Int. J. Econ. Environ. Geol. Vol.

Khurram
13 (2) 67-73, 2022
et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022 Open Access
Journal home page: www.econ-environ-geol.org ISSN: 2223-957X
c

Seismic Hazardand Spectral Acceleration For Hydro Power Project in Gilgit Baltistan
Pakistan
Shahzada Khurram,*1 Perveiz Khalid,1 Muhammad Irfan Ehsan,1 Shahbaz Muhammad2
1
Institute of Geology, University of the Punjab, Lahore. Pakistan
2
Geological Survey of Pakistan, Lahore, Pakistan

* Email: [email protected]

Received: 02June, 2022 Accepted: 07 July, 2022

Abstract: Peak ground acceleration is the maximum ground shaking intensity parameter in geophysics. To prevent the
big loss of infrastructure, dam site or multistorey buildings as well as power project due to any seismic hazard, it is
essential to mitigate the damages. Seismic hazard analysis for peak ground acceleration was carried out for hydropower
project in Gilgit Baltistan to mitigate the effect of seismic hazard. Seismicity and tectonic map was drawn for distribution
of seismic events.Study region was divided into seven source zones to rectify the seismic risk reduction assessmement
of the region. Regression analysis for freqeuncy magnitude was also carried out using seismicity catalogue. Three distinct
ground motion equations were used to predict the value of g with their return period. The actitvity rate analysis of seismic
source zones was also done drawn to determine the source contribution. Maximum credible earhquake, operational based
earthquake and maximum design earthquake were detremined. According to the ICOLD and seismic risk reduction
policy, the values of peak ground acceleration for Phandar hydro power project was 0.59g for maximum credible
earthquake, for design basis earthquake g value was 0.311g for and 0.231g foroperational basis earthquake with 475 years
of return period at 50% probability of exceedence. Spectral acceleration for 0.1s, 0.2s, 0.5s, 1s and 2s was also computed
for horizontal and vertical components. The values of spectral accleeration varied from 0.19g to 1.250g for maximum
credible earthquake, 0.019g to 0.700g for design based earthquake and 0.050g to 0.480g for operational based earthquake.
The results reveal that the maximum credible earthquake is to ensure safety level and for reliability level, operational
based and design based earthquakes can be utilized.

Keywords: Peak ground acceleration, annual rate of exceedence, rate of activity, design operational and credible
earthquakes, response spectra.

Introduction proposed project aims to provid the power of 80 MW to

local areas of Gilgit and adjoining valleys to mitigate
During last two decades Pakistan facing terrible the prevailing high cost of supply, and to meet the local
earthquake and rate of seismicity has increased due to demand of the area (WAPDA Report, 2012). Peak
global warming and earth inside temperature (Usman ground acceleration is an imprtant tool to compute the
and Zafar, 2010). Many large earthquake have occured value of maximum ground shaking at site that is
in the Pakistan region over the last 100 years having associated with uncertainty in time and space(Rehman
magnitude 7. Three disastrous earthquakes with et al., 2012 ; Rafi et al., 2011).There are two methods
magnitude more than 7.0 included Quetta earthquake in to attain the g value for any site analysis, first is
1935, Makran coast earthquake 1945 and Kashmir- deterministic seismic hazard analysis (DSHA) and 2nd is
Hazara earthquake in 2005. Ground shaking is the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) (Khalid et
significant threat to the human lives which requires al., 2002). PSHA is the well known method for hazard
earthquake resistant structures to prevent and mitigate assessment among all other approaches, firstly
the loss (Khalid et al., 2016 ; Khurram et al, 2021). The described by Cornell(1968). Seismic hazard analysis
parameters of maximum ground motion such as strike, (SHA) utilized the earthquake science and statistics
dip and rake angle as well as tectonics and geology, and directly, and provides a signifcant value of peak ground
rock formation factors arethe mian features for acceleration (PGA) that can be readily used for
construction of dam, hydro power plant or any other earthquake resistant design structure. Therefore, careful
large sturtcure. Earthqauke and structural engineering seismic hazard analysis involves the quantitative and
are the main branches, which pah dominant role in the qualitative estimation of ground shaking for
study of earthquake resistant design structures hydropower projects proposed in seismically active
(Khurram and Khalid, 2021 ; Sarfraz et al., region. Phandar hydor power project has important role
2018).Pakistan has three large dams and many hydro in the progress of Pakistan. So it is necessary before
power plants, which are very useful to overcome the construction to find out maximum ground shaking value
shortage of water and electricity in Pakistan. Phandar in the term of PGA.
lake project of hydro power provides the electricity for
local area. The Phandar power proejct lies at 36° 10' The earthquake soucre parameters such as strong
05.8'' N and 72° 57' 50.84'' E about 165 km northwest ground motion, risk map and seismic hazard analysis
of Gilgit on Ghizar river in Gilgit-Baltistan area. The have a key role to assess the significance of the PGA

67 Copyright © SEGMITE
 Khurram et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022

(Bilham et al., 2001; Bilham, 2006). Historical and still continues. It has resulted in the formation of
instrumental seismicity catalogues are important to Himalayan Range(Condie, 1989). Tirich Mir fault along
explain the behavior of PGA (Kumar et al., 2006; eastern Hinudkush region has been formed during early
Khurram and Khalid, 2021; Khan et al., 2021). Cretaceous period Karakoram terrain (Zanchi et al.,
2000; Hildebrand et al., 2001), and intra-oceanic
The objective of this study is to find the value of g Kohistan arc formed over a subduction (Khan et al.,
according to the guidelines gien by ICOLD 1997). A sandwich had been made in the Kohistan is an
specifications for hydro power project. The famouse
Basha dam is also located in the Gilgit Baltistan region intra-oceanic island arc between MMT to the south and
Khurram et al. (2021) has obtained the value of peak the MKT in the north. Gravity data modeling indicates
ground acceleration of Dia Mir Basha dam that the MMT and MKT dip northward at 35° to 50° and
determinitically and probabilistically. Norsar Report the thickness of Kohistan Isalnd arc varied from 8 to 10
(2017) has been prepared for seismic zonation and km (Malinconico, 1989). Instrumental data of storng
seismic hazard assessment of Azad Kashmir in groundmotion and gravity modelling reccomended that
collaboration with Pakistan Meterological department
this arc is underlain by the Indian crustal plate (Seeber
(PMD) and Norway. They have drawn the hazard curves
of different region of Pakistan at different return period, and Armbuster, 1979;Fineti et al., 1979). This region
correlatrion between their focal depth, magnitude comprises the mountain ranges of Nanga Parbat,
according to the freqeuncy magnitude relation. Waseem Hazara, Southern Kohistan, Swat, Margalla, Kalachitta,
et al. (2018) also explained the seismic hazard Kohat, Potwar and Salt Range (Quittmeyer et al.,
assessment of northern Pakistan, and also obtained the (1979).
g value with response spectral acceleration.
Pivnik & Wells, 1993 described that the subduction of
Indian plate beneath the Eurasian plate has generated
many tectonic features such as Main Karakoram Thrust
(MKT), Main Mantle Thrust (MMT), Main Boundary
Thrust (MBT), Main Central Thrust (MCT) and Salt
Range Thrust (SRT) (Fig. 2).

Structurally MMT is characterized by a number of

northwest dipping high angle thrusts, which converge
together in the east and terminate at Raikot Fault (Kazmi
and Jan, 1997). Many other shear stresses associated
with MMT and near Bunji and Chilas together to join
Raikot fault.The main historical large earthquake ‘Patan
Fig. 1 Pakistan altitude map showing the geographic location (plus
earthquake’ December 28, 1974 with Mw 6.2 was
sign) of Phandar hydro power project. associated with MMT.Seismicity and geological setting
ofPanjal fault nearby MMT has active regional tectonic
Regional Tectonic Framework feature capable of generating large earthquakes
(Ghzanfar and Chaudry, 1996).
Phandar hyrdo power project lies in northern Pakistan
which is sitauted in the centre of Kohistan Island Aarc
(KIA). Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) and Main
Korakorum thrust (MKT) are two main tectonic features
including Nanga Parbat Haramosh syntaxial bend are
included in this region. The incrseasing rate of seismicity
have been recorded for three decades along the MBT and
other associated thrusts. Seeber et al. (1980) described
that great earthquakes have occured along Himalayan
Arc. Based on the above, MBT considered as an active
thrust having more seismic potential which is sufficient
enough to generate large earthquakes (Seeber and
Armbuster, 1979).

Regional geodynamic framework of the Phandar

Hydropower Project (PHP)area is characterized by Fig. 2 Tectonicframework of northern Pakistan (modified after
Pivnik, and Wells., 1999).
collision of Eurasian and Indian continental plates.This
collisionbegan in late Eocene to early Oligocene, and Materials and Methods

68
 Khurram et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022

Probilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) is used to (70.61, 38.13) (73, 38.13) (73, 36.70) (70.61, 36.70)
determine the peak ground acceleration, specifically for Zone - 2
dam site assessment, hydro project. This procedures can (73, 38.13) (75.39, 38.13) (75.39, 36.70) (73, 36.70)
also be used to identify the uncertinities during hazard Zone - 3
assessment. The PSHA method based on four basic (70.61, 36.70) (73.13, 36.70) (73.13, 35.30) (70.61,
steps that can be easily approcahed. The first step, 35.30)
identification and characterisation of earthquake Zone - 4
sources, same as in deterministic hazard assessment (73.13, 36.70) (75.39, 36.70) (75.39, 35.85) (75,
(DSHA).2nd step is, toassign the seismicity to each zone, 36.04) (73.13, 36.04)
probability distributions was carriedout such that Zone - 5
earthquakes are not occurhomogenously within all (73.13, 36.04) (75, 36.04) (75.39, 35.85) (75.39,
source zone. The seismicity or temporal distribution of 34.40) (73.45, 34.87) (73.13, 34.85)
earthquake recurrence must be characterised. 3rd one is Zone - 6
recurrence relation for accumulative numbers of (70.61, 35.30) (73.13, 35.30) (73.13, 34.27) (70.61,
earthquakeusing freqeucny magnitude relation famous 34.27)
as Gutenberg Richter Law (1956a) and their rate of Zone - 7
productivity ‘a’ and slope of region ‘b’ value mentioned (73.13, 34.85) (73.45, 34.87) (75.39, 34.40) (75.39,
in Eq. (1). 34.27) (73.13, 34.27)
Log N (m) = a – b*M w 1 Results and Discussion
Where N = cumulative numbers of earthquake per year
,Mw = moment magnitude, The earthquake catalogue Prepared a composite earthquake catalogue included
was utilized as instrumental seismicity for the period stduy region which contained epicentral locations,
from 1960 to 2020 was used to determine freqeucny depth, magnitude, time and source.The spatial division
magnitude relation parameters. All the seismic events of this region divided into seven source zones on the
having M w < 3.5 were not considered for site analysis. basis of seismicity distribution and their tectonic
The last one is ground motion attenuation equation activity in study region (Fig. 3). Zone 1 and zone 3 lie
(GMPEq) proposed by different researchers (Douglas, in the intense seismic activity, whereas zone 2 and zone
2011; 2021). The earthquake catalogue consists the 4 are less around the project location. Phandar hydro
epicentral location, earthquake size, and ground motion project lies in zone 3 which is tectonically active having
parameter prediction which were combined to obtain the higher seismicity rate. Zone 5, zone 6 and zone 7 are
probability estimation for specific time period.There are less active as compared to zone 3. Their seismic activity
some uncertainties mentioned below which make the is almost similar. This project lies in earthquake prone
probabilistic analysis more reliable according to site region (Fig. 2). Main Mantle thrust and Main
parameters namely attenuation law and reccurence Karakorum thrust passess beneath this project.
relation. Therefore, due to these two thrust zones, project is at
high risk on Ghizer river in Gilgit Baltistan. This zones
For the PSHA, EZFRISK computer based program was vise speration of the whole is the easy way to identitfy
used to identify the values of PGA for site analysis in the study region vulnerability with respect to
the term of hazard curve after utilizing the three earthquake.
different new generation attenuation (NGA) ground
motion prediction equations (GMPEqs), Three ground
motion Prediction equations namely,Cambell and
Bozorginia 2008 (NGA) and Boore-Joyner-Fumal1997
and Idriss 2008 (NGA) for PGA. These equation based
on rock formations parameters and rock quality factor.
First, we divide the study region into 7 seimic source
zones and prepared a significant earthquake catalogue
specific for the study region. These zones are based on
seismictectonic features. A working radius of about 200
km around the site was choosed as per the ionstruction
and reccoemndation of the dam or hydro powe project
construction given in ICOLD (2007) guidlines.. The
following zones were charaterised in the form of
polygon bounded by their region. For Phandar
Hydropower Project, the global position of hydro power
project at N: 36° 10' 05. 87", E: 72° 57' 50.84" is taken
as reference site. Seven zones have been made for PGA
assessment presented given below:
Zone - 1 Fig. 3 Seismicity distribution over the seven seismic source zones.

69
 Khurram et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022

The seismicity distritbution map with respect to moment Zones / EQs Min. Magnitude Activity b β Magnitude
magitude can be seen in Fig. 4 using ZMAP program Magnitude (Mw) Min Rate (a) Value Value (Mw) Max
proposed by Weimer, (2000) ; (2001) which spatially Zone 1 2365 4.5 7.814 1.419 3.267 7.0
distributed earthquake catalogue. The seismicity Zone 2 543 4.6 6.114 1.207 2.779 6.8
catalogue was prepred from the period 1963-2020, Zone 3 1344 4.4 6.340 1.092 3.296 7.8
Many faults and folds occured in this region. This
Zone 4 817 4.3 3.296 0.81 1.890 7.8
seismicity map differientiate the seismic events with
different colour variations. It ca be observed from the Zone 5 412 4.6 5.571 1.067 2.457 8.0
map that very rare events are of highe rmagnitude above Zone 6 285 4.6 6.464 1.272 2.929 8.0
the 8 magnitude. Very few events in the bottom of the Zone 7 86 4.6 6.790 1.272 2.929 8.0
region are magnitude 7. Saturation of seismic events
was observed between two magnitude classess of 5 to
5.9, and 4 to 4.90 respectively.

Fig. 4 Spatial distribution of the seismic events from1963– 2020 using

moment magnitude.

Regression analysis was carried to obtained the value of

frequency magnitude relation. For this purpose
Gutenberg-Richter law (1944) was used to formulate the
regression coefficient in the form of a and b values.
determine the source parameters for all seven
Fig 5. Regression analysis for frequency magnitude relation for seven
seismotectonic zones in the project area which lies in source zones.
zone 3. The regression analysis plots between
magnitudes and commulative number of events / year Seismic hazard curve is the g value curve for obtaining
are shown in Figure 5 in which frequency magnitude the value of maximum ground shaking intensity. This
relation can be seen for each zone seperatly. Their study also inolves the spectral acceleration for Phandar
values of rate of productivity ‘a’ and slope level ‘b’ of hydropower project. Spectral accleration for MCE,
are also displayed in Table 1.Beta value mentioned in DBE and OBE was obtained for different time span in
table 1 can be taken as b*ln10 for EZFRISK software to the term of spectral time period. Seven zones were
easily interpret this input data. Specific zone 3 has more drawn to elaborate the seismic significance of the
than one thousand seismic events with minimum project. For the selected spectral time period are 0.1s,
magnitude 4.4 to maximum magnitude of 7.8. Zone 1 0.2s, 0.5s, 1s and 2s (Table 2) with their spectral
has high seismicity with high intenisty level. The acceleration computed for horizontal and vertical
Maximum potential earthquake was obtained from components. The values of spectral accleeration varied
famouse emiprical relation described by Wells and from 0.19g to 1.250g for maximum credible earthquake,
Coppersmith (1994) in Table 2. These source 0.019g to 0.700g for design based earthquake and
parameters are essential part to calculate the g value 0.050g to 0.480g for operational based earthquake. The
using ground motion attenuation models in EZFRISK, Figures 6a, 6b, 6c showing the MCE, DBE and OBE
A computer based program to evaluate the g value. spectral accleration values for
Table 1 Seismic source zones with their source characteristics.

70
 Khurram et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022

Ground Acceleration (PGA) at the Phandar

Hydropower Project site is 0.595g for MCE, for DBE
and OBE, values of 0.311g and 0.231g The mean hazard
curve was taken among all curves of three GMPEqs.
Individual zone desripton for the participation of each
curve with respect to site analysis can be seen in Fig. 8.
The main contribution is zone 3 and zone 1 in and
aournd the power project. These two source zones have
much impact on the value of maximum ground
acceleration.

Fig. 6 a). Response spectra acceleration for horizontal and vertical

components of MCE, Probability of Exceedance 1 / 10,000 Years, b).
For DBE, Probability of Exceedance 1 / 475 Years, c). For OBE,
Probability of Exceedance 1 / 145 Years at 5% damping.

Table 2. Horizontal and vertical components of spectral accleration

for MDE, DBE and OBE.

MCE Spectral 1.150 / 1.250 / 0.500 / 0.300 /

1 / 0.65
Accleration (g) 0.780 0.850 0.300 0.190
Horizontal /
Vertical Spectral Period Fig. 8 PSHA for PGA for Period of 0.01 sat 5% damping.
Comp. 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2
(Second)
Conclusion
DBE Spectral 0.550 / 0.700 / 0.400 / 0.200 / 0.150 /
Accleration 0.350 0.450 0.270 0.175 0.019
Horizontal /
Vertical
According to the ICOLD and seismic risk reduction
Comp. Spectral Period 0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 policy, it was concluded that the values of peak ground
acceleration for Phandar hydro power project was 0.59g
OBE Spectral 0.390 / 0.480 / 0.280 / 0.125 / 0.05/
Accleration 0.250 0.325 0.190 0.098 0.09 for maximum credible earthquake, for design basis
Horizontal / earthquake, g value was 0.311g whereas, the determined
Vertical Spectral
Comp. Period
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 value 0.231g for operational basis earthquake with 475
years of return period at 50% probability of exceedence.
Spectral acceleration for 0.1s, 0.2s, 0.5s, 1s and 2s was
also computed for horizontal and vertical components.
The values of spectral accleeration varied from 0.19g to
1.250g for maximum credible earthquake, 0.019g to
0.700g for design based earthquake and 0.050g to
0.480g for operational based earthquake.All these
values can utilized by the structural engineer to
construct the earthquake resistant design structure at
certain level of ground shaking without any damage.

Reference
BCP, (2007). Building code of Pakistan seismic
provision. In : Ministry of housing and works
Islamabad, Pakistan
Fig 7. PGA by spectral response at 5 % damping source zones
contribution.
Bilham, R. V., Gaur, P. Molnar (2001). Himalayan
The results of the PSHA computations were compiled seismic hazard. Science, 293, 1442–1444.
in the form of (total hazard and individual hazard at the
site) for seismic zones with PGA at period 0.01s are Bilham, R. (2006). Dangerous tectonics, fragile
shown in Fig. 6. Total hazards are measured for peak buildings, and tough decisions. Science, 311, 1873–
ground acceleration (0.01s) and In the hazard curve
three distinct ground motion attenuation eqiations were 1875.
used to findout the values of PGAs. Annual frequency
of exceedence or return priod with respect to their g
values. The resulting value for the Horizontal Peak

71
 Khurram et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022

Cornell, C. A. (1968). Engineering seismic risk Muhammad, W., Giovanni, L.C., Spacone, E. (2007).
analysis. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58 (05), 1583– Seismic hazard assessment of northern Pakistan.
1606. Nat. Hazards (2018). 90, 563–600.
https://doi.org/10. 1007/s 11069-017-3058-1
Douglas, J. (2011). Ground-motion prediction equations
1964-2010. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Norsar and PMD Report, (2007). Seismic hazard
Research Center, Berkeley, CA. BRGM/RP- analysis and zonation for Pakistan, Azad
59356-FR, 444 Pages, 9 Illustrations. Jammu and Kashmir.

Douglas, J. (2021). Ground motion prediction equations Pivnik, D. A., Sercombe, W. J. (1993). Compression
1964_2021. Department of Civil and and transpression-related deformation in the Kohat
Environmental Engineering. University of Plateau, NW Pakistan. In: Treloar, P. J. & Searle,
Strathclyde James Weir Building 75 Montrose M. P. (eds.). Himalayan Tectonics. Geol. Soc.
Street Glasgow. http://www.gmpe.org.uk/United Lond. Spec. Publ.,74, 559 – 580.
Kingdom john.
[email protected]://www.strath.ac.uk/staf Quittmeyer, R. L., Farah, A., Jacob, K .H. (1979). The
f/douglasjohndr/ Thursday 31st March, 2022 seismicity of Pakistan and its relation to surface
faults. In Farah, A. and DeJong, K. A. (eds.),
Gutenberg, B. Richter, C. F. (1956a). Magnitude and Geodynamics of Pakistan. Geol. Surv. Pak., Quetta,
energy earthquakes. Ann Geophysics, 9,1-15 Pp. 271 – 284. Royden, L.H and Burchfield, B.C.
DOI:https ://doi.org/10.4401/ag-5590 1997.

Kazmi, A. H., Jan, M. Q. (1997). Geology and tectonics Richter, C.F. (1958). Elementary seismology. In :
of Pakistan. Graphics Pubishers, Karachi. Freeman WH, and Co. Eds 205. Illus, San
Francissco and Bailey Bros, & Swinfen Ltd.,
Khalid, P., Butt, K. A., Hussain, J., Mahmood, H. London p. 768.
(2002). Peak ground accélérations
assessment of an imaginary site at Hawks Bay Rafi, Z., Lindholm, C., Bungum, H., Laghari, A.,
near Karachi, Geol. Bull. Univ. Peshawar. 35, 27- Ahmed, N. (2011). Probabilistic seismic hazard of
41 Pakistan, Azad-Jammu and Kashmir. Natural
Hazards, 61 (3), 1317–1354.
Khalid, P., Bajwa, A. Naeem, A., Zia, M. (2016).
Seismicity distribution and focal mechanism Rehman, S. U., Khalid, M., Ali, A., El-Aal, A. E.,
solution of major earthquakes of Northern Pakistan. (2012). Deterministic and probabilistic seismic
Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica 51, 347-357. hazard analysis for Gwadar city, Pakistan. Arab. J.
Geosci. DOI 10.1007/s12517-012-0635-1.
Khalid, P., Ghazi, S., Yasin, Q., Khurram, S. (2014).
Assessment of Kalam Ashirat Dam of Swat, Sarfraz, K., Waseem, M., Asif, K., Waqas, A. (2018).
Pakistan. Journal of Earth Science. Updated earthquake catalogue for seismic hazard
analysis in Pakistan. Journal of Seismology, 22 (4),
Khurram, S., Khalid, P., Qureshi, J., Zia, Ud. Din. 841 -861.
(2021). Assessment of seismic hazard of
roller compacted concrete dam site in Gilgit- Seeber, L., Armbruster, J. (1979). Seismicity of Hazara
Baltistan of northern Pakistan. Earthq Eng. & Arc in Northern Pakistan: Decollement vs.
Eng. Vib (2021) 20: 621-630 doi: Basement Faulting. In: Farah, A. and DeJong, K.A.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-021-2042-7 (eds.), Geodynamics of Pakistan. Geol.Surv.Pak.,
131-142.
Khurram, S., Khalid, P. (2021). A statistical analysis of
seismicity and magnitude of completeness for Seeber, L., Quittmeyer, R.C., Armbruster, J.G. (1980).
northern and south western part of Pakistan, Acta Seismotectonics of Pakistan: A review of results
GeoDynamica et Geo Materailia. from network data and implications for the central
Himalayas. Geol. Bull. Univ. Peshawar,13, 151-
Lisa, M., Azam, A., Khawaja, (2005). Tectonic model 168.
of NW Himalayan fold And thrust belt on the basis
of focal mechanism studies. Pakistan Journal of Usman, M., Zafar, M. (2010). Effects of temperature
Metereology, 2 ( 4). increase on earthquake frequency and depth in

72
 Khurram et al. /Int.J.Econ.Environ.Geol.Vol. 13(2) 67-73, 2022

northern Pakistan. 2010 International Conference

on Biology, Environment and Chemistry. IPCBEE
vol.1 (2011) © (2011) IACSIT Press, Singapore.

Wiemer, S. (2001). A software package to analyze

seismicity. ZMAP Seismol. Res. Lett. 72, 373-
382.https: //doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.72.3.373

Weimer, S. Wyss, M. ( 2000). Minimum magnitude of

complete reporting in earthquake catalogs: example
from Alaska, the Western United States, and Japan.
Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 90, 856-869.

https://doi.org/ 10.1785/0119990114 The Water And

Power Development authority (Wapda) Annual
Report 2008-2009.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

73