Environmental Flows in Myanmar: Assessment of

Environmental Flows in Myitnge River Basin

Su Su Hlaing1*, Cho Cho Thin Kyi1, Win Win Zin1, John Conallin2,3, Miroslav Marence2
1
Yangon Technological University, Yangon, Myanmar
2
IHE Delft, Delft, Netherlands, 3Charles Sturt University, Albury, Australia

Introduction
Myanmar is rich in water resources with four main rivers: Ayeyarwady, Chindwin, Sittaung, Thanlwin rivers.
It has a great potential for a number of hydropower projects with its abundant water resources and topographical
feature of a high difference in elevation. The hydropower potential is estimated to be more than 100,000 MW in
terms of installed capacity [1]. Hydropower is a major sector for the electricity supply of the country. The
Myitnge river which is one of the eastern tributaries of Ayeyarwady river is also an important water resource
that operates the power production with Yeywa hydropower dam, Myanmars largest hydropower dam with a
790 MW capacity. However, an altered flow regime related to hydropower production could be threatening
critical processes downstream in the Myitnge river and the receiving Ayeyarwady river.
Hydropower projects can disrupt the natural flows and freshwater ecosystem. The magnitude, frequency,
duration, and timing of flow regime and their sediments can be changed due to dam operation. Longitudinal
connectivity from upstream to downstream is lost and changed due to the physical barrier of the dam. Lateral
connectivity between main channel and floodplain is diminished or reduced due to the loss of flood. A primary
challenge in water resource development is designing and operating infrastructure projects in order to provide
social benefits while preventing the loss of natural ecosystem services and loss of biodiversity.
Environmental flow is used as a tool in managing the impacts of hydropower dams and this becomes an
important component for the need to safeguard downstream ecosystems and ecosystem services when managing
water to meet power production demand. Environmental flows refer to water for healthy ecosystem and provide
critical contributions to river health, economic development and poverty alleviation. Environmental flow
describes the quantity, quality and timing of water flows required to sustain freshwater ecosystems and the
human livelihoods and well-being that depends on these ecosystems. [1] Maintaining the amount and timing of
water released from the reservoir for downstream environment that incorporates components of the natural flow
regime is critically in sustaining the native biodiversity and ecosystem integrity in river basins. Trade-off
analyses among the water use sector including environmental flows are necessary for efficient water
management. [2] Sustainable water resource developments require reservoir operations that provide
environmental flows to support the downstream riverine ecosystem by controlling the impact risk on the flow
regime.

1. Background
The Myitnge river (Namtu) is one of the largest tributaries on left bank of Ayeyarwady river and it originates
from Mount Loi Swang at an elevation of 1460 m on the northern Shan Plateau and joins the Ayeyarwady river
about 15 km southwest of Mandalay. River basin area is 34800 km2 and it covers from Mandalay division near
the confluence of the Ayeyarwady river to the north-west part of the Shan state. The river flows in a generated
direction of north-east to south-west and joins the Ayeyawady river at about 15 km to the south-west of
Mandalay. It longs about 530 km and its tributaries are Zawgyi, Panlaung and Nantalan rivers. The Mytinge
river basin covers the northwest part of the Shan state and its location is approximately between the latitude 20
51' to 23 48' N and the longitude 96 23' to 98 22' E. Along Myitnge river, there are seven hydropower
projects which are either under investigation, under construction or completed. Deedoke plant, which is run-of-
river type, expected capacity 66 MW, Middle Yeywa 700 MW, Nantalan 210 MW, Nantsin 30 MW and Hsipaw
252 MW are under investigation or being built. Upper Yeywa is under construction state and its installed
capacity is 280 MW (4x70MW). The Yeywa power plant, installed capacity of 790 MW (4x179.5MW) was
completed in 2010 and located 80 km upstream of the confluence of Ayeyarwady river. The catchment area of
Yeywa plant is 28260 km2. The average annual inflow to the reservoir is about 15231x106 m3 which has gross
storage of 2.6x109 m3 and effective storage of 1.6x109 m3 .The maximum water level in the reservoir is 185 m
above mean sea level. The surface area at maximum water level is 59 km2. The design energy is 3550 GWh
annually. This study focuses only on the downstream condition affected on Yeywa hydropower plant. The
location map of catchment area in Myitnge river basin is shown in Fig. 1.
 Fig.1. Myitnge river basin map including the completed and future hydropower projects along the river

1.1 Historical Flow Records

Along the Myitnge river, there are two discharge stations: Hsipaw station that is located on the upstream
area of the river and Shwesaryan station located on the downstream of the river. For the study of downstream
condition of Myitnge river after operation of Yeywa power plant, the discharge data at Shwesaryan station was
used for the period of 1981-2009 (pre-dam period) and 2010-2018 (post-dam period). These data was collected
from the Department of Meteorology and Hydrology (DMH) and Department of Hydropower Implementation
(DHPI).

2. Environmental Flow Assessment by Hydrological Approach

There are many techniques and methods being applied to assess environmental flows requirements across
the world. These methods can be classified into four categories_ hydrological method, hydraulic rating methods,
habitat simulation and holistic methods [7]. Each has its strength and weakness and requires varying levels of
effort. The methods differ in scope of application and data requirements. Any environmental flow method used
will differ in usefulness for determining environmental flows depending on the situation. Each method has
advantages and disadvantages. In this study due to a lack of ecological and hydrological data availability and
time, Hydrological methods, also called Desktop methods, were selected and applied for the initial stage of the
study on setting the environmental flow for Myitnge river using the historical flow of pre-dam period (1981-
2009).

2.1 Tennant Method

Tennant method is a simplistic approach that defines environmental flow values as percentage of the average
daily discharge or mean annual flow (MAF). Thereby, 10% of MAF are considered as absolute minimum flow,
30% of MAF are recommended for the sustainment of a good habitat, while 60-100% of MAF is expected to
provide optimal habitat conditions. Natural flushing event is 200% of MAF [4].

2.2 Tessman Method

Tessman, also called modified Tennant method, considers natural variation in flow on a monthly basis to
determine the flow threshold. Tessman rule recommends minimum flow guidelines which require the flow to
vary each month. The environmental flow for each month is determined by considering the following rule;
 MMF, if MMF < 40% MAF
 40% MAF, if 40% of MAF< MMF< 100%MAF
 40% MMF , if MMF > MAF
Where, MAF is the mean annual flow and MMF is the mean monthly flow. [5]

2.3 Global Environmental Flow Calculator (GEFC) Method

Global Environmental Flow Calculator (GEFC) is a software package developed by International Water
Management Institute (IWMI) to link the flow and ecology condition. GEFC relies on a reference Flow
Duration Curve (FDC) based on monthly discharge time series and calculates how much the flow can be
modified by shifting original reference FDC for each specified Environmental Management Classes (EMC) for
maintaining the river. The original reference FDC corresponding to the 17 fixed percentage points on the
probability axis: 0.01, 0.1, 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 95, 99, 99.9 and 99.99 percent to cover the
entire range of flows. EMC have six classes such as Class A- natural, Class B- slightly modified, Class C –
moderately modified, Class D – largely modified, Class E –seriously modified and Class F – critically modified.
The higher the EMC, the more water will need to be allocated to the ecosystem or conservation and more flow
variability will need to be preserved. [3]
In Myitnge river, Yeywa hydropower plant has been constructed and operated since 2010, so, the river has
been in a modified state for some years and it is impossible to maintain as like to natural condition (class A) and
similarly natural (class B). Therefore, environmental management class C was determined as an optimum class
for defining the environmental flow of Myitnge river.

2.4 Minimum Environmental Flow Requirement at Initial Level by Various Methods

Most of the hydrological methods provide the minimum flow guidelines which vary each month and it
can give the good results for the initial stages of an environmental flows study.

Table 1. Minimum environmental flow and observed pre and post dam flow

Pre-Dam Post-Dam Tennant Tessman GEFC

Jan 246.28 278.80 147.04 196.05 151.7966
Feb 203.86 270.21 147.04 196.05 133.1379
Mar 178.32 257.28 147.04 178.32 120.239
Apr 166.30 271.78 147.04 166.30 116.3276
May 211.71 300.50 245.06 196.05 132.9069
Jun 346.97 299.00 245.06 196.05 185.1621
Jul 632.70 372.46 245.06 253.08 277.2483
Aug 1074.73 995.17 245.06 429.89 490.431
Sep 1039.41 1086.46 245.06 415.76 478.0795
Oct 860.84 804.24 245.06 344.34 380.6483
Nov 582.46 529.79 147.04 232.99 260.6034
Dec 337.84 335.10 147.04 196.05 182.5103

3. Determination of Hydrologic Alteration with Three Reservoir Operation Scenarios

3.1 Three Reservoir Operation Scenarios

In this study, the reservoir operation is done using HEC-ResSim reservoir simulation software to simulate the
released flow with three scenarios. Based on the natural flow and simulated outflow for each scenario, the
alteration is assessed using the 67 statistical parameters. These parameters are divided into two groups including
33 Indicator of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA) parameters and 34 Environmental Flow Component (EFC)
parameters. IHA parameters are composed of magnitude, frequency, duration, timing and rate of change.
Additionally, EFC parameters are for five components such as extreme low flow, low flow, high flow, small
flood and large flood.
 Scenario-1: Existing operation policy
This simulation is conducted to check how flow regime was changed from natural flow under the existing
operation policy. In the existing condition, Yeywa power plant is connected to the national power grid and it is
operated to meet the power demand in the region. Firstly, the model performance is checked using the statistical
analysis. For this purpose, the observed and simulated condition of the released flow is compared for the period
from 2010 to 2018. Operation analysis was conducted using the input data of daily inflow, water elevation,
power generation and physical data of the reservoir. Reservoir operation rule applied for this scenario is
hydropower time series requirement rule. The average annual power production was the observed power of
2533.45 GWh and the simulated power of 2558.6 GWh. The observed and simulated release flow condition is
shown in Fig. 4. In contrast, the objective approaches are based on calculating some quantitative statistical
parameters, namely the squared correlation coefficient (R2) and the Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency coefficient (NSE).
Therefore, the value for R2, and NSE parameter for daily released flows are 0.91 and 0.91 respectively. Hence
the statistical result indicates that the simulated data are satisfactorily matched with the observed data. So the
model performance clearly indicates that HEC-ResSim model could represent and simulate the water resources
system to an acceptable level. The observed and simulated release flow condition is shown in Fig. 2.
 2,500

2,000

Flow (cms) 1,500

1,000

500

0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
CP2.Existing--0.Flow.1DAY YEYWA.OBSERVED.OUTFLOW.1DAY Time of Simulation

Fig.2. Comparison of the simulated and observed outflow under the existing operation policy

 Scenario-2: Rule curve based operation

In this scenario, Yeywa reservoir is operated such that the hydropower system is allowed to run at their full
generation capacity within the rule curve without considering the environmental flow. The design rule curve for
conservation zone in Yeywa reservoir is shown in Fig. 3. In case of rule curve based operation, the simulated
power production is 3253.29 GWh annually. This scenario gives an overall 27 % increase in power production
compared to the existing operation policy.

Fig.3. Design rule curve for Yeywa reservoir

 Scenario-3: Operation with the consideration of the monthly minimum environmental flow
The reservoir is operated with the constraint that the release flow is not allowed to be less than the monthly
minimum environmental flow requirement obtained by GEFC (class C). For this scenario, hydropower time
series requirement and downstream control function rule are used. Among these, downstream control function
rule is defined as the first priority. The reservoir is operated in such a way that the power production is as much
as possible, while maintaining the monthly minimum EF amount. The simulated result indicates that the annual
power can be produced 2.2 % more than the existing power production. The released flow condition with the
constraint of minimum EF is shown in Fig. 4.
2,500

2,000

1,500
Flow (cms)

1,000

500

0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
EFlow.PandE-----0.Flow-MIN.1DAY CP2.PandE-----0.Flow.1DAY Time of Simulation

Fig.4. Simulated daily outflow (blue) and minimum environmental flow requirement (red) at Yeywa hydropower plant
3.2 Indicator of Hydrologic Alteration
Indicator of Hydrological Alteration (IHA) is a software package which can assess the environmental flow
with 67 statistical parameters. IHA was originally developed to enable rapid processing of daily hydrologic
records. A range of recommended flow are developed for extreme low flow in some months, low flow in each
month, high flow pulse throughout the season or year, floods with the targeted inter-annual frequencies. These
parameters are characterized into magnitude, frequency, timing, duration and rate of change as critical factors to
sustain the integrity of the riverine ecosystem.
The range of IHA is bracketed by 25th and 75th percentile values of pre-dam daily historical flow. [6] For
getting the closet to natural river condition, the released flow condition should fall within the recommended range
according to the optimal reservoir operation policy. Using the pre dam flow (1981-2009) and post dam flow
(2011-2018), flow regime alteration due to dam operation for each scenario is assessed as shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Hydrologic alteration assessment under 34 EFC parameters for three operation scenarios
Parameter Boundary Outflow
25 percentile 75 percentile Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Parameter group 1 (m3/sec) : Monthly Low Flow
Jan 218.7 274.7 262.1 292.1 266.9
Feb 178.2 228.8 247.3* 278.4 258.9
Mar 167.4 209.7 248.9 256.4 267.9
Apr 160.1 192.7 265.2 259.4 303.9
May 176.3 242.7 315.7 262.4 349.2
June 229.3 406.5 225.3 216.3 251.4
July 381.3 560.4 265.7 393.1 344.9
Aug 553.1 636.1 461.8 495.4 442.9
Sep 531.5 636.6 619.7 582.5 621.3
Oct 502 596.1 582.9 424 572.4
Nov 395.3 522.4 481.7 377.4 486.9
Dec 270.5 393.3 322.8 356.7 325.2
Parameter group 2 : Extreme Low Flow
Peak (m3/sec) 128.6 143.6 118.4 122.3 132
Duration (days) 4.25 20.5 1.25 2 1
Timing (julian date) 108.8 144.5 113.8 161 73.5
Frequency 0 4 13 4.5 7.5
Parameter group 3 : High Flow Pulse
Peak (m3/sec) 776.3 1150 775.3 814.9 692.1
Duration (days) 2 11.75 5 7.75 1
Timing (julian date) 219 256.5 279 202.5 279
Frequency 2 5.5 3 3 3
Rise rate (m3/sec) 71.35 144.5 59.9 141.7 59.5
Fall rate (m3/sec) -94.89 -47.75 -39.8 -44.27 -44.95
Parameter group 4 : Small Flood
Peak (m3/sec) 2129 2689 2254 2302 2257
Duration (days) 38.75 89.25 71.5 109.5 67
Timing (julian date) 238 286.8 235 252 235
Frequency 0 1 1 0 1
Rise rate (m3/sec) 31.77 130.1 65.28 40.04 64.89
Fall rate (m3/sec) -95.66 -31.52 -35.92 -27.68 -40.18
Parameter group 5 : Large Flood
Peak(m3/sec) 3216 4243 - - -
Duration (days) 31 105 - - -
Timing (julian date) 235 289 - - -
Frequency 0 0 0 0 0
 Rise rate (m3/sec) 46.96 266.4 - - -
Fall rate (m3/sec) -159.3 -62.15 - - -
*Bold indicates when parameter has been exceeded
The downstream flow conditions were highly altered in all of the three operation scenarios because the
most of the important parameters for the natural river ecosystem are out of the recommended range defined based
on the natural historical flow (Table 2).
After dam construction, the loss of large floods which can provide the services such as flushing away
products and pollutants, migration pattern of fish for spawning and ground water recharge for shallow aquifer
have been lost. Ecosystem services related to low flow such as suitable water temperature, dissolved oxygen,
water table level and soil moisture has a change from natural condition in the river have also been lost.
Moreover, flow regime of extreme low flow after dam had the greatest alteration. As a consequence, the
invasion of exotic and introduced species from aquatic and riparian communities could become a problem in the
river after dam construction. In addition as the high flow pulse parameters are out of the acceptable limits, the
river could experience problems in restoring normal water quality after prolonged low flow, aeration of eggs in
spawning gravel and prevention of the salination in surrounding floodplain areas. From these detail assessment
of the released flow condition under the three operation scenarios, it found that the scenario 2 condition (full
operating condition) has the greatest alteration from natural conditions and suggests that this would have the
most impact on the natural condition of the river.

3.3 Range of Variability Approach

Range of Variability Approach (RVA) employs a set of IHA to generate a series of hydrologic alteration
factors using pre-dam period from post-dam period. RVA quantify the degree of alteration of 33 IHA flow
parameters. RVA boundaries are the median plus or minus 17th percentile. If RVA boundary is outside the range
of the pre-impact data, it will be reset to the 25th and 75th percentile. The degree of hydrologic alteration “D” is
the measure to quantity the deviation of the post-dam flow regime from the pre-dam one.
(N o  N e )
Di     100
 Ne 
Where Di is the degree of hydrologic alteration for ith indicator, No and Ne are the observed and expected
number of post-dam years for which the parameter values fall within the RVA target range [6]. The natural flow
and simulated outflow are used to define the alteration degree for three reservoir operation scenarios as shown in
Table 3. Alteration is divided into three categories; High, Medium, Low, and for this study, high was considered
unacceptable to maintain the ecosystem
Table 3. Hydrologic alteration assessment under 33 IHA parameters for three operation scenarios. H- High
alteration, M – medium alteration, L – Low alteration
D (%) IHA class D (%) IHA class D (%) IHA
class
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Parameter group 1 (m3/sec) : Monthly Low Flow
Jan 20.83 L 69.79 H 9.375 L
Feb 100 H* 100 H 100 H
Mar 69.79 H 100 H 69.79 H
Apr 67.05 H 100 H 100 H
May 34.09 M 100 H 34.09 M
June 34.09 M 67.05 H 34.09 M
July 67.05 H 31.82 L 34.09 M
Aug 67.05 H 67.05 H 31.82 L
Sep 31.82 L 64.77 M 31.82 L
Oct 67.05 H 67.05 H 67.05 H
Nov 1.136 L 34.09 M 31.82 L
Dec 20.83 L 9.375 L 20.83 L
Parameter group 2 (m3/sec) : Magnitude and duration of annual extreme flow and base flow condition
1-day minimum 100 H 100 H 67.05 H
3-day minimum 100 H 34.09 M 100 H
7-day minimum 100 H 34.09 M 1.136 L
30-day minimum 34.09 M 67.05 H 34.09 M
90-day minimum 100 H 100 H 100 H
 1-day maximum 9.375 L 39.58 M 39.58 M
3-day maximum 1.136 L 67.05 H 1.136 L
7-day maximum 1.136 L 67.05 H 34.09 M
30-day maximum 31.82 L 34.09 M 34.09 M
90-day maximum 1.136 L 100 H 100 H
Number of zero day - - - - - -
Base Flow 67.05 H 31.82 L 97.73 H
Parameter group 3: (Julian day) Timing of annual extreme flow
Minimum Date 39.58 M 69.79 H 141.7 H
Maximum Date 9.375 L 9.375 L 9.375 L
Parameter group 4 : Frequency and duration of High and Low Pulse
Low pulse count 100 H 100 H 75.83 H
Low pulse duration (day) 100 H 100 H 100 H
High pulse count 20.83 L 3.333 L 20.83 L
High pulse duration (day) 9.375 L 39.58 M 9.375 L
Parameter group 5 : Rate and frequency of flow change
Rise rate (m3/s/d) 34.09 M 130.7 H 34.09 M
Fall rate (m3/s/d) 100 H 100 H 100 H
Number of reversals 100 H 100 H 100 H
*H-High is highlighted to show which parameters were unacceptable and in the high alteration range.

3.4 Summary Result for Three Scenarios

Table 4 summarises the result of alteration under the three reservoir operation scenarios. The conditions that
fall out of the recommended range in EFC parameter and that are the high alteration class in the IHA parameters
are defined as the risk condition on the natural riverine ecosystem.
In the existing condition (scenario 1), the number of parameters which have high alteration from the natural
river ecosystem is 35 among out of the 67 statistical parameters. The existing power production is 2558.6 GWh
annually although the design annual power is 3550 GWh. It defines as the base case for the comparison with
another scenario as shown in Table 5. For scenario 2 at full operational capacity, 44 hydrologic alteration
parameters are in the high category. Although the overall power production increase 27.8 % more than the base
case, this operation is predicted to have severe negative impacts on the river ecosystem due to the high alteration
of the natural flows. In scenario-3, considering a monthly environmental flow requirement, the power
production increases 2.2 % for the fulfilment of minimum Eflow by the power plant flow. The hydrologic
alteration level can be slightly decreased due to one parameter from the existing condition. These results
indicate that under full operational capacity, which is intended to occur in the future, the downstream river
condition will become unacceptable, and highlights the need to look further into the flow management of the
reservoir, and inclusion of environmental flows.

Table 4. Summary results showing the number of impact parameters for three scenarios
Scenario-1 Scenario-2 Scenario-3
EFC parameters out of the recommended range 20 22 20
High alteration class in IHA parameter 15 20 14
Total risk 35 44 34

Table 5. Comparison results for three scenarios

Scenario Simulate Energy Change Power Risk Change Impact
(GWh) Production (%) Parameters (No)
1 2558.602 Base case 35 Base case
2 3271.977 + 27.8 44 +9
3 2615.315 + 2.2 34 -1

4. Conclusion
The initial stage of environmental flows was assessed using the methods of hydrological approach.
Furthermore, more detailed assessment using the environmental flow parameters which can provide the
ecosystem services with various ways was done by the determination of flow alteration due to the hydro-electric
project. The degree of flow alteration is substantial, the most severe alteration is in the case of rule curve based
operation (full operational capacity) without considering the environmental flow. The river channel, habitats and
aquatic species could be negatively impacted due to the severe alteration. However, in this case, providing a
monthly environmental flow did not significantly improve the alteration parameters from the current operational
strategy, where alteration is still relatively high from the natural state. However, as the objective of
environmental flows is not to reproduce a natural flow regime in whole, but rather to achieve a flow regime that
maintains the essential processes required to support healthy river ecosystems, more investigation is needed to
assess the impacts of the dam its relationship to determining environmental flow recommendations. For the
sustainable water resource developments, it requires the developed reservoir operation rule that provide
environmental flows to support the downstream riverine ecosystem by controlling the impact risk on the flow
regime, and still maximizes energy production.
References

1. Nam, K., Cham, M.R.., and Halili, P.R., 2015, “Power Sector Development in Myanmar”, ADB Economic Working Paper
Series, No. 460, October, Manila.

2. Cate Brown, Jackie King, Jessica Hughes and Vaqar Zakaria, “Environmental Flows for Hydropower Projects”. Guidance
for the Private Sector in Emerging Markets, February 2018.

3. Richter, B.D., Baumgartner, J.V., Braun, D.P., Powell, J., 1998, “A spatial assessment of hydrologic alteration within a
river network”, Regulated Rivers Research Management 14 (4), 329-340.

4. C. Mielach, R. Schinegger, S. Schmutz, A. Galie, F. Isfan, I. Tanase, B. Popa, D. Gasparetto, I. Saccardo, M. Cesca, A.
Rechberger, H. Talker, S. Santl, N. Conaric, N. Zvanut Smolar: "Comparative Analysis of Methodologies for the
Implementation of Environmental Flow (EF), According to the WFD". Work Package 4-Preserving Water Bodies
Ecosystem, Final Version :23.8.2012

5. Korsgaard, L. (2006), Environmental Flows in Integrated Water Resources Management: Linking Flows, Services and
Values.(Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Environment & Resources, Technical University of Demark). Available Online, from
http:///www.er.dtu.dt

6. The Nature Conservancy, 2007. Indicator of Hydrologic Alteration, Version 7.1 User’s Manual

7. Mullick, M. R.A., Babel, M.S.& Perret, R., (2010). Flow characteristics and environmental flow requirements for the
Teesta River, Bangladesh. In the Proceedings of International Conference on Environmental Aspects of Bangladesh.
University of Kitakyushu, Japan, September 4, 159-162.

Su Su Hlaing is a PhD candidate in water resource engineering at Yangon Technological University, Myanmar and works as
a lecturer in Thanlyin Technological University, Myanmar. She graduated bachelor degree in 2006 and master degree in
2009 with civil engineering from Pyay Technological University. She started the work as an instructor in 2010 and joined the
doctoral course at Yangon Technological University in 2015. Currently, she does the research related to environmental flow
in Myitnge river while she works as a teacher.

Cho Cho Thin Kyi graduated bachelor degree in civil engineering from Yangon Institute of Technology, Myanmar in 1987
and master degree in civil engineering from Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand in 1998. She graduated PhD degree in
water resource engineering from Yangon Technological University (YTU) in 2018. She works as an Associate Professor at
YTU and her teaching professionals are the subjects related to river engineering, hydraulic engineering, urban drainage,
integrated coastal zone management. She interests the research filed about environmental flow, urban drainage and water
quality.