial cost
of Rs.2100 Crore targeting rehabilitation and
improvement of about 250 dams initially of
six, later of nine implementing agencies -
namely: MPWRD, OWRD, TNWRD,
TANGEDCO, KWRD, KSEB, KaWRD,
UJVNL and DVC.
In June 2018, the project was extended by
two years, until June 2020. The current
revised cost for DRIP is Rs.3466 Crore out of which Rs. 2920.5 Crore is allocated for
Component 1 (Rehabilitation and Improvement of Dams and Associated Appurtenances),
Rs.232.5 Crore for Component 2 (Dam Safety Institutional Strengthening), and Rs.313 Crore
for Component 3 (Project Management). Appropriate assistance is also provided under
DRIP to develop O & M Manuals and Emergency Action Plans (EAP) for these dams. The
project also promotes new technologies and improves institutional capacities for dam safety
evaluation and implementation at the Central and State levels as well as in some identified
premier academic and research institutes in the country. The actual total number of dams
under DRIP stands at 223.
The Implementing Agencies for DRIP are the Water Resources Departments and State
Electricity Boards in the participating States and Damodar Valley Corporation (DVC) with
Central Water Commission at Central Level. State Implementing Agencies are responsible
for implementation of works of dams under their charge. Co-ordination and management of
such works within a State rests with the
concerned State Project Management
Unit (SPMU). Overall project oversight
and coordination is carried out by Central
Project Management Unit (CPMU) headed
by the Project Director with assistance of
an Engineering and Management
Consultant.
Karnataka Water Resource Department
(KaWRD) joined DRIP in August 2014
with initial number of dams totalling 31.
Later, KaWRD dropped 9 dams and
continuing in DRIP with 22 dams.
Preliminarily estimated initial DRIP project
cost for KaWRD was Rs.276.1 Crore and
the revised project cost is Rs.581.2 Crore.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
ix | P a g e
Table of Contents
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................. 1
2. PROJECT DETAILS ......................................................................................... 2
2.1 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Project Location ............................................................................................................... 2
2.3 Project Benefits ................................................................................................................ 2
2.4 Dam and Reservoir Features (Before rehabilitation under DRIP) ............................... 3
2.5 Any Emergency Spillway, Fuse Plug etc. ...................................................................... 4
2.6 Details of previous dam incidents, if any ...................................................................... 4
2.7 PST Details ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.8 DSRP, CPMU and World Bank Recommendations and Compliance ......................... 5
2.9 Scope of Rehabilitation Works as per PST ................................................................... 5
2.10 Drawings ......................................................................................................................... 11
3. DAM VISITS (PST STAGE) ............................................................................ 17
3.1 Dam Inspections ............................................................................................................ 17
3.2 Summary of observations made by CPMU ................................................................. 17
4. DESIGN FLOOD REVIEW (DFR) ................................................................... 17
4.1 DFR Outcome ................................................................................................................. 17
4.2 Brief Summary of Review.............................................................................................. 17
4.3 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 17
5. REHABILITATION WORKS CARRIED OUT ................................................. 17
5.1 Summary of Investigations ........................................................................................... 17
5.2 Main Dam Works ............................................................................................................ 18
5.3 Basic facilities ................................................................................................................ 18
6. INSTRUMENTATION ..................................................................................... 18
6.1 List of existing instruments installed in dam and their condition ............................ 18
6.2 Details of new instruments installed ........................................................................... 18
6.3 CPMU Recommendations ............................................................................................. 18
7. PROCUREMENT OF WORKS ....................................................................... 19
7.1 Package wise details ..................................................................................................... 19
7.2 Details of bidding process ............................................................................................ 20
7.3 Reason for Variation, if any .......................................................................................... 20
7.4 Litigation / Arbitration, If Any ....................................................................................... 20
8. THIRD PARTY CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION VISITS BY CPMU ........... 20
8.1 Summary of Visits undertaken ..................................................................................... 20
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
x | P a g e
8.2 Summary of Third Party Material Testing .................................................................... 20
8.3 Summary of Major Recommendations ........................................................................ 20
8.4 Summary of Compliance by SPMU .............................................................................. 24
8.5 Summary Special Visits made by CWC/World Bank/Expert Committee .................. 24
8.6 Summary of Technical Assistance provided by CPMU ............................................. 24
9. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK (ESMF) 24
9.1 Basic Details ................................................................................................................... 24
9.2 Summary of Observations ............................................................................................ 24
9.3 Details of ESMF/EIA study (if any) ............................................................................... 24
10. OTHER NON-STRUCTURAL INTERVENTIONS ........................................... 24
10.1 Basic Details ................................................................................................................... 24
10.2 Summary of Observations ............................................................................................ 25
11. PENDING REHABILITATION WORKS .......................................................... 25
11.1 Details of pending works .............................................................................................. 25
11.2 Further course of action................................................................................................ 25
12. REFERENCES ............................................................................................... 25
Annex A: PST Approval Letter .............................................................................. 27
Annex B: Drawings issued for Rehabilitation measures .................................... 31
Annex C: Completion Certificate .......................................................................... 41
Annex D: Photographs Before and After Rehabilitation Works ......................... 51
Annex F: DBA and Inundation Maps .................................................................... 63
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Index Map of Votehole Dam. ........................................................................................... 11
Figure 2-2: Google Map of Votehole Dam. ........................................................................................ 12
Figure 2-3: Layout Map of Votehole Dam. ........................................................................................ 13
Figure 2-4: Longitudinal Section of Votehole Dam. ....................................................................... 14
Figure 2-5: Typical Cross Section of Votehole Earth Dam. ............................................................ 15
Figure 2-6: Masonry Dam & Spillway Cross-section of Votehole Dam. ........................................ 16
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
1 | P a g e
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Project Rehabilitation Report (PRR) is for Votehole Dam, which is one of the 22
dams under DRIP in the state Karnataka. The Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP)
inspected the dam in May 2015 and recommended both structural & non-structural
measures to be taken up by the dam authorities.
DSRP main recommendations included arresting leakage on left bank along a
pipeline under non-overflow section of masonry dam; providing drainage for the dam
top roadway by providing cross slope towards downstream; providing longitudinal
and cross drains on downstream slope of dam; install an automatic water level
recorder; examine condition of existing piezometers and if needed provide new ones;
clear all vegetative growths noticed on the spillway; non-overflow dam sections and
training walls; provide trash racks at the entry of sluice vents; and investigation of
spillway stilling basin. Non-structural measures included review of design flood,
reservoir siltation surveys; preparation of EAP and O&M manual.
The original design flood for Votehole dam was 531.07 m3/sec with corresponding
MWL of 966.05 m. The revised design flood (SPF) under DRIP worked out to be
1606 m3/sec. Flood routing study carried out by the SPMU indicates that the revised
MWL is at EL 967.84 m. The Top Bund Level (TBL) is at 968.48 m. Hence, the
available freeboard above the revised MWL is only 0.64 m, which is less than the
recommended 1.5 m freeboard for embankment dams as per IS 10635. Compliance
to freeboard requirements for the revised design flood is pending.
Following DSRP recommendations, rehabilitation works carried out under DRIP
included:
Package 1 (Civil):
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope of earthen
dam.
Providing semi dense bituminous concrete on road way of dam.
Arresting leakage on the left bank.
Providing trash racks for Irrigation sluices.
Providing barbed wire fencing.
Package 2 (Instrumentation):
Providing and installation of piezometer and Automatic water level recorder.
The rehabilitation works were executed under 2 contracts at a total completion cost
of Rs. 163.73 Lakhs.
Existing vibrating wire piezometers were repaired and made functional. Hence,
installation of piezometer in package 2 was omitted. Automatic water level recorder
was installed.
CPMU carried out dam break analysis and prepared inundation maps. Based on this,
Emergency Action Plan (EAP) was prepared by dam authorities, reviewed by CPMU
and has been published for stakeholders dissemination.
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) manual is currently under preparation as per
CWC guidelines published under DRIP.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
2 | P a g e
2. PROJECT DETAILS
The Votehole dam is located across Votehole River in Hassan district, Karnataka
state at Latitude of 13º03’30” N and Longitude of 75º55’00” E. It was completed in
the year 1984. The project consists of an earthen dam 1,075 m long and 5.49 m dam
crest width. It has 32 m long spillway with 3 nos. of radial gates having discharge
capacity of 531.07 cumec.
The TBL, FRL, original MWL and Spillway Crest level are at EL 968.48 m, 966.05 m,
966.05 m and 961.476 m, respectively. The gross storage at FRL is 42.75 MCM (or
1.51 TMC).
2.1 Project Description
Sl. No.
Item Details
a. Project Identification Code (PIC) KA06HH0154
b. Project Name Votehole Dam
c. River Basin Cauvery
d. Sub River Basin Votehole
e. River/Stream Votehole
f. Catchment area (km2) 110
g. Year of commencement of project 12/01/1975
h. Year of completion of project 05/01/1984
2.2 Project Location
Sl. No.
Item Details
a. State Karnataka
b. District Hassan
c. Earthquake Zone II
d. Survey of India Map Ref No’s 48-o/16
e. Nearest City Hassan
f. Nearest Airport Bangalore
g. Nearest Railhead Hassan
h. Name of Immediate U/S Project No
i. Name of Immediate D/S Project Hemavathy Dam
j. Latitude in Deg., Min, Sec. (North) 13º03’30”
k. Longitude in Deg., Min, Sec. (East) 75º55’00”
2.3 Project Benefits
Sl. No. Item Details
a. Type of Project Irrigation
b. Gross Command Area (Ha) 9108
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
3 | P a g e
Sl. No. Item Details
c. Culturable Command Area (Ha) 7489
d. Annual Irrigation Potential (Ha) 7489
e. Hydropower –
Installed Capacity (MW) Nil
f. Hydropower –
Firm Power (MW) Nil
g. Hydropower –
Average Annual Generation (MU) Nil
h. Domestic/Municipal/Industrial Water –
Annual Quantum (MCM) Nil
i. Domestic/Municipal/Industrial Water –
Area and Population Benefitted Nil
j. Flood Protection –
Flood Protected Area (Ha) Nil
k. Flood Protection –
Details of Area Benefitted Nil
l. Details of Tourism/Recreational Facilities Nil
2.4 Dam and Reservoir Features (Before rehabilitation under DRIP)
Sl. No.
Item Details
a. Full Reservoir Level (m) 966.05
b. Original Maximum Water Level (m) 966.05
c. Gross Reservoir Storage Capacity at FRL (Mm
3 )
42.75
d. Live Storage Capacity (Mm3 ) 38.7
e. Revised Live Storage Capacity, if any
(Mm3 )
38.7
f. Date of bathymetric survey, if any Nil
g. Dam Type Earth fill Cum Masonry Dam
h.
Length of Dam at Top (m)
i) Total length of the main dam
ii) Length of embankment dam
iii) Length of masonry/concrete dam
1,075
912
163
i. Number and length of dykes (No. & m) 1, 175
j. Top of dam (El. in m.) 968.48
k. Top Level of Upstream Parapet Wall of main dam (El. in m.)
-
l.
Height of Dam (m)
i) Embankment dam – above river bed level (up to dam top without camber)
ii) Concrete/Masonry dam – above deepest foundation level (up to dam
28.19
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
4 | P a g e
Sl. No.
Item Details
top) 44.48
m Top width of main dam (m) 5.49
n. Spillway details
i) Location Middle
ii) Type of spillway Ogee
iii) Length of spillway (m) 32
iv) Spillway crest level (m) 961.476
v) Type of Gate Radial
vi) Number and size of gates (no. and
m. x m.) 3, 9.14 X 4.57
vii) Number and thickness of piers (no.
and m. x m.) 2, 2.286
o.
Outlet/Sluice details
i) In Embankment dam
Number
Size (Width (m). x Height (m).)
Location
Invert level El. (m)
Discharging capacity (m3/s)
ii) In Concrete/Masonry dam
Number
Size (m. x m.)
Location
Invert level El. (m)
Discharging capacity (m3/s)
2, LBC and RBC
1.524 X 0.90 and 1.828 X 1.676
CH +185 and CH +750
955.00 and 953.235
0.358 and 3.88
Note: All elevations are above MSL
2.5 Any Emergency Spillway, Fuse Plug etc.
Nil
2.6 Details of previous dam incidents, if any
Nil
2.7 PST Details
Sl.
No. Item Date/Cost Remarks
a. PST first received from SPMU 27/06/15
b. Proposed PST Cost (INR in Lakhs) 215.0
c. First review by CPMU -
d. Final review by CPMU 19/08/15
e. World Bank Approval 24/08/15 E- mail dated 24/08/2015
f. Approved PST Cost (INR in Lakhs) 215.0
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
5 | P a g e
2.8 DSRP, CPMU and World Bank Recommendations and Compliance
2.8.1 DSRP Recommendations and Compliance
Compliance to DSRP recommendations as submitted by SPMU/dam authorities is
shown on pages 6 to 10 below.
2.8.2 CPMU/World Bank Recommendations and Compliance
Majority of CPMU/WB Comments are in line with DSRP comments. Additional
recommendations raised by CPMU/WB included dam stability analysis and ensuring
the impervious core is above the revised MWL. These recommendations are yet to
be taken up by the SPMU.
2.9 Scope of Rehabilitation Works as per PST
(a) Remedial Measures (Structural)
i. Providing longitudinal and cross drain for the downstream slope and longitudinal drain for saddle portion of left bank
ii. Arresting leakage on the pipe line provided in the left bank portion
iii. Providing trash racks for right bank sluice and left bank sluice.
(b) Non-structural Measures
iv. Providing and installation of Piezometers and automatic water level recorder.
(c) Basic Facilities
v. Providing and installation of Piezometers and automatic water level recorder.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
11 | P a g e
2.10 Drawings
Figure 2-1: Index Map of Votehole Dam.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
14 | P a g e
Figure 2-4: Longitudinal Section of Votehole Dam.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
15 | P a g e
Figure 2-5: Typical Cross Section of Votehole Earth Dam.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
16 | P a g e
Figure 2-6: Masonry Dam & Spillway Cross-section of Votehole Dam.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
17 | P a g e
3. DAM VISITS (PST STAGE)
3.1 Dam Inspections
Sl. No.
Item Date of visit Remarks
a. Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP) 20 August 2014
b. Site Visit made by CPMU experts 21 August 2015
3.2 Summary of observations made by CPMU
CPMU observation and recommendation focused mainly on arresting leakage
through a pipeline on the left bank under the non-overflow masonry dam section.
This was taken in the works Contract and an attempt was made to arrest the leakage
from the downstream side but it was not successful.
4. DESIGN FLOOD REVIEW (DFR)
4.1 DFR Outcome
Sl. No.
Item Original
Value
Revised
Value Remarks
a. Inflow Design Flood (m3/s) 531.07 1,606 SPF
b. Spillway Capacity / Routed Outflow (m
3/s)
- 937.45 Flood routing study by SPMU
c. Maximum Water Level (m) 966.05 967.84 TBL = 968.48
4.2 Brief Summary of Review
The original design flood for Votehole dam was 531.07 m3/sec with corresponding original MWL of 966.05 m. The revised design flood (SPF) under DRIP worked out to be 1606 m3/sec. Flood routing study carried out by the SPMU indicates that the revised MWL is at EL 967.84 m. The Top Bund Level (TBL) is at 968.48 m. Hence, the available freeboard above the revised MWL is only 0.64 m, which is less than the recommended 1.5 m freeboard for embankment dams as per IS 10635.
4.3 Recommendations
Structural measures – a 1 m high parapet wall shall be considered to be
considered to accommodate the revised deign flood.
Non-structural measures - EAP.
5. REHABILITATION WORKS CARRIED OUT
5.1 Summary of Investigations
Sl. No.
Item Details Remarks
a. Geo-Physical Investigations NA
b. Reservoir Bathymetric Study Not Carried Out
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
18 | P a g e
Sl. No.
Item Details Remarks
c. Hydraulic Model Studies NA
d. Underwater investigation of spillway flip bucket
NA
5.2 Main Dam Works
Sl. No.
Item Details Remarks
a. Works from hydrological angle
Design flood review Completed.
b. Repairs to d/s toe drains, provision of V-Notches for seepage measurements
Providing longitudinal and
cross drains for the
downstream slopes of earthen
dam
Completed.
c. Works because of Seepage / leakage issues in embankment dams
Arresting leakage on left bank
Work carried out but
not successful in
arresting leakage.
d. Hydro-mechanical works
i. Outlet gates & hoists
Providing trash racks for Irrigation sluices
Completed.
5.3 Basic facilities
S/N Item Details Remarks
a. Roads Providing semi dense bituminous concrete on road way of dam
Completed.
b. Fencing / security provisions Providing barbed wire fencing Completed.
c. Others Providing and installation of piezometer and Automatic water level recorder.
Completed.
6. INSTRUMENTATION
6.1 List of existing instruments installed in dam and their condition
Digital water level recorder.
Vibrator wire piezometers.
6.2 Details of new instruments installed
Nil.
6.3 CPMU Recommendations
Nil
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
19 | P a g e
7. PROCUREMENT OF WORKS
7.1 Package wise details
Work Package No.
Name of Works
Estimated
Cost
(INR in Lakhs)
Procurement
Method
Invitation for bids / NIT Issue
date
Pre-Bid Meeting
date
Bid Opening
date
Contract Agreement
No.
Contract Agreement
date
Contractor’s Name &
Address
Scheduled
Duration (Months)
Scheduled Completio
n date
Contract /
Award Value
(INR in Lakhs)
Completion Cost (INR in Lakhs)
Actual Date of
Completion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
1
Providing longitudinal and
cross drains for the downstream slopes
of earthen dam: Semi dense
bituminous concrete on road way of dam, Arresting leakage on left
bank, Trash racks for Irrigation sluices, Barbed wire fencing
to Votehole dam under Votehole
reservoir project.
149.7 NCB 05/12/15 - 16/11/15 No.: 07/2016-
17 20/04/2016
S.NARAYANAR:EDDY, CLASS-I
CONTRACTOR,
NAGASAMUDRA ROAD
CHANNARAYAPATTANA.
HASSAN DIST.
6 01/11/16 160.08 158.23 18/08/17
2
Providing and installation of
piezometer and Automatic water level recorder to Votehole dam
21.7 NCB 05/12/15 - 16/11/15 No. 08 /2016-
17 02/05/2016
SRI. ABDUL ADIL,
CONTRACTOR AIMJL LTD, NAGASANDR
A OUTER RING ROAD
,BANGALORE .
6 01/1116 20.31 5.5 29/10/18
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
20 | P a g e
7.2 Details of bidding process
As per details in the above table.
7.3 Reason for Variation, if any
No variation of cost increase was registered. As the existing piezometer was repaired
and functional, there was no need to install new piezometers. Hence only 27.1% of
package 2 contract amount was used for installation of automatic water level
recorder and repair of existing piezometers.
7.4 Litigation / Arbitration, If Any
No litigation.
8. THIRD PARTY CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION VISITS BY
CPMU
8.1 Summary of Visits undertaken
Sl. No. Date of visit Transmittal details of CSV Report
a. 27-07-2016 3585/11.08.2016
b. 13-12-2016 4038/29.12.2016
c. 21-06-2017 4765/11-07-2017
d. 22-09-2017 5817/29.11.2017
e. 17-01-2018 5589/22.02.2018
8.2 Summary of Third Party Material Testing
Nil.
8.3 Summary of Major Recommendations
1st Construction Site Visit Report
Key observations:
Welding works (Providing of trash racks) normally require Welding
Procedures and Certified Welders. In this case the welding works regard
normal steel grating panel, nonetheless it is recommended to use very high
skill labours.
Significant documentations need to be completed and submitted.
Recommendations:
PPE supplying to be improved (Safety Shoes).
The Contractor has demonstrated good attitude and knowledge for
performing the scheduled works, nevertheless Method Statement represents
a crucial document in case any corrective action might be required.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
21 | P a g e
2nd Construction Site Visit Report
Observations and Recommendations:
The overall quality of works reviewed is considered as satisfactory; however,
significant documentation including the environmental management plan,
HSE manual and method statements need to be completed and submitted at
the earliest.
Closure of an underground leak on near the toe of the embankment wrap-
around is still in progress. The Contractor has excavated to a depth of 3 to 4
meters to cap the leak in an old water line that is no longer in use. Closure of
the line is important to ensure erosion potential is stopped. The leaking pipe
has been a long-term problem at the dam and is now under remedial works
as part of the DRIP works.
Package II – Instrumentation is yet to be taken up. This package has been
awarded with a contract value of Rs. 0.20 Crore and includes installation of
piezometers for use in monitoring performance of the embankment. Notice to
proceed has not been granted at the time of the site visit.
No. Deficiency or Observation Remarks
1 Housekeeping chores needed attending to.
Contractor has cleared debris. Minor excavated material around concrete work needs to be removed and or spread out and compacted.
2 Bare areas adjacent to drains and kerb wall need to be turfed. Not in contract
CPMU recommends these areas be turfed or seeded to minimize erosion.
3 Contract for Instrumentation works not yet taken up.
Award is awaited.
4 Grass emerging through fresh asphalt
Contractor to apply environmentally-friendly herbicide to check weed growth on all pavements.
3rd Construction Site Visit Report Observations:
Observations and recommendations
DSRP’s recommendations for the left downstream non-overflow section river
sluice pipe leakage included finding the source of the leaks and plugging as
necessary. However, during excavation upstream of the shutoff valve and slightly
downstream of the masonry section, it became evident that this activity could not
be implemented and plugging the pipe downstream was not feasible.
CPMU recommends that the BOQ line items in the contract be tasked to conduct
geophysical scanning to first locate position of intake pipe alignment and
secondary to locate seepage/leakages along pipe. Once the information and
drawings are prepared, a solution for controlling the seepage may be entertained.
The porous and foundation drains are thoroughly calcinated and or plugged with
calcareous materials. CPMU recommends these items as well as upstream face
treatment be carried out during the second phase of DRIP and or as time and
budget allow.
No. Deficiency or Observation Remarks
1 Bare areas adjacent to drains and kerb wall needs to be turfed. Not in contract
CPMU recommends these areas be turfed or seeded to minimize erosion
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
22 | P a g e
2 Contract for Instrumentation works not yet taken up.
Requires MD approval
3 Grass emerging through fresh asphalt
Contractor to apply environmentally-friendly herbicide to check weed growth on all pavements
4 Seepage under left NOF section
Efforts to close the River Sluice pipe have not been accomplished. CPMU recommends a magnetometer scan of the reservoir be constructed using contract line items for consultancies to locate and recommend repair of the old MS pipe.
4th Construction Site Visit Report Observations:
Observations and recommendations:
Most of the porous holes in the body of the dam are clogged and very little or no
flow of water from the drainage holes in the foundation gallery. Reaming/re-
drilling of both the porous drains and foundation drains are required to be taken
up.
The older piezometers have been repaired and appear to be in good working
condition. CPMU recommends the data be recorded and monitored for any
changes.
For arresting leakage on the left bank, the IA has recommended the Contractor
sink another 10-feet of well to reach the pipe location and deploy higher capacity
dewatering pump to complete the well sinking. The problem is that there are no
plan drawings indicating the exact position and actual size of the conduit.
Possibility of real piping erosion along the existing pipe could occur and a
sinkhole could develop on the upstream side of this very short non-overflow
section. Loss of the wrap-around and potential erosion of the non-overflow block
could seriously compromise the stability of the dam. CPMU strongly
recommends stoppage of additional sinking of the well works immediately.
Further, CPMU urges that the IA develops a methodology and plan for repairing
the pipe and control mechanism to ensure the dam remains stable and the
undersluice can be used without endangering the dam. Below is an example of
necessary steps to assist the IA in developing a thorough program to fix the pipe
without endangering the safety of the dam:
Immediately backfill the downstream excavation with graded crushed
aggregate 19-mm (-minus).
Locate the existing pipe on the upstream side of the where it enters the non-
overflow block.
Excavate the upstream side of the wraparound to the pipe level.
Sleeve the mild steel 30-cm-diameter pipe through the masonry section
Install new HR valve on the upstream side.
Backfill the upstream wrap-around with impervious material allowing for an
inspection well around new valve.
Remove all downstream existing pipes and replace with new pipe either
steel or Hume pipe, backfill and compact using best engineering practices.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
23 | P a g e
No Observation / Deficiency Remarks
1
Mortar layer of concrete at D/s face of glacis got eroded/peeled off at many locations and aggregate surface is exposed. (Fig-9 & 10)
Damage caused is not critical at present. Depending on frequency and duration of letting out of water through gates may cause further deterioration of glacis and lead to major damages. It is recommended for abrasive protective coat,
2 Providing and installation of piezometers under packge-2
During the inspection of CE, WRDO & Nodal Officer DRIP, it was noticed that the piezometers already embedded are in working condition and displaying the readings. Hence instructed there is no need of providing new piezometers. During my inspection also it is observed that the piezometer gauges are displaying the readings.
3 Installation of water level recorder under package-2
Contractor not mobilised to carry out the work.
5th Construction Site Visit Report Observations:
Observations and recommendations:
The Contractor was not successful in arresting the leakage along the pipeline on
left flank masonry. Attempts made by excavating at the d/s toe of the dam were
not acceptable for the safety of the dam and in the last CSV report, the
Contractor was instructed to immediately backfill the excavated section with
sand-gravel material However, backfill was not done until the current site visit and
CPMU again gave the same instruction during this inspection. One month later,
the Contractor has carried out the backfill and sent photographs on 16 February
2018.
As previously recommended by CPMU, any attempt to plug the leakage shall be
done from u/s side.
On the capacity of the spillway, a flood routing report dated 9 Nov 2015 indicates
that the MWL for the revised design flood is at EL 967.84 m. The dam crest level
is at 968.48 m (3177.42 ft). Hence, the available freeboard above MWL is only
0.64 m. CPMU recommends construction of a 1-meter-high wave deflection wall
to meet minimum freeboard requirements be taken up as budget and schedule
allow. DSRP & PST also recommended to prepare EAP including a suitable
communication system for flood warning.
SPMU informed that the leakage along the pipeline under left masonry NOF
section has been continuing for over 25 years (since 1992). The leakage amount
ranges from 2 to 2.5 l/s. SPMU also informed that the pipeline is about 8 m below
the hand wheel of the valve at the toe of the dam. Based on this and geological
borehole log information near the pipeline obtained from old design drawings, the
pipeline may be in a rock foundation. But SPMU is recommended to further verify
and confirm.
No. Deficiency / Observation Remarks
1 Excavation at the toe of the dam to locate source of leakage along pipe. This is not acceptable in terms of safety of the dam.
Contractor stopped excavation and backfilled.
2 Some corrosion of installed trash racks at left and right bank canal intakes
Contractor agreed to paint the trashracks with suitable anti-corrosion epoxy.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
24 | P a g e
8.4 Summary of Compliance by SPMU
The main compliance issue was related to arresting leakage on left bank under NOF
section of the dam. However, as explained above, this activity could not be
implemented successfully and plugging the pipe downstream was not feasible.
SPMU compliance of the same is also given on page 9, in No. 9 of compliance to
DSRP recommendations.
8.5 Summary Special Visits made by CWC/World Bank/Expert Committee
Nil.
8.6 Summary of Technical Assistance provided by CPMU
Review of PST. Review of design flood.
Provided technical guidance on maintaining quality of works as per design, contract agreement technical specification and best engineering practices.
Carrying out dam break analysis and preparation of inundation maps.
Review of Emergency Action Plan (EAP).
9. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT
FRAMEWORK (ESMF)
9.1 Basic Details
No. Item Yes / No Remarks
a. ESMF Issue Identified in PST Yes
b. Mitigation Measures Proposed Yes
c. Any Rehabilitation and Resettlement involved No
d. Site Visit Date of CPMU E&S Specialists -
e. Site Visit Report of CPMU E&S Specialists -
9.2 Summary of Observations
ESMF management during implementation was generally satisfactory but CPMU
construction site visit reports indicate PPE was hardly provided during construction.
9.3 Details of ESMF/EIA study (if any)
Nil.
10. OTHER NON-STRUCTURAL INTERVENTIONS
10.1 Basic Details
Sl. No.
Item Yes / No Remarks
a
Emergency Action Plan (EAP)
(i) EAP Available at Site
(ii) EAP Prepared under DRIP
(iii) EAP Published
No
Yes
No
Inundation maps prepared by CPMU and based on this the SPMU prepared EAP, which was reviewed and approved by CPMU for
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
25 | P a g e
Sl. No.
Item Yes / No Remarks
(iv) Stake holder consultations No stakeholders’ dissemination.
b. O&M Manual availability Yes O&M manual is under preparation as per DRIP guideline.
c. Inflow Forecasting No
d. DHARMA Implementation Yes In progress. Most data uploaded.
e. Siren Yes Yes
10.2 Summary of Observations
Nil
11. PENDING REHABILITATION WORKS
11.1 Details of pending works
i. Compliance to freeboard requirements for the revised design flood as per IS
10635.
ii. Preparation of O&M manual.
iii. Completion of data entry in DHARMA.
iv. Address noted incompliances to DSRP recommendations.
11.2 Further course of action
All pending actions stated above should be completed before December 2019.
12. REFERENCES
i. PST
ii. DSRP report
iii. Construction site visit report.
iv. Information received from SPMU from time to time
v. Completion Certificate.
vi. World Bank approval
vii. Compliance letters from SPMU.
viii. Inundation report and maps.
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
31 | P a g e
Annex B: Drawings issued for
Rehabilitation measures
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
51 | P a g e
Annex D: Photographs Before and
After Rehabilitation Works
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
53 | P a g e
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope - Before
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope - During
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
54 | P a g e
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope – During
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope – During
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
55 | P a g e
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope – During
Providing longitudinal and cross drains for the downstream slope – After
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
56 | P a g e
Arresting Leakage on Left Bank – During
Arresting Leakage on Left Bank – During
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
57 | P a g e
Arresting Leakage on Left Bank – During
Arresting Leakage on Left Bank – During and After Backfiling at toe of dam
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
58 | P a g e
Providing Trash Rack for Irrigation Sluice
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
59 | P a g e
Providing Barbed Wire Fencing - During
Providing Barbed Wire Fencing - During
Project Rehabilitation Report of Votehole Dam
62 | P a g e
Repaired Vibrating Wire Piezometer – Functionlal
Completed Asphalt Road on Dam Crest