Government of India & Government of The Netherlands strengthen water management partnership

Government of India & Government of The Netherlands
CSMRS Building, 4th Floor, Olof Palme Marg, Hauz Khas, New Delhi - 110016 (INDIA). Tel: 6861681-84
Fax : +91 11 6861685 E-Mail : dhvdelft@del2.vsnl.net.in
DHV CONSULTANTS &
DELFT HYDRAULICS
with HALCROW, TAHAL,
CES, ORG & JPS
Semi - Annual Progress Report
October 2002 – March 2003
March 2003
IN032501

SAPR October 2002 – March 2003 TOC
Table of Contents
Page
Abbreviations i
1 Project profile............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Core data ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Background.................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 The Technical Assistance ............................................................................................ 3
1.4 Achievements............................................................................................................... 7
1.5 Institutionalisation of a sustainable HIS ..................................................................... 13
2 Status of HP and TA activities ................................................................................ 18
2.1 General ...................................................................................................................... 18
2.2 Assessing the needs of users .................................................................................... 21
2.3 Review and establishment of observation networks .................................................. 21
2.4 Management of historical data................................................................................... 24
2.5 Data collection and sample analysis .......................................................................... 24
2.6 Data processing, analysis and reporting.................................................................... 25
2.7 Data exchange........................................................................................................... 26
2.8 Data storage and dissemination................................................................................. 27
2.9 Institutional and human resource development ......................................................... 27
2.10 HIS management........................................................................................................ 31
3 Technical Assistance Activities.............................................................................. 32
3.1 Utility of HIS and data needs...................................................................................... 35
3.2 Observation network .................................................................................................. 37
3.3 Data collection............................................................................................................ 38
3.4 Data processing, analysis and reporting, and inter-agency data validation ............... 39
3.5 Inter-agency data exchange and validation ............................................................... 44
3.6 Data storage and dissemination................................................................................. 45
3.7 Institution and human resources development .......................................................... 46
3.8 Summary of TA activities to the end of the project..................................................... 53
4 Inputs ........................................................................................................................ 55
4.1 Staffing....................................................................................................................... 55
4.2 Staff and financial resources for TA extension till March 2004 .................................. 57
Annexes
I Salient features of HIS and TA input 70
II Logical framework for HIS 79
III TA outputs and deliverables 86

SAPR October 2002 – March 2003 i
Abbreviations
AAS Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer
ADCP Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler
AEE Assistant Executive Engineer
AMC Annual Maintenance Contract
APB Annual Programme and Budget
AQC Analytical Quality Control
ARG Autographic Rain Gauge
AWLR Autographic Water Level Recorder
BoCW Bank Operated Cable Way
BOD Biological Oxygen Demand
CAD Command Area Development
CBIP Central Board of Irrigation and Power
CDO Central Design Office
CE Chief Engineer
CGWB Central Ground Water Board
CPCB Central Pollution Control Board
CPWD Central Public Works Department
CRO Chief Research Officer
CSMRS Central Soil and Material Research Station
CTI Central Training Institute
CWC Central Water Commission
CWPRS Central Water and Power Research Station
DAS Data Analysis Software (for AQC)
DB Data Base
DBM Data Base Management
DCA Development Credit Agreement
DDPC Divisional Data Processing Centre
DES Data Entry Software
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
DMC Data Management Consultant
DO Disolved Oxygen
DOICAD Department of Irrigation and Command Area Development
DoT Directorate of Telecommunications
DPA Data Processing Assistant
DPC Data Processing Centre
DRS Data Retrieval System
DSC Data Storage Centre
DWLR Digital Water Level Recorder
EE Executive Engineer
FCS Full Climatic Station
GC Gas Chromatograph
GD Gauge Discharge Station
GDS Gauge Discharge Silt Station
GDSQ Gauge Discharge Silt Quality Station
GEMS Groundwater and Environmental Management System
GERI Gujarat Engineering Research Institute
GIS Geographical Information System
GoI Government of India
GoN Government of The Netherlands
GPS Global Positioning System

SAPR October 2002 – March 2003 ii
GSDA Groundwater Surveys & Development Agency
GW Groundwater
GWD Groundwater Department/Directorate
GWDES Groundwater Data Entry System
GWIS Groundwater Information System
HD Help Desk
HDUG Hydrological Data User Group
HIDAP Hydrology Institution Development Action Plan
HIN Hydrological Information Needs
HIS Hydrological Information System
HIS-CC HIS Co-ordination Committee (national level)
HIS-CS HIS Co-ordination Secretariat (MoWR)
HLTG High Level Technical Group
HMC Hydrological Monitoring/HIS Management Consultant
HoT Hands on Training
HP Hydrology Project
HRD Human Resource Development
HYMOS Hydrological Modelling System Software
IBS Integrated Bathymetric System for reservoir sedimentation survey
ICB International Competitive Bidding
ID Institutional Development
IDA International Development Agency
IHE Intern. Institute for Infrastructural, Hydraulic & Environmental Engineering
IIT Indian Institute of Technology
IMD India Meteorological Department
IT Information Technology
ITRC Industrial Toxicology Research Centre
IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management
LAN Local Area Network
MIS Management Information System
MoE&F Ministry of Environment & Forestry
MoWR Ministry of Water Resources
MQC Monitoring Quality Control
MTR Mid-Term Review (World Bank/RNE)
NCB National Competitive Bidding
NCC National Co-ordination Committee
NDC National Data Centre (GW & SW)
NDPC National Data Processing Centre
NDSC National Data Storage Centre
NEDA Netherlands Development Assistance
NEERI National Environmental Engineering Research Institute
NHTC National Hydrology Training Committee
NIC National Informatics Centre
NIH National Institute of Hydrology
NLSC National Level Steering Committee
NRCD National River Conservation Directorate
NWA National Water Academy (CWC)
OD Organisational Development
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OTT Overseas Training and Study Tours
PCS Project Co-ordination Secretariat
PHED Public Health Engineering Department
QA Quality Assurance

SAPR October 2002 – March 2003 iii
QC Quality Control
R&D Research and Development
RDPC Regional Data Processing Centre
RDSC Regional Data Storage Centre
RGNGWTRI Rajiv Gandhi National Groundwater Training & Research Institute (RGI)
RIBASIM River Basin Simulation software
RNE Royal Netherlands Embassy
RO Research Officer
RSS Reservoir Sedimentation Survey (ref. IBS)
SAP Standard Analytical Procedures
SAPR Semi Annual Progress Report
SAR Staff Appraisal Report
SCC State Coordination Committee
SDC State Data Centre
SDDPC Sub-Divisional Data Processing Centre
SDPC State Data Processing Centre
SDSC State Data Storage Centre
SE Superintending Engineer
SGWD State Ground Water Department
SGWSI State Ground Water Survey and Investigation
SLCC State Level Co-ordination Committee
SMC State Management Consultant
SPC State Procurement Committee
SPCB State Pollution Control Board
SRG Standard Rain Gauge
SRO Senior Research Officer
SSWD State Surface Water Department
STC State Training Co-ordinator
STIS Staff Training and Information System
SW Surface Water
SWD Surface Water Department
SWDES Surface Water Data Entry System
tbn to be nominated
TA Technical Assistance
TBR Tipping Bucket Raingauge
TIS Training Information System
ToT Training of Trainers
UV-VIS Ultraviolet Visual Spectrophotometer
WALAMTARI Water and Land Management Training and Research Institute
WALMI Water and Land Management Institute
WB World Bank
WISDOM Water Information System and Data On-line Management
WM Water Management
WQ I Water Quality Laboratory Level I
WQ II Water Quality Laboratory Level II
WQ II+ Water Quality Laboratory Level II+
WQAA Water Quality Assessment Authority (national level)
WQDES Water Quality Data Entry System
WQMS Water Quality Monitoring System
WQRC Water Quality Review Committee (state level)
WRA Water Resources Assessment
WRD Water Resources Development
WRIC Water Resources Investigation Circle

SAPR October 2002 – March 2003 Page 1
1 Project profile
1.1 Core data
Hydrology Project (World Bank)
Credit IDA Credit No. 2774-IN
Project Name Hydrology Project
Implementation
period
September 1995 to March 2003
Location Central agencies: Central Water Commission (CWC), Central
Ground Water Board (CGWB), National Institute of Hydrology (NIH),
Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), India
Meteorological Department (IMD).
States: Water Resources and Groundwater Departments in Andhra
Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Kerala, Karnataka, Madhya
Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa and Tamil Nadu.
Contract partners The World Bank (IDA), Government of India and nine participating
States
Contract signing 22 September 1995
Credit validity
term
20 December 1995 - 31 December 2003
Finance Total project cost: IRs 6,000 million (US$ 122 million)
Special Drawing Rights: 75.1 million
(after reduction with SDR 15 million = US$ 19.6 million)

Technical Assistance for the Hydrology Project (Government of The Netherlands)
Activity number IN-032501
Project Name Technical Assistance for the Hydrology Project (HP)
Project Phase Operationalisation and Consolidation
Location India, South Asia; main office at New Delhi
(Sub) sector Water, Ministry of Water Resources
Term of validity 1 May 1996 – 31 March 2003 (extension till 31 March 2004 proposed)
Contractor DHV Water BV in association with WL|DELFT HYDRAULICS, HALCROW,
TAHAL, CES, ORG, JPS & MDP
Date of signing July 1996 (Contract for extension signed in March 2002)
Counterpart Project Co-ordination Secretariat (PCS), Ministry of Water Resources
(MoWR)
Finance (in Euro) Initial Budget Revised Budget
Consultancy staff:
Reimbursable costs:
Overseas study tours/training:
7,900,767
4,319,988
544,532
9,304,375
4,928,365
616,434
Total budget 12,765,287 14,849,174
Type of finance Untied grant
Date of reporting March 31, 2003
Review period October 2002 – March 2003
Planning period April – September 2003
1.2 Background
In 1995, the Government of India and participating states entered into a Development Credit
Agreement with the World Bank to implement the Hydrology Project, under a joint financing
arrangement whereby the Government of the Netherlands provided related Technical
Assistance in the form of a grant.
The overall development objective to which the project aims to contribute is to support major
aspects of the National Water Policy through improvement of the institutional and technical
capacity to measure, process, and disseminate quantity and quality data on surface water,
groundwater, and related climatic data.
The specific objective of the project in this context is to assist the relevant agencies in
establishing an integrated Hydrological Information System (HIS), by improving
organizational arrangements, institutional and technical capabilities and physical facilities for
measurement, validation, compilation, analysis, transfer, and dissemination of hydrological,
hydro-meteorological, and water quality data and for basic water resources evaluations.

To this end, the project provides funds and expertise for upgrading and development of
appropriate data collection networks, procurement and installation of data processing
equipment, formulation and introduction of data communication practices, and related
institutional strengthening such as office buildings, furniture, vehicles, staff training, etc.
A brief overview of the project is presented in Annex I, and a logical Framework for the HIS
is given in Annex II. TA outputs and deliverables, many of which will soon be made available
on the HIS-website, are listed in Annex III.
Implementation of the project has been complex due to the fact that there are many
participating implementing organizations, with their individual strengths and weaknesses.
Originally this included eight states, but with the carving of the new state of Chhattisgarh out
of Madhya Pradesh the total number has become nine. With each agency having its own,
generally separate, surface and groundwater organizations, and the central agencies having
their own representative structure at state and regional level, the project is now being
implemented by 24 separate organizational entities.
As conceived, there were four distinct phases in the project: i) inception, ii) development,
iii) implementation and operationalisation, and iv) consolidation. The original intent was that
development and implementation would take about three years, followed by three years for
achieving sustainable operation of the procedures and structures. However, mainly due to
logistical and institutional weaknesses, development and implementation were seriously
delayed.
At present, the HIS system (i.e. functioning from data collection to data storage and
dissemination) is still not fully in operation. On the groundwater side this is largely due to
delays in contracting and developing the dedicated data processing software, whereas there
is also delay in development of the general data storage centre software for both surface
and groundwater data. Moreover, there have been delays in procurement of equipment,
construction of civil works at many remote locations throughout the participating states, and
recruitment of certain categories of staff. Notwithstanding the fact that it was unable to meet
all expectations, the project has succeeded in developing and establishing a functional HIS.
The utility of HIS is increasingly more widely understood. Due to the support from pro-active
administrators and decision-makers, HIS information is now a critical parameter for
developing new WR projects.
1.3 The Technical Assistance
The objective of the Technical Assistance (TA) has been a derivative of the project’s
objectives: “to provide broad technical and institutional support to the participating agencies,
and to assist the project authorities to implement the Hydrology Project in accordance with
technical criteria, standards, and procedures agreed by the World Bank and the
Government”. Specifically, the TA was to deliver a number of relevant technical outputs, and
otherwise advise and assist the agencies in their activities.
Development of the Hydrological Information System
Under the project, actual development and implementation of the HIS has been the
responsibility of the implementing organizations of the participating states and central
agencies. To this end, they employed the proceeds of the World Bank credit. It has been
the function of the TA to support the organizations in carrying out this responsibility, through
design of the system, formulation of technical specifications for software, hardware and civil
works, formulation of organizational arrangements and job descriptions, providing a

methodology for monitoring progress towards target achievement, and in general supporting
the implementing organizations in managing their activities under the project.
As designed by the Consultant, the HIS is conceptualized as a “distributed system”,
comprising interrelated autonomous components in the different agencies. It represents a
paradigm shift from the pre-existing data collection practices, introducing a scientific basis
for aquifer / basin-wide data collection, major improvements in data validation, a change in
focus from collection and storage to analysis, and availability of the data to outside users.
Data is being collected either directly in the field at surface and groundwater observation
sites or, from water samples taken at these sites, through analysis in different types of
laboratories. This data is then entered into databanks at the subdivision / subdistrict level
(and for WQ data in the laboratories), where it undergoes primary validation to eliminate the
most obvious anomalies. The data is then sent to the division / district level offices for
secondary validation, and finally to the state data processing center for final validation and
ultimate storage in the state data storage center.
To assist in the implementation of the system, the Consultant has worked with the individual
organizations at the local level as well as at the inter-agency level, to ensure appropriate
arrangements between the components (within and between the agencies) for system-wide
communication to facilitate data validation, integration of databases, and broadening of
scope.
Activities of the Technical Assistance
Project implementation required a significant administrative / logistical effort, for which many
of the agencies were poorly prepared, involving inter alia the creation of dedicated HIS units,
procurement of equipment, construction of civil works, establishment of new positions, and
training. Because of the many different locations at which the system was to be implemented
and the varying levels of readiness, the participating organizations carried out these
activities at their own pace. Hence, the project adopted a phased implementation: an
inception phase to lay the necessary groundwork; a development phase for standardization
of procedures, specifications for system design, and training development; an
implementation phase to put all the new procedures and structures into place; and a
consolidation phase to arrive at sustainable operation of the system.
This necessitated a strong framework for planning and monitoring of the agencies’ activities.
The Consultant provided this in the form of the HIDAP, which categorized everything to be
done in a logical grouping and sequencing of activities. In each of the HIDAP categories, the
Consultant provided the necessary support. The relevant TA activities are summarized
below (following the HIDAP categories):
• Assessing the needs of the users – the Consultant provided inter alia a questionnaire for
data need assessment, terms of reference and model agendas for Hydrological Data
User Groups
• Review and establishment of the observation network – the Consultant provided inter
alia all manuals for the design, operation, and maintenance of the hydro-meteorological
and surface water and groundwater quantity and quality networks. This included the
review and integration of the observation networks, and guidance for the establishment
of a network of water quality laboratories.
• Management of historical data – the TA developed an approach for systematic inventory
of data availability and planned data entry and processing.

• Data collection – the TA developed the relevant manuals and training documents, and
conducted regular field inspections to investigate actual data collection practices. This
included the development of standard analytical procedures for WQ data.
• Data processing, analysis, and reporting – the Consultant assisted the agencies in the
design of their data processing centers, developed a comprehensive set of HIS
operation manuals, and formulated specifications for all hardware and software to be
used in the data centers. The TA provided the SW data processing software and fully
tuned it to the needs of the HIS. The TA continuously supported the outside Consultant
engaged for the GW software, who did not have the necessary domain experience. On
substantive processing, the TA initiated research studies in the Sabarmati and Godavari
basins.
• Data exchange and reporting – the TA provided specifications for relevant equipment
and incorporated data exchange procedures in the processing phases in the HIS
operation manuals and embedded them in the SW and GW protocols.
• Data storage and dissemination – the Consultant assisted the agencies in the design of
their data storage centers, formulated hard and software specifications, and produced
the relevant design and operation manuals. The TA also gave extensive support to the
outside Consultant engaged to develop the DSC software.
• Institutional and human resources development – the Consultant provided assistance in
planning of HP activities through HIDAP, and monitoring and evaluation of progress
through the MIS. The Consultant also arranged long-term relationships with established
training institutes to include training on the HP approaches in their respective programs
(ranging from field-level data collection to data processing, storage, and analysis),
arranged overseas training for key HIS personnel, assisted in setting up HDUGs,
conducted workshops on cultural assessment and change management, and undertook
promotional activities to disseminate the utility of the HIS to different target groups within
and outside the participating organizations.
Each agency implemented its part of the project in line with the design, specifications, etc.
outlined by the Consultant in generic activities. However, where local conditions and
circumstances presented specific problems, the Consultant also assisted the agencies in
finding or identifying specific solutions. The first line of assistance in this regard was
provided through the office of the State Management Consultant (SMC). Especially in the
early years of the project, the SMCs were able to help the agencies keep their activities on
track, implement their activities in line with general specifications, rules for procurement, etc.,
and generally liaise with the central TA office in New Delhi for additional support if need be.
Later on in the project, generally after the physical elements of the HIS had been put in
place, the SMCs were replaced by HIS Management Consultants (HMC), who focused more
on the substantive operationalization of the system.
Approach
From the start, HIS development has not been approached as development of a mere
technical instrument, but as a change in how the agencies deal with hydrological information,
in general representing a shift from very instrumental data gathering (for individual
development projects) to a more systemic approach (to improve the general overview and
understanding of the state of water resources in the hydrological cycle). While emphasizing
this systemic character, it was at the same time necessary to ensure that the distributed
elements of the system would meet all individual requirements of the participating
organizations. This necessitated intimate involvement of the organizations from the very
beginning of the project, in order to create a sense of ownership. In turn, this precluded the
use of a blue print approach. Instead, a process approach was employed allowing the

different agencies to specify their individual needs and priorities, as well as accommodating
their different capabilities and capacities for change.
These two apparently conflicting principles – striving towards system integration and
standardization while leaving room for individual differences and abilities – made it
necessary to develop and adhere to a rigid logical framework of activities. To this end, the
Consultant assisted the agencies in identifying their objectives and related outputs of their
activities in the project, together with an identification of possible obstacles and threats to the
successful completion of these activities. The Consultant then identified relevant advisory
activities in relation to these findings, i.e. in support of the agencies’ own development work
or in trying to address the obstacles and threats (e.g. through addressing these at higher
levels to which the individual organizations have only limited access).
An important question throughout the project has been the relative involvement of the TA
with the different agencies. In the beginning, when all agencies had to find their way in the
project, all required and received equal assistance on the same aspects of development. As
the agencies diverged in their progress, the nature of the individual assistance began to
vary, but all agencies nonetheless still received equal attention. However, as time went by, it
became clear that a number of agencies could not create the basic conditions for HIS
operationalization. Therefore, towards the end of the project it was decided that the TA’s
attention should focus more on agencies that showed real potential for full-fledged
operationalization of the HIS. The expectation was that concentrating TA support on
agencies that were most likely to be successful offered the best probability that the success
would be sustained and thus become an example for the other agencies to follow on their
own, possibly with additional government support post-HP.
A key principle of the approach has been that the Consultant should limit himself to
assistance, while leaving detailed implementation to the agencies. Accordingly, in the
beginning of the project, TA consultants traveled extensively to assist the agencies in
detailed implementation of network identification, data need identification, etc. Mid-project,
the Consultant focused much more on general organization and structuring of the system
(formulating staffing requirements, job descriptions, training approaches, etc.), whereas
towards the end of the project the attention was on operationalization. The change in
emphasis was reflected in the change in how the TA provided support at the local level: in
the first few years the TA maintained a “State Management Consultant” (SMC) in each of the
states, whose job was to assist in matters of procurement, monitoring general direction of
the project, etc. Once the physical aspects of the HIS fell into place, the SMCs were phased
out and replaced by HIS Management Consultants (HMCs) and Data Management
Consultants (DMCs). The function and operations of the HMCs was significantly different
from those of the SMCs, in that they were much more substance oriented and, moreover, did
not devote their entire attention to only one state but generally managed the development
activities in a few states. The DMCs, mostly operating from the central TA office in New
Delhi, focused on the technical aspects of HIS implementation.
Hydrology Institution Development Action Plans
The systematic identification of activities for the agencies took place in the formulation of the
HIDAP. This planning instrument was identified in the Appraisal Report as crucial to
successful project implementation, and was intended to underpin annual review of progress
and subsequent action. The Consultant developed the HIDAP instrument along the lines of
logical framework analysis, taking care to present only concepts to the agencies and leaving
the ultimate detail up to them. Since the first HIDAPs were developed individually in and by
the different agencies, this resulted in varying quality and content. The Consultant then
assisted in focusing HIDAP development on the best elements revealed in this process, by

developing a Model HIDAP. Application of the model did justice to the standardization
element in the project, while leaving room for the agencies to identify relevant activities in
widely diverging circumstances and to do so in a systematic manner. Moreover, as it
presented the key elements of the entire project in a logical inter-related framework, the
Model HIDAP as applied in the individual agencies became a powerful tool for introduction of
new participants in the organizations.
Taking the step towards the intended systematic progress review, the Consultant identified
the key information to be extracted from the HIDAP for annual progress monitoring at all
relevant levels in the organizations. This was done with the help of the SW and GW
agencies in Andhra Pradesh, which actively participated in identifying what information
needed to be reported to different levels of management and what form such report should
take. This became the basis for the Status Reports, which were subsequently developed by
all agencies for the Mid-term Review Mission. Finally, further distillation of only the most
important information resulted in HIS Balanced Scorecards, which showed progress on three
dimensions of performance: internal perspective, user perspective, and sector perspective.
The Status Reports also gave shape to the agency-level MIS subsequently introduced in the
agencies. However, whereas in HIDAP all activities were always related to output
objectives, it appeared that in many agencies the focus of progress reporting through the
MIS remained on the use of inputs rather the production of outputs. It is on the latter aspect
that the MIS was to link to the HIS, but even today there seems to be limited attention for
monitoring the data collection and processing activities either in quantitative or qualitative
terms.
Further development of the HIDAP as a planning and monitoring instrument stopped after
the Mid-term Review Mission. Hence, with most progress reporting conducted through the
MIS, the HIDAP ceased to be annually updated, although at project end one or two agencies
expressed a desire to rekindle the HIDAP planning process.
1.4 Achievements
General - Earlier water resources development projects were formulated to serve largely
irrigation requirements or irrigation combined with hydroelectric power generation. As the
projects were few, inter-project considerations were absent. Each project was investigated
and planned independently. Generally, long-range development for integrated use of water
resources was not planned. As a result, hydrological data collection with respect to surface
water remained limited to the specific project sites. In contrast, groundwater data have in
most places always been collected on a system-wide basis, i.e. reflecting depletion and
recharge of entire (interrelated) aquifers.
Demographic and development pressure has resulted in ever more WR projects being
identified, and this has resulted in the recognition of the need for comprehensive strategic
planning for integrated use of water resources. The National Water Policy enunciates the
ensuing need to establish suitable mechanisms for co-ordinating river basin development. A
key requirement for coordination was identified as collection and free exchange of
hydrological data by the different agencies concerned.
By and large, the objectives of the project have been met. The major achievement is the
establishment of standardized systems, networks, and procedures. The technical system
has become an operational reality in most participating states. Networks have been
rationalized, data is being shared, and data validation is gradually gaining ground. A water

quality monitoring network has been introduced in the SW and GW domains. Hydrological
information is now being collected systematically and processed in a standardized manner, it
is stored in a manner that allows analysis, and it is available to many different users.
Institutionally, the implementing agencies have significantly improved their capacity and
capabilities for data collection and processing, although the sophistication of processing
capability is greater for SW than for GW. Sophisticated data collection equipment has been
introduced. Standardized practices for technical procedures have been laid down in
manuals that are available in all the agencies. While the development of the HDUGs has
been delayed, there is nevertheless still scope for development of a strong role for data
users in the operation of the HIS. Most importantly, a real enthusiasm has developed in the
agencies for the benefits associated with the HIS.
The improvements brought about under the HP could not have been possible without
significantly increased staffing levels. In this connection, the TA has produced staffing
schedules and job descriptions. However, in many cases staffing levels remain lower than
proposed by the TA. Two factors contributed to this: a recruitment ban that necessitated the
filling of new HIS positions through redeployment of existing staff from elsewhere, and –
especially in SW organizations – a lack of enthusiasm among staff to take up HIS posts.
Especially the water quality and data management positions remain difficult to fill in most
states, as there are few staff with requisite experience that can be redeployed to the
positions in question. Ultimately the best approach seems to be to train otherwise well-
educated personnel of other disciplines for such redeployment.
With respect to the creation of favorable institutional conditions for sustainable operation of
the HIS, most states have managed to formally establish an HIS organization, formulate a
proper WQ mandate, make available an adequate HIS budget, and establish an HIS
helpdesk. The HIS protocols have been adopted into the regular government procedures in
almost all states, as has been the execution of the analytical quality control program.
However, not all states have established training cells in the HIS organizations.
The achievement is sketchier with respect to effective communication with users. All states
have established HDUGs and adopted the relevant terms of reference, and almost all have
produced system maps. However, with the exception of a model Hydrological Information
Need (HIN) document for Maharashtra, as yet no HIN documents have been prepared to
document the underpinning of the networks’ layout, nor have thematic yearbooks been
produced or user satisfaction surveys conducted. The latter is due to the fact that, unlike the
HIN documents, yearbooks and satisfaction surveys require the (full) functioning of the HIS,
and that has been seriously delayed by late production of the software for groundwater data
processing and for the data storage centers. In fact, the agencies themselves are only
gradually developing a perspective on the utilities of HIS data as operation of the system is
becoming more routine.
It appears that HIS manuals are not available at all observation sites and that the
possibilities afforded by the HIS to collect management information on data collection and
processing are not being utilized sufficiently. On the other hand, there is genuine enthusiasm
among data processing staff for the possibilities of data analysis afforded by the HIS, for SW
with the fully adapted version of HYMOS and for GW and WQ even at the limited level that
was possible with the data entry systems produced by the TA while the data processing
software was not yet available.

Standardized systems, network and procedures – The concept of advanced levels of
data processing and analysis was not entirely new to most of the institutions involved in the
HP. However, in the ‘pre-project’ system there were wide variations in data collection,
analysis, and storage practices within and between states and agencies. Requisite hardware
and software was lacking.
The HP monitoring network is distinctly different from the ‘pre-project’ system of data
collection mechanisms, both in terms of quality and spatial distribution. The noteworthy gains
in the area of data collection for monitoring have been:
a) optimization of the monitoring network within the agency and integration of
monitoring networks between different agencies operating in the same domain;
upgrading of domain-specific monitoring networks;
b) introduction and operationalization of high frequency, error free data collection
mechanisms;
c) establishment of a water quality monitoring network within the GW and SW domains;
and
d) introduction of standardized measurement methodologies and techniques.
The data collection network, comprising field stations and laboratories, has been vastly
improved under HP. Almost all organizations report near 100% target completion in this
respect.
The HIS is a so-called distributed system, comprising 390 data entry and processing centers
at various levels and 31 data storage centers at the apex levels at each of the states and
central agencies, including the regional offices of the latter. A key accomplishment has been
the establishment of active, logical and up-to-date links between these different locations for
data collection and processing. The multiple sets of data now make possible a series of well-
defined validation exercises within and between these centers, including systematic inter-
agency data exchange.
The HIS design, field operation and reference manuals, comprising for Surface Water and
for Groundwater ten volumes each, cover all operational, maintenance and management
aspects of the HIS. This voluminous documentation of ‘what and how’ of the HIS in a
sequential and ‘easy to refer to’ format has been designed to enable the institutions to
operate and manage the HIS on an ‘error free’ and sustainable basis. These manuals, along
with other documents, are being made available on the internet through a HIS resources
database.
Pre-HP, limited data processing capacity had resulted in a large quantity of unprocessed
historical data in the form of paper records. This had caused an unmanageable and undue
time lag between data collection and analysis. Moreover, the potential for analytical use of
the data was hampered by the fact that the data had not been validated. Under HP, these
historical data have been converted into computer compatible formats, in the process of
which the data also have been validated. These vastly improved data are now easily
accessible in the Data Processing Centers (and soon in the Data Storage Centres) where it
has now become a reliable source for trend analysis and historical interpretation of current
data.

There was only sporadic data dissemination in the system existing before HP. The HIS
established under the Project, introduced the concept and practice of systematic and
‘demand linked’ data dissemination. In all states and agencies, Hydrological Data User
Groups exist to provide feedback to the agencies regarding the desirability and quality of
data, and procedures have been established for interested parties to become authorized
users of the system. In this capacity, they have access to the data through the data storage
centers.
Staffing - Operationalization of the HIS has necessitated a significant increase in the
number of staff. Although a large number of observation sites existed prior to HP, they were
largely inoperative due to scanty staff numbers. Little data were being collected for
processing, as a result even the data that were collected showed many gaps and could not
be validated. This lack of effective operation of the system contributed to reassignment of
staff originally working in hydrology to other duties, as a result of which Pre – HP system
performance further declined.
The improvements undertaken in HP could not have been possible without significant
additional staff numbers at all levels. The Project produced an extensive set of job
descriptions and proposed manning schedules for all elements of the system, be they
monitoring sites (field stations and laboratories), data processing facilities (points for first-
level data entry and validation and higher-level data collation) or data storage centers.
The government agreed that, as a rule, these posts would be staffed through redeployment.
There has been the agreement-in-principle by the government that specialist staff for
positions requiring qualifications not available among staff within the organization could be
recruited from the outside. However, this has become an issue of some contention, as this
appeared to violate the government-wide ban on recruitment. This pertained especially to
the professional level water quality and information technology positions. A solution was
found in re-training staff in order to bring them to the approximate qualifications required
under the HIS job descriptions, or to employ specialist staff from outside the government on
contractual basis. However, many of these positions remain unfilled or filled with under-
qualified staff.
Positioning of specialist staff, especially for WQ and IT, has been difficult since the agencies
do not have such staff for redeployment to HIS and there exists a ban on recruitment.
Solutions that have been attempted were deputation of staff from specialist organizations to
HIS units, contracting staff, outsourcing of works and training of existing staff. Deputation is
difficult since the staff involved may not wish to remain separate from their parent
organization. Outsourcing has been successful in Maharashtra (WQ analysis) and Tamil
Nadu (IT), where non-government staff have been hired through a local company to conduct
the necessary activities in the facilities established under HP. Contracting free-lance
personnel has proved to be successful in Karnataka (IT & WQ), at least for the time being.
However, this may not be sustainable in the longer term due to excessive budgetary burden.
Hence, the only solution seems to be training existing staff belonging to other disciplines. For
example, the agencies have many staff with a chemistry background, and many engineers
have an understanding of IT. In this respect it appears that the additional abilities actually
required may not be as sophisticated as previously imagined and, hence, the training need
may not be insurmountable.
One type of specialist function conspicuously absent in the agencies is that of
instrumentation specialist. This is an obvious handicap, considering the many instances
where equipment has failed to perform (aside from the lack of technical attention during the

procurement process itself). Ideally, each agency should have an instrumentation specialist
who could investigate instances of non-performance and arrange improvements with the
suppliers accordingly. An alternative presently being discussed is to place this responsibility
with the CWPRS. Although this would be better than nothing, the CWPRS is a centralized
organization lacking regional representation in the states. Hence, all issues involving
equipment performance would have to be dealt with by staff based in Pune. Thus the
CWPRS only could deal with general procurement issues, more or less in the way the
Consultant has been able to provide support, but local non-performance of equipment would
remain essentially non-addressed.
Human resources development – One outstanding and most visible achievement of the
HP has been the extensive skill building of HIS staff across all levels. Over 9,000 people at
the top, middle and field level have been trained in HIS concepts, methods, tools, techniques
and applications.
For long-term sustainability of human resources development, the TA had introduced the
concept of training of trainers (TOT), through which a core group of 300 in-house trainers
has become available within the implementing agencies themselves (110 for hydrometry, 60
for WQ, 15 for each SWDES and HYMOS, 70 for GW and 30 for GWDES). The TA team
has established contacts between the implementing HIS agencies and central training
institutes (CTIs). CTIs are generally apex organizations in the relevant domain, e.g. IMD,
NIH and NWA, which has agreed to provide the necessary training in the long term (post-
HP). One of the most important gains of the HP is the development and documentation by
the TA team of standardized training curriculum and reference material for current use and
future reference in this on-going process.
Many national level institutes (NWA, NIH, RGI) participated in the delivery of various training
courses. These institutes gained a good grasp of HIS-specific training requirements and
became proficient in the delivery of domain-specific course contents. Experience indicates
that these institutes can successfully become the ‘knowledge banks’ for future training
deliveries. However, absence of a centralised training institute for water quality was
recognized as a major constraint. This was partly addressed by drawing upon the expertise
of operational agencies (CPCB) as well as research institutes (ITRC, EPTRI, NEERI). There
is a need to identify a national level organization to fill this apparent gap. Since CPCB has
the required expertise and national level stature, recognizing and positioning it as an apex
body for training in water quality will be a step in the right direction. This issue is included in
the agenda of the next meeting of the Water Quality Assessment Authority.
The TA has not been involved in voluminous training of field-level staff. However, the TA did
train HIS operator staff (data entry, validation, etc.) and water quality staff.
Institutional strengthening – Institutional strengthening is defined in the project as
establishing the capability and capacity of the pertinent organizations to maintain and
operate the HIS. Also, it asks of these organizations to interact with the data users on their
needs. This aspect has been pursued in HP through investment in the establishment of
system sites, the provision of equipment, and related positioning and training of staff.
A large number of HIS Operationalization workshops has been conducted at regional and
divisional level, to address managerial issues and shape attitudes of the field and middle
level staff related to Monitoring Quality Control. The workshops have focused on creating
awareness and commitment towards the HIS, with the promise of becoming part of the
annual post-HP training calendar to ensure continuous commitment.

The ultimate test of HIS performance is whether data are flowing from the sites to the data
entry centers, from there through the different collation points to the data storage centers,
and ultimately disseminated to and appreciated by the users. The TA has been extensively
engaged in gauging the impact of establishing the HIS in the relevant organizations, and the
requisite changes in individual and organizational behavior to ensure demand-oriented HIS
operation.
The HIS protocols have been accepted and translated into uniform institutional practices
across states and agencies. Hydrology Data User Groups have been established with
appropriate terms of reference and sample agendas to ensure meaningful contact between
the HIS agencies and the prospective clientele.
With respect to data processing, an important first indicator is whether offices have been
constructed / upgraded for the data centers, and whether equipment such as computers and
other relevant office equipment has been procured and installed. Most agencies have been
able to achieve close to 100% performance in this category. In most places where
performance is less, this is due to later decisions to reduce the level of construction and
procurement.
A number of tangible and intangible achievements were made in the area of institutional
development, while working around and under existing constraints and limitations. The gains
so far achieved include:
• establishing a national level WQ Assessment Authority,
• establishing and activating unified (GW, SW & WQ) Data Storage Centers
• introduction of O&M procedures, and
• systematic inter-agency data exchange and validation practices.
These achievements are some of the intermediate outputs of the HP, contributing to:
• improved dissemination of the HIS data to a wide variety of users,
• optimizing investments in the water sector,
• improved water resource planning and management at the regional, state and
national level,
• ensuring more equitable distribution of water resources, and
• enabling the administrators and decision makers to respond to extreme situations
(drought, flood) in a more responsible and efficient manner.
The TA has devoted considerable time in convincing the organizations to establish a number
of institutional conditions favouring successful and sustainable operation of the HIS,
including managing the relations with data users. With respect to the system itself, these
conditions involved the permanent establishment of a Hydrology Unit with a clear mandate
for data monitoring, processing, dissemination (including for water quality), provision of a
separate annual budget head for O&M, and the establishment of a helpdesk. To further
enhance sustainability of the system, there would also need to be a training cell, together
with a separate annual training budget. For operation of the system, enabling conditions
involve the adoption and implementation of O&M protocols (general) and the implementation
of an analytical quality control programme (water quality).
A number of these conditions have been met during the project. However, several other
conditions cannot yet be observed as it is too early for meaningful feedback from users
because the data processing software has been seriously delayed.

Innovative R&D projects – A large number of innovative R&D projects were initiated in both
the surface and groundwater domains. These include projects specific to groundwater such
as fresh water-salt water interface in the multi-aquifer system of Krishna delta and solute
transport modeling studies for Kuttanad, Kerala. Similar examples of projects in the surface
water domain are integrated river basin planning and management in Sabarmati and
Godavari basins, and hydrological investigations and modeling for water quality
sedimentation in the upper Bhopal lake and several others in both domains.
1.5 Institutionalisation of a sustainable HIS
The need for setting up of a comprehensive HIS in India surfaced because the ‘pre-project’
system of collecting, compiling, analyzing and disseminating hydrological information was
found to be inadequate, both in terms of reliability and spatial coverage. In addition, a
complex inter-twining of technical, procedural, managerial and institutional factors resulted in
difficulties and bottlenecks inter-agency cooperation.
Efficient management of the HIS calls for a series of changes in the institutional setting,
technology, systems, policies, procedures and human processes. The technological
changes that HP has initiated in the implementing organizations include: setting up of
modern physical infrastructure; introduction of technologically superior and sophisticated
data collection equipment; computerized data processing tools and techniques; etc. Bringing
about changes in the management systems, policies and procedures is more time
consuming and difficult, because they are determined by the higher level administrative
hierarchy and the implications spread beyond the immediate HIS organization.
During the past seven years of the project implementation, the TA consultants have
specifically focused on strengthening a variety of institutional mechanisms with the intention
of removing apparent institutional weaknesses and at the same time enhancing their
inherent strengths. The objective of these efforts was to enable the central and state level
agencies to address the troublesome institutional and managerial issues effecting the
establishment of a sustainable HIS, so that they can make a more effective use of financial,
physical and human resources.
Each of the implementing agencies has its own unique historical legacy determining its
dominant cultural ethos, norms, values, administrative systems and work practices. The
intertwining of several matters such as relatively poor remuneration, lack of general career
incentives, stunted individual growth, limited decision making latitude, inadequate user
orientation etc. are revealing examples of apparent institutional handicaps of the
implementing agencies.
Recognizing the historical institutional constraints and the lack of enthusiasm of the agencies
in adopting a management approach radically different from the one they were traditionally
conditioned to, the TA Consultants chose to introduce changes in the following three distinct
internal domains of the agencies:
• Structure and systems
• Policy and procedures and
• People and processes

They are briefly summarized below:
• Structure and systems. This is one of the most difficult areas for inducing changes,
because structure and system aspects in a government setting generally come under the
purview of the larger parent organization and the gestation period between initiation and
implementation of systemic and structural changes tends to stretch very long. Despite
this limitation, successes were achieved, inter alia (i) integrating the system of water
quality aspects into the traditional domain of quantity measurement, (ii) application of
domain-specific standardized systems of data collection, processing and validation, (iii)
establishment of a uniform HIS organization structure in most states, (iv) formation of
training cells headed by a training coordinator, (v) system for preparing staffing and
training plans, (vi) unified (GW & SW) organization structure in Tamil Nadu, and (vii)
achieving unity of command under one Chief Engineer (Hydrology) in Maharashtra (SW).
• Policy and procedures. The formulation and implementation of routine policies and
procedures are by and large determined by the implementing agencies. Only policies
having larger inter-departmental implications are referred to the parent organizations.
Therefore, introduction of a wide variety of simple procedural changes was feasible.
Formal release of several HIS specific administrative orders is one of the models of this
initiative, inter alia (i) constituting national/state level Water Quality Assessment
Authority, (ii) procedure for budgeting O&M, (iii) introduction of O&M procedures, (iv)
adoption of procedures regarding uniform water quality sampling, (v) expanding the
membership base to include local NGOs in the state HDUGs and formation of task-
specific specialist groups, (vi) introduction of a protocol for the data flow through the HIS,
for inter-agency data validation, data exchange and data dissemination, and (vii)
outsourcing of water quality analysis activities to private agencies in Maharashtra (SW).
• People and processes are mostly intangible, nevertheless extremely important domains.
The TA has contributed significantly in this area. Adoption of the model HIDAP,
successful institutional transition from a rigid and compartmentalized outlook towards a
more integrated water resource management perspective, initiation of divisional level
HIS operationalization workshops and active participation of field level staff in these
workshops, adoption of widespread computerized work practices, open minded
approach to commence inter-agency data exchange, agency-wide emphasis on a quality
oriented and error free HIS, are all clear manifestations of a series of changes brought
about by the TA.
Towards effective functioning of the HIS – It is important to recognize that the
development and introduction of the HIS alone is unlikely to bring about major changes in
the performance of the participating organizations beyond the use and utility of the system
itself. There are five critical determinants for successful implementation and consolidation of
the HIS:
a) Development of a dependable and dynamic HIS
b) Institutional strength and competency of staff in the implementing agencies
c) Cultural profile and value-system of the implementing agencies and people
d) Users’ response impacting demand pattern
e) Coordination
The first two factors, strength of the ‘product’ and institutional strength will largely influence
whether the HIS can be operated in a mostly technical sense. Sustainability of the system
will also depend on the culture of the implementing agencies, and the demand pattern of the
users. Finally, as the HIS is a so-called distributed system, in which individual agencies can

make changes suiting their own needs, there is a need for effective coordination. The inter-
play of these determinants is crucial to successful implementation of the HIS project. So far,
more than average attention has been given to the first two determinants. In the current
phase of consolidation, work is programmed for realising achievement in all five critical
areas. A synoptic presentation of the status covering the relevant activities is given below.
a) Development of HIS. Ample results have been achieved as a result of TA interventions,
in the development of a quality HIS. However, a few activities still remain, mainly relating
to the operationalisation of dedicated software for data storage and dissemination, and
for groundwater data processing. These areas, otherwise, do mainly require attention in
terms of coaching of data validation, analysis, storage and dissemination activities.
b) Institutional strength and competency of staff. Considerable work has been done for
building institutional strength, developing operational skills and enhancing competencies
of human resources in the implementing agencies. Results have been achieved through
appropriate structuring of the HIS organizations. Systems and procedures for regulating
technical, managerial and operational activities have been put in place. Policies and
practices for result orientation have been established. Institutional tie-up has also been
done with external agencies for various arrangements, services and facilities. Now that
the documentation part is substantially complete, the Consultant will concentrate on
lobbying with the concerned authorities for formal adoption of the manuals, systems,
guidelines, etc., through e.g. Government Orders or instruments of similar importance.
This intervention is expected to significantly contribute to sustainability of the HIS.
c) Culture and value-system. The work culture and value-systems of the implementing
agencies have serious implications for sustainability of the HIS. To obtain a clear view of
this relationship, a cultural audit of the implementing agencies was undertaken in three
focus states. Missions and Values statements were developed, as well as Change-
Action plans. Core Teams and Task Forces were formed to implement these action
programs. Once the cultural dimension is clearly understood, it is proposed to hold
workshops on Change Management. The workshops will share a vision for building
linkages and goal-oriented performance and discuss the re-defined role of the
implementing agencies. The workshops will be structured aiming at increasing the
motivation and commitment of key actors in the agencies, to ensure sustainability of the
HIS.
d) Demand pattern. Involvement of existing and potential users in ‘product’ development
and updating, increased level of utilization of HIS services and expansion of user-base
are some of the factors that would have direct impact on the sustainability of the HIS.
This would require influencing the external environment. Apart from several interventions
the implementing agencies may take, the Consultants will assist in implementing an
appropriate ‘Communication Strategy’ for promoting the HIS.
Hydrological Data User Groups, with representation of various stakeholders, have been
constituted in all the States and at the Centre to ensure that the HIS remains responsive
to (emerging) user needs. While the HDUGs at the state level have been activated, the
forums at the Central level are yet to become active and brought into a systemic working
mode. This would ensure involvement of existing and potential users in product
development and directing responsiveness of the HIS system.
e) Coordination. During the project, coordination has been provided through coordination
committees at the central and state level. These committees comprise representatives
from the different implementing agencies. There is a clear need to continue coordination
after the project. To date, this role is being performed by the National Level Steering
Committee (NLSC) constituted by the Ministry of Water Resources. This committee is
supported by the Project Coordination Secretariat (PCS), which has also provided a

nodal point for interaction with the Consultants on a day-to-day basis. Successful
execution of the HIS and its sustained development and growth rests on continuous
monitoring of the HIS organization and its operational performance. Transition of the
NLSC into a permanent national HIS Coordination Committee (HIS-CC), and freezing
institutional aspects for the body to meaningfully operate, needs to be completed before
the project end. Along with it, the PCS would need to develop into the HIS Coordination
Secretariat (HIS-CS) of the HIS-CC, and gradually take over certain roles of the TA
Consultants.
1.6 Data users
The HIS has been conceived as a dynamic system, able to accommodate growing and
changing demand patterns of data users. This requires not only a demand orientation in the
HIS organizations as data providers, but also the development of active external demand
from the outside users. The HDUGs were intended to play a pivotal role in stimulating this
demand and to become a steering element in further HIS development.
However, since at the start of HP the data providers were also the largest data users, the
need to establish HDUGs was initially not widely perceived. At the same time, outside
parties until then not using hydrological data were themselves not clear about their needs.
Indeed, the understanding of these needs was not possible until a working HIS could deliver
a range of outputs. Having such outputs available would help in “educating” potential
“customers” as to their possible data needs. Conversely, not having outputs from a fully
functional HIS risked disappointing – and possibly alienating – users if they discovered that
the need they had just learned to express could not be met.
A pragmatic solution then was to first develop the HIS with the existing data providers and to
focus on HDUGs later. This was also in line with the TOR, which foresaw an increasingly
operational HIS for the second half of the project period, during which the Consultant could
assist in dealing with the “growing pains” that plague any new system, and in the process
acquaint the users with demand identification through the HDUGs. Ultimately, the HDUGs
would then become able to interact with the HIS providers and identify feasible adjustments
to the system. It was not expected that during this period there would be a need for
significant adjustment of the network layout and monitoring practices, but the experience
gained in data need identification and formulating practicable ways to accommodate these
needs would prepare the HDUGs for their post-project role in this respect.
The late delivery of software for data processing and data storage meant that the activities
as originally foreseen for the second half of the project could not take place. Although
HDUGs have been established in all states during the project, the limited functioning of the
HIS made that they have had little of substance on their agenda. Hence, they are not yet
fully prepared for their important post-HP role in ensuring the dynamic development of the
HIS, and do not yet develop a strong interactive role with the agencies in shaping the HIS.
As a result, the HIS remained to be the “property” of the original agencies. This has to some
extent perpetuated the originally prevailing supply orientation in those agencies. The lesson
from this chain of events may be that the establishment of the HDUGs should have been
further postponed until completion of the software development for GW and WQ data
processing and especially for DSC operation. Although this could not have been foreseen
early on, this would have meant that the initialization work on HDUGs should have begun
during the first year of the project extension, which would have made it possible to actively

involve the data users in the operationalization phase of the respective software items in the
agencies from April 2003 onwards.
The delayed activation of the HDUG concept could have benefited from stronger
professional pride and capabilities in the agencies, and this could have been supported
through the establishment of “quality circles”. Such circles would involve data practitioners,
i.e. HIS staff of the different national and state agencies collecting, processing, and applying
data. While establishing “quality circles” could have risked exacerbating the proprietary
image of the HIS from the agencies’ perspective, by building appreciation for the potential
utilities of the HIS it could have created a stronger platform for HDUG activation. For
example, with stronger professional commitment, HIN documents for all networks might
have been available earlier on, setting the stage for future demand-supply interaction in the
HDUGs. In turn, the availability of such documents might have provided more focus for
development of the HIS as a technical system, thus perhaps avoiding some – though by no
means all – of the obstacles that have delayed implementation.
1.7 Potential for future development
At the end of the HP, all agencies in all states had set up observation networks and started
data collection and processing in a standardized manner. Groundwater data processing
software has finally been completed and installed, and agencies are beginning to work with
it. Fortunately, they have been able to do some processing for several years already using
the Data Entry Software developed by the TA. A real enthusiasm for the system and what it
can do is growing among the staff of the agencies. As could be expected given the different
circumstances and conditions, some agencies have proved to be more successful than
others in operationalizing the HIS.
Due to the delays in especially the development of the software for data processing (GW)
and data storage (both SW and GW), the two years originally planned for a consolidation
period have been lost. Hence, now that the mentioned software is finally coming available, it
is of utmost importance to consolidate the infrastructure established in the peninsular states
to ensure long-term sustainability. Consolidation would involve:
• Optimization of monitoring activities, involving expansion or intensification of the
networks, adjustment of monitoring frequencies, etc.;
• Consolidation of day-to-day operational procedures and maintenance – particularly
internalization of the need for data validation, collection of and taking action on data
relevant for network management, etc.;
• Retraining of existing staff lacking requisite specialist background (as recruiting new
properly qualified staff is not possible);
• Taking inventory of the potential users and their data needs in the private sector, and
non-WR institutions in the public sector, to assess how their needs can be met and how
they can be involved;
• Preparation of water resources assessment reports;
• Assisting the HDUGs in assuming their interactive role with the HIS agencies to guide
future changes to the network layout and monitoring practices to accommodate the
needs of data users as they change over time.
These activities are important for consolidating the achievements to date. They also provide
the basis for further development.

One opportunity that presents itself now that the HIS has become functional in all respects is
to replicate the system to states that did not participate in the HP. This horizontal expansion
would involve essentially the same activities as under the HP in peninsular India, i.e.
focusing on the technical processes of data collection, data processing, and data
management.
However, for long-term sustainability of the HIS it will be necessary to shift from data
collection and processing towards using the data in the planning and management of water
resources. One of the limitations of the HP has been that it was being implemented by
technical units with direct responsibility for data collection and processing, without much
involvement of planning and development units. This has resulted in underexposure of the
benefits of the HIS, and this has also made it difficult to generate interest among other users
outside the department. Effective demand for hydrological information will often exist in a
broader water resources and inter-sectoral development context. Therefore, a vertical
extension of the HIS is highly recommended, shifting from data collection and processing
towards using the data in the planning and management of water resources.
Two possibilities are real-time use of data for operational purposes and planning and
implementing integrated water resources management (IWRM). Real-time data use
includes early flood warning, operational management of irrigation systems and reservoirs,
and drought monitoring (conjunctive use, watershed management, resource assessment).
Developing IWRM involves expanding the HIS into a Water Information System (WIS), i.e.
linking the hydrological information collected under the “basic” HIS (data describing the
natural system) to data describing the socio-economic system and the administrative and
institutional system. In line with the existing National Water Policy, the development of
IWRM would involve the creation of river basin organizations. Such organizations have as a
prime technical function the development of a network of data banks and databases at basin
level, which should be freely accessible to all user agencies. The existence now of a user
oriented HIS is a significant contributing factor to the establishment of RBOs.
2 Status of HP and TA activities
2.1 General
The activities under the Hydrology Project, aimed at upgrading and expanding the HIS, have
always been based on the basic structure of the hydrological institution development action
plan (HIDAP), to keep the project on track in its diverse implementation environment, and to
structure the different activities in a logical sequence. The project and related TA activities
can be broadly classified in the following categories:
• Assessing the needs of users
• Review and establishment of an observational network
• Management of historical data
• Data collection
• Data processing, analysis and reporting
• Data exchange and inter-agency data validation
• Data storage and dissemination
• Institutional and human resource development
Reporting in this chapter and in Chapter 3 is based on these categories of activities.

Phased implementation
The implementation of HP from the perspective of the Technical Assistance (TA) went
through the following four phases:
1. Inception Phase, in which the necessary groundwork for HP implementation,
development of the organizational framework and planning of project activities took place
2. Development Phase, which comprised standardization of procedures and technical
specifications, design of HIS, development of staff training curricula and planning
3. Implementation/operationalization Phase, in which the procedures and designed
structures were gradually being implemented, and
4. Consolidation Phase, including support activities to arrive at sustainable operation of the
HIS.
All participating Central and State agencies went through the different project phases, but
duration and timing varied according to achieved progress. Project management tools such
as HIDAP and Logical framework analysis were applied to sequence the activities.
HIDAP
Activities, required to upgrade HIS, were streamlined in the execution of a Hydrological
Institution Development Action Plan (HIDAP). The HIDAP was conceived to keep the project
on track in its diverse implementation environment, structuring the different activities in a
logical sequence. HIDAP aimed to establish a link between inputs available under HP
(construction, equipment, training, etc.) and the ultimate objective of establishing and
operating an effective HIS on a sustainable footing. Using HIDAP, the agency would identify
specific outputs to produce and co-ordinate their related activities with those of other
agencies. HIDAPs were developed through Initial Planning Meetings (formulation of output
objectives, identification of restraining and driving forces), Consolidation Meeting
(formulation of strategies and action plans), Interim Review Meetings (detailed planning,
formulation of aspect plans) and State Conferences. HIDAP forced the agencies to critically
review their objectives under HP and focused on potential obstacles to overcome and
opportunities to make use of. Each implementing entity made its own HIDAP based on a
model developed by the Consultant, and updated it annually. The Management Information
System (MIS), developed and implemented by the Consultant, monitored the progress of the
activities. The scope of the activities is outlined in the next sections.
Logical Framework for the HIS
Throughout the Project implementation phases logical framework analysis has been applied
to identify the outputs that the project must produce to meet its objectives. These outputs
were the expected results of activities to be undertaken in the project. It is to be noted that
the project activities were for the greater part carried out by the agencies, with no
involvement of the Consultant in a line relationship. Hence, while TA activities were
necessary for achievement of the project objectives, they must be seen as complementary to
activities to be undertaken by the agencies.
For each of the outputs a number of indicators were mentioned by which the achievement
could be observed. In the logical framework, the identification of the TA activities was
preceded by an assessment of the current status with respect to the relevant output. The

proposed TA activities were directly related to this status. Next, the framework listed the
inputs to be provided by the Consultant. These inputs were always of advisory nature, and
were identified in terms of the individual TA staff members’ designations. Finally, the logical
framework listed a number of assumptions on the basis of which the activities were expected
to bear fruit. Following standard logical framework analysis practice, expectations that were
most likely to become reality were not listed under assumptions. Although a number of
assumptions were crucial for the successful completion of the project, none was deemed to
be a “killer assumption” (i.e. not likely to become reality) for all agencies. However, some
issues, e.g. availability of specialist staff in posts created, resulted in framing a “killer
assumption” if staff could not be redeployed, trained, or recruited. Where such staff
remained unavailable the TA had no option but to abandon the respective activity in such
agency. This resulted in an automatic selection of the states, in which the TA continued the
full range of its activities.
As an example, the logical framework for the Consolidation Phase of the Project is
presented in the Annex II. The analysis points to the activities as from November 2001,
required for building on and completing the work that had been ongoing since 1996. The
activities mentioned have played an important role in the pursuit of this objective.
TA during project extension
The software for data processing GW and data storage is nearing completion (March 2003),
which marks the implementation of the complete HIS, though not yet its full
operationalisation. The focus is now indeed on operationalisation and consolidation of the
system. The APB 2002 was prepared observing two conditions:
• the TA shall focus on the best performing states wherever feasible given the limited
time and financial resources remaining, and
• the TA shall emphasize institutional support, since the inputs would be mainly applied
where the technical development and implementation is nearly completed.
However, even though the focus has been on the best performing states or agencies, it
would have been unwise to stop TA activities in the others which have shown good progress
in part of the HIS. The main difference was that the pro-activeness of the TA tapered off from
the focus states to others. Pro-active input towards the full range of institutional development
and HIS issues and aspects is being provided only to the focus states (i.e. AP, MAH & KAR).
More reactive inputs are provided to medium-level support states (GUJ, TN). In the other
four states (CHH, KER, MP, OR) assistance is now only catering to specific requests, as far
as time permits.
The TA activities for 2002/03 were all conceived in the context of withdrawal of the
Consultant from the day-to-day implementation concerns of the agencies. This is reflected in
the fact that, barring some remaining technical contributions, the Consultant henceforth
explicitly takes the position of “accompanying the officer” instead of “being accompanied by
the officer”. An example of this is the institution of helpdesks in the data processing centres,
which are to be the first line of assistance in the respective HIS network components and
beyond which the Consultant will not provide any more assistance. In addition, a helpdesk
function is being created at the centre, which at the moment is located in the TA Office but
which will be transferred to the National Data Centres (NDC).
Also, the transition of the PCS into a HIS Coordination Secretariat (HIS-CS) under the
Commissioner (WM) of the MoWR, would need to take place with the dual responsibility of:

• providing policy support to a central HIS Coordination Committee as a permanent
forum of coordination at the central level, and
• monitoring development of the HIS components under responsibility of the state and
central agencies.
Though Consultants have till date played a crucial role in the operationalisation of nearly all
HIS components, it needs to be appreciated that the TA, in no instance, has taken over the
actual implementation and operationalisation of HIS components. Nor has the TA been
directly imparting the supporting activities such as providing formal training (with few
exceptions). Hence, the full responsibility for the operation of the HIS has rested with the
concerned agencies from the beginning of HP and as such no transfer of responsibilities is
necessary. By now all agencies have developed a sense of ownership of the HIS and
appreciate the need for its future sustenance. What needs to be transferred to the HIS-CS
are the coordinating, motivating and stimulating roles of the TA, while its technical support
and Help Desk functions need to be transferred to the NDCs. Simultaneously, the agencies
have to establish agency level HIS-Help Desks and should learn to find solutions to
problems without following the easy route of referring them to the Consultants.
2.2 Assessing the needs of users
To take full consideration of user needs a Hydrological Data User Group (HDUG) for each
state and for the central agencies has been constituted. A wide array of potential
hydrological data users including the HIS implementing agencies are represented in these
HDUGs. The main aim of such HDUGs is to review on a regular basis hydrological
information needs, to identify shortfalls in content and services provided, and to make
suggestions and proposals for improvements. This will then require the implementing agency
to reconsider HIS objectives and incorporate improvements where possible. Suggestions
may also include updating of equipment.
To streamline the assessment of data needs, a questionnaire has been designed to consult
the data users. The purpose of this questionnaire is to provide the following information in a
structured manner:
1. The profile of the users of hydrological data (i.e. why they need hydrological data)
2. The current and proposed use of water systems
3. Current hydrological data availability and requirements
4. Future hydrological data requirements.
Based on the response to the questionnaire the HIS organisation compiles a Hydrological
Information Needs (HIN) document. A detailed description of the hydrological data need
assessment will be provided in the Model HIN document (to be completed for Maharashtra
state in March 2003) and in the HIS Design and Field Manuals for Surface Water and for
Groundwater.
2.3 Review and establishment of observation networks
After the objectives of the systems were laid down, the observation networks were planned,
designed and established/upgraded/adjusted. The observation networks were thoroughly
reviewed from three specific viewpoints:

• to open new stations in the areas that were poorly represented or very sparsely
covered earlier or to replace non-representative stations with dedicated sites,
• to eliminate duplication of stations across various agencies, and
• to improve the frequency and accuracy of the observations through automated
equipment and standard procedures.
The equipment as per the revised objectives and design was installed at the observation
stations, and old and defunct equipment was replaced with new, standard equipment.
The procedures for these activities are laid down in Volumes 3 to 6 of the HIS Design and
Field Manuals Surface Water and the Volumes 3, 4 and 6 of the HIS Design and Field
Manuals Groundwater. These volumes cover hydro-meteorology, hydrometry, geo-
hydrology, sediment transport, and water quality. Since this manual is being utilized by all
agencies it provides uniformity of monitoring equipment in use by different agencies.
The procedures presented in the documents were applied to review and upgrade the hydro-
meteorological, surface water, groundwater and water quality networks in the Project States.
All networks have been considered. The network densities for hydrometry and hydro-
meteorology were, as a first step, set to the minimum requirements according to WMO
standards, which is generally sufficient for water resources planning. These densities have
to be reassessed in future after a thorough analysis of the data needs. State and Central
agencies were brought together to eliminate duplications in their networks, to jointly review
existing measuring locations, and to select new ones. Good use was made of the equipment
specifications and station design instructions to upgrade the observational networks, a major
step towards standardization.

Surface water monitoring network
A major improvement in the hydro-meteorological network has been the reactivation of many
old rainfall stations that had become defunct due to inadequate monitoring and shortage of
funds. Many new full climatic stations, comprising standard and autographic raingauges, dry
and wet bulb, minimum and maximum thermometers, anemometer, sunshine recorder and
pan evaporimeter have been established. At the start of HP there were about 7,200 rainfall
and 640 climatic stations in the project area. The field inspections revealed that improper
location of stations, poorly maintained or defunct equipment, and sub-standard observation
practices were common features at these existing stations. To revitalize the meteorological
network about 500 new stations have been set-up and another 1,700 stations have been
upgraded to meet the standards.
The main improvement of river gauging stations has been the introduction of digital
recorders. The practice of employing floats has been replaced by current meter
measurements. Most reservoir locations have been provided with automatic water level
recording. Sophisticated techniques of discharge measurements like Acoustic Doppler
Current Profilers (ADCPs) have also been employed at a few stations where gauging is
extremely difficult with conventional means. Under HP, about 265 existing stations have
been upgraded and another 650 stations have been newly established, including a good
number of sites with Bank Operated Cableways.
Modern technology such as the Integrated Bathymetric System, which allows faster data
acquisition with better accuracy for reservoir sedimentation surveying, has also been
introduced in all the participating states. This also includes CWPRS, Pune, which would
function as the future nodal agency in training and maintenance of this equipment.
Groundwater monitoring network
The main objective of the groundwater component of the HP has been to establish the
required infrastructure for improving the understanding of groundwater systems, both in
terms of quantity and quality. The water level and water quality monitoring networks have
been expanded and upgraded by replacing non-representative observation wells with
scientifically designed piezometers. Piezometers are purpose-built, non-pumping
observation wells that facilitate measurement of vertically averaged piezometric head of a
single layer. The piezometers have been designed to tap the selected layer. Piezometer
design has made provision for sampling water from the tapped aquifer for water quality
monitoring. There were about 27,000 observation wells in the project area before the project.
Only 6% of these were tubewells while others were hand-dug open wells. These open dug
wells were not owned by the agencies and were also not maintained adequately. Under the
project the network has been strengthened by constructing about 7,900 dedicated
piezometers.
The design of the network has been optimized by integrating the monitoring piezometers of
the different agencies. The improved network has been designed to get a good spatial and
vertical coverage, representation of all the hydro-geological set-ups, considering the present
and projected status of groundwater development and water quality variations. As many as
6,200 Digital Water Level Recorders (DWLRs) have been procured, to ensure measurement
of undistorted piezometric head at the desired frequency (ranging from 10 minutes to 6
hours). The high frequency and credible piezometric head data would enhance the
information content of the data and also facilitate many new analyses. The improved
groundwater monitoring network provides:

• long-term hydro-geologic information and groundwater quality data,
• characterization of different groundwater flow regimes,
• information necessary for regulating use and conservation of groundwater resources,
• a baseline for control of over-pumping of groundwater
• information necessary for conjunctive use planning
The design objectives of DWLR networks have only been partially achieved due to poor
performance of equipment. Various brands of DWLRs have been procured, viz. Greenspan,
InSitu, M-squared, IRIS and Unidata. Unfortunately, a large number of problems were
encountered with the introduction of the DWLRs. Some 40% did not function properly, if at
all. Problems typically related to rapid exhaustion of the batteries, malfunctioning of the
software, leakage and intermittent functioning for unknown reasons. Only one brand (InSitu)
showed a low failure rate from the beginning, while Unidata equipment still had to manifest
itself and M-squared equipment had just been repaired/replaced at the time of writing of this
report.
Water quality monitoring network
Extensive networks for monitoring the quality of surface water (SW) at about 675 locations
and groundwater (GW) at about 29,000 locations have been established by categorizing the
stations into “Baseline”, “Trend” and “Flux”/”Surveillance” stations based on the guidelines of
the World Health Organization. Frequency of sampling and water quality parameters to be
analyzed for each category of stations have been defined and documented in the “Protocol
for Water Quality Monitoring”, to unify the monitoring procedure of all the participating
agencies for comparable results.
2.4 Management of historical data
State and central agencies have maintained observation networks for many years and
voluminous records exist for the most part in the form of manuscript or chart records, which
are not readily accessible for use and are of variable quality. A programme of historical data
entry has been established in each agency holding such data. It has been stressed that
priority in the first instance was to be given to ensuring that current data are entered,
validated, and stored effectively. The next priority should be for historic data of the
immediate past ten years and so on. Guidelines were developed to document the data
availability and how to proceed with data entry, validation, completion, and analysis and
reporting. Meanwhile, the majority of historical data has been entered, though validation of
these data has still a long way to go.
2.5 Data collection and sample analysis
The observations at the network stations/wells are taken manually or automatically
depending upon the type of instrument available at the station. Measuring frequencies are
tuned to the variability of the processes observed and potential use of the data.
Observations are entered in standardized forms or are stored in data loggers. At monthly
intervals the data are transferred to the Data Processing Office for entry in the computer and
primary validation. A suitable number of trained Supervisors, Technicians, Observers,
Helpers, etc. are engaged and materials are provided at the observation sites for carrying
out day-to-day data collection work and also for regular maintenance.

Water quality samples are analyzed at the water quality laboratories using Standard
Analytical Procedures (compiled by the Consultant) and equipment. Laboratory results are
regularly reviewed through Analytical Quality Controls within and between the agencies.
The procedures described in the manuals are in concurrence with WMO and ISO standards
as far as applicable to the conditions in Peninsular India. The techniques have been
embedded in the training courses for the staff complying with their job descriptions.
Application of the procedures ensures uniformity in observing the hydro-meteorological,
surface and groundwater quantity and quality variables according to the standards.
The recently established Water Quality Assessment Authority (WQAA) is in the process of
adopting the standard procedures and approach to WQ monitoring as developed under the
Hydrology Project for the entire country.
2.6 Data processing, analysis and reporting
Data processing is a broad term covering all activities from receiving records of observed
field data to making them available in a usable form. The field data are in a variety of formats
such as hand-written records, charts, and digital records. Data as observed and recorded
may contain many gaps and inconsistencies. To obtain reliable data and to arrive at useful
information it is essential that these observed data are passed through a series of
operations, typically:
• data entry
• making necessary validation checks,
• filling-in missing values in a data series,
• processing of field data to estimate required variables,
• compilation of data in different forms
• analysis of data for commonly required statistics, etc.
The data processing activities are accomplished with the help of dedicated hydrological data
processing software. Appropriate control on the continuity of the data flows is to be carried
out to make sure that the number of data values produced by the system match with the
requirements.
Of particular importance is assuring the quality and reliability of the data provided to users
through the application of a variety of validation procedures and the flagging of suspect data.
The user must be informed of the quality of the data supplied and whether the values are
estimated or actually observed.
Once the system is fully functional, annual reports will be prepared to bring out the salient
characteristics of the hydrological regime of the region for each year or season. Consultants
have designed example year-books for both SW and GW, also including WQ. Special
reports are also envisaged as and when required for attracting the attention of the users
towards unusual events, major changes in the hydrological regime or to regularly
disseminate important revised long-term statistics.
Uniform data processing procedures have been introduced throughout, which are described
in detail in Volume 8 of the HIS Operation Manuals for Surface Water and Groundwater. The
manuals describe data entry, primary validation, secondary validation, final processing,
analysis and data management for all observations collected in the HIS.

To execute the procedures documented in the Manuals, comprehensive and user-friendly
software packages have been developed and implemented, viz for:
1 Hydro-meteorology and Surface Water:
• SWDES, for data entry and primary processing
• HYMOS, for full data processing, analysis and reporting activities
2 Groundwater:
• GWDES, for data entry and primary processing
A dedicated system (named GEMS) for groundwater data processing and analysis is in the
final stage of development and implementation.
The TA Team developed the dedicated softwares SWDES and GWDES. The HYMOS data
processing system is a product of WL|Delft Hydraulics and was tuned to the requirements in
India under the Hydrology Project. The software systems were well received and have found
large-scale application, following extensive training courses on software operation and the
background of procedures at various levels. Implementation of these systems has created
uniformity in data processing throughout the HIS, up to the highest standards. To ensure
sustainability, an annual maintenance contract will be signed for SWDES and HYMOS.
The groundwater data processing system GEMS, developed by M/s Tata Infotech, will
become available at a late stage in the Project (by March 2003). Hence, before the project
end a thorough introduction of the system to all relevant levels in the HIS is not possible. It is
anticipated that another two years will be required for debugging of the software and ongoing
support of the recipient agencies. A training programme forms part of the software contract.
This training has to be properly embedded in the training strategy developed under HP,
while a group of in-house trainers (ToTs) should be trained to sustain and support the large
group of potential users of GEMS.
Under the Project the participating GW agencies began to procure GIS data sets at 1:50,000
scale, ultimately to cover the entire project area. These GIS data sets include landuse and
land cover, geology, geomorphology, soil, transport network (road & rail), drainage network,
contour and spot elevation, and administrative boundaries upto block level and settlements.
For this procurement States signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with authorized
government agencies, including ORSAC (Orissa), KARSAC (Karnataka), MRSAC
(Maharashtra), Chhattisgarh Infotech Promotion Society (CHIPS, Chhattisgarh), Kerela State
Land use Board (Kerela), and Anna University (Tamil Nadu).
Training programmes for quality checking and quality assurance (QC/QA) and evaluation of
GIS data sets were conducted by the Consultant. The delivery of GIS data sets is still
ongoing and can not be completed before September 2003. The GIS data sets will be of
great value for the groundwater departments, a.o. for Groundwater Resource Assessments
with the GEMS system, while part of these data sets will also be used by the SW-DPCs.
2.7 Data exchange
Data processing activities are carried out at more than one level within each agency and this
makes it essential to have adequate data transport/communication links between them. The
requirement for communication is based on a low frequency and high volume of
communication. There is need for exchange of information between various agencies for the
purpose of data validation, as surface and groundwater networks are operated by different
state and central agencies. The data exchange procedures in the processing phases are

Government of India & Government of The Netherlands strengthen water management partnership

Government of India & Government of The Netherlands strengthen water management partnership

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Government of India & Government of The Netherlands strengthen water management partnership

Similar to Government of India & Government of The Netherlands strengthen water management partnership (20)

More from hydrologywebsite1

More from hydrologywebsite1 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Government of India & Government of The Netherlands strengthen water management partnership