1.

0 Citation: Iqbal, N., Rasheed, H., Imran, M., Hassan, F., Ashraf, M., (2019). Water Quality Assessment of Tehsil Pind Dadan Khan. Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources (PCRWR), pp. 41.

© All rights reserved by PCRWR. The authors encourage fair use of this material for non-commercial purposes with proper citation.

ISBN: 978-969-8469-70-2

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this booklet are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the institution.

Water Quality Assessment of Tehsil Pind Dadan Khan

Naveed Iqbal Hifza Rasheed Muhammad Imran Faizan-ul-Hassan Muhammad Ashraf

Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources (PCRWR)

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their deepest appreciation to all those who provided them the possibility to complete this report. The authors are highly indebted to all members of GIS/Geo-Hydrological Laboratory and National Water Quality Laboratory, PCRWR Islamabad for their scientific contributions. Sincere and warm gratitude is due to Ms. Saiqa Imran, Ms. Kiran Anwaar, Ms. Rahila Noureen, Ms. Rizwana Perveen, and Ms. Irum Gul for testing of all water samples. My thanks and appreciations go to Mr. Shafiq-ur-Rehman and Mr. Muhammad Asghar for analytical data quality control. The authors are also thankful to Mr. Sohail Anjum, Mr. Zeeshan Munawar and Mr. Qismatullah for data entry and composing the report.

i

ii Contents

Summary ...... vii

1. Introduction ...... 1

2. Study Area Characteristics ...... 2

3. Water Availability Challenges ...... 4

4. Methodology ...... 5 4.1 Groundwater Investigation ...... 5 4.1.1 Study Design ...... 5 4.1.2 Working Principle and Procedure of the Electrical Resistivity Technique ...... 7 4.1.3 Electrical Resistivity Survey Equipment ...... 10 4.1.4 Field Procedure ...... 10 4.2 Water Quality Assessment...... 11

5. Results and Discussions ...... 17 5.1 Groundwater Investigation ...... 17 5.1.1 Groundwater Quality vs. Water Table Depth ...... 18 5.2 Water Quality Assessment...... 22

6. The Way Forward...... 29

7. References ...... 34

iii List of Figures Figure 1: Map of district Jhelum ...... 3 Figure 2: Study design for establishment of VES and sampling ...... 6 Figure 3: Location of VES stations ...... 6 Figure 4: Resistivity survey ...... 9 Figure 5: Depth to water table measurement ...... 9 Figure 6: Water quality sampling from water supply scheme...... 13 Figure 7: Water quality sampling from tubewell ...... 13 Figure 8: Variation in depth to water table ...... 18 Figure 9: Groundwater quality at 15 m depth...... 19 Figure 10: Groundwater quality at 30 m depth) ...... 19 Figure 11: Groundwater quality at 50 m depth ...... 20 Figure 12: Groundwater quality at 70 m depth ...... 20 Figure 13: Groundwater quality at 100 m depth ...... 21 Figure 14: Groundwater quality at 150 m depth ...... 21 Figure 15: Excessive levels of water quality test parameters ...... 23 Figure 16: Unsafe TDS levels (i.e. >1000 mg/l) in monitored water sources ...... 24 Figure 17: GIS characterization of microbial contamination ...... 25 Figure 18: Spatial variation in arsenic concentration ...... 26 Figure 19: GIS characterization of microbial contamination in water supply schemes ...... 28 Figure 20: Reverse osmosis system ...... 30 Figure 21: A schematic showing single and multi-strainers skimming wells 31 Figure 22: A 4-strainers skimming well ...... 31 Figure 23: Generalized design of rooftop rainwater harvesting system ...... 32 Figure 24: Collection of hill run off water ...... 32 Figure 25: Chlorinators installed at two water supply schemes (Khewra and Gol Chowk Pind Dadan Khan city ...... 33

iv List of Tables Table 1: Water quality parameters and methods used for analysis ...... 14 Table 2: Water quality permissible limits for drinking water ...... 16 Table 3: Water quality criteria based on electrical conductivity ...... 17 Table 4: Descriptive statistics of major water quality test parameters ...... 22 Table 5: Descriptive statistics of main water quality test parameters ...... 27 Table 6: Water quality status of water supply schemes at source and at POU ...... 28

v

vi Summary

Provision of safe drinking water is a basic human right and is the responsibility of state. More than 90% of the drinking water comes from groundwater. However, various studies showed that more than 80% of water supplied to the people is contaminated and Pind Dadan Khan Tehsil of Jhelum has no exemption. Infact, this tehsil is facing both quantitative and qualitative issues. The quantitative and qualitative assessment of surface and groundwater resources is a first step towards providing safe drinking water to the masses.

Electrical resistivity surveys and water quality assessments were carried out by PCRWR teams for identification of availability of water and its quality. Vertical electrical soundings have been carried out at 82 selected points using resistivity meter and employing Schlumberger electrode arrangements. Water samples from these selected points were collected for physico-chemical and micro- biological analysis.

The study shows that fresh water supply in the study area is scarce and vulnerable in terms of its availability, quantity and quality. There is only a shallow and small fresh groundwater pocket existing near Jalalpur village, whereas the groundwater of the remaining tehsil is highly saline and unacceptable for drinking.

Total 57 water supply schemes were reported to be existing and out of these, 35 were found functional, while 21 schemes were non- functional or partially functional due to drying of water source, infrastructure problems or shortage of power supply.

vii The test results of all samples compared with Pakistan’s National Drinking Water Quality Standards show that 90% of the water sources are unsafe for drinking due to prevalence of bacteriological contamination, turbidity, higher salt levels, fluoride, and arsenic. A follow-up water quality assessment of water supply schemes at water source or at point of use also declared 91% of the 70 collected samples as unsafe for drinking due to microbial contamination, excessive turbidity, hardness, fluoride, chlorides, TDS and arsenic.

It is advised that maximum groundwater drilling depth of 50 m (150 ft) may be kept in the eastern part close to the River Jhelum starting from Jalalpur Sharif to Dhariala Jaalib. To help the local communities to overcome acute shortage of drinking water and unsafe water quality, integrated water quantity and quality management initiatives are recommended such as; installation of Reverse Osmosis (RO) plants, development of rainwater harvesting techniques, installation of skimming wells, supplying piped water from alternative safe water sources, disinfection of water sources and water storage bodies and regular water quality monitoring.

viii 2. Introduction

Safe and affordable water is a fundamental human right. After 18th amendment in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, provision of safe drinking water is the responsibility of the provinces. However, Pakistan Vision 2025 (GoP, 2013) sets a target to ensure clean drinking water to all Pakistanis by 2025. Similarly, Sustainable Development Goal SDG 6.1 exclusively focuses on providing safe drinking water to all by 2030.

The provinces are trying their best to provide safe water to their people. However, the studies conducted by Pakistan Council of Research in Water Resources (PCRWR) show that over 70% sources in the urban areas and over 80% drinking water sources in the rural areas are unsafe for human consumption. Out of 164 water supply schemes surveyed (2006-12) in district Jhelum, 101 were functional (62%). Out of these functional schemes, only 28% were supplying safe drinking water (see Annexure-I).

The main reasons for the low safe drinking water coverage are: improper identification of the sources, deferred maintenance of the water supply schemes, intermittent supply of water, rusted and leaked water supply lines, lack of proper treatment of raw water, lack of professional capacity in the design of water supply schemes and water treatments technologies etc.

The Pind Dadan Khan tehsil of district Jhelum is a classic example. Being at the foothills of the Salt range, most of its groundwater is saline. The drinking water to the local community is being provided

1 through installation of tubewells at the bank of River Jhelum and small springs originating from the Salt range. There is acute shortage of drinking water in the area.

This study therefore, was carried out: (i) to investigate the groundwater to find the freshwater pockets for the installation of tubewells (ii) to assess the quality of the drinking water being provide by the local authorities and (iii) to propose a viable plan to overcome the water quantity and quality issues.

3. Study Area Characteristics

The study was conducted in Pind Dadan Khan Tehsil of Jhelum district located at 32°35'16 N 73°2'44 E in the foothills of the Salt range on the bank of River Jhelum and nearby Khewra salt mines. The Salt Range is a strip of hill system between the valleys of the Indus and Jhelum rivers, located in the northern part of Punjab region and derived its name from one of the richest salt fields in the world. The range extends from Jhelum River to Indus across the northern portion of Punjab Province. This region is bounded by district Chakwal in the north, Khushab in the west, Bhalwal in the south and Mandi Bahauddin in the east. The most populated areas in the salt concentrated strip are Khewra, Pind Dadan Khan and Choa Saiden Shah (Figure-1).

2

Figure 1: Map of district Jhelum

Tehsil Pind Dadan Khan with population of over 0.7 million people is an administrative subdivision of Jhelum District and consists of 16 union councils, out of which 13 union councils are rural and 3 union councils are urban (PMSIP, 2011).

The climate of Salt Range is arid to semi-arid with average annual rainfall at Jhelum (close to tehsil Pind Dadan Khan) is 889 mm (Pakistan Meteorological Department, 1989-2010). Mining is a major activity in this region linked with salt range. In addition to the salt deposits mined from ancient times, the Salt Range contains coal, gypsum, and other minerals. Large deposits of high-grade gypsum

3 and anhydrite, an important calcium mineral, are found near Jalalpur. Economically, the salt and coal mines and limestone quarries are the most important.

4. Water Availability Challenges

The area is affected by heavy salinity and the condition is deteriorating overtime with the use of brackish groundwater. Mostly, groundwater is highly saline having Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) above 4000 mg/L except eastern region having some groundwater potential to be utilized through modern well designing techniques. Small areas on the slopes and in the longitudinal valleys are being terraced for irrigation using the water of lakes and springs but in the limited quantity.

The area lying between river Jhelum and Salt range is comprised of virgin land. The groundwater and discharge brought by hill torrents are saline, therefore irrigation is being practiced just on edge of river Jhelum, whilst remaining area of about 160,000 acres is deprived of any irrigation supply. Therefore, farmers are mainly practicing rainfed agriculture.

In tehsil Pind Dadan Khan, almost 90% of the total population is dependent on Public Health Engineering Department (PHED)’s water distribution system for drinking and other domestic purposes. PHED and Community Based Organizations (CBOs) are supplying water to the population through 60 water supply schemes which are not fully functional, whereas functional schemes are providing un-treated contaminated drinking water. The main sources of water on which

4 these schemes depend are Jhelum River, boreholes and natural springs.

5. Methodology

5.1 Groundwater Investigation The current survey was conducted for investigating subsurface layer properties and groundwater potential using resistivity technique viz. Vertical Electrical Sounding (VES). Since this method is appropriate for hydrogeological surveys in sedimentary rocks, the subsurface characterization was determined on the basis of change in resistivity values with depth. Range of specific resistivity value indicates the presence of certain rock mass characteristics.

5.1.1 Study Design

In total, 82 VES stations were conducted to investigate the subsurface geology and aquifer potentials by establishing a regular grid size of 3 x 3 km² (Figures 2 and 3) and using Schlumberger electrode configuration with maximum current electrode separation (A and B) of 600 m and depth of resistivity information up to 300 m.

5

Figure 2: Study design for establishment of VES and sampling

Figure 3: Location of VES stations

6 Information regarding depth to water level was also collected to understand the existing variations in water table level over the study area.

5.1.2 Working Principle and Procedure of the Electrical Resistivity Technique

The technique is based on Ohm’s Law wherein current is applied to the ground at two points and potential drop is measured at another couple of points. The resistivity (resistance per unit cube) calculated from these measurements is used to map the sub-surface geological formations and demarcate the freshwater aquifer. The resistivity of any formation is mainly dependent on two factors, viz. the porosity of the formation and the salinity of the solution held in the pores. Dry rocks are poor conductors.

In water bearing formations such as sand, sandstone or gravel/admixture, the current is carried entirely by the dissociated ions of the salt held in solution. Thus, the resistivity of the formation is not characteristics of the formation itself and any one formation may have a wide range of values, depending upon its nature and the quality of water, which is influenced by such factors as porosity and the amount of salts, held in solution. Considering these factors, it is possible to classify the resistivity of the formation in terms of its textural and lithological character.

For example, a particular formation with constant porosity will have different resistivity values depending on (a) its moisture, and (b) its salt content. The moisture content in a formation is directly proportional to the porosity of the formation, and hence, under given

7 conditions the resistivity indirectly may reflect porosity. There exists a sufficient resistivity contrast between sweet and saline water. This contrast provides the basis for use of the electrical resistivity survey technique to delineate the freshwater aquifers. Saline water conducts electric current more quickly, and its resistivity, therefore, falls sharply as compared with the geological formation holding sweet water; whereas sweet water conducts electric current in a smaller amount, given its increased value of resistivity. From the gradient of the resistivity field curve, the quality of water in the area can therefore by inferred easily.

When the medium is not homogenous, the observed values of resistivity are not in general the resistivity of any particular formation and hence instead of true resistivity (R), we get apparent resistivity

(Ra).

In conducting resistivity surveys, a commuted direct current is induced into the ground via two electrodes (A & B). The potential difference is measured between a second pair of electrodes (M & N). The four electrodes are arranged in any of several possible patterns. The current & potential measurements are then used to calculate apparent resistivity values. During the current study’s fieldwork Schlumberger electrode configuration was applied. This configuration is the most widely used in the world for conducting electrical resistivity survey. Four electrodes are placed along a straight line on the earth surface in the order of AM NB with AB  5 MN. The general setting of the potential and current electrodes and distribution of current as well as potential lines is shown in Figures 4 and 5.

8

Figure 4: Resistivity survey

Figure 5: Depth to water table measurement

9 5.1.3 Electrical Resistivity Survey Equipment Terameter SAS 4000 was used in the area to collect the field data. This instrument works on the basis of Ohm's laws using Equation 1 R V / I Equation (1)

The Equation-1 can be rewritten as:

R  K *V / I Equation (2) where:

R : Resistivity; Ohm-meter V : Voltage (potential drop) mili-Volt I : Current; mili-ampere K : Constant of proportionality

(AB/2 )2 -(MN/2)2  =  Equation (3) MN Where:

 : Constant i.e. 3.14159

AB: Spacing between the current electrode meter

MN: Spacing between potential electrode meter

5.1.4 Field Procedure

The Sounding “techniques” of expanding the electrode array about a fixed center was used to obtain quantitative information on the variation of resistivity with the depth. The Schlumberger configuration was preferred for logistical simplicity and because of its relative insensitivity to the lateral variations with the superficial deposits.

10 Current electrodes separation was increased from 2.0 to 160 meters in the ratio of 1:1.2. The potential dipole length varied between 0.5 and 20 m in three steps with overlapping of one point to define any consequent offset in the apparent resistivity values. The ABEM Terrameter SAS 4000 used for the survey transmits current pulses of alternating polarity to rescue electrode polarization to offset the naturally occurring currents and voltages within the ground. The voltage signal is measured after a short delay from the onset of the plus to allow time for transient effects, such as eddy currents, and induced polarization to decay. By integrating the response and averaging the results of successive measurements, the signal / noise ratio is further enhanced so that even with Schlumbergher array and relatively low currents the depth of investigation can exceed 100 m.

The field curves were interpreted through partial curve matching with the help of master curves and auxiliary point charts. From the preliminary interpretation, initial estimates of the resistivity and thickness of the various geo-electrical layers at each VES location were obtained. These geo-electrical resistivity curves were later used as starting model for PROGRESS software which produces thickness and resistivity values of each geo-electrical layer by using forward and inverse modeling methods.

5.2 Water Quality Assessment

Following the American Public Health Association Protocols (APHA, 2012) for sampling, laboratory testing and quality control, 82 water samples from each VES station were collected mostly from groundwater sources including springs, tube-wells and water supply

11 schemes. Accordingly, four types of samples were collected from each site, preserved and transported to National water Quality Laboratory. The details of these samples and preservative used for each sample are given below:

Type A – All sites – Pre-sterilized sampling bottles for microbiological analysis;

Type B – All sites – 2 ml/liter Nitric Acid (HNO3) as preservative for trace elements;

Type C – All sites – 1 ml/100 ml, 1 Molar Boric acid as preservative for Nitrate

Type D – All sites – No preservative for other water quality parameters.

Samples types B, C and D were collected for physico-chemical and microbiological analysis in polystyrene bottles of 0.5 litter capacities. Before collecting these samples bottles were washed properly and rinsed thoroughly several times with water. For microbial analysis, samples were collected in pre-sterilized bottles of 200 ml volume. Water samples (B, C and D) collected for chemical analysis were transported to laboratory without ice boxes, whereas samples type A were transported to the PCRWR water quality laboratory Islamabad under controlled temperature (2 and 8 oC) in the insulated ice boxes. Field blank and replicate samples1 for quality control purpose were also collected.

1 Field Blank is a blank solution (Deionized water) that is subjected to all aspects of sample collection, field processing, preservation, transportation, and laboratory handling as an environmental sample.

12

Figure 6: Water quality sampling from water supply scheme

Figure 7: Water quality sampling from tubewell

Ten sites were selected for replicate and were analyzed to evaluate the reproducibility of analytical results. Field observations and

13 information regarding each sample (such as sample types, sample ID, sample code given to the sample, GPS reading, date and time of sample collection, physical conditions like water table depth etc.) were recorded on the Sample Collection Proforma. Using American Public Health Association (APHA) standard methods (APHA, 2012) as listed in Table 1 all samples were analyzed for physico-chemical and bacteriological parameters.

Table 1: Water quality parameters and methods used for analysis Sr. Parameters Analysis Method No. 1 Alkalinity 2320, Standard method (2012) (mg/l as CaCO3) 2 Arsenic (ppb) AAS Vario 6, Analytik Jena AG (3111B APHA) 2012 3 Bicarbonate (mg/l) 2320, Standard method (2012) 4 Calcium (mg/l) 3500-Ca-D, Standard Method (2012) 5 Carbonate (mg/l) 2320, Standard method (2012) 6 Chloride (mg/l) Titration (Silver Nitrate), Standard Method (2012) 7 Conductivity (S/cm) E.C meter, Hach-44600-00, USA 8 Hardness (mg/l) EDTA Titration, Standard Method (2012) 9 Magnesium (mg/l) 2340-C, Standard Method (2012) 10 Nitrate as Nitrogen Cd. Reduction (Hach-8171) by (mg/l) Spectrophotometer 11 pH pH Meter, Hanna Instrument, Model 8519, Italy 12 Potassium (mg/l) Flame photometer PFP7, UK 13 Sodium (mg/l) Flame photometer PFP7, UK 14 Sulfate (mg/l) SulfaVer4 (Hach-8051) by Spectrophotometer 15 Phosphate (mg/l) 8190 and 8048 Colorimeters (HACH) 16 TDS (mg/l) 2540C, Standard method (2012) 17 Turbidity (NTU) Turbidity Meter, Lamotte, Model 2008, USA 18 Fluoride (mg/l) 4500-FC.ion-Selective Electrode Method Standard (2012) 19 Bacteriological PCRWR Qualitative field testing kit Contamination (presence/absence) (presence/absence)

14 All test results were compared with the permissible limits of National Drinking Water Quality Standards of Pakistan (Table 2) to evaluate the degree of fitness of water sources for drinking purpose.

Following this first monitoring of groundwater sources, water supply schemes in tehsil Pind Dadan Khan were also monitored. In total 57 schemes were reported to be existing and out of these, 35 were functional, whilst remaining 21 schemes were non-functional or partially functional due to drying of water source, infrastructure problems or shortage of power supply. From functional schemes, 70 samples from multiple sources such as tubewells (29), springs (04) and pond (01) were collected at source and at point of use (POU) and analysed for physico-chemical & microbiological parameters.

15 Table 2: Water quality permissible limits for drinking water Sr. Permissible Limits Parameter Units # WHO NSDWQ 1. Alkalinity mg/l NGVS NGVS 2. Bicarbonate mg/l NGVS NGVS 3. Calcium mg/l NGVS NGVS 4. Carbonate mg/l NGVS NGVS 5. Chloride mg/l 250 250 6. Colour TCU 15 Colorless 7. Conductivity µS/cm NGVS NGVS 8. Fluoride mg/l 1.5 1.5 9. Hardness mg/l NGVS 500 10 Iron mg/l 0.3 0.3 11. Magnesium mg/l NGVS NGVS 12. Odor - Odorless Unobjectionable 13. Nitrate-N mg/l 10 10 14. pH - 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 15. Potassium mg/l NGVS NGVS 16. Sodium mg/l 200 NGVS 17. Sulfate mg/l 250 NGVS 19. TDS mg/l 1000 1000 20. Turbidity NTU 5 <5 22. Arsenic µg/l 10 50 23. Total Coliforms CFU/100ml 0 0 24. E-Coli CFU/100ml 0 0

WHO World Health Organization, NSDWQ National Standards for Drinking Water Quality CFU: Colony Forming Unit NGVS: No Guideline Value Set, TCU: Total Color Units

16 6. Results and Discussions

6.1 Groundwater Investigation

A vertical electrical sounding method has been applied and the results were able to delineate different geo-electric sections which were correlated to determine their corresponding geological formations. The promising area was mapped based on the nature and properties that constitutes the aquifer layer and the overburden material and thickness. The study area was divided into four groundwater quality zones based on Electrical Conductivity (EC) as given in Table 3:

Table 3: Water quality criteria based on electrical conductivity Category EC Level (dS/m) Fresh quality <1.5 Marginal/slightly saline quality 1.51-2.50 Saline quality 2.51-4.0 Highly saline zone >4.0

Considering above listed categories, the groundwater investigation data was compared with respect to variation in water-table depths. Figure 8 shows that mostly the groundwater is shallow except some parts of the Lilla. Most of the groundwater is in the range of 3m to 12m. Some isolated pockets of waterlogging are also found.

17

Figure 8: Variation in depth to water table

6.1.1 Groundwater Quality vs. Water Table Depth

The lateral extent of groundwater quality to the depth of 15 m is depicted in Figure 9 The fresh groundwater with acceptable quality for drinking and irrigation exists mostly near the River Jhelum starting from Jalalpur Sharif to Dhariala Jaalib. The groundwater quality in the remaining area of Pind Dadan Khan is saline to highly saline having. The thickness of the freshwater pockets further reduces horizontally and vertically with increase in depth (Figures 10 to 14). Interestingly, groundwater along the bank of the River Jhelum is also highly saline. This has also been reported by Ashraf et al (2012).

18

Figure 9: Groundwater quality at 15 m depth.

Figure 10: Groundwater quality at 30 m depth)

19

Figure 11: Groundwater quality at 50 m depth

Figure 12: Groundwater quality at 70 m depth

20

Figure 13: Groundwater quality at 100 m depth

Figure 14: Groundwater quality at 150 m depth

21 From the software interpretation, the depth at the top of the existing aquifer in the study area is 8-10 m. Therefore, maximum groundwater drilling depth of 50 m (150 ft) is advised in the eastern part of tehsil Pind Dadan Khan near River Jhelum starting from Jalalpur Sharif to Dhariala Jaalib. However, site specific investigation will be required to ensure accurate litho-logging and related documentation. A down-hole geophysical logging of the drill hole will be more appropriate to enhance or facilitate well design and completion processes for optimization of resulting borehole yield.

6.2 Water Quality Assessment

In total, 82 water samples were collected from different water sources falling within each grid including hand pump (33), motor pump (4), Nullah, solar submersible, and tap (1 each), tubewells (13), structured water supply schemes (WSS) on surface or ground water (16), wells (07), and springs (03) for testing of various physico-chemical and microbiological parameters at PCRWR’s National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL), Islamabad. Descriptive Statistics of the major test parameters impacting the water quality is shown in Table 4:

Table 4: Descriptive statistics of major water quality test parameters Standard Test Parameter Unit Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation (SD) pH - 6 8 7 0.36 Turbidity mg/l 0 3060 61 339 Hardness mg/l 10 8000 1312 1344 TDS mg/l 174 23164 3852 5091 Chloride mg/l 0 13000 1702 2784 Nitrate mg/l 0 33 2 5.07 Fluoride mg/l 0 86 3 9.92 Arsenic µg/l 0 100 13 16.23

22 The test results of all samples compared with Pakistan’s NSDWQ (Table 2) revealed that 8 out of 82 samples (10%) were found safe for drinking, whereas remaining 74 (90%) samples were found unsafe. The most prevailing contaminants were bacteriological contamination, TDS, hardness, fluoride and turbidity (Figure 15). These results are similar to the technical assessment survey of water supply schemes conducted in 2011 by PCRWR, which also showed 72% of unsafe water supply at source and 90% at consumer’s end. The quality of the groundwater sources in the current study was found highly unacceptable due to excessive salt contents beyond 23000 mg/L possibly due to adjacent salt mining in the region.

Figure 15: Excessive levels of water quality test parameters

The source wise distribution pattern of unsafe TDS level (>1000 mg/L) showed the comparatively lower salt levels in springs (Figure 16).

23

Figure 16: Unsafe TDS levels (i.e. >1000 mg/l) in monitored water sources

In addition to higher TDS, the contaminants of potential public health concerns were bacteriological contamination (71% of the unsafe sources reflected as Figure 17), fluoride (45%), arsenic (5%) and nitrate (4%). The microbiological contamination may result in outbreaks of water related diseases like cholera, diarrhea, typhoid, hepatitis A & E. The water sources with acceptable TDS level such as below 1000 mg/L, but with higher fluoride, arsenic or nitrate levels require immediate remedial measures.

24

Figure 17: GIS characterization of microbial contamination

Excessive fluoride level in 45% of the water sources is another geological problem and consumption of such type of contaminated water may result in dental fluorosis, skeletal and crippling fluorosis. As shown in Figure 18, unsafe levels of arsenic in 4% of water sources (when compared with Pakistan’s safe limit of 50 mg/L) or in 43% of water sources (when compared with World Health Guideline value of 10 mg/L) if consumed through drinking or cooking or food preparation may result in long term health implications such as kidney diseases, heart disease, birth defects, black foot disease and various types of cancers.

25

Figure 18: Spatial variation in arsenic concentration

Nitrate is a form of nitrogen, an element whose compounds are vital components of foods and fertilizers and is also an essential nutrient for plant growth. Nitrate comes from many sources, such as plants and other organic matter that return nitrate to the soil as they decompose. Septic sewer systems, waste from animal feedlots, and nitrogen-based fertilizers also discharge nitrates to the groundwater. Consumption of water contaminated with higher levels of nitrate may cause methemoglobinemia, and have been cited as a risk factor in developing gastric or intestinal cancer (Yang et al., 1998). Compared to arsenic and fluoride, nitrate level was found unacceptable in only 3 groundwater sources.

26 The follow up water quality assessment of water supply schemes at source and at point of use (POU) in tehsil Pind Dadan Khan showed the descriptive statistics of the major test parameters impacting the water quality (see Table 5):

Table 5: Descriptive statistics of main water quality test parameters Standard Test Parameter Unit Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation (SD) EC uS/cm 262 4890 835 686 pH - 7 9 8 0 Turbidity mg/l 0 11 3 0 Hardness mg/l 110 700 276 149 TDS mg/l 144 2690 460 377 Chloride mg/l 12 930 77 127 Nitrate mg/l 1 5 1 1 Fluoride mg/l 0 3 1 1 Arsenic ug/l 0 100 21 22

Test results of samples collected at water source such as tubewells, springs and ponds revealed that 88% samples at source are unsafe due to microbial contamination (32%) as depicted in figure 19, turbidity (6%), hardness (9%), fluoride (6%), TDS (3%) and arsenic (65%). Whereas, test results of samples collected at point of use (POU) revealed 94% samples to be unsafe due to microbial contamination (69%), pH (3%), hardness (8%), chlorides (6%), fluoride (11%), TDS (8%) and arsenic (58%). Source wise and overall status of degree of fitness of water for drinking purpose is given at Table 6.

27

Figure 19: GIS characterization of microbial contamination in water supply schemes

Table 6: Water quality status of water supply schemes at source and at POU %age Cause of Source No. Unsafe Unsafe Contamination Tubewell 29 25 86% Microbial Spring 4 4 100% Contamination, Pond 1 1 100% Sub-total 34 30 88% Excessive Turbidity, Tap (POU) 36 34 94% Hardness, Fluoride, Chlorides, TDS and Total 70 64 91% Arsenic

28 A comparison of source vs. POU revealed 28 sources with no microbial contamination but showed contamination at POU indicating the cross contamination due to infrastructural problems related to water supply pipes or water storage tanks. Detailed results are given at Annexure-II.

7. The Way Forward To address the prevailing situation, integrated water quantity and quality management initiatives are proposed as below:

A. Installation of Reverse Osmosis (RO) units: ROs should be installed in the areas where groundwater is highly saline. Reverse Osmosis (RO) is a filtration technique used to remove ions and molecules from a solution by applying pressure to the solution on one side of a semipermeable or selective membrane. Reverse osmosis filter out salts, metals, organic contaminants, and pathogens. Installation of three to four RO units in tehsil Pind Dadan Khan on public-private partnership model is strongly recommended to convert saline water into sweet water.

B. A case study of Changa Pani in Bhalwal, District Sargodha is one of the best examples of public-private partnership model for long- term sustainability. Replicating the same model for the installation of RO plant in tehsil Pind Dadan Khan may help provide safe water to the community.

29

Figure 20: Reverse osmosis system

C. Exploitation of fresh groundwater resources through skimming well technology: Skimming well is a technique employed with an intention to extract relatively freshwater from the upper zone of the fresh-saline aquifer. The skimming wells (Figures 21 and 22) are low discharge cluster of wells drawing groundwater from relatively shallow depth. These are generally designed for irrigation or drinking water supply. The types of skimming wells include: the conventional single strainer well, multi-strainers wells, scavenger wells, radial collector wells and dug wells (Ashraf et al., 2012).

30

Figure 21: A schematic showing single and multi-strainers skimming wells

Figure 22: A 4-strainers skimming well

D. Application of Rainwater Harvesting Technique: The harvesting of rainwater simply involves the collection of water from surfaces on which rain falls, and subsequently storing this water for later use (Figure 23). Few examples are storage ponds, rooftop rainwater harvesting or storm water collection for groundwater recharge through inverted wells, soakaway, injection wells, etc.

31

Figure 23: Generalized design of rooftop rainwater harvesting system

Figure 24: Collection of hill run off water

Rainwater harvesting technique is generally utilized to harvest rainwater from roofs and other above surfaces to be stored for later

32 use. Harvesting of hill torrent water (Figure 23) is recommended in Pind Dadan Khan Tehsil for efficient utilization of runoff potential from the Salt range.

E. Construction of small dams: Exploitation of hill torrent runoff potential through construction of small dams and distribution of water by water supply lines after necessary treatment may help to overcome water shortage. Small dams storing hill torrent water, if used for agriculture, domestic and livestock may prove to be an effective tool for poverty alleviation.

F. Disinfection of Unsafe Water: Use of water purification and disinfection methods either at source-to-supply network or at household level is required. This also requires the need of diligent and effective water quality monitoring and purification by the local water supply agencies and local community to prevent potential health risks. PCRWR has installed two chlorinators (Figure 25).

Figure 25: Chlorinators installed at two water supply schemes (Khewra and Gol Chowk Pind Dadan Khan city

33 G. Installation of tile drainage system to drain the excess water to control waterlogging and salinity in the area.

H. Capacity building of professionals of local water supply agency for regular monitoring and disinfection (chlorination) of water supply is recommended.

8. References  Ashraf M., A. Z. Bhatti, Zakaullah. 2012. Diagnostic analysis and fine tuning of skimming well design and operational strategies for sustainable groundwater management - Indus basin of Pakistan. International Journal of Irrigation and Drainage 61: 270-282

 APHA, AWWA and WEF, D.E 2012. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation, 22nd Edition, Washington, DC.  Krishnamurthy, J. V., Kumar, N., Jayraman, V., & Manivel, M. (1996). An approach to demarcate groundwater potential zones through remote sensing and a geographical information system. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 7(12), 1867– 1884.  LaMoreaux, P. E. B. M. Wilson, B. A. Memon, eds., 1984, Guide to the hydrology of carbonate rocks: UNESCO, 354 p.  Punjab Municipal Services Improvement Project (PMSIP), 2011. Tehsil Pind Dadan Khan.  Yang, C.Y., Cheng, M.F., Tsai, S.S. and Hsieh, Y.L., 1998. Calcium, magnesium, and nitrate in drinking water and gastric cancer mortality. Japanese Journal of Cancer Research, 89(2), pp.124-130.

34 Annexure-I

Findings of PCRWR technical assessment survey of water supply schemes (2012)

Table-1.1: Functional and non-functional status of water supply schemes in district Jhelum

Water Supply Population Functional Schemes Non-Functional Schemes Schemes of Permane temporary Tehsil Population %of Temporary Total ntly Closed Tehsil Surveyed No % served population Closed Closed Schemes (000) served No. % No. % No. % (in 000) Sohawa 64 64 21 33 40.65 4 43 67 35 81 8 19 69.50 Pind Dadan 49 49 45 92 340.40 47 4 8 3 75 1 25 24.00 Khan Dina 27 27 19 70 74.80 10 8 30 4 50 4 50 13.00 Jhelum 24 24 16 67 284.50 39 8 33 8 100 0 0 16.50 District 164 164 101 62 740.35 100 63 38 50 79 13 21 123.00 Total

Table-1.2: Source of water supply in district Jhelum Number of Schemes by Population Served Source of Water Supply Schemes (000) Functional Surface Tehsil Groundwater Groundwater Surface WSS Water Water Total Wells Spring Wells Spring No. % No. % No. % Pop % Pop % Pop % Sohawa 21 20 95 1 5 0 0 39.7 98 1.0 2 0 0 40.70 Pind Dadan 45 41 91 4 9 0 0 320.1 94 20.3 6 0 0 340.40 Khan Dina 19 18 95 0 0 1 5 70.8 95 0.0 0 4.0 5 74.80 Jhelum 16 15 94 0 0 1 6 283.5 100 0.0 0 1.0 0.4 284.50 District 101 94 93 5 5 2 2 714.1 96 21.3 3 5.0 1 740.40 Total

35 Table-1.3: Availability of water treatment facilities in district Jhelum Functional No Tehsil Water Supply Chlorination Others* Treatment Schemes Sohawa 21 13 0 8 Pind Dadan 45 45 0 0 Khan Dina 19 8 11 0 Jhelum 16 11 3 2 District 101 77 14 10 Total * Others include bleaching powder, potassium permanganate

Table-1.4: Quality of water at source in district Jhelum Functional Unsafe Major Causes Total Safe for Water for of Tehsil Samples Drinking Supply Drinking Contamination Collected Schemes No. % No. % biological, Sohawa 21 22 2 9 20 91 turbidity, nitrate, iron Pind biological, Dadan 45 49 19 39 30 61 turbidity, TDS, Khan hardness, iron biological, turbidity, TDS, Dina 19 21 2 10 19 90 hardness, nitrate, iron biological, Jhelum 16 28 11 39 17 61 turbidity, iron District 101 120 34 28 86 72 - Total

36 Table-1.5: Water quality at source in district Jhelum Functional Unsafe Total Safe for Major Causes Water for Tehsil Samples Drinking of Supply Drinking Collected Contamination Schemes No. % No. % biological, Sohawa 21 22 2 9 20 91 turbidity, nitrate, iron Pind biological, Dadan 45 49 19 39 30 61 turbidity, TDS, Khan hardness, iron biological, turbidity, TDS, Dina 19 21 2 10 19 90 hardness, nitrate, iron biological, Jhelum 16 28 11 39 17 61 turbidity, iron District 101 120 34 28 86 72 - Total

Table-1.6: Water quality at consumer’s end in district Jhelum Functional Unsafe Total Safe for Major Causes Water for Tehsil Samples Drinking of Supply Drinking Collected Contamination Schemes No. % No. % biological, Sohawa 21 41 2 5 39 95 turbidity, nitrate, iron Pind biological, Dadan 45 92 2 2 90 98 turbidity, TDS, Khan hardness, iron biological, turbidity, TDS, Dina 19 31 5 16 26 84 hardness, nitrate, iron biological, Jhelum 16 30 10 33 20 67 turbidity, iron District 101 194 19 10 175 90 - Total

37 Annexure-II

Water quality assessment of water supply schemes in Tehsil Pind Dadan Khan (September, 2019)

Nature NO Total Sr# Location of Site ID EC pH Turbid Ca Hard Mg HCO Cl K Na 3 SO TDS Arsenic F Remarks 3 (N) 4 Coliform Source 6.5- 500 250 10 1000 1.50 Permissible limit NSDWQ NGVS 5 NTU NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS 10 ppb Negative Safe/Unsafe 8.5 ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm Jalapur, PD 1 Tubewell Source 732 7.8 1.11 52 200 17 270 26 4.50 82 BDL 73 403 2.14 0.21 Negative Safe Khan

Jalapur, PD 2 Tap consumer 755 7.8 2.50 52 210 19 290 28 4.50 82 BDL 73 415 2.15 0.14 Negative Safe Khan

Nagial,PD 3 Tubewell Source 860 7.9 2.17 56 190 12 200 100 2.40 120 1 93 473 5.20 0.43 Positive Unsafe khan

Nagial,PD 4 Tap consumer 874 8.9 2.08 52 190 17 210 108 2.50 122 1 80 481 5.15 0.42 Positive Unsafe khan

wagh- PD 5 Tubewell Source 874 7.9 2.20 44 200 19 210 108 2.40 122 1 80 481 0.00 0.45 Positive Unsafe khan

wagh- PD 6 Tap consumer 892 8.3 2.37 48 210 22 230 112 2.40 130 1 72 491 0.10 0.42 Positive Unsafe khan

Pipli PD 7 Tubewell Source 976 7.5 4.75 84 310 54 250 50 3.80 84 BDL 180 537 10.20 0.47 Negative Unsafe khan

Pipli PD 8 Tap consumer 1951 7.9 4.78 96 450 51 330 120 7.30 260 BDL 518 1073 1.23 0.51 Positive Unsafe khan

Thill PD 9 Tubewell Source 1058 7.9 4.80 40 200 24 360 72 7.10 170 BDL 125 582 5.10 1.30 Negative Safe kan

Thill PD 10 Tap consumer 1129 8.0 3.09 44 210 24 380 72 7.10 170 BDL 120 620 4.45 1.38 Positive Unsafe kan

Ghoura Pd 11 Tubewell Source 1052 7.8 2.95 40 180 19 400 72 7.40 170 BDL 77 578 3.38 1.75 Negative Unsafe khan

Ghoura Pd 12 Tap consumer 1057 8.3 2.90 40 200 24 400 72 7.10 170 BDL 80 581 0.29 1.83 Negative Unsafe khan

13 Chak shadi Tubewell Source 275 7.9 3.16 36 110 5 120 14 1.30 13 BDL 24 162 28.60 0.30 Positive Unsafe

14 Chak shadi Tap consumer 300 7.8 2.91 40 110 5 110 12 1.60 15 BDL 28 165 22.42 0.41 Positive Unsafe

38 Nature NO Total Sr# Location of Site ID EC pH Turbid Ca Hard Mg HCO Cl K Na 3 SO TDS Arsenic F Remarks 3 (N) 4 Coliform Source 6.5- 500 250 10 1000 1.50 Permissible limit NSDWQ NGVS 5 NTU NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS 10 ppb Negative Safe/Unsafe 8.5 ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm Karyala 15 Tubewell Source 408 7.9 2.93 48 190 17 160 12 1.70 14 BDL 29 225 25.20 0.27 Positive Unsafe Jalip

Karyala 16 Tap consumer 426 7.8 2.99 48 200 20 170 12 1.80 14 BDL 32 235 20.15 0.28 Positive Unsafe Jalip

Chak 17 Tubewell Source 500 7.5 4.54 60 220 17 220 12 2.00 21 BDL 32 275 40.25 0.32 Negative Unsafe Mujahid

Chak 18 Tap consumer 495 7.5 3.47 56 200 15 210 13 2.00 20 BDL 32 273 28.19 0.22 Positive Unsafe Mujahid

19 Khoutian Tubewell Source 1659 7.6 1.20 120 600 73 350 210 3.80 102 BDL 202 912 20.23 0.31 Negative Unsafe

20 Khoutian Tap consumer 1470 7.5 1.70 100 470 53 290 200 4.00 102 BDL 171 809 15.25 0.33 Positive Unsafe

Dharyala 21 Tubewell Source 699 8.0 0.90 48 190 17 210 36 2.70 72 BDL 102 384 18.51 0.33 Negative Unsafe Jalip

Dharyala 22 Tap consumer 804 7.8 3.01 80 280 19 290 24 2.60 68 BDL 95 442 17.69 0.28 Negative Unsafe Jalip

Nawan 23 Tubewell Source 494 7.6 4.86 44 200 22 160 36 1.90 26 BDL 62 272 28.30 0.20 Positive Unsafe Louk

Nawan 24 Tap consumer 577 7.8 2.67 48 220 24 190 26 2.00 28 BDL 90 317 26.10 0.25 Positive Unsafe Louk

Chak Ali 25 Tubewell Source 577 7.7 3.92 44 220 28 200 16 2.00 42 BDL 82 317 40.59 0.22 Negative Unsafe shah

Chak Ali 26 Tap consumer 573 8.0 2.66 56 210 24 190 20 2.20 50 BDL 81 315 39.15 0.31 Positive Unsafe shah

Chak 27 Tubewell Source 2500 8.1 2.02 148 700 80 440 204 4.40 240 BDL 472 1375 25.20 0.93 Negative Unsafe Hameed

Chak 28 Tap consumer 2250 7.8 0.84 144 680 78 180 370 4.60 180 BDL 393 1237 21.10 0.29 Negative Unsafe Hameed

Sodhi 29 Tubewell Source 271 8.3 1.18 36 130 10 110 12 2.30 7 BDL 17 149 3.21 0.29 Negative Safe Gujjar

Sodhi 30 Tap consumer 278 8.2 1.25 36 140 12 110 16 2.10 7 BDL 18 153 2.25 0.19 Positive Unsafe Gujjar

31 Kaslian Tubewell Source 272 8.0 1.07 40 120 5 100 16 2.00 6 BDL 21 150 10.00 0.22 Negative Safe

32 Kaslian Tap consumer 262 8.1 1.13 36 110 5 160 14 2.00 7 BDL 18 144 9.11 0.09 Negative Safe

39 Nature NO Total Sr# Location of Site ID EC pH Turbid Ca Hard Mg HCO Cl K Na 3 SO TDS Arsenic F Remarks 3 (N) 4 Coliform Source 6.5- 500 250 10 1000 1.50 Permissible limit NSDWQ NGVS 5 NTU NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS 10 ppb Negative Safe/Unsafe 8.5 ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm Dhudhi 33 Tubewell Source 564 7.6 2.57 76 280 22 270 20 2.00 12 BDL 35 310 50.25 0.19 Negative Unsafe Phuphra

Dhudhi 34 Tap consumer 398 8.2 2.40 40 200 17 150 26 4.10 19 BDL 20 219 42.50 0.28 Negative Unsafe Phuphra

Wara 35 Tubewell Source 360 7.9 2.76 40 170 17 160 12 1.40 11 BDL 26 198 100.00 0.22 Negative Unsafe Phuphra

Wara 36 Tap consumer 380 7.7 1.50 52 180 12 170 14 1.80 13 BDL 27 209 35.70 0.12 Positive Unsafe Phuphra

37 Samanwala Tubewell Source 441 8.1 2.48 40 200 24 210 12 3.00 19 BDL 29 243 28.15 0.26 Negative Unsafe

38 Samanwala Tap consumer 453 8.2 2.85 44 200 22 210 12 3.40 23 BDL 25 249 25.20 0.25 Negative Unsafe

39 Jutana Spring Source 928 7.9 1.40 120 500 49 380 24 5.30 18 BDL 135 510 0.00 0.55 Positive Unsafe

40 Jutana Tap consumer 4890 7.6 2.35 148 640 66 600 930 21.00 698 5 297 2690 0.00 0.76 Positive Unsafe

41 Rawal Spring Source 783 8.1 2.57 80 300 24 280 24 7.00 38 BDL 97 431 1.10 0.70 Positive Unsafe

42 Rawal Tap consumer 819 8.3 3.05 84 310 24 270 36 7.30 39 BDL 99 450 0.31 0.56 Positive Unsafe

43 Baghwala Spring Source 890 8.2 3.14 92 330 24 280 36 6.30 56 BDL 132 490 3.21 0.84 Positive Unsafe

44 Baghwala Tap consumer 899 8.1 2.35 96 340 24 290 36 8.50 60 BDL 136 494 3.20 0.89 Positive Unsafe

45 Noon wala Tubewell Source 294 8.2 1.75 32 140 15 130 12 1.60 7 BDL 23 162 15.10 0.12 Negative Unsafe

46 Noon wala Tap consumer 302 8.0 2.92 32 140 15 140 12 1.50 7 BDL 14 166 12.14 0.06 Negative Unsafe

47 Haran Pur Tubewell Source 306 7.8 2.74 32 140 15 140 12 1.70 8 BDL 20 168 25.21 0.21 Negative Unsafe

48 Haran Pur Tap consumer 293 8.3 2.48 32 140 15 120 48 2.40 9 BDL 22 161 22.19 0.20 Positive Unsafe

49 Usman Kot Tubewell Source 295 8.0 3.56 36 140 12 130 12 1.70 7 BDL 24 162 50.11 0.06 Negative Unsafe

50 Usman Kot Tap consumer 278 8.0 3.31 32 140 15 120 12 1.50 7 BDL 21 153 32.65 0.19 Positive Unsafe

51 Qammar Tubewell Source 313 7.9 2.73 40 150 12 130 12 1.60 8 1 27 172 50.00 0.06 Negative Unsafe

52 Qammar Tap consumer 279 7.5 2.35 36 130 10 110 16 1.40 7 BDL 24 153 45.31 0.21 Negative Unsafe

Mandi 53 Tubewell Source 433 7.9 2.21 44 220 27 230 12 1.80 11 BDL 15 238 12.00 0.17 Negative Unsafe Siddique

Mandi 54 Tap consumer 415 7.9 0.30 44 200 22 180 18 1.90 11 BDL 26 228 10.10 0.21 Negative Unsafe Siddique

40 Nature NO Total Sr# Location of Site ID EC pH Turbid Ca Hard Mg HCO Cl K Na 3 SO TDS Arsenic F Remarks 3 (N) 4 Coliform Source 6.5- 500 250 10 1000 1.50 Permissible limit NSDWQ NGVS 5 NTU NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS NGVS 10 ppb Negative Safe/Unsafe 8.5 ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm 55 Hattar Tubewell Source 815 7.7 3.68 80 320 29 230 82 2.30 38 BDL 79 448 12.15 0.20 Negative Unsafe

56 Hattar Tap consumer 816 8.1 2.20 80 320 29 230 90 2.50 42 1 73 449 12.10 0.10 Positive Unsafe

57 Shaotra Tubewell Source 1316 8.1 10.59 124 460 36 230 190 2.80 80 1 170 724 100.20 0.22 Negative Unsafe

58 Shaotra Tap consumer 1324 7.9 3.86 128 470 36 200 220 2.80 80 1 138 728 80.45 0.38 Positive Unsafe

59 Golpur Tubewell Source 633 7.9 2.29 56 280 34 200 60 2.00 25 BDL 35 348 50.78 0.28 Positive Unsafe

60 Golpur Tap consumer 568 8.1 4.03 52 250 29 180 80 2.00 23 BDL 34 312 45.80 0.25 Positive Unsafe

61 Spring Source 816 8.3 7.24 76 300 27 320 24 7.50 42 1 40 449 1.00 1.85 Positive Unsafe

62 Lillah Tap consumer 749 8.3 3.12 74 290 26 300 26 2.40 48 BDL 79 412 1.00 2.54 Positive Unsafe

63 Bhilowal Tap consumer 858 8.3 3.87 74 290 29 300 36 2.30 49 BDL 109 472 3.25 2.82 Positive Unsafe

64 Touba Tap consumer 815 8.2 3.84 80 300 24 310 26 3.90 49 BDL 74 448 0.79 2.56 Positive Unsafe

TMA Pind 65 Dadan Tubewell Source 620 7.8 3.32 68 260 22 150 72 2.10 27 BDL 63 341 25.40 0.06 Negative Unsafe khan

TMA Pind 66 Dadan Tap consumer 1221 7.8 2.41 112 450 41 200 204 3.20 68 BDL 137 672 24.20 0.35 Positive Unsafe khan

67 Khawra Tubewell Source 1290 7.9 2.28 118 480 45 200 210 2.40 66 BDL 160 710 23.10 0.36 Negative Unsafe

68 Khawra Tap consumer 1293 7.9 4.97 110 480 50 190 220 2.70 65 BDL 170 711 23.00 0.21 Negative Unsafe

TMA 69 Pond Source 1662 8.0 2.57 120 620 78 250 82 3.80 102 2 450 914 0.69 0.97 Positive Unsafe Khawra

TMA 70 Tap consumer 1370 8.0 4.84 110 540 64 180 220 3.00 76 BDL 290 754 0.00 0.52 Positive Unsafe Khawra Min. 262 7.5 0.30 32 110 5 100 12 1.30 6 1 14 144 0.00 0

Avg. 835 7.9 2.90 66 276 27 227 77 3.48 67 1 99 460 20.70 0.52

Max. 4890 8.9 10.59 148 700 80 600 930 21.00 698 5 518 2690 100.20 2.82

StDev 686 0.3 1.51 33 149 18 93 127 2.84 96 1 108 377 21.86 0.60

41