Water Services Development Plan

ANNEXURE A

CITY OF TSHWANE

WATER SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLAN

2017 - 2021

CITY OF TSHWANE WATER SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLAN – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Contents Contents ...... ii LIST OF TABLES ...... iv LIST OF FIGURES ...... iv LIST OF MAPS ...... iv 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 7 1.1 Purpose of the Water Service Development Plan ...... 7 1.2 Processes followed when developing the Water Service Development Plan ...... 7 1.3 Executive summary of the Water Service Development Plan ...... 7 2 CITY OF TSHWANE – GENERAL BACKGROUND ...... 8 2.1 Water supply and sanitation boundaries ...... 8 2.2 Topography and hydrology ...... 8 2.3 Climate and rainfall ...... 8 2.4 Population and Demographics ...... 9 2.5 Land use ...... 9 2.6 Spatial Development Framework ...... 10 3 BACKGROUND TO MASTER PLANNING ...... 15 3.1 Water Infrastructure Planning ...... 15 3.2 Sewer Infrastructure Planning ...... 16 4 WATER NETWORK ...... 17 4.1 Current Demand ...... 17 4.2 Water Service Level ...... 17 4.3 Future Demand ...... 17 4.3.1 Infilling of vacant stands ...... 17 4.3.2 Spatial Development Framework and Future Water Requirements...... 18 4.4 Water Resources ...... 18 4.5 Network Overview and Existing Infrastructure ...... 20 4.5.1 Bulk System ...... 20 4.5.2 Reticulation ...... 21 4.6 Future Water Infrastructure Requirements ...... 21 4.7 Overview of Key Water Projects ...... 21 4.8 Water Loss and WCWDM ...... 26 4.9 Potable Water Quality ...... 26 5 Sewer Network ...... 28 5.1 Present Peak Day Dry Weather Flows ...... 28 5.2 Sewer Service Level ...... 28 5.3 Future Peak Day Dry Weather Flows ...... 28 5.3.1 Infilling of vacant stands ...... 28 5.3.2 Spatial Development Framework and Future Sewer Flows ...... 29 5.4 Network Overview and Existing Infrastructure ...... 29 5.5 Future Sewer Infrastructure Requirements ...... 30 5.5.1 Waste Water Treatment ...... 30 5.6 Overview of key Sewer Projects ...... 30 5.7 Discharge Water Quality ...... 37 6 Special considerations: Water Resource Master Plan ...... 38 6.1 Background...... 38 6.2 Current WWTWs and sewer flow ...... 38 6.3 Future water demand and sewer flows ...... 39

6.4 Current bulk water Master Plan and its requirement for future water resources ...... 40 6.5 Current sewer reticulation and WWTW Master Plan ...... 40 6.6 Water resource analysis ...... 41 6.6.1 Surplus yields in the Crocodile River basin ...... 41 6.6.2 Deficit in the Olifants River basin ...... 41 6.7 Proposed Expansion of Rietvlei WTP (with transfer from Olifantsfontein WWTW) ...... 42 6.8 Proposed Expansion of Roodeplaat WTP ...... 42 6.9 RW Augmentation to Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit...... 43 6.10 Cost Analysis ...... 43 6.10.1 WRMP Unit costs ...... 43 6.11 RW Bulk Supply Comparison ...... 44 6.12 Conclusion from WRMP ...... 44 6.13 Implementation of the WRMP – first 5 Years ...... 44 7 FINANCIAL ...... 48 8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 49 APPENDIX 001: CITY OF TSHWANE CAPEX AND OPEX ...... 50 Capital Projects ...... 51 Historical Opex Budget and Expenditure ...... 55

iii

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.01: Dwelling types in City of Tshwane ...... 10 Table 4.01: Current water service levels ...... 17 Table 4.05: City of Tshwane historical Blue Drop status ...... 27 Table 5.01: Current sewer service levels ...... 28 Table 5.03: Regional Sewer Master Plan cost requirements for entire planning horizon ...... 32 Table 5.04: Regional Sewer Master Plan cost requirements for next 5 years ...... 32 Table 5.05: CoT existing and future WWTW’s and capacities ...... 33 Table 5.06: Green Drop history and targets ...... 37 Table 6.01: Water Requirement Projections (million kl/annum) ...... 39

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.01: City of Tshwane’s population and population growth rate, 2011–2015 ...... 9 Figure 4.01: City of Tshwane Present and Future reliance on Water Sources ...... 19 Figure 4.02: City of Tshwane historical Non-Revenue Water ...... 26 Figure 7.01: Historic W&S Capex budget and spend ...... 48

LIST OF MAPS Map 2.01: CoT area of jurisdiction areas within the water drainage (catchment) areas ...... 11 Map 2.02: Topograhy ...... 12 Map 2.03: Spatial Development Framework ...... 13 Map 2.04: Developments anticipated in the next 5 Years ...... 14 Map 4.01: Layout of Current City of Tshwane Water distribution network ...... 23 Map 4.02: Master Plan for entire water network ...... 24 Map 4.03: 5 Year Master Plan for water network ...... 25 Map 5.01: Layout of Current CoT Sewer network ...... 34 Map 5.02: Master Plan for entire sewer network ...... 35 Map 5.03: 5 Year Master Plan for sewer network ...... 36 Map 8.01: Water and Sanitation: Deficient Bulk Capacity Impact Areas…………………………………………………………. 55

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS: a – annum AADD – Annual Average Daily Demand (water) ADDWF – Average Day Dry Weather Flow (sewerage) BD – ‘Blue Drop’ BH – borehole CAPEX – capital expenditure CBD – Central Business District CoT – City of Tshwane d – day DWA – Department of Water Affairs ERWAT – East Rand Water Care Association FDA – Future development area GD – ‘Green Drop’ GIS – Geographic information system ha – hectare IDP – Integrated Development Plan kl/d – kilolitres per day km – kilometre LDO – Land Development Objective l/s – litres per second LM – Local Municipality m – metre m – month MAWIGA – Mabopane/Winterveldt/Ga-Rankuwa MIS – Management information system ML – Megaliters ML/d – Megalitres per day Mm3/a – Million cubic metres per annum MP – Master Plan MW – Magalies Water NRW – Non-revenue water OPEX – operational expenditure PDDWF – Peak Day Dry Weather Flow (sewerage) RDP – Reconstruction and Development Plan PPP – Public-Private Partnership PV – Present Value R – Rand RW – Rand Water s – second SDA – Sewer Drainage Area SDF – Spatial Development Framework UAW – Unaccounted-for-water UDS – Urine Diversion System UH – Unit Hydrograph (pattern of flow) UWD – Unit Water Demand W&S – Water & Sanitation Division

WCWDM – Water Conservation and Water Demand Management WDZ – Water distribution zone WLM – Water Loss Management WRMP – Water Resources Master Plan WSA – Water Services Authority WSDP – Water Services Development Plan WTP – Water Treatment Plant (potable water) WWTW – Waste water treatment works y – year

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of the Water Service Development Plan The Water Services Development Plan (WSDP) is a regulatory requirement of the Water Services Act and deals with the long term planning for the provision of water supply and sanitation services. 1.2 Processes followed when developing the Water Service Development Plan The WSDP has to conform to the prescribed format of the National Department of Water & Sanitation (DWS). This format stipulates the uploading of a geodatabase and population of various spreadsheets/data tables on the website. Once complete, the WSDP document is generated automatically, in PDF format, on the website. This PDF document has to be considered and approved by DWS and City of Tshwane (CoT), which then constitutes the official WSDP of the Water Services Authority (WSA) for the CoT.

The WSDP databases and tables information are gathered from the CoT current models and master plans, together with the approved Integrated Development Plan (IDP) projects and budgets. 1.3 Executive summary of the Water Service Development Plan The populating of the WSDP geodatabase, website and PDF document follow a separate but parallel process to the one followed here in producing the Executive Summary of the CoT Water and Sanitation systems and master plans.

This document has been prepared specifically as a precursor to the pending City of Tshwane (CoT) Water Services Development Plan (WSDP), with the intention being that it acts as an interim executive summary to the WSDP. A specific focus of the document is to assess the development requirements and consequent Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) requirements for the next 5 years, with a view to achieving the objectives of the 2017/21 Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The National DWS geodatabase and website will then be populated and aligned to the approved Executive Summary.

2 CITY OF TSHWANE – GENERAL BACKGROUND 2.1 Water supply and sanitation boundaries The areas of jurisdiction for City of Tshwane (CoT) that this report is based on, as well as its 7 administrative regions, are shown on Map 2.01. CoT shares boundaries with Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipalities, and Bojonala, Moretele, Bela-Bela, Dr. JS Moroka, Thembisile, Emalahleni and Delmas Local Municipalities (LM).

Certain portions of the Moretele LM water systems are linked to or supplied from the Tshwane bulk system. The same applies to the Madibeng LM. A small rural portion of Midrand in City of Johannesburg is supplied from the Tshwane bulk water system. Certain portions of the Midrand area sewer systems discharge into the Tshwane sewer system. In the Bronkhorstspruit area, two large diameter pipes that are jointly supplied from RW and CoT feed into Thembisile. 2.2 Topography and hydrology The general topography of the CoT area is shown on Map 2.02. The general fall of the land is from high areas in the south and east, to lower lying areas in the north. The main features of the topography, which have a bearing on bulk water supply, are as follows:

 The Magaliesberg, along which a large number of reservoirs have been constructed.  The Waterberg, along which a large number of reservoirs have been constructed.  The Schurveberg.  The Bronberg.  Higher lying areas east of the Magaliesberg, where Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit are located.

The main rivers and springs, along which most of the outfall sewers flow are also shown on Map 2.02. The main features of the topography, which have a bearing on outfall sewer, are as follows:

 The Sesmylspruit and Hennopsriver drain from the Rietvlei dam to the Hartebeespoort dam.  The Moot, which is a valley between the Magaliesberg and the Waterberg, drains westward towards the Hartebeespoort dam.  The Apies- and Pienaars rivers north of the Magaliesberg.  Smaller springs in the MAWIGA/Soshanguve/Nuwe Eersterus area, which all drain north- westwards to the Crocodile River.  Bronkhorstspruit and the Bronkhorstspruit dam.  The Honds River which bisects Bronkhorstspruit.  The Elands River east of Cullinan/Rayton/Refilwe.

2.3 Climate and rainfall CoT has a moderate climate, with warm, sometimes hot and humid summers, and cool to warm, dry, crisp winters. The mean annual rainfall precipitation in the region is ± 700 mm, decreasing somewhat to the north and northwest. Precipitation occurs mainly during summer in the form of thunderstorms, which often results in sewer ingress, which cause sewerage system overflows.

The onset of summer, during September/October is normally fairly hot and also prior to the start of the rainy season. It is during this period that water demand is at a peak, mainly due to irrigation of gardens. Prolonged periods of drought can occur from time-to-time. This results in an area wide shortage of water and consequently water use restrictions are implemented. Climate change

exaggerate these existing water related challenges and create new ones, which are related to climate variability due to extreme weather events and changing rainfall seasons/patterns. 2.4 Population and Demographics The current population of CoT is estimated to be in the order of 3.2 million. Figure 2.01 shows the most recent available figures on the CoT population and growth rates. In-migration is a significant contributor to the growth.

3 500 000 4,0%

3 000 000 3,5%

3,0% 2 500 000 2,5% 2 000 000 2,0% 1 500 000 1,5% 1 000 000 1,0%

500 000 0,5%

0 0,0% 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Population 2 829 507 2 921 204 3 007 655 3 087 974 3 161 809 Population growth rate (%) 3,5% 3,2% 3,0% 2,7% 2,4%

Figure 2.01: City of Tshwane’s population and population growth rate, 2011–2015

The CoT population is characterised by cultural variety, consisting of several black ethnic groups, coloureds, a relatively small oriental and Indian population, as well as a white population, which includes descendants and immigrants of various European nations. 2.5 Land use The CoT area covers approximately 6 370 km2. Approximately 20% of the area is urbanised, followed by open space (8%) and vacant state owned land (7%). The rest (± 65%) is mostly agricultural land.

The developed residential land consists mainly of ± 550 000 single dwelling units. In addition, there are ± 70 000 group/duplex (cluster housing) units, and ± 75 000 units in high-rise flats. There are many relatively large areas on which informal residential settlements have been established. The number of informal dwellings in Tshwane is estimated at ± 150 000 to 200 000. Many of these settlements are on undevelopable land (dolomites, steep slopes, mining rights, etc.) and need to be relocated. Table 2.01 gives an indication of the dwelling type distribution within CoT.

Table 2.01: Dwelling types in City of Tshwane Dwelling type Number Percentage of total House on stand 558 136 61.20% Traditional dwelling 3 916 0.40% Flat 74 488 8.20% Townhouse 68 345 7.50% Backyard room 34 224 3.80% Informal dwelling 164 001 18.00% Caravan/tent 674 0.10% Other 7 698 0.80%

The major retail and office space areas are in the Pretoria Central Business District (CBD) as well as in the Hatfield and Menlyn areas, east and south east of Pretoria. Other notable areas are Centurion City and the Akasia CBD. There are also smaller commercial centres in Cullinan, Rayton and Bronkhorstspruit.

The most important industrial areas are in Rosslyn, Pretoria Industrial, Waltloo, Garankuwa Industrial, and Babelegi. Large-scale industrial developments are also currently taking place in the south of Centurion adjacent to the Ben Schoeman highway (e.g. Samrand). There are also smaller industrial centres in Rayton and Bronkhorstspruit. 2.6 Spatial Development Framework CoT has an approved Spatial Development Framework (SDF), which has been interpreted by the Water and Sanitation Division (in consultation with the CoT Town Planners) to result in the identification of 2400 potential Future Development Areas (FDA), including potential densification of existing developments. Each of these FDA’s has been assigned an anticipated implementation year, land use, density and Unit Water Demand (UWD), which is represented per unit or per hectare. The potential FDA’s also include the in-situ upgrading of developable informal settlements, and the relocation of informal settlements on undevelopable land, as per the Tshwane Housing Strategy.

Map 2.03 shows the FDA’s themed per land use and on Map 2.04 those anticipated to develop in the next 5 years. Some of the “hot spots” on this map, where there is a distinct lack of bulk water infrastructure, includes West Centurion, Soshanguve East, and Bronkhorstspruit.

Map 2.01: CoT area of jurisdiction areas within the water drainage (catchment) areas

Map 2.02: Topography

Map 2.03: Spatial Development Framework

Map 2.04: Developments anticipated in the next 5 Years

3 BACKGROUND TO MASTER PLANNING The Water and Sewer Master Planning process involves an assessment of the current and future water and sanitation requirements of City of Tshwane (CoT) for a 45-50 year planning horizon. The scope of this document is only for the following 5 years, however it is necessary to be cognisant of the full master plan process, as many of the 2017/21 CAPEX requirements form part of long term strategies. The water and sewer master plans pursue the following objectives:

 Conformity with pre-defined operational requirements and standards.  Optimal use of existing facilities with excess capacity.  Optimisation with regards to capital, maintenance and operational cost.  Conformity with the Land Development Objectives (LDO's).

In addition, the master planning process is informed by the following high level planning objectives at CoT:

 Water security and assurance of supply.  Meeting ‘blue drop’ and ‘green drop’ status.  Water born sewers and tap water to all formal areas.  Basic water to all informal settlements.  Institutional Design Criteria; such as the required emergency storage at reservoirs, special standards in dolomite areas, etc.

A brief summary of how this is achieved in the context of water and sewer is described below under:

3.1 Water Infrastructure Planning The existing water systems are evaluated on the basis of their maximum potential present Annual Average Daily Demand (AADD), i.e. as though all presently developed stands are occupied and are using water in accordance with the calculated Unit Water Demands (UWD). For the planning of future systems, AADD’s of all potential future developments and upgraded informal areas are added to the system. The only way to assess the existing network and the impact of likely future developments at the required level of detail is through the use of computerized hydraulic modelling. Accordingly, city- wide hydraulic models of the existing and future networks are maintained and updated on a quarterly basis.

The network’s compliance with operational criteria such as maximum and minimum pressure, maximum allowable flow velocities, required pump capacities and reservoir storage capacity is assessed in the context of both the current and future network demands. Infrastructure requirements (subsequently referred to as Master Plan (MP) items) are generated on the basis of (1) shortcomings and backlogs in the existing network, and (2) those which are required to enable future development. Additional drivers for change in the Master Plan include strategic/aspirational requirements for the network, such as the minimisation of supply zones fed directly off a bulk pipe, pressure reduction and a decreased reliance on external bulk supply. Priorities are assigned to MP items in accordance with how urgently they are required, denoted by the suggested year of implementation.

3.2 Sewer Infrastructure Planning The master planning process for the sewer systems follows the same philosophy as described for water. Existing systems are evaluated on the basis of their maximum potential present Peak Day Dry Weather Flow (PDDWF) and for the planning of future systems, PDDWF’s of all potential future developments and upgraded informal areas are added. To enable this, computerized city-wide hydraulic models of the existing and future network are maintained and updated on a quarterly basis.

The operational and design parameters for assessing sewer systems include criteria such as minimum pipe spare capacity, maximum and minimum flow velocities, pump station capacities and Waste Water treatment Work (WWTW) capacity. As with water, MP items are generated on the basis of (1) shortcomings and backlogs in the existing network, and (2) those which are required to enable future development.

4 WATER NETWORK 4.1 Current Demand On the basis of bulk water meter information from all the City of Tshwane’s (CoT’s) water sources, the year 2016 Annual Average Daily Demand (AADD) was 920 ML/d, which include external supplies to Johannesburg (Midrand), Moretele, Madibeng and Thembisile. With some adjustments for rationalisation of Unit Water Demands (UWD’s), meter inaccuracies and water losses the current theoretical AADD for the CoT water system is estimated at 924 ML/d.

CoT has approximately 720 000 formal water customers on 580 000 stands in the billing systems. In addition, CoT monitors water supply to 200 000 informal settlements units. External supplies to Madibeng, Moretele, Thembisile and Johannesburg (Midrand) are also monitored and billed. The current CoT water loss figure of 27% is the difference between the bulk water inputs from all the water sources, and the billed or monitored (metered) supply to customers and informal areas.

For purposes of evaluating and planning the CoT water and sanitation systems, it has been assumed that the long term water loss figure can be brought down to 20% through Water Conservation and Demand Management (WCWDM) – see Chapter 4.8.

4.2 Water Service Level The current water service levels in CoT are given in Table 4.01.

Table 4.01: Current water service levels Description 2016 (Dwellings) WATER (ABOVE MIN. LEVEL) Piped water inside yard/dwelling 630 349 Using public tap (within 200m from dwelling) 53 772 Minimum Service Level and Above sub-total 684 121 Minimum Service and Above Percentage 86% WATER (BELOW MIN. LEVEL) Using public tap (more than 200m from dwelling) 6 725 Other water supply (more than 200m from dwelling) 102 172 Below Minimum Service Level sub-total 108 897 Below Minimum Service and Percentage 14% Total number of households* 793 017

4.3 Future Demand Future demands for CoT are determined on the basis that current unoccupied stands will become occupied, and the future expansion of the network and densification of existing development will occur in accordance with the approved Spatial Development Framework (SDF).

4.3.1 Infilling of vacant stands There are many developed unoccupied vacant stands in CoT. Such stands have been identified from the billing systems. If a theoretical UWD is applied to these stands they can contribute a further 164 ML/d (including losses) to the present AADD. This will result in a total potential fully occupied AADD of 1 088 ML/d based on the extent of the current network.

4.3.2 Spatial Development Framework and Future Water Requirements The future development areas (FDA) are based on the SDF, which are anticipated to develop over a horizon of 45 years. The FDA’s will add a net contribution of 1 478 ML/d to the future AADD. With an additional growth in the water supply to external areas, the potential future AADD is estimated to increase from the existing 924 ML/d to 2 565 ML/d over the next 45y to 50y. This includes an AADD of 42 ML/d which will be generated in the Johannesburg water system, but needs to be accounted for in that it will end up in the CoT sewerage system.

The water master plan for the CoT was therefore compiled for a future “ultimate” AADD of 2,591 ML/d, to be realised in 45 – 50 years from now. This development plan, however, focusses on the requirements of the first 5 years. 4.4 Water Resources The principle source of bulk water to the CoT is Rand Water, which accounts for 78% of the total bulk input to the network. The existing system has 49 connections to the RW system, which imports water from the Vaal River system. These connections mostly supply under pressure into CoT reservoirs and water towers, but in some cases the pressure is utilised to supply directly into reticulation networks.

CoT Water Treatment Plants (WTP), which receive water extracted from local watercourses and impoundments, provide a total of 16% of the bulk water used by the network. These WTPs include Rietvlei, Roodeplaat, Temba, Bronkhorstspruit and a number of smaller package plants located around Bronkhorstspruit dam. A further 1% is provided by Local WTP’s that are owned and operated by Magalies Water, which include Klipdrift, Wallmannsthal and Cullinan WTP.

The remaining 5% of the bulk water requirement is made up by boreholes and springs. Significant contributors in this regard are the Upper and Lower Fountains (which are essentially springs) which have a reported assured yield of 22 ML/d, and Sterkfontein Spring which delivers ±4 ML/d. Rietvlei springs also provide ±7 ML/d, however this is blended with the supply at Rietvlei WTP. The 16 boreholes in the network are widely distributed and generally supply water to rural and peripheral areas, however a number of larger boreholes in the south of the network each contribute in excess of 1ML/d to the bulk system.

The potential growth in demand from the current 924 ML/d to 2 591 ML/d will have a significant impact on the water resources and associated bulk infrastructure at CoT. The current Water MP assumes that the majority of water supply will continue to be provided by Rand Water from the Vaal River system. Significant capacity upgrades will also be required at almost all of the CoT and MW WTP’s, as well as the bulk distribution and storage infrastructure required to convey this to the current and future supply zones across the network.

Conservatively, the future reliance on springs and boreholes has been reduced due to the risk associated with the impact of Climate Change and/or possible contamination. The loads on current and future water resources are summarised in Table 4.02 and shown in Figure 4.01.

Note that an alternative Water Resources Master Plan (WRMP) has also been prepared, in which CoT will endeavour to maximise their own resources without compromising the supply to future developments elsewhere. This alternative WRMP is discussed in Chapter 6.

Figure 4.01: City of Tshwane Present and Future reliance on Water Sources City of Tshwane Present Water Sources City of Tshwane Future Water Sources Boreholes Magalies Boreholes and Magalies WTP; and fountains; WTP; 3,30% fountains; 5,40% 1,60% 2,70%

CoT WTP; 17,70% CoT WTP; Rand Rand 18,80% Water; Water; 72,50% 78,00%

Table 4.02: City of Tshwane water resources (current Master Plan) Present supply Future supply Water Resource AADD AADD Comment % % (kl/d) (kl/d) From Vaal River via multiple RW Rand Water* 713 211 77.60% 2 022 366 78.04% bulk connection points Values inc. blended supply from Rietvlei WTP* 34 512 3.76% 48 030 1.85% Rietvlei Springs Rietvlei Springs - - - - Inc. in Rietvlei WTP supply Roodeplaat WTP* 32 079 3.49% 110 747 4.27% Temba WTP 40 379 4.39% 183 411 7.08% Klipdrift WTP 3 031 0.33% 9 075 0.35% Owned by Magalies Water (MW) Wallmannsthal WTP 4 426 0.48% 23 246 0.90% Owned by Magalies Water (MW) Cullinan WTP 4 773 0.52% 37 272 1.44% Owned by Magalies Water (MW) Bronkhorstspruit WTP 38 552 4.19% 109 260 4.22% Extended in future to consolidate Bronkhorstbaai WTP 197 0.02% 4 165 0.16% WTP's around BHS dam Abandon in favour of extended Summerplace WTP 82 0.01% - - BHBaai WTP Kungwini Country Abandon in favour of extended Estate WTP 562 0.06% - - BHBaai WTP Abandon in favour of extended Aqua Vista WTP 248 0.03% - - BHBaai WTP Abandon in favour of extended Clover Hill WTP 315 0.03% - - BHBaai WTP Bayadam WTP - - 823 0.03% Future WTP Only reliable yields assumed for Fountains 37 940 4.13% 32 086 1.24% future Sterkfontein Spring - - - - Inc. in Fountains Supply Rietvlei BH 5 348 0.58% 6 171 0.24% Assumed unreliable in future - Varsfontein BH 1 806 0.20% 2 059 0.08% supply from RW Assumed unreliable - supply from Kentron BH - - - - RW Assumed unreliable - supply from Valhalla BH - - - - RW Assumed unreliable - supply from Zonderwater BH - - - - Cullinan WTP Onverwacht BH's 534 0.06% 734 0.03% Sokhulumi BH's 1 088 0.12% 1 971 0.08% TOTALS 919 084 100% 2 591 416 100%

4.5 Network Overview and Existing Infrastructure Map 4.01 shows the layout of the complete CoT water system, inclusive of some cross-boundary supplies. Table 4.03 below is a summary of the elements that make up the CoT system.

Table 4.03: Summary of City of Tshwane water network elements (as in model) Elements Count Length (m) Capacity (kl; kl/d) Replacement Value (R) Pipe 11 301 601 R15 205 807 045 Check Valve 325 R39 814 764 Pump 219 R361 108 647 Valve(PRV) 305 R103 271 742 Valve(FCV) 162 R144 235 000 Valve(PSV) 6 R1 625 400 Valve(PBV) 1 R3 387 020 Valve(TCV) 1 R183 400 Subtotal 694 11 301 926 R15 859 433 018 Reservoir 170 1 913 656 R3 420 678 951 Tower 40 14 356 R196 809 386 Tank 8 130 R846 300 BPT 2 1 646 R12 582 024 Bulk connection 49 - R37 268 000 WTP 13 250 600 R1 855 028 333 Well 10 - Borehole 16 - Dam 7 60 000 River 2 16 000 Subtotal 317 R5 523 212 993 TOTALS R21 382 646 011

4.5.1 Bulk System With reference to Table 4.03, the CoT existing bulk water distribution system serving the current AADD of 924 ML/d consists of:

 49 RW connections.  4 Major own WTP’s.  2 Minor own WTP’s.  3 MW owned WTP’s.  A few privately owned package WTP’s.  A number of fountains, BH’s and springs.  860 km of bulk pipelines (216km of which is external or privately owned).  170 storage reservoirs (19 of which are external or privately owned) on 119 sites with a total capacity of 1,913 ML.  40 elevated water towers with total capacity 14 ML (8 of which are external or privately owned).  99 pumping stations (19 of which are external or privately owned).  235 primary WDZ’s (per reservoir, water tower, or direct link to bulk system).

The total replacement value of the bulk and raw water infrastructure is R8.7 billion. External or privately owned bulk and raw water elements account for a further R1.7 billion.

4.5.2 Reticulation The total length of reticulation network is approximately 10,400km, of which 600km is external or privately owned. The total replacement value of the reticulation network (including associated valves, tanks, etc.) is R10.4 billion. External or privately owned reticulation elements account for a further R0.6 billion.

4.6 Future Water Infrastructure Requirements Map 4.02 shows the water master plan for the entire horizon. A master plan cost summary per region and system type is given in Table 4.04. The total capital requirement shown, in Table is R15.6 billion. Assuming this is carried out over the planning horizon of 45 years, this equates to an annual spend of R350 million/a.

Map 4.03 shows the water master plan for the next 5 years. When considering the next 5 years only,

Table 4.05 shows a capital requirement of R5.5 billion, resulting in a considerably higher annual spend requirement of R1.1 billion/a. This reflects the high priority assigned in the master plan to address the current backlog in infrastructure requirements.

If the effect of external bulk and private systems are omitted from the calculations, the annual spends reduces to R297.7 million/a, for the entire MP horizon, and R822.2 million/a, for the next 5 years. 4.7 Overview of Key Water Projects A full list of Projects that are scheduled to begin within the next 5 years is provided in Annexure A. It is beyond the scope of this report to discuss each of these individually, however the following major (macro) projects warrant further discussion:

 Themba WTP expansion due to water shortage (IDP-710878T).  Reservoirs at Mamelodi R5, Parkmore HL (Menlyn), Grootfontein, Mooikloof, Sunderland Ridge, Highveld, Sekanpaneng, La-Montagne (Nelmapius), Pretoriusrand (Olievenhoutbosch) (IDP- 712534)  Extension of the Rietvlei WTP and Roodeplaat for purposes of water security  Pumping system from Roodeplaat WTP to Doornpoort East/West reservoirs & Roodplaat- Doornpoort bulk pipe line (IDP-711335DP).  Upgrade Wallmannsthal WTP and pumps (BLK-WT-159) – Magalies Water.  Southerly reinforcement (phase 2) and easterly reinforcement of Bronberg (Kungwini) bulk system (BLK-KW-081) and Extension of Bronberg (Kungwini) bulk from Goedemoed junction to Mooiwater reservoir + new reservoir (phase 1) (BLK-KW-083).  Replacement and upgrading of deficient bulk pipelines (IDP-711335D).  Upgrade of bulk water supply pipeline from Mamelodi to Bronkhorstspruit (Ekangala) – Rand Water

The listed projects have to be implemented by CoT but can be partly financed from bulk services contributions by developers. There are also a number of projects included in the MP that pertain to external Water Service Providers (viz. Magalies Water and Rand Water) but are critical to the operation of the CoT system.

Table 4.04: Regional Water Master Plan cost requirements for entire planning horizon External External Private Region Bulk External Bulk Raw Reticulation Private Bulk Reticulation Raw Reticulation Grand Total Madibeng R2 273 880 R89 000 100 R38 910 900 R130 184 880 Moretele R0 Region1 R925 404 340 R9 728 880 R7 776 020 R573 300 R1 292 380 880 R2 235 863 420 Region2 R1 706 751 340 R517 999 160 R1 120 254 240 R3 345 004 740 Region3 R709 876 160 R1 694 000 R735 681 380 R1 447 251 540 Region4 R607 417 300 R1 694 000 R680 260 R973 605 640 R1 583 397 200 Region5 R464 531 340 R614 262 040 R4 693 220 R4 306 400 R826 807 660 R1 914 600 660 Region6 R1 692 906 180 R872 262 020 R242 620 R1 757 200 900 R4 322 611 720 Region7 R246 019 620 R3 872 400 R2 296 700 R332 624 600 R584 813 320 Grand Total R6 355 180 160 R2 110 512 600 R46 686 920 R4 693 220 R5 802 580 R2 296 700 R7 038 555 300 R15 563 727 480

Considering only first 5 years, the summary changes as follows:

Table 4.05: Regional Water Master Plan cost requirements for next 5 years

External External Private Region Bulk External Bulk Raw Reticulation Private Bulk Reticulation Raw Reticulation Grand Total Madibeng R2 273 880 R72 597 140 R35 451 080 R110 322 100 Moretele R0 Region1 R313 400 500 R4 880 960 R329 000 R288 827 840 R607 438 300 Region2 R919 136 400 R259 153 720 R328 925 380 R1 507 215 500 Region3 R243 120 920 R178 059 420 R421 180 340 Region4 R286 048 140 R680 260 R130 603 900 R417 332 300 Region5 R353 177 580 R302 692 180 R4 693 220 R4 306 400 R75 279 540 R740 148 920 Region6 R494 520 180 R678 463 100 R102 200 R334 211 500 R1 507 296 980 Region7 R96 231 240 R2 463 860 R593 740 R66 821 160 R166 110 000 Grand Total R2 707 908 840 R1 315 370 000 R40 332 040 R4 693 220 R5 417 860 R593 740 R1 402 728 740 R5 477 044 440

Map 4.01: Layout of Current City of Tshwane Water distribution network

Map 4.02: Master Plan for entire water network

Map 4.03: 5 Year Master Plan for water network

4.8 Water Loss and WCWDM Water Loss and Water Conservation and Water Demand Management (WCWDM) are not part of the scope of this document but a cursory summary is relevant in the context of its impact on infrastructure replacements and upgrades.

The CoT has actively been engaged in WCWDM activities for a number of years. In this regard the CoT drafted their first WCWDM strategy in 2008 and revised it in September 2015, of which a copy is available from the W&S Division upon request. The latest revision will be ready by September 2017.

The non-revenue water (NRW) component of the city is at 27.5% as at 31 January 2017. Figure 4.02 below depicts the fluctuations in the city’s NRW since January 2007:

Figure 4.02: City of Tshwane historical Non-Revenue Water

4.9 Potable Water Quality Water Quality is not part of the scope of this document but a cursory summary is relevant in the context of its impact on infrastructure upgrades and extensions.

CoT purchases more than 70% of all potable water from RW and is thus not responsible for the input quality of this water. CoT does however have to ensure the quality of water from its own surface water sources (WTP’s) and groundwater sources (fountains and boreholes). In addition, CoT has to ensure that input water quality is maintained in the distribution system. To this end there is an extensive monitoring system in place that is being managed from a laboratory at Rietvlei WTP. The

results of this monitoring system are uploaded to the DWS Blue Drop website, where it contributes amongst other factors to the overall Blue Drop status of the CoT systems. Table 4.05 below summarises the historical CoT Blue Drop performance:

Table 4.05: City of Tshwane historical Blue Drop status 2014 2015+ Water Treatment Plants/ 2010 BD 2011 BD 2012 BD 2013 BD BD BD Supply Area Report Report Report Report Report Reports Tshwane Central and South Not 96,36% 97,22% 99,20% 99,50% 97,56% (Rietvlei WTP and RW) Assessed Tshwane North Not 96,36% 95,48% 96,88% 97,00% 97,22% (Roodeplaat WTP) Assessed Not CBD (mainly RW) 96,36% 92,22% 97,02% 98,00% 96,04% Assessed Not Bronkhorstspruit WTP 41,25% 81,24% 95,33% 97,00% 96,08% Assessed Not Temba & Klipdrift (MW) 96,36% 82,35% 93,50% 97,00% 88,97% Assessed Not Not Not Not Not Cullinan WTP(MW) 95,05% Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Not Not Not Not Not Wallmansthal WTP (MW) 90,02% Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed Assessed

Blue No Blue Drop Drop Achieved Achieved

5 Sewer Network 5.1 Present Peak Day Dry Weather Flows Not all sewer flows in City of Tshwane (CoT) are bulk metered at Wastewater Treatment Work (WWTW) inlets, and even where such bulk metering exists it is not always accurate. Therefore, a straightforward application of bulk metered sewer flows, to determine an accurate present PDDWF, for CoT is not possible.

Through various sewer flow monitoring programs, CoT has calibrated sewer flows generated by the various land use types in the CoT with their typical Unit Water Demands (UWD’s). For this purpose, Unit Hydrographs (UH’s) have been developed, which for planning purposes represent the peak day volumes and patterns of sewer flow discharge for every typical land use unit in CoT. In addition, parameters for groundwater infiltration and storm water ingress were also determined.

Applying these hydrographs and parameters to the existing water demands, and routing them through a calibrated model of the entire CoT sewerage system, indicates a total existing Peak Day Dry Weather Flow (PDDWF) of 557 ML/d for the CoT. 5.2 Sewer Service Level The current sewer service levels in CoT are given in Table 5.01:

Table 5.01: Current sewer service levels Description 2016 (Dwellings) SANITATION/SEWERAGE (ABOVE MINIMUM LEVEL) Flush toilet (connected to sewerage)* 582 994 Flush toilet (septic tank)^ - VIP Pit toilet (ventilated) 4 975 Double vault UDS toilet (above min service level) 12 943 Minimum service level and above sub-total 600 912 Minimum service level and above Percentage 75% SANITATION/SEWERAGE (BELOW MINIMUM LEVEL) Bucket - No toilet provision/Other toilet (below min service level) 185 289 Below Minimum service level sub-total 203 174 Below Minimum service level Percentage 25% Total households** 804 085

5.3 Future Peak Day Dry Weather Flows As done with the water network, future sewer flows for CoT are determined on the basis that current unoccupied stands will become occupied and that the future expansion of networks and existing development densifications will occur in accordance with the Spatial Development Framework (SDF).

5.3.1 Infilling of vacant stands If a typical UH is applied to each of the currently vacant stands within developed areas in CoT, they can contribute another 71 ML/d to the present PDDWF, for a total potential fully occupied present PDDWF of 628 ML/d.

5.3.2 Spatial Development Framework and Future Sewer Flows The 2400 future development areas (FDA’s) based on the approved Spatial Development Framework (SDF) are anticipated to develop over a horizon of 45 years. Each of these FDA’s has been assigned an anticipated land use, density, UH, additional sewer pipe length (for calculation of groundwater infiltration) and implementation year.

Many of the FDA’s are existing informal areas, which currently have no flush sanitation, but are earmarked to be in-situ upgraded to full service level.

The FDA’s will add a net contribution of 1192 ML/d PDDWF, together with the 71 ML/d PDDWF due to occupation of existing vacant stands. This includes future developments in Johannesburg within the Midrand region, which can generate a further 30 ML/d. The potential future PDDWF is therefore estimated to increase from existing 557 ML/d to 1820 ML/d over the next 45y to 50y.

The Sewer MP for CoT was therefore compiled for future “ultimate” PDDWF of 1820 ML/d, to be realised in 45 - 50 years from now. This development plan, however, focusses on the requirements of the first 5 years. 5.4 Network Overview and Existing Infrastructure Map 5.01 shows the layout of the complete CoT sewer system. As illustrated, the system comprises of 8 different main drainage areas.

Table 5.02, below is a summary of the elements that make up the CoT system. With reference to Table 5.02, the existing sewer system serving CoT consists of:

 19 own WWTW’s  15 private or institutionally owned WWTW’s  8,987km of Gravity mains (of which 539 km is external or privately owned)  86km of rising main (18km of which is external or privately owned)  124 Pump structures (45 of which are external or privately owned

Table 5.02: Summary of City of Tshwane sewer network elements Elements Count Length (m) Replacement Value (R) Gravity Pipe 8 954 236 R19 940 725 874 Bridge Pipe 1 698 R11 738 263 Culvert/Sleeve Pipe 4 020 R16 960 741 Encased Pipe 15 752 R110 770 903 Siphon Pipe 10 774 R140 331 458 Tunnel Pipe 794 R46 606 082 Subtotals 8 987 274 R20 267 133 324 Rising Main 86 015 R213 061 625 Subtotals 86 015 R213 061 625 Manhole 160 365 R3 458 000 Sub-Catchment 7 R- End Manhole 16 R- Rodding Eye 7 599 R- Top End 1 920 R- T-Piece 143 R- Dummy 141 R- Flow Meter 6 R- Diversion 320 R79 205 000 Conservancy Tank 4 R3 076 189 Pump Structure 124 R227 858 456 WWTW 39 R7 555 571 646 Subtotals 170 684 R7 869 169 291 TOTALS R28 349 364 241

5.5 Future Sewer Infrastructure Requirements Map 5.02 shows the sewer master plan for the entire horizon. A sewer master plan cost summary per region and system type is given in Table 5.03 and Table 5.04.

The total capital requirement, shown in Table 5.03, is R22 billion. Assuming this is carried out over the planning horizon of 45 years, this equates to an annual spend of R489 million/a.

Map 5.03 shows the sewer master plan for the next 5 years. When considering the next 5 years only, Table 5.04 shows a capital requirement of R7.9 billion, resulting in a considerably higher annual spend requirement of R1.6 billion/a. As with the water Master Plan, this reflects the high priority assigned in the Master Plan to addressing the current backlog in infrastructure requirements.

If the effect of external bulk and private systems are omitted from the calculations, the annual spends reduces to R485.7 million/a, for the entire Master Plan horizon, and R1.56 billion/a, for the next 5 years.

5.5.1 Waste Water Treatment CoT is responsible for own waste water treatment and a large portion of the future required Capex is for the provision of additional capacity. Table 5.05 lists the existing and future required capacities at the CoT WWTW’s. Note that this list excludes a number of smaller privately owned WWTW’s.

5.6 Overview of key Sewer Projects A full list of projects scheduled to begin within the next 5 years are provided in Annexure A. It is beyond the scope of this report to discuss each of these individually, however the following major (macro) projects warrant further discussion:

 Extension of the existing 150 ML/day Rooiwal North WWTW sludge facility, with an additional 80ML/day Biochemical Nutrient Removal Module (IDP-710411D).  Extension of the existing 60 ML/day Baviaanspoort WWTW sludge facility, with an additional 40ML/day Biochemical Nutrient Removal Module (IDP-710411F1).  Extension of the existing 30 ML/day Zeekoegat WWTW sludge facility, with an additional 50ML/day Biochemical Nutrient Removal Module (IDP-710411B).  Backlog eradication projects in greater Temba and Ekangala (IDP-710878)

The listed projects all have to be implemented by CoT, but can be partly financed from bulk services contributions by developers.

Table 5.03: Regional Sewer Master Plan cost requirements for entire planning horizon External External External Private Private Private Region Bulk Collector Bulk Collector Reticulation Bulk Collector Reticulation Reticulation Grand Total Johannesburg R25 842 700 R18 592 600 R10 697 600 R55 132 900 Madibeng R15 059 500 R15 059 500 Region1 R2 944 723 900 R314 391 900 R118 313 000 R3 377 428 800 Region2 R6 066 596 300 R411 186 000 R1 708 000 R1 026 000 R51 695 800 R6 532 212 100 Region3 R384 274 500 R196 794 700 R195 000 R54 795 400 R636 059 600 Region4 R3 075 378 300 R517 740 300 R8 277 500 R4 566 100 R80 710 200 R3 686 672 400 Region5 R2 218 186 900 R244 338 600 R1 839 600 R15 891 500 R2 137 400 R22 351 800 R2 504 745 800 Region6 R3 709 167 900 R327 089 200 R33 600 R1 714 100 R5 183 000 R11 909 000 R60 076 000 R4 115 172 800 Region7 R829 424 100 R221 877 700 R2 506 900 R6 159 500 R1 619 000 R8 275 300 R1 069 862 500 Grand Total R19 227 751 900 R2 233 418 400 R25 876 300 R33 652 100 R10 697 600 R7 768 600 R36 537 500 R20 426 500 R396 217 500 R21 992 346 400

Considering only first 5 years the summary changes as follows:

Table 5.04: Regional Sewer Master Plan cost requirements for next 5 years External External Private Private Private Region Bulk Collector Collector Reticulation Bulk Collector Reticulation Reticulation Grand Total Johannesburg R4 452 000 R1 197 200 R5 649 200 Madibeng R15 059 500 R15 059 500 Region1 R1 426 504 500 R196 838 600 R84 228 200 R1 707 571 300 Region2 R2 130 081 500 R101 468 600 R1 026 000 R10 470 700 R2 243 046 800 Region3 R261 237 500 R94 460 100 R195 000 R24 698 000 R380 590 600 Region4 R884 040 400 R59 748 600 R4 294 200 R155 800 R10 598 900 R958 837 900 Region5 R986 936 900 R114 759 900 R1 839 600 R15 891 500 R2 137 400 R13 785 500 R1 135 350 800 Region6 R923 720 000 R108 869 700 R1 714 100 R5 183 000 R11 321 000 R14 933 600 R1 065 741 400 Region7 R301 436 900 R74 346 400 R2 506 900 R1 423 800 R782 600 R380 496 600 Grand Total R6 913 957 700 R750 491 900 R19 511 500 R1 197 200 R6 060 600 R26 394 700 R15 233 000 R159 497 500 R7 892 344 100

Table 5.05: CoT existing and future WWTW’s and capacities WWTW Name Current Capacity (Ml/d) Future Capacity (Ml/d) Babelegi WWTW 2,300 3,000 Baviaanspoort WWTW 60,000 310,000 Bronkhorstspruit Dam WWTW - 3,000 Daspoort (East) WWTW 18,000 18,000 Daspoort (West) WWTW 42,000 42,000 Ekangala South WWTW 4,000 To be abandoned Ekangala WWTW 10,000 16,000 Godrich WWTW 5,000 40,000 Klipgat WWTW 55,000 90,000 Lewzene WWTW - 12,000 Olifantsfontein WWTW - 12,500 Rayton WWTW 1,200 11,200 Refilwe WWTW 2,200 To be abandoned Rethabiseng WWTW 2,000 To be abandoned Rietgat WWTW 27,500 122,500 Rietvlei WWTW - 35,000 Rooiwal (East) WWTW 54,500 99,500 Rooiwal (North) WWTW 150,000 400,000 Rooiwal (West) WWTW 40,800 40,800 Sandspruit WWTW 20,000 65,000 Schurveberg WWTW - 50,000 Summerplace WWTW 300 To be abandoned SunderlandRidge WWTW 95,000 210,000 Temba WWTW 12,500 92,500 Zeekoegat WWTW 30,000 160,000

Map 5.01: Layout of Current CoT Sewer network

Map 5.02: Master Plan for entire sewer network

Map 5.03: 5 Year Master Plan for sewer network

5.7 Discharge Water Quality Water Quality is not part of the scope of this document but a cursory summary is relevant in the context.

CoT discharges all its treated effluent into the Crocodile and Olifants River catchments. The effluent quality is monitored by an extensive system that is managed by the laboratory at Daspoort WWTW. The results of this monitoring system are uploaded to the DWS Green Drop website, where it contributes amongst other factors to the overall Green Drop status of the CoT systems.

Table 5.03 below shows the improvements in achieving Green Drop status over the last 10 years as well as the targets set for the immediate future.

Table 5.06: Green Drop history and targets Green Drop Status Planning/Targets 2008- 2009- 2011- 2013- 2015- 2017- Assessment period 2009 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2019-2020 Wastewater Treatment 2010 2011 2013 2015 Number Works Region Report Report Report Report Green Green 1 Babelegi 2 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green Green 2 Baviaanspoort 6 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green Green Green 3 Daspoort 3 Drop No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green Green 4 Ekangala 7 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green 5 Godrich 7 No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Green Drop Green 6 Klipgat 1 No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Green Drop Green Green 7 Rayton 7 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop 8 Refilwe 7 No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD Decommissioned 9 Rethabiseng 7 No GD No GD No GD No GD Decommissioned 10 Rietgat 1 No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD Green Drop Green Green 11 Rooiwal East 2 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green 12 Rooiwal North 2 No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Green Drop 13 Sandspruit 1 No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD No GD Green Drop Green Green 14 Summer Place 7 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Sunderland Green Green 15 Ridge 4 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green Green 16 Temba 2 No GD No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Green Green Green 17 Zeekoegat 5 Drop No GD No GD No GD Drop Drop Green Drop Hennopsriver Green (New) 4 Drop Green Drop Cullinan/Refilwe Green (New) 7 Drop Green Drop Number of WWTWs 10 10 17 17 16 18 17 Number of Green Drops 2 0 0 5 10 15 17

6 Special considerations: Water Resource Master Plan 6.1 Background In 2014, a study was completed concerning the possible upgrading or extension of City of Tshwane’s (CoT) own water resources, with a view to reduce the dependence on imports from the Vaal River basin (via Rand Water). It also concerned the Crocodile River basin and the Olifant’s River basin, which both receive significant sewer return flows from Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg and CoT that influence the yields of the local water resources and water allocations to downstream users.

The local water resource yields of the Crocodile River and Olifant’s River tributaries, which are the sources for the main CoT and Magalies Water WTP’s, are all very much dependant on the above sewer return flows (with Bronkhorstspruit WTP and Cullinan WTP being notable exceptions). Developing or extending CoT’s own water resources will reduce the load on the Vaal River system (via Rand Water), but as a result reduce the return flows into the Crocodile and Olifant’s River basins. A particular constraint in this regard is the assurance of sufficient yield to enable water supply to the proposed Eskom coal fired power plants in Lephalale via the Mokolo Crocodile Water Augmentation Project (MCWAP).

In the Olifants River basin, all Department of Water Affairs (DWA) allocated licences for water abstraction are already being exceeded and water is imported from the Vaal River via a 30 ML/d pumping scheme that delivers water into the Ekandustria reservoirs, for on-supply to Thembisile.

The purpose of the water resource analysis was thus to establish the current and projected future yields of local water resources, while incorporating the effect of current and future WWTW return flow. This will confirm the possible upgrading or extension of CoT’s own water resources, while maintaining the assurance of supply to the system downstream users.

The Master Plans generated and described thus far have been prepared on the basis that there would not be significant restrictions on the availability of external bulk supply (Rand Water). The results of the 2014 WRMP were incorporated into an alternative Master Plan for CoT that considers a restriction of RW supplies, the results of which are described below:

6.2 Current WWTWs and sewer flow The CoT straddles with water divide between the Crocodile River basin in the west, and the Olifants River basin in the east. Approximately 505 ML/d is discharged into the rivers as sewer ADDWF returns. Of this, 96% or the 485 ML/d ends up in the Crocodile River basin, and only 4% or 20 ML/d in the Olifants River basin.

The main CoT WWTW’s discharging to the Crocodile River basin are Sunderland Ridge (95 ML/d), Baviaanspoort (60 ML/d), Zeekoegat (30 ML/d), Daspoort (60 ML/d), Rooiwal (245 ML/d), Temba WWTW (12 ML/d), Rietgat (27 ML/d), Sandspruit (20 ML/d) and Klipgat (55 ML/d). In addition, ERWAT’s Olifantsfontein (105 ML/d) and Hartbeesfontein (45 ML/d) WWTW’s also discharge Ekurhuleni’s sewer flow into the Crocodile River basin, upstream of CoT.

The main CoT WWTW’s that are discharging into the Olifants River basin are Cullinan (2 ML/d), Refilwe (2 ML/d), Rayton (1 ML/d), Godrich (5 ML/d) and two maturation pond systems serving Ekangala.

6.3 Future water demand and sewer flows In accordance with the CoT current water and sewer master plans, which are based on the approved SDF, the CoT AADD is set to increase over the next 45y – 50y to 2591 ML/d, with concomitant increase in ADDWF to 1593 ML/d. Note that these values assume a reduction of losses from the current 27% to an anticipated 20%, on the basis of improved Water Conservation practices.

Table 6.01: Water Requirement Projections (million kl/annum) Annual Project compound 2012 2013 2014 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 description growth (%) CoT WRMP - High 336.837 349.148 361.459 373.769 435.323 496.877 558.43 61.984 2.6 CoT WRMP - Selected (Sc1) 323.713 332.854 340.995 357.633 407.363 454.489 501.825 542.632 2.24 DWA Recon 306.938 312.91 316.881 337.846 375.752 408.451 441.57 451.63 1.81 Theoretical - - 309.055 317.708 362.979 412.684 466.915 525.699 2.56 Theoretical (+neighbours) - - 331.878 340.531 362.979 412.684 466.915 525.699 2.21 Scenario A (301.149) (301.662) (301.903) 310.356 354.579 403.134 456.109 513.534 2.56 Scenario D (301.149) (301.662) (301.903) 311.262 362.593 420.345 487.295 563.538 3.02 Scenario E (301.149) (301.662) (301.903) 311.363 359.335 415.099 475.574 542.123 2.83 Scenario E with WCWDM (301.149) (301.662) (301.903) 309.591 348.703 397.38 457.855 524.404 2.66 Scenario D (+neighbours until 2020) (325.410) (325.710) (325.726) 334.085 362.593 420.345 487.295 563.538 2.66 Scenario E (+neighbours until 2020) (325.410) (325.710) (325.726) 334.186 359.335 415.099 475.574 542.123 2.47 Scenario E with WCWDM (+neighbours until 2020) (325.410) (325.710) (325.726) 332.414 348.703 397.38 457.855 524.404 2.31 Notes: Historical volumes shown in brackets Neighbours included where underlined WRMP refers to Tshwane Water Resource Master Plan Study (Jan 2014) Annual compound growth is calculated from 2014 to 2035

The most probable scenario is scenario E, which is based on the following assumptions:

 3% increase in Residential Low Income from 2014 to 2025 and a further 3% increase by 2035, i.e. people moving up from Informal to Residential Low Income category (total increase in Residential Low Income of 6%).  2% increase in Residential Medium Income from 2014 to 2025 and a further 2% increase by 2035, i.e. people moving up from Informal to Residential Low Income to the Residential Medium Income category (total increase in Residential Medium Income of 4%).  1% increase in Residential High Income from 2014 to 2025 and a further 1% increase by 2035, i.e. people moving up from Informal to Residential Medium Income to Residential High Income category (total increase in Residential High Income of 2%).

 Realistic population projection with a compound growth rate of 2.56%. (Initial Realistic population growth rate of 2.8%/annum tapering off to 2.4%annum). 6.4 Current bulk water Master Plan and its requirement for future water resources The current bulk water MP for CoT was compiled without any prior knowledge of the limitations on and expansion possibilities of the water resources supplying CoT’s and MW’s WTP’s. In this context, most of the future requirement for water was assumed to be from RW, but the following WTP matters were included in the MP:

 Rietvlei WTP – to remain at 40 ML/d since there was no knowledge of additional resource.  Roodeplaat WTP – to increase from 60 ML/d to 120 ML/d being the ultimate demand driven requirement.  Temba WTP – to increase from 60 ML/d to 180 ML/d as required for projected future summer peak demands.  MW Klipdrift WTP – to remain at 18 ML/d (of which 8 ML/d is supplied to CoT), with the slack taken up by extensions to the Temba WTP.  MW Wallmannsthal WTP – to increase from 12 ML/d to 24 ML/d, with the slack taken up by augmentation from the RW system.  MW Cullinan WTP - to increase from 16 ML/d to 48 ML/d as required for projected future summer peak demands.  MW Bronkhorstspruit WTP - to increase from 54 ML/d to 174 ML/d as required for projected future summer peak demands (in addition to existing 30 ML/d RW augmentation scheme already in place).

6.5 Current sewer reticulation and WWTW Master Plan The following extensions to the main WWTWs are foreseen in the sewer reticulation MP:

Crocodile River basin:

 Sunderland Ridge WWTW (95 ML/d to be extended to 217 ML/d).  Schurveberg WWTW (proposed WWTW with 46 ML/d capacity).  Baviaanspoort WWTW (60 ML/d to be extended to 312 ML/d).  Zeekoegat WWTW (30 ML/d to be extended to 160 ML/d).  Daspoort WWTW (60 ML/d).  Rooiwal WWTW (245 ML/d to be extended to 548 ML/d).  Temba WWTW (12 ML/d to be extended to 89 ML/d).  Rietgat WWTW (27 ML/d to be extended to 115 ML/d).  Sandspruit WWTW (20 ML/d to be extended to 62 ML/d).  Klipgat WWTW (55 ML/d to be extended to 95 ML/d).  ERWAT Olifantsfontein WWTW (105 ML/d to be extended to 157 ML/d).  ERWAT Hartbeesfontein WWTW (45 ML/d).  ERWAT Rietvlei WWTW (proposed WWTW with 193 ML/d capacity).

Olifants River basin:

 Lewzene WWTW (proposed with 7 ML/d capacity, replacing Cullinan and Refilwe WWTWs).  Rayton WWTW (1 ML/d to be extended to 11 ML/d).

 Godrich WWTW (5 ML/d to be extended to 40 ML/d).  Ekangala WWTW (proposed with 20 ML/d capacity, replacing existing maturation ponds). 6.6 Water resource analysis Water Resources Planning Model (WRPM) analyses were conducted to establish the maximum surplus yield that could potentially be utilised without affecting the assurance of supply of any users through an iterative process.

6.6.1 Surplus yields in the Crocodile River basin The results of the analysis indicated that, after meeting MCWAP requirements, a surplus yield was available in Hartebeespoort Dam, Roodeplaat Dam, Rietvlei Dam and the Apies River system. The analysis results concluded that the total surplus yields (as of 2014) available from Rietvlei Dam, Roodeplaat Dam and Olifantsfontein WWTW (Hartebeespoort Dam) are 4.7 Mm3/a, 9.2 Mm3/a and 27.6 m3/a respectively and are projected to increase to 33.0 Mm3/a, 63.6 Mm3/a and 44.5 Mm3/a respectively by 2057 (mainly due to increased sewer return flows).

Rietvlei WTP and Roodeplaat WTP are at present the most appropriate points for access to the additional water resources available in the Crocodile River catchments. The reasons for this are, that the sites houses substantial established WTPs, which draw water from the two largest impoundments in the city, providing appropriate buffers and reservoirs for raw water storage. The only portion of the Hartebeespoort surplus yield that would be feasible for the CoT to utilise is the return flows from the ERWAT Olifantsfontein WWTW, which contribute to the Hartebeespoort Dam yield.

The surplus yields in the Crocodile River basin are sufficient to allow the following:

 Stepwise increase of the Rietvlei WTP capacity from 40 ML/d to 140 ML/d.  Further increase of the Rietvlei WTP capacity to 240 ML/d if water is transferred from the ERWAT Olifantsfontein WWTW to the Rietvlei Dam.  Stepwise increase of the Roodeplaat WTP capacity from 60 ML/d to 240 ML/d.  Increasing the Temba WTP from 60 ML/d to 180 ML/d in step with the peak summer requirements.

Additional capacity created at Rietvlei WTP (with or without Olifanstfontein WWTW transfer) can be efficiently absorbed into the bulk water distribution system.

In order to efficiently utilise the additional Roodeplaat WTP capacity, it will be required to increase the supply into the Wallmannsthal system, thereby eliminating the need for any further Wallmannsthal WTP expansions.

6.6.2 Deficit in the Olifants River basin The results of the WRPM analysis, with the CoT projection, showed that the users cannot be supplied according to their required assurance criteria. The following interventions will be required to ensure sufficient water resource availability:

 Total surplus yield from Rust de Winter Dam required as support.  The successful implementation of WCDM initiatives to achieve total savings of 12.8 Mm3/a.  Additional augmentation of approximately 14 Mm3/a.

There is no further yield available for the required increases in capacity at the Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit WTPs. The only option for augmenting this shortage is additional supply from RW into these two systems.

6.7 Proposed Expansion of Rietvlei WTP (with transfer from Olifantsfontein WWTW) If a transfer scheme from Olifantsfontein were to be implemented, this would involve:

 A receiving works on the site of the Olifantsfontein WWTW.  A pumping station.  13 km of pipeline to transfer the raw water across the catchment.  Receiving works at the Marais Dam just upstream of Rietvlei Dam.

Based on the yield analyses, a transfer capacity of 80 ML/d could be supplied by 2020, and a further 40 ML/d by 2045. The expansion of the Rietvlei WTP can then be executed according to the following timeframes.

 Current capacity = 40 ML/d.  2020: 100 ML/d expansion.  2035: 50 ML/d expansion.  2045: 50 ML/d expansion.  WTP capacity at 2055 = 240 ML/d.

It is proposed that the expansions be implemented on open land to the north of the Rietvlei Dam wall, which will require pumping of the raw water to this higher elevated site. The following additional infrastructure will need to be provided:

 A new abstraction facility as the current unit has reached its capacity.  A raw water pumping station to deliver water to the new site.  A new sludge handling facility.

The existing 40 ML/d capacity of Rietvlei WTP is pumped into the Klapperkop and Garsfontein “receiving” reservoirs, from where it is on-supplied to many other reservoirs and distribution zones. The same can be done with the extended capacities of the Rietvlei WTP, almost allowing 100% utilisation of the expanded capacities. A new pumping system is required with required items in sync with the WTP extensions and the future demands. 6.8 Proposed Expansion of Roodeplaat WTP The following capacity expansions are proposed in the light of available resources:

 Current capacity = 60 ML/d.  2015 Expansion: 30 ML/d (still in planning stage).  2025 Expansion: 50 ML/d.  2035 Expansion: 50 ML/d.  2045 Expansion: 50 ML/d.  Total WTP capacity by 2055: 240 ML/d.

The following additional infrastructure will need to be provided in order to establish the WTP along this proposal:

 A new abstraction facility.  A raw water pump station and pumping mains to deliver water to the WTP site.

All the additional water from the proposed 4 phases of the extended Roodeplaat WTP will have to be pumped. There are two existing pumping schemes in place, namely 60 ML/d to Montana reservoir, and 10 ML/d to Wallmannsthal reservoir. Additional pumping systems are required to optimally accommodate the Roodeplaat WTP in the bulk water system, with phasing in synch with the WTP extensions and the future demands. 6.9 RW Augmentation to Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit There is no additional water resource available from natural flow and/or sewer return flows to increase the capacity of the Cullinan WTP or the Bronkhorstspruit WTP from their existing 16 ML/d and 54 ML/d capacities. The only option is to augment the water supply from the RW system, parallel to the already existing 30 ML/d augmentation scheme via RW Bronberg Reservoir.

The long term required additional augmentation to Cullinan amounts to 32 ML/d on a peak summer day, and similarly 112 ML/d to the Bronkhorstspruit system (via the Ekandustria reservoirs). Due to the dire situation in the Olifants River catchment, and to allow for expansion of the small Bronkhorstspruit WTP, these values have been rounded up to 40 ML/d and 120 ML/d respectively for planning purposes. The required infrastructure could be considered extensions of the RW (Bronberg) system, although would require resolution with RW and MW regarding existing and future operational boundaries.

6.10 Cost Analysis Note that in this paragraphs all CAPEX, OPEX, finance and unit costs referred to are 2014/15 based, as at the time of the WRMP study.

Master Plan items were created for the required bulk water infrastructure identified as part of the WRMP analysis. The CAPEX requirements for each of these schemes were put into a financial model together with calculated utilisation percentages, in order to determine the unit cost of water production and distribution, as well as the financing requirement. The model was set up to determine the unit cost on the premise that the scheme must have “paid off” all capex, opex and financing costs (i.e. reach breakeven) by year 2065, ± 20y after the last capex spent.

Table 6.02 summarises the Present Value of capex requirements, represented in Figure 6.01 as a bar chart, for all the schemes (for Rietvlei the transfer scheme was included, but not the full reuse compliance process). The total cost requirements are summarised in Table 6.03.

6.10.1 WRMP Unit costs The Rietvlei total unit costs compare well with the current RW tariff of R5.55/kl, and so do the Roodeplaat unit costs. Even with full reuse compliance, the unit costs are still lower than the RW tariff.

The bulk water distribution unit costs for the Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit augmentation scheme are relatively low, but the water has to be bought at R5.55/kl from RW. The institutional matter of who is to finance, build and operate the scheme will have a bearing on the costs payable by CoT, and has to be resolved with RW. As it is, the capex required for the augmentation scheme (from a CoT point-of- view, i.e. excluding the cost for RW to deliver the water in their Bronberg system) is ± R 338.7 million less than what it would have been if there was sufficient water available in the Olifants River basin.

6.11 RW Bulk Supply Comparison A comparison between the current bulk water MP and the adjusted MP based on the WRMP indicated the following effective trade-offs between RW supply and the possible extended own water sources, in the MP horizon year of 2058:

 RW supply to CoT reduces from 2022 ML/d AADD to 1815 ML/d, a reduction of 207 ML/d.  Despite the reduction, the above RW supply includes augmentation of 22 ML/d AADD and 60 ML/d AADD to Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit respectively.  Own Source Supply from Rietvlei WTP (inc. of the Rietvlei Springs contribution) increases from 48 ML/d AADD to 240 ML/d AADD, an increase of 192 ML/d.  Own Source Supply from Roodeplaat WTP increases from 111 ML/d AADD to 218 ML/d AADD, an increase of 108 ML/d.

6.12 Conclusion from WRMP The following conclusions were drawn from the WRMP analysis:

 There is sufficient surplus yield available in the Crocodile River basin for CoT to increase the capacities and supply areas of Rietvlei and Roodeplaat WTP’s, and despite significant capex it can be achieved at a unit cost for water which is lower than the RW tariff.  There is sufficient yield available in the Crocodile River basin to expand the Temba WTP in step with the increase in demand.  There is no additional resource available in the Olifants River basin for expansion of the Cullinan, Bronkhorstspruit and Bronkhorstbaai WTPs. The only solution is an augmentation scheme from RW to Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit. Such a scheme should include buffer capacity, which will allow under-utilisation of the Olifants resource for Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit, essentially freeing up the limited resource required to expand the Bronkhorstbaai WTP.  PPP’s may be considered for the implementation of the WRMP, on the basis that such course of action will be off the CoT balance sheet and should result in bulk water supply to CoT at a rate lower than the current RW tariff. 6.13 Implementation of the WRMP – first 5 Years Implementation of the WRMP in its entirety should be considered in order to reduce the dependency on RW and the Vaal River system, but also to ensure the possibility of a resource trade-off that will allow RW/Vaal augmentation into the Olifant basin, in order to supply the Cullinan, Bronkhorstbaai, Bronkhorstspruit, Zithobeni, Rethabiseng, Ekangala, Ekandustria, and Thembisile areas.

In this context, the implementation of the following components of the WRMP should be considered in the 5 Year plan:

 Transfer scheme from Olifantsfontein WWTW to Rietvlei dam.  Expansion of 100 ML/d at Rietvlei WTP.  Bulk water supply pumping scheme to distribute 100 ML/d from Rietvlei WTP into Klapperkop and Garsfontein reservoirs.  Concomitant augmentation scheme from RW Bronberg reservoir to Cullinan and Ekandustria (a RW project).  Expansion of 30 ML/d at Roodeplaat WTP.

 Bulk water supply pumping schemes to distribute additional capacity from Roodeplaat WTP into Wallmannsthal and proposed Doornpoort reservoirs.

There is potential to implement all of the above from the CoT balance sheet, if an external implementation mechanism (e.g. private or public-public partnership PPP) can be considered which will sell the bulk water to CoT at a tariff below that currently charged by Rand Water.

Table 6.02: Capex requirements (in R mill) – base year 2014/15 as per the WRMP report Roodeplaat Cullinan/ Rietvlei Bulk Rietvlei Roodeplaat Temba BHBaai Totals Year Bulk BHS Bulk Distribution WTP WTP WTP WTP (R mill) Distribution Supply 2013 2014 2015 R 166.50 R 172.80 R 259.10 R 598.40 2016 R 543.70 R 20.50 R 564.20 2017 2018 2019 2020 R 222.20 R 945.90 R 194.30 R 1 362.40 2021 2022 2023 R 1.60 R 1.20 R 2.80 2024 2025 R 465.60 R 465.60 2026 2027 R 121.80 R 121.80 2028 2029 2030 R 21.40 R 13.30 R 34.80 2031 2032 2033 2034 R 297.20 R 297.20 2035 R 125.00 R 308.20 R 139.00 R 287.90 R 202.60 R 1 062.60 2036 2037 2038 2039 R 3.20 R 3.20 2040 2041 2042 R 1.20 R 1.20 2043 2044 2045 R 2.00 R 287.90 R 306.30 R 199.80 R 9.60 R 805.70 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 R 2.00 R 2.00 2051 2052 2053 R 60.90 R 60.90 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 TOTALS R 349.20 R 1 542.00 R 516.30 R 1 232.60 R 946.10 R 43.40 R 753.00 R 5 382.60

Figure 6.01: Capex projection Table 6.03: Summary of WTP and bulk water distribution cost aspects – base year 2014/15 as per the WRMP report WTP capex WTP unit PV of WTP Bulk water Bulk water PV of bulk Total Total unit PV of total Scheme cost finance Capex unit cost water finance Capex cost finance (R mill) (R/kl) (R mill) (R mill) (R/kl) (R mill) (R mill) (R/kl) (R mill) Rietvlei (w/o Olifantsfontein WWTW transfer) R 719.50 R 2.97 R 511.00 R 137.80 R 0.41 R 135.10 R 857.30 R 3.38 R 646.10 Rietvlei (with Olifantsfontein WWTW transfer) R 1 542.00 R 3.08 R 1 203.30 R 349.20 R 0.46 R 322.00 R 1 891.20 R 3.54 R 1 525.30 Rietvlei (with transfer and full reuse compliance) R 2 467.50 R 4.53 R 1 837.40 R 349.20 R 0.46 R 322.00 R 2 816.70 R 4.99 R 2 159.40 Roodeplaat R 1 232.60 R 3.11 R 968.50 R 516.30 R 1.00 R 461.70 R 1 748.90 R 4.11 R 1 430.20 Temba WTP R 946.10 R 7.58 R 1 248.90 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a RW augmentation to Cullinan & Bronkhorstspruit n/a n/a n/a R 753.00 R 2.37 R 613.30 n/a n/a n/a Bronkhorstbaai WTP R 43.40 R 4.71 R 49.40 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

7 FINANCIAL The W&S Division is mainly responsible for the development of new capital infrastructure and the upgrade of existing infrastructure. Regions on the other hand, mainly deal with the repair and maintenance of existing infrastructure, while the maintenance of water treatment plants and waste water works still remain the responsibility of the W&S department. In the context of this report, however, the focus is on infrastructure development and therefor on Capex.

In Chapters 4 and 5 it was determined based on sound principles and master planning that the average Capex requirements over the next 45y are R350 million/a for water and R489 million/a for sewer, thus R839 million/a for W&S, but that the immediate 5 y requirements due to a significant backlog are R1.1 billion/a for water and R1.6 billion/a for sewer = R2.7 billion/a for W&S. Yet, the budgetary history in Figure 7.01 shows a completely different reality, coupled with an alarming reduction in Capex over the last few years.

The above does not include the Capex requirements for the implementation of the WRMP, which can possibly be done off the CoT balance sheet via a PPP, with Opex advantages in that water will possibly be produced cheaper than the RW purchase cost. The above also exclude CAPEX required for infrastructure replacement, which is maintenance related.

The draft 5 year Capex budget is included in Appendix 001

Figure 7.01: Historic W&S Capex budget and spend CAPEX R 1 200 R 1 000 R 800 R 600

Millions R 400 R 200 R 0 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 % 97,8% 98,6% 96,5% 95,7% 76,3% 95,6% 96,9% 95,0% 98,5% 79,5% 98,8% Budget R 239 R 314 R 487 R 725 R 644 R 798 R 763 R 911 R 954 R 524 R 502 R 383 Spend R 234 R 309 R 470 R 694 R 491 R 763 R 739 R 865 R 939 R 417 R 487

8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The City of Tshwane (CoT) has world-class up-to-date models and master plans of the entire water and sanitation systems, based on sound engineering and planning principles, integrated with the billing system and the Spatial Development Framework (SDF). The master plans have a horizon of 40-45 years. The implementation of the master plans is skewed with more annual CAPEX required in the first 5 years than the average over the entire horizon, due to the need to first eliminate backlogs in capacity. An annual average CAPEX spend of R822 million per annum is required over the next 5 years for the water system, and R1, 414 million per annum for the sanitation system (bulk and reticulation).

The areas that will be impacted due to current deficient bulk infrastructure is indicated on Map 8.01. These areas will have to be placed on hold regarding new developments until the bulk upgrades had been completed.

A Water Resource Master Plan (WRMP) has been developed in order to reduce the dependency on the Randwater (RW) and Vaal River systems, and in order to create the possibility of a resource trade- off that will allow augmentation from RW/Vaal into the Olifants River basin for supply to Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit areas, where all available water resources have been fully allocated. First phase implementation of the WRMP will entail 100 ML/d expansion at Rietvlei Water Treatment Plant (WTP), 30 ML/d expansion at Roodeplaat WTP, concomitant pumping schemes to distribute the additional water into the system, and an augmentation scheme from RW Bronberg system to Cullinan and Bronkhorstspruit (the latter to be implemented by RW). A private- or public-public partnership (PPP) may be considered for the WRMP implementation, which will be off-balance sheet for CoT and may result in bulk water purchases at rates lower that the RW tariff.

Map 8.01: Water and Sanitation: Deficient Bulk Capacity Impact Areas

APPENDIX 001: CITY OF TSHWANE CAPEX AND OPEX

Capital Projects PROPOSED CAPEX PROJECTS(2017/18 TO 2021/22)

Approved Budget Proposed Budget Proposed Budget Proposed Budget Proposed Budget Project 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 Project Name Number Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Township Establishment 10 000 000 10 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 700004 Township water & sanitation services development: Tshwane 10 000 000 10 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 contributions Water Networks 185 000 000 208 000 000 222 000 000 230 000 000 250 000 000 700005 Lengthening of network and supply pipelines 3 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 700008 Replacement of worn out network pipes 102 000 000 95 000 000 105 000 000 110 000 000 120 000 000 700185 Reduction water losses: water networks 8 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000 20 000 000

700456 Water Conversation and Demand Management 80 000 000 85 000 000 87 000 000 90 000 000 90 000 000 700077 Waste Water Treatment Works 53 000 000 202 500 000 626 000 000 1 064 000 000 1 250 000 000 Sunderland Ridge WWTW: New 50Ml/day BNR Module - 35 000 000 40 000 000 120 000 000 200 000 000

Zeekoegat WWTW: Tertiary treatment and debottle-necking - 20 000 000 80 000 000 100 000 000

Klipgat WWTW Phase 1, Upgrading of exisiting infrastrucutre 10 000 000 30 000 000 40 000 000

Extension of Rooiwal WWTW: Sludge facility, 80Ml.day BNR 10 000 000 80 000 000 160 000 000 395 000 000 395 000 000 Module Hennops River WWTW: Land acqusition (Sunderland Ridge) 150 000 000

Hennops River WWTW: New 50Ml/day BNR Module 20 000 000 Baviaanspoort WWTW: Sludge facility, New 20 Ml/day BNR 34 991 547 60 000 000 150 000 000 250 000 000 345 000 000 module (small foot print) Rietgat WWTW: Sludge facility, 7Ml/day BNR re-commission, 6 000 000 50 000 000 100 000 000 40 000 000 New 20Ml/day BNR Module Sandspruit WWTW: Sludge facility, New 10 Ml.day BNR 10 000 000 35 000 000 10 000 000 Module

Babelegi WWTW Upgrade of exisitng infrastructure and 1 500 000 10 000 000 20 000 000 upgrade of processes Godrich WWTW: Sludge facility, New 10Ml/day BNR Module 5 000 000 10 000 000 50 000 000

Cullinan/Refilwe WWTW: Effluent pump station & pipeline & 2 1 000 000 4 000 000 25 000 000 Ml/d extension New Lewzene WWTW / (10 Ml/day) 5 000 000 Waste Water Treatment facilities upgrages Minor Capital 8 008 453 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 Projects 700127 Backlog Eradication 52 000 000 115 500 000 425 000 000 143 000 000 144 000 000 Ramotse-Marokolong waterborne sanitation (Backlog 2 000 000 30 000 000 80 000 000 124 000 000 Eradication) Ekangala Block A Sewer reticulation and toilets 500 000 35 000 000 33 000 000 20 000 000

Sewer Reticulation Kudube Ext 5 20 000 000 250 000 000 Sewer Reticulation New Eersterust Ext 1, 2, 3 30 000 000 Refurbishment of sewer networks and backlog eradication: 40,000,000 30,000,000 30,000,000 New Eersterust South water borne sewer Refurbishment of sewer networks and backlog eradication: 55,000,000 50,000,000 Greater Temba: Suurman, Mashemong and Majaneng Temba Water Purification Plant Extention 50 000 000

700158 Bulk Water Pipelines 22 000 000 93 000 000 120 000 000 140 000 000 123 000 000 Replacement and upgrading: Deficient bulk pipeline 20 000 000 30 000 000 30 000 000 30 000 000 infrastructure( various areas ) Replacement and upgrading bulk pipeline Union Bulding 35 000 000 30 000 000 30 000 000 (Jumbo Rally to Schoeman str) Heights Iscor Feeder 15 000 000 18 000 000 10 000 000 Bronkhorstspruit Reservoir zone eastern pipe reinforcement 2 000 000 5 000 000 20 000 000 and PRV Pumping system from Roodeplaat WTP to Doornpoort 5 000 000 5 000 000 50 000 000 50 000 000 East/West reservoirs & Roodplaat-Doornpoort bulk pipe line

Soshanguve feeder main to Reservoirs DD and L upgrade and 25 000 000 replace Replace feeder main from Garsfontein to Parkmore HL 3 000 000 Reservoir Cathodic protection to all Steel pipes 5 000 000 5 000 000 5 000 000 5 000 000 Mamelodi R5 feeder main relocation (1.341km long) 5 000 000 10 000 000

Bronkhorstpruit Bulk Pipeline 5 000 000 Upgrade and extend Bronkhorstbaai bulk system (Phase 1) 5 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000

Upgrade Sokhulumi reservoir and tower site 5 000 000 5 000 000 Sewers replacement and upgrade 20 000 000 55 000 000 68 100 000 122 800 000 82 000 000 70168 Replacement of deficient sewers 20 000 000 25 000 000 30 000 000 40 000 000 40 000 000 700222 Moreletaspruit outfall sewer 8 100 000 12 800 000 2 000 000 Rietspruit outfall sewer upgrade 20 000 000 20 000 000 70 000 000 40 000 000 Silver Lakes outfall sewer upgrade Phase 1 10 000 000 10 000 000

Water Treatment Plants 15 000 000 50 000 000 75 000 000 200 000 000 400 000 000 Bronkhorsptuit WPP Refurbishment 15 000 000 20 000 000 5 000 000 Rietvlei WTP Extension 30 000 000 70 000 000 200 000 000 400 000 000 700300 Reservoirs 87 000 000 175 000 000 204 000 000 166 000 000 58 000 000 Doornkloof Reservoir 20 000 000 25 000 000 15 000 000 10 000 000 Mooikloof Reservoir and Bulk water pipeline 40 000 000 25 000 000 25 000 000 Installation of bulk meters, loggers and Telementry at 10 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000 8 000 000 8 000 000 reservoirs Replace reservoir fencing and ancillary works 5 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000 10 000 000 Relining/Upgrading reservoirs 10 000 000 4 000 000 New Klipgat Hospital 3 Reservoir 12 000 000 - - New Parkmore LL Reservoir (10 ML iso 4 ML in process) and 25 000 000 25 000 000 25 000 000 Parkmore HL reservoir Bronhorstbaai: Refurbishment and upgrade of clear-well and 15 000 000 15 000 000 19 000 000 8 000 000 WPP infrastructure Grootfontein Water Reservoir, Tower and pipework 25 000 000 28 000 000 Babelegi Reservoir Extension 8 000 000

15 ML Mamelodi R5 Reservior 10 000 000 20 000 000 10 000 000 New La Montagne Reservoir (Nelmapius) 5 000 000 15 000 000 25 000 000 Upgrade Sokhulumi reservoir and tower site. 15 000 000 25 000 000 New Pretoriusrand reservior, feeder and outflow main 15 000 000 25 000 000 New van Riebeeck Reservoir 10 000 000 30 000 000 New Highveld (Heritage Hill) Reservoir 15 000 000

700530 Formalisation of informal settlements 83 304 248 167 115 426 174 000 000 75 700 000 40 000 000

Midas - 580 housing units - water provision 11 000 000 12 000 000 - - - Midas - 580 housing units - sewer provision - - - - - Soshanguve South Ext 1 (Plot 67) - 398 housing units - water - - - - -

provision Soshanguve South Ext 1 (Plot 67) - 398 housing units - sewer - - - - -

provision Kudube Unit 8 - 1784 Housing Units - Water Provision 18 000 000 5 000 000 - - - Kudube Unit 8 - 1784 Housing Units - Sewer Provision 14 115 426 40 000 000 Hammanskraal Ext 2 Stand 3505 - 61 Housing Units - Water 1 304 248

Provision Hammanskraal Ext 2 Stand 3505 - 61 Housing Units - Sewer

Provision Hammanskraal Ext 10 - 2767 Housing Units - Water Provision 10 000 000 20 000 000 10 000 000

(Bulk services) Hammanskraal Ext 10 - 2767 Housing Units - Sewer Provision 5 000 000 - 20 000 000

(Bulk Services) Atteridgeville Ext 16 - Bulk water plus outfall sewer to service future stands Atteridgeville Ext 19 - Water network Atteridgeville Ext 19 - 900 housing units - Sewerage network 10 000 000 50 000 000 (Upgrading of the existing sewer pumpstation and construction of the temporary sewer pump station) 10 000 000 15 000 000 Kameeldrift 174 & 175 - 356 Housing Units - Water Provision 10 000 000 15 000 000 Kameeldrift 174 & 175 - 356 Housing Units - Sewer Provision 5 000 000 25 000 000 14 700 000 Mahube Valley Ext 15 - Water provision for 2 353 stands 1 000 000 30 000 000 20 000 000 Mahube Valley Ext 15 - Sewer provision for 2 353 stands

Mamelodi Ext 11 - Water network link for 1 859 stands 18 000 000 15 000 000 10 000 000 1 000 000 18 000 000 11 000 000 Mamelodi Ext 11 - Sewerage network line for 1 859 stands Nellmapius Ext 24 - Outfall sewer pipeline for 2 640 stands

Mamelodi Ext 11 - Upgrading of bulk water supply pipeline

Water standtaps to informal areas 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 20 000 000 700591 Gatsebe Sewer network and toilet top strctures 15 000 000 TOTAL 527 304 248 1 076 115 426 1 934 100 000 2 161 500 000 2 367 000 000

Historical Opex Budget and Expenditure BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL % SPEND R&M R&M YEAR INCOME EXPENDITURE R&M R&M R&M AS % OF BUDGET AS % OF ASSET 2012/2013 R 3 389 943 000 R 2 568 335 251 R 179 003 581 R 159 963 259 89.40% 7.00% 2013/2014 R 3 955 073 000 R 2 499 806 914 R 111 791 413 R 59 358 242 53.10% 4.50% 1.10% 2014/2015 R 4 079 183 000 R 2 950 968 779 R 114 451 653 R 88 707 214 77.50% 3.90% 1.10% 2015/2016 R 4 546 983 000 R 3 359 832 490 R 99 369 200 R 74 197 905 74.70% 3.00% 2016/2017 R 5 241 373 000 R 3 559 354 462 R 93 744 229 - 0.00% 2.60%