INFRASTRUCTURE READINESS STUDY EHLANZENI DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY Project No. : EDM / 04 / 2011-12 Project Name : Driekoppies Regional Bulk Water Supply Scheme Date : April 2015 Prepared By: Prepared For: Lubisi Consulting Engineers Ehlanzeni District Municipality 20 Branders Street 8 van Niekerk Street P O Box 12393 PO Box 3333 Nelspruit Nelspruit 1200 1200 Tel: 013 752 6416 Tel: 013 759 8500 Fax: 013 752 6418 Fax: 013 755 8539 E-mail: [email protected] Contact: Mr C T Pagiwa Contact: Mr P Du Toit DRIEKOPPIES BULK WATER SUPPLY SCHEME AND FUTURE EXTENSIONS NKOMAZI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY INFRASTRUCTURE READINESS STUDY Approval Driekoppies Bulk Water Supply Scheme And Future Extensions - Infrastructure Title Readiness Study EDM Report No. Consultant Lubisi Consulting Engineers Report Status Revision 1 Date April 2015 Study Team - Lubisi Consulting ........................................................................ ..................................................................... Mr C T Pagiwa Pr Eng Mr SP Tshuma Director Engineer Project Manager Study Leader Ehlanzeni District Municipality Team ........................................................................ ........................................................................ Adv M Mbatha Mr P Du Toit Municipal Manager Deputy Manager Water & Sanitation Ehlanzeni District Municipality Ehlanzeni District Municipality 2 | P a g e Executive Summary Driekoppies Bulk Water Scheme serves several villages of Nkomazi Local Municipality. The scheme is located in the South-East of the Ehlanzeni District Municipality (EDM). The supply area is predominantly rural with yard stand pipes and ventilation improved pit (VIP) toilets. Current and projected population of the study area is as presented below: Table 1: Executive Summary: Population Projection 2014 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 Settlement Name Pop Pop Pop Pop Pop Pop Driekoppies 34 278 35 843 38 613 41 598 44 812 48 276 Middelplaas 4 415 4 617 4 973 5 358 5 772 6 218 Schulzendal 4 122 4 310 4 643 5 002 5 389 5 805 Langeloop 24 588 25 711 27 698 29 838 32 144 34 628 Aniva 779 815 878 945 1 019 1 097 Boschfontein 11 254 11 768 12 677 13 657 14 713 15 850 Skoonplaas 3 528 3 689 3 974 4 282 4 613 4 969 Jeppe's Rust 11 575 12 103 13 039 14 046 15 132 16 301 Magogeni 1 697 1 774 1 912 2 059 2 218 2 390 Buffelspruit 13 468 14 083 15 172 16 344 17 607 18 968 Schoemansdal North 2 704 2 827 3 046 3 281 3 535 3 808 Schoemansdal C 12 770 13 353 14 385 15 497 16 695 17 985 Schoemansdal 15 395 16 098 17 342 18 682 20 126 21 681 Jeppe's Reef 27 997 29 276 31 538 33 976 36 602 39 430 Total 168 568 176 268 189 890 204 566 220 375 237 407 From the inception and scoping studies, indications are that the water demand in the study area has exceeded supply and existing system capacity. The study area receives raw water from the Driekoppies Dam and the Lomati River. The calculated summer peak demand for 2017 is 34Ml/d and projected demand for 2037 is 45Ml/d. Existing Water Treatment Works (WTW) capacity is 20Ml/d, which is less than the current calculated demand. It has been noted that current operation capacity of the Driekoppies WTW is about 27Ml/d which is beyond the plant's design capacity. There is a need to increase water supply into the Driekoppies scheme so as to meet the demand and to stop water rationing which is currently being implemented. Nkomazi Local Municipality is authorised to draw 9,646,240m3/a from the Driekoppies Dam. This abstraction volume is a total of adding up licenses from the areas covered by the Driekoppies Bulk Water Scheme. Nkomazi LM will have to apply for one license for the Driekoppies Bulk Water Scheme which will combine all available licences to allow for more allocations as demand increases with time. Below is a summary of the projected water demand for the twenty year study period: Table 2: Executive Summary: Demand Projection Year Population AADD – Ml/d GAADD – Ml/d SPD – Ml/d 2017 176 259 17.91 22.66 33.99 2037 237 396 23.80 30.11 45.17 There is no one license that allows for the abstraction of the required volume from the Lomati River however by combining the licenses for the different schemes, 9 646 240m3/a will be available for this development. This translates to 26.43Ml/d, when compared with the 2017 GAADD (22.66Ml/d) and the i | P a g e 2037 GAADD (30.11Ml/d) shows that the above licenses will be adequate till sometime around 2027 when more allocations will have to be made available to the scheme. However, there will be a need for Nkomazi Local Municipality to apply for one license which will be able to be used to meet the full scheme demand. LCE is to assist Nkomazi Local Municipality with the application for combining the available licenses into one. Below is the phasing for the proposed works: Table 3: Executive Summary: Project Phasing Phase Description 1 Upgrade of WTW to 30Ml/d Capacity 2 Upgrade of Reservoirs 3 Upgrade of Pipelines and Pump Stations 4 Upgrade of the WTW to 40Ml/d Capacity The preliminary designs were prepared encompassing the regional scheme concept and viability. This report covers the implementation readiness state of the project. Upgrading of the bulk water supply infrastructure consisting of Driekoppies Water Treatment Works, bulk pipelines, pump-stations and storage reservoirs will be implemented in phases as presented above, over the 20 year period aligned to the projected demand patterns. The estimated cost for the entire project is R311, 581,500.68 (VAT Inclusive). ii | P a g e Below is the “Implementation Readiness Study Check List” referenced for this report: ITEM CRITERIA REF 1 STRATEGIC & PLANNING ISSUES 1.1 In line with Water Service Development Plan and Integrated Development Plan? 1.1 1.2 In line with Provincial Growth & Development Strategy? 1.2 1.3 Are other parts of the water/sanitation supply chain in place 1.3 1.4 Strategic importance, delivery targets 1.4 1.5 Do all parties agree to the need and technical proposal 1.5 1.6 Level of service 1.6 1.7 Economic growth requirements 1.7 1.8 Water scarcity, etc. 1.8 1.9 Functional criticality of total scheme & specific components 1.9 1.10 Extent of cost 1.10 1.11 Available co-funding 1.11 2 SOCIAL CRITERIA 2.1 Number of households & people to be uplifted to basic & higher service levels 2.1 2.2 Number of poor households to be served & the social cost (capital & operation) 2.2 2.3 Number of jobs to be created (temporary & permanent, by gender & age category) 2.3 2.4 Affordability of proposed water tariffs ( per service level & community) 2.4 2.5 Contribution towards poverty eradication, social upliftment & health improvement 2.5 2.6 Number of associated services benefiting (e.g. schools, clinics, communal facilities) 2.6 Socio-political support for the proposed development options (per development 2.7 2.7 option) 3 ECONOMIC CRITERIA Number of current businesses & industries to be served(by type & water use 3.1 3.1 category) Expected economic value to be generated by the new businesses(GDP before & 3.2 3.2 after) as result of the project Number of SMMEs & BEE enterprises to benefit (by type & monetary value/benefit) 3.3 3.3 during project & as an indirect result of the project Regional economic benefit from the proposed water users and their value chain 3.4 integrated development objectives (socio-economic benefits, provincial growth & 3.4 development objectives, IDPs & associated sector programmes like housing) 4 TECHNICAL CRITERIA 4.1 Is the project part of a Master Plan proposal 4.1 4.2 Appropriateness and acceptability of solution 4.2 Appropriate water resource choice & adequate water allocation (confirmed/approved 4.3 4.3 by DWS, WRM re choice, water license – volume, assurance & quality) Compliance to water demand / water conservation objectives (acceptable water 4.4 losses and appropriate plans to reduce/control water demand). Is a WDM/WC 4.4 strategy/Plan in place? Optimal choice of bulk distribution networks (pipeline routes, pump stations and bulk 4.5 storage) Considering full life-cycle cost(capital, financing, operating & maintenance 4.5 cost) 4.6 Proof of best suited technology (pro’s and con’s per option) 4.6 iii | P a g e 5 INSTITUTIONAL CRITERIA 5.1 Indicate who will own the infrastructure 5.1 5.2 Confidence in the capacity of the institution to implement 5.2 5.3 Agreements on the infrastructure ownership (per scheme component) 5.3 5.4 Agreement on implementation responsibility (per scheme component) 5.4 5.5 Proof implementation capacity (e.g. capital expenditure over last 3years) 5.5 5.6 History on past implementation quality & performance (e.g. functionality audits) 5.6 5.7 Agreement on operating responsibilities (per scheme component) 5.7 5.8 Proof adequate staff numbers & skills levels (per scheme component) 5.8 5.9 History on water services interruptions (annual interruptions in household-days) 5.9 5.10 Commitments of above Institutional leadership (e.g. Municipal Mayor and Council 5.10 5.11 Cooperation agreements between key Stakeholders 5.11 5.12 Approval of Institutional arrangements 5.12 5.13 Cost recovery system (including policy on free basic water and non-payment) 5.13 5.14 Water Conservation and Demand performance by institution 5.14 5.15 Responsibilities and Accountability 5.15 6 FINANCIAL CRITERIA 6.1 Available funding (grant, loan & investment) 6.1 6.2 Funding conditions (repayment period, interest) 6.2 6.3 Financial analysis of cost projections (cash flows) 6.3 6.4 Financial modelling of projected income taking into account affordability 6.4 6.5 Proposed tariff adjustments to reconcile