Pilot Project Hand-Pump Installation For Shallow Well: Appendix 7

APPENDIX 7
Appendix 7.1
Pilot Project ; Hand-pump installation for Shallow well
1． Purpose
There are over 3,000 of wells are installed in Chitungwiza Municipality. Water from these wells is
withdrawn by bucket with rope hoisting, and it was quite inefficient and insanitary. Indeed recent
prevalence of cholera and typhoid in the municipality was suspected to be utilizing shallow wells.
Then the tTeam planed to improve the inefficient and insanitary condition by installation of hand
pumps.
2. Selected area
Selected area is Unit L as shown Figure X1.1, where water is distributed several hours weekly, and in
addition, there are many wells with high yield capacity.
Figure A7.1.2 Location of Selected Area
The Number of selected wells is 10, and these were selected as shown in Figure A7.1.2 with below
conditions:
1) The yield capacity is relatively large and it was confirmed by hearing to neighborhood
2) Surrounding area’s housings people are using the well
3. Hand Pump
The Team considered that hand pump should be selected as a local product and these are prevailed in
the municipality. “Elephant Pump” shown in Photo.A7.1.1 is found in several housings in the
municipality.
APP. 7 - 1
APPENDIX 7
The mechanism of the pump is shown in Figure A7.1.3, which is very simple and low costs, just
250USD.
⑩ ⑨ ⑤
① ② ⑥
⑧ ⑦
Well installed 　
④ ③
hand pump ④
Figure A7.1.2 Location of Hand Pump to be Installed Wells
Hand Rotator
Piston wring
Pipe
Well Wall of Well
Hand Rotator
Photo A7.1.1 Elephant Pump
This pump withdraws water by rising wrings in a pipe with

capacity of around 10 litter/min same with a normal faucet.
The wrings are fixed to string, and raised by continuously
rotating wheel.
Figure A7.1.3 Mechanism of
Elephant Pump
APP. 7 - 2
APPENDIX 7
4. Hand Pump Installation and Survey

Hands pumps were installed on the beginning of November, and before the installation basic
information for the housings utilizing target wells were surveyed as shown Table AA7.1.1(1)-(10).
The photo of wells before installation and after installation are shown Photo A7.1.2(1) to A7.1.2(2).
When wells were installed below leaflet was distributed to housings utilizing target wells for
awareness of hygiene improvement of well utilization. The numbers of surveyed housings for target
wells are decided to be minimum 1/3 to all the utilizing housings.
5. Survey Results
Survey results are also shown in Table A7.1.1 (1)-(10). The results, which can be analyzed numerically,
are shown in Table A7.1.2. As shown Table A7.1.1 (1)-(10) and Table A7.1.2, feature of families
utilizing wells are summarized below:
1) The numbers of utilizing families for each well are 7-30 (average 16.4)
2) Sample families were selected 68 out of 164, 41.4%
3) Average living number of surveyed families was 8.7
4) Average consumption (intake) of well water was 284 litters/day
5) Average spending time of water intake from well was 55.4 minutes/day
6) For the hygiene safety of drinking water, 57% of people use tablets, which can be purchased
local markets and/or some of them were distributed by donor organizations
APP. 7 - 3
APPENDIX 7
Before After
Photo A7.1.2 (1) No.1 Well
Before After
Before After
APP. 7 - 4
APPENDIX 7
Before After
Before After
Before After
APP. 7 - 5
APPENDIX 7
Before After
Before After
Before After
APP. 7 - 6
APPENDIX 7
Before After
Table A7.1.1 (1) Survey Sheet for No.1 Well
APP. 7 - 7
APPENDIX 7
Table A7.1.1 (3) Survey Sheet for No.3Well
APP. 7 - 8
APPENDIX 7
APP. 7 - 9
APPENDIX 7
Table A7.1.2 Summarized Survey Results

Average Consumption Spending
Using Sample Rate Rate Use Tablet
No. Living (L/d) Time(min.)
Families no. (times) (times)
Number Before After Before After Before After
1 15 10 9.3 285 308 1.08 56 15.3 0.27 5 7
2 20 7 7.4 307 308 1.00 58 32 0.55 6 6
3 15 6 8.7 258 296 1.15 65 18 0.28 2 2
4 20 8 9.1 347 359 1.03 47 19 0.40 4 4
5 20 10 7.6 210 243 1.16 54 12 0.22 3 3
6 12 4 11 156 188 1.21 46 4.3 0.09 3 3
7 30 10 9.2 385 495 1.29 65 31 0.48 7 7
8 10 5 7.2 295 315 1.07 46 30 0.65 3 3
9 7 3 6.7 258 342 1.33 50 20 0.40 3 3
10 15 5 10.4 335 480 1.43 67 14.8 0.22 3 3
Total 164 68 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 39 41
Average 16.4 6.8 8.7 284 333 1.17 55.4 19.6 0.36 3.9 4.1
APP. 7 - 10
APPENDIX 7
After installation of hand pump, below changes were found:

1) Water consumption was slightly increased to be 1.17 time (333/284)
2) Spending time was drastically decreased to be 0.36 times (19.6/55.4)
3) The rate of using tablet was not changed so much though the instruction by distributed leaflets
4) Some families complained the poor quality of hand pump, but after modification of these by the
manufacturer under the requirement form the Team, these complain was ceased
6. Conclusion
Installation of hand pumps is one of predominant method to improve the inefficiency and insanitary
condition. As the results of this pilot project, efficiency was found to be drastically improved, and the
hygiene condition is also much improved because people don’t need to touch well water. Accordingly,
the installation should be progressed, but below procedures will be required:
1) Since water quality of shallow wells is not suitable for direct drinking, strong instruction of
boiling or using tablets will be necessary
2) Quality of installed hand pumps were low with uneven/low quality parts and poor installation skill,
and then a standardization of design, parts and installation procedures will be necessary.
APP. 7 - 11
APPENDIX 7
Appendix 7.2
Pilot Project ; Water Leakage Survey and Flow Measurement
1． Purpose
1.1 Water Leakage Measurement
Water leakage ratio was assumed by the comparison between water supply amount and inflow amount
of STP (Sewage Treatment Plant). Additionally, night time measurements of two areas were carried
out by this pilot project. During night, since water consumption of people is little, water flow in a
certain area is assumed to be water leakage.
1.2 Flow Measurement of Branch Pipes

In the water supply system of Chitungwiza Municipality, only one flow meter installed in PE-WTP,
which was repaired on July 2012, is measuring the transmission flow form City of Harare to the
municipality. Other meters are installed at the outlet pipe from elevated tank and outflow pipe from
lift pumps, by which water is transmitted to the elevated tank, but both of flow meters are now out of
order.
The municipality water section wants to know the flow balance of blanch pipes as shown in Figure
A7.2.1 and then flow measurement of blanch pipes was planned.
2. Measurement Condition
Originally two ultra-sonic flow meters are planned to be used, but unfortunately one of them brought
from Japan cannot be used to measure pipe flow, and then only one flow meter was used by a local
specialist.
The location of measurement points was shown Figure A8.2.1, however due to the low flow to the
municipality in a week when the Team measured the flow, measurement points for water leakage were
changed. Originally, two (2) points of a/b and c/d were planed to be measured, but it was changed to
be points e and f due to only one flow meter available. In addition since the water flow cannot reach
point 9 and the ground reservoirs because of low water flow, the flow at point 6, 7, 10 cannot be
measured.
The target areas of leakage survey are shown in Figure A7.2.1 and Figure A7.2.2 (1) and (2).
Area E is composed by a housing complex as shown in Figure A7.2.2 (1), which was constructed
1980th and the area had been always distributed compared to intermittent distribution of other areas
because the branch valve to regulate the distribution flow was broken down under the open condition.
However since it was repaired on August this year, it has been closed by the municipality if necessary.
Area F is composed by the largest hospital of municipality and a housing complex as shown Figure
A7.2.2 (2). Because this area was the first priority area for the municipality to sustainable water supply,
Valve ⑤ never close completely. The pipe installation of Area E is 1980, and that of Area F is 1976.
On the measurement of “e” and “f”, daily water flow decided by average water flow of two hour
interval of measurement, and 12 hour of flow was continuously measured.
APP. 7 - 12
APPENDIX 7
Figure A7.2.1 Location of Measurement Points
APP. 7 - 13
APPENDIX 7
Figure A7.2.2 (1) Area E Location
Figure A7.2.2 (2) Area F Location
Table A7.2.1 shows condition of each measurement points. As shown in the table, eight points cannot
be measured because of no water flow and only one flow meter available.
The measurements were carried out from 19th to 24th November.
APP. 7 - 14
APPENDIX 7
Table A7.2.1 Explanation of Measurement Points

Pipe Diameter
Execution Explanation of the point Reason not to measure
No. (mm)
① 225 Yes Branch from Main
② 300 Yes Branch from Main
③ 350 Yes Branch from Main
④ 350 Yes Branch from Main
⑤ 375 Yes(2times) Branch from Main
⑥ 250 No Branch from Elevated Tank No water
⑦ 300 No Branch from Elevated Tank No water
⑧ 300 Yes Branch from Main
⑨ 300 No Branch from Main No water
⑩ 450 No Inflow to Reservoir No water
a 300 No Original Leakage Survey Point Utilizing one flow meter
b 300 No Original Leakage Survey Point Utilizing one flow meter
c 300 No Original Leakage Survey Point Utilizing one flow meter
d 300 No Original Leakage Survey Point Utilizing one flow meter
e 150 Yes Actual Leakage Survey Point
f 100 Yes Actual Leakage Survey Point
3. Leakage Survey Results

Measurement results were shown in Figure A7.2.3 and A7.2.4. As shown in the figures, in the
midnight the water flow apparently decreased, and daytime consumption is larger than early morning
and evening measured by two hours interval of measurement. Based on the figures, if water
consumption in midnight is assumed to be water leakage, water leakage ratio of each area is calculated
as below:
Area E: 4.5/14.5=31.0%
Area F: 6.5/20.5=31.7%
In the municipality, since the distribution of water has been carried out intermittently and the schedule
has been unknown, people tend to keep water in various buckets whenever water is distributing. In the
cased of Area E, above condition can be applied, while in the case of Area F water supply seldom stop
but some of hospital staff are working 24 hours consuming water. Then even in the night some rate of
water is considered being used, the NRW ratio of 25% in the municipality predicted in Chapter 8 is
considered reasonable. In NRW, though the consumption of illegal connections is contained, illegal
connections of municipality are assumed little by the municipality.
APP. 7 - 15
Flow Rate (m3/hr)
Flow Rate(m3/hr)
20
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
19 20:30
19:20
19:30 20:40
19:40 21:50
: 21:00
APPENDIX 7
2 50 :
200:0 22 10
20:410 22:10
:
2 50 22:20
211:0 22:30
21:10 22:40
21:20 23:50
21:30 23:00
21:40 23:10
:
2 50 23:20
222:0 23:30
22:10 23:40
22:20 :
22:30 0:50
22:40 0:00
:
2 50 0:10
233:0 0:20
23:10 0:30
23:20 0:40
23:30 1:50
23:40 1:00
:5
00 1:10
0: :0 1:20
0:10 1:30
0:20 1:40
0:30 2:50
0:40 2:00
1:50 2:10
1:00 2:20
1:10 2:30
1:20
APP. 7 - 16
2:40
1:30
3
1:40
3:50
2:50
3:00
Minimun Flow: 4.5m /hr
Minimun Flow: 6.5m3/hr

2:00 3:10
Time 11/20-11/21
3:20
Daily Average Flow: 20.5m3/hr

2:10
Time 11/21-11/22
2:20 3:30
2:30 3:40
Daily Average Flow: 14.5m3/hr
2:40 4:50
3:50 4:00
3:00 4:10
3:10 4:20
3:20 4:30
3:30 4:40
Figure A7.2.4 Measurement Results of Area F

Figure A7.2.3 Measurement Results of Area E
3:40 5:50
4:50 5:00
4:00 5:10
4:10 5:20
4:20 5:30
4:30 5:40
4:40 6:50
5:50 6:00
5:00 6:10
5:10
5:20 6:20
5:30 6:30
4 6:40
6: 0
6:00 7:50
6:10 7:00
6:20 7:10
6:30 7:20
6:40 7:30
50 7:40
8:50
00
APPENDIX 7
4. Flow Measurement Results

Unfortunately, since the water distribution to the municipality from Harare Water Works was little,
15,000-18,000m3/day, during flow measurement, the cases of flow measurement were limited.
During this week, water could not reached reservoirs and places located on high elevation areas due to
low water flow, because Valve ⑤ is never closed completely water flow for branch pipes was limited.
Then branch ⑥,⑦,⑨ and ⑩ could not measure. In addition, various water flow conditions with
valves operation conditions cannot make due to also low water flow. Water flow from City of Harare
was around 15,000m3/d from 19th to 23th morning, and 18,000m3/d from 23th noon to 24th. The results
are shown in Figure A7.2.4 (1) to A7.2.4 (7).
15
150
Total Flow:620m3/hr=14,880m3/d
14 Total Flow:620m3/hr=14,880m3/d
140
13
Flow (m3/hr)
Flow (m /hr)
130
12 3 120
Average:12.6m3/hr Average:126.3m3/hr
11 110
10 100
0
0
:2
:3
:4
:5
:0
:1
0
15
15
15
15
16
16
:1
:1
:2
:2
:3
10
10
10
10
10
11/20 11/20
Figure A7.2.4 (1) Point 1 Measured Results Figure A7.2.4 (2) Point 2 Measured Results
110 270
260
100 Total Flow:620m3/hr=14,880m3/d
250
Flow (m /hr)
Flow (m3/hr)
90 240 Average:229.7m3/hr
3
230
80
3
Average:100.7m /hr 220
70 210
200
60
5
0
:1
:2
:3
0
10
10
10
:1
:1
:2
:2
11
11
11
11
11/22 11/23
Figure A7.2.4 (3) Point 3 Measured Results Figure A7.2.4 (4) Point 4 Measured Results
APP. 7 - 17
APPENDIX 7
210 450
440
200
430
420
Flow (m3/hr)
Flow (m3/hr)
190
3 3 410
Total Flow:620m /hr=14,880m /d
180 400
Average:196.0m3/hr 390
170 Average:405.1m3/hr
380
160 370
5
30
35
40
:0
:1
:1
9:
9:
9:
12
12
12
11/22 11/24
Figure A7.2.4 (5) Point 5 1st Measured Results Figure A7.2.4 (6) Point 5 2nd Measured Results
340
330
320
Flow (m3/hr)
310
300 Average:313.7m3/hr
290
280
30
35
40
8:
8:
8:
11/23
Figure A7.2.4 (7) Point 8 Measured Results
The measurement results was arranged by three (3) conditions as shown in Table A7.2.2
Table A7.2.2 Water Flow by some Conditions

Total Branch Name Measured Total
Item Case
Flow(m3/hr) ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑧ ⑨ Flow(m3/hr)
Valve
225 300 350 350 375 300 300
Dia.(mm)
1 620 O O O C O C C
Valve
2 620 O C C O O O C
Condition
3 760 O C C C O O O
Measured 1 620 12.6 126.3 100.7 --- ？ --- --- 239.6
Flow 2 620 ？ --- --- 229.7 196 ？ --- 425.7
(m3/hr) 3 760 ? --- --- --- 405.1 313.7 0* 718.8
Note: O=open, C=close *Cannot measured due not to be full flow
APP. 7 - 18
APPENDIX 7
Appendix 7.3
Pilot Project ; Groundwater Resource Survey
1． Purpose
It is said that the groundwater potential is much better than City of Harare (from Professor
(Zimbabwe University) I. NHAP), and the current use of ground water from shallow wells
and boreholes in the municipality is considerable. Although the groundwater resource of
Harare Metropolitan Area will be limited in the near future, that in Chitungwiza should be
pursued.
Currently, the water supply capacity of Harare Water Works is apparently insufficient to cover the
supply areas reflecting the shortage of supply water. The bulk water supply to Chitungwiza
Municipality is frequently stopped and/or drastically reduced. Some of the reasons of that are the
outstanding overdue bill of the bulk water to Harare Water Works and the insufficient water supply
amount of Harare Water Works.
In the near future, Harare Water Works must refurbish their managing facilities thoroughly and expand
the water resource and production capacity, however for the realization of these, a huge investment
will be required. The funds for refurbishing can be secured from foreign donors such as Chinese and
Indian Organizations. But there are no concrete plans for the development of water resources and
construction of new WTPs.
2. First Stage Survey

In Chitungwiza Municipality, there are
over 3,000 shallow wells and around 50
boreholes, and these are used for people
living mainly in Seke North and Seke
South, where piped water is distributed
only for several hours in a week. These
wells do not dry up by daily consumption
even in dry seasons.
Thus, JICA Project Team started to find
ground water resources surrounding the
municipality. The survey was
determined by the current shortage of
water, obscure future development plans
and active utilization of groundwater by
the people in the municipality.
As the results of first stage survey hiring

of local hydro-geologists, candidate Figure A7.3.1 Candidate Areas of Aquifer
aquifers shown in Figure A7.3.1 were
found through electrical resistance tests. The survey results are reported in Attachment -1. The
locations are very near to Seke reservoir site, and the recharge for candidate area 1 accounts from the
recharge from Harava Dam and Manyame catchment area. The report mentioned quite large yield
APP. 7 - 19
APPENDIX 7
capacity of wells can be installed the target

area. Under the recommendation, a test well
was installed, which is predicted 20 litter/sec
of yield (1,728 m3/d), but actual yield
capacity was only around one (1) litter/sec
(86 m3/d) even though the depth of 100m,
1/20 to original.
3. Restarted Survey
After the result was found, the Team made
hearing from some hydro-geologist, and Photo A7.3.1 Yield Water from First Test Well
their opinions were; 1) such large yield
capacity of well is unbelievable, and 2) since there is a granite zoon nearby Harava Dam, existing of
aquifer is quite low possibility. Accordingly, a resurvey by a definitive hydro-geologist in Harare Area
was conducted, and it revealed doubtfulness of the existence of the aquifer for the candidate area 1. In
addition, although the groundwater potential of candidate area 2 is well-known because of the existing
of red-soil, the actual intake capacity was also doubtful because many private boreholes have already
been installed in this area.
Thus new aquifers were again explored in the surrounding area of the municipality by a team headed
by the previously mentioned hydro-geologist. The hydro-geologist found that the eastern area of the
municipality shown in Figure A7.3.2 have many faults of granite and is widely covered by red-soil,
which is a well-known sign that an aquifer exists beneath. Candidate area 3 was selected first because
of an existing well with good yield capacity in the area and many potentially good points were found
by electrical resistance tests.
Three test wells (with borehole diameter of 150mm) were installed based on the results, and the results
of yield capacity tests are shown in TableA7.3.1. As shown in the table, the yield capacities of T-2
and T-3 are large, while those of boreholes located in Chitungwza Municipality are less than 1.5 L/sec.
As the results of the test wells installation indicate, candidate points of wells should be selected
carefully and a rate of failure drilling must be accepted.
Table A7.3.1 Results of Yield Capacity Tests of Test Wells

Elevation Well Depth Water Level(GL-m) Yield capacity
No. Geology
(m) (m) Initial Dynamic L/sec m3/hr m3/day
T-1 Red-soil 1,458 60 7 33 0.3 1.1 26
T-2 Fault of granite 1,442 60 1.8 24 3.5 12.6 302
T-3 Fault of dolerite 1,440 60 1.4 15 3.9 14.0 337
The water qualities for Test well-2(T-1) and Test well-2(T-2) is shown in Table A7.3.2, and the quality
APP. 7 - 20
APPENDIX 7
of wells are not so good as water resource, especially for low pH, and high concentration of bacteria
and coliform. Even though these problems can be solved by chlorine and lime injection, careful
control of the injection is required. The discharge transparency condition of water for the test well T-2
is shown in Photo A7.3.2.
Seke Reservoir Site
Candidate Area 4 T-1
T-2
Candidate Area 3
T-3
Candidate Area 5
Area with Many Faults and Red-Soil Deposit
Candidate Area 6
0 2.5 5 km
Scale N
Location of Test Wells
Figure A7.3.2 Surveyed Areas for Groundwater
Table A7.3.2 Water Quality of Test Wells

WHO
Item unit T2 T3
Standard
pH --- 6.5-8.9 5.7 5.7
Conductivity μs/cm 1,600 14 70
TDS mg/L 1,000 10 49
Alkalinity mg/L --- 10 20
Hardness mg/L 250 15 13
Calcium mg/L 250 3.1 3.2
Turbidity NTS 5 0.2 0.1
Iron mg/L 0.3 0.10 0.08
Manganese mg/L 0.1 0.03 0.05
Copper mg/L 0.30 0.03 0.02
Zinc mg/L 0.10 0.02 0.02
APP. 7 - 21
APPENDIX 7
WHO
Item unit T2 T3
Standard
Nitrate mg/L 50 0.93 0.93
Potassium mg/L --- 1.7 4.6
Magnesium mg/L 150 1.7 1.2
Sodium mg/L 200 4.5 6.7
Sulphate mg/L 250 6 18
Chloride mg/L 250 6 18
Bacteria no./ml 100 2,900 110
Coliform no./100ml Nil 209 109
E-coli --- Negative Negative Negative
The hydro-geologist recommended three other candidate areas, area 4, 5 and 6, which have similar
geological features with the candidate area 3. However, even though these helpful wells have been
discovered, the recharge capacity of the wells location areas is critical because the planned intake will
be continuous for 24 hours/day and 365 days/year.
4. Conclusion
The hydro-geologist concluded as mentioned
Attachment -2:
1) The recharge capacity of the four selected
areas is limited and the total intake ability is
assumed to be less than 5,000 m³/day,
2) Average yield capacity of wells will be 3-5
m³/day (72-120 m³/day).
From the results of the survey (Pilot Project),

utilization of groundwater is unseemingly
feasible.
Photo A7.3.2 Yield Water from Test Well T-2
APP. 7 - 22
APPENDIX 7
Attachment -1
boreholesiting@gmail.com
Cellular no: +263 772 993182
Groundwater Survey Report
SOUNDING NAME : JICA PROJECT TEAM
EQUIPMENT : Abem Terrameter SAS 1000
ELECTRODE ARRAY : Schlumberger
ACQUISITION DATE : 4 to 19 September 2012
LOCATION DETAILS
LOCATION : Chitungwiza Municipality and Surrounding areas
PROJECT DETAILS
PERSONNEL : M. Dausi
CLIENT : JICA Team
PROJECT : Improvement of Water Supply, Sewage and

Solid Waste Management.
PROCESSING DATE : 26 September 2012
COMMENTS:
This submission serves as a report for detailed hydro geological and geophysical survey activities carried out
from 4 to 26 September in Mayambara area and Unit O extension. The main objective of this task is to survey
and identify aquifer/s with potential to yield 15, 000 m3 per day. The report describes the field investigations,
data collection, conclusions and recommendations of further survey.
1. General:
About 88% percent of Chitungwiza Municipality and surrounding land consist of granites rocks. Locating
ground water supplies in these bedrock areas are extremely difficult because potentially good aquifers are widely
scattered and physical make up of granites rocks is unfavorable for storage or transmitting of economically
useful volume of water.
2. The survey to identify cadidate site
Prior to carrying out the geophysical/hydrogeology investigations survey, a thorough analysis of previous
groundwater survey was carried out. The activities included the study of topographical and geological maps,
reviewing previous study reports and making reconnaissance field trips. It has been noted that the existing local
dug well have potential recharge source and its water quality is good. The main objective of the walk over survey
was to have a general field geological and hydro geological knowledge of the area. The approach was such that
potential sites were selected with the aid of geological maps and reviewing past reports. Inspection of
groundwater potential sites by visiting existing traditional dug well and consultations local residences was done.
As the results of above survey, two candidate sites were identified nearby Harava Dam and in Unit O, where are
desirable places to utilize water because Seke Reservoir Site is near.
APP. 7 - 23
APPENDIX 7
3. Methodology
In the two candidate sites, the resistivity method was adopted for its ability to determine resistivity of subsurface
geology layers, identify clay or saline aquifers, determine depth to the hard rock of various Vertical Electrical
Sounding (VES) and isolated various individual geo-formation layers with thickness.
Resistivity Survey methods of the geophysics sciences were applied in this groundwater investigation. Total of
46 Vertical Electrical Sounding (Harava dam 30 Unit O extension 16) were probed in these areas. As the resulted
in above survey, Aquifer Harava and Aquifer Unit O were determined as shown in Figure -1. Pictures of the each
aquifer site and location of probed points are shown in Figure -2.
Figure -1 Locations of Aquifers
APP. 7 - 24
APPENDIX 7
Figure -2 Pictures of Aquifer Area and the Surveyed Points
Geology and Hydrogeology.
Chitungwiza Municipality and the whole surveyed areas are covered by igneous and metamorphic rocks
APP. 7 - 25
APPENDIX 7
specifically the granitoid shield and the basement system comprised mainly of crystalline granites , gneisses and
migmatites. Chitungwiza municipality as well as surveyed surrounding areas are wholly being controlled by the
existence of faults, fractures and lineaments and shear zones. Intrusive bodies such as dykes, quartz veins and
sills play a great role for the existence and occurrence of groundwater in geologically none interlocking types of
rocks. In such hydro geological conditions, groundwater in the granitoid shield and basement system is therefore
anticipated to be encountered in the weathered and fractured parts of the rock mantle. This phenomenon is true
only if the fractures are however fully saturated, otherwise the weathered zone will only act as storing media
with fractures being the potential groundwater producing media, and the aquifers. Sometimes if intrusive bodies
such as dykes, quartz veins and sills are met within the hole while drilling, large quantities of groundwater
should be expected. Table -1 and Table -2 show the surveyed results of Aquifer Harava and Unit O, respectively.
Table -1 Surveyed Results of Aquifer Harava
VES NO Location Elevation Well Depth Casing Distance from Approximate yield in
coordinates (metres) (metres) diameter The nearest Litres per minute
(mm) tested site(m)
1 X299532 1451 50 300 30 Investigations only
Harava Y8008553 780
2 X299471 1447 50 33 Investigations only
Harava Y8008599 780
3 X299391 1445 50 300 32 780
Harava Y8008645 Proposed well site
Harava Y8008719 780
Harava Y8008698 780
6 X2999553 1449 50 300 30 780
Harava Y8008768
8 X299545 1447 80 200 30 1200
Harava Y8008788 Test hole
Harava Y8008825 780
10 X299524 1451 50 300 45 780
harava Y8008939 780
12 x299608 1445 50 30 Investigations only
Harava Y8008974 780
Harava Y8009025 780
14 X299657 1446 50 300 50 780
Harava Y8008896 780
16 X299579 1447 50 300 40 780
17 X300067 1451 60 200 110 450
APP. 7 - 26
APPENDIX 7
Harava Y8008765 450

19 X300181 1459 60 200 80 240
20 X300380 1447 60 200 60 240
Harava Y8008645 240
22 X300592 1449 50 200 70 240
23 X300592 1449 50 200 70 240
24 X300677 1450 50 200 80 240
25 X300664 1455 50 200 60 240
26 X300479 1456 60 200 35 240
27 X300227 1456 60 200 50 240
28 X300153 1456 60 200 40 114

Harava Y8008252
Proposed well site
29 X300690 1455 60 200 40 114
30 X300412 1459 60 200 50 114
TOTAL TOTAL ASSUMED
NO OF AQUIFER
BH =18 YIELD/minute
7,062 litres per minute
VES NO LOCATION ELEVET WELL CASING DISTANCE FROM APPROXIMATE

COORDINATES ION DEPTH DIAMETER THE NEAREST YIELD IN LITRES
(m) (m) (mm) TESTED SITE(m) PER MINUTE
1 X301014 1465 50 200 70 120
Unit O Y8006430 Proposed well site
2 X301057 1468 50 200 30 120
Unit O Y8006380 Investigations only
3 X301134 1464 50 200 40 120
4 X301212 1464 50 200 70 320
5 X301375 1463 50 200 45 300
6 X301289 1466 50 200 50 300
7 X301330 1465 50 200 60 300
8 X301334 1464 50 200 70 300
9 X301307 1463 50 200 35 300

10 X301346 1462 50 200 90 300
APP. 7 - 27
APPENDIX 7
11 X301346 1467 50 200 60 450

12 X301628 1465 50 200 89 450
13 X301005 1458 50 200 40 480
14 X301555 1467 50 200 69 480
15 X301114 1458 50 200 70 480
Proposed Total aquifer assumed
BH = 11 yield 3,510 litres per
minute
Conclusion and Recommendation:
Basing on the groundwater investigation conducted and the results that have been obtained the following
geological and geophysical parameters are noted:
>Resistivity survey has proved the surveyed area to have undergone medium to deep weathering succeeded by
immediate weathered and fracturing granitic bedrocks.
>Since weathering is medium to deep seated, then area has medium to deep coefficient of storastivity.
>The interpretable resistivity value indicates that there will be fair to large volumes groundwater with good
quality
>However upon exploratory drilling the discharge and therefore water quality could be known.
Recommended test well specifications
It is recommended that the following procedure has to be followed:

1. a test hole shall be drilled at the proposed test whole site;
2. the diameter shall be not less than 160 mm;
3. whole depth of 80-120 m; utilizing an air based drilling rig.
4. drill the test hole depth to the minimum depth 80 m and 120 m maximum.
5. An accurate of the material penetrated shall be recorded by Water Well Engineer to the depths and
thickness of the various underlying formations. Water well Engineer shall be responsible to secure protect
and deliver all test hole formation and water sample to the laboratory.
6. Aquifer test, the test well shall be pumped to estimate the transmissitivity, storage coeffient and specific
capacity. To obtain this information the well shall be test pumped at a constant rate for 72 hours .The
following test will be conducted: Formation samples, Chemical analyses which include PH, CO2, H2S and
Total dissolved solvents (TDS) Other to be sent to approved laboratory, the test holes has sufficient amount
of water, the borehole should be turned into monitoring well by casing and protecting it.
Note: This aquifer is sustained by higher rates of induced filtration from the nearby dam. A possibility of 10,000
m3 per day can be increased by increased number of wells.
APP. 7 - 28
APPENDIX 7
Attachment -2
JICA Project Team
NJS Consultants Co. Ltd
Ground Water Investigations in Seke Communal Land
for the Location of Borehole Sites Suitable for Test Drilling as a
Water Supply Option for Chitungwiza Municipality
by
Jeremy Prince & Associates
Harare
Project Office: 15 Smit Crescent

Chitungwiza Municipality Head Office EASTLEA
CHITUNGWIZA Harare
November, 2012 Ref: W18141-50
APP. 7 - 29
APPENDIX 7
GROUND WATER INVESTIGATIONS IN SEKE COMMUNAL LAND FOR THE LOCATION OF

BOREHOLE SITES SUITABLE FOR TEST DRILLING
INTRODUCTION
The JICA Project Team, though NJS Consulting Co. Ltd, is under ‘Government-to-Government’ contract
with the Chitungwiza Municipality to facilitate “The Improvement of Water Supply, Sewage and Solid
Waste Management in Chitungwiza, Republic of Zimbabwe”. An option requiring close investigation is the
ground water potential in and around the Chitungwiza Municipal area to either provide or supplement the
provision of potable water to the conurbation. It is desirable to deliver this water on a sustained basis to the
Seke reservoirs, situated on the low watershed between the Manyame and Nyatsime rivers, which flow
west and bound the host Seke Communal Land. The overall catchment runoff to these rivers represents the
means to impound Harare and Chitungwiza’s surface water supply by means of the Harava, Seke, Chivero
and Manyame dams. Chitungwiza’s share of the available water supply is insufficient and inadequate for
the population that requires its use.
Previously NJS had sub-contracted Messrs boreholesiting@gmail.com, led by Mr M. Dausi, in September

2012 to identify potential areas suitable for ground water investigation and the drilling of test wells to prove
the suitability of ground water in terms of quality and quantity with a long term view of enhancing well
fields to provide up to 15 000 m3 of water per day to the Seke Reservoirs. Two potential “aquifer” areas
were identified for geophysical investigation, namely one adjacent and to the south of Harava Dam and the
other adjacent to Unit ‘O’ of Chitungwiza within Seke Communal Land. Numerous sites were investigated
by means of vertical electrical soundings and subsequently two test boreholes were drilled to respective
depths of 100 metres and 55 metres in the Harava area on the premise that ground water recharge might be
fed from the dam source. The water yield of the first was disappointing, not exceeding 1 litre per second
whilst the second borehole was effectively dry. No borehole was drilled in the Unit ‘O’ area, which is
becoming heavily developed on a fairly informal basis with most houses having their own shallow well and
pit latrine.
In late October, Jeremy Prince & Associates was requested to submit a proposal to further the investigation
and identification of potential “aquifers” that may provide or supplement the Chitungwiza water supply.
This proposal was accepted in mid-November and field work was undertaken across the Jonase area of
Seke Communal Land in the week beginning 12th November. Test resitivity profiles and soundings were
observed in the Harava area to enable comparison with those observed around Jonase. In conclusion ten
potential borehole sites were identified and pegged on the ground, three of which were chosen for test
drilling in the contrasting geological environments encountered (Table 1). Drilling of these boreholes is
intended to begin on Monday 26th November.
APP. 7 - 30
APPENDIX 7
METHOLOLOGY
Reconnaissance
A preliminary hydrogeological reconnaissance and desk study of the project area was carried out before
fieldwork was commenced. This included procurement and examination of available geological and
topographical maps, a review of hydrogeological and geological literature and liaison with NJS Consultants,
who are the Project leaders. As no formal regional geological mapping is available, aerial photographs
across and in the area to the east of Chitungwiza in particular were studied with the aid of Google Earth
imagery where examined. A general appreciation of the hydrogeological conditions likely to be
encountered in the project area was acquired during the desk study. Geological features of major
hydrogeological significance were delineated on topographical maps and targeted for field investigation
using applied geophysical methods in order to evaluate their ground water potential.
Geophysical Techniques
Geophysical techniques employed in terrain investigations are non-direct methods that measure physical
parameters, which may be applied to gain an image of the subsurface. Various applications may be
employed to gather data on these subsurface features, depending on the type of information required and
suitability of the method in relation to the problem under investigation. Earth Resistivity (E.R.) has been
successfully applied in ground water investigations of hardrock geological environments across Zimbabwe,
and was employed for this particular project.
The Earth resistivity technique involves the running of Constant Separation Traverses (C.S.T.) or profiles
to determine lateral variations in resistivity that may be related to deep weathering or bedrock fracturing.
The resistivity profiles are run across promising geological features targeted during the preliminary desk
study and during confirmatory field observations. These features may include major fault zones,
lithological variations and their contact zones, and any other significant lineaments or anomaly.
Following E.R. profiling vertical electrical soundings (V.E.S.) are observed over all anomalous zones along
the profile to determine the thickness of the porous overburden combined with any potentially fractured
rock that may represent ‘effective’ secondary porosity above or within fresher, generally impermeable
bedrock. The most promising V.E.S. is then pegged after a field assessment of all the results, which often
includes soundings observed on producing boreholes in similar hydrogeological circumstances and a
knowledge of previous work in that particular geological environment. The siting reports appended to this
text only reflects the V.E.S. finally selected and does not include the C.S.T. along which any one site was
isolated.
V.E.S. Interpretation
The standard interpretation of resistivity data is based on matching the V.E.S. obtained in the field against a
catalogue of theoretically generated curves (for the corresponding field array) representing a layered earth
model. Each layer in the assumed model is characterised by a known resistivity and thickness. The
APP. 7 - 31
APPENDIX 7
parameters for the model represented by field V.E.S. can be determined from the master curve that best fits
the field results. However, no uniqueness of result is achieved as several models can fit the same V.E.S.
and speedy interpretation in the field is not possible. It is interesting to note that the standard method is
based on the assumption that earth is homogeneously layered but in practice this is not true.
Jeremy Prince and Associates have evolved an empirical method of interpretation, which allows for simple
and speedy processing of resistivity data in the field. The field results are plotted on a linear scale as a
curve of resistivity versus a depth function, AB/3 (along the vertical axis) as opposed to a logarithmic scale,
which is adopted in the conventional method. A study of gradient changes in the curve is the main feature
of the interpretation procedure. The weathered and extensively fractured bedrock are assumed to form one
“equivalent layer” and in the crystalline rock environment the main resistivity contrast is assumed to be
between the “equivalent layer” and fresh bedrock. The appearance of bedrock in this geological
environment is defined on the curve as the main change in gradient usually from positive to negative slope.
The depth to bedrock is estimated by the numerical value of AB/3 at which the main gradient change
occurs. Sedimentary formations with poor primary porosity are interpreted in a similar manner. In fluvial
and lucustrine environments the essence of the method is to estimate the thickness of the alluvial cover over
basement.
GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY
Geology
The greater extent of central Zimbabwe comprises an ancient continental nucleus made up primarily of a
variety, in terms of age and composition, of granitic rocks and a series of Archaean volcano-sedimentary
sequences, referred to as greenstone belts. Broadly the two distinct rock groups may be distinguished by
their contrasting soils, the granites’ generally being sandy and light whilst the greenstones usually reflect
heavier ‘red’ loamy soils. Changing circumstances of environment will introduce contrasts to this general
rule. Consolidation of these ancient rocks has created a macro-unit referred to as the Zimbabwe Craton.
This resistant but brittle block has been subject to various stresses and strains over time. These have
introduced sets of fracture lineaments and the intrusion of younger magma, often expressed in the form of
dolerite dykes and sheets. The dominant expression of the latter is known as the Mashonaland Dolerite. A
prominent north-north-east trending ‘Great Dyke-parallel’ fault passes across Chitungwiza from Seke Dam
to the main sewage works on the Nyatsime River. This feature is often quartz-filled and deeply weathered,
in contrast to the enclosing massive granites so apparent across the town. Other fracture patterns are
prominently north-easterly in direction with a subordinate north-westerly trend becoming apparent.
Topographically the larger extent of Seke Communal Land, and Chitungwiza Town, lies across the mature
and generally level African Landsurface. This can be seen in all directions from the area of Jonase.
Imposition of the Manyame and Nyatsime rivers across this landscape has introduced the effects of
downward erosion as a function of the post-African Erosion Cycle. The effect of this erosion has been to
APP. 7 - 32
APPENDIX 7
exhume the subsurface weathering profile, so evident across Chitungwiza town and adjacent to the two
rivers in the expression of rounded boulders, balancing rocks and pavements of massive granite. The
main road through and east from Chitungwiza follows the local watershed separating the Manyame from
the Nyatsime drainage. A distinct feature of this divergent drainage is in the development of shallow, grassy
depressions referred to locally as vleis but more regionally as dambos. These are seasonal wetlands, which
attenuate rainfall runoff and facilitate, from generally shallow and perched aquifers, the base flow to
downstream channels and consequently to the main river courses. The vleis appear to often be controlled
along fracture lineament sets, as becomes apparent from the available imagery (Figure 1). The interfluves,
by contrast tend to carry deeper soils and represent the concentration of cultivated lands. This cultivation, in
many instances, allows for the identification of contrasting soil types on imagery. These contrasts may
reflect the distinction between dominantly granitic terrain and that underlain by remnants of either
greenstone or intrusive dolerite or, as has become apparent in the field, the presence of a lateritic hard cap
of surface ironstone, which defines the African surface and the catenary interface between this and the
dambo depressions. The laterite or ferricrete represents a shallow soil feature in which the gravelly
substrate is cemented in an iron-rich matrix, and this tends to mask the underlying geological expression,
thus confusing the extent of greenstone preservation in the granites.
The regional geology south of Harare, and across Seke Communal Land in particular, has not been formally
mapped. The expression on the 1:1 Million geological map of Zimbabwe is the result of a reconnaissance
mapping exercise done for the purpose by F.L. Amm in 1954 to assess the extent of the Mashonaland
Dolerite Province. Therefore, in assessing the geological situation across Chitungwiza and adjacent Seke
Communal Land, we must apply our remote and field observations with past experience, especially in the
field of ground water exploration, in order to apply this to the hydrological implications of the terrain.
Hydrogeology
The massive granite terrain that prevails across Chitungwiza Town, and indeed over the entire area south of
the Harare Greenstone Belt from Tafara/Mabvuku through Ruwa and Epworth to Hatfield and Waterfalls
has proved time and again not to be an adequate source of ground water for boreholes. The massive,
crystalline bedrock is highly resistant to weathering and tends to sub-outcrop from shallow depth.
APP. 7 - 33
APPENDIX 7
FIGURE 1: Google Earth Imagery centred on Jonase Clinic, Seke Communal Land, showing the
surveyed borehole site positions. Sites W18141, W18144 and W18146 were drilled as test boreholes in
November 2012.
APP. 7 - 34
APPENDIX 7
FIGURE 2: Geological interpretation around Jonase Clinic showing inferred fracture lineaments
and areas with red soil and dolerite. The numbered areas are suggested targets for further
hydrogeophysical investigation. Borehole sites in Area 1 were located for test drilling purposes;
W18144 on the red soil interfluve, W18141 in a fracture-controlled vlei environment and W18146
in the dolerite environment. Adapted from 1:50 000 map 1831A1, Seke.
APP. 7 - 35
APPENDIX 7
Available ground water tends to be perched, as is widely illustrated by the innumerable shallow wells that
have been dug around the periphery of Chitungwiza and rurally in Seke Communal Land. That is the
ground water tends to lie at a depth of 1 to ten metres below surface, depending on the degree of
decomposition of the granite and a wells’ position in relation to the topographic gradient. Generally
ground water influence is noticed within the bottom of vlei lines where the seepage contributes to the base
flow of streams. Subvertical and horizontal jointing facilitates spheroidal weathering of the granite mass
and provide marginally improved zone for ground water accumulation and transmission. The larger fracture
lineaments may provide optimum situations for ground water development in this environment, but even
then water yields are invariably small and often do not exceed a yield of 1 to 2 cubic metres per hour.
Appended is a previous report by this company on ground water options for supplementary water supplies
to the Chitungwiza Municipality. It will be noted that the optimum situations within the town relate to sites
along the known Domboshawa Fault extension, where weathering might extend to depth. Often
quartz-filled, this zone is also associated with soft gouge material, the silty nature of which will often not
allow for ground water transmission. Other drilling programmes have shown that boreholes, where
successfully drilled, might allow for the use of hand pumps due to their limited yield potential. Records
show that a high proportion of boreholes drilled into granite must be considered unsuccessful. It is not the
environment that will provide or sustain a well field that will significantly supplement the Chitungwiza
water requirement.
This situation illustrated itself to you in the drilling of two boreholes in Area 1 adjacent to Harava Dam.
In the first, weathering above the granite did not exceed a depth of 5 m above massive bedrock, where the
rest water level stands at 3.76 m below ground level. That is, the perched water ‘aquifer’ has a saturated
depth of only 1.24 m. Slightly weathered to fresh granite persisted to a depth of 100 m, with a water break
occurring at about 31 m. Test borehole 2 was taken to a depth of 55 m over a similar 200 ohm-metre
resistivity trough to that recorded at borehole No. 1. Here ferricrete and weathered granite exceeds a depth
of 15 m when it passes into massive granite that is intruded by a thin, fine-grained dolerite between 31 and
38 m, below which massive granite samples are heavily contaminated by collapsing material from the
surface, a clear sign of poor drilling practice. The hole had back-filled, due to poor borehole construction,
to a depth of 41 m and the rest water level stood at 3.5 m from surface. Pumping showed that no perceptible
water yield could be gained from this hole. The situation shows that lateral ground water flow to the
boreholes is not happening and that the concept of drawing recharge water from Harava Dam or elsewhere
in this massive bedrock environment is invalid. Therefore drilling to great depth in massive granite is not
feasible.
The motorized borehole was drilled for Welt Hunger Hilfe during the recent cholera epidemic and was sited
over a localized red soil anomaly along the main road adjacent to Unit ‘O’. This borehole serves a piped
water scheme and is said to yield up to 10 m3 of water per hour. A borehole drilled to a depth of 52 m for
the Jonase Clinic is said to have yielded between 7 and 9 m3 per hour. The contrast between massive
granite terrain and those areas displaying rafts of mafic material is distinct. Therefore the more mature
APP. 7 - 36
APPENDIX 7
landsurface, where red soils are fairly extensive and the interfluves are separated by intervening dambo
features with minimal rock outcrop must represent the obvious targets for ground water investigation if the
abstraction of reasonably large quantities of ground water is to be potentially feasible. Investigation of the
wider area centred on Jonase Clinic shows that the distribution of reddish soils is patchy on the interfluves
and that much of the marginal soils relate to the weathering of associated gravelly ferricrete, which might
overlie granitic bedrock. It appears that the sheared basaltic rock is represented as thin rafts and xenoliths
within an older granite mass than that seen around Chitungwiza and that course-grained pegmatite is an
expression of this. Massive granite boulders similar to those seen in Chitungwiza outcrop extensively
towards Gombe Business Centre and around Marisa Business Centre, and are not a part of this investigation.
Moving south and east towards St Martin’s School and Madamombe Business Centre, rounded outcrops of
massive dolerite become apparent, in which intervening zones of fairly intense shearing occurs. The
massive dolerite normally creates a poor potential aquifer for the same reason as granite, but the shear
zones can represent zones for ground water flux worthy of investigation.
Hence three sites were chosen in differing hydrogeological environments. The first is on the crest of the
interfluve east of Jonase Clinic where deep red soils are evident. This is intended to investigate the nature
and potential of the mafic rocks that may occur across the mature land surface. The second site is located in
the lower vlei environment where potential for deep fracture-related porosity adjacent to granite is
indicated. There may be enhanced lateral recharge for ground water down the axis of the vlei line. The third,
also in low-lying ground, explores the potential of the sheared dolerite. It is re-iterated – the massive
granite is not an option.
THE WATER BALANCE

Area
The area under consideration for its ground water potential is that lying south-east of the Seke water
reservoirs across the Seke Communal Land, which is bounded in the north by the Manyame River and in
the south by the Nyatsime River. The north-western boundary is taken as the Duri River, close to the
Chitungwiza boundary with Seke and flowing to the Nyatsime and in the south-east to the Nyarusheshe
River south of Dema Township. The main tarred road through Seke follows the local watershed between
the Manyame and Nyatsime rivers. The component relating to the Manyame catchment covers an area of
50 km2. That referring to the Nyatsime catchment is 190 km2 in extent. The area is undulating with level
interfluves and intervening vlei depressions reflecting a maximum vertical difference of no more than 30 m
in the area of detailed investigation centred on Jonase Clinic and with a maximum elevation difference of
137 m occurring between the Duri confluence with the Nyatsime at 1490 m above sea level (masl) and a
trigonometrical beacon south of Dema at 1527 masl. Thus the main fall of the land, and consequently the
ground water gradient, is directed west ultimately to the confluence of the Manyame and Nyatsime rivers.
The catchment area as described is generally underlain by granitic terrain with intervening, but limited
extents of intrusive dolerite and occasional greenstone schist remnants. The weathering profile is generally
shallow, often not exceeding a depth of 5 m, and thus the predominant aquifer relates to a perched water
APP. 7 - 37
APPENDIX 7
table, which favours the development of shallow wells for exploitation and from which seasonal wetlands
draw their base flow.
Precipitation
The average annual rainfall ranges from a total of 800 to 850mm. The most complete data is for Kutsaga
Tobacco Research Station near the Airport. Most of the rainfall falls between November and April in any
one season, but mid-season shortfalls are not uncommon. Viz the 2010/11 season with a wet January but dry
February and March. Continuous annual rainfall figures for Kutsaga are referred to for the seasons 1958/59
to 1979/80. The mean annual precipitation over a 22-year period at Kutsaga is 813 mm. The lowest
recorded was in 1963/64 at 363mm and the highest was 1336 mm in 1973/74, giving a range of 973 mm.
Eleven of those years were above average for the season and eleven were below average. Generally it
would appear that a low rainfall cycle lasting between 1 and 3 years occurs once every 7 to 10 years.
Recharge
Ground water recharge across the Manyame/Nyatsime divide, in the hydrogeological environment defined
is derived in the main from direct precipitation, and minimally as lateral transfer from neighbouring
catchment areas. Due to the gentle topographic gradients, rainfall runoff will be attenuated, thus facilitating
ingress to ground water across the interfluves, but that runoff that gravitates into the seasonally wet bottom
lands or vleis will have recharge potential to ground increased, especially along fracture and shear zones
that may facilitate the available storage. Recharge to massive granites will not occur in a primary sense, and
will only be enhanced within the largely superficial joint system.
Based on studies by Hydrotechnica (1985) in similar hydrogeological environments, a unit recharge rate of
5 to 6 mm per annum is estimated for the Seke area. This will vary between above-average and
below-average rainfall season, to perhaps between 2 and 8mm per annum.
Surface Outflow
Runoff records for the area are secured from the Nyatsime Edinburgh gravity weir (C23) at grid reference
TR012948 just south of the Duri confluence where the overall catchment area for the Nyatsime is 500 km2,
and at the Manyame Henry Hallam (Harava) upstream gravity weir (C81) north of Murisa Business Centre,
which commands an upper Manyame catchment 488 km2 in extent. The former has records from 1953/54
season to 1979/80 over 27 years; the latter records are from 1974/75 to 1979/80. At Nyatsime Edinburgh
the runoff falls off from June/July in any one season and picks up from October to November, depending
on the nature of early rains. Maximum flow is in February and March. It is noted that from inception of
the record base to 1962 there were no days with no-flow. The mean unit runoff progressively decreases
from 202 to 104 per year, with an average over 27 years of 118. The mean unit runoff above Harava Dam
on the Manyame over a 6-year period is 199, with no single year recording any days with no-flow. A medial
runoff unit value of 134 is taken for purposes of calculation.
APP. 7 - 38
APPENDIX 7
Ground Water Outflow

Ground water outflow into the local stream network was estimated using a method recommended by Balek
(1989) for small catchments in Zambia. The formula states that ground water yield to streams is a function
of precipitation over time.
ie. q = R x 10002 mm
N
where q = ground water outflow
R = runoff
N = time in seconds
and q = 135/ (365x24x3600) x 1,000,000 mm
q = 4.28 mm
Abstraction
As almost the total runoff in the two rivers is reserved for the City of Harare storage in downstream dams,
the upstream abstraction from intervening dams and weirs, such as for Dema Growth Point is generally for
domestic and local irrigation purposes. Current ground water abstraction is mostly from shallow wells and
a number of hand-pumped boreholes, with only a few being motorized such as, again for Dema Growth
Point. It is estimated that the ground water abstraction is no more than 0.5 mm per annum, based on
general field observations.
Evaporation
Pan Evaporation records at Kutsaga for the same 22-year period average 1929 mm. Turc’s method for
calculating evapotranspiration in semi-arid regions states that:
E = P mm/yr
—————————
[ 0.9 + (P / L)2 ] ½
where P = mean annual precipitation
L = 300 + 25 x T + 0.05 x T3
T = mean annual temperature = 20.5oC
E = 818 = 685mm/yr
———————————
[ 0.9 + (818 / 1244)2 ] ½
Water Balance
The water balance of the subcatchment assumes that the aquifer is unconfined with limited secondary
porosity in the form of fracturing, and low hydraulic conductivity. The aquifer is formed by the weathered
mantle or regolith, which is usually between 5 and 30 m thick, the former being the norm. The general
APP. 7 - 39
APPENDIX 7
ground and surface water flow direction is westwards with the topographic gradient, but is modified off the
local watershed, north to the Manyame River over an area of 50 km2 and east to the Nyatsime River across
an area of 190 km2. The discharge area relates effectively to the mature seasonal wetlands or vleis and to
the confluence of the Manyame and Nyatsime rivers.
Table 2: Water Budget for the Seke Communal Land east of Chitungwiza
Factor Amount (mm) Source
Precipitation 818 Hydrological Summaries, 1980
Recharge 6 Hydrotechnica, 1985
Input 824
Evapotranspiration 685 By Turc's method. Evaporation - Hydro. Summaries, 1980
Surface outflow 134 Hydrological Summaries, 1980

Ground Water Flow 4.28 Balek, 1989
Ground Water Abstraction 0.5 Estimated from field data
Output 823.78
In the subcatchment, exploitable water is closely linked with natural recharge from precipitation.
Recharge to ground water normally occurs in the wet season from November to April. In years with low
rainfall, recharge will be poor, or may not occur at all.
Where recharge equals outflow from the system, the amount in storage will remain unchanged. If discharge
exceeds recharge, storage will decrease.
Thus: AS = Qr - Qd
Where: AS = Change in ground water storage
Qr = Ground water recharge
Qd = Ground water discharge + abstraction
AS = 6 – 4.78 = 1.22mm
Ground Water Supply

An analysis of the water balance indicates that approximately 1.22 mm or 292,800 m3 per annum of
underground water is available in storage in the 240 km2 subcatchment. This translates to a yield of 1220
m3 per km2 per annum. Judging from the yield of producing boreholes in the area, and that from optimized
sites drilled as test boreholes, it can be seen that this ranges from 1m3/hr to a maximum of 15 m3/hr. On
average a production borehole might sustain a yield of say 3 m3/hr under close management. Of the 15,000
m3/day or 5,475,000 m3/annum required for Chitungwiza at an average yield per day per borehole of 72 m3,
a well field comprising 208 efficiently maintained production boreholes would be required.
APP. 7 - 40
APPENDIX 7
It is sincerely regarded as being highly unlikely that these boreholes will sustain heavy ground water
abstraction on a daily basis with the limited ground water resource available, even when optimized.
Boreholes will have to be optimally spaced with a minimum of 300 m separation, preferably 500 m. The
ground suitable for further geophysical investigation, based on geological constraints is limited. Figure 2 is
an outline of areas deemed to be suitable for detailed investigation for ground water supplies, based on
geological indicators. The greater part of Seke Communal Land and adjacent areas to the north and south
are not suitable for ground water production on a sustained volume-related basis for reasons associated with
the adverse hydrology of granite terrain. At best perhaps 3 well fields comprising between 10 and 20
boreholes each might be developed to supplement Chitungwiza’s water supply. Each borehole will not
bear continuous pumping. A total say of 50 managed and maintained boreholes might supplement the
water supply to 3600 m3/day up to a maximum of about 5000 m3/day, a figure falling to one-third that of
the total requirement.
The consequences of establishing such well fields will be in conflict with the local rural population needs
and perceptions. Water tables will be drawn down, shallow wells will dry up, base flow to the vleis and the
main rivers will recede or cease, and in effect the security of Harare’s main water supply will be put under
further stress. An environmental impact assessment will have to assess the magnitude of these potential
consequences, which will also affect the pumping capabilities of individual boreholes within each well field,
and therefore the long-term sustainability of such a supply will require to be ascertained.
THE GROUND WATER SURVEY
Extended Area Targets for Ground Water Exploration

The current ground water exploration exercise targeted the area centred on Jonase Clinic and schools.
Following extensive geophysical investigations, involving Constant Separation Traverses and Vertical
Electrical Soundings, ten sites were identified and pegged, three of which were suggested for test drilling in
contrasting geological environments (Table 1). The site locations are depicted on Figure 1 and Figure 2, the
latter in relation to geological aspects ascertained from remote sensing interpretation, other information
available to us, and ground truthing. The area outline 1 on Figure 2 covers about 7 km2. The criteria used
required firstly that the geological environment contrast markedly from the massive granite terrain of
Chitungwiza. The extent of red soil formation indicates the presence of mafic lithologies; vlei lines appear
to be controlled by fracture lineaments and dolerite intrusion is possible.
A smaller area to the west of Jonase Primary School (2) covers about 5 km2, and might represent an
extension of the Jonase target area in closer proximity to Chitungwiza. However the rapid, apparently
informal housing development adjacent to the Chitungwiza boundary is characterized by the proliferation
of hand dug wells (which indicate a perched water table) and adjacent pit latrines. This, a health risk in
itself, begs the down-gradient contamination of both surface and ground water, especially in the Duri and
APP. 7 - 41
APPENDIX 7
Nyamaphupfu valleys, which tend south-east to the Nyatsime River.
To the east of the Jonase target area, area 3, about 6 km2 in extent is centred on Madamombe Business
Centre and St Martin’s School. Dolerite appears to be the dominant rock type. The massive material
represents a poor potential aquifer, but shear and contact zones hold potential for borehole development.
An area (4) that has not been reconnoitred is one of about 10 km2 lying south of Gombe Business Centre
and west of the Nyatsime River. Patchy red soil formation is apparent, as is the presence of suitable fracture
lineament targets. If proved encouraging, further investigation could be carried to the west across Harlech
and adjacent farms.
Social Restraints
Respect must be shown to the sensitivities and perceptions of the local rural community at all times. They
will perceive that a resource, which is rightly theirs, is being utilized without benefit to them. The pilot
investigation, per force, was restricted to open areas along public roads and in open communal grazing land,
which is usually equivalent to the grassy vlei lines. The area, in particular the interfluves, is densely
cultivated and ownership relates traditionally to a well-structured land use system. The social impacts of
establishing well fields must be carefully considered.
Community Contact
With respect to the initial ground water investigations south of Harava Dam and east of Unit ‘O’, the
Manyame District Council Authorities had been informed about the need to site and drill certain test
boreholes. In phase 2 around Jonase, field work was not commenced until a member of the Chitungwiza
Municipality staff, Mr Joseph Zenda of the Council’s Water Sector, accompanied by Mr Wiston Mabika of
Jeremy Prince and Associates had appraised the local affected headmen and kraalheads within the project
area. These community leaders in turn undertook to inform their villagers. The leaders visited were Messrs
Murisa, Jena (Madimi), Mazvuru, Chikambi, Chimbindi, Chirandati and Chihota. Even then there was
some suspicion of the siting and drilling activities and questions were asked. The siting team was
accompanied by a member of the Chitungwiza Municipal staff, usually Mr Jeremiah Chimuku, who fielded
such questions. Even then it has been noted that some of the pegs finally places have been removed from
the ground. These require to be permanently marked by the client to avoid their loss. Mr Chimuku knows
of all the locations in the field.
When drilling commenced, there was a delegation at one of the test sites to say that in their understanding
neither the District Administrator nor the Manyame District Council were aware of the project in whose
area of jurisdiction the activities were being performed. A meeting with Mr Zenda clarified the position and
the test drilling proceeded. However, it follows that very careful stakeholder communication is necessary
should a decision be made to expand the pilot area into a well field or well fields for large-scale ground
water abstraction. This might take place through the terms of an environmental impact study, which could
APP. 7 - 42
APPENDIX 7
reveal significant technical and social constraints to the venture.
Harava and Unit ‘O’ Areas

A total of 45 vertical electrical soundings were observed across the two target areas by Mr Dumasi, who
applied an AB/2 configuration to an apparent maximum depth of 40 m. Two test holes were drilled in the
Harava area, one at UTM grid reference 299608X 8009147Y and the second at 300440X 8008774Y. The
former was drilled to a depth of 100 m, cased to 80 m with 140mm Class 10 PVC and tested with a
reported maximum yield of 3 cubic ms per hour. The rest water level stands at 3.4 m from surface.
Weathering does not exceed a depth of 5 m whilst massive granite with intervening joint-related water
strikes occur, notably at 31 m. The resistivity at a depth of 27 m is recorded as 200 ohm m, and the
sounding below 33 m is poorly defined. The borehole should be preserved for use as a communal water
source.
Similarly resistivity at the second test site reflects a value of 200 ohm metres on AB/3 with poor definition
of the VES in depth. This borehole was drilled to a depth of 55 m and has since backfiled through poor
construction to 41 m. The rest water level stands at 3.5 m from surface. Here ferricrete with quartz rubble is
noted above decomposed to weathered granite to a depth of 15 m. Slightly weathered to fresh massive
granite extends to 32 m where a fine-grained dolerite is apparent to 38 m with no apparent water strike of
significance on the contacts. The samples below this depth, in massive granite, are heavily contaminated by
collapsed material from high level in the borehole. Pumping at the borehole did not produce a water supply
that could warrant a hand pump.
A constant separation traverse across the area in the north-west of the Harava priority where a
concentration of VES had been recorded showed consistently high resistivity values in the range of 400 to
900 ohm metres, a situation which reflects the prevalence of massive bedrock from shallow depth, and one
made visual by the extensive rounded boulder outcrop between Harava Dam and the main road near the
Seke Reservoirs. The area cannot be recommended for further geophysical investigation, and the drilling
results confirm that areas underlain by massive granite around Chitungwiza do not constitute ground water
targets. The available water is invariably perched at high level and lateral recharge is not taking place at
depth.
Although the area east of Unit ‘O’ is potentially an improvement in terms of its potential for more
favourable geological circumstances, reconnaissance shows that the patchy red soils relating to mafic
inclusions in the granite are restricted and that the proliferation of pit latrines and an apparently largely
perched water table precludes this area from further investigation or well field development.
The Jonase Investigation

Specific target areas open to investigation were covered by way of constant separation traversing with
APP. 7 - 43
APPENDIX 7
soundings being observed over anomalous resistivity troughs. Of these many soundings, ten were pegged
as having potential for ground water development within the target area centred on Jonase Clinic. This area
comprises three apparent ground water targets worthy of test drilling. The main interfluve between Jonase
Secondary and Jonase Primary schools and beyond to the south-west is heavily cultivated and Google
Imagery reflects the presence of red-brown soils. Rock outcrop is limited so the extent of apparent mafic
inclusions within the surrounding granites is uncertain. The added extent of gravelly ferricrete on this
surface became increasingly apparent, emphasizing the restricted distribution of greenstone-related
lithologies. As the Jonase Clinic borehole had yielded between 7 and 9 m3 of water per hour, the area is
considered to be a strong contender for borehole development. Three sites were located along the road
between the two schools, and a fourth was located along the road just south-east of the Clinic. The latter
site (W18148) was awarded drilling priority overall, but it was not recommended for test drilling as
conditions are likely to be soft and the site may not be representative of the environment. Instead Site
W18144 displaying good definition but higher resistivity values was chosen for drilling on the local
watershed.
The extensive vlei lines separating the interfluves represent the second target area. The red soils do not
persist as these are masked by gleyed and dark expanding lattice soils reflecting seasonal saturation, but the
ferricrete persists in places. Pegmatitic granite is not characteristic of the massive variety, and this can be
seen to outcrop close to water courses and is often exposed in decomposed well spoil. Many of the vlei
lines appear to be fracture-controlled. Lower observed resistivity values recorded along CST’s are
encouraging, whereas in places elevated resistivity values are usually reflective of granite bedrock. Three
sites were pegged in the vlei environment over distinct resistivity troughs and Site W18141, which is well
defined, was chosen for test drilling.
Further south, closer to the Musakandoro River and adjacent vlei development, massive dolerite becomes
apparent in outcrop, whilst streambed exposures show that strongly sheared hornblende schist lies adjacent
to pegmatitic granite. Three boreholes were pegged in this environment and W18146 was chosen for test
drilling.
THE SITES (Figure 1)
The Interfluve Environment

Site W18143 is located over a distinct resistivity trough placed centrally within the red soil anomaly along
the interfluve road. The sounding shows definition for weathering to a depth of about 27 m, whilst potential
for further effective porosity is possible to some 45 m depth. The site is encouraging within the context of
the Chitungwiza environment. The site is given seventh drilling priority overall where it is estimated that a
68% chance exists for achieving a water yield, which may be in the range of 2 to 5 m3 per hour.
APP. 7 - 44
APPENDIX 7
Site W18144 occurs over a resistivity trough where the surrounding values are higher than elsewhere.
The sounding is considered to be promising for the interfluve environment in that the VES indicates
potential for effective porosity to a depth of about 33 m and a possibility for further fractures below this
depth. The site was chosen for test drilling and it was estimated that a good chance existed for achieving a
useful water supply, which could be in the range of 2 to 10 m3 per hour, given open fracturing. However,
the site proved to be a poor test hole in that at a depth of 12 m below a raft of hornblende schist, compact
white, slightly pegmatitic granite was intercepted to 29 m where a small water strike coincided with the
lower granite contact with hornblende schist. Further granite inclusions were present down to a depth of 47
m, below which minor water ingress on stained joints took place to 49 m. Hard grey-blue hornblende schist
then continued to the end of hole at 60 m. The final pumping showed a disappointing water yield that may
only be in the order of 1 m3 per hour, and with a 3 hp pump drew down rapidly to pump intake. The
borehole should be equipped for community use by installing a hand pump. Alternatively it could be
preserved for water level monitoring.
Site W18150 was located back along the road closer to the Secondary School over median resistivity
values where the soil changes from gravelly ferricrete to red-brown loam. The site, by comparison is
considered to be fair. VES definition suggest effective to partially effective porosity to a depth of about 33
m, below which further fracturing may be limited. Given 10th drilling priority overall, the site was not
recommended for drilling as it can only be estimated that a 67% chance exists for achieving a small water
supply, which may be in the order of 1 to 2 m3 per hour. A decision to drill this site must be speculative.
In strong contrast Site W18148 along the roadside south-east of the Clinic is located on the edge of a
pronounced low resistivity trough where weathering and effective porosity could persist to a depth of about
40 metres, below which potential continues to depth. Although the site was chosen as first drilling priority
on geophysical grounds, low resistivity gradients are often indicative of soft to muddy drilling conditions,
which can affect the efficiency of a borehole due to formation damage during drilling and restricted
transmissivity in a silty clay weathering substrate. The site should be considered for future drilling in that it
is estimated that a 70% chance exists for achieving a developed water supply, which may be in the range of
4 to 10 m3 per hour.
The Fracture-related Vlei Environment

The open grassy vlei line south-east of the Clinic generally reflects low to median resistivity values in the
range of 20 to 50 ohm metres. Although pegmatitic granite is exposed south of and within the watercourse,
the vlei expanse displays no rock outcrop except for the rare evidence for surface ferricrete.The linear
control to the vleis suggest fracture control, notably on ENE and NNE intercepting trends (Figure 1).
Site W18141 is over a distinct resistivity trough in the lower catena of the vlei, which coincides with a
projected fracture zone. The VES is particularly well defined and the site overall was given third drilling
preference as it was considered that granitic material may be intercepted. Weathering is apparent to a depth
APP. 7 - 45
APPENDIX 7
below 27 m whilst potential for effective fracture-related porosity might be inferred to continue to a depth
of at least 45 m. Harder and fresh bedrock can be expected below a depth of 50 m. It may be estimated that
a 70% chance exist for achieving a water yield that may be in the range of 4 to 10 m3 per hour. The site was
recommended for test drilling in the vlei environment. The outcome was very encouraging in that
overburden and a high degree of weathering was shown to 26 m above a very coarsely broken and stained
fracture zone in epidote-bearing hornblende schist. This persisted to a depth of about 40 m, representing a
major water strike. Below 50 m the hornblende schist became harder and less weathered to the end of hole
at 60 m. The estimate of the constant discharge pumping test over a 24-hour period was a delivery of 4
litres per second or 14.4 m3 per hour. Recovery after one hour was to 7 m below datum.
Site W18142 is located slightly higher up on the side of the vlei where a similar low resistivity trough was
encountered. This site appears to be associated with an ENE fracture trend. Weathering is apparent to a
depth of about 30 m whilst potential for further effective porosity may persist to some 50 m. The site
should lie close to the interface between granite and greenstone, and it is encouraging from a geophysical
point of view. Given sixth drilling priority overall, but revised to 4th, it is estimated that a 68% chance
exists for achieving a water supply, which may be in the range of 2 to 9 cubic m per hour.
Also on the NNE fracture trend Site W18149 is located over another prominently low resistivity anomally
close to the mafic contact where weathering is apparent to a depth of about 30 m and potential for further
effective to partially effective porosity may extend to a depth of up to 50 m. Soft to muddy drilling
conditions may be intercepted. The site is encouraging. Originally given eighth drilling priority, the
location is revised to 6th position following the test drilling. It is estimated that a 68% chance exists for
achieving a water supply, which may be in the range of 2 to 7 m3 per hour.
The Dolerite Environment

The area of investigation proved most encouraging close to an inferred NNW shear or fracture trend close
to the Musukandoro River, where both massive spheroidal dolerite and sheared hornblende schist are
apparent in outcrop, as is pegmatitic granite. Site W18146 corresponds to a resistivity trough close to the
contact between dolerite and pegmatitic granite. The site, on geophysical grounds, was chosen as the test
site for this area. Weathering is apparent to a depth of about 33 metres whilst there is potential for further
fracture-related porosity to depth. It was estimated that a good, say 69%, chance exists for achieving a
water supply, which could be in the range of 3 to 10 m3 per hour. In the event of test drilling dolerite was
not intercepted but grey-white pegmatitic and partly micaceous granite. The main water strike corresponds
with the presence of coarsely fragmented yellow green epidote, a secondary fault-related mineral that
became prominent between 43 and 50 m. The site was drilled to a depth of 60 m and an estimated yield
during a 24-hour pumping test suggested a delivery of 3.5 litres per second or 12.6 m3 per hour.
Site W18145, which is apparently over the same NNW fracture trend, appears to be in sheared dolerite.
Here potential for effective porosity may extend to a depth of about 45 m. The site retains its fifth pole
APP. 7 - 46
APPENDIX 7
position where it is estimated that a 68% chance exists for achieving a water supply, which may be in the
range of 2 to 8 m3 per hour.
Site 18147 along the road back towards the clinic is located over a resistivity trough in dolerite, which
outcrops as spheroidal boulders. Here weathering may not exceed a depth of 21 m and potential for
effective porosity to 30 m. The resistivity gradient below this depth suggests that only partially effective
porosity may be present to depth. This relegates the site to 9th drilling position where it is estimated that a
67% chance exists for achieving a water supply, which may be in the range of 1 to 4 m3 per hour. The risk
of drilling for water under the circumstances described must attract speculation.
In terms of the Water Act, there is a requirement for you to apply for authority to drill a borehole, prior to
drilling, through the Upper Manyame Subcatchment Council based at No. 9 Connaught Road in Newlands,
and administered by the Manyame Catchment Council from 1st Floor Old Mutual Centre cnr. Speke Avenue
and Sam Nujoma Street in Harare, Tel: 702124/793738-32. Form GWI is supplied with the relevant UTM
co-ordinates for your completion and submission and to the Catchment Council. Having drilled the test
boreholes, and supplied the necessary information on drilling and test pumping records generated by your
drilling contractor, you are then obliged to apply for a permit to abstract ground water, depending on the
usage that you decide upon.
The sites are all pegged with a treated stake, which is painted yellow and appropriately numbered. The
locations are known to Mr Jeremaih Chimuku who is attached to your project through the Chitungwiza
Municipality. You are advised to mark the sites permanently to avoid their loss. Some of the pegs have
already been removed. Each report shows a sketch of the location, a graphic presentation of the VES, the
lithology likely to be intersected, drilling recommendations and a brief outline of water possibilities.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• It has been shown time and again that the prevailing massive granites across Chitungwiza Town
and surrounds do not create a reliable aquifer, and that alternative geological settings must be
identified and tested for their potential to deliver ground water on a greater and sustained scale.
• This includes a preferred area north of the Seke reservoirs close to Harava Dam on the Manyame
River. The two test sites subsequently drilled by JICA proved unsuitable for large-scale use.
Lateral recharge to ground water in massive granite is insignificant, and the available water is
largely perched at high level, and is accessed by hand dug wells.
• Similarly a preferred area adjacent to Unit ‘O’ of Chitungwiza was not further investigated as
contrasting red soil areas with a better yielding borehole are limited and patchy. Informal
APP. 7 - 47
APPENDIX 7
development shows that numerous hand dug wells lie adjacent to pit latrines. The downstream
ground and surface water influence is contaminated.
• Our general knowledge, aerial photographs and Google Imagery show that conditions change in
adjacent Seke Communal Land where a mature land surface displays remnants of red-brown soil
relating to included mafic material and the weathering of surface ironstone, in an area where these
are intruded by an apparently older, often pegmatitic granite and in places later dolerite, and where
mature seasonally wet vlei or dambo features represent the apparently fracture-controlled
headwaters of water accumulating off a local watershed separating the Manyame and Nyatsime
rivers to north and south.
• Four such adjacent areas where identified in an approximately 50 km2 area of Seke Communal
Land up to 12 km south and east of the Seke reservoirs. The area centred on Jonase Clinic and
schools was chosen for field investigation to identify suitable sites in contrasting hydrogeological
settings for test drilling.
• Following communication with local community headmen, an essential component for any future
ground water survey and drilling programme, ten potential borehole sites were located, chosen and
pegged for consideration as test sites. These locations are described in this report. Three potential
environments were identified.
1) The mature interfluve surface with red-brown soil development (the extent of
greenstone-related remnants were found to be patchy and much of the expression is due to
the extent of surface ironstone related to the African Landsurface).
2) A linear vlei or dambo environment where intervening wetland areas are apparently
controlled by fracture lineaments and may include mafic remnants in a pegmatitic granite
host.
3) Sites relating to the intrusion of later massive dolerite, often sheared close to the contacts
with host granitic bedrock.
• A higher resistivity, well-defined site (W18144) was chosen to test the red soil environment, in
preference to a low resistivity, potentially deep and highly weathered site (W18148) near Jonase
Clinic. The test site proved disappointing in that hornblende schist rafts were found to be
interleaved with white granite. Little water was developed (perhaps 1 m3/hr) and it is
recommended that the site be either equipped for the local community or it should be preserved as
a ground water level monitoring hole (or both). In contrast the borehole at Jonase Clinic is
estimated to have yielded 7 to 9 m3/hr. Site W18148 should be preserved for future drilling in this
environment.
APP. 7 - 48
APPENDIX 7
• Well defined resistivity sites were recorded over the recommended test holes in the other two
environments where lower resistivity troughs correspond to fractured ground in the wet land
environment, which commands improved potential for local recharge. Both sites were drilled
successfully with apparent constant discharge yields of 14.4 and 12.6 m3/hr respectively.
Although other encouraging sites were located in these environments, conditions vary considerably
and in future variable, often low water yields could be achieved from boreholes, say from 1 to 15
m3/hr depending on the subsurface conditions intercepted.
• Any boreholes in a future well field that are intended for constant pumping for water supply
purposes should be separated by a minimum distance of 300 m, preferably 500 m. Even then it is
anticipated that the sustainability of individual borehole water supply will be doubtful, and may
not provide the consistent water volumes desired to provide Chitungwiza with a reliable 15,000 m3
per day. Given the restricted development of suitable and available ground for the location of
further optimum boreholes, it is suggested that no more than ten production boreholes per area
(maximum 20) might be achieved, giving a total of 40 to 80, which may produce on average 3 to 5
m3 per hour or 72 to 120 m3/day each. It is suggested that at best a daily supplementary water
supply of about 5000 m3/day might be achieved. Even then the well fields will require constant
abstraction monitoring and management. Should the full volume be required it would seem that
between 125 and 208 boreholes which are unfaltering over 365 days a year will be required to
deliver. In the writer’s opinion this ideal is not fitting to the provision of water from a restricted,
hardrock aquifer environment where the conditions are unconfined and ground water storage is
largely superficial, except perhaps along fracture lineaments of limited extent.
• Environmental impact of such an extraction requires to be seriously considered. There is a large

and well-established rural population who have their own views and perceptions relating to the
wholesale use of ‘their resource’ to supply Chitungwiza with water. Recharge is largely from
precipitation between November and April in any one rainfall season. Much of the water supply is
by way of shallow wells dug into a perched water table situation. Ground water mining will result
in depletion of those water supplies, and the drying up of base flow though the intervening
wetlands to stream flow. This will in turn affect the attenuated flow to the main rivers, namely the
Nyatsime and Manyame, and will place further stress on Harare’s water storage facilities. The
impacts of continuous pumping could have serious consequences.
• Seke Communal Land is bounded in the north by the Manyame River and the south by the
Nyatsime, both with upstream catchments some 500 km2 in extent. The main road through Seke
follows the local watershed. Of a total area of say 240 km2, 50 km2 relates to surface runoff to the
Manyame and 190 km2 to the Nyatsime. The ground water gradient overall is directed from
south-east to north-west to the confluence of the two rivers. Considerable downward erosion has
APP. 7 - 49
APPENDIX 7
exhumed the granite landscape that is seen, especially across Chitungwiza. Massive bedrock
prevails from shallow depth, thus controlling the perched nature of most available ground water.
• On average annual precipitation totals between 800 and 850 mm. Kutsaga Research Station near
the Airport has averaged 818mm over a 27-year span. Seasonal variations are between 363 mm
and 1336 mm, giving a range of 973 mm. Inter-season rainfall deficits often occur. Ground water
recharge is largely derived from direct precipitation. Lateral recharge through the rock mass is
minimal, except locally, usually along transgressing linear fractures, which provide secondary
porosity. The ground water recharge rate may be at 5 – 6 mm per annum, based on parallel studies.
This will vary between above-average rainfall and below average-rainfall seasons to perhaps
between 2 and 8mm, or in extreme drought not at all.
• Surface outflow has been recorded at the Nyatsime Edinburgh weir and Harava upstream gauging
weir. A medial unit runoff value of 134 is taken for the two catchments. A ground water outflow
to base flow is calculated at 4.28 mm. As ground water and surface water abstraction upstream of
Harava Dam is largely for domestic and small-scale irrigation, this is taken as being 0.5 mm per
annum.
• Annual pan evaporation for Kutsaga is averaged at 1929 mm. The greatest loss in the water
balance is by way of evapotranspiration, which is calculated at 685 mm per year. Judging from the
water balance presented, the amount of water available for exploitation from ground water storage
is small, and may be as small as 1.22 mm equivalent. Therefore the amount of water available for
large-scale abstraction for Chitungwiza is small and delivery at the rates required is unlikely to
cope with the necessary demand.
T J BRODERICK
For Jeremy Prince & Associates, Harare
REFERENCES
BALEK, J. 1989. Groundwater Resources Assessment. Developments in Water Science. Elsevier,
Amsterdam, 249pp.
HYDROTECHNICA 1985. Summary report on the Accelerated Drought Relief Programme, Victoria
Province, Zimbabwe. Unpublished. Dept. Water Resources, 64pp.
MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT 1982. Hydrological Summaries, 1980.

Hydrological Branch, Ministry of Water Resources and Development, 375pp.
APP. 7 - 50
APPENDIX 8
APPENDIX 8.1
Pilot Project for Sewerage System
PROPOSED GRIT SURVEY

FINAL RESULTS REPORT
BCHOD
CONSULTINGENGINEERS
BrianColquhounHughO’DonnellandPartners
BrianColquhounHughO’Donnell&Partners
22 York Avenue
Newlands
Harare, Zimbabwe
March 2013
APP. 8 - 1
Pilot Project For Sewerage System
March 2013
APPENDIX 8
Table of Contents
1 Introduction....................................................................................... 3
1.1 Background to Project ....................................................................................................... 3
2 Study Area ......................................................................................... 4
3 Installation......................................................................................... 5
4 Monitoring......................................................................................... 6
5 Methodology for Calculating Amount of Captured Sand ..................... 7
5.1 Days in Operation ........................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Water Supply Situation ................................................................................................... 7
5.3 Limitation of Devices....................................................................................................... 7
5.4 Reliability of Results ....................................................................................................... 8
5.5 Basis of Calculations ...................................................................................................... 8
6 Zengeza Sewage Works – Inlet Works Grit Survey............................ 17
7 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 20
7.1 Water Supply over the Same Period ............................................................................. 20
7.2 Blockages in the System............................................................................................... 20
7.3 Settlement of Grit in the System ................................................................................... 20
7.4 Carry-over of Grit at the Works ..................................................................................... 20
8 Recommendations ............................................................................ 21
APP. 8 - 2
Pilot Project For Sewerage System
March 2013
APPENDIX 8
1 Introduction
1.1 Background to Project
.
The existing sewerage infrastructure for Chitungwiza is now very old and dilapidated in some sections. Some assets
like manholes have been vandalised over the years and are now allowing into the system grit during the rainy season
and other forms of debris.
A serious problem with the existing system has been identified as that of sand deposition in the reticulation and rising
mains including the works. Although there has been some rehabilitation works which are still on-going under the
AfDB Scheme (Multi Donor Fund) these works have not eliminated the problem.
In order to identify the most appropriate method of dealing with this issue, field surveys involving installation of grit
traps to 150 properties including monitoring were conducted to try and ascertain the amount of grit being discharged
into the system by household cleaning chores. In addition grit arriving at Zengeza Sewage Works was monitored in
order to validate the results of grit measured by the household grit traps.
Therefore this Report analyses the results obtained from the survey, and extrapolate these in accordance with the
designated Areas in order to have an insight on the volume of sand entering the system from various households.
The report follows the following structure:
• Study Area covering

o Areas, and
o Sub-Areas.
• Methodology for Calculating the amount of sand captured by devices covering;

o Number of days device was in operation,
o Water supply situation over the above period,
o Limitation of devices, and
o Reliability of results,
• Results from the following;

o Sub Areas,
o Study Area
• Zengeza Sewage Works - Inlet Works Grit Survey

o Methodology,
o Period of Study,
o Targeted Areas, and
o Results of Study.
• Recommendations covering;
o An outreach programme to educate the residents,
o Flushing the sewerage network,
o Provision of a constant water supply to achieve self-cleansing velocities in the network.
APP. 8 - 3
Pilot Project For Sewerage System March 2013
APPENDIX 8
2 Study Area
The Study Area was divided into Sub-Areas namely;
• Area 1- Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s,
• Area 2- Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and Zengeza 5,
• Area 3- Zengeza 4,
• Area 4- Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K, and
• Area 5- Unit F, M, N, L, G, O and P.
Households per area where household grit traps were installed in kitchen gullies are as outlined in table
below;
Area Sub-Area Number of Households

1 Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s 25
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and Zengeza 5 40
3 Zengeza 4 20
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K 30
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 35
APP. 8 - 4
APPENDIX 8
3 Installation
Installation of devices was conducted over the following period;
Area Sub-Area Day of Installation Number Installed

1 Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s 15/10/2012 28
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and 15/10/2012 and 16/10/2012 37
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 16/10/2012 16
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K 17/10/2012 33
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 17/10/2012 28
It was observed that in some areas gullies were too small to take-in the grit traps. In other areas mainly
Zengeza 1 and Zengeza 2 the internal kitchen sink drainage system was linked-up with the foul drainage
system and as a result grit traps were installed on Extended Properties with proper gullies.
In addition to the above challenge, it was discovered that, grit traps were tightly fitting into gullies making
installation a problem.
APP. 8 - 5
APPENDIX 8
4 Monitoring
Monitoring of devices was conducted over the following period;
Area Sub-Area Day of Monitoring Number of Readings

1 Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s 22/10/2012, 23/10/2012, 90
24/10/2012, 26/10/2012,
31/10/2012, 2/11/2012
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and 22/10/2012, 128
Zengeza 5 23/10/2012,25/10/2012 and
1/11/2012
3 Zengeza 4 22/10/2012, 25/10/2012, 60
30/10/2012, 1/11/2012
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K 24/10/2012, 29/10/2012 66
2/10/2012, 26/10/2012
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 24/10/2012, 29/10/2012 86
2/10/2012, 26/10/2012
Because of the tightness of the grit trap devices, during monitoring it was observed that upon clogging the
devices were getting flooded including in extreme cases, poorly drained areas around the gully. As a result
of that, a number of grit traps were removed by the residents since they now constituted a hazard. The table
below shows the number of grit traps discovered to have been removed before and during the monitoring
period;
Area Sub-Area Number Removed

2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and 4
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 None
APP. 8 - 6
APPENDIX 8
5 Methodology for Calculating Amount of Captured Sand
5.1 Days in Operation

Devices were monitored for two weeks. Monitoring was not on a daily basis as was proposed in the
Proposal Document. This is because Chitungwiza Municipality is currently facing serious water supply
challenges. The emergency supply regime lacks any structure i.e. it is haphazard in nature. Consequently it
was noted that behavioural habits of the targeted households might have been affected by this erratic
water supply situation. People are more conscious of conserving every drop of water; hence the amount of
anticipated sand entering the sewerage network might be small compared with that which would enter the
same network during normal water supply periods.
The table below does show the number of days the devices were in operation;
Area Sub-Area Day of Installation Removal Date Total number

of days in
operation
1 Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s 15/10/2012 02/11/2012 19
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 15/10/2012 and 16/10/2012 02/11/2012 19 and 18
and Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 16/10/2012 02/11/2012 18
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K 17/10/2012 01/11/2012 16
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 17/10/2012 01/11/2012 16
5.2 Water Supply Situation
Number of times the various areas were supplied with water during the monitoring period are outlined in
the table below.
Area Sub-Area Total number of times areas

received water
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 4
and Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 4
As a result of the above, sampling in Areas 4 and 5 were limited to 3 times due to this problem of water
supply. Residents normally hoard water when available and use that sparingly. Part of the used water is
thrown into vegetable gardens thereby distorting the real impact of the amount of sand that should enter the
sewerage network under normal water supply. In areas 4 and 5 residents rely more on boreholes and wells.
5.3 Limitation of Devices

It was discovered that grit trap devices, since fabricated by hand, did vary a bit dimension-wise. In addition,
due to devices fitting tightly inside gullies, they caused flooding of a number of properties. As a result
affected residents ended up removing them.
The Table below gives an outline number of grit traps removed before the monitoring period and during
the monitoring period.
APP. 8 - 7
APPENDIX 8
Area Sub-Area Number Removed Before Number Removed During

Monitoring Monitoring
1 Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s None 4
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and None 4
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 None None
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K None 4
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 1 3
5.4 Reliability of Results

Due to the erratic water supply situation in Chitungwiza, there is most likely a behavioural change in the
habits of the people in the study area. This observation will have an impact on the actual amount of sand
entering the sewerage system. Adjustments might need to be done to the methodology in order to have a
fair picture of the actual amount of sand entering the system.
5.5 Basis of Calculations

The following assumptions have been made in the calculation of anticipated amount of sand entering the
sewerage network;
• The study area has an affluent population but, this shall be ignored in the calculation of Total
Household Grit from the Study Area,
• That the amount of grit captured by the devices during times of water supply constitute 75% of that
that would enter the system under a normal water supply situation,
• That the behaviour of the residents in the study area has changed due to the erratic water supply
situation and hence there is an associated distortion of the results.
• The Prototype device dimensions as depicted below are assumed to be the standard dimensions for
calculation purposes,
• Trapped sand contained at least 40% of debris other than sand. Therefore, this amount will be
accounted for in the calculation of the Total Household Grit from the Study Area,
• Based on a Study that was conducted at Zengeza Sewage Treatment Works, Job No. 11188 dated
November 1996, it was discovered that 50% of material passing through the 425 micrometre sieve
as defined in BS 1377-Part 1 & 2 was silt clay. This figure will be accounted for in the calculation
of the Total Household Grit from the Study Area, (See Appendix A).
5.5.1 Formula Used

Trapped sand depth was measured using scale rules and this measured
depth has been multiplied by the surface area of the sand trap device to
give the volume of trapped sand less the assumed volume of trapped
debris. Part of the trapped debris was first removed from the device
before measurement. It was observed that in most cases sand settled at
the bottom and debris at the top. This was most likely due to the
different specific gravities of the various substances.
APP. 8 - 8
APPENDIX 8
5.5.2 Measurement Results- No Adjustments

a) Area 1 Results
Sub- Hous Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd Date 4th Date Average
Area e No. Name Date Date Date; Date; Results Results Results Results Total m3
; ; m3 m3 m3 m3
Old St 2,595 Jekachek 0 2 4 0 1.42 2.840 2.13x10-5
Mary’s a x10-5 x10-5
Old St 2,734 Jekachek 1 Rem 7.088 7.088x10-6
Mary’s a oved x10-6
Old St 2,821 Dere Ave 1 5 5 7 7.088 3.544 3.544 4.962x1 3.19x10-5
Mary’s x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 0-5
Manya 4,306 Manyame 0 Rem 0 0
me Dr oved
Manya 6,595 Manyame 2 5 3 25 1.420 3.544 2.126 1.772 2.418x10-4
me Dr x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
Old St 1,806 Chiedza 1 5 1 7 7.088 3.544 7.088 4.962 2.481x10-5
Mary’s Dr x10-6 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Old St 1,804 Chiedza 1 Rem 7.088 7.088x10-6
Mary’s Dr oved x10-6
Old St 1,802 Chiedza 1 7 10 5 7.088 4.962 7.088 3.544 4.075x10-5
Mary’s Dr x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,740 Hurudza 1 1 10 3 7.088 7.088 7.088 2.126 2.658x10-5
Mary’s x10-6 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,801 Hurudza 1 3 5 5 7.088 2.126 3.544 3.544 2.481x10-5
Mary’s x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,037 Yambuka 0 3 2 10 0 2.126 1.420 7.088 3.543x10-5
Mary’s i x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,033 Yambuka 1 5 5 6 7.088 3.544x1 3.544 4.253 3.013x10-5
Mary’s i x10-6 0-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,031 Yambuka 0 4 6 6 0 2.840 4.253 4.253 3.782x10-5
Mary’s i x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,029 Yambuka 1 4 3 15 7.088 2.840 2.126 1.063 1.63x10-4
Mary’s i x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
Old St 1,025 Yambuka 2 1 4 5 1.42 7.088 2.840 3.544 8.512x10-5
Mary’s i x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,412 Katanga 5 2 3 8 3.544 1.420 2.126 5.670 3.19x10-5
Mary’s x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,414 Katanga 4 3 4 4 2.840 2.126 2.840 2.840 2.66x10-5
Mary’s x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,418 Katanga 2 6 5 3 1.420 4.253 3.544 2.126 2.835x10-5
Mary’s x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 1,420 Katanga 3 5 1 10 2.126 3.544 7.088 7.088 3.368x10-5
Mary’s x10-5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Old St 1,422 Katanga 4 2 2 5 2.840 1.420 1.420 3.544 3.075x10-5
Mary’s x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 8 Mabvazu 5 5 4 3.544 3.544 2.840 3.309x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 10 Mabvazu 2 6 6 1.42 4.253 4.253 3.309x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 12 Mabvazu 3 2 5 2.126 1.420 3.544 2.363x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 14 Mabvazu 5 5 4 3.544 3.544 2.84 3.309x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 2 Mabvazu 6 4 Remo 4.253 2.840 3.547x10-5
Mary’s va ved x10-5 x10-5
Old St 3 Mabvazu 4 3 7 2.840 2.126 4.962 3.309x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Old St 3 Mabvazu 2 8 5 1.420 5.670 3.544 3.545x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
APP. 8 - 9
APPENDIX 8
Sub- Hous Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd Date 4th Date Average
Area e No. Name Date Date Date; Date; Results Results Results Results Total m3
; ; m3 m3 m3 m3
Old St 3 Mabvazu 7 1 5 4.962 7.088 3.544 3.072x10-5
Mary’s va x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Total 0.001186536
b) Area 2 Results
Sub- House Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Average
Area No. Name Date Date; Date; Date; Date Date Date Date Total m3
; Result Result Result Result
s s s s
m3 m3 m3 m3
Zenge 43 Mvurache 1 4 2 5 7.088 2.840 1.420 3.544 2.838x10-5
za 2 na x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 17,742 Mvurache 1 2 5 6 7.088 1.420 3.544 4.253 2.481x10-5
za 2 na x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 17,746 Mvurache 2 2 2 8 1.420 1.420 1.420 5.670 2.483x10-5
za 2 na x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 17,748 Mvurache 5 3 5 7 3.544 2.126 3.544 4.962 3.544x10-5
za 2 na x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 17,749 Mvurache 0 5 1 7 0 3.544 7.088 4.962 3.072x10-5
za 2 na x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zenge 36 Hombaru 1 1 5 2 7.088 7.088 3.544 1.420 1.595x10-5
za 2 me x10-6 x10-6 x10-5 x
10-5
Zenge 4 Tsambatsi 1 6 6 6 7.088 4.253 4.253 4.253 3.367x10-5
za 2 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 17,999 Nyatsime 5 5 3 Remo 3.544 3.544 2.126 3.071x10-5
za 2 ved x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 52 Hwata 2 2 5 6 1.420 1.420 3.544 4.253 2.659x10-5
za 2 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 52 Nyatsime 1 4 35 6 7.088 2.840 2.481 4.253 8.153x10-5
za 2 x10-6 x10-5 x10-4 x10-5
Zenge 1 Jerenyenz 3 3 3 4 2.126 2.126 2.126 2.840 2.305x10-5
za 2 e x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 5 Jerenyenz 1 1 2 2 7.088 7.088 1.420 1.420 4.254x10-5
za 2 e x10-6 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 14 Dengu 3 5 2 5 2.126 3.544 1.420 3.544 2.659x10-5
za 1 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 34 Dengu 3 1 4 6 2.126 7.088 2.840 4.253 2.482x10-5
za 1 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 18 Dengu 3 5 2 2 2.126 3.544 1.420 1.420 2.128x10-5
za 1 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 12 Kudzaiza 0 4 6 3 0 2.840 4.253 2.126 3.073x10-5
za 5 nu x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 10 Kudzaiza 2 8 4 50 1.420 5.670 2.840 3.544 1.134x10-4
za 5 nu x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
Zenge 82 Mandela 1 2 2 5 7.088 1.420 1.420 3.544 1.773x10-5
za 5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 83 Mandela 2 1 5 0 1.420 7.088 3.544 0 1.891x10-5
za 5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zenge 85 Mandela 1 2 3 1 7.088 1.420 2.126 7.088 1.241x10-5
za 5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6
Zenge 16 Mandela 2 5 1 8 1.420 3.544 7.088 5.670 2.836x10-5
za 5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zenge 14 Mandela 2 2 1 2 1.420 1.420 7.088 1.420 1.242x10-5
za 5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zenge 6 Rutendo 1 Remo 7.088 7.088x10-6
za 3 ved x10-6
APP. 8 - 10
APPENDIX 8
Sub- House Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Average
Area No. Name Date Date; Date; Date; Date Date Date Date Total m3
; Result Result Result Result
s s s s
m3 m3 m3 m3
Zenge 10 Rutendo 5 1 0 5 3.544 7.088 0 3.544 2.599x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zenge 7 Rutendo 3 2 4 10 2.126 1.420 2.840 7.088 3.369x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 2 Rutendo 3 3 3 3 2.126 2.126 2.126 2.126 2.126x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 1 Rutendo 5 2 2 4 3.544 1.420 1.420 2.840 2.306x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 4 Madyirap 4 1 5 10 2.840 7.088 3.544 7.088 3.54x10-5
za 3 anze x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 6 Madyirap 2 2 6 Remo 1.420 1.420 4.253 2.364x10-5
za 3 anze ved x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 3 Madyirap 3 1 3 15 2.126 7.088 2.126 1.063 3.898x10-5
za 3 anze x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-4
Zenge 8 Madyirap 1 5 2 10 7.088 3.544 1.420 7.088 3.190x10-5
za 3 anze x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 15 Madyirap 0 1 4 80 0 7.088 2.840 5.670 2.01x10-4
za 3 anze x10-6 x10-5 x10-4
Zenge 27 Mhanda 0 2 5 5 0 1.420 3.544 3.544 2.836x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zenge 29 Mhanda 4 3 1 10 2.840 2.126 7.088 7.088 3.19x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zenge 31 Mhanda 2 1 5 15 1.420 7.088 3.544 1.063 4.076x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-4
Zenge 8,925 Mhanda 3 1 1 1 2.126 7.088 7.088 7.088 1.063x10-5
za 3 x10-5 x10-6 x10-6 x10-6
Zenge 8,927 Mhanda 2 1 Remo 1.420 7.088 1.064x10-5
za 3 ved x10-5 x10-6
Total 1.269x10-3
c) Area 3 Results
Sub- House Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd 4th Average
Area No. Name Dat Dat Dat Dat Results Results Date Date Total m3
e; e; e; e; m3 m3 Results Results
m3 m3
Zengez 12,241 Kuwirirana 2 1 2 2 1.420 7.088 1.420 1.420 1.242x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
a4 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
a4 x10-6 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 2 Kuwirirana 2 3 1 2 1.420 2.126 7.088 1.420 1.419x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zengez 4 Kuwirirana 1 3 4 1 7.088 2.126 2.840 7.088 1.596x10-5
a4 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6
Zengez 12,164 Shavanho 10 20 20 150 7.088 1.420 1.420 1.060 5.66x10-3
a4 we x10-5 x10-4 x10-4 x10-3
Zengez 12,165 Shavanho 3 1 4 5 2.126 7.088 2.840 3.544 2.305x10-5
a4 we x10-5 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 11,514 Harare St 0 1 5 5 0 7.088 3.544 3.544 2.599x10-5
a4 x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 11,513 Harare St 1 5 1 3 7.088 3.544 7.088 2.126 1.772x10-5
a4 x10-6 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zengez 11,515 Harare St 2 0 2 5 1.420 0 1.420 3.544 2.128x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
APP. 8 - 11
APPENDIX 8
Sub- House Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd 4th Average
Area No. Name Dat Dat Dat Dat Results Results Date Date Total m3
e; e; e; e; m3 m3 Results Results
m3 m3
Zengez 10,969 Nehanda 3 5 4 4 2.126 3.544 2.840 2.840 2.838x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 10,979 Nehanda 4 5 5 10 2.840 3.544 3.544 7.088 4.254x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 10,640 Nehanda 2 5 2 8 1.420 3.544 1.420 5.670 3.014x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 10,641 Nehanda 4 3 1 6 2.840 2.126 7.088 4.253 2.482x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Zengez 10,645 Nehanda 3 2 5 5 2.126 1.420 3.544 3.544 2.659x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Zengez 9,507 Nehanda 2 3 3 3 1.420 2.126 2.126 2.126 1.95x10-5
a4 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Total 0.00599801
d) Area 4 Results
APP. 8 - 12
APPENDIX
Sub- House
8 Street 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd Date 4th Date Average
Area No. Name Date Date Date Date Results Results Results Results Total m3
; ; ; ; m3 m3 m3 m3
Unit 9,575 5 4 6 0 3.544 2.840 4.253 0 3.546x10-5

H x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 9,586 3 7 2 4 2.126 4.962 1.420 2.84x10- 2.837x10-5
H x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 5
Unit 9,583 6 5 5 5 4.253 3.544 3.544 3.544x10 3.721x10-5

H x10-5 x10-5 x10-5 -5
Unit 3,872 Musar 1 Rem 7.088 7.088x10-6

D urwa oved x10-6
Unit 3,873 Musar 2 5 5 1.420 3.544 3.544 2.836x10-5
D urwa x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 3,671 Musar 1 7 8 7.088 4.962 5.670 3.78x10-5
D urwa x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 3,672 Musar 0 Rem 0 0
D urwa oved
Unit 3,674 Musar 1 5 5 7.088 3.544 3.544 2.599x10-5
D urwa x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 5,671 Chidu 2 2 5 1.420 1.420 3.544 2.128x10-5
J ku x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 5,641 Chidu 0 50 50 0 3.544 3.544 3.544x10-4
J ku x10-4 x10-4
Unit 5,628 Chidu 1 6 2 7.088 4.253 1.420 2.127x10-5
J ku x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 5,631 Chidu 3 4 3 2.126 2.840 2.126 2.364x10-5
J ku x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 5,632 Chidu 4 5 5 2.840 3.544 3.544 3.309x10-5
J ku x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 7,627 Gura 1 5 2 7.088 3.544 1.420 1.891x10-5
K x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 7,628 Gura 0 50 15 0 3.544 1.063 2.304x10-4
K x10-4 x10-4
Unit 7,629 Gura 0 5 5 0 3.544 3.544 3.544x10-5
K x10-5 x10-5
Unit 7,847 Menhe 0 Rem 0 0
K oved
Unit 7,846 Menhe 1 5 4 7.088 3.544 2.840 2.364x10-5
K x10-6 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 1,371 10 5 5 7.088 3.544 3.544 4.725x10-5
A x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 1,372 10 5 5 7.088 3.544 3.544 4.725x10-5
A x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 1,373 13 Rem 9.215 9.215x10-5
A oved x10-5
Unit 1,367 3 0 6 2.126 0 4.253 3.19x10-5
A x10-5 x10-5
Unit 1,366 3 0 5 2.126 0 3.544 2.835x10-5
A x10-5 x10-5
Unit 3,060 7 5 60 4.962 3.544 4.253 1.701x10-4
F x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
Unit 3,058 6 1 10 4.253 7.088 7.088 4.017x10-5
F x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Unit 3,056 5 0 5 3.544 0 3.544 3.544x10-5
F x10-5 x10-5
Unit 3,062 10 20 110 7.088 1.418 7.797 3.308x10-4
F x10-5 x10-4 x10-4
Unit 3,063 7 1 9 4.962 7.088 6.379 4.017x10-5
F x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Unit 4,720 5 3 26 3.544 2.126 1.843 8.033x10-5
C x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
Unit 4,689 5 7 15 3.544 4.962 1.063 6.379x10-5
C x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
APP. 8 - 13
APPENDIX 8
Unit 4,691 5 10 20 3.544 7.088 1.418 8.271x10-5

C x10-5 x10-5 x10-4
Unit 4,692 6 5 1 4.253 3.544 7.088 2.835x10-5
C x10-5 x10-5 x10-6
Unit 4,693 2 4 Rem 1.420 2.840 2.13x10-5
C oved x10-5 x10-5
Total 0.001895048
e) Area 5 Results
Sub- Hous Str 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd Date 4th Date Average
Are e No. eet Date; Date; Date; Date; Results Results Results Results Total m3
a Na m3 m3 m3 m3
me
Unit 18,567 4 0 6 2.840 0 4.253 3.547x10-5

L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 18,568 11 1 10 7.797 7.088 7.088 5.198x10-5
L x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Unit 18,565 5 0 5 3.544 0 3.544 3.544x10-5
L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 18,561 5 Remo 3.544 3.544x10-5
L ved x10-5
Unit 17,706 5 0 6 3.544 0 4.253 3.899x10-5
L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,704 4 1 4 2.840 7.088 2.840 2.13x10-5
L x10-5 x10-6 x10-5
Unit 17,703 5 0 2 3.544 0 1.420 2.482x10-5
L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,707 5 0 9 3.544 0 6.379 4.962x10-5
L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,708 5 0 3 3.544 0 2.126 2.835x10-5
L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,709 4 0 3 2.840 0 2.126 2.483x10-5
L x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,148 5 4 10 3.544 2.840 7.088 4.491x10-5
M x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,146 2 2 5 1.420 1.420 3.544 2.128x10-5
M x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,103 6 Remo 4.253 4.253x10-5
M ved x10-5
Unit 17,104 11 5 4 7.797 3.544 2.840 4.727x10-5
M x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 17,105 5 3 3 3.544 2.126 2.126 2.599x10-5
M x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 12,752 5 0 5 3.544 0 3.544 3.544x10-5
N x10-5 x10-5
Unit 12,753 2 0 Remo 1.420 0 1.42x10-5
N ved x10-5
Unit 12,755 4 0 7 2.840 0 4.962 3.901x10-5
N x10-5 x10-5
Unit 12,756 4 Remo 2.840 2.84x10-5
N ved x10-5
Unit 12,757 5 6 0 3.544 4.253 0 3.899x10-5
N x10-5 x10-5
Unit 15,243 5 3 Remo 3.544 2.126 2.835x10-5
O ved x10-5 x10-5
Unit 15,238 3 0 20 2.126 0 1.418 8.153x10-5
O x10-5 x10-4
Unit 15,252 2 2 0 1.420 1.420 0 1.42x10-5
O x10-5 x10-5
APP. 8 - 14
APPENDIX 8
Sub- Hous Str 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Date 2nd Date 3rd Date 4th Date Average
Are e No. eet Date; Date; Date; Date; Results Results Results Results Total m3
a Na m3 m3 m3 m3
me
Unit 14,222 5 5 3.544 3.544 3.544x10-5
O x10-5 x10-5
Unit 14,225 4 Remo 2.840 2.84x10-5
O ved x10-5
Unit 14,220 10 3 11 7.088 2.126 7.797 5.67x10-5
M x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 14,219 10 2 11 7.088 1.420 7.797 5.435x10-5
M x10-5 x10-5 x10-5
Unit 14,218 6 5 Remo 4.253 3.544 3.899x10-5
M ved x10-5 x10-5
Total 0.00102222
5.5.3 Number of Properties in Study Area

The total number of properties/houses in the Areas, Sub-Areas and Study Area are as outlined in the Table
below. Please note, these figures were extracted from the Household Dwellings Survey that was conducted
in August 2012 by BCHOD on behalf of NJS. These houses will be used to calculate the quantity of grit
from each Study Area.
Area Sub-Area Total Number of Houses

1 Manyame Park and Old St Mary’s 5,700
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and 10,680
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 2,700
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K 10,443
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 8,492
Total Houses Study Area 38,015
5.5.4 Quantity of Grit from Study Area

Based on the above table in 5.5.3 the quantity of grit from the Study Area is as calculated in the Table
below;
5.5.4.1 Quantity of Grit from Study Area over a 2 Week Period
Area Sub-Area Total Number of Grit from Surveyed Extrapolated Total

Number of Houses Houses over a 2 Grit from Area over a
Houses Surveyed Week Period (m3) 2 Week Period (m3)
1 Manyame Park and Old St 5,700 28 0.00119 6.783
Mary’s
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, 10,680 37 0.00127 13.564
Zengeza 3 and Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 2,700 16 0.006 16.2
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and 10,443 33 0.0019 19.842
K
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 8,492 28 0.00102 8.662
Total 38,015 142 65.051
APP. 8 - 15
APPENDIX 8
5.5.4.2 Adjusted Quantity of Grit from Study Area over a 2 Week Period Based on 40%
Debris Entrapment
Area Sub-Area Total Adjustme Unadjusted Adjusted downwards

Number of nt factor Extrapolated Total Extrapolated Total Grit
Houses Grit from Area over a from Area over a 2 Week
2 Week Period (m3) Period (m3)
1 Manyame Park and 5,700 40% 6.783 4.07
Old St Mary’s
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, 10,680 40% 13.564 8.138
Zengeza 3 and
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 2,700 40% 16.2 9.72
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, 10,443 40% 19.842 11.905
J and K
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O 8,492 40% 8.662 5.197
and P
Total 65.051 39.03
5.5.4.3 Adjusted Quantity of Grit from Study Area over a 2 Week Period Based on 50%
Silt Clay Passing through the Grit Traps
Area Sub-Area Total 40% Debris Adjustment Adjustment 50% Silt Clay
Number downwards Extrapolated factor Adjustment upwards
of Total Grit from Area over Extrapolated Total
Houses a 2 Week Period (m3) Grit from Area over a
2 Week Period (m3)
1 Manyame Park and 5,700 4.07 1.5 6.105
Old St Mary’s
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 10,680 8.138 1.5 12.207
2, Zengeza 3 and
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 2,700 9.72 1.5 14.58
4 Unit A, B, C, H, E, 10,443 11.905 1.5 17.858
D, J and K
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O 8,492 5.197 1.5 7.796
and P
38,015 39.03 58.546
APP. 8 - 16
APPENDIX 8
6 Zengeza Sewage Works – Inlet Works Grit Survey

Zengeza Sewage Works comprises the following process units;
• Inlet works comprising static screens, grit chambers and a bypass system.
• Stabilization ponds,
• Biological filters,
• Effluent recirculation and disposal facilities, and
• An off-line BNR Plant.
More than 50% of sewage from the study area drains by gravity to these works. In order to validate the results
obtained from the household grit survey as extrapolated above, it was proposed to measure the amount of grit
reaching the works by gravity. Presently, all the sewage pumping stations are not working due to rehabilitation works
currently going on at these facilities.
The survey was therefore conducted at the inlet works chamber just before the screens and assumed that grit hitting
the works will predominantly come from the following drainage areas;
• The whole of Zengeza 2,
• 50% of Zengeza 5,
• 50% of Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K, and
• The whole of Unit F, M, N, G, O and P.
In this area of the inlet works, it was observed that due to the sudden slowing of sewage as it goes through the screens,
grit is settling to the bottom of the chamber. This area of the inlet works was therefore cleaned by a tanker and plan
dimensions measured. The survey commenced on the 21st of November at 14:30pm, immediately after the cleaning
exercise. The survey ran for two weeks to match the number of days the household grit survey was conducted.
The number of properties in the above areas, are as outlined in the Table below;
Area Sub-Area Total Number of Houses
2 Zengeza 2, Zengeza 3 and 50% of 6,472
Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 2,700
4 50% of Unit A, B, C, H, E, D, J and K 5,605
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 8,492
Total Houses Study Area 23,269
Therefore, the adjusted volume of grit from households will be for each area above;
Area Sub-Area Total Number of Extrapolated Total
Houses Grit from Area over a
2 Week Period (m3)
2 Zengeza 1, Zengeza 2, 6,472 7.397
Zengeza 3 and Zengeza 5
3 Zengeza 4 2,700 14.58
4 50% of Unit A, B, C, H, 5,605 9.585
E, D, J and K
5 Unit F, M, N, G, O and P 8,492 7.796
Total 23,269 39.358
APP. 8 - 17
APPENDIX 8
Below are the Plan dimensions of the measured part of the Inlet Works;
APP. 8 - 18
APPENDIX 8
The above measured area of the inlet works was cleaned by a tanker and it was observed that there was some grit that
was left in this area due to limitations of tanker removal under flow conditions. Point 1 was disregarded because sand
removal by tanker was not very thorough. Point 2 had some residual grit that was measured at 0.2m. Therefore, point
2 was used in the calculations in the table below.
Based on the above structure and dimensions, the amount of grit that has accumulated in the surveyed Inlet structure
over a period of 2 weeks for point 2 taking into consideration an adjustment of the measured depth is as detailed in
the table below. This is based on a measured depth of sand of 0.6m.
Measured Area at Inlet Calculated Total Grit from

Works (m2) Inlet Works over a 2 Week
Period (m3)
8.125 4.875
APP. 8 - 19
APPENDIX 8
7 Conclusion
The thinking process behind surveying the two extreme ends of the system was to try and ascertain if volumes of grit
being received at the Sewage Works could be compared with that entering the system at the top-end. If the volume of
grit hitting the works was much higher than that entering the system, then, it was only reasonable to conclude that
there must be collapsed sections and damaged manholes in the network letting-in grit into the system.
Though the household and inlet works survey period did not start at the same time, the two surveys were based on the
same duration of 2 weeks. However, it must be noted that the following factors and occurrences did influence the rate
at which grit was entering the system and its subsequent movement to the terminal point, which is the Treatment
Works for the Gravity part of the system;
• Water supply over the study period,
• Blockages in the system,
• Settlement of grit in the system, and
• Carry-over of grit at works due to changes in sewage flow velocity.
7.1 Water Supply over the Same Period

Water supply does influence the amount of grit entering the system. If the number of times the various areas were
supplied by water is different over the two study period, then the volume of grit entering the system will be different
and also the volume of grit hitting the works will be different.
7.2 Blockages in the System

Sewage surcharging from the system due to blockages does scour and remove part of the grit in the system. Because
of the many sections surcharging in the study area, this amount is significant and hence the amount of grit reaching
the works is affected.
7.3 Settlement of Grit in the System

Due to constrictions velocities in the network are reduced leading to settlement of grit. Hence, the amount of grit
reaching the works is affected. It was recently observed during rehabilitation works of a sewer main in Unit N that
settled grit was now occupying nearly 85% of the existing pipe diameter leaving a small section for sewage to flow.
This is assumed to be rampant in the existing network.
7.4 Carry-over of Grit at the Works

Due to the erratic water supply, settled grit in the study section of the inlet works was observed to be scoured during
peak periods leading to a massive carry-over of grit to downstream process units.
Therefore, based on the above, it is nearly impossible to correlate the amount of grit from the gravity section of the
network, entering the system through households and that arriving at the works.
APP. 8 - 20
APPENDIX 8
8 Recommendations
From the above survey figures and the grit settlement in sewers leading to surcharging conditions, we recommend the
following in order to resolve the current grit problem in Chitungwiza;
• Carry-out an outreach/awareness programme to discourage the residents from using sand when doing their
dishes,
• Resolve the water supply situation so that, self-cleansing velocities are met once per day in the network,
• Flush-out the system to reduce or eliminate surcharging conditions due to settlement of grit in the system,
• Carry-out a CCTV survey of the flushed system in-order to locate and repair collapsed sections of the
network, and
• Finally carry-out a hydraulic model/assessment of the existing network in-order to assess hydraulic
capacities of major sewer mains.
APP. 8 - 21
APPENDIX 8
SOILTEST LABORATORIES
(PVT.)LttD. P.0.BOX 4502
140 SEKE ROAD
HARAR匡 HARARE
Tel: 752244/752281
ZIMBABWE 771656/771658
Fax:770433
Your Ref:
our Ref: JFM/j el38L2/7980 31 July 1997
N」 S Consultants
19th Floor Mukwati Building
Centra■ Avenue
HARARE
ATTENT10N : Mr M Mamose
Dear Sir
SOILS INVESTIGAT工 ON ― ZENGEZA SEWACE TREATMENT PLAM
We submit a final report on the soils investlgatlon carried out at the

above project in ChitungwLza.
LOCAT10N AND GEOLOGY

͡
The location of the test site was given in our preliminary report (ref
: JIM/j e/38L2/7977) dated 30 July L997. The area investigated is to the
east of the existing anaerobic ponds and sludge drying beds. As
described in our preliminary report the area ln the vicinity of trial
holes 1 and 2 (see figure 8.2.3) is an o1d gravel pit whil-st trial hole
3 is l-ocated in open land with light grasscover. There are isolated
Large anthills in the area.
The gradient is south to southeastwards towards a seasonal watercourse

which flows in southwestwards direction. The geol-ogical bedrock is so1ld
or decomposed granlte.
DIRECTORS:S R SPRAKE RNTD PrTech(Eng)l Eng FIHIE MlHT AMZwelE TMSAICE

A E SPRAKE A KUHN FCIS
…。
/2
APP. 8 -」22
APPENDIX 8 -2-
NJS Consultants 31 July 1997
SOILS INVESTIGAT10N
Excavations rrere conducted using the core dri1l 116mm diameter in the
overburden and residual soils with MOI and B)M core barrel-s for the core
recovery in the basement rock materiaL.
There is heavily weathered decomposed granite from present ground level

down to 12,0m depth in trial hole 1. The grain texture of the granite
naterial varies with depth. No solid rock was struck in the trial hole.
Trial hole 2 revealed an horizon of silty clayey sand from 0,0m down to
l,Om depth. beneath this the heavlly \ileathered decomposed granite was
encountered and extended down to 2,4m below ground level- where granite
rock was obtained and extended the full depth of the excavations (12r0n).
Trial hole 3 has an upper horizon silty clayey sand from ground level
down to 2,0m depth. This is followed by heavily weathered decomposed
granite that extends down to l0m depth where weathered rock was struck
and extended the fu1l depth of excavations.
GROUNDWATER
exploration work used water and after removing this water
The drilling
from the drilling the boreholes lrere examined and the following
observations were made :
Trial Depth (n) Remarks

IIole
6r8 trIet conditions in the borehole suggesting
seasonal water table.
No evi.dence of groundwater.
No evidence of groundwater.
As the site is close to the Nyatsime River there is a likelihood of

striking a fluctuating seasonal \rater table from at least 6'0m below
natural ground leve1 especially in the vicinity of trial hole 1 and the
area to the south east of between trial holes 1 and 2. In the wet season
the water table is likely to rise.
...lt
APP. 8 - 23
APPENDIX 8 -3-
NJS Consultants 31 」u■ y 1997
PHYSICAL FEATURES
There are large anthill-s on the site. These features measure 6m to 8m
above ground leve1 and are between 10n and 25m in diameter at ground
level. Fron past field work it has been found that the anthills will
extend into the ground approxirnately the equlval-ent of the anthill
height. The anthil-ls are active with live workings and will require
treatment when removing.
There are large rock boulders (1r0n to 1r5m in length) to the west of
the existing Sewage Works Screen and Grlt Chambers. There are isolated
large rock boulders of similar sLze in the area to the south of trial
hol-es 1 and 2 a1.ong the seasonal- natercourse featured in the drawing
figure 8.2.3.
^
LABORATORY TESTS
The following test resul-ts were obtained :
Trial- Depth (n) Moisture Specific

Ho■ e Content (Z) Gravity
1 0,0 - 1,0 1,8 2,60
2 0,0 - 1,0 1,6 2,52
3 0,0 - 1,0 3,1 2,51
The particle sLze distribution figures are given below together with
^ the Atterberg Linits values :
Percentage Passing Ho■ e : …

1
B. S. Sieve
4,75 nm 99 98 99
2,36 fr 87 93 93
1,18 * 51 63 71
600 mLcrons 29 73 55
300 I' 18 67 48
150 rl 14 59 42
75 rt 11 52 37
Liquid Linit non p1-ast,ic 39 30
Plastic Linit non plastic 19 18
Plasticity Index non plastic 20 L2
.。。
/4
APP. 8 - 24
APPENDIX 8 -4-
NJS Consultants 31 」u■ y 1997
Unconflned CompressLve Test of the rock samples from the trial holes are
as followe :
Tria■ Ho■ e
lned Compresslve
Unconf
Strength (MPa) 23,0ノ 21,7/26,2 18,0/15,0/12,0
Untt l{elglrt (kglm3) 1578ノ 1560/1582 1440/1418ノ 1435
I{e trust thls report glves sufficlent lnfornatLon, but we would be pleased
n to asslst further, lf requLred.
イｃ
Yours faithfully
Ｆ
Ｍ
Ｌ
ＥＯ
Ｄ
pp 8 SOILTEST LA30RATORIES (PRIVATE)LIMITED
enc。
APP. 8 - 25
APPENDIX 8
50)ビこ
5T
331ι Tena€zA
Re co*5 OF 5o rus IN υこ∫ィlaハィ
`o村
Hole No.
X t、
も3-――
一―一一一一 _!2
く°オ
κ ・
・
バ
=ド l
上 ____ 1上
__3:__
■ 5-― 一
奪
‐ 一―一―
2 上
T
ニ
"でー Xアゼ
｀
*9and メ
ヽ
ス
_-----3_ メ
｀
｀
SrLt ハメ
c [o'r たゝ
dbc. -
■ck:_4
{'o C・
・ t
rρ cた
Stq{..1,-5- S
■ Ln,
eSt―
―
‐
卜 K、
_Xス
ス
`X
lメヽ
バ、ハ
X'K
:2
宙討bI°ごし
IJ■ 9与」
ン),_“
APP. 8 - 26
ヽ 2● ●Ьl c
^ヽ
APPENDIX 8
APP. 8 - 27
APPENDIX 8
APP. 8 - 28
APPENDIX 8
APP. 8 - 29
０ ● 引口 ” ︼０．００ ∩
ＨＣっ０﹁ ∽ ０“ メ００“ づ０ ●Ｃ＝〓０﹄ ● ω ︼０ ● ● “ 〓 ∽ ヽづ引ＨＯ ∽ ロトｏ︼ｍ ●〓 ∞ 引目 ●∽引Ｏ日ｈ︼ω＞ヽ●∽ＨＯ目〇
。Ｑ
鋼Ｈ︰ＯＯ﹁
０ ● 引口 ” ︼０。００ ∩ ●口 ” ∽ メ００“ ．００ ∩ ● ∽引〇目
Ｈ ” っ０引 ∽ ω“ ● ｏ● 引 “ ︼ ∞ １０● 引﹄づ０ ●Ｃ＝ＨＯ﹄ ω ∽口 ω ∩ 日 ” 引鬱 ω日口ｏ︼ｍ ● 〓 ∞ ＝目、日●〓∞鋼Ｈ∽
ヽ口∽引〇目一Ｏ．ＯＨ︰〇
。
め
，
０ ● 引口 ” ︼００口 “ ∽
● ω ∽ｏｎ日ｏｏｏ ∩ メ００“ づ０００。日０００ ∩ ０ ∽“ ω ∩ 日づ引 ● ω日
。。
Ｈ “ ● ● 引００“ づ ω口＝ ” ︼ ∞ ｌｏ∽︼Ｃ００ ● ０ ●” ＝ＨＯ﹄ヽ日﹄引﹄、︼ ω＞ “ 〓ｏ︼ｍ ● 〓 ∞ 引ロ ● ∽引０日、日 ● 〓 ∞ ＨＨ ∽ ｏｍ︰〇Ｎ
、 ” ＨＯ ● Ｈ引 ∽ ●口 “ ∽ 、日 ● 〓 ∞ 引Ｈ ∽ ｎ
づ ω ●コ０。 ∽● “ ︼目 ● ＯＣ ●口Ｈ日口引﹄ロ ■ ｏ︼ｍｏ ∞口 “ 口ｏ ● ∽引０目一Ｏ ∞ ︰〇．〇
“ ロロ０日
ヽ︼∩ 。。
０ ● 引口 “ ︼ＯＨＣ ● ● 引００“ メ００“ 可０ ●Ｃ引ＨＯ﹄可＝ＨＯ ∽ 口００︼Ｏメロ ” ∩ ｈ ω ︼Ｏ〇Ｎ［１せＮ
０ ● 引口 “ ︼Ｏ ●口 “ ∽
可 ω ｏｏＯ日ｏｏｏ ∩ 髯００“ 可ｏ ∽ Ｏｎ日ｏｏｏ ∩
Ｈ ” っづ︼ ∽ ω“ づ０口引ｏ日“︰日”引づｏ日り０ ●０﹁ＨＯ﹄日︼引﹄、︼０＞口００︼Ｏ髯︼ ” ∩ 卜０︼Ｏ ● ∽引ｏ日、日 ● 〓 ∞ ＝Ｈ ∽ ヾ
。
Ｎ︰〇．Ｈ
ｎ
■ ０ ● ︼ｏ。 ∽口 “ ︼日卜 ” ＨＯ ● Ｈ引 ∽ ●口 ” ∽ ● ０” ●口Ｈ日︼引﹄、日 ● 〓 ∞ 引Ｈ ∽ 口〓０︼ “ ω ∞口 ” ︼〇 ● ｏ＝０日、日 ● 〓 ∞ 引Ｈ ∽ ＯＨＩＯ．〇
Ｎ目８
APP. 8 - 30
０ ● 引口 ” ︼Ｏ ●口 “ ∽
可 ω ∽ 〇。日０００ ∩ メ００“ ● ０ ∽ ０魚日ｏｏｏ ∩
ＨＣ ● ● 引 ∽ ｏ“ ■ ０● 引 “ ︼ ∞ ︰ｏ口引ｈづ０ ● Ｃ＝ＨＯ﹄ ω ∽“ ω ∩ 日 ” 引 ● ０日ロトｏｍ ●〓 ∞ 引日、日０＞
“ ∽ＨＯ冒一〇．凶︼︰〇．ＯＨ
，
ω ● 引口 ” ︼Ｏ ●口 ” ∽
● ０ ∽ ００日ｏｏｏ ∩ 髯００“ ● ｏ ∽Ｏｎ日ＯｏＯ ∩
へ＾
Ｈ ” ” づ引 ∽ Φ“ 可 ω口引 “ ︼ ∞ ｌ ω ∽ 口 ● ００可０ ●０﹁ＨＯ﹄０ ∽● ０ ∩ 日 ” 引可 ω日口ｏ︼ｍ ●〓“ 引ロ ● ∽＝０日、コ ω＞ヽ● ∽引０目ＯＯＨ︰〇い
，
０ ● 引口 ” ︼Ｏ０口 “ ∽
可 ω ∽ ｏａ日ｏｏｏ ∩ 出００“ ● ｏ ∽０。日ｏｏｏ ∩
へ
Ｈ ” ● ■ ＝ ∽ ω“ 可 ω員引 ” ︼ ∞ ｌ ω 口引﹄ ” ０ ● “ 引ＨＯ﹄０ ∽口 ω ∩ 日 ” 引 ● ０日ロトｏ︼ｍ ● 〓 ∞ ＝目 ● ∽引０目〇い︰〇．０
０ ● 引口 ” ︼Ｏ０口 ” ∽
● ０ ∽ ００日Ｏｏｏ ∩ メ００“ ● Φ ∽ Ｏｎ日ｏｏｏ ∩
へ
Ｈ “ ” ● 引 ∽ ０“ ● ｏ口引 “ ︼ ∞ ｌｏ ∽︼ ■ ００ ■ ０ ●ＣＨＨＯ﹄０ ∽“ ω ∩ 日 ” 引 ● ０コ ●卜ｏ︼ｍ ●〓∞ 引日 ● ∽ＨＯ目〇ＯｉＯ．崎
０ ● 引口Ｃ︼００口 ” ∽
づ ω ∽ ｏ魚日Ｏｏｏ ∩ メ００“ ● ω ∽ ＯＱ日Ｏｏｏ ∩ ω ∽“ ω ∩ 日つ引つ０日
APPENDIX 8
Ｈ “ ” ● 引００“ ● ω口引 ” ︼Ｏ１０ ● 引﹄ ■ ０ ●“ 引ＨＯ﹄ヽ日︼引﹄、︼ω卜ヽ日︼引﹄０ ∞口 “ ︼〇ロト〇︼ｍ ● 〓 ∞ 引日卜Ｈ ●〓 ∞ 引Ｈ ∽
● ∽引Ｏヨ一〇．崎︱〇．〇
ＨロロＯ目
馴朝Ы 田司創翻 ω 粕● ● ０● ︼ “ ∽ 閑１１１
０副ｄ劇可州可劇００︼っＯＨ００口Ｏ＝ ● 引づ● ００倒Ⅵ∃翻
０︼づ ● ∽引０コ
∽︹ “ ０餞 ¨
劇ｇ里目口０ ● “ 目 ∽ ｄＮ目０ “ 口Ｎ “ ●００﹁ＯＨ餞
目
￨す
。
ヘ
”口ｏｎ。■ ｌｏＨ引 ЧｏＨ餞Ｈ引ｏ ∽ ＮＨ∞ め ¨ ＯＯ﹁
ｒ口ｏｈ出
巳嵐〓卜 ■ 曇 ■ 〓ぃ出 ”Ｌ ∽ 田ｏ占ゝ゛
８亀〓＝ ∽ 官Ｊ電８３ ■ 夢︻
′〓一一
一

一。
”い
請”
認託
峰〓
〓一コ
引一
′
ェｒｒ一”
軋
‘
′し︹Ｈ〓一・３〓
︺
／
﹂︺一饉懺〓
才
／
可
、
＼ヽ
じ颯
﹁
働０
︱︱崚⋮ ⋮
lii
︱・︱
APP. 8 - 31
APPENDIX 8
一
¨ ％
一・︱︱劃到﹁︱︲
APPENDIX 8
SOIETEST LABORATORIES
Stvr rno
lob L… …1117… …
…
Date.¨ …
………
…1117・ 12.Z… …
CFent …NI'.… 99■ ,■11ヽ,,… …………_、
PrOiCt… ζ ■,w,3■ 1̈,Pl,.

'139そ
NP
Plarricity Index NP
Coarscncss Ldcx 13
PLsticity Product 15
Coarse sand
Medium sand Vo
Fine sand
Liquid limit LL
Plasticity Index Pl
Coarseness lndex Cl
Plasticiry product
Classification
APP. 8 - 32
Φ APPENDIX 8
SOIETEST LABORATORIES
Srava lt;
Job L… "1812
“
Date… …… …1107。
97
N」 S Consu■ tants
F:"ε MED:UM COARsc 日 MED:● M COARSC

"E
SANO FRACT:0“ GRAVEL FRACT10N
APP. 8 - 33
APPENDIX 9
APPENDIX 9.1
Pilot Project on Solid Waste Management

in Chitungwiza City
FINAL REPORT
BCHOD
CONSULTINGENGINEERS
BrianColquhounHughO’DonnellandPartners
BrianColquhounHughO’Donnell&Partners
5thFloorGoldBridgeNorth
Eastgate
CnrRobertMugabe/3rdStreet
Harare, Zimbabwe
December 2012
APP. 9 - 1
APPENDIX 9
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Background of the Project............................................................................................................... 5
3. Method of the Pilot Project ............................................................................................................. 6
3.1 Basic Approach for Implementing the Pilot Project ................................................................ 7
3.2 Selection of Project Sites ......................................................................................................... 7
3.3 Notification to Communities or Business Establishments ....................................................... 9
3.3.1 Notification in communities ............................................................................................. 9
3.3.2 Business establishments ................................................................................................... 9
3.3.3 Schools ............................................................................................................................. 9
3.4 Implementation of Public Education ..................................................................................... 10
3.5 Implementation of Fixed-time and Fixed Station Collection ................................................ 10
3.5.1 Primary Collection by Community Residents................................................................ 10
3.6 Monitoring ............................................................................................................................. 11
3.7 Sharing of Project Outcome................................................................................................... 11
3.8 Planned Implementation Schedule......................................................................................... 11
3.9 Monitoring of Public Awareness before and after the pilot project....................................... 12
3.9.1 Initial questionnaire survey in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) ................. 12
3.9.2 Final questionnaire survey in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and Seke Unit J Extension ......... 12
3.9.3 Questionnaire Survey for the cart operators ...................................................................... 13
3.10 Public Education .................................................................................................................... 14
3.10.1 Schools ........................................................................................................................... 14
3.10.2 Community, Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) ............................................. 16
4. Awareness Campaign Schedule of the pilot project ..................................................................... 16
5. Identification of causes of illegal dumping ................................................................................... 17
6. Stakeholders Identified ................................................................................................................. 17
6.1 JICA Project team (JPT) ........................................................................................................ 17
6.2 Chitungwiza Municipality ..................................................................................................... 18
6.3 Communities .......................................................................................................................... 18
6.4 Community Based Organizations (CBOs) ............................................................................. 18
6.4.1 Green Africa Network .................................................................................................... 19
6.4.2 Boston Plastics .............................................................................................................. 19
6.5 Meeting with Water, Sanitation and Health (WASH) stakeholders ...................................... 19
6.6 Final meeting with Stakeholders to share project outcome .................................................. 20
APP. 9 - 2

APPENDIX 9
6.6.1 Sharing Project Outcome with other communities ....................................................... 21

7. Clean-up campaign ....................................................................................................................... 21
8. Actual time schedule of the Pilot Project ...................................................................................... 25
9. Problems and discussions ............................................................................................................. 25
9.1 Problems ................................................................................................................................ 25
9.2 Discussions ............................................................................................................................ 26
9.2.1 Efficiency of primary collection ................................................................................... 26
9.2.2 Littering around the collection points ............................................................................ 27
9.2.3 Selection of project sites ................................................................................................ 28
9.2.4 Collection and storage method ....................................................................................... 28
9.2.5 Security issues ................................................................................................................ 28
9.2.6 Establishment of rules for discharge and collection ...................................................... 28
9.2.7 Rescheduling of the clean-up campaign........................................................................ 28
10. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 29
11. Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 29
11.1 Community Based Organizations (CBO) .............................................................................. 30
11.2 Servicing the current fleet ..................................................................................................... 30
11.3 Infrastructure development ................................................................................................... 30
11.4 Procure compactor trucks ..................................................................................................... 30
11.5 Refuse receptacles ................................................................................................................. 30
11.6 Educational awareness sessions to the Municipality ............................................................ 30
Attachments .......................................................................................................................................... 31
Attachment 1: Map of Illegal Dumping Sites in Chitungwiza Municipality .................................... 31
Attachment 2: Collection Rules ........................................................................................................ 31
Attachment 3: Results of initial questionnaire survey ...................................................................... 32
Attachment 4: Minutes for community meetings............................................................................. 39
Attachment 5: Meeting with JICA Project Team .............................................................................. 42
Attachment 6: Interview to Boston Plastics by Environment Africa ................................................ 44
Attachment 7: Initial stakeholders’ meeting – Attendance Register ................................................. 45
Attachment 8: Minutes for the initial stakeholders’ meeting ............................................................ 47
Attachment 9: Clean-up campaign .................................................................................................... 49
Attachment 10: Attendance register for the clean-up campaign ....................................................... 50
Attachment 11: Results of final questionnaire survey to the community ......................................... 57
Attachment 12: Minutes for second stakeholders’ meeting .............................................................. 61
APP. 9 - 3

APPENDIX 9
Tables
Table AP-10.2-(1) Counted number of houses in Chitungwiza
Table AP-10.2-(2) Planned schedule for the pilot project
Table AP-10.2-(3) Schedule of awareness sessions
Table AP-10.2-(4) Actual schedule for the pilot project
Figures
Figure AP-10.2-(1) Type of waste receptacle used to store waste
Figure AP-10.2-(2) Method of household garbage disposal
Figure AP-10.2-(3) Concerns about Solid Waste Management
Figure AP-10.2-(4) Willingness to participate
Figure AP-10.2-(5) Solid waste management attitude scales
Figure AP-10.2-(6) Type of Tenure
Figure AP-10.2-(7) Households practicing gardening & animal production
Figure AP-10.2-(8) Person responsible for disposal of garbage
Figure AP-10.2-(9) Willingness to pay refuse tariffs
Figure AP-10.2-(10) Amount to be paid per month
Figure AP-10.2-(11) Feelings about the pilot project
Figure AP-10.2-(12) Benefits from the pilot project
Figure AP-10.2-(13) Methods of reducing amount of waste in refuse bins
Figure AP-10.2-(14) Materials recycled by residents
Figure AP-10.2-(15) Continuity of Pilot Project
Figure AP-10.2-(16) Improvements in the Pilot project
Abbreviations
WACS Waste Amount and Composition Survey
SWM Solid Waste Management
JPT JICA Project Team
PED Provincial Education Officer
DEO District Education Officer
DA District Administrator
GAN Green Africa Network
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
M/P Master Plan
APP. 9 - 4
APPENDIX 9
1. Introduction
Solid Waste Management (SWM) has become one of the major challenges facing urban local
authorities in Zimbabwe. The rapid pace at which urbanization has taken place over the past ten years
has placed an immense strain on these authorities inevitably resulting in failure to provide adequate
services to people under their jurisdiction. There is therefore a great need to promote smart and health
built environment as a way of protecting human life as well as the environment. Smart and health
workplaces and living environments are centered on community engagement, regulations as well as
communication and education to promote the smart environments
BCHOD worked with the JICA Project Team on a study of Chitungwiza Infrastructure –
Improvement of Water Supply, Sewerage and Solid Waste Management (SWM). The purpose of this
assignment was to review the Solid Waste Management in Chitungwiza community, conduct a pilot
scheme for primary and secondary waste disposal in some of the problem areas of the city and find
ways of educating and engaging the public.
Table A9.1.2-(1): Counted number of houses in Chitungwiza
Number of buildings Divided Sample

Area Locality Total
Housing Others Total Housing Number
St Mary’s St Mary’s 2,850
Manyame 2,850
Total 5,700 105 5,805 5,805
Zengeza 1,2,3,5 7,300 200 7,500 3,380 10,880
Zengeza Zengeza 4 2,700 200 2,900 2,900 50
Seke Seke South 6,800 140 6,940 2,300 9,240 50
Seke Seke North 9,700 160 9,860 2,000 11,860
Total 32,200 805 33,005 7,680 40,685 100
The above table was taken from the survey results that were done for water supply by BCHOD. The
total housing buildings, and other buildings such as shops, factory and office buildings in Chitungwiza
are approximately 40,685. These were counted on the Google map taken on November 2011. Divided
houses are houses that are divided into 2 to make up 2 households (semi-detached).
A total of 50 houses in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and 50 houses in Unit J Extension in Seke South were
selected for the pilot project on SWM.
2. Background of the Project

An improvement on Solid Waste Management is required in Chitungwiza due to the increase in
population in the city. Through a preliminary Waste Amounts and Composition Survey (WACS)
conducted by the JICA Project Team, 390 illegal dumping sites were identified in different locations
of the city of Chitungwiza. Attachment 1 shows a map of Chitungwiza showing these illegal
dumping sites scattered all over the city. From the WACS results, Zengeza 4 and St Marys have the
highest amounts of waste on illegal dumps by volume of 7,643 m3 and 8,763 m3 respectively.
The leachate from solid waste from some of the illegal dumps discharges into the water catchment of
Chivero river basin, and causes water pollution of its water basin. The improvement of the current
state on SWM is important in terms of reduction of non-point source pollution.
APP. 9 - 5
APPENDIX 9
Currently a house to house collection service is carried out weekly by the Municipality refuse
collection service in locations that have access roads. However, some residents still dump waste at
illegal dump sites in these areas where the Municipality is doing refuse collection once a week.
According to the Municipal Solid Waste Superintendent, collection of refuse twice a week will be
most appropriate but limitations of fuel, vehicles and other logistics are a problem. . Residents end up
illegally dumping the excess waste and this is a health hazard and causes pollution to the environment.
Some residents have been allocated stands in non-serviced areas. Houses have already been built and
occupied but there are no access roads and water and sewage reticulation systems. Municipal vehicles
cannot access these areas for refuse collection therefore the residents resort to illegal dumping within
their communities. This pilot project on SWM was formulated mainly targeting the reduction of
illegal dumping in Municipal non-collection areas by the introduction of primary and secondary
collection.
3. Method of the Pilot Project

identification of four cart operators
selection of project
central collection identified to carry
sites by BCHOD,JICA
point to place the out the door to door
and Municipality
perforated drums collection
collection by door to door

refuse store in
municipality( collection by cart
drums at collection
secondary operators(primary
station
collection) collection)
to municipal
dumpsite
• Primary and secondary collection: 1.5 months from 22 October to 30 November 2012
• Houses selected: 100 houses[50 from Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) & 50 from Seke Unit J
Extension ]
Central collection point:
• Identified for each of the 2 communities

• 10 perforated drums with handles were placed at each central collection point for storage of
refuse from primary collection
Cart operators
• Identified from the 2 communities
• Carried out the door to door collection activity
• 2 operators for each community
• Provided with personal protective clothing by the JICA Project Team
• Oriented by BCHOD on collection and the collection rules given in Attachment 2
Door to door collection
APP. 9 - 6
APPENDIX 9
• Carried out every Monday and Thursday by the cart operators

• Residents used their own refuse receptacles
• On Wednesday the operators cleared illegal dumpsites around the central collection points.
Monitoring of onsite activities was undertaken by BCHOD throughout the duration of the primary and
secondary collection.
3.1 Basic Approach for Implementing the Pilot Project

Currently, house to house collection service is carried out by the municipality collection service.
However, illegal dumping sites are identified at any locations of the city, which brings a significant
sanitary problem. One of the largest problems will be that the municipality collection service cannot
reach all communities in the city. A development plan on procurement of collection vehicles will be
formulated in the Master Plan (M/P) to solve this issue.
The following two causes on illegal dumping were estimated in addition to above problem.
Case 1: Most communities are covered by the municipality collection service in the city.
However, the residents of the communities don’t comply with the rules or schedules of
the municipality collection service. In Case 1, some communities are unaware of above
rules / schedules, or, they do not discharge their waste appropriately. In this case, public
education will be necessary at communities or school levels to comply with above rules
or appropriate discharge of the household wastes. Activities for encouraging the
communities to take their initiative in appropriate discharge should be formulated in
pilot projects.
Case 2: In this case, the municipality collection service cannot access the communities near the
illegal dumping sites because road condition is not good or sewage is directly
discharged into the nearby road. A combination of collection system of primary and
secondary collection should be established in pilot projects. The primary collection will
be carried out through manual collection system such as manual carts by the community
residents and their transport to the fixed station where the municipality collection
service can reach.
3.2 Selection of Project Sites

On the selection of project sites, initially a discussion was held with the Municipality to assist in
identifying sites which had no access roads for Municipal refuse collection. St Mary’s (Manyame
Park) and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) were selected due to the inaccessibility and high volumes of waste on
illegal dumps in these areas.
A second inspection of the project sites was done to verify if the sites could be utilized for the pilot
project. On the second inspection it was discovered that in St Mary’s (Manyame Park) most of the
houses were still under construction and had not yet been occupied. Seke Unit J Extension was then
chosen in the place of St Mary’s (Manyame Park).
As preliminary information, a map of non-collection service area and a location map on illegal
dumping which was obtained in the WACS (Waste Amount and Composition Survey) were utilized.
A field survey was conducted to examine the accessibility on the municipality’s collection service,
road, ground, topographical condition and the availability of household number exceeding 50
households. The discussions with the Municipality were made to select the project sites.
The following project sites were selected based on above selection criteria.
APP. 9 - 7
APPENDIX 9
 Zengeza 4
 Seke Unit J Extension
Project sites Unit J Extension Zengeza 4 (Pagomba)
Illegal dump sites in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4
Children were seen playing at the illegal dumpsites on bare foot. There are dangers of getting cut
and contracting diseases from the refuse.
APP. 9 - 8
APPENDIX 9
3.3 Notification to Communities or Business Establishments
Poster at a durawall in Zengeza 4 Banner at a central collection point
Prior notification to residents or business establishments was necessary in relation to outline of the
pilot project, its methodology and schedule. The method of notification was determined through the
discussions with Chitungwiza Municipality.
3.3.1 Notification in communities

The BCHOD team and one representative from the Municipality moved from door to door notifying
the communities (Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4) of the pilot project. One banner and two posters
with the JICA logo were erected for each of the project sites.
Sticker for identification Notification to residents
Stickers were put at the front of the selected houses for identification. The stickers were numbered
from 1 to 50 for Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and Unit J Extension respectively.
3.3.2 Business establishments

Notifications to business establishments were done through the District Administrator and the
Municipality.
3.3.3 Schools
A clearance letter from the Provincial Education Director (PED) was obtained, granting permission to
the BCHOD team to visit schools and conduct educational awareness sessions on SWM. Visits were
done to each of the six schools involved in the pilot project for notification.
APP. 9 - 9
APPENDIX 9
3.4 Implementation of Public Education

As mentioned above, there are two types of practices on illegal dumping, namely, a case that the
residents are unaware of the appropriate discharge manners and another case that the residents does
not discharge in appropriate manners even though they are aware of the rules or schedules.
In the pilot project, the public education was carried out by the following methods;
 Holding community consultation meetings repeatedly

 Preparation of posters, banners placed at central collection points, collection rules for
primary collection.
 To carry out monitoring on the state of the projects and feedback its results to better
implementation of the project
3.5 Implementation of Fixed-time and Fixed Station Collection

An attempt of fixed-time or fixed station collection was carried out to promote the incentive of the
communities toward appropriate waste discharge in addition to public education.
3.5.1 Primary Collection by Community Residents

The primary collection by the local residents was carried out as follows.
3.5.1.1 Organizing of Community Residents

The organizing of several teams for primary collection consisting of community residents was
necessary in Case 2. The organizing of the primary collection was carried out through the discussions
with community leaders.
The primary collection team is shown as below;

1 team (2 workers) x 2 = 2 teams (total: 4 workers)
Above workers of the primary collection team were hired in the Project.
3.5.1.2 Preparation of Necessary Equipment for Primary Collection

The target area of the primary collection cannot be accessed by the Municipality collection service
and manual collection by the local residents of the communities was a major practice. Therefore, some
equipment such as manual carts was procured to the residents by the project.
The equipment used for the pilot project is listed below:
• 20 x 200litre drums for storage of refuse at central collection station

• 4 x 85litre plastic buckets for storing refuse during primary collection
• 2x manual carts with a capacity of about 100kg for primary collection
• 12mm steel rods for making drum handles
• Cutting disc for cutting rods for drum handles
• Welding rods for use when making drum handles
• Padlocks for security of drums
• Gate chain for security of drums
• Skip truck for secondary collection was provided by the Municipality of Chitungwiza.
• On 8 October 2012, a meeting was conducted with the JICA Project team to discuss on the
work plan that BCHOD had prepared. The skip bins were going to take three to four weeks to
be manufactured and each skip dish would cost about US$2,500.
• The JICA Project Team preferred the use of 200litre drums to the skip bins siting the high
cost and the required time to manufacture skip bins given the duration of the pilot project.
BCHOD pointed out their concern about the security of drums which would be a challenge.
APP. 9 - 10
APPENDIX 9
The community uses drums as scaffolds, water storage containers and for making door frames
and braai stands. The response from the JICA Project team was that they were going to put
the drums under lock and chain and that the drums would be perforated. The duration of the
project was further reduced to 2.5 months.
• Manual carts were used for door to door collection of refuse to the central collection point.
The central collection points were located where the Municipal collection refuse vehicle was
able to access for collection of the refuse from primary collection for disposal at the city’s
dump site.
On the implementation of primary and secondary collection it was observed that the gate chains were
on demand in the community and using them could lead to the theft of the drums and chains. A
decision was made to engage the local community to take care of the drums and the use of lock and
chain was dropped. Two houses were identified that were close to the central collection points in the
two communities. The drums were kept at these houses during the night for safe keep for the duration
of the primary and secondary collection.
Primary collection by cart operator Secondary collection by the Municipality
3.5.1.3 Selection of Collection Point

The community residents had to transport the waste collected by primary collection to a designated
collection point where the Municipality collection service could access. The collection point was
determined through discussions with Municipality in both Zengeza 4 and Unit J Extension.
3.6 Monitoring
Before and after the implementation of the pilot project, a public awareness survey was conducted to
monitor the change of their awareness toward the improvement of the collection. The monitoring was
carried out with the municipality (C/P) to verify the process of the activities, validity or efficiency of
activities and input, outcome of the plan, project and their evaluation.
3.7 Sharing of Project Outcome

The project outcome will have to be shared among the relevant authorities through workshops,
publicity papers and school classes as good practices. In addition, the information of the project
outcome also will be disclosed to the relevant authorities except the municipality through steering
committee meetings and donor meetings.
3.8 Planned Implementation Schedule

The pilot project was expected to be implemented in the schedule as shown in Table A9.1.2.
APP. 9 - 11
APPENDIX 9
Table A9.1.2 Planned Schedule of Pilot Project
2012
Task September October November December
1. Preparation
2. Identification / Analysis of Causes
3. Selection of Project Sites
4. Notification to Communities
5. Public Education
6. Fixed-time & Station Method Collection
7. Primary & Secondary Collection
8. Monitoring
9. Sharing of Project Outcome
3.9 Monitoring of Public Awareness before and after the pilot project
3.9.1 Initial questionnaire survey in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba)

Attachment 3 shows the results from a door to door survey that was done in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba)
and in Seke Unit J Extension. This survey was done to assess the residents’ knowledge and attitude
towards solid waste management.
• Generally the majority of the residents showed concern about issues of solid waste
management with the majority of residents (86%) concerned about diseases related to
improper waste disposal. Some of the residents having experienced the Typhoid and Cholera
outbreaks that have particularly raged in Chitungwiza in the past years i.e. 2010 and 2011.
• 90% of the respondents are willing to participate in efforts aimed at reducing waste, recycling
and composting waste at household level.
• The survey also established that most of the residents would rather advocate for permanent
solutions like infrastructure development in the form of roads rather than temporary measures
like collection stations that could potentially become dumpsites if the Municipality fails to
collect refuse from these waste collection points.
Survey team in Zengeza 4
3.9.2 Final questionnaire survey in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and Seke Unit J Extension
A second survey was done in the communities at the end of the primary and secondary collection
period. The results of the final questionnaire survey are under Attachment 13.
• Generally the residents (97%) feel that the pilot project was a good attempt with some even
describing it as a “wonderful job”. The majority of the residents say they now have a clean
APP. 9 - 12
APPENDIX 9
environment with less flies and mosquitos compared to the times when they dug pits to bury
their garbage on their yards.
• The residents feel that for collection to be carried out effectively in the community,
infrastructure such as roads must be developed as it is the only permanent solution to refuse
problem.
• The survey results show that the people (82%) are aware of the fact that illegal dumping
attracts a US$20 fine but because there is no refuse collection in their communities they are
forced to dump their waste illegally.
• Of the residents interviewed 83% are willing to form arts and crafts and recycling groups as a
means of income generation and as a means of waste reduction. This will encourage source
separation of refuse at household level and reduce the amount of waste in the bins.
3.9.3 Questionnaire Survey for the cart operators
1. What is the waste composition of the garbage you are collecting?

All the operators indicated that Food Waste, Plastics, Papers, Yard Wastes are among the waste
they are collecting from different households. The other waste include Metal, tin cans, broken
glass, diapers (pampers), human and animal excreta.
2. What is the approximate volume of the waste you collect from each household?
It ranges from 15kg to 30kg
3. How many drums are you filling per day? Six drums
4. How long do you take to finish garbage collection per day? 4 Hours in Unit J and 6Hours
in Zengeza 4
5. Are there any households in the pilot project from which you are not collecting garbage
and why?
In Zengeza 4 area the operators are collecting garbage from all the households. However from
Unit J area the operators are not collecting garbage from a few houses (on average 3households),
the residents will have burnt their garbage or put in pits.
6. How do residents discharge their garbage?

Residents from the two areas discharge their garbage in a wide range of receptacles which include
cement bags, empty metal tins, plastic bags and plastic bins. However some still discharge in
their pits and some still even resort to illegal dumping.
7. What do you suggest to be the best way of storing garbage prior to collection by the
residents?
The cart operators suggested that the residents must put their waste in plastic receptacles and put
their bins outside their homes on the stipulated days of garbage collection
8. What are the challenges you are facing during your operations?
The operators are not getting response from other households thus would just pass without
collecting the garbage. They also indicated the shortage of tools which include racks and shovels.
The other challenge is that despite collecting garbage from households, illegal dumpsites are
continuing to be seen in Zengeza 4
APP. 9 - 13
APPENDIX 9
9. What do you think needs to be improved by the residents to make your operations easy?
Residents must practice source separation and also not put water and sand in their receptacles
10. What do you think can be improved to increase efficiency of the present collection
system?
Residents must put their waste receptacles outside their homes where it’s accessible for the
operators to collect the garbage. Residents staying close to the collection system (i.e. drums) must
be encouraged to empty their own garbage directly into the drums.
-Can the residents near the collection station (drums) discharge their garbage directly into the drums
to reduce the load of your collection? Yes
11. Do you want to continue this work after this pilot project is finished?
All the operators showed willingness to continue with the work after the project is finished.
12. If you want to continue this work, what do you want to request to the Municipality?
The Municipality must continue with projects of this nature and also provide skip dishes around
the non-collection areas to reduce illegal dumping. The Municipality must also provide residents
with receptacles and also engage in educational activities to the communities for the project to be
sustainable.
3.10 Public Education

Educational awareness sessions on SWM were conducted in six schools, in Unit J Extension and
Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) communities.
3.10.1 Schools
The six schools were identified in the pilot project sites where most of the children in these
communities attend. The selection of the schools was done after consultations with Chitungwiza
Municipality.
• Letters were written to the Provincial Educational Director and to the District Education
officer seeking their permission to hold educational awareness sessions on Solid Waste
Management in 6 schools as listed below:
Zengeza 4 schools
Zengeza 3 High School
Zengeza 4 High School
Ndangariro Primary School
Unit J schools
Seke 6 High School
Seke 7 Primary School
Seke 8 Primary School
APP. 9 - 14
APPENDIX 9
Environmental club at Seke 6 High school Presentation by Michael Saopa
Drama on solid waste by students Facilitators using a visual image

• Permission was granted by the PED to hold educational awareness sessions in the six schools
in Seke Unit J and Zengeza 4.
• The participating schools first shared their knowledge on solid waste management with the
JICA facilitating team through song, dance, drama and poetry.
• The facilitating team then used visual images and interactive methods to engage the students
in the awareness session.
• During the presentation, rulers and pens were given out to all participating students. The aim
was to show the student body the proper solid waste management methods they already knew
but did not practice.
• The facilitating team concentrated on crucial topics like re use recycle and reduce (the 3 Rs).
Environmental Clubs in the six schools were each given cleaning material comprising the following:
10 shovels
10 rakes
10 hard brooms
2 x 85 litre plastic bins
15 pairs of PVC long gloves.
• Some of the clubs in Seke 6 High School, Zengeza 4 High School, Ndangariro Primary
School and Seke 8 High School that were dormant were revamped.
• The environmental clubs were encouraged to work with the Environmental Health Officers
from the Municipality to address issues that affected their health and the environment.
APP. 9 - 15
APPENDIX 9
• School heads and the environmental club patrons were encouraged to take part in community
awareness initiatives like clean-ups and that they should start by cleaning the dumpsites
around their schools and put up rules on littering being a punishable offence.
3.10.2 Community, Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba)

Educational awareness sessions on SWM were undertaken by BCHOD together with the Municipality
Health Department and Green Africa Network in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba). The
main focus was on behavioral change at the primary point of solid waste generation and that is at
household level.
• It was established that the community loves a clean environment and are willing to work
together to maintain the clean environment. According to the community, the cause of illegal
dumps is because of the non-collection of refuse by the Municipality and also lack of
knowledge on the residents’ part on how to properly manage their solid waste for a clean
living environment.
• During the awareness sessions, the residents showed willingness to form recycling groups and
make use of waste as a way of reducing the amount of waste that they put in their bins.
Boston Plastics was identified in Unit M which buys low density (LD) plastics for example
sugar and maize meal plastics. The company also buys broken buckets and other plastic
containers. Residents can make money out of selling this recyclable waste. Boston Plastics is
willing to spearhead the formation of recycling groups in the community.
• Some women in the community were identified that are willing to learn how to make artefacts
from waste and earn a living in the process. Green Africa Network said that they can
spearhead this initiative in the community.
• Residents that are not part of the pilot project are keen to have the project also extend to their
areas. Minutes of the community meetings are attached with this report, see Attachment 4.
4. Awareness Campaign Schedule of the pilot project

Educational awareness sessions were held in six schools and the community as shown in Table A9.1.3
below. From the table, the following abbreviations are defined as:
• DA - District Administrator
• PED – Provincial Educational Director
• DEO – District Education Officer
Table A9.1.3 Schedule of Awareness campaigns

Meeting place
Mobilizing
Target group Activity Unit J Date
team Zengeza 4
Extension
DA Meeting Secretary Council Council 29/10/12
Boardroom Boardroom
PED Meeting BCHOD Chester House 30/10/12
DEO Meeting Municipal DEO’s office 31/10/12
Public Education
Officer
Stakeholders Meeting BCHOD Seke South Clinic 20/11/12
Community Presentations BCHOD Central 15/11/12
collection
point
Central 16/11/12
collection point
APP. 9 - 16
APPENDIX 9
Meeting place
Mobilizing
Target group Activity Unit J Date
team Zengeza 4
Extension
Schools Presentations BCHOD Seke 6 High 7/11/12
Seke 7 6/11/12
Primary
Seke 8 14/11/12
Primary
Ndangariro 8/11/12
Primary
Zengeza 3 High 13/11/12
Zengeza 4 High 15/11/12
Clean-up campaign Unit J Zengeza 4 7/12/12
Stakeholders Meeting Workshop 5/12/12
Zengeza 4 After project survey Door to door 3/12/12
Unit J Extension After Project survey Door to door 4/12/12
5. Identification of causes of illegal dumping

From interviews with some of the local residents, the following causes of illegal dumping were
identified as:
• Lack of public awareness on illegal dumping
• There is no Municipal collection in some parts of Chitungwiza where there are no
access roads.
Discussion with the Solid Waste Superintendent in the Chitungwiza Municipality revealed the
following:
• Residents were allocated stands and started building and occupying their stands
before the construction of access roads by the Municipality.
• Deteriorated collection vehicles which are poorly serviced affect the collection of
solid waste in Chitungwiza.
• The Municipality supply of fuel and other consumables is not constant and therefore
interferes with Municipal collection of solid waste from residential areas
• Municipal collection of once a week from accessible communities seems insufficient
leading residence to dump uncollected waste illegally.
6. Stakeholders Identified
The stakeholders in this project are all those involved with Solid Waste Management in Chitungwiza.
The identified stakeholders in the pilot project are listed below:
• JICA Project team

• BCHOD
• Chitungwiza Municipality
• The Community
• Water, Sanitation and Health stakeholders
• Green Africa Network
• Boston Plastics
6.1 JICA Project team (JPT)

BCHOD worked with JPT on a study of Chitungwiza Infrastructure – Improvement of Water Supply,
Sewerage and Solid Waste Management. The purpose of this assignment is to look at the SWM aspect
of the study.
• In the initial meeting held between BCHOD and the JICA Project team on 27 September 2012,
BCHOD was assigned to come up with a work plan to implement a pilot project involving
primary and secondary collection of refuse in St Mary’s and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba). These two
APP. 9 - 17
APPENDIX 9
areas were chosen because of the high volumes of waste on illegal dumps that were identified
in these two areas.
• The use of wheel carts for door to door collection and skip bins for storage of waste at central
collection points was suggested by the JICA Project team. The Pilot Project was scheduled to
run for 3 months.
• During the second meeting on 8 October 2012, The JICA Project Team indicated that they
had done further investigations in St Mary’s with consultations with the Municipality and
found out that most of the houses under consideration were not yet occupied. Unit J Extension
was chosen in the place of St Mary’s.
• The minutes for the second meeting with the JICA Project Team are in this report as
Attachment 5.
6.2 Chitungwiza Municipality

Chitungwiza Municipality is the Local Authority responsible for service delivery in Chitungwiza city
including among other services, collection of refuse, water and sewer reticulation. It is the main
beneficiary of the results from the pilot project as the project may lead to an improvement in service
delivery to the city.
• After the meeting with JTS, BCHOD held another meeting with Chitungwiza Municipality
Solid Waste Section to discuss the way forward on the Pilot Project. In the previous meeting
with the JICA Project team, the Municipality was to provide a refuse collection vehicle for the
duration of the pilot project.
• The Municipality requested JICA to fix one of their vehicles which needed minor repairs, up
to US$300. They also asked if it was possible for JICA to provide the fuel for the collection
vehicle that was going to be used for the pilot project. The response from the team was that
JICA was not going to pay for any running costs; therefore all the above requests from the
Municipality were not accepted.
• The Municipality expressed concern by the use of drums for storage of waste at the central
collection points fearing that it might lead to community dumping at the end of the Pilot
project.
6.3 Communities
The communities are the residents of Chitungwiza City. They get their service delivery for refuse
collection, water and sewerage reticulation from the Municipality.
• The Municipality is doing refuse collection in communities which have access roads once a
week but it is still unable to cope with the amounts of waste generated in these areas.
• The communities which have no access roads are not receiving Municipal refuse collection
service. The residents in these areas dispose of their waste by digging pits on their yards and
dumping on illegal sites within their communities.
• Primary and secondary collection of refuse was introduced in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4
(Pagomba) with the aim of reducing illegal dumps in these areas which have no Municipal
refuse collection.
6.4 Community Based Organizations (CBOs)

Two CBOs were identified in Chitungwiza during the pilot project which is Green Africa Network
and Boston Plastics.
APP. 9 - 18
APPENDIX 9
6.4.1 Green Africa Network

• During the meeting with the Municipality, there was mention of a Community Based
Organisation (CBO) that was involved in solid waste management in Chitungwiza. A meeting
was arranged with the CBO, Green Africa Network (GAN). GAN was established in 2006
by the residents of Chitungwiza with the aim of promoting community participation and
involvement in solid waste management. Voluntary members were selected from the
community as those with the appreciation of on-going waste management challenges in
Chitungwiza. Green Africa Network has carried out activities like rehabilitation of illegal
waste dumps, clearing of storm water drains and has held community education and
awareness on solid waste management.
• GAN is an organisation with the community at heart. As they are part of the Chitungwiza
community, the failure by the Municipality affects them in terms of non-collection of waste,
burst sewer pipes, illegal waste dumps and poor service delivery. This CBO is willing to take
on the initiative of educating the community about proper solid waste management, formation
of recycling groups in the community and teaching the community how to make artefacts
from waste. This way the community will use waste as a resource of economic value. See
GAN’s project profile in Attachment 6.
6.4.2 Boston Plastics

• BCHOD met with Boston Plastics, a CBO that deals with recycling of plastics in Chitungwiza.
The purpose of the meeting was to find out from the company what services it could offer to
the community to encourage waste reduction.
• Murehwa, the owner of the company confirmed that they were buying used plastic and broken
plastic containers from the community at US$0.20 per kilogram. He indicated that he would
prefer the community to form recycling groups, bring their recyclable plastic from the
community, and he can then teach them how to make chips and pellets from the plastic.
• These (chips/pellets) can be sold to companies that make irrigation pipes. Boston Plastics has
been allocated 2 hectares of land by Chitungwiza Municipality for their recycling activities.
• Attachment 7 shows an article from the Greenline Magazine where Boston Plastics was being
interviewed by Environment Africa. In the interview, Murehwa gives a background of his
company and where they see themselves in five years.
6.5 Meeting with Water, Sanitation and Health (WASH) stakeholders
Presentation by BCHOD to WASH stakeholders
APP. 9 - 19
APPENDIX 9
Another meeting was held with other stakeholders of Chitungwiza who are part of the Typhoid Fever
Outbreak Response team. The attendance register is attached as Attachment 8.
• At the end of the Typhoid meeting, BCHOD gave an overview of the pilot project on primary
and secondary collection that was ongoing in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and Unit J Extension. The
challenges that were being faced were brought to light and they varied from non-collection of
refuse by the Municipality and failure by the residents to practice source separation even after
educational awareness sessions were held in their communities.
• It was suggested by the stakeholders that educational awareness on appropriate ways of refuse
disposal was to be conducted until there is an attitude change in the people towards reduction
of waste.
• BCHOD made a proposal for GAN to continue with awareness educational campaigns on
SWM in the communities after the completion of the Pilot Project. A question was raised on
the capacity of Green Africa Network (GAN) to continue with the educational awareness and
teaching the community on how to make artifacts from waste such as hats, handbags, baskets,
etc. A suggestion was made for GAN to identify an organization to partner with in order to
revamp their capacity to carry out such community initiatives.
• One of the members pointed out that even in those communities where there is refuse
collection; illegal dumps can be seen. The response to this was that Municipal collection of
once a week was not sufficient hence the residents resorted to illegally dumping the excess
waste. A suggestion was made for the council vehicles to collect waste twice a week from the
residents.
• There was a comment from the stakeholders that in their view, council may not have the
capacity to collect waste twice a week from the residents due to the condition of their fleet
and the availability of fuel for use by the Municipal collection vehicles that was not consistent.
See minutes attached to this report in Attachment 9.
6.6 Final meeting with Stakeholders to share project outcome

At the end of the Pilot Project, another meeting with the stakeholders was conducted at the Municipal
workshop to discuss on the outcome of the Pilot Project in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and Unit J Extension.
The aim of the meeting was to share the project outcome and to come up with a decommissioning
concept.
The stakeholders that were part of this meeting included:
• JICA Project Team

• BCHOD
• Green Africa Network
• Chitungwiza Municipality (Solid Waste Department)
• Chitungwiza Municipality (Health Department)
• Policy maker for Seke South
• District Administrator’s office
After sharing the project outcome a discussion was opened on how to proceed as the duration of the
pilot project had come to an end on 30 November 2012.
BCHOD explained that since the Pilot Project had come to an end, it was the responsibility of the
Municipality to carry on with the project. The Municipality representative responded by saying that
the Municipality had no capacity to continue with collection in the project sites noting that the
APP. 9 - 20
APPENDIX 9
targeted houses are too few compared to the number of residents in these communities. He also said
that if drums were left at collection points it could lead to community dumping at the collection sites.
It was agreed that the drums were to be taken to the workshop for safe keep.
However, the Municipality representative from the refuse department said that as a temporary
measure, Unit J Extension residents who are close to access roads could take out their waste for
Municipal collection on Wednesday when the collection in Unit J is done. There will be a challenge in
Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) as this is a swampy area and Municipal vehicles may get stuck during
collection as the rainy season has started.
BCHOD pointed out that it had managed to clear all the illegal dumps in and around the project sites.
BCHOD however showed concern that the residents were left at a time when they were used to
regular refuse collection during the primary and secondary collection phase. Given the challenges that
the Municipality is experiencing, there is no guarantee that refuse collection service will continue in
the Pilot Project sites. The minutes for the stakeholders’ meeting are under Attachment 13.
6.6.1 Sharing Project Outcome with other communities

The project outcome was shared with other communities besides Zengeza 4 and Unit J Extension and
the communities are listed below:
• Seke Unit J, Unit M, Unit D residents participated during the clean-up campaign.
• Zengeza 3, 4 residents by taking part in the clean-up campaign.
• Students and teachers who came from Zengeza 1, Zengeza 3, Seke Unit K, Seke Unit B, Seke
Unit L and other parts of Chitungwiza were informed about the pilot project during
educational awareness sessions in schools.
• Stakeholders from German Agro Action, World Health Organisation, Reckitts and Africare
who were part of stakeholders meetings held during the pilot project.
7. Clean-up campaign
Date conducted: Friday 7 December 2012
Time: 9:00hrs-13:00hrs.
Location: 2 locations
• Zengeza 4 (Pagomba ) along Tilcor road

• Seke Unit J along the T junction of Kubatana Road and Tumba Road
APP. 9 - 21
APPENDIX 9
clean up
campaign
Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) along Seke Unit J Extension

Tilco Road along Kubatana Road
and Tumba T junction
Led by Gilbert Mndaga Led by Zibusiso Dube

(Green Africa Network) 83 (BCHOD) with 78
people in attandance people in attandance
cleared all the identified cleared all the identified

illegal dumpsites and filled illegal dumpsites and
150 x50kg refuse bags filled 130x 50kg refuse
bags
• In total 169 people were in attendance and Attachment 11 shows the attendance register for the
clean-up participants.
• All the participants were issued with caps and t-shirts before the clean-up exercise.
• Municipality provided the cleanup equipment which included shovels, rakes, hard brooms,
water containers , refuse bags ,gloves and a collection vehicle to take the waste to the dumpsite
• Everyone who was involved was pleased with the work done by the JICA clean-up team and the
community requested that clean-ups of this nature should be carried out frequently as illegal
dumpsite are sprouting everywhere in the community due to the Municipality’s inability to cope
with refuse collection.
• The people were served lunch at the end of the clean-up exercise
The police clearance letter for the clean-up campaign is in Attachment 10.
Some of the sites identified for the clean-up campaign.
Unit J: Along Kubatana Road Unit J: Cans along Timba Road
APP. 9 - 22
APPENDIX 9
Unit J: Along Timba Road Unit J: Along Timba Road
Unit J: Along Timba Road
Zengeza 4: Along Tilcor Road
APP. 9 - 23
APPENDIX 9
A clean-up campaign was conducted in Unit J and Zengeza 4 for the purpose of clearing existing
illegal dumps around the pilot project sites at the end of primary and secondary collection.
Clean-up team moving to sites Men and women at work
APP. 9 - 24
APPENDIX 9
Refuse put in plastic bags for Municipal collection
Green Africa Network supported the clean-up campaign greatly from the preparatory stages including
among others organizing teams, requisition of equipment from the Municipality etc.
8. Actual time schedule of the Pilot Project

Table 4 shows the actual schedule that was implemented in the pilot project.
Table A9.1.4 Actual project schedule
Work done Date Duration

Preparation of work plan 1 -14 October 10 days
Selection of target households 10 October 1 day
Selection of central collection point 12 October 1 day
Procurement of equipment 15 -19 October 5 days
Notification to residents 19-20 October 2 days
Interview cart operators 19 October 1 day
Implementation of pilot project in project sites 22 October-30 November 30 days
Monitoring of project activities 22 October-30 November 30 days
Conduct initial survey in the community 23-25 October 3 days
Meeting with the District Education officer and District 30 October 1 day
Administrator
Meeting with the Provincial Education Officer 31 October 1 day
Educational awareness sessions in schools 6-14 November 1 week
Meeting with Green Africa Network 14 November 1 day
Community awareness sessions 15-16 November 2 days
Conduct stakeholders meeting 20 November 1 day
Meeting with Boston Plastics 28 November 1 day
Conduct final questionnaire survey 3-4 December 2 days
Hold final stakeholders meeting 5 December 1 day
Hold clean-up campaign 7 December 1 day
Preparation of final report (draft) 10-14 December 2012 5days
9. Problems and discussions
9.1 Problems
The following are the major problems identified during the pilot project.
APP. 9 - 25
APPENDIX 9
 After the implementation of the project some of the residents were not taking out their waste
on collection days.
 Some residents were putting wet materials in their waste receptacles which made it heavy for
the operators to carry.
 Throughout the duration of the pilot project, residents were asking for plastic bags to store
their waste before collection by operators.
 Human excreta were part of the refuse collected from the households and this is because many
houses have no ablution facilities in the pilot project communities.
 On several days there was no collection of refuse from collection points by the Municipality
due to council strikes, breakdown of collection vehicles and fuel challenges.
1. In November the Municipality workers went on strike twice on the 9th of November and
from the 25th to 30th of November
2. From the19th to the 21st of November the municipality did not collect refuse from
collection points because of fuel challenges
3. From the 12th to the 16th of November there was no collection due to breakdown of
Municipal collection vehicles.
Unit J Extension Zengeza 4 (Pagomba)
Collection sites during non-collection by the Municipality
 There was no significant change in the attitude of the communities after the education
awareness sessions that were held in the community as most of the residents were still putting
their organic waste in their bins and were not practicing point source separation.
 The greatest challenge has been how to decommission the project in such a way that residents
do not resort to illegal dumping at the end of the pilot project given the challenges that the
Municipality is going through.
 The pilot project only benefited a minute population of Chitungwiza. Other residents in
Municipal non-collection areas who were not part of the pilot project expressed concern for
the project to be implemented in their communities as well.
9.2 Discussions
9.2.1 Efficiency of primary collection

From the informal interviews conducted during monitoring, BCHOD was able to gather the following
suggestions to improve the efficiency of door to door collection
APP. 9 - 26
APPENDIX 9
• Ideally each household should have a permanent refuse receptacle. There is need to provide
the residents with plastic bags to store their baggage as it was discovered that some residents
had no storage containers during the Pilot Project.
• There is need to encourage full participation from the residents in such programs as it was
discovered during the course of the pilot project a few residents were still not taking out their
waste for collection by the operators on collection days
• There is need to develop the sewer system so resident can have proper toilets as one of the
problems faced by operators was human excreta in the refuse.
• Residents were not practicing waste separation at source in order to reduce the amount of
waste they put in the bins. Some of the residents put water in their refuse receptacles.
• Some of the community residents delivered their waste to the collection points directly
without waiting for collection by cart operators.
9.2.2 Littering around the collection points

Littering or illegal dumping was identified at the collection station. The clean-up activity of illegal
dumps at the collection station was covered in the pilot project because the project sites have some
environmental problems. Little children could be seen playing at the dumps posing a health hazard.
Project sites at launch of primary and secondary collection
Project sites as the primary and secondary collection progressed
APP. 9 - 27
APPENDIX 9
Project sites at the end of the pilot project
Littering around the project sites was improved by the pilot project as can be seen on the pictures
above. The communities were now putting all their waste in the drums located at the project sites by
the end of the pilot project.
However it is not possible to maintain the cleanliness at the project sites after the pilot project unless
there is cooperation from the Municipality for the secondary collection.
9.2.3 Selection of project sites

Initially, St Mary’s Manyame Park and Zengeza 4(Gomba) were selected as project sites. However,
Manyame Park had very few residents and Seke South Unit J Extension was selected instead of
Manyame Park.
9.2.4 Collection and storage method

Initially, skip bins were planned for storing the collected waste from primary collection at the
collection station. However, it would take 3 to 4 weeks for the manufacture of skip bins therefore the
use of 200 litre drums was adopted in place of the skip bins for the storage of waste from primary
collection.
9.2.5 Security issues

Initially, steel chain was planned as a protection against theft. However, the chain itself is a major
attraction to thieves as it can be used to lift heavy things. The drums were being kept at one of the
nearby houses in both Zengeza 4 and Unit J Extension during the night at a cost of $1 per night. A
more permanent solution to the security of drums needs to be established. One of the challenges was
that the collection station for Unit J Extension for example was someone else’s stand.
9.2.6 Establishment of rules for discharge and collection

Every Monday and Thursday was scheduled for the discharge of the residents’ solid waste and the
primary collection by the operators. Initially, the following days of Tuesday and Friday were selected
for the secondary collection by the municipality. However, through the discussions with the
municipality, it was confirmed that the Secondary collection could be carried out on the same day of
the actual operation of the Primary collection to guard against scavengers. Wednesday was selected
for the clean-up of illegal dumps around the collection area.
9.2.7 Rescheduling of the clean-up campaign

A clean-up campaign was organised for clearing illegal dump sites that had not been cleared during
the period of the primary and secondary collection around the project sites. The initial date of 30
November had to be rescheduled to 7 December due to Municipal strike. School children were to be
APP. 9 - 28
APPENDIX 9
part of the clean-up but they closed schools by the 6th of December. However the school children
attended the clean-up campaign from their homes.
10. Conclusion
The pilot project ran for 2.5 months from the 1st of October to the 14th of December. Primary and
secondary collection was conducted over six weeks from 22 October to 30 November 2012. All the
illegal dumping sites around the project sites were cleared during the duration of the pilot project.
• The pilot project achieved its goal of clearing all illegal dumpsites in the pilot project
communities through primary and secondary collection and the clean-up campaign that was
conducted on 7 December 2012.
• The pilot project’s door to door collection service was successful in both Zengeza 4
(Pagomba) and Unit J Extension communities.
• Municipality does not have the capacity to carry on with primary and secondary collection in
the two communities of the pilot project sites.
• The residents in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) were left with no alternative to dispose of their waste
properly at the end of the pilot project because it is a swampy area and the Municipal
collection vehicle may get stuck in the rainy season.
• Introduction of source separation in the communities, formation of recycling clubs and
making of artifacts from waste will ensure reduction of waste which is put in the bins for
disposal.
• BCHOD was able to carry out education awareness sessions on SWM in the schools and
community but intense and constant education awareness must be carried out in the
communities until there is behavior change.
• Deterrent and effective penalties must be put up by the Municipality to enforce proper SWM
in the community.
Unit J Extension - Before the Pilot Project after the Pilot Project
11. Recommendations
The following recommendations are proposed for addressing the issue of solid waste management in
Chitungwiza:
APP. 9 - 29
APPENDIX 9
11.1 Community Based Organizations (CBO)

In Chitungwiza we have identified 2 CBOs namely Boston Plastics and Green Africa Network, these
group comprise of Chitungwiza residents that care about the environment because they want to make
it safe for their children. If the Municipality would combine their efforts together with these CBOs it
would go a long way in managing solid waste in Chitungwiza.
11.2 Servicing the current fleet

Of priority is the servicing of the current fleet of Municipal collection vehicles. There are six vehicles
that are functional at the moment with each vehicle servicing its targeted sections among the six
sections in Chitungwiza. Five vehicles are down. Among the five vehicles, some need new tyres and
batteries.
During the second stakeholders’ meeting, the Municipality stated that they have a grader which is
down at the moment. If funds are availed for them to fix the grader, they can start working on making
access roads in those areas which are inaccessible.
11.3 Infrastructure development

The development of infrastructure like roads, water reticulation and sewer reticulation systems is the
permanent solution to address refuse collection in the city of Chitungwiza.
11.4 Procure compactor trucks

The trucks that are used for refuse collection in Chitungwiza are too small for the populace and the
amounts of waste generated in the city. On collection days refuse can be seen along roads as it drops
off from the collection vehicle due to overloading. This causes an outrage from the residents as they
have to sweep outside their yards after every collection.
According to the Municipality, the purchase of 4 compactor trucks would go a long way in improving
the efficiency of refuse collection in Chitungwiza.
11.5 Refuse receptacles

There is need to provide refuse receptacles to every household in Chitungwiza for waste storage. Not
all the people have sacks or proper containers where to store their waste before Municipal collection.
During the pilot project there were some residents with no means of storage and would put their waste
on the corners of their yards for collection by the cart operators.
11.6 Educational awareness sessions to the Municipality

Educational awareness on SWM should start by educating the Municipality for attitude change. Once
the Municipality changes the way they perceive SWM, it will be easy to pass it on to the community.
The two parties need to work together to ensure proper SWM in Chitungwiza.
APP. 9 - 30
APPENDIX 9
Attachments
Attachment 1: Map of Illegal Dumping Sites in Chitungwiza Municipality
Fig 1: Illegal dump sites map
Attachment 2: Collection Rules

Names of operators
Name Identification number
Brian Popo 63-553165-B42
Jeffrey Sithole 63-780192-W13
Shepherd Nemutenzi 75-054064-D44
Maxwell Ruzivo 63-862201-K32
Collection rules
1. Operators shall collect solid waste from residents twice a week on Mondays and Thursdays
from 0830hrs to 1300hrs.
2. On Wednesday, the operators shall clear solid waste on illegal dumps to the central collection
point.
3. The Municipality shall collect waste thrice a week from the central collection point on
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday from 1400hrs to 1630hrs.
4. At least two people shall lift a drum when emptying onto the skip bin
APP. 9 - 31
APPENDIX 9
5. Operator shall empty the small waste container from the household into the black bin in the
cart
 Put back the small waste container to the position you have taken it after emptying.
6. Ensure that you do not litter the surroundings on collection of solid waste from the residents.
7. Operator shall empty containers from every household in the pilot project.
Attachment 3: Results of initial questionnaire survey

COMBINED QUESTIONNAIRRE SURVEY RESULTS FOR UNIT J EXTENSION AND
ZENGEZA 4 IN CHITUNGWIZA
Household solid waste management
Type of waste Closed Open container Plastic bags Pit Pile in the yard
receptacle used to contai (%) (%) (%) (%)
store waste ner
(%)
3 8 50 37 2
Method of Burn Bury Toilet Re-use Dump Dump Burn Comp Manual Doesn’t
household (%) (%) (%) (%) on in the and ost grinding & apply the
garbage disposal road yard bury (%) drain into listed
(%) (%) (%) sewage methods
system
Food waste 6 37 4 4 25 5 10 5 4 0
Yard trimmings 25 29 0 0 26 3 12 5 0 0
Paper/cardboard 56 14 0 1 15 4 10 0 0 0
Plastic 61 13 0 1 15 2 8 0 0 0
Metals 4 33 1 2 29 6 10 0 0 15
Glass 6 30 9 0 31 3 9 0 0 12
Average (%) 26.3 26 2.3 1.3 23.2 3.8 9.8 1.6 0.57 3.86
Type of waste receptacle used to store waste

2% 3%
8%
37% Closed container (%)

Open container (%)
Plastic bags (%)
50% Pit (%)
Pile in the yard (%)
Figure A9.1.1
APP. 9 - 32
APPENDIX 9
70
60
50
40
% Food waste
30 Yard
trimmings
Paper/cardboar
20 d
Plastic
10
Method of Garbage Disposal by Type of Waste
Figure A9.1.2
The majority of the households (46%) reported that they stored most of their house hold garbage in
plastic bags before disposing it, while some (32%) pit dispose of their garbage in pits in the yard and a
few of the residents interviewed can afford some kind of container to store their garbage with (8%)
storing in open containers and (3%) storing in closed containers. Burning constituted the major
method of household garbage disposal by respondents (26.3%). many others make use of pits, they
bury (26%) their garbage in pits and with (23%) dumping their garbage by the road side which is a
cause for concern in the whole of Chitungwiza.
Concerns about Solid Waste Management
Issue of concern Concerned (%) Not concerned (%) No opinion (%)

Health risks related to burning 73 22 5
Illegal dumps polluting rivers 81 13 6
Diseases related to improper waste disposal 86 11 3
Flooding due to garbage blocking drains 78 9 13
To participate in a composting program 88 9 3
Service provided by municipality 93 5 2
Litter in the area 82 16 2
Presence of rats in the area 92 6 2
Garbage in Chitungwiza 86 10 2
APP. 9 - 33
APPENDIX 9
100
90
80
70
60
% 50
40
30 Concerned (%)
Not concerned (%)
20 No opinion (%)
10
Concerns about Solid Waste
Figure A9.1.3
Generally the majority of the respondents show concern about issues of solid waste management.
Most respondents (86%) were concerned about diseases related to improper waste disposal and the
services provided by the Municipality. Only a few residents (5%) were not concerned about the health
risks related to burning garbage. Also great concern is the service provided by the Municipality (93%)
because in these areas there is no refuse collection service yet though some of the residents pay to the
municipality refuse tariffs. The majority of residents (92%) showed concern of the presence of rats in
these areas as some described rats as a menace in the households with rats destroying property and
food.
Willingness to participate
Yes (%) No (%)

Residents with knowledge of composting 85 15
Residents with knowledge of recycling 66 34
Willing to participate in a composting program 90 10
Willing to separate material for collection 90 10
Want more information on re use, recycle, reduce 93 7
Willing to carry garbage to collection point 88 12
Ensure the security of drums 92 8
APP. 9 - 34
APPENDIX 9
100
90
80
70
60
% 50
40 Yes (%)
30 No (%)
20
10
0
Residents with Residents with Willing to Willing to Want more Willing to carry Ensure the
knowledge of knowledge of participate in a separate information on garbage to security of
composting recycling composting material for re use, recycle, collection point drums
program collection reduce
Willingness to Participate
Figure A.9.1.4
A greater percentage of the respondents (90%) are willing to participate in efforts aimed at reducing
waste, recycling and composting of household garbage and (93%) are willing to get more information
on how to reduce garbage. 92% of the respondents are willing to ensure the security of drums at
collection points as this reduces the number of illegal dumpsites in the areas as the residents have
drums to dispose of their garbage.
Solid waste management attitude scale
Agree Disagree No opinion

Attitude
(%) (%) (%)
I play an important role in solid waste management 89 9 2
Environmental education should be taught in schools 98 - 2
Purchase decisions increase/decrease the amount of garbage I must get rid 84 13 4
of
Burning garbage is not bad for my health and the health of others 35 63 2
People dump garbage because they have no option 65 31 4
Municipality is not doing enough to deal with solid waste in Chitungwiza 80 13 7
Regular collection is the only solution 92 2 6
Picking up garbage is the residents’ responsibility 73 24 3
Public education is one way to fix the crisis 94 4 2
Municipality should put recycling laws and programs in place 95 3 2
APP. 9 - 35
APP. 9 - 36
Figure A9.1.5
APP. 9 - 36
APPENDIX 9
While most of the respondents (89%) agreed that they individually play important roles in garbage
management, a greater percentage of respondents (98%) believe that environmental education should be
taught in schools and (94%) believe that public education about proper garbage management is a way to
fix the garbage crisis. A large number of respondents (95%) agreed that recycling laws and programs
should be put in place in the Chitungwiza Municipality and that regular collection of garbage is the only
solution to the garbage problem. When asked about whether burning garbage was bad for their health
(60%) agreed but indicated that burning was their only option and (30%) showed no concern about the
health effects related to burning.
Socio-economic environment
Question Reply
Type of tenure? Owned (%) Rented (%)
67 33
For what purpose do you For growing vegetables For growing vegetables For feeding animals (%)
discharge your kitchen waste? only (%) and fruits (%)
64 24 12
Person responsible for Housewife Maid (%) Children (%) Person on duty (%)
discharge of garbage? (%)
58 3 15 24
Willingness to pay refuse Yes (%) No (%)
tariffs? 78 12
How much do you pay per US$1 US$2 US$3 US$4 US$5 US$10
month?
Number of respondents 19 20 4 3 22 10
Total (US$) 19 40 12 12 110 100
(rate per month x no. of
respondents)
Average rate per month US$3.75
Type of tenure
Rented
(%)
33%
Owned
(%)
67%
Figure A9.1.6
APP. 9 - 37
APPENDIX 9
For For what purpose do you discharge your

feeding kitchen waste?
animals
(%)
12% For growing
vegetables and
fruits (%)
24% For growing
vegetables only
(%)
64%
Figure A9.1.7
Person responsible for discharge of

garbage
Person on duty
(%)
24%
Children (%) Housewife (%)

15% 58%
Maid (%)
3%
Figure A9.1.8
Willingness to pay refuse tariffs

No (%)
13%
Yes (%)
87%
Figure A9.1.9
APP. 9 - 38
APPENDIX 9
How much can you pay per month for garbage
collection
25
20
15
% How much do you pay per
10 month
0
US$1 US$2 US$3 US$4 US$5 US$10
Payment per Month in US$
Figure A9.1.10
Most of the respondents are house owners (67%), which make it possible for them to grow vegetables
(64%) and because their yards are small very few are able to keep animals with (12%) of the respondents
owning dogs. The mothers are mainly responsible for disposing of the garbage (58%) as majority of the
respondents are unemployed and also African culture says it’s their responsibility. In rented households
the person on duty (24%) is responsible for disposing the garbage. Many respondents want to improve the
situation of illegal dumps and hence willing to pay refuse tariffs. On average, from the table above, the
average rate is US$3, 75 monthly for refuse tariffs.
Attachment 4: Minutes for community meetings

CHITUNGWIZA PILOT PROJECT: COMMUNITY MEETINGS FOR UNIT J EXTENSION
AND ZENGEZA 4
1. MINUTES FOR THE UNIT J EXTENSION COMMUNITY AWARENESS SESSION

DATE – 15 NOVEMBER 2012
TIME- 10:30-12:30am
VENUE- UNIT J EXTENSION
PRESENT
COUNCILLOR-MR GWEKWETE
PEACE-MR KAFERA
ATTENDANCE-68 RESIDENTS
FACLLITATORS
WINNET MATIKI ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER CHITUNGWIZA

MUNICIPALITY
MIKE SAOPA ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY
APP. 9 - 39
APPENDIX 9
GILBERT MANDAGA ENVIRONMENTALIST GREEN AFRICA NETWORK
MEMORY GWENA BCHOD CONSULTANT
ZIBUSISO DUBE BCHOD CONSULTANT
There was a delay in holding the meeting as we had to meet the policy makers first before conducting the
community meeting.
The purpose of the meeting was a focus on behavioral change at the primary point of solid waste
generation and that’s at household level. The critical issues discussed were waste reduction and waste
separation. This was an interactive meeting and the following points were raised during the meeting:
• The residents were asked what they understood of a pilot project, an explanation was given that a
pilot project is something done as a test before being introduced more widely and it was pointed
out that if the current pilot project succeeds, it may be extended to other areas. It was pointed out
that cooperation from residents was key to the success of the pilot project
• A definition was given of waste that it is something that is discarded because it is no longer useful
or required by the current owner. The residents were asked to define waste in their own terms and
to give examples of waste generated in the home such as garden waste, pampers, cut offs from
vegetables, ash etc.
• The importance of source separation of solid waste was hammered to the residents. Residents
were encouraged to make garden composts using organic waste (reduce) such as left over sadza,
yard waste, cut offs from vegetables. Reuse of empty containers e.g. peanut butter bottles for
storage of sugar or salt was brought to the attention of the residents.
• BCHOD identified a company in Unit M called Boston Plastics was identified which buys LD
used plastics for example sugar and maize meal plastics. The company also buys broken buckets
and other plastic containers. Residents could make money out of selling this recyclable waste to
Boston Plastics. Most of the residents indicated that they knew about this recycling company but
only a few were selling their recyclable plastic there at US$0.10 per kilogram.
• The facilitator then went on to explain that the amount of waste to be put in the bin will be
reduced if the residents practice reuse, recycling and reduction of solid waste.
• The residents were taught how overloading their bins with solid waste that they could reuse,
reduce or recycle would lead to the depreciation of Municipal vehicles hence reducing the life
span of these vehicles as they have to overload in order to cope with the demand.
• It was emphasized that people and dirt don’t mix and people should practice hygiene by not
throwing their solid waste at inappropriate places.
• A picture of an illegal dumping site in Unit J Extension was presented to the residents. It was
pointed to them that 390 such sites were identified in Chitungwiza during a WACS survey that
was done.
• The residents were asked to point out the dangers and diseases caused by these illegal dumps. It
was pointed out that mosquito, flies, rats, worms etc. would breed in the illegal dumps and cause
malaria, cholera, typhoid, dysentery, children being cut by broken glasses etc.
• Fire out breaks could also result from the illegal dumps due to chemical reactions of the waste.
APP. 9 - 40
APPENDIX 9
• The vice chairman of the area gave closing remarks and encouraged the residents to practice
proper solid waste disposal.
• Residents were hinted of the clean-up campaign to be held at the end of November 2012 but a
concrete date was to be advised.
2. MINUTES FOR THE ZENGEZA 4 (PAGOMBA) COMMUNITY AWARENESS

SESSION
TIME- 10:30-12:30
VENUE- ZENGEZA 4 (PAGOMBA)
PRESENT
VERONICA CHIWANDIRE- CITY HEALTH PROMOTER
ESTHER MAZIVEI- CITY HEALTH PROMOTER
ATTENDANCE-72 RESIDENTS
FACLLITATORS
WINNET MATIKI: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY

MIKE SAOPA: ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICER CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY
GILBERT MANDAGA: ENVIRONMENTALIST GREEN AFRICA NETWORK
MEMORY GWENA: BCHOD CONSULTANT
ZIBUSISO DUBE: BCHOD CONSULTANT
Further to the presentation that was done in Unit J Extension, Green Africa Network pointed out
the following to the residents in Zengeza 4.
• The Environment Management Agency is looking for people that can create artifacts from waste
to sell at United Nations World Tourism Organization in Victoria Falls early next year and EMA
is going to sponsor their travelling expenses.
• He also spoke on the economic value of waste and he appealed to the residents who want to earn
a living from making artifacts from waste to get in touch with him and will get them a teacher.
EMA will then market their products and find places for them in already existing markets like
Sheraton hotel, curio shops around the city , and they get to sell their artifacts at shows held
around the country and all their expenses will be taken care of by EMA
• The facilitator told the residents how scavengers are earning a living from collecting recyclable
materials from the municipal dumpsite.
• In closing he emphasized that people and dirt don’t mix and people should practice hygiene
• Winnet Matiki pointed out to the residents that, dumping is against the law and anyone caught
dumping is required by the public health act to pay a fine of US$20.
Feedback from the residents
APP. 9 - 41
APPENDIX 9
• The residents are pleased with the project and most of the residents commented that the operators
are hardworking ,helpful cheerful individuals and all the dumpsites around the project site have
been cleared
• According to the residents who stay where the pilot project is taking place, there are less dangers
associated with illegal dumpsites in their community
• Residents outside the pilot project are requesting for more drums at different locations so that
they can carry their waste there for collection by the Municipality.
• When the issue of the security of the drums was mentioned, the residents agreed that at the end of
the pilot project the security of the drums will be community initiative; ideally they would prefer
skip bins as they cannot be carried off by thieves.
• It was pointed out that during the duration of the pilot project residents who are not part of the
pilot project could carry their waste to the collection points on Monday and Thursday before
12:00 am for collection by the Municipality.
• Residents requested plastic bins where they can store their waste
• Residents that are not part of the pilot project are keen to have the project also extend to their
areas.
Attachment 5: Meeting with JICA Project Team

MINUTES FOR CHITUNGWIZA PILOT PROJECT PROPOSAL ON SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT
VENUE: CHITUNGWIZA COUNCIL OFFICES
DATE: 8 OCTOBER 2012
TIME: 1500HRS
PRESENT
JICA Project Team

Memory Gwena: BCHOD
Zibusiso Dube: BCHOD
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss BCHOD’s first draft of the pilot project proposal. The
following points were pointed out by NJS:
• NJS wants sampling of 100 households for both Zengeza 4 and St Mary’s, whereas BCHOD
proposes to sample 200 households for the two suburbs.
• According to NJS, the community will not receive any plastic bags where they can put their
waste; instead they will have to find their own means like buckets, sacks, plastic bags etc. to get
their waste ready for collection by the cart operators. They suggest that this will be more
sustainable than giving people plastic bags.
• Two cart operators for St Mary’s and 2 for Zengeza 4 will be needed to collect waste from the
communities. This waste will be disposed of at a central collection station which can be accessed
by Municipal collection.
APP. 9 - 42
APPENDIX 9
• NJS suggests that only two wheel carts will be sufficient for the pilot project. According to
BCHOD a third cart will be necessary as standby in case one of the carts packs up.
• Instead of using skip bins (which in their opinion are expensive and take time to manufacture);
NJS proposes to use six x 200litre drums per suburb for disposing of waste from the households.
• The drums will be chained together with a lock and key to ensure security of the drums.
• On collection the drums will be unlocked and each drum will be emptied individually onto the
collection truck. This may pose a health hazard to the operators as they may end up lifting loads
bigger than 55kg which is recommended by International Labor Organization (ILO) for a person
to carry.
• NJS will hire a tipper truck for collection of waste from the drums to the dump site twice a week
from the two suburbs for the duration of the pilot project.
• According to NJS, JICA does not permit them to service or maintain any municipal vehicles.
BCHOD was of the opinion that, instead of hiring a vehicle, NJS could service one of the
municipal vehicles for use in the pilot project and this will ensure the sustainability of the project
after the pilot project completion.
• NJS indicated that they have already purchased works suits, gumboots and long PVC gloves for
the pilot project but the numbers were not disclosed.
APP. 9 - 43
APPENDIX 9
Attachment 6: Interview to Boston Plastics by Environment Africa
APP. 9 - 44
APPENDIX 9
Attachment 7: Initial stakeholders’ meeting – Attendance Register
APP. 9 - 45
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 46
APPENDIX 9
Attachment 8: Minutes for the initial stakeholders’ meeting
TIME- 1000-13:30
SEKE SOUTH CLINIC
PRESENT
See attached attendance register
FACLLITATORS
MEMORY GWENA: BCHOD CONSULTANT

ZIBUSISO DUBE: BCHOD CONSULTANT
GIBERT MANDAGA: GREEN AFRICA NETWORK
• An opening prayer was said before the beginning of the meeting.
• Self-introductions were done by all present
• The Municipality had other issues to discuss before we could do our presentation.
• We were then asked to do our presentation at the end of the Municipal meeting.
• An overview was done on the pilot project that we are doing in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4
(Pagomba).
• The purpose of the pilot project was noted as a reduction in illegal dumps in Chitungwiza
• Two photographs were shown to the stakeholders showing one of the illegal dumps and then a
map showing the number of such illegal dumps in the city of Chitungwiza and the number was
said to be 390.
• There was mention of the WACS survey that was conducted by NJS and Zengeza 4 was cited as
having high volumes of solid waste on illegal dumps.
• It was pointed out that the reason why Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and Unit J Extension were selected
for the Pilot Project is because there are no access roads and Municipal vehicles cannot access
these areas for refuse collection.
• Only 50 houses in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and 50 houses in Unit J Extension were selected for the
pilot project but if the project is a success then it could be rolled out to other communities.
• It was stated that primary and secondary collection were being undertaken in these selected areas.
Operators make use of wheel carts to collect waste from the households and take it to a central
collection point where there are storage drums. Municipal vehicles then empty the refuse in the
drums to their skip trucks for dumping at Chitungwiza dump site.
APP. 9 - 47
APPENDIX 9
• Door to door collection is undertaken twice a week on Mondays and Thursdays and Wednesdays
are for clearing illegal dumps around the dump site. Municipal vehicles collect the refuse in the
afternoons of the same days as door to door collection.
• The stakeholders were told of the clean-up campaign that will be taking place on 30 November
2012 in Unit J and Zengeza 4. One of the Stakeholders, Africare indicated that they would want
to be part of the clean-up campaign.
• A suggestion was made to council to allow Green Africa Network (a community based
organization) to work together with the Municipality for the continuation of the works in Unit J
Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba).
• Recommendation was made to allow Boston Plastics (a recycling company) in Chitungwiza to

buy recyclable plastics from the community. Boston Plastics would also allow willing members
of the community to bring their own recyclable plastics and use his machines to make chips and
pellets and he can assist them to get buyers for their material.
Challenges
• It was pointed out that, on several occasions Municipal vehicles do not collect the refuse on the
agreed days due to break down of collection vehicles in some instances and the unavailability of
fuel at times.
Comments
• It was suggested by the stakeholders that educational awareness on appropriate ways of refuse
disposal was to be conducted until there is an attitude change in the people towards reduction of
waste.
• A question was raised on the capacity of Green Africa Network (GAN) to continue with the work
as they do not have equipment of their own.
• A suggestion was made for GAN to enter into a partnership to revamp their capacity.
• One of the members pointed out that even in those communities where there is refuse collection,
illegal dumps can be seen.
• A suggestion was made for the council vehicles to collect waste twice a week from the residents.
There was a comment from the stakeholders that in their view, council may not have the capacity
to collect waste twice a week from the residents due to the condition of their fleet and the erratic
supply of fuel for use by the collection vehicles.
APP. 9 - 48
APPENDIX 9
Attachment 9: Clean-up campaign
APP. 9 - 49
APPENDIX 9
Attachment 10: Attendance register for the clean-up campaign
APP. 9 - 50
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 51
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 52
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 53
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 54
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 55
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 56
APPENDIX 9
Attachment 11: Results of final questionnaire survey to the community
Combined survey result for Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and for Seke Unit J Extension
Question Good attempt (%) Fair attempt (%)

How do you feel about the pilot project 97 3
Clean environment Awareness about the
(%) environment was
enhanced (%)
What did you benefit from the pilot project 82 18
Composting (%) Recycling (%)
How are you reducing the amount of waste you put into 91 9
your bin
Plastic (%) Nothing (%)
What materials are you recycling 51 49
How do you feel about the pilot

Fair project
attempt
(%) What did you benefit from the pilot
3% project
Awarene
ss about
the
Good environm Clean
attempt ent… environm
(%) ent (%)
97% 82%
Figure A9.1.11 Figure A9.1.12
How are you reducing the amount of What materials are you recycling
waste you put into your bin
Recyclin Nothin Plastic
g (%) g (%) (%)
9% 49% 51%
Compost
ing (%)
91%
Figure A9.1.13 Figure A9.1.14
Comments
Generally the residents (97%) feel that the pilot project was a good attempt with some even describing it
as a “wonderful job”. The majority of the residents (82%) benefited a clean environment from this pilot
project with the most common comment being that there are less flies and mosquitos in the community
comparing with the times when they dug pits to bury their garbage in the yards. Composting (91%) is the
APP. 9 - 57
APPENDIX 9
most common method of waste reduction at house hold level, then (9%) are either recycling or selling
their waste to waste merchants in the community. Plastic (51%) is the most common recycled material in
the community and (49%) of the residents are not engaged in recycling activities yet.
4.What is neccesary for

the continuation of the 100%
pilot project?
63% 37% no
commented comment
40% 23%
37% no
provision servicing of
comment
bins roads
Figure A9.1.15
Comment
Out of the 100 residents that were asked this question only 63% of the residents answered question 4.
From 63% that answered 40% 0f them feel that the provision of plastic bins to the community would be
necessary for the continuation of the pilot project and 23% feel that for the pilot project door to door
collection to continue efficiently they are to pay money and offer their time to ensure that roads are
graded so the wheel cart can access all areas its intended to service
7. what service would

you improve in this 100%
pilot project
41% commented 59% no comment
29% continue
12% volunteer to either 59% no comment
srevice the roads educational
awareness
sessions
Figure A9.1.16
APP. 9 - 58
APPENDIX 9
Comment
Out of 100 residents that were asked question 7 only 41% answered and the other 59% said they were
happy with the service provided by the pilot project. Of the 41% that answered 12% said they would
volunteer their services to improve the current road condition and 29% feel that educational awareness
sessions should continue until there is attitude change from the community
Survey results
Question One
How do you hope to keep the community clean after the pilot project?
Answer: - Out of the 100 respondents, 61% indicated that they will practice composting after the
pilot project has complete. 9% indicated that they will practice recycling and 30% will carry their
waste to the central collection point as a way of keeping their community clean.
Question Two
What is necessary for carrying out the collection activity effectively inside your community
where the Municipality service cannot access?
Answer: - Out of the 100 respondents from the two communities; Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) and
Unit J 11% indicated that more equipment i.e. refuse collection trucks would be needed by the
Municipality to improve efficiency and effectiveness of garbage collection in their communities.
38% suggested that assistance from various NGO groups can contribute positively to garbage
collection activity. 51% indicated that infrastructure development was very important since
residents from a community with no developed roads will end up dumping waste in ditches and
by the roadsides.
Question Three
Category 1:
• Have you ever heard of Boston Plastics at C Junction that buys plastics for recycling?
81% gave a yes response that they knew about Boston Plastics, a plastic recycling company.
19% indicated that they did not know anything about the plastic recycling company.
Category 2:
• Would you be willing to work with Green Africa Network to help you make a living
making and selling artefacts?
81% were willing to work with the local community based organisation and 19% were not
interested.
Category 3:
• Are you part of any arts and crafts groups?
APP. 9 - 59
APPENDIX 9
All the residents (100%) from the two communities indicated that they are not members of
any art and craft groups.
Category 4:
• Would you like to be part of any of these arts and crafts groups or recycling groups?
Out of the 100 respondents, 80% indicated that they wanted to be part of art and craft groups
and recycling groups as a way to be involved in waste reduction and also to earn a living
from selling the products
Category 5:
• Are you aware that the public health act says that if you are caught dumping waste
illegally, you will be fined USD 20?
Out of the 100 respondents; 82% indicated that they are aware of the USD 20 fine attracted
by illegal dumping. Only 18% were not aware of the fine.
Category 6:
• Are you willing to form recycling groups?
84% of the respondents were willing to join recycling groups whilst 16% were not interested
due to other commitments which include full-time employment.
Comments
To keep the community clean after the door to door collection of the pilot project stops (61%) of the
residents said that they are going to compost their organic waste and only (6%) of the residents said they
are going to recycle their waste. The majority of the residents are aware of the reason why there is no
refuse collection service in their communities is that there are no access roads, 51% feel that
infrastructure development is the answer to this crisis and 38% feel that constant support from the Non-
Government Organizations
Questions
Category 1: have you ever heard of Boston Plastics at C Junction that buys plastics for recycling?
Category 2: would you be willing to work with Green Africa Network to help you make a living making
and selling artifacts?
Category 3: are you part of any arts and crafts groups?
Category 4: would you like to be part of any these arts and crafts groups or recycling groups?
APP. 9 - 60
APPENDIX 9
Category 5: are you aware that the public health act says that if you are caught dumping waste illegally,
you will be fined US$20?
Category 6: are you willing to form recycling groups?
Comments
The survey results show that (82%)of the people are aware of the fact illegal dumping attracts a fine of
US$20 but because there is no refuse collection service in their communities they are forced to dump their
waste on the roads and on illegal dumpsites. All the residents interviewed do not belong to any arts and
crafts groups while (84%) of them willing to form recycling groups and (83%)are willing to form arts
and crafts groups as a means of income and reduction of waste. This will encourage separation of waste at
source. The (20%) of the residents who are do not want to join arts and crafts groups or recycling groups
posed the reason that they have fulltime jobs and do not have time or because of old age they can’t
commit themselves to such groups. After the awareness sessions we held in the communities the majority
of the residents (81%) are aware that there is a company called Boston Plastic that buys recyclable plastic
materials.
Attachment 13: Minutes for second stakeholders’ meeting

CHITUNGWIZA PILOT PROJECT ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
MINUTES FOR THE SECOND STAKEHOLDERS’ MEETING TO SHARE PROJECT

OUTCOME
DATE: 5 DECEMBER 2012
VENUE: CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY WORKSHOP
TIME: 1000HRS TO 1200HRS
PRESENT
W JIRIMUMWOYO (WJ): CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY
G.T DUMBA (GD): CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY
D. CHINHU (DC): CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY
H YANAGAWA (HY) : Engineering Africa
M. GWENA (MG): BCHOD
Z. DUBE (ZD): BCHOD
G. MANDAGA (GM): GREEN AFRICA NETWORK (GAN)
S. MAYIMBI (SM): DISTRICT ADMINISTRAROR’S OFFICE
A KAFERA (AK): POLICY MAKER
APP. 9 - 61
APPENDIX 9
1.0 Introduction
MG started by welcoming all the stakeholders that had come for the meeting and all the people present
were asked to do self-introductions
2.0 Brief summary of the Pilot Project by BCHOD

2.1 A summary of the pilot project that was undertaken in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba)
was given by ZD.
2.2 It was pointed out that primary and secondary collection was introduced in the two communities for
only 50 houses
2.3 Door to door collection was done by cart operators and the waste was put in drums at a central
collection point
2.4 The Municipality have been collecting the waste from the central collection points after the door to
door collection and take it to the Municipal dump site.
2.5 Educational awareness sessions were held in schools and in the community to educate the students
and the community on how to manage their solid waste appropriately.
The communities were taught how to separate waste at household level. They were taught how to make
composts using biodegradable waste. Plastics and broken plastic containers were to be sold to a company
in Unit M called Boston Plastics which is a recycling company.
3.0 Challenges faced during the pilot project

The main challenge was the non-collection of waste by the Municipality on some days due to the
following:
3.1 Breakdown of collection vehicles - 12-16 November 2012
3.2 Fuel challenges – 19-21 November 2012
3.3 Strike by council workers – on 9 November and 25 – 30 November 2012
3.4 The other challenge was the continued disposal into the bins of biodegradable waste. Most of the
residents say that they do not have enough space on their yards to make composts.
3.5 There is need for more educational awareness sessions in the communities to ensure attitude change in
the people. Awareness sessions also need to be undertaken within the Municipality to ensure that they
fully cooperate when such projects (like the pilot project) are being undertaken.
4.0 Presentation by Green Africa Network (GAN)

Green Africa Network (GAN) did their presentation of what they have been doing in the community.
4.1 They have been involved in clearing of some illegal dumps in the city of Chitungwiza.
4.2 Green Africa Network has no equipment of their own to carry the collected waste from illegal dumps
to Chitungwiza dump site. They have however made a partnership with a company called Elgin Earth
Movers. They have been allowed to use two tipper trucks and one front end loader and they are supposed
to put their own fuel. The fuel has been a major challenge as the community based organisation is made
up of volunteers and does not have the capacity to supply their own fuel.
4.3 They are involved in making artefacts such as hats, baskets and bags using waste and are willing to
train the community at a minimal fee to learn how to make these artefacts and sell to make a living. They
have a challenge though of financing the preparation of educational material for sustainable training
sessions to the community.
4.4 After presentation by Green Africa Network (GAN), HY stated that GAN could apply to the Japanese
government for a grant to prepare educational material for training the community to make artefacts from
waste. JICA does not provide funds for running costs like providing fuel for collection vehicles therefore
Green Africa Network has to look for other means of getting the fuel.
5.0 AFRICARE
ZD stated that AFRICARE already has Health Promotion clubs in other communities in Chitungwiza and
is willing to take it to other communities in conjunction with Green Africa Network (GAN).
6.0 Boston Plastics
APP. 9 - 62
APPENDIX 9
6.1 Boston Plastics, a recycling company, could not make it for the meeting due to other commitments.
This company makes pellets and chips from plastics and broken plastic containers like buckets which they
sell to the industry.
6.2 In a meeting held with Boston Plastics before, Mr Murewa (owner) explained that Boston Plastics was
willing to engage the community in pelletizing their on plastics using his machines and he would show
them a market where they could sell their pellets/chips to make a living. It was further explained that from
the questionnaire survey conducted, the community was willing to work with Boston Plastics in this.
6.3 A way of screening the community for this service will have to be devised as there was an
overwhelming interest from the community to be part of this exercise.
7.0 Discussion on sustainability issues

A discussion was opened on how to proceed as the duration of the pilot project had come to an end on 30
November 2012.
7.1 A question was raised on whether to leave the drums in the communities for the residents to continue
bringing in their waste to the central collection point for Municipal collection.
WJ responded by saying that the Municipality had no capacity to continue with collection in the project
sites noting that the targeted houses are too few compared to the number of residents in these
communities.
7.2 WJ noted that they would prefer door to door collection rather than bringing waste to a central
collection point. This he said could lead to community dumping at the collection sites in the event that the
Municipality fails to collect the waste on time. He also mentioned that manpower would be needed to
empty the drums onto the Municipal vehicle and that the council is short-staffed at the moment.
7.3 WJ pointed out the lessons they learnt from Unit B flats. The residents requested for a skip dish but
people who were not staying at the flats would bring their waste to the dish and within a few hours the
dish would be full leading to community dumping. Drums, he said, were only meant for shopping centres.
7.4 AK responded by saying that in Unit J Extension they could organise a team of six people to help in
the emptying of drums onto the Municipal vehicle and the Municipality would only provide protective
clothing for these people.
7.5 WJ pointed out that the Municipality had financial challenges and that the refuse collection vehicles
were in a poor state. He mentioned that there are six vehicles that are functional at the moment with each
vehicle servicing its targeted sections among the six sections in Chitungwiza. Five vehicles are down.
Among the five vehicles, some need new tyres and batteries and two more vehicles are needed.
7.6 WJ went on to say that the Municipality had a grader for servicing roads which needed minor repairs.
Once the grader is fixed, the Municipality will be able to put up roads in non-serviced areas to allow
Municipal vehicles to access these areas for refuse collection.
7.7 AK asked if JICA could not provide the safety clothing for the six people above.
HY responded by saying that JICA was unable to do that under the pilot project. He stated that JICA is
doing a feasibility study on sewer, water and solid waste, which when complete around March 2013,
would be presented to the Japanese government who will in turn look for sponsorship.
7.8 GD asked with concern if JICA had done a decommissioning concept for the pilot project. HY said
that the pilot project was undertaken for the purposes of the feasibility study and it was up to the
Municipality to take up the project in Unit J Extension and Zengeza 4 (Pagomba).
7.9 WJ said that as a temporary measure, Unit J Extension residents who are close to access roads could
take out their waste for Municipal collection on Wednesday when the collection in Unit J is done.
There will be a challenge in Zengeza 4 (Pagomba) as this is a swampy area. As we are in the rainy season,
Municipal vehicles may get stuck, WJ said.
8.0 Closing remarks

8.1 BCHOD pointed out that it had managed to clear all the illegal dumps in and around the project sites.
BCHOD however showed concern that the residents were left with no alternative but to revert back to
illegal dumping as the Municipality has no capacity to carry on with the project.
8.2 MG gave some closing remarks and thanked all that had attended the meeting.
APP. 9 - 63
APPENDIX 9
8.3 All the stakeholders that attended the meeting were presented with a t-shirt and a cap.
APP. 9 - 64
APPENDIX 9
APPENDIX 9.2
Current Collection Capacity of Solid Waste of Chitungwiza Municipality

Capacity Density Loading Trip Collection Amount
Vehicle Type Quantity
(m3) (t/m3) Ratio Number (ton/day)
Tipper Truck 15 2 0.30 0.8 4 28.8
Side Loading Tipper

Truck 10 1 0.30 0.8 4 9.6
Dump Truck 6 3 0.30 0.8 4 17.28
Skip Loader
(Residential) 5 1 0.15 0.8 4 2.4
Skip Loader
(Establishments) 5 2 0.15 0.8 8 9.6
Total 67.7
APP. 9 - 65
APPENDIX 9
Copy of Letter on Candidate Site of Final Disposal Facility (1)
APP. 9 - 66
APPENDIX 9
Copy of Letter on Candidate Site of Final Disposal Facility (2)
APP. 9 - 67
Table Procurement Plan of Collection Equipment
APPENDIX 9
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Remaining Ratio（％） 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1. Collection Capacity
Capacity of Existing Vehicles
1) Tipper Truck 28.8 25.9 23.0 20.2 17.3 14.4 11.5 8.6 5.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2) Side Loading Tipper Truck 9.6 8.6 7.7 6.7 5.8 4.8 3.8 2.9 1.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3) Dump Truck 17.3 15.6 13.8 12.1 10.4 8.6 6.9 5.2 3.5 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
4. Skip Loader for Residential Area 2.4 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5. Skip Loader for Commercial Area 9.6 8.6 7.7 6.7 5.8 4.8 3.8 2.9 1.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total of Collection Capacity of Existing Vehicles 67.7 60.9 54.1 47.4 40.6 33.8 27.1 20.3 13.5 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Planned Collection Amount (t/d) 174.8 212.2 224.5 244.3
Planned Collection Amount for Procurement (t/d) 0.0 244.3 244.3 244.3
Required Collection Capacity (1) 0.0 244.3
Collection Capacity of Procured Vehicles (1) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3
Collection Capacity of Existing + Procured (1) 67.7 60.9 54.1 47.4 40.6 33.8 27.1 20.3 257.8 251.0 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3 244.3
Required Collection Capacity (2) 0.0
2. Procurement Plan
2.1 Planned Collection Waste Amount
APP. 9 - 68
Designed Collection Waste Amount for Residential

Area (in Collection Service Area) 0.0 156.3 0.0
Designed Collection Waste Amount for Residential
Area (in Non-Collection Service Area) 0.0 52.1 0.0
Designed Collection Amount for Commercial &
Institutional Wastes 0.0 35.8 0.0
(1) Collection Waste Amount for Skip Bin for 0.0 35.8 35.8 35.8
(2) Collection Waste Amount for Skip Bin for Non-
Collection Area 0.0 52.1 52.1 52.1
2.2 Procurement Plan
(1) Tipper Truck (10m3) (Backup: 1) 0 10 0
(2) Compactor Truck (8m3) (Backup: 1) 0 8 0
(4) Skip Truck (Multi Loader) (Backup: 1) 0 20 0
(3) Skip Bin (5m3)
'1) Number of Skip Bin for Establishments 0 60 60 60
'2) Number of Skip Bin for Non-Collection Area 0 304 304 304
Notes
*1: Designed Collection Amount for Skip Bin =( (Waste Collection Amount in Non-collection Serivice Area) + (Commercial + Institutional Waste Collection Amount) )at 5 years later
Table Incoming Waste Amount and Accumulated Waste Volume at New Final Landfill
APPENDIX 9
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
Daily Incoming Waste Amount (t/day) 204.8 212.2 214.7 217.1 219.6 222.0 224.5 222.6 220.7 218.8 217.0 215.1
Annual Incoming Waste Amount (t/year) 0 0 0 0 74,739 77,470 78,361 79,252 80,144 81,035 81,927 81,244 80,562 79,880 79,197 78,515
Annual Incoming Waste Volume
(m3/year) (A) 0 0 0 0 93,424 96,837 97,951 99,066 100,180 101,294 102,408 101,555 100,702 99,850 98,997 98,144
Volume of Cover Soil (m3/year) (B=30%
x (A)) 0 0 0 0 28,027 29,051 29,385 29,720 30,054 30,388 30,722 30,467 30,211 29,955 29,699 29,443
Total Embankment Volume per Year
(m3/year) 0 0 0 0 121,451 125,888 127,337 128,785 130,234 131,682 133,131 132,022 130,913 129,804 128,696 127,587
Accumulated Embankment Volume (m3) 0 0 0 0 121,451 247,339 374,676 503,461 633,694 765,377 898,507 1,030,529 1,161,442 1,291,247 1,419,943 1,547,530
Table Planned Landfill Volume

Case: B=200m, D=380m
Excavation Volume
No. hi in m Area (S1) in m2 Area (S2) in m2 Mean Area in m2 Distance in m Volume in m3
1 4.75 0.0 972.6 486.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 4.69 972.6 960.3 966.4 4.75 4,590.5 4.8
3 4.07 960.3 831.4 895.8 50.0 44,792.3 54.8
4 3.46 831.4 703.3 767.4 50.0 38,368.0 104.8
APP. 9 - 69
5 2.84 703.3 576.0 639.6 50.0 31,981.8 154.8

6 2.22 576.0 449.4 512.7 50.0 25,633.7 204.8
7 1.60 449.4 323.6 386.5 50.0 19,323.7 254.8
8 0.99 323.6 198.5 261.0 50.0 13,051.7 304.8
9 0.37 198.5 74.2 136.4 50.0 6,817.9 354.8
10 0.06 74.2 13.0 43.6 25.2 1,099.4 380.0
3
Total Excavation Volume 185,659 m
Embankment Volume up tp EL.1409

No. hi in m Area (S1) in m2 Area (S2) in m2 Mean Area in m2 Distance in m Volume in m3
1 0.00 0.0 11.7 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 0.06 11.7 135.6 73.7 4.75 350.0 4.8
3 0.68 135.6 260.3 198.0 50.0 9,898.9 54.8
4 1.29 260.3 385.7 323.0 50.0 16,151.6 104.8
5 1.91 385.7 511.9 448.8 50.0 22,442.3 154.8
6 2.53 511.9 638.9 575.4 50.0 28,771.2 204.8
7 3.15 638.9 766.6 702.8 50.0 35,138.2 254.8
8 3.76 766.6 895.1 830.9 50.0 41,543.3 304.8
9 4.38 895.1 960.2 927.6 50.0 46,381.5 354.8
10 4.69 960.2 0.0 480.1 25.2 12,097.9 380.0
Total Embankment Volum 212,775
Embankment Volume of Height 15m
3
76,000 44800 60,400.0 20 1,208,000.0 m
3
Total Volume 1,606,434 > 1,547,530 m
Table Estimate of Volume of Leachate Collection Pond
APPENDIX 9
Rainfall (1987-2006) in Table 2 Landfill Area Water Balance in Landfill Area Daily Leachate Amount Calculation by Water Balance Model
Rain Evapotranspiration Phase Area(m2) Inflow Equation =I*A/1000 +Si+G+W Q=(C/1000)*I*A
Month 3
fall (mm) avg,(mm) 1 76,000 where Q: Leachate volume (m /day)
1 110.15 3.8 2 157,400 I= Rainfall intensity (mm) I: Rainfall intensity (mm/day)
2 129.32 4.6 TOTAL 233,400 A=Catchment area of leachate (m2) C: Leaching cofficient
2
3 102.08 5.3 Si=Surface stormwater run-off from the outside of landfill area A: Landfill area (m )
4 33.01 5.5 G=Springwater in the landfill area (m3/year) Q1= 756 m3/day
5 25.74 4.6 W=Water content amount retained in filled waste and cover soil Q=Q1+Q2=(1/1000)*I*(C1*A1+C2*A2)
6 3.07 3.4 C1: Run-off coefficient of leachate in the landfill area in progress
7 0.56 3.1 Outflow Equation =E*A/1000+So+Q C2: Run-off coefficient of leachate in the completed landfill area
2
8 1.27 3.5 where A1: Landfill area in progress (m )
2
9 0.58 3.3 E=Evapotranspiration amount A2: Completed landfill area (m )
10 28.77 3.1 So=Surface stormwater run-off from the landfill area C1 is calculated as follows.
11 101.91 3.2 Q=Leachate generation amount Q1=(I-E1)*A1/1000
12 198.50 3.4 I= 6.403226 (Using Max Rain fall month in 1987-2006 average
Total 734.97 46.8 Thus, water balance within the landfill area will be; E1= 1.6
Ave. 61.20 3.9 Si+G+W-(So+Q)+(I-W)*A/1000=Cw+Rw A1= 157,400 m2
Max 198.50 5.5 where Q1= 756 m3/day
Min 0.56 3.1 Cw=Water content fluctuation amount retained in cover soil Or Q1=C1/1000*I*A1
Rw=Water content fluctuation amount retained in waste Q1= 756 m3/day
Calculated Formula: C1=1-(E1/I)
ET = P - CP2 Assuming, C1= 0.750
ET = effective evapotranspiration (mm/yr) G= 0 (Surface trenches prepaired) C2 is calculated as follows.
P = average annual rainfall over the watershed (mm) Si= 0 (Stormwater drains prepaired) Q2=(I-E2)*A2/1000-So
APP. 9 - 70
T = average annual temperature W= negligible Q2=C2/1000*I*A2

C = 1/ (0.8 + 0.14T)1000 Cw & Rw =nnegligible C2=1-((E2+1000*So/A2)/I)
C2=C1*(1-((E2-E1+1000*So/A2)/I-E1))
P= 734.97 Then, leachate generation flow is obtained by the following equation. C2=C1*(1-((1000*So/A2)/I-E1))
Temp.= 19.27 C2= 0.75
C= 0.000286
ET= 580.50 mm Calculation of Leachate Amount In general, 1000*So/A2(I-E1)=0.4 (Survey result in Japan)
3
Rainfall: 734.97 mm Rainfall amount within the leachate catchment area = I*A/1000 (m /year) C2≒C1*(1-0.4)=0.6C1
I= 735 mm/year A= 233,400 m2 C2≒ 0.45
Total RF 171,543 m3/year
Designed Leachate Volume
E= 580.5 mm/year
Assuming, Q=(1/1000)*I*(C1*A1+C2*A2)
So= 0
Q=(I-E)*A/1000-So I= 2.0 mm/day (Avg.)
Q= 36,054 m3/year 6.4 mm/day (Max)
Qday= 99 m3/day C1= 0.750
C2= 0.45 (=0.6*C1)
最大月間降水量の日換算値より最大浸出水量を求める A1= 76,000 m2 (Phase 2)
2007年12月が月間最大降水量として580.5m3/dayを記録 A2= 157,400 (-)
Effective Evapotranspirationの日換算値は
ET / 365 = 1.590411 Q= 260 (Avg.)
最大月間降水量の日換算値は、580.5m3/day 割る31より 820 (Max)
18.72580645
従って、最大浸出水量は、
Q=(I-E)*A/1000-So
3999.401308 m3/day
最大進出水量１日分の容量を調整池容量として決める
< 40 x 50 x 2.5 = 5000 m3 > 3999.401308
APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 71
Conceptual Layout of Community Compost Facility

APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 72
Conceptual Layout of Central Compost Facility

APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 73
Conceptual Layout of MRF (Material Recovery Facility)

APPENDIX 9
APP. 9 - 74
Conceptual Layout of New Final Disposal Facility

Appendix 10
Appendix 10.1.1
CHITUNGWIZA PROCUREMENT
POLICY AND
Implementation: Chief
Procurement Officer
MUNICIPALITY PROCEDURES
Supervision: Finance Director
Compliance: All Departments
Contents
1.0. Preamble
2.0. Mandate
3.0. Principles
4.0. Tender Documents and Definitions
5.0. Tender Limits
6.0. The Policy
6.1. Conflicts of Interest
6.2. Access to Tendering Information
6.3. Transparency
6.4. Tender Preferences
6.5. Remedies for Tender Preferences
6.6. Tendering Procedure
6.7. Publication of Notice
6.8. Notice Contents
6.9. Tender Receipt
6.10. Tender Bids Opening
6.11. Late Bids
6.12. Clarification and Alteration of Bids
6.13. Confidentiality
6.14. Checklist for Tender Specifications
6.15. Tender Responsiveness
6.16. Reasons for the disqualification of tenders
6.17. Price Review
6.18. Awarding of Points
6.19. Risk Analysis
6.20. Sureties
6.21. Tender Evaluation Reports to the Municipal Procurement Board
6.22. Cancellation of Bids
6.23. Negotiations
6.24. Contract Award
6.25. Contract Administration
7. Effectofbribery,fraudorcollusionbysupplier
APP. 10 - 1
Appendix 10
1.0. Preamble
1.1. All employees must follow established policies and procedures for procurement of equipment,
materials and services.
1.2. Adherence to policies and procedures shall ensure that purchases and contracts are open, fair, and at
the best value in the use of public funds.
1.3. Whenever possible, this Policy shall be used in conjunction with the Chitungwiza Municipality
“Supplier Pre-Qualification Policy and Procedure” Policy for large and/or complex contracts.
2.0.Mandate
The Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15), section 211 (2) states, “…before entering into a contract for the
execution of any work for the council or the supply of any goods or materials to the council which involves
payment by the council of an amount exceeding such sum or sums as may be prescribed, the council or, in the
case of a municipal council, the municipal procurement board shall call for tenders, by notice posted at the
office of the council and advertised in two issues of a newspaper, specifying -
a) the nature of the proposed contract, giving such particulars thereof as the council or the municipal
procurement board, as the case may be, considers to be desirable; and
b) the closing time and date for the receipt of tenders therefor, which shall be not less than twenty-eight days
after the date of the first publication of the notice in the newspaper:
Provided that, if in any case the council or the municipal procurement board, as the case may be, considers
the execution of the work or the supply of the goods or materials to be urgent, the period of such notice may
be reduced to not less than fourteen days.”
3.0.Principles
Chitungwiza Municipality shall select a supplier of goods/services through processes which: -
3.1. Are competitive, fair, transparent, equitable and cost-effective;

3.2. Allow all prospective service providers to have equal and simultaneous access to all information
relevant to the bidding process;
3.3. Minimize the possibility of fraud, waste and abuse;
3.4. Make Council accountable to the local community and the reasons for any decision in this regard; and
3.5. Take into account the need to promote the empowerment of new and emerging enterprises.
4.0. Tender Documents and Definitions
4.1. Accounting officer (Town Clerk):

4.1.1. must reject a proposal for award if he/she determines that the service supplier recommended for
award, has engaged in corrupt or fraudulent activities in competing for the contract in question;
4.1.2. may insist that a provision is included in the contract agreement with the contractor, requiring
contractors to permit the Town Clerk and/or relevant treasury official to inspect their accounts and
records relating to the performance of the contract and to have them audited by auditors appointed
by the Town Clerk.
4.1.3. where evidence in support of corrupt, fraudulent practices or criminal offences are reported and
substantiated, the Town Clerkis to initiate criminal proceedings against such business entity, official
or other role player, and inform the Chamber Secretary and Finance Director of such measures.
4.2. Control - The possession and exercise of legal authority and power to manage the assets, goods
shall and daily operations of a business and the active and continuous exercise of appropriate
managerial authority and power in determining the policies of the business and directing the
operations of the business.
4.3. Commerciallyuseful function -The performance of real and actual work, or the provision of actual
APP. 10 - 2
Appendix 10
services, in the discharge of any contractual obligation which shall include but not be limited to the
performance of a distinct element of work which the business has the skill and expertise to undertake
and the responsibility for management and supervision.
4.4. “Corrupt practice”means the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any thing of value to influence
the action of a Council official in the selection process or in contract execution.
4.5. Emergency – “…unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of the municipality that either: (a)
Present a real, immediate threat to the proper performance of essential functions; or (b) shall likely
result in material loss or damage to property, bodily injury, or loss of life if immediate action is not
taken.” If an emergency situation has been declared, the Town Clerk may waive competitive bidding
requirements and Council may award all necessary contracts to purchase goods, materials, or
services to address the emergency situation. Purchase order(s) must be properly documented as
pertaining to an emergency as soon as possible following the event. If a contract is awarded without
competitive bidding due to a declared emergency, Council must adopt a resolution certifying the
emergency situation existed no later than two weeks following the award of the contract.
4.6. Equity ownership-Equity ownership shall be equated to the percentage of an enterprise which is
owned by individuals, or in the case of a company, the percentage shares that are owned by
individuals who are actively involved in the management and daily business operations of the
enterprise and exercise control over the enterprise, commensurate with their degree of ownership.
4.7. “Fraudulent practice” means a misrepresentation of facts in order to influence a selection process or
the execution of a contract to the detriment of the accounting officer, and includescollusive practices
among bidders/contractors (prior to or after submission of proposals) designed to establish prices at
artificial, non-competitive levels and to deprive the accounting officer of the benefits of free and open
competition.
4.8. Owned-Having all the customary incidents of ownership, including the right of disposition and the
sharing of all the risks and profits commensurate with the degree of ownership interests as
demonstrated by an examination of the substance rather than the form of ownership arrangements.
4.9. Local supplier: A Local Enterprise that:
4.9.1. owns, operates or maintains an establishment within Zimbabwe, in which materials or supplies
required for the performance of the contract are brought, kept in stock and regularly sold to the
public in the usual course of business; and
4.9.2. engages as its principle business, and in its own name, in the purchase and sale of the products
in question, or the provision of a professional service or the execution of works.
4.10. Local labourers - unskilled individuals employed by the Contractor in the performance of the Contract,
who permanently reside in the area of the ChitungwizaMunicipal Council.
4.11. Agents- “Agent” means a person mandated by another person (“the principal”) to do business for and
on behalf of, or to represent in a business transaction, the principal, and thereby acquire rights for the
principal against a client and incur obligations binding the principal in favour of a client.
4.12. Businessenterprise-A business whichis registered by the Registrar of Companies as a legal entity,
adheres to statutory labour practices, is registered with the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority and is a
continuing and independent enterprise for profit providing a Commercially useful function. The latest
relevant documentation is for the shareholding (CR2), physical address (CR6), directors (CR14) and
ZIMRA Tax Registration and Clearance Certificates, NSSA Clearance Certificate, Trade References,
Financial Position and Audited Accounts, Bankers, Legal Advisors, Accountants where it is an
outsourced function, etc.
4.13. Jointventure- Means an association of persons for the purpose of combining their expertise, property,
capital, efforts, skill and knowledge in an activity for the execution of a contract. For it to be acceptable,
a Joint Venture shall submit its certified copies of the
a) Joint Venture Agreement.
b) Resolutions of the partners to tender and authority to sign on behalf of the partners to the Joint
Venture.
c) A statement that the liability is joint and several.
d) And the relevant latest documentation (CR2, CR6, CR14, NSSA Clearance Certificate, and
APP. 10 - 3
Appendix 10
ZIMRA Tax Registration and Clearance Certificates, Financial Position and Audited Accounts,
Bankers, Legal Advisors, Accountants where it is an outsourced function, Trade References, etc)
relative to the trading nature of each of the partners to the Joint Venture.
4.14. Management- In relation to an enterprise or business, means an activity inclusive of control and
performed on a daily basis, by any person who is a principal executive officer of the company, by
whatever name that person may be designated, and whether or not that person is a director.
4.15. “Sole Entity Purchase Contract” means the product is unique and can be purchased from only one
supplier and it shall meet the following requirements:
a) Proprietary - The item is under patent, copyright, or proprietary design.
b) Replacement parts - The purchase is for replacement parts or components.
c) Technical service - The purchase is for technical service in connection with the assembly
installation or servicing of equipment of a technical or specialized nature.
d) Continuation of work - We now require additional work, additional item or additional service, but
we did not know it would be needed when the original order was placed.
e) Urgent requirement - Need must be met immediately. Please explain the nature of the urgency,
including an explanation of why the purchase is critical and why only the suggested supplier can
meet it.
f) Exclusive capability - Only one supplier qualified. No other suppliers known and please explain.
4.16. Sub-contracting-Means the primary contractor’s assigning or leasing or making out work to, or
employing, another person to support such primary contractor in the execution of part of a project in
terms of the contract.
5.0. Types of Tenders andTender Limits
5.1. Petty Expenses: <USD$200.00, No competitive bids required, Departmental selection.Documents –

Purchase Requisition (Stores Indent), Purchase Order, and Receipts to be attached.
5.2. Informal Tenders: USD$200.00 – USD$10,000.00, Three written competitive quotes, Town Clerk
approves.Documents – Purchase Requisition (Stores Indent), Purchase Order, and Receipts to be attached.
5.3. Formal Tenders: USD$10,000.00>, Newspaper advert, Competitive bids, Council awards.Documents –
Tender Evaluation Report, Council Resolution, Purchase Order, and Receipts to be attached.
5.4. Purchases may not be broken into multiple projects or purchases to avoid compliance with statutes and
Council policies.
5.5. A “Sole Entity Purchase Contract” is characterized as meeting one or more of the following standards:
(a) theCouncil department has conducted a screening process whereby it can justify purchase of a
specific product;
(b) the Council requires legitimate specifications to which only one supplier can successfully respond; or
(c) the product is available only through one manufacturer (or distributor) and the manufacturer so
certifies. In any such case where the purchase exceeds $10,000, the supplier shall certify that the
Council is getting the lowest price it offers anyone.
5.6. Purchases in excess of USD$10,000.00 from a sole source supplier require prior approval of the Town
Clerk and Finance Director and must be signed by requesting Department Director.
5.7. Budget Adjustments - Each department’s authorizing staff must ensure that purchases are initiated
only when departmental appropriations are sufficient to cover the anticipated cost. Expenditures that
exceed departmental appropriations require the Town Clerk’s approval via the Budget Adjustment
Request Form.
6.0. The Policy - The policy set out hereunder is general in nature. The Tender Specificationsshall elaborate
APP. 10 - 4
Appendix 10
on the principles and requirements.
6.1. Conflicts of Interest

6.1.1. Council shall not accept donations of materials or services in return for a commitment to continue or
initiate a purchasing agreement.
6.1.2. No employee shall participate in procurement when they are aware of a conflict of interest, or accept
gifts or gratuities from existing or potential suppliers in return for a commitment to continue or initiate a
purchasing relationship.
6.2. Access to Tendering Information

6.2.1. All formal tender notices shall be advertised in the press in accordance with the provisions of
applicable law.
6.2.2. All tender openings shall be open to the public and the name of each tenderer shall be announced
and recorded together with the price (if practical).
6.2.3. Where formal tenders are invited, the unsuccessful tenderers shall be advised in writing of the
reasons why they were not awarded a tender, but such reasons shall be brief in nature, e.g. price too
high, equipment offered not to specification, etc, to enable tenderers to evaluate and improve their
performance. This is in accordance with Section 211 (8), which states, “The council or, in the case of a
municipal council, the municipal procurement board shall advise every tenderer in writing whether or
not his tender has been accepted.”
6.2.4. Bids are not available for perusal by the public. Any bidder shall, when requesting it in writing, be
provided with the reasons why his/her own bid was not successful. The reasons why another bidder’s
bid was unsuccessful shall not be supplied, as this may contain privileged information. No itemised
prices other than the formal contract prices of the successful bidder(s) shall be supplied to competitors.
6.2.5. No official may assist any tenderer in compiling his rates or prices, delivery periods, etc, as this would
be contrary to law (i.e. strict impartiality must be maintained).
6.2.6. No tenderer may ask an official to check that his document/offer is complete and in order prior to
submission as this is also contrary to law as the official would then be aware of the price and could
divulge such price to competitors.
6.2.7. When practical, Council shall conduct a pre-bid conference to allow a thorough discussion of Council’s
intent, scope, specifications, and terms.
6.3. Transparency:
6.3.1. Adjudication criteria, including the manner in which adjudication points are to awarded, are to be
clearly and unambiguously stated in the Tender Specifications.
6.3.2. Adjudication points are to be awarded in such a manner that competent persons who were not part of
the adjudication team would arrive at a similar result were they to perform the adjudication.
6.3.3. Details regarding the awarding of adjudication points in respect of all contracts are to be recorded for
audit and evaluation purposes.
6.3.4. Points for price shall be scored only after tendered amounts have been corrected and adjusted to a
common base. Where preferences in respect of local content are provided for, the scoring shall be
performed on prices which have been adjusted to reflect such preferences. Fixed price and adjustable
price tenders shall also be reduced to a common base for comparative purposes.
6.4. Tender Preferences:

6.4.1. Price preferences of up to 10% are granted for local content as opposed to "imported content" which
is defined as the portion of the tender price represented by the cost components, parts or materials
which are imported inclusive of freight, importation, landing cost, taxes, etc.
6.4.2. A price preference of 2,5% for products bearing the SAZ standardization mark or ISO certification.
6.4.3. Tenderers are required to furnish documentary evidence that they qualify for such preferences.
6.5. Remedies for Preferences - the following remedies shall be applied shall it be found that claims for
preference are unfounded, or excessive:
APP. 10 - 5
Appendix 10
6.5.1. Recover from the contractor all costs, losses or damages incurred or sustained as a result of the
award of the contract.
6.5.2. Cancel the contract and claim damages arising from having to make less favourable arrangements
after such a cancellation.
6.5.3. Impose a penalty on the contractor not exceeding 5% of the value of the contract.
6.6. Tendering Procedure

There are essentially five distinct stages in the bidding process and these are:
i. Request from Town Clerk authorization to call for bidsand compiling Tender Specifications
documents, which define the rights, risks and obligations of the parties involved in a contract
and define the nature, quantity and quality of the goods, services or works to be provided in
the performance of the contract. All disputes relating to the tender are to be settled by means
of mutual consultation, mediation (with or without legal representation), or, when unsuccessful,
in a competent court of law;
ii. Inviting bids through a publication of notice. Council may decide to charge a refundable or
non-refundable fee for bidding documents if and when necessary, provided that: the fee shall
be reasonable and reflect only the cost of the printing and delivery to prospective bidders; and
the fee shall not be so high as to discourage prospective bidders;
iii. Receiving bids;
iv. Evaluating bids;
v. Clearing successful bidders and awarding contracts.
6.7. Publication of Notice - After Town Clerk authorization, the requesting department director shall
publish the Call for Tenders in the national newspaper or a newspaper of general circulation most
likely to bring responsive tenders and ensure notice is posted on the Council web page, at least 13
days prior to bid submittal deadline.
6.8. Notice Contents - Notice (or advertisement) for bids shall contain definite specifications and
procedures for tender bidders to use to estimate their bids. At a minimum, a tender notice must
include:
6.8.1. Project title;
6.8.2. Nature and scope of work;
6.8.3. Where contract documents (plans and specifications) can be reviewed or obtained;
6.8.4. Cost to obtain a set of contract documents;
6.8.5. Place, date, and time that bids are due;
6.8.6. Where applicable, statement that a bid security must accompany the bid;
6.8.7. Statement that the Council retains the right to reject any and all bids and to waive minor
irregularities in the bidding process;
6.8.8. Statement that the Council is an equal opportunity employer and invites responsive bids from all
qualified responsible bidders.
6.8.9. In addition, provide evaluation criteria; minimum qualifications; date, time, and location of pre-
bid conference (if applicable); name, address, and telephone number of the project contact; and
number of required copies.
6.9. TenderReceipt - Tenders are received by the Town Clerk in a sealed Tender Box.
6.10. Tender Bids Opening - This is in accordance with Section 211 (4), which states, “Tenders received in
terms of subsection (2) shall be opened in public on the closing date fixed therefor forthwith after the
closing time.”
6.10.1. The time for the bid opening shall be the same as for the deadline for receipt of bids or promptly
thereafter and shall be announced, together with the place for bid opening, in the invitation to bid.
6.10.2. Councilshall open all bids at the stipulated time and place. Bids shall be opened in public, that is,
APP. 10 - 6
Appendix 10
bidders or their representatives shall be allowed to be present. If requested by any bidder, the
name of the bidders and if practical the total amount of each bid and of any alternative bids, shall
be read aloud.
6.10.3. The names of the bidders and their individual total prices shall be recorded when bids are opened.
* NOTE: Tenders shall be endorsed with the approved tender stamp and the officials shall
endorse their initials next to the value on the form of acceptance.
6.11. Late Bids - Tender bids received after the time stipulated shall not be considered and be returned
unopened immediately.
6.12. Clarification or Alterations of Bids - Bidders shall not be requested or permitted to alter their bids
after the deadline for receipt of bids. Councilshall only allow questions be asked to bidders for
clarification needed to evaluate their bids but shall not ask or permit bidders to change the substance
or price of their bids after bid opening. Requests for clarification and the bidder’s responses shall be
made in writing.
6.13. Confidentiality - After public opening of tender bids, information relating to the examination,
clarification and evaluation of tender bids and recommendations concerning awards shall not be
disclosed to bidders or other persons not officially concerned with the process, until the successful
bidder is notified of the award.
6.14. Checklist for Tender Specifications

6.14.1. Invitation to bid
6.14.2. Goods/services to be supplied and any relevant special conditions
6.14.3. Pricing schedule
6.14.4. Declaration of interest
6.14.5. Technical specifications, Warranty requirements, Maintenance requirements, Minimum
performance requirements
6.14.6. Work to be carried out
6.14.7. Location of the work
6.14.8. Place of delivery or installation
6.14.9. Delivery schedule
6.14.10. Date of completion
6.14.11. General terms and conditions of contract
6.15. Tender Responsiveness - After the opening of tenders, the responsiveness of each tender shall be
established by determining whether it:
6.15.1. Complies with the conditions of tender or substantially responsive to the tender bidding
documents;
6.15.2. Has been properly completed and signed;
6.15.3. Provides such clarification and/or substantiation as is called for;
6.15.4. Meets the minimum resource goals, if any laid down;
6.15.5. Contains no material deviation from, or unacceptable qualification to, the terms, conditions
and requirements of the contract, which could:
i. Detrimentally affect the scope, quality, or performance of the works, or
ii. Change the Employer's, or the contractor's risks and responsibilities under the contract,and
iii. Would detrimentally affect the competitive position of other, responsive tenders, if it were
to be rectified.
NOTE: Any tender not meeting the stipulated requirements shall be regarded as being non-responsive.
The reason for declaring a tender non-responsive shall be recorded. Non-responsive tenders shall be
APP. 10 - 7
Appendix 10
eliminated from further consideration. All responsive tenders shall proceed to the next stage of
adjudication.
6.16. Reasons for the disqualification of tenders apart from the above.
According to section 211 (6) states, “The council shall accept wholly or partly the tender which in all the
circumstances appears to it to be the most advantageous: Provided that –
(i) nothing contained in this subsection shall prevent the council from rejecting all tenders;
(ii) the tender of any person who canvasses or solicits or causes to be canvassed or solicited the
support of the mayor, any councillor or employee of the council or any number of municipal
procurement board in support of his tender shall not be considered;
(iii) any tender which is received after the time when the tenders are opened in public in terms of
subsection (4) shall not be considered.”
The others may include failure to:
6.16.1. Submit rates for items in the schedule of quantities/bill of quantities on contracts;
6.16.2. Adhere to any qualifications which may be laid down; and
6.16.3. Attend a site meeting.
6.17. Price Review

6.17.1. The prices of all responsive tenders shall be brought to a common base by the correction of arithmetic
and other obvious errors.
6.17.2. Note that in a fixed price contract the total amount tendered cannot be adjusted.
6.17.3. Every tenderer who has tendered an unrealistically low price shall be interviewed to ascertain whether
there is a valid reason for his tender price being unrealistically low.
6.17.4. If there is no valid reason, the tender shall be eliminated from further consideration.
6.17.5. If there is an upper limit on the price at which a contract may be awarded, tenders with adjusted prices
higher that the limit shall be eliminated from further consideration.
6.17.6. The Rates and Fees shall be and shall remain commercially competitive in terms of:
i. theprices offered by the Supplier to other customers whose orders for services are comparable
to the orders for Goods/Services placed the Agreement; and
ii. prices and terms and conditions, offered by other service providers in the market for services
which are the same as or equivalent to the Goods/Services.
iii. If the Supplier wishes to propose any change in the Unit Prices of the Goods/Services, the
Supplier must, no later than three months prior to the next anniversary of the Commencement
Date, provide to Council a detailed report substantiating any such proposed change.
iv. Council and the Supplier shall discuss in good faith any changes to the Unit Prices proposed,
however Council shall be under no obligation to agree to any such proposed change. If the
parties do agree to a change in the Unit Prices of the Goods/Services, such agreement must be
in writing, and shall take effect from the next anniversary of the Commencement Date.
6.18. Awarding of Points

6.18.1. Points for price, rounded off to two decimal places, shall be awarded to all tenders remaining in
contention after the prices have been adjusted to a common base.
6.18.2. Up to 70 adjudication points for price are awarded to the lowest tender, and proportionately fewer to
those tenders which are higher in price.
6.18.3. Up to 30 adjudication points for:
i. Tender specifications and requirements (which meet criteria as set out in the tender documents)
– up to 7 points;
ii. Shareholding composition of the firm if it conforms to the indigenisation statutory rules – 2 points;
iii. Source – 5 points ifgoods/services are manufactured locally by the supplier or by its supplier;
iv. Expertise in respect of the disciplines required, e.g. accounting, legal, educational, engineering,
computer, etc. – up to 3 points;
APP. 10 - 8
Appendix 10
v. Capabilities with respect to personnel, equipment and construction or manufacturing facilities

– up to 3 points;
vi. Track Record and Experience (technical, administrative, managerial and engineering)as reflected
in projects already dealt with – up to 3 points; and
vii. Financial position –up to 7 points.
6.18.4. The successful tenderer would, normally, be the one who is awarded the most points, subject,
however, to technical factors, previous contractual performance, financial references, unit rates and
prices, alternative offers, qualifications etc., being acceptable.
6.18.5. The points awarded for price and for tender specifications and requirements shall be added for each
tender and, subject to satisfactory risk analysis.
6.18.6. The tender which has been awarded the highest total number of pointsshall be recommended for
acceptance. If the tender with the highest total number of points fails the risk analysis, it shall be
eliminated and the tender with the next highest total number of points shall be subjected to risk
analysis and, if satisfactory, be recommended for acceptance. According to section 211 (7), “If any
tender, other than the lowest tender, is accepted the council shall cause the reasons for its decisions
to be recorded in the minutes of its proceedings.”
*NOTE: In the event that one or more tenderer are awarded the same number of points, the contract
shall be awarded to the tenderer with highest number of tender specifications and requirements.
6.19. Risk Analysis

6.19.1. Suppliers shall be assessed by supply chain practitioners, for possible risks such as the availability of
adequate facilities, financial standing, capacity and capability to deliver, previous performance in
terms of quality and service delivery, as well as attainment of goals.
6.19.2. Prior to the award of any contract, accounting officers shall ensure that neither the recommended
bidder nor any of the directors are listed as companies/directors/persons restricted to do business with
the public sector or Council.
6.19.3. Prior to being recommended for acceptance, a tender shall be subjected to a risk analysis by the Chief
Internal Auditor to ensure that it would, if accepted, not place the Council or the tenderer, at undue risk.
The following features of the tender and the tenderer shall, inter alia, be considered:
i. The tender price and its make up;
ii. Unduly high individual rates;
iii. Unduly low rates;
iv. The tenderers’ ability to obtain the required performance guarantee, if applicable;
v. The tenderers’ previous experience;
vi. The tenderers’ total resources;
vii. The resources which the tender could mobilize for the contract;
viii. The tenderers’ current commitments/availability of key staff;
ix. The tenderers’ track record on previous similar contracts;
x. Ability to supervise and control labour and, if required, to supply materials and provide
plant/transport;
xi. Understanding of the scope of work required; and
xii. Imbalances in pricing.
The risk analysis is best performed by interviewing tenders. Tenders may be overlooked if the price make up
of portions of the work differ substantially from the estimated price and the tenderer is unable to account for
such discrepancies.
6.20. Sureties
6.20.1. Bid securities are normally required from bidders in the engineering contracts, as well as from
auctioneers.
APP. 10 - 9
Appendix 10
6.20.2. Council may decide whether bidders shall supply securities at the bidding phase.
6.20.3. Bid security shall not be set so high as to discourage bidders.
6.20.4. Bid security shall remain valid for a period of four weeks beyond the validity period for the bids,
in order to provide reasonable time for Council to act if the security is to be called.
6.20.5. Shall the recommended bidder or the contractor withdraw his/her bid prior to the award of the
bid or commencement of the contract, the bidder/supplier may forfeit his security to Council.
6.20.6. Bid securities shall be released to unsuccessful bidders once it is determined that they shall
not be awarded the contract.
6.20.7. Risk management procedures shall determine the need for and form of bid sureties.
6.20.8. Risk shall be allocated in the best interest of Council by means of proper risk analyses and
management.
6.20.9. Councilshall decide whether itself or the supplier shall bear the risk.
6.20.10. Whenever sureties are required, Council shall ensure that the contents meet with legal
requirements.
6.20.11. Council shall ensure that the correct contract amount (both in amounts and in words) is
quoted in any guarantee, together with the description of the goods/service to be delivered
and details of the supplier/contractor. It is advisable to have guarantees perused by Legal
Advisors prior to acceptance to ensure that the contents are acceptable and not qualified.
6.21. Tender Evaluation Reports to the Municipal Procurement Board
• According to section 210 (4), “A municipal council shall not procure any goods, materials or services
unless its municipal procurement board has made recommendations to the council thereon and the
council has considered such recommendations.”
• According to section 211 (5) states, “In the case of a municipal council, the municipal procurement
board shall without delay consider all tenders opened in terms of subsection (4) and submit them,
together with the board’s recommendations, to the council for its consideration.”
6.21.1. In an advisory capacity, Council shall appoint a Tender Evaluation Committee, through
therequesting department director, for the evaluation of bids received for goods/works or services
and to prepare a report and recommendation on all tenders received. Where there is a lack of
capacity (human resources) to establish the committee structure in Council, it may be agreed upon
to share/utilize externalexpertise if and when required. The Head of Department, who initiated the
requirement, shall be accountable for the decisions taken.
6.21.2. The Tender Evaluation Committee shall be cross functional and shall be composed of at least one
supply chain management practitioner and officials from the user departments requiring the goods
and/or services. The composition of the Tender Evaluation Committee can change to
accommodate different scenarios. It is recommended that the Tender Evaluation Committee be
constituted with different members as that of the specification committee, and only where not
possible, the tender specification committee and the Tender Evaluation Committee have the same
membership.
6.21.3. Evaluation and Comparison of Tenders - Bids shall only be evaluated in terms of the criteria
stipulated in the tender bidding documents. Amending the evaluation criteria after closure of the
bids shall not be allowed, as this would jeopardise the fairness of the system. Points scored for
price must be added to points scored for goals and the contract is usually awarded to the bidder
who scores the highest points.
6.21.4. Bidding documents shall provide for the rejection of all bids if and when deemed necessary. This is
justified when there is lack of effective competition, or tender bids are not substantially responsive.
However, lack of competition shall not be determined solely on the basis of the number of bidders.
If all bids were rejected, Councilshall review the causes justifying the rejection and consider making
revisions to the specific conditions of contract, design and specifications, scope of the contract, or
a combination of these, before inviting new bids.
APP. 10 - 10
Appendix 10
6.21.5. If the rejection was due to most or all of the bids being non-responsive, new bids may be invited
from the initially pre-qualified firms, or with the agreement of the head of department, from only
those that submitted bids in the first instance. All bids shall not be rejected solely for the purpose of
obtaining lower prices. If the lowest evaluated responsive bid exceeds Council’s pre-bid cost
estimates by a substantial margin, the head of departmentshall investigate causes for the
excessive cost and consider requesting new bids as described above.
6.21.6. Alternatively, Council may negotiate with the identified preferred bidder to try to obtain a
satisfactory contract through a reduction in the scope and/or a reallocation of risk and responsibility
that can be reflected in a reduction of the contract price. However, substantial reduction in the
scope or modification to the contract documents may require re-bidding.
6.21.7. The head of department prior agreement shall be obtained before rejecting all bids, soliciting new
bids, or entering into negotiations with the identified preferred bidder. This approval shall be
recorded for auditing purposes.
6.21.8. In order that the Municipal Procurement Board may objectively review all reports submitted for
consideration, it is important that reports contain all relevant information and be structured in a
uniform manner.
6.21.9. All reports to the Municipal Procurement Boardshall, insofar as is possible, be standard in format.
6.21.10. The report format is set out hereunder:
1. Contract Number and description - The full contract description must be set out in the heading of
the report.
2. Introduction - This section shall set out the authority to invite tenders as well as a brief background
to the tender i.e. why the work is being done, who the works serve, the benefit to be derived, etc.
3. Tenders Received - This section must set out the date the tenders were advertised and the date the
tenders were opened. Thereafter, all tenders received shall be listed. Please note that the full name of
the entity tendering must be shown including its legal standing e.g. close corporation, partnership, etc.
4. Evaluation of tenders received - The Council is required to consider all tenders received. Officials
preparing tender reports must therefore consider and report on all tenders received. This does not
mean that all tenders shall be deemed to be responsive. The report must indicate which tenderers are
being excluded from further consideration and document the reasons. All remaining responsive
tenders must then be examined and reported on. The evaluation includes the technical evaluation of
the offer as well as financial and process evaluation. It is important that all documentation
substantiating the nature of the entity tendering (as well as the partners, members or shareholders) be
included in the report, as Annexures. All documentation called for in the tender document e.g.
certificate of incorporation, VAT registration, Tax clearance, etc must also be checked to ensure that
they are valid, and that the details coincide with the detail of the tenderer.
5. Comparison of prices - This section must clearly set out the amounts tendered and show the points
calculated for price, the points calculated for process and the total points.
6. Additional information - Any other information which has an influence on the objective evaluation of
the tenders shall be included here.
7. Cost Benefit Analysis - A detailed cost comparison of alternatives/option shall be included in the
report (unless this has been done previously e.g. when the Capital Budget or Recurrent Budget was
prepared) to enable the Council to ensure that it is achieving the best value for money. Where the cost
benefit analysis was done previously this shall be referred to in the report. Care shall however be
taken to ensure that the cost benefit analysis is still relevant given the pricing and structure of the
tender under consideration. Other factors which require to be taken into consideration include all other
costs associated with the project e.g. staffing, maintenance costs, further capital acquisitions e.g.
equipment for a clinic or a library, etc. The cost benefit analysis must effectively cover the expected
life of the asset. For example, it may be that the cheaper capital option has much higher maintenance
costs whichshall soon overtake the next highest capital costs.
8. Recommendations -
APP. 10 - 11
Appendix 10
i. The recommendations summarise the result of the process set out above. They need to
commence with the reasons for deeming certain tenders to be non-responsive.
ii. If only three or four tenders have been examined/evaluated in detail then the reasons for not
evaluating the remaining tenders must also be recorded.
iii. The recommendation must however make it clear that they were considered but passed over
for a particular reason e.g. price too high, etc.
iv. The recommendation relating to the actual award must clearly indicate the full name of the
tender (not abbreviated form), the value of tender (including if it is fixed or subject to final
determination in terms of the contract) as well as the fact that the tenderer scored the highest
points based on the points scoring system as set out in the Council's Procurement Policy.
v. If the award is not made to the tenderer scoring the highest points then the reasons why the
Council elected to award the tender to another tenderer must be fully set out.
vi. The final recommendation relates to the funding for the project i.e. the vote number and the
amount available.
vii. Where the project is to be performed over two (or more) financial years then this fact needs to
be incorporated into both the report (introduction) and the recommendation with specific
recommendations relative to future funding.
6.22. Cancellation of Bids

Prior to the award of a bid, cancel the bid if:
a. due to changed circumstances there is no longer a need for the goods or services for
which bids were solicited;
b. funds are no longer available to cover the total envisaged expenditure; or
c. no acceptable bids were received.
6.23. Negotiations
The Finance Director and the respective user Department may negotiate the final terms of
contracts with bidders identified as preferred bidders through a competitive bidding process,
provided that such a process does not allow the bidder concerned a second (unfair) opportunity
and it is not to the detriment of any other bidder. Minutes of such negotiations must be kept for
record purposes.
6.24. Contract Award

i. After approval of a bid, both parties shall sign a written contract or, if necessary, a service level
agreement. Original/legal copies of contracts shall be kept in a secure place for judicial
reference.
ii. On behalf of Council, the signatures of Town Clerk, Chamber Secretary, Finance Director and
head of the respective user department shall validate the contract.
6.25. Contract Administration

Contract administration, including monitoring of socio-economic objectives as undertaken by the
supplier during the bidding stage, is the responsibility of the user department.
7. Effectofbribery,fraudorcollusionbysupplier (based on section 39 of the Procurement Act [Chapter

22:14])
7.1. If Council is satisfied that a supplier, or any employee or agent of a supplier—
(a) in contravention of section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16], has given, agreed
to give or offered any consideration to an employee or agent of Council in connection with any
procurement proceedings; or
(b) has knowingly misrepresented any material fact in a tender, bid or proposal submitted in any
APP. 10 - 12
Appendix 10
(c) has entered or attempted to enter into a collusive agreement or arrangement, whether enforceable
or not, with any other supplier whereby the prices quoted in their respective tenders, bids or
proposals are or would be, as the case may be, higher than would have been the case had there been
no collusion between the suppliers concerned;
Council shall reject any tender, bid or proposal the supplier may have submitted in connection with those
proceedings.
7.2. If, after a procurement contract has been concluded with a supplier, it is proved that the supplier, or an
employee or agent of the supplier—
(a) in contravention of section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16], gave, agreed to
give or offered any consideration to an employee or agent of Council in connection with the preceding
(b) knowingly misrepresented a material fact in a tender, bid or proposal submitted in the preceding
(c) entered or attempted to enter into a collusive agreement or arrangement, whether enforceable or
not, with any other supplier whereby the prices quoted in their respective tenders, bids or proposals
were or would have been, as the case may be, higher than would have been the case had there been
no collusion between the suppliers concerned;
the procurement contract shall be void as between Council and the supplier.
APP. 10 - 13
Appendix 10
Chitungwiza Municipality
Annexure
PROCUREMENT PROCESS REPORT - TENDERS

Request for Approval
[Name of Department]
To: Town Clerk Reference Number:
Finance Director [If available no.]
Other[Provide details] Tender no.:
File no.:
Project Title:
1. Business Unit Details
Contact person: Telephone:

Position:
Department/Section
2. Procurement Proposal [Provide highlights/synopsis of the Procurement Proposal]:
3. Procurement Arrangement
Contract Type
[Tick the appropriate boxes below]
One-Off Supply
Sole Entity Purchase Contract (SEPC)
Other …………………………[please specify]
Procurement Type
Goods1 Services2 Consultancy
Contract Category ………………………………………………………………………..

4. Procurement Process
Open Tendering
Selective Tendering
Limited Tendering (Exemptions)
Other [please specify] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
Some project may involve goods and services. In such instances tick the category representing the highest value
APP. 10 - 14
Appendix 10
Exemption
□Exemption from open tendering with 3 tenders obtained
□Exemption from both open tendering and obtaining three tenders
5. Invitation Details
Date Requests Invited: ___/___/___ Date Requests Closed: ___/___/___

Request Period: [Number of working days request was open, inclusive of the days the request commenced and closed]
Date of Supplier Briefings, (if applicable): ___/___/___
Number of Offers Received:[Number of offers received including late offers]
Number of Offers Shortlisted:
Method of Advertisement/Notice: [Tick the appropriate boxes below]
Procurement Portal The Herald The Sunday Mail Daily News/Newsday
Other [Provide details]
6. Evaluation Process [Details of the evaluation process including:]
• List evaluation criteria and weightings

• The outcome of any post-tender negotiations
• Basis for selecting the preferred supplier(s)
7. Tender Summary Total Cost/Rates (incl. VAT) Evaluation Score
Shortlisted tenderers [Total cost/rate per recommended tenderer] [Score/ranking per recommended
tenderer]
[Names of shortlisted tenderers, if any]
Recommended tenderer(s) [Total cost/rate per shortlisted tenderer] [Score/ranking per shortlisted
tenderer]
[Name of the recommended/selected tenderer(s)]
8. Contract Details [proved attachments if appropriate]
Contract Period or Term

Estimated Start Date: ___/___/___ Estimated End Date: ___/___/___
Options to Extend: [The number and length of each option to extend, e.g. 2 x 1-year extensions. Indicate whether the options to extend shall be
discretionary (at the department’s prerogative) and/or conditional (eg upon satisfactory performance of contract obligations)]
Contingencies
Total Estimated Contract Value (incl. VAT)
[The total (whole-of-life) value of this contract including the value of all options to extend and VAT where applicable. Where a schedule of rates or fee
options is used, provide an estimate of the likely total expenditure and the basis of the estimation. Attach the schedule of rates or fee options. Where
a contingency is factored into the contract value, specify the percentage and dollar value of the contingency]
Contract Price Variation Provisions

[Details of any price variation provisions/mechanisms in the proposed contract]
Project Governance Framework [Provide Details]
APP. 10 - 15
Appendix 10
Contract Management Structure/Arrangements [Category Management/Continuous Improvement Arrangement}]
Transition in/out Arrangements [Provide Details]
Savings [Estimated value for money/cost benefit (if applicable)]
9. Background and Strategic Context

Please attach business case that outlines the following sub-points:
• Extent of regulatory reduction
• Extent of efficiency improvement
• Extent of environmental sustainability addressed in outcome
• Extent of consultation with other department ‘buy-in’
• Extent of outer budget engagement
• Sourcing options considered
• Market engagement strategy
• Value for money assessment
10. Environmental Sustainability [Tick the appropriate box below]

The recommended tenderer(s) documented an approach to environmental issues and commitment to continual
improvement
in environmental performance
The recommended tenderer(s) Environmental Management System (EMS) satisfies project requirements or the
tenderer(s)
documented appropriate measures to address environmental sustainability issues
The contract is to include provisions for environmental commitments
This project has very limited environmental impact
11. Risk Management [Tick appropriate boxes below]
Risk Management Plan (Risk management plans are required for procurement valued in excess of $100,000 and complex procurements less than $10
million)
Public Liability Insurance: [Company, policy no. and expiry date]
Product Liability Insurance: [Company, policy no. and expiry date]
Professional Indemnity Insurance: [Company, policy no. and expiry date]
[Details of the financial or performance checks conducted against the recommended tender(s). Provide details of any warranties, guarantees or
securities required of the recommended tenderer(s) including the type and value. If a risk management plan was prepared, was the procurement
process undertaken in accordance with the plan?]
APP. 10 - 16
Appendix 10
12. Probity [Tick the appropriate boxes below]
All internal evaluation team members (Council officials) have indicated awareness of their obligations under the Code of Conduct.
All external evaluation team members (private sector) signed a Conflict of Interest Declaration and a Confidentiality
Agreement
If any member did not provide a Conflict of Interest Declaration and/or Confidentiality Agreement, provide details why, in an attachment
to this form.
[Provide details of any conflicts of interest and confidentiality matters that arose and how they were addressed, in an attachment to this
form.]
13. Contract Management Details
Project Manager: Telephone:

Position:
Department/Section:
Contract Manager: Telephone:
Position:
Department:
14. Approvals
Department/Section
I certify that:
1. The procurement process for [insert Project Name] complies with Chitungwiza Municipality Procurement Policy
2. All relevant procurement documentation is attached or available on file.
3. I certify that funds are available
Name: ……………………………………… ...........................................................Position: ..…………………………………………………
Date: …………………………………………......................................................... Signature: .…………………………………………………
Finance Director
Approved Endorsed
Name: ……………………………………… ...........................................................Position: ..…………………………………………………

Date: ………………………………………… Signature: .…………………………………………………
Town Clerk
Approved and refer to the Municipal Procurement Board
Name: ………………………………………………………
Signature: ……………………………………………….. Date: …………………………………………………………
Schedule of Attachments
1. Tender Brief
2. Tender Evaluation Report with a summary of the financial comparison
3. Schedule of Rates or Fee Options, if any
4. Certificate of Exemption (if applicable)
5. Conflict of interest and or confidentiality issues, if any
6. Other if applicable
APP. 10 - 17
APPENDIX 10
Appendix 10.1.2 CHAPTER 22:14
PROCUREMENT ACT
Act 2/1999, 22/2001 (s. 4).
ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
PART I
P RELIMINARY
Section
1. Short title and date of commencement.
2. Interpretation.
3. Application of Act.
PART II
S TATE P ROCUREMENT B OARD
4. Establishment of State Procurement Board.

5. Functions of State Procurement Board.
6. Composition of State Procurement Board.
7. Disqualifications for membership of State Procurement Board.
8. Terms of office and conditions of service of members.
9. Limitation on right of chairman to engage in other occupations or business; disclosure of business interests
and assets by other members.
10. Vacation of office by members.
11. Suspension of members.
12. Filling of vacancies on State Procurement Board.
13. Vice-chairman of State Procurement Board.
14. Meetings and procedure of State Procurement Board.
15. Principal officer and staff of State Procurement Board.
16. Committees of State Procurement Board.
17. Members of State Procurement Board and committees to disclose certain connections and interests.
18. Minutes of proceedings of State Procurement Board and of committees.
19. Remuneration and allowances of members of State Procurement Board and of committees.
20. Directions to State Procurement Board.
21. Reports of State Procurement Board.
22. Delegation of functions by State Procurement Board.
23. Validity of decisions and acts of State Procurement Board.
PART III
FINANCIAL P ROVISIONS
24. Funds of State Procurement Board.

25. Investment of moneys not immediately required by State Procurement Board.
26. Financial year of State Procurement Board.
27. Accounts of State Procurement Board.
28. Audit of State Procurement Board’s accounts.
29. Internal auditor.
PART IV
PROCUREMENT P ROCEEDINGS
30. Form of procurement proceedings.

31. Tendering proceedings.
32. Procedure for procurement of services.
33. Procurement regulations.
34. Eligibility of suppliers.
35. Record of procurement proceedings.
36. Public access to regulations, etc.
37. Suppliers to permit access to their books and accounts.
APP. 10 - 18
APPENDIX 10
38. Non-liability of procuring entity where all tenders are rejected.

39. Effect of bribery, fraud or collusion by supplier.
40. Effect of failure to disclose interest by member of State Procurement Board or committee thereof.
41. State Procurement Board may declare supplier ineligible to be awarded State contract.
42. Directions to procuring entities by State Procurement Board.
PART V
APPEALS
43. Appeal to Administrative Court.

44. Suspension of procurement proceedings pending appeal.
PART VI
GENERAL
45. State Procurement Board may require information.

46. Investigations by State Procurement Board.
47. Procedure on completion of investigation.
48. Offences relating to procurement.
49. Application of Act to BOOT or BOT contracts.
50. Savings.
AN ACT to establish a State Procurement Board and to provide for its functions; to make provision
for the procurement of goods, construction work and services by the State, statutory bodies and other
persons; and to provide for matters connected with or incidental to the foregoing.
[Date of commencement: 1st August, 2001.]
PART I
P RELIMINARY
1 Short title and date of commencement

This Act may be cited as the Procurement Act [Chapter 22:14].
2 Interpretation
(1) In this Act—
“building” includes any man-made structure whatsoever or any part thereof, whether above or below the
ground;
“chairman”, in relation to the State Procurement Board, means the chairman of the Board appointed in terms
of subsection (1) of section six;
“conduct” includes any act or omission;
“construction work” means all work associated with the construction, reconstruction, demolition, repair or
renovation of any building or infrastructure, and includes—
(a) site preparation, excavation work, the installation of equipment or materials, decoration and
finishing; and
(b) incidental services such as drilling, mapping, photography and environmental and seismic
investigation, where—
(i) the services are provided pursuant to the procurement contract; and
(ii) the value of the services does not exceed that of the construction work itself;
“goods” means things of every kind and description, including—
(a) raw materials, products and equipment; and
(b) things in solid, liquid or gaseous form; and
(c) electricity; and
(d) immovable property; and
(e) services incidental to the supply of goods, where the value of the services does not exceed that
of the goods themselves;
“member” means the chairman or any other member of the State Procurement Board;
“Minister” means the Vice-President or Minister to whom the President may, from time to time, assign the
administration of this Act;
“procurement” means the acquisition by any means of goods, construction work or services;
APP. 10 - 19
APPENDIX 10
“procurement contract” means a contract between a procuring entity and a supplier which results from
procurement proceedings;
“procurement regulations” means regulations made in terms of subsection (1) of section thirty-three;
“procuring entity” means—
(a) the State Procurement Board, to the extent that it conducts procurement proceedings on behalf of
any person referred to in paragraph (b) or (c) of this definition; or
(b) any—
(i) Ministry, department or other division of the Government; or
(ii) statutory body;
that engages in procurement; or
(c) any local authority or other person declared in terms of subsection (2) to be a procuring entity;
“services” means any object of procurement other than goods or construction work;
“State Procurement Board” means the State Procurement Board established by section four;
“statutory body” means a body corporate established directly by or under any enactment for special purposes
specified in that enactment, the membership of which consists wholly or mainly of persons appointed by
the President, a Vice-President, a Minister, any other statutory body or by a Commission established by
the Constitution;
“supplier” means an actual or potential party to a procurement contract with a procuring entity;
“vice-chairman”, in relation to the State Procurement Board, means the person designated as vice-chairman
in terms of subsection (1) of section thirteen.
(2) The Minister may, by statutory instrument, declare any local authority or other person to be a procuring
entity for the purposes of this Act:
Provided that the Minister shall not make any such declaration in relation to—
(a) a local authority, except with the consent of the Minister responsible for local government; or
(b) a person, other than a body corporate wholly owned or controlled by the State, without that person’s
consent.
3 Application of Act
(1) This Act shall apply to procurement by all procuring entities except—
(a) such classes of procurement; or
(b) such procuring entities or classes of procuring entities;
as may be specified by the President by statutory instrument.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) shall be construed as preventing a person who engages in procurement to which
this Act does not apply from requiring suppliers to conform with all or any of the provisions of this Act in the
course of the procurement proceedings.
PART II
S TATE P ROCUREMENT B OARD
4 Establishment of State Procurement Board

There is hereby established a board to be known as the State Procurement Board, which shall be a body
corporate capable of suing and being sued in its own name and, subject to this Act, of doing all things that bodies
corporate may do by law.
5 Functions of State Procurement Board
(1) Subject to this Act, the functions of the State Procurement Board shall be—
(a) to conduct procurement on behalf of procuring entities, where the procurement is of a class prescribed in
procurement regulations; and
(b) to supervise procurement proceedings conducted by procuring entities, in order to ensure proper
compliance with this Act; and
(c) to initiate investigations in terms of section forty-six and take action pursuant thereon in terms of section
forty-seven; and
(d) to perform any other function that is conferred or imposed on the State Procurement Board by or in
terms of this Act or any other law.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the State Procurement Board shall not be subject to the
direction or control of any person or authority in the exercise of its functions under this Act.
6 Composition of State Procurement Board
(1) The State Procurement Board shall consist of a chairman and not fewer than seven nor more than ten
other members appointed, subject to this section and section seven, by the President.
(2) Members shall be chosen for their ability and experience in administration or their professional
qualifications or their suitability otherwise for appointment:
APP. 10 - 20
APPENDIX 10
Provided that at least one of the members shall be a person who has held a post or posts of a senior grade in
the Public Service for periods which in the aggregate amount to at least three years, and at least three members
shall be appointed from a list submitted by recognised chambers of business, industry, commerce and other
professional bodies.
(3) Members shall be appointed after consultation with the Public Service Commission.
(4) The Minister shall ensure that the appointment of every member is notified in the Gazette.
7 Disqualifications for membership of State Procurement Board
(1) A person shall not be appointed as a member, and no person shall be qualified to hold office as a
member, if—
(a) he is not a citizen of Zimbabwe or ordinarily resident in Zimbabwe; or
(b) he has been adjudged or otherwise declared insolvent or bankrupt in terms of a law in force in any
country, and has not been rehabilitated or discharged; or
(c) he has made an assignment to or arrangement or composition with his creditors in terms of a law in
force in any country, and the assignment, arrangement or composition has not been rescinded or set
aside; or
(d) he has been sentenced—
(i) in Zimbabwe, in respect of an offence; or
(ii) outside Zimbabwe, in respect of conduct which, if committed in Zimbabwe, would have
constituted an offence;
to a term of imprisonment of not less than six months imposed without the option of a fine, whether or
not any portion has been suspended, and has not received a free pardon; or
(e) he has been convicted—
(i) in Zimbabwe, of an offence under this Act or of an offence involving dishonesty; or
(ii) outside Zimbabwe, in respect of any conduct which, if committed in Zimbabwe, would have
constituted an offence involving dishonesty;
and sentenced to a fine of any amount or to a term of imprisonment of any duration, whether or not any
part of the sentence has been suspended, and has not received a free pardon.
(2) A person who is—
(a) a member of Parliament; or
(b) a member of two or more other statutory bodies;
shall not be appointed as a member of the State Procurement Board nor shall he be qualified to hold office as a
member.
(3) For the purposes of paragraph (b) of subsection (2), a person who is appointed to a council, board or
other authority which is a statutory body or which is responsible for the administration of the affairs of a statutory
body shall be regarded as a member of that statutory body.
(4) Any person who, knowing that he is disqualified in terms of this section to hold office as a member 
(a) attends any meeting of the State Procurement Board as a member; or
(b) performs any other act as a member;
shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level four or to imprisonment for a period not
exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
[Subsection as amended by section 4 of Act No. 22 of 2001]
8 Terms of office and conditions of service of members

(1) A member shall hold office for such period, not exceeding three years, as the President may fix at the
time of his appointment.
(2) On the expiry of the period for which a member has been appointed he shall continue to hold office until
he has been re-appointed or his successor has been appointed:
Provided that a member shall not continue to hold office in terms of this subsection for more than six months.
(3) A person who ceases to be a member shall be eligible for re-appointment.
(4) Members shall hold office on such conditions as the President may fix.
9 Limitation on right of chairman to engage in other occupations or business; disclosure of
business interests and assets by other members
(1) During his term of office, the chairman shall not engage in any other occupation, service or employment
for remuneration, unless the President has consented to his engaging in it:
Provided that the chairman shall be entitled to engage in an occupation, service or employment for which he
is entitled only to payment by way of travelling and subsistence allowances and out -of-pocket expenses.
(2) Before any member, including the chairman, performs any function as a member, he shall disclose in
writing to the President the full extent of—
(a) every occupation, service or employment which he or his spouse engages in for remuneration; and
(b) all assets held by him or his spouse, in excess of such value as the President may specify.
APP. 10 - 21
APPENDIX 10
(3) As soon as possible after he or his spouse—

(a) commences any occupation, service or employment for remuneration; or
(b) acquires any asset in excess of such value as the President may have specified in terms of paragraph (b)
of subsection (2);
a member shall disclose that fact in writing to the President.
10 Vacation of office by members
(1) A member shall vacate his office and his office shall become vacant—
(a) one month after the date he gives notice in writing to the President, through the Minister, of his intention
to resign his office or after the expiry of such other period of notice as he and the Minister may agree;
or
(b) on the date he begins to serve a sentence of imprisonment, whether or not any portion has been
suspended, imposed without the option of a fine—
(i) in Zimbabwe, in respect of an offence; or
(ii) outside Zimbabwe, in respect of conduct which, if committed in Zimbabwe, would have
constituted an offence;
or
(c) if he becomes disqualified in terms of section seven to hold office as a member; or
(d) if he is required in terms of subsection (2) or (3) to vacate his office as a member.
(2) The President may require a member to vacate his office if—
(a) the member has been guilty of conduct which renders him unsuitable to continue to hold office as a
member; or
(b) the member has failed to comply with any condition of his office fixed in terms of section eight; or
(c) the member is mentally or physically incapable of efficiently performing his duties as a member; or
(d) the member contravenes section nine or seventeen; or
(e) the member or his spouse engages in any occupation, service or employment, or holds any asset, which
in the President’s opinion is inconsistent with his duties as a member.
(3) The President, on the recommendation of the State Procurement Board, may require a member to vacate
his office if the President is satisfied that the member has been absent without the consent of the chairman of the
Board from three consecutive meetings of the Board, of which he has been given at least seven days’ notice, and
that there was no just cause for the member’s absence.
11 Suspension of members
(1) The President may suspend from office a member against whom criminal proceedings are instituted for
an offence involving dishonesty and, whilst that member is so suspended, he shall not carry out any duties or be
entitled to any remuneration or allowances as a member.
(2) The President may suspend a member from office if the President has reasonable grounds to believe that
the member’s office has become vacant in terms of subsection (1) of section ten but the member has not
relinquished his office.
12 Filling of vacancies on State Procurement Board
On the death of, or the vacation of office by, a member, the President may appoint a person to fill the
vacancy:
Provided that, if the number of members is fewer than the minimum number of members specified in section
six, the President shall appoint a person to fill the vacancy within three months after being notified of the vacancy.
13 Vice-chairman of State Procurement Board
(1) The President shall designate one of the members, other than the chairman, to be the vice-chairman of the
State Procurement Board.
(2) The vice-chairman may at any time, by written notice to the President, resign his office as vice-chairman.
(3) Within three months after being notified of a vacancy in the office of vice-chairman, the President shall
designate a member to fill the vacancy.
(4) The vice-chairman shall perform the functions of the chairman whenever the chairman is unable to
perform them.
14 Meetings and procedure of State Procurement Board
(1) Subject to this Act, the State Procurement Board shall meet for the dispatch of business and adjourn,
close and otherwise regulate its meetings and procedures as it thinks fit.
(2) The chairman may himself at any time and shall, at the request in writing of not fewer than two members,
convene a special meeting of the State Procurement Board, which meeting shall be convened for a date not sooner
than seven days or later than thirty days after receipt of such request.
(3) The chairman or, in his absence, the vice-chairman shall preside at meetings of the State Procurement
Board.
APP. 10 - 22
APPENDIX 10
(4) A majority of members shall form a quorum at any meeting of the State Procurement Board.
(5) All acts, matters or things authorized or required to be done by the State Procurement Board may be
decided by a majority vote at a meeting of the Board at which a quorum is present.
(6) Subject to section seventeen, at all meetings of the State Procurement Board each member present shall
have one vote on each question before the Board:
Provided that—
(i) in the event of an equality of votes, the chairman or person presiding shall have a casting vote in
addition to his deliberative vote;
(ii) no member shall take part in the consideration or discussion of, or vote on, any question before the
Board which relates to his vacation of office as a member.
(7) Any proposal circulated among all members of the State Procurement Board and agreed to by a majority
of them shall have the same effect as a resolution passed at a duly constituted meeting of the Board and shall be
incorporated in the minutes of the next succeeding meeting of the Board:
Provided that, if a member requires that any such proposal be placed before the State Procurement Board, this
subsection shall not apply to the proposal.
(8) With the approval of the Minister, the State Procurement Board may co -opt any person to the Board, but
a co-opted person shall have no vote in any decision by the Board.
15 Principal officer and staff of State Procurement Board
(1) The State Procurement Board may employ, on such terms and conditions as it may fix with the approval
of the Minister—
(a) a principal officer; and
(b) such other members of staff as may be necessary for the proper exercise of the Board’s functions.
(2) Subject to any directions given to him by the State Procurement Board, the principal officer of the Board
shall be responsible for controlling and supervising the Board’s staff.
(3) The State Procurement Board may engage persons otherwise than as employees, to perform services of a
specialised, technical or professional nature for the Board.
(4) Any remuneration, allowances, pensions and other benefits to which the persons referred to in subsection
(1) or (2) are entitled shall be chargeable to the funds of the State Procurement Board.
(5) Notwithstanding subsection (1), if the State Procurement Board so requests and the Public Service
Commission so permits, the Minister may assign members of the Public Service employed in his Ministry to
perform all or any of the functions of the principal officer and members of staff referred to in that subsection.
16 Committees of State Procurement Board
(1) For the better exercise of its functions, the State Procurement Board may establish one or more
committees in which, with the consent of the Minister, it may vest such of its functions as it thinks fit:
Provided that the vesting of a function in a committee shall not prevent the State Procurement Board from
itself exercising that function, and the Board may amend or rescind any decision of the committee in the exercise
of that function.
(2) On the establishment of a committee the State Procurement Board may appoint to the committee persons
who are not members of the Board.
(3) The chairman of the State Procurement Board or of a committee may at any reasonable time and place
convene a meeting of that committee.
(4) The procedure of each committee shall be as fixed from time to time by the State Procurement Board.
(5) Subject to this section, subsections (2) to (7) of section fourteen shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to
committees and their members as they apply to the Board and its members.
17 Members of State Procurement Board and committees to disclose certain connections and
interests
(1) In this section—
“relative”, in relation to a member of the State Procurement Board or a committee of the Board, means the
member’s spouse, child, parent, brother or sister.
(2) If a member of the State Procurement Board or of a committee of the Board, or a relative of such a
member—
(a) is a supplier who is participating or has participated in any procurement proceedings that are being
considered by the State Procurement Board or by any committee of the Board, whether on appeal or
otherwise; or
(b) knowingly acquires or holds a direct or indirect pecuniary interest in a supplier that is participating or
has participated in any procurement proceedings referred to in paragraph (a); or
APP. 10 - 23
APPENDIX 10
(c) owns any property or has a right in property or a direct or indirect pecuniary interest in a company or
association of persons which results in the member’s private interests coming or appearing to come into
conflict with his functions as a member;
the member shall forthwith disclose the fact to the State Procurement Board or the committee, as the case may be.
(3) A member referred to in subsection (2) shall take no part in the consideration or discussion of, or vote on,
any question before the State Procurement Board or the committee, as the case may be, which relates to any
procurement proceedings, property, right or interest referred to in that subsection.
(4) Any person who contravenes subsection (2) or (3) shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not
exceeding level four or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such
imprisonment.
18 Minutes of proceedings of State Procurement Board and of committees

(1) The State Procurement Board shall cause minutes of all proceedings of and decisions taken at any
meeting of the Board or of a committee of the Board to be entered in books kept for the purpose.
(2) The State Procurement Board shall without delay send the Comptroller and Auditor-General a copy of all
minutes referred to in subsection (1).
(3) Any minutes referred to in subsection (1) which purport to be signed, with the authority of the State
Procurement Board or the committee concerned, as the case may be, by the chairman of the meeting to which the
minutes relate or by the chairman of the next following meeting, shall be accepted for all purposes as prima facie
proof of the proceedings of and decisions taken at that meeting.
19 Remuneration and allowances of members of State Procurement Board and of committees
(1) Members of the State Procurement Board and of committees of the Board shall be paid from the Board’s
funds—
(a) such remuneration, if any, as the President may fix for members of the Board or members of
committees, as the case may be, generally; and
(b) such allowances, if any, as the President may fix to meet any reasonable expenses incurred by the
member in connection with the business of the State Procurement Board or the committee, as the case
may be.
(2) The remuneration payable to a member of the State Procurement Board shall not be reduced during his
tenure of office.
20 Directions to State Procurement Board
(1) The President may give general written directions of policy to the State Procurement Board and the Board
shall take all necessary steps to comply with them.
(2) If the State Procurement Board has failed to carry out any duty imposed upon it by or under this Act or
any other law, the Minister may, in writing, direct the Board to take such action as he considers necessary to
rectify the matter within such time as he may specify:
Provided that before doing so, the Minister shall give the Board an opportunity to make any representations it
may wish to make in the matter.
(3) If the State Procurement Board fails to take action in accordance with a direction in terms of subsection
(2) within the time specified by the Minister, the Minister may take appropriate action on behalf of the Board to
rectify the matter.
(4) The State Procurement Board shall report to Parliament the nature and substance of every direction given
to it, together with any comments the Board may wish to make thereon, either by means of a special report
submitted in terms of section twenty-one or in its annual report submitted in terms of that section.
(5) The President or the Minister, as the case may be, shall ensure that the substance of any direction given to
the State Procurement Board in terms of subsection (1) or (2) is published in the Gazette within thirty days after
the direction was given.
21 Reports of State Procurement Board
(1) The State Procurement Board—
(a) shall, as soon as possible after the 31st December in each year, submit to the Minister an annual report
upon matters the Board has dealt with during the previous year; and
(b) shall submit to the Minister a special report where the procurement cost exceeds one per centum of the
current year’s national budget;
(c) may at any time submit to the Minister a special report on any matter upon which the Board considers it
desirable to report;
(d) shall submit to the Minister a monthly report specifying the instances in which tenders have been invited
and those in which a procurement contract has been concluded.
APP. 10 - 24
APPENDIX 10
(2) The Minister shall lay before Parliament on one of the fourteen days on which Parliament next sits after
the report is received by him—
(a) the annual report submitted to him in terms of paragraph (a) of subsection (1); and
(b) any special report submitted to him in terms of paragraph (b) or (c) of subsection (1) which the State
Procurement Board has requested be laid before Parliament.
22 Delegation of functions by State Procurement Board
(1) Without derogation from any other law, with the consent of the Minister the State Procurement Board
may delegate any of its functions to—
(a) any of its members; or
(b) any member of its staff referred to in section fifteen
(2) A delegation in terms of subsection (1)—
(a) may be absolute or conditional and may be withdrawn or amended at any time; and
(b) shall not prevent the State Procurement Board from itself exercising the function concerned or from
amending or rescinding any decision of the delegate in the exercise of that function.
23 Validity of decisions and acts of State Procurement Board
No decision made or act done by or under the authority of the State Procurement Board shall be invalid solely
because there were one or more vacancies on the Board when the decision was taken or the act was done or
authorized, as the case may be.
PART III
FINANCIAL P ROVISIONS
24 Funds of State Procurement Board

The funds of the State Procurement Board shall consist of—
(a) moneys payable to the Board from moneys appropriated for the purpose by Act of Parliament; and
(b) any other moneys that may vest in or accrue to Board, whether in terms of this Act or otherwise.
25 Investment of moneys not immediately required by State Procurement Board
Moneys not immediately required by the State Procurement Board may be invested in such manner as the
Minister, acting on the advice of the Minister responsible for finance, may approve.
26 Financial year of State Procurement Board
The financial year of the State Procurement Board shall be the period of twelve months ending on the 31st
December in each year.
27 Accounts of State Procurement Board
(1) The State Procurement Board shall ensure that proper accounts and other records relating to such
accounts are kept in respect of all its activities, funds and property, including such particular accounts and records
as the Minister may direct.
(2) As soon as possible after the end of each financial year, the State Procurement Board shall prepare and
submit to the Minister a statement of accounts in respect of that financial year or in respect of such other period as
the Minister may direct.
28 Audit of State Procurement Board's accounts
(1) The accounts of the State Procurement Board shall be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General,
who for the purpose shall have all the functions conferred on him by sections 8 and 9 of the Audit and Exchequer
Act [Chapter 22:03] as though the assets of the Board were public moneys and the members, employees and
agents of the Board were officers as defined in that Act.
(2) Any member, employee or agent of the State Procurement Board who—
(a) fails or refuses to provide the Comptroller and Auditor-General with any explanation or information
required by him for the purpose of an audit in terms of subsection (1); or
(b) hinders or obstructs the Comptroller and Auditor-General in the conduct of an audit in terms of
subsection (1);
shall be shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level four or to imprisonment for a period
not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Comptroller and Auditor-General may appoint a suitably qualified
person to audit the accounts of the State Procurement Board and, if he does so 
(a) subsections (1) and (2) shall apply in respect of the person so appointed as if he were the Comptroller
and Auditor-General; and
(b) any expenses incurred by the person so appointed in carrying out his audit shall be met from the funds of
the State Procurement Board.
APP. 10 - 25
APPENDIX 10
29 Internal auditor
Section 19 of the Audit and Exchequer Act [Chapter 22:03] shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to the appointment
of an internal auditor to the State Procurement Board in all respects as if the Board were a department of the
Ministry for which the Minister is responsible.
PART IV
PROCUREMENT P ROCEEDINGS
30 Form of procurement proceedings

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the procurement of 
(a) goods or construction work by a procuring entity shall be done by means of tendering proceedings in
accordance with section thirty-one;
(b) services by a procuring entity shall be done by a method which complies with section thirty-two.
(2) Where in accordance with this Act a procuring entity adopts a method of procurement other than one
specified in subsection (1), the procuring entity shall include in the record of its proceedings a statement of the
grounds and circumstances on which it relied to justify the adoption of that method.
31 Tendering proceedings
(1) Subject to this Act, in any tendering proceedings conducted by a procuring entity—
(a) the invitation to suppliers to tender shall be published—
(i) in the Gazette, where the procuring entity is the State; and
(ii) in a newspaper circulating in the area in which the procuring entity has jurisdiction or carries on
business, where the procuring entity is not the State; and
(iii) in a newspaper of wide international circulation or in a relevant trade or technical or professional
journal of wide international circulation, where tenders are invited from suppliers who are not
nationals or residents of Zimbabwe;
(b) the invitation to suppliers to tender shall contain the following information—
(i) the procuring entity’s name and address; and
(ii) a comprehensive description of the goods to be supplied or, as the case may be, of the
construction work to be effected; and
(iii) the time within which the goods are to be supplied or, as the case may be, the construction work
is to be completed; and
(iv) the criteria by which, subject to section thirty-four, suppliers will be evaluated; and
(v) the manner in which solicitation documents may be obtained and their price; and
(vi) the deadline for the submission of tenders and the place where they are to be submitted; and
(vii) such other information as may be prescribed in procurement regulations;
(c) an invitation to prequalify shall be published in the manner prescribed in paragraph (a) and shall contain
the information referred to in subparagraphs (i) to (iv) of paragraph (b), together with the following
information—
(i) the manner in which prequalification documents may be obtained and their price; and
(ii) the deadline for the submission of prequalification documents and the place where they are to be
submitted; and
(iii) such other information as may be prescribed in procurement regulations;
(d) the price charged for solicitation documents and any prequalification documents shall not exceed the
cost of printing them and providing them to suppliers;
(e) solicitation documents shall contain comprehensive information as to—
(i) the nature, quantity and quality of the goods or construction work required; and
(ii) the manner and time in which tenders are to be prepared and submitted; and
(iii) the criteria and procedures by which the successful tender will be determined; and
(iv) the manner in which the tender price is to be formulated and expressed; and
(v) any tender security required; and
(vi) the date, time and place for the opening of tenders and the procedure to be followed at such
opening; and
(vii) any right on the part of the procuring entity to reject all tenders;
(viii) such other information as may be prescribed;
(f) any modification of a solicitation document shall be communicated without delay to all suppliers who
have received the document;
(g) any extension of the deadline within which tenders must be submitted shall be communicated without
delay to all suppliers who have received solicitation documents;
(h) tenders shall be submitted in writing and sealed in an envelope or other container so that they cannot be
read before the time fixed for the opening of all tenders;
APP. 10 - 26
APPENDIX 10
(i) before the time fixed for the opening of all tenders, the procuring entity shall take all necessary steps to
ensure that the contents of any tender is not disclosed to any other supplier;
(j) any tender that is submitted after the deadline for their submission, or any extension of that deadline,
shall not be opened and shall be returned to the supplier concerned;
(k) if suppliers are required to provide security as a condition of their submitting tenders, the requirement
shall apply equally to all suppliers;
(l) all suppliers that have submitted tenders shall be permitted to witness the opening of the tenders and
shall have the right to be informed of the price and other salient terms of each tender opened;
(m) the procuring entity shall accept whichever valid tender offers the lowest price, unless other criteria are
specified in the solicitation documents, in which event those criteria shall be followed;
(n) no negotiations shall take place between the procuring entity and a supplier with respect to a tender
submitted by the supplier;
(o) if any formalities need to be complied with before a procurement contract is concluded, the successful
tenderer shall be given due notice of those formalities.
(2) Subject to subsection (1), a procuring entity shall conduct its tendering proceedings in accordance with
procurement regulations or, in regard to any matter that is not prescribed in such regulations or this Act, in
accordance with such procedure as the procuring entity may fix:
Provided that any procedure so fixed shall be such as to ensure that all suppliers are treated fairly and
impartially and shall be communicated without delay to all suppliers concerned.
32 Procedure for procurement of services
(1) Subject to this Act, in any proceedings for the procurement of a service by a procuring entity—
(a) a notice requesting suppliers to submit proposals for the provision of the service shall be published—
(i) in the Gazette, where the procuring entity is the State; and
(ii) in a newspaper circulating in the area in which the procuring entity has jurisdiction or carries on
business, where the procuring entity is not the State; and
(iii) in a newspaper of wide international circulation or in a relevant trade or technical or professional
journal of wide international circulation, where proposals are invited from suppliers who are not
nationals or residents of Zimbabwe;
(b) the notice referred to in paragraph (a) shall contain at least the following information—
(i) the procuring entity’s name and address; and
(ii) a brief description of the service to be procured; and
(iii) how to obtain documents giving details of the service to be procured and the manner in which
the successful supplier is to be selected;
(c) the documents referred to in subparagraph (iii) of paragraph (b) shall contain the following
information—
(i) a comprehensive description of the service to be supplied and, where applicable, the time when
it is to be provided; and
(ii) the criteria and procedures by which, subject to section thirty-four, the qualifications of suppliers
will be evaluated; and
(iii) the information or evidence, if any, which suppliers must provide to prove their qualifications;
and
(iv) the deadline for the submission of proposals and the place where they are to be submitted; and
(v) the criteria and procedures by which the successful proposal will be ascertained; and
(vi) any right on the part of the procuring entity to reject all proposals received; and
(vii) the terms and conditions of the procurement contract, to the extent that they are known to the
procuring entity; and
(viii) such other information as may be prescribed in procurement regulations;
(d) an invitation to prequalify shall be published in the manner prescribed in paragraph (a) and shall contain
the information referred to in subparagraphs (i), (ii), (iii), (v) and (vi) of paragraph (c), together with the
following information—
(i) the manner in which prequalification documents may be obtained and their price; and
(ii) the deadline for the submission of prequalification documents and the place where they are to be
submitted; and
(iii) such other information as may be prescribed in procurement regulations;
(e) the price charged for the documents referred to in paragraphs (c) and (d) shall not exceed the cost of
printing them and providing them to suppliers;
(f) any extension of the deadline within which proposals must be submitted shall be communicated without
delay to all suppliers who have received the documents referred to in subparagraph (iii) of paragraph
(b);
APP. 10 - 27
APPENDIX 10
(g) any proposal that is submitted after the deadline for their submission, or any extension of that deadline,
shall not be considered and shall be returned to the supplier concerned;
(h) if suppliers are required to provide security as a condition of their submitting proposals, the requirement
shall apply equally to all suppliers;
(i) the procuring entity shall treat all proposals submitted in such a manner as to avoid the disclosure of
their contents to competing suppliers;
(j) the procuring entity shall evaluate all proposals that have been validly submitted in accordance with the
procedures and criteria specified in the documents referred to in subparagraph (iii) of paragraph (b);
(k) if any formalities need to be complied with before a procurement contract is concluded, the successful
supplier shall be given due notice of those formalities.
(2) Subject to subsection (1), a procuring entity shall conduct all proceedings for the procurement of a
service in accordance with procurement regulations or, in regard to any matter that is not prescribed in such
regulations or this Act, in accordance with such procedure as the procuring entity may fix:
Provided that any procedure so fixed shall be such as to ensure that all suppliers are treated fairly and
impartially and shall be communicated without delay to all suppliers concerned.
33 Procurement regulations
(1) Subject to this Act, the Minister, after consultation with the Minister responsible for finance and the State
Procurement Board, may make regulations providing for all matters relating to procurement by procuring entities.
(2) Procurement regulations may provide for—
(a) methods of procurement that may be adopted by procuring entities instead of or in addition to the
methods specified in section thirty;
(b) classes of procurement in which any of the provisions of sections thirty-one and thirty-two may be
dispensed with or applied subject to modification;
(c) subject to sections thirty-four and forty, the qualifications that suppliers must possess in order to
participate in procurement proceedings;
(d) the procedure to be adopted by procuring entities and suppliers, and the manner in which they shall
conduct themselves, in procurement proceedings;
(e) information to be provided to suppliers in procurement proceedings;
(f) alterations that suppliers may be permitted to make to their tenders, bids or proposals or to any
documents submitted by them in any procurement proceedings;
(g) the evaluation, comparison and acceptance of tenders, bids or proposals made by suppliers;
(h) measures to ensure that tenders, bids or proposals submitted by suppliers are not disclosed to other
suppliers;
(i) circumstances in which suppliers may be debarred from participating in, or continuing to participate in,
any procurement proceedings;
(j) fees, deposits and charges payable by suppliers and other persons in respect of procurement proceedings
and anything done by the State Procurement Board in terms of this Act;
(k) the monitoring and supervision by the State Procurement Board of the performance of parties to
procurement contracts;
(l) circumstances in which the provisions of the regulations may be departed from or waived.
(3) Procurement regulations may prescribe requirements by reference to the UNCITRAL Model Law on
Procurement of Goods, Construction and Services adopted by the United Nations Commission on International
Trade Law at its twenty-sixth session in 1993.
(4) Procurement regulations shall not have effect until they have been published in the Gazette.
34 Eligibility of suppliers
(1) Subject to this section, a procuring entity may require suppliers, before they participate in procurement
proceedings, to satisfy the procuring entity as to all or any of the following matters—
(a) that they possess the necessary professional and technical qualifications and competence, financial
resources, equipment, facilities, personnel and experience to perform the procurement contract;
(b) that they have the legal capacity to enter into the procurement contract;
(c) that they are not insolvent, in liquidation or under judicial management under the law of any country,
and that proceedings have not been instituted in any country for their sequestration or winding up or for
placing them under judicial management;
(d) that they have paid all taxes, duties and rates for which they are liable in Zimbabwe, together with any
contributions or payments due under the National Social Security Authority Act [Chapter 17:04];
(e) that they are not ineligible to participate in procurement proceedings in terms of section forty-one;
(f) that neither they nor, in the case of a body corporate, any of their directors or officers have in the
preceding ten years—
(i) been convicted in any country of an offence by whatever name called relating to—
APP. 10 - 28
APPENDIX 10
A. the conduct of their profession or business; or

B. the making of a false statement as to their qualifications to enter into a procurement
contract;
or
(ii) been disqualified in any country from taking part in procurement proceedings as a result of any
conduct referred to in subparagraph A or B of subparagraph (i).
(2) Subject to this section, a procuring entity may restrict participation in procurement proceedings to persons
who are citizens of or ordinarily resident in Zimbabwe:
Provided that a procuring entity shall not impose any such restriction except to the extent that it is authorised
to do so by procurement regulations.
(3) Any requirement in terms of subsection (1) or (2) shall—
(a) apply equally to all suppliers for the procurement contract concerned; and
(b) be set out in any documents by which tenders, bids or proposals in relation to the procurement contract
are sought.
(4) A procuring entity shall impose no criterion or requirement with respect to the qualifications of suppliers
other than those provided for in this section, and shall not impose different criteria or requirements for different
suppliers.
(5) A procuring entity shall evaluate the qualifications of suppliers according to the criteria or requirements
set out in the documents by which tenders, bids or proposals in relation to the procurement contract are sought,
and according to no other criteria.
(6) This section shall not be construed as affecting any right a procuring entity may have under procurement
regulations to debar a supplier from participating in procurement proceedings on account of any act or omission
on the supplier’s part in connection with those proceedings.
35 Record of procurement proceedings
(1) A procuring entity shall keep a record of its procurement proceedings, which record shall contain—
(a) a brief description of the goods, construction work or services sought to be procured; and
(b) the names and addresses of—
(i) suppliers that participated in prequalification proceedings; and
(ii) suppliers that submitted tenders, bids or proposals in relation to the procurement contract;
and information relating to the qualifications, or lack of qualifications, of those suppliers; and
(c) the price, or the basis for determining the price, and a summary of the other principal terms and
conditions of each tender, bid or proposal that was submitted in relation to the procurement contract;
and
(d) the name and address of the supplier with whom the procurement contract was entered into, and the
contract price; and
(e) a summary of the procuring entity’s evaluation and comparison of the tenders, bids or proposals that
were submitted in relation to the procurement contract; and
(f) such other information and particulars as may be prescribed in procurement regulations.
(2) Except as may otherwise be provided in procurement regulations, a procuring entity shall, on request,
disclose—
(a) to any person, that part of the record of its procurement proceedings that contains the information
referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1); and
(b) to any supplier who submitted a tender, bid or proposal in the procurement proceedings concerned, that
part of the record of the proceedings that contains the information referred to in paragraphs (c) to (f) of
subsection (1).
36 Public access to regulations, etc.
(1) A procuring entity shall ensure that, whenever it engages in procurement—
(a) a copy of any procurement regulations which apply to the procurement proceedings; and
(b) where the regulations referred to in paragraph (a) refer to the UNCITRAL Model Law specified in
subsection (3) of section thirty-three, a copy of that Model Law; and
(c) a copy of any direction issued in terms of section forty-two and applicable to the procurement
proceedings concerned; and
(d) copies of any other documents regulating the procedure in the procurement proceedings or the
qualifications of suppliers therein;
are available for public inspection at all reasonable times during business hours at the offices of the procuring
entity.
(2) A procuring entity shall either—
(a) provide any interested party, for a reasonable charge, with a copy of any document referred to in
subsection (1); or
APP. 10 - 29
APPENDIX 10
(b) permit any interested party, at his own expense, to make a copy of any document referred to in
subsection (1).
37 Suppliers to permit access to their books and accounts
(1) It shall be a condition of every procurement contract concluded with the State or any statutory body after
the date of commencement of this Act that—
(a) the supplier shall permit the State Procurement Board, or any person authorised in writing by the Board,
at all reasonable times to inspect the supplier’s books and accounts relating to the contract; and
(b) if the State Procurement Board so directs, the supplier shall permit the Comptroller and Auditor-
General, or a person who is registered as a public auditor under the Public Accountants and Auditors
Act [Chapter 27:12] and nominated by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, to audit the supplier’s
accounts relating to the contract.
(2) The cost of any audit referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection (1) shall be met from the funds of the
State Procurement Board.
38 Non-liability of procuring entity where all tenders are rejected
Where a procuring entity, before accepting any tender, bid or proposal, rejects all the tenders, bids or
proposals that were submitted in any procurement proceedings, the procuring entity shall incur no liability towards
the suppliers that submitted those tenders, bids or proposals.
39 Effect of bribery, fraud or collusion by supplier
(1) If a procuring entity is satisfied that a supplier, or any employee or agent of a supplier—
(a) in contravention of section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16], has given, agreed to
give or offered any consideration to an employee or agent of the procuring entity in connection with any
(b) has knowingly misrepresented any material fact in a tender, bid or proposal submitted in any
(c) has entered or attempted to enter into a collusive agreement or arrangement, whether enforceable or not,
with any other supplier whereby the prices quoted in their respective tenders, bids or proposals are or
would be, as the case may be, higher than would have been the case had there been no collusion
between the suppliers concerned;
the procuring entity shall reject any tender, bid or proposal the supplier may have submitted in connection with
those proceedings.
(2) If, after a procurement contract has been concluded with a supplier, it is proved that the supplier, or an
employee or agent of the supplier—
(a) in contravention of section 3 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16], gave, agreed to give
or offered any consideration to an employee or agent of the procuring entity in connection with the
preceding procurement proceedings; or
(b) knowingly misrepresented a material fact in a tender, bid or proposal submitted in the preceding
(c) entered or attempted to enter into a collusive agreement or arrangement, whether enforceable or not,
with any other supplier whereby the prices quoted in their respective tenders, bids or proposals were or
would have been, as the case may be, higher than would have been the case had there been no collusion
between the suppliers concerned;
the procurement contract shall be void as between the procuring entity and the supplier.
40 Effect of failure to disclose interest by member of State Procurement Board or committee
thereof
Without derogation from subsection (4) of section seventeen, if the State Procurement Board or a committee
of the Board is conducting procurement proceedings on behalf of a procuring entity and a member of the Board or
the committee, as the case may be, contravenes subsection (2) or (3) of that section by—
(a) failing to disclose any relationship or interest he or a relative of his may have in a supplier in those
proceedings; or
(b) taking part in the consideration or discussion of, or voting on, any question before the Board in
proceedings such as are referred to in paragraph (a);
any procurement contract concluded between the procuring entity and the supplier concerned shall be void.
41 State Procurement Board may declare supplier ineligible to be awarded State contract
(1) Subject to this section, if the State Procurement Board is satisfied that—
(a) any supplier has been convicted of contravening section forty-eight or any provision of the Prevention of
Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16] in respect of procurement proceedings in which the State or a statutory
body was the procuring entity; or
(b) any procurement contract between a supplier and the State or a statutory body has been cancelled or
otherwise terminated on account of fraud on the part of the supplier;
APP. 10 - 30
APPENDIX 10
the State Procurement Board may declare the supplier to be ineligible to participate in procurement proceedings
with the State or any statutory body for such period as the Board may specify, which period shall not exceed three
years.
(2) Before making a declaration in terms of subsection (1), the State Procurement Board shall notify the
supplier concerned that it is contemplating making the declaration and shall ensure that the supplier is given an
adequate opportunity to make representations in the matter.
(3) The State Procurement Board shall ensure that all Ministries and departments of the State, all statutory
bodies and the supplier concerned are notified without delay of the terms of any declaration the Board has made in
terms of subsection (1).
(4) The State Procurement Board, on good cause shown, may at any time amend or revoke a declaration
made in terms of subsection (1).
(5) During the period that a declaration in terms of subsection (1) is in effect, no tender, bid or proposal
submitted by the supplier concerned in any procurement proceedings conducted by the State or any statutory body
shall be considered, and any procurement contract concluded between the supplier and the State or a statutory
body shall be void.
42 Directions to procuring entities by State Procurement Board
(1) Subject to this Act, the State Procurement Board may issue written directions to any procuring entity
providing, in relation to any particular procurement proceedings or class thereof, for any of the matters for which
procurement regulations may be made.
(2) In the event of any inconsistency between a direction issued in terms of subsection (1) and any provision
of procurement regulations, the regulations shall prevail.
(3) A procuring entity shall take all necessary steps to comply with a direction issued to it in terms of
subsection (1) and shall inform all suppliers in the procurement proceedings concerned of the terms of the
direction.
PART V
APPEALS
43 Appeal to Administrative Court

(1) Subject to this section, any person who is aggrieved by a decision of the State Procurement Board or any
procuring entity—
(a) in any procurement proceedings; or
(b) in terms of section forty-one;;
may appeal against that decision to the Administrative Court.
(2) An appeal in terms of subsection (1) shall be noted by lodging a written notice of appeal with the
Registrar of the Administrative Court and the principal officer of the State Procurement Board within twenty days
from the date on which the appellant was notified of the decision that is the subject of the appeal.
(3) In an appeal in terms of subsection (1), the Administrative Court may confirm, vary or set aside the
decision appealed against or give such other decision as in its opinion the State Procurement Board ought to have
given, and may make such order as to costs as it thinks fit.
(4) The Administrative Court Act [Chapter 7:01] shall apply in relation to the composition, procedure and
powers of the Administrative Court in an appeal in terms of subsection (1).
44 Suspension of procurement proceedings pending appeal
(1) Subject to this section, where an appeal has been noted in terms of section forty-three—
(a) the procurement proceedings concerned shall be suspended for a period of seven days from the date on
which the appeal was noted; and
(b) the operation of the procurement contract concerned shall be suspended for a period of seven days from
the date on which the appeal was noted, where the contract entered into force before or during that
period.
(2) The noting of an appeal in terms of section forty-three shall not have the effect referred to in subsection
(1) if—
(a) the Administrative Court considers that the appeal is frivolous or vexatious or is noted solely to delay
the procurement proceedings or the operation of the procurement contract concerned, and directs that
the noting of the appeal shall not suspend the proceedings or the operation of the contract, as the case
may be; or
(b) the procuring entity concerned certifies in writing that urgent public interest considerations require the
procurement to proceed.
(3) A certificate in terms of paragraph (b) of subsection (2) shall be included in the record of the procurement
proceedings concerned kept in terms of section thirty-five.
APP. 10 - 31
APPENDIX 10
(4) The period during which procurement proceedings or the operation of a procurement contract are
suspended in terms of subsection (1) may be extended by a president of the Administrative Court.
PART VI
GENERAL
45 State Procurement Board may require information

Every procuring entity shall provide the State Procurement Board with such information as the Board may in
writing require regarding procurement engaged in by the procuring entity.
46 Investigations by State Procurement Board
“investigator” means a person appointed in terms of subsection (2) to conduct an investigation under this
section.
(2) If the State Procurement Board considers that such an investigation is necessary or desirable for the
purpose of preventing, investigating or detecting a contravention of this Act or any other law, the Board may
appoint a person to conduct an investigation into any matter related to the conduct of any procurement
proceedings by a procuring entity or the conclusion or operation of any procurement contract.
(3) For the purpose of an investigation in terms of subsection (2), an investigator shall have the same powers,
rights and privileges as are conferred upon a commissioner by the Commissions of Inquiry Act [Chapter 10:07],
other than the power to order a person to be detained in cus tody, and sections 9 to 13 and 15 to 19 of that Act
shall apply, mutatis mutandis, in relation to an investigation in terms of subsection (2) and to any person
summoned to give or giving evidence at that investigation.
(4) In addition to the powers referred to in subsection (3), an investigator may, for the purposes of an
investigation in terms of subsection (2)—
(a) at any time during normal office hours, without previous notice, enter any premises of the procuring
entity concerned or of any supplier in the procurement proceedings concerned;
(b) require any officer, employee or agent of the procuring entity or supplier referred to in paragraph (a) to
produce any books, records, accounts or documents;
(c) search any premises referred to in paragraph (a) for any books, records, accounts or documents;
(d) examine and make extracts from and copies of any books, records, accounts or documents of the
procuring entity or supplier referred to in paragraph (a);
(e) remove any books, records, accounts or documents of the procuring entity or supplier referred to in
paragraph (a), for so long as may be necessary for the purpose of examining them or making extracts
from or copies of them:
Provided that the investigator shall give a full receipt for any such books, records, accounts or
document so removed;
(f) require any officer, employee or agent of the procuring entity or supplier referred to in paragraph (a)—
(i) to explain any entry in any books, records, accounts or documents;
(ii) to provide the investigator with such information concerning the management or activities of the
procuring entity or supplier as the supervisor may reasonably require.
(5) The powers of entry and search conferred by subsection (4) shall not be exercised except with the consent
of the procuring entity or supplier concerned or of the person in charge of the premises concerned, unless there
are reasonable grounds for believing that it is necessary to exercise those powers for the prevention, investigation
or detection of an offence or for the obtaining of evidence relating to an offence.
(6) Any person who, without just cause, hinders or obstructs an investigator in the exercise of his functions
under this section shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding leve l five or to imprisonment for
a period not exceeding six months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
47 Procedure on completion of investigation

(1) On completion of an investigation in terms of section forty-six an investigator shall—
(a) forward a copy of his report thereon to the State Procurement Board; and
(b) send a summary of his findings and recommendations to the procuring entity and to any supplier whose
conduct was the subject of the investigation.
(2) If, after considering an investigator’s report sent to it in terms of subsection (6), the State Procurement
Board is satisfied that there has been a contravention of this Act or any other law in relation to any procurement
proceedings or procurement contract, the State Procurement Board may take such action as in its opinion is
necessary to rectify the contravention, including —
(a) annulment of the procurement proceedings;
(b) cancellation of the procurement contract;
APP. 10 - 32
APPENDIX 10
(c) condonation of the contravention;

(d) ratification of anything done in relation to the proceedings;
(e) a declaration in terms of section forty-one;
and, notwithstanding any other law, the proceedings or contract concerned shall be annulled, cancelled or have
effect, as the case may be, accordingly.
(3) Before taking any action in terms of subsection (2) which may adversely affect the rights or property of
any person, the State Procurement Board shall afford that person an adequate opportunity to make representations
in the matter.
48 Offences relating to procurement
If any supplier, or any person acting or purporting to act on behalf of a supplier—
(a) knowingly misrepresents any material fact in a tender, bid or proposal submitted in any procurement
proceedings; or
(b) enters or attempts to enter into a collusive agreement or arrangement, whether enforceable or not, with
any other supplier whereby the prices quoted in their respective tenders, bids or proposals are or would
be, as the case may be, higher than would have been the case had there been no collusion between the
suppliers concerned;
he shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level eight or to imprisonment for a period not
exceeding two years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.
[Section as amended by Act No. 22 of 2001]
49 Application of Act to BOOT or BOT contracts

(1) In this section
“BOOT or BOT contract” means a contract or other arrangement under which a person undertakes to
construct an item of infrastructure for the State, a local authority or a statutory body in consideration for
the right to operate or control it for a specified period, after which period he will transfer or restore
ownership or control to the State, the local authority or the statutory body concerned.
(2) The Act shall apply, mutatis mutandis, in respect of BOOT or BOT contracts as if they were procurement
contracts, and for that purpose
(a) every person who enters or offers to enter into such a contract with the State or a local authority or
statutory body shall be deemed to be a supplier; and
(b) the State or a local authority or statutory body shall be deemed to be a procuring entity in regard to any
such contract which it enters into or seeks to enter into.
50 Savings
“former board” means the Government tender board constituted pursuant to instructions issued by the
Treasury under section 18 of the Audit and Exchequer Act [Chapter 22:03].
(2) Anything made, done or commenced by the former board which, immediately before the date of
commencement of this Act, had or was capable of acquiring legal effect shall continue to have or to be capable of
acquiring, as the case may be, the same effect as if it had been made, done or commenced, as the case may be, by
the State Procurement Board in terms of this Act.
APP. 10 - 33
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.2
Table A10.2 Water Supply Construction Cost
Target Year of 2020 (1/2)
No. Sub-No Facility Category Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price LC FC Total
(USD) (K USD) (M YEN) (K USD)
1.1 1.1.1 Distribution DIP D700 m 1,780 1,294 230 162 2,303
Pipe D600 m 3,290 1,011 333 233 3,326
D400 m 430 627 27 19 270
D350 m 2,850 537 153 107 1,530
Pipe
uPVC D355 m 70 144 9 0 10
installation
D250 m 40 88 3 0 4
D200 m 3,470 57 179 2 199
D160 m 4,100 46 170 1 189
Pipe Sub-Total 1,105 524 7,830
Gate Valve 700 unit 1 47,960 5 3 48
600 unit 3 20,480 6 4 61
450 unit 5 11,335 6 4 57
350 unit 4 6,321 3 2 25
300 unit 3 3,302 1 1 10
Valve 250 unit 2 2,070 0 0 4
200 unit 7 1,498 1 1 10
150 unit 11 872 1 1 10
100 unit 5 510 0 0 3
Installation of Valve LS 1 65,000 52 1 65
Valve Sub-Total 75 17 293
a. Direct Cost 1,180 541 8,123
b. Consulting Services: 7% 83 38 569
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 1,262 579 8,692
d. Price Contingency: 5% 63 29 435
e. Physical Contingency: 5% 63 29 435
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,388 637 9,561
g. Administration Cost: 9% 861 0 861
h. VAT: 15% 1,434 0 1,434
i. Import Tax: 10% of FC 694 0 694
3 Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 4,378 637 12,551
1.1.2 Seke Pump 10m3/mx28mHx60kW unit 3 65,000 20 14 195
Reservoir Pipework unit 1 195,000 20 14 195
P/S Electrical unit 1 260,000 26 18 260
El i l R
Electrical Room 50 2
50m2 unit
i 1 81
81,250
250 73 1 81
P/S Sub-Total 138 46 731
Tank 100m3 unit 1 100,000 90 1 100
Facilities unit 1 65,000 33 3 65
Disinfection
House 60m2 unit 1 117,000 105 1 117
Disinfection Sub-Total 228 4 282
DIP D700 m 40 1,480 6 4 59
D600 m 30 1,142 3 2 34
D500 m 100 882 9 6 88
D400 m 80 696 6 4 56
Pipe
D350 m 90 602 5 4 54
uPVC D300 m 72 157 10 0 11
Additional Excavation unit 1 26,000 23 0 26
Pipe Sub-Total 63 21 329
Gate Valve 700 unit 1 47,960 5 3 48
600 unit 3 20,480 6 4 61
500 unit 1 10,126 1 1 10
400 unit 1 5,144 1 0 5
Valve
350 unit 5 6,321 3 2 32
300 unit 4 3,302 1 1 13
Installation unit 1 39,000 35 0 39
Valve Sub-Total 52 12 208
Electric D600 unit 1 78,000 8 5 78
Mechanical D400 unit 1 32,500 3 2 33
Flow Meter Mechanical D350 unit 1 26,000 3 2 26
Meter Pit unit 1 26,000 23 0 26
Flow Meter Sub-Total 37 10 163
DIP D600 unit 6,889 1,011 696 489 6,964
Transmissio Valve D600 unit 2 20,480 4 3 41
n Main Connection D350 unit 1 13,000 1 1 13
Transmission Sub-Total 702 492 7,017
a. Direct Cost 1,220 586 8,731
b. Consulting Services: 7% 85 41,000 611
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 1,305 627 9,342
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,435 689 10,276
h. VAT: 15% 1,541 0 1,541
APP. 10 - 34
APPENDIX 10
Water Supply Construction Cost
Target Year of 2020 (2/2)
1.1 1.1.3 Well Groups Well digging D200*60m ea 30 7,000 189 2 210
Well facilities HP ea 15 2,000 3 2 30
Well facilities EP ea 15 8,000 12 8 120
Well 80
Pipe D80 km 12 35,000 378 3 420
Electrical unit 15 15,000 23 16 225
Well 80 Sub-Total 605 31 1,005
Pump 1.5m3x55mx22kW unit 2 5,000 1 1 10
1.5m3x40mx15kW unit 2 4,000 1 1 8
0.8m3x40mx7.5kW unit 2 3,000 1 0 6
Pipework unit 3 25,000 68 1 75
P/S Electrical Power source unit 1 200,000 180 2 200
Electrical unit 3 50,000 135 1 150
Tank m3 250 650 146 1 163
Pump R m3 90 1,500 122 1 135
P/S Sub-Total 653 7 747
uPVC D160 m 700 46 29 0 32
D200 m 2,550 57 131 1 145
Pipe D250 m 6,100 88 483 4 537
Flow meter D160 unit 3 15,000 5 3 45
Pipe Sub-Total 647 9 759
a. Direct Cost 1,905 47 2,511
b. Consulting Services: 7% 133 3,309 176
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 2,038 51 2,687
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 2,242 56 2,955
h. VAT: 15% 443 0 443
Grand Total 29,771
Target Year of 2030

1.2 1.2.1 Distribution DIP D400 m 13,300 621 826 580 8,263
Pipe
Pipe Valve D400 unit 1 104,000 10 7 104
installation
Pipe Sub-Total 837 587 8,367
Mech LS 1 39,000 4 3 39
Others Meter Pit 600 unit 3 19,500 6 4 59
Other Sub-Total 10 7 98
a. Direct Cost 846 594 8,464
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 906 636 9,057
d. Price Contingency 5% 45 32 453
e. Physical Contingency 5% 45 32 453
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 996 699 9,963
h. VAT: 15% 1,494 0 1,494
1. Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 4,150 699 13,116
Urgent
1.3 1.3.1 Shallow Wells Digging 10m Unit 280 500 126 1 140
Supplemantal
Hand pump Unit 700 300 189 2 210
Water Suppy
Shallow Borehole D160mmxh50m unit 51 9,000 413 4 459
Well Elc. Pump & tank unit 20 3,000 54 0 60
Pipe replace unit 1 1,000,000 900 8 1,000
Shallow well Sub-Total 1,682 15 1,869
a. Direct Cost 1,682 15 1,869
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 1,800 16 2,000
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,980 17 2,200
h. VAT: 15% 330 0 330
1. Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 2,527 17 2,747
APP. 10 - 35
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.3
Table A10.3 Sewage Facilities Construction Cost
Target Year of 2020

Sub- Unit Price LC FC Total
No. Facility Unit Process Work Description Detail Unit Quantity
No (USD) (K USD) (M YEN) (K USD)
2.1 2.1.1 Option 1 Civil Work
New Anaerobic Pond Earth Work Half Soft Rock m3 180,000 78 12,636 109 14,040
Stabilization Sheeting Water Proof m2 60,000 90 540 379 5,400
Pond Facultative Pond Earth Work Half Soft Rock m3 360,000 78 25,272 219 28,080
Sheeting Water Proof m2 240,000 90 2,160 1,516 21,600
Maturation Pond Earth Work Half Soft Rock m3 54,000 78 3,791 33 4,212
Sheeting Water Proof m2 36,000 90 324 227 3,240
Road 5m width Tar Macadum m2 230,000 37 7,659 66 8,510
Inyard Pipelines 500mm dia AC Avg depth 2m m 2,000 210 378 3 420
M/E Refurbishing STP ME 2-1 (3) LS 1 175,343 18 12 175
a. Direct Cost 52,777 2,566 85,677
b. Consulting Services: 7% 3,694 180 5,997
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 56,472 2,745 91,675
d. Price Contingency 5% 2,824 137 4,584
e. Physical Contingency 5% 2,965 144 4,813
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 62,260 3,027 101,071
g. Administration Cost: 9% 9,096 0 9,096
h. VAT: 15% 15,161 0 15,161
i. Import Tax: 10% of FC 3,290 0 3,290
2.1.1 Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 89,808 3,027 128,619
2.1.2 Option 2 Trickling Filter
Trickling Civil Work TF structure RC work m3 895 540 435 4 483
Filters + OD Pipe work 500mm dia m 70 210 13 0 15
M/E Mech/Elec works STP ME 2-1 (3) LS 1 175,343 18 12 175
Sprinkler LS 1 65,000 7 5 65
Total (TF) 472 21 738
Oxidation Ditch
Civil Work Miscellaneous Repair Work LS 1 200,000 180 2 200
Structure Removal m3 130 120 14 0 16
OD Structure RC Work m3 6,480 540 3,149 27 3,499
M/E Mech/ Elec Work 1 STP ME 22-1
1 (2) LS 1 5,133,288 513 360 5,133
15kw x 8 x 2 units 16 221,000 354 248 3,536
Elect Work LS 1 55,250 50 0 55
Total (OD) 4,260 638 12,439
a. Direct Cost 4,732 659 13,178
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 5,063 705 14,100
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 5,582 777 15,545
h. VAT: 15% 2,332 0 2,332
2.1.1 Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 10,158 777 20,121
2.1.3 Option 3 Trickling Filter See above Total (TF) 472 21 738
Trickling BNR
Filters + BNR Civil Work Miscellaneous Repair Work LS 1 200,000 180 2 200
M/E STP orig(2) Refurbishing LS 1 9,000,000 900 632 9,000
Total (BNR) 1,080 633 9,200
a. Direct Cost 1,552 654 9,938
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 1,661 700 10,634
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,831 771 11,724
h. VAT: 15% 1,759 0 1,759
APP. 10 - 36
APPENDIX 10
Target Year of 2030

Unit Price LC FC Total
No. Sub- Facility Unit Process Work Description Detail Unit Quantity
2.2 2.2.1 Sewer Pipes & Pipes
Pump Station Road 4m width Tar Macadum m2 16,000 37 533 5 592
Pipelines 225mm dia HDPE Avg depth 1.5m m 2,000 100 20 14 200
250mm dia HDPE Avg depth 1.5m m 2,000 110 22 15 220
Miscellaneous LS 1 2,000 2 0 2
Sub-Total 577 34 1,014
Pump Station
Building RC Underground m3 2,300 90 186 2 207
Aboveground m3 1,100 90 10 7 99
Miscellaneous LS 1 132,000 119 1 132
M/E Mech work 30kw x 3.3 m3/min LS 1 212,000 21 15 212
Elect work LS 1 53,000 5 4 53
Sub-Total 342 28 703
a. Direct Cost 918 62 1,717
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 982 67 1,837
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,083 73 2,026
h. VAT: 15% 304 0 304
Urgent
Unit Price LC FC Total
No. Sub- Facility Unit Process Work Description Detail Unit Quantity
2.3 2.3.1 Tilcor Pipes (Newly)
Industrial Pipelines 200 mm dia SP ×2, Avg depth 1.5m m 200 184 4 3 37
Area 300 mm dia AC, ×2, Open piping m 200 67 1 1 13
Pipe Support RC 50 x 50, H=5m nos. 50 540 24 0 27
Sub-Total 29 4 77
Pump Station
Building Tank Surface Repair RC work m3 10 540 5 0 5
Miscellaneous (10% of RC repair) LS 1 540 0 0 1
M/E Sewage Pump 28 kw, 150 m nos. 3 25,084 8 5 75
Submergible Pump for se 1.5 kw nos. 1 1,716 0 0 1
Screen W=500 mm, 50 mm in opening nos. 1 1,354 0 0 1
Electrical panel nos. 1 77,893 6 4 78
Sub-Total 19 10 162
a. Direct Cost 97 27 239
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 103 29 256
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 114 31 282
h. VAT: 15% 42 0 42
2.1.1 Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 216 31 384
APP. 10 - 37
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.4
Table A10.4 Cost for Alternative Options of the Solid Waste Management Master Plan
Unit Cost LC FC Total
No. Sub-No. Facility Unit Quantity
USD K USD M YEN K USD
3.1 3.1.1 Clean-up of Illegal Dumping Site LS 1 4,387,500 3,949 34 4,388
a. Direct Cost 3,949 34 4,388
b. Consulting Services 7% 276 2 307
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 4,225 37 4,695
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 4,658 40 5,176
g. Administration Cost 9% of LC 466 0 466
h. VAT 15% of LC 776 0 776
i. Import Tax 10% of FC 44 0 44
Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 5,944 40 6,463
3.1.2 Procurement of Collection Equipment LS 1 11,694,800 1,169 821 11,695
a. Direct Cost 1,169 821 11,695
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 1,251 878 12,514
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,380 968 13,796
g. Administration Cost 9% of LC 1,242 0 1,242
h. VAT 15% of LC 2,069 0 2,069
i. Import Tax 10% of FC 1,053 0 1,053
3.1.3 Safety Closure of Existing Open Dump Site LS 1 13,766,620 1,377 966 13,767
a. Direct Cost 1,377 966 13,767
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 1,473 1,034 14,731
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 1,624 1,140 16,241
h. VAT 15% of LC 2,436 0 2,436
i. Import Tax 10% of FC 1,239 0 1,239
Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 6,761 1,140 21,378
3.1.4 Construction of New Final Disposal Facility LS 1 9,800,763 6,725 240 9,801
a. Direct Cost 6,725 240 9,801
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 7,196 257 10,487
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 7,934 283 11,562
h. VAT 15% of LC 1,734 0 1,734
3.1.5 Home Compost LS 1 58,327 44 1 58
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 47 1 63
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 52 1 70
h. VAT 15% of LC 10 0 10
Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 70 1 88
3.1.6 Community Compost Plant LS 1 133,623 109 2 134
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 116 2 143
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 128 2 158
h. VAT 15% of LC 24 0 24
Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 168 2 199
3.1.7 MRF (Material Recovery Facility) LS 1 970,855 330 50 971
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 353 53 1,039
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 389 59 1,145
h. VAT 15% of LC 172 0 172
Round Up Total Cost (f+g+h+i) 728 59 1,485
3.1.8 Central Composting Facility LS 1 5,705,848 2,498 250 5,706
a. Direct Cost 2,498 250 5,706
c. Sub-Total (a+b) 2,673 268 6,105
f. Sub-Total (c+d+e) 2,947 295 6,731
h. VAT 15% of LC 1,010 0 1,010
Grand-Total 35,314 2,788,978 71,086
APP. 10 - 38
APPENDIX 10
3.1.1 Cleanup of Illegal Dumping Site

Description Unit Quantity Unit Price LC FC Total Cost
Cleanup by Front-End Loader (Capacity: 200m 3/day) * unit-day 6,000 195 1,053 9 1,170
Cleanup by Dump Truck (15m 3 Truck in 5 trips) * unit-day 16,500 195 2,896 25 3,218
a. Direct Cost 3,949 34 4,388
* Including rental fee of the equipments, operators and fuel
3.1.2 Procurement of Collection Equipment

Description Unit Price Quantity LC FC Total Cost
Tipper Truck (10m 3) (Backup: 1) 172,900 10 173 121 1,729
Compactor Truck (8m3) (Backup: 1) 243,100 8 194 136 1,945
Multi Loader (5m3) (Backup: 1) 223,600 20 447 314 4,472
Skip Bin (5m3) * 3,250 1,092 355 249 3,549
a. Direct Cost 1,169 821 11,695
* Durable years of Skip bin is estimate 5 years.
3.1.3. Safety Closure of Existing Open Dump site

Excavation & transfer of Existing Waste m3 724,200 7 507 356 5,069
Landfilling of Existing Waste (A=200m x 350m) m3 724,200 10 724 508 7,242
Final Cover Soil (t=0.2m for 4 years, t=0.5m for 1 year) m3 91,000 10 91 64 910
Gas Exhaust - Vertical Type PVC200mm unit 40 163 1 0 7
Operation Road (Gravel) (L=800m, W=10m) m2 8,000 48 38 27 384
Drainage (Drain Ditch) m 1,300 55 7 5 72
Fence, H=2.5m m 1,300 64 8 6 83
a. Direct Cost 1,377 966 13,767
APP. 10 - 39
APPENDIX 10
3.1.4. Construction of New Final Disposal Facility

Civil Work
Excavation - Soil m3 55,698 7 351 3 390
Excavation - Weathered Rocks m3 111,395 7 702 6 780
Excavation - Rocks m3 18,566 195 3,258 28 3,620
Acess Road (Gravel) m2 2,080 48 90 1 100
Onsite Road (Gravel) m2 10,080 48 435 4 484
Retaining Wall-Embankment-Soil m3 7,728 10 70 1 77
Retaining Wall-Embankment-Rubble Stone m3 1,932 341 593 5 659
Gas Exhaust - Vertical Type PVC200mm unit 43 163 6 0 7
Leachate Collection Facilities (Drain Pipe - Main) m 400 338 122 1 135
Leachate Collection Facilities (Drain Pipe - Branch) m 3,240 117 341 3 379
Resrvoir Pit unit 3 27,300 74 1 82
Leachate Treatment Pond - Excavation - Soil m3 2,500 7 16 0 18
Leachate Treatment Pond - Excavation - Weathered Rocks m3 2,500 7 16 0 18
Impermeable Liner Sheet Laying (HDPC, t=2mm) container 8 75,905 61 43 607
Connection Drainage m 50 52 2 0 3
Groundwater Monitoring Well 30% 2 8,970 16 0 18
Rainwater Drainage - 900-300x520 m 1,260 86 98 1 108
Rainwater Drainage - 1200-600x520 7% 160 104 15 0 17
Fence, H=2.5m m 2,670 64 154 1 171
Gate 5% 2 7,800 14 0 16
Civil Works Direct Cost 6,433 97,827 7,687
Building Works
Administration m2 100 260 21 0 26
Warehouse m2 100 260 21 0 26
Building Works Direct Cost 42 811 52
Equipment
Truck Scale (capacity 40ton) unit 1 112,060 56 4 112
Pump Installing Works (6.6kW) unit 2 6,240 1 1 12
Truck Excavator unit 1 637,000 64 45 637
Bulldozer unit 1 624,000 62 44 624
Dump Truck unit 2 182,000 36 26 364
Wheel Loader unit 1 312,000 31 22 312
Equipment Direct Cost 251 141,188 2,062
3.1.4. Total Direct Cost 6,725 239,826 9,801
3.1.5. Home Compost

Materials & Equipment
Plastic Container (40 Lit.) m2 200 13 2 0 2,600
Plastic Container (2 Lit.) m3 200 7 1 0 1,400
Material for Seeding m3 1 520 0 0 520
Misce. Tools for Seeding m2 1 455 0 0 455
Dissemination Materials (e.g. Pamphlets) set 100 13 1 0 1,300
Facilitator / Instructor man/month 2 14,014 14 1 28,028
Assistant Facilitator / Instructor man/month 3 8,008 24 0 24,024
3.1.5. Total Direct Cost 43,686 1,141,744 58,327
APP. 10 - 40
APPENDIX 10
3.1.6 Community Compost Plant

Civil Work
Site Clearing m2 1,250 7 7.88 0.07 8.75
Excavation m3 250 7 1.58 0.01 1.75
Earth Filling & Compaction m3 275 10 2.48 0.02 2.75
Primise Road with Pavement, Gravel Compaction: 3.5m(W m2 140 48 6.05 0.05 6.72
Drainage (Drain Ditch), H=30 cm m 150 55 7.43 0.06 8.25
Fence, H=1.8m m 150 63 8.51 0.07 9.45
Steel Gate: 2.5m(H) x 6m(W) incl. installation L.S. 1 3,900 3.51 0.03 3.90
Civil Works Direct Cost 37.41 0.32 41.57
Building Works
Compost Processing Building m2 125 260 26.00 0.51 32.50
Guard House m2 10 3,900 35.10 0.3 39.00
Utilities (Water Supply, Power Supply) LS 1 3,380 3.04 0.03 3.38
Septic Tankl LS 1 3,380 3.04 0.03 3.38
Building Works Direct Cost 67.18 0.86 78.26
Equipment
Platform Scale, 0 - 150 kg unit 1 858 0.43 0.03 0.86
Shredder (3.75 kW) unit 1 8,580 0.86 0.6 8.58
Manual Sieve unit 1 858 0.09 0.06 0.86
Plastic Container, 75 litter unit 30 26 0.70 0.01 0.78
Electric Thermometer pc 2 182 0.33 0. 0.36
Hand Cart for Collection unit 1 260 0.23 0. 0.26
WaterJet Pump, Hose & Nozzle unit 1 1,235 1.11 0.01 1.24
Tools & Equipmnt LS 1 858 0.17 0.05 0.86
Total Construction Cost 3.92 0.77 13.79
3.1.6. Total Direct Cost 108.52 1.96 133.62
3.1.7 Material Recovery Facility (MRF)

Civil Work
Excavation m3 304.8 7 2 0.02 2
Earth Filling & Compaction m3 304.8 10 3 0.02 3
Primise Road with Pavement m2 846 48 37 0.32 41
Drainage (Drain Ditch) m 175 55 9 0.08 10
Fence, H=2.5m m 175 208 33 0.28 36
Civil Works Direct Cost 83 0.72 92
Building Works
MRF Building m2 762 260 158 3.09 198
Administration Building m2 24 260 5 0.1 6
Utilities (Water Supply, Power Supply) LS 1 13,000 12 0.1 13
Septic Tank LS 1 6,500 6 0.05 7
Building Works Direct Cost 181 3.34 224
Equipment
Weigh Bridge (30 ton) incl. installation unit 1 112,060 11 7.86 112
Crusher or Shredder unit 1 17,160 2 1.2 17
Granulator unit 1 8,580 1 0.6 9
Packing Machine unit 1 8,580 1 0.6 9
Conveyor: 0.9m(W), 10m (L) incl. installation unit 2 46,800 9 6.57 94
Hopper unit 2 13,000 3 1.82 26
Wheel Loader: 75KW, Bucket 1.5 - 2 m3 unit 1 312,000 31 21.9 312
Open Truck (2 ton) unit 1 68,900 7 4.84 69
Water jet Pump, Horse & Nozzle unit 1 1,300 0 0.09 1
Tools & Equipmnt unit 1 7,000 1 0.44 7
Equipment Direct Cost 66 45.93 655
3.1.8. Total Direct Cost 330 49.98 971
APP. 10 - 41
APPENDIX 10
3.1.8. Central Compost

Civil Work
Excavation m3 7,700 7 49 0.42 54
Earth Filling & Compaction m3 7,700 10 69 0.60 77
Primise Road with Pavement m2 1,560 48 67 0.58 75
Drainage (Drain Ditch) m 352 55 17 0.15 19
Fence, H=2.5m m 352 64 20 0.18 23
Civil Works Direct Cost 223 1.93 248
Building Works
Compost Building m2 5,328 260 1,108 21.60 1,385
Administration Building m2 80 260 17 0.32 21
Receiving Area m2 75 260 16 0.30 20
Primary Sorting Area m2 75 260 16 0.30 20
Primary Treatment Area m2 100 260 21 0.41 26
Process Area m2 80 260 17 0.32 21
Storage Area of Resideual Waste m2 50 260 10 0.20 13
Utilities (Water Supply, Power Supply) LS 1 585,000 527 4.56 585
Septic Tank LS 1 260,000 234 2.03 260
Building Works Direct Cost 1,964 30.06 2,350
Equipment
Weigh Bridge (30 ton) incl. installation, Belt Conveyor -

5ton per hour (w:1.0m x L8.0m), Bag Breaker- 5 tons per
hour per unit, Rotary Drum Cutter, Screen and LS 1 1,950,000 195 136.85 1,950
Seggregation (or Shear Drum) - 5 tons per hour per unit,
Granulator -3.5 tons per hour per unit, Packaging
Machine for 40 kg per sack, Tools & Equipmnt
Equipment for Compost Operation
Wheel Loader - Bucket of 1.0-1.5m3, 85HP unit 2 312,000 62 43.79 624
Open Dump Truck-Loading Capacity 2 tons unit 2 97,500 20 13.69 195
Compost Operation Equipment Direct Cost 82 57.48 819
Collection Vehicles for Compostable Waste
Open Dump Truck-Loading Capacity 4 tons unit 3 113,100 34 23.81 339
Collection Vehicles for Compostable Waste Direct Cost 34 23.81 339
3.1.8. Total Direct Cost 2,498 250.14 5,706
APP. 10 - 42
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.5
Table A10.5 Estimated O&M Cost for Water Supply

Electricity
Energy charge per kWh 0.12 USD
acity charge per unit of demand (each location) 6.84 USD
Power Unit Operation time Consumption Consumption Daily Cost
Name
(kW) (duty) (hr) Rate (kWh) (USD)
Lift pump 60 2 10 0.8 960 115.2
Mixer 0.75 4 6 0.8 14.4 1.728
Well pumps 3.7 15 20 0.8 888 113.4
Transmission pumps 44.5 1 16 0.8 569.6 75.192
Sub Total 2,432 305.52
Energy Charge Capacity Charge Annual Cost
Name
Daily Cost Sub-total Rate Unit no. Sub-total (USD)
Lift pump 115.2 42,048 6.84 2 164.16 42,212
Mixer 1.728 631 6.84 4 328.32 959
Well pumps 113.4 41,391 6.84 15 1231.2 42,622
Transmission pumps 75.192 27,445 6.84 1 82.08 27,527
Sub Total 113,321
VAT (15%) 16,998
Total 130,319
Chemicals
Well water Injection Ratio Chlorine Hypochlorite* Unit Cost** Daily Cost Annual Cost
Name
(m3/d) (mg/L) (kg) (kg) (USD/kg) (USD) (USD)
Hypochlorite 3,000 1 3 5 4.03 20.15 7,355
VAT (15%) 1,103
Total 8,458
* Hypochlorite is 60% of Chlorine
Staff
Unit Price No. Annual Cost
Classification
USD/ person (USD)
Superintendent* 28,264 1 28,264
Attendant* 17,149 7 120,043
Foreman 16,927 6 101,562
Operator 7,853 44 345,532
General Staff 5,986 33 197,538
Total 91 792,939
* No information available for this classification. Referenced from the Employment Cost of Sewerage Operation
Facility Maintenance Cost

New M&E New Existing Existing
Facilities
New Pipes
Structures Structure Distribution Total
1. Urgent (Supplemental Water Supply) 270,000 1,000,000 599,000
2. Distribution Pipe 8,123,445
3. Seke Reservoir 715,000 7,717,276 298,250
4. Supplemental Water Supply 824,000 1,179,350 507,500
Existing/ Urgent + 2020 Total Direct Cost 1,809,000 18,020,070 1,404,750 4,000,000 30,000,000
Rate for O&M cost (%) 5.0 0.2 5.0 0.1 1.0
Annual O&M Cost 2020 (USD) 90,450 36,041 70,238 4,000 300,000 500,729.00
5. 2030 Distribution Pipe 201,500 8,262,891
2030 Total Direct Cost 2,010,500 26,282,961 1,404,750 4,000,000 30,000,000
Rate for O&M cost (%) 5.0 0.2 5.0 0.1 1.0
Annual O&M Cost 2030 (USD) 100,525 52,566 70,238 4,000 300,000 527,329.00
APP. 10 - 43
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.6
Table A10.6 Estimated O&M Cost for Sewerage management
Electricity
A monthly capacity charge per unit of demand (each location) 6.84 USD
STP VAT= 15%
Option 1 Flow 36,000m3/d
Item
Stabilization Ponds kW No. Hours kWH
Stabilization Ponds Pump (Faculative) 5.5 1 16 32,120
Pump (Maturation) 22 1 16 128,480
Total Cost (USD) 19,279
Total Cost w/ VAT (USD) 22,171
Option 2 Item Flow 20,000m3/d
TF+OD kW No. Hours kWH
TF Pump 37 2 16 432,160
New Pump 22 1 16 128,480
Sludge pump(ST-TT) 1.5 1 6 3,285
Sludge pump(TT-DB) 1.5 1 6 3,285
Irrigation pump 110 1 24 963,600
Sub-Total Cost (USD) 183,704
OD Pump 127.4 1 16 744,016
Pump (OD) 22 1 16 128,480
Sludge Pump (OD) 123.7 1 6 270,903
Sewage Pump (OD) 172.6 1 16 1,007,984
Sludge Pump 36.3 1 6 79,497
Option 3 Item Flow 20,000m3/d
TF+BNR kW LS Hours kWH
TF Pump 37 2 16 432,160
New Pump 22 1 16 128,480
BNR Pump 127.4 1 16 744,016
Aerator 882 1 24 7,726,320
Mixer 132 1 24 1,156,320
RAS 88 1 24 770,880
WAS 7.5 1 6 16,425
Sludge Pump 44.3 1 6 97,017
Sub-Total Cost (USD) 1,261,324
Total Cost (USD) 1,445,028
Total Cost w/ VAT (USD) 1,661,782
Pum Station
Item kW No. Hours kWH
Pump Station Pump 30 3 6 197,100
Tilcor Industrial Area

APP. 10 - 44
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.6
Table A10.6 Estimated O&M Cost for Sewerage management
Electricity
A monthly capacity charge per unit of demand (each location) 6.84 USD
STP VAT= 15%
3
Option 1 Flow 36,000 m /d
Item
Stabilization Ponds kW No. Hours kWH
Stabilization Ponds Pump (Faculative) 5.5 1 16 32,120
Pump (Maturation) 22 1 16 128,480
Option 2 Item Flow 20,000 m3/d
TF+OD kW No. Hours kWH
TF Pump 37 2 16 432,160
New Pump 22 1 16 128,480
OD Pump 127.4 1 16 744,016
Pump (OD) 22 1 16 128,480
Sludge Pump (OD) 123.7 1 6 270,903
Sewage Pump (OD) 172.6 1 16 1,007,984
Sludge Pump 36.3 1 6 79,497
Option 3 Item Flow 20,000 m3/d
TF+BNR kW LS Hours kWH
TF Pump 37 2 16 432,160
New Pump 22 1 16 128,480
BNR Pump 127.4 1 16 744,016
Aerator 882 1 24 7,726,320
Mixer 132 1 24 1,156,320
RAS 88 1 24 770,880
WAS 7.5 1 6 16,425
Sludge Pump 44.3 1 6 97,017
Sub-Total Cost (USD) 1,261,324
Total Cost (USD) 1,445,028
Total Cost w/ VAT (USD) 1,661,782
Pum Station

APP. 10 - 45
APPENDIX 10
Staff
STP
Super- General
Attendant Foreman Operator
Treatment Method Classfication intendent Staff Total
Capacity USD/person 28,264 17,149 17,149 7,851 5,382
Option 1 Stabilization Ponds No. 2 5 15 16 29 67
Flow 36,000 m3/d K USD 57 86 257 126 156 681
Option 2 Trickling Filters No. 1 6 8 18 16 49
3
Flow 26,100 m /d K USD 28 103 137 141 86 496
Oxidation Ditch No. 2 6 8 12 11 39
Flow 20,000 m3/d K USD 57 103 137 94 59 450
Total
K USD 85 206 274 236 145 946
46,100 m3/d
Option 3 Trickling Filters No. 1 6 8 18 16 49
Flow 26,100 m3/d K USD 28 103 137 141 86 496
BNR No. 2 6 8 18 16 50
3
Flow 20,000 m /d K USD 57 103 137 141 86 524
Total
K USD 85 206 274 283 172 1,020
46,100 m3/d
Pump Station
General
Superintendent Attendant Foreman Operator
Staff Total
Unit cost (USD) 28,264 17,149 17,149 7,851 5,382
No. 0 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.0 3.5
Cost (K USD) 0 9 26 4 5 44

General
Superintendent Attendant Foreman Operator
Staff Total
Unit cost (USD) 28,264 17,149 17,149 7,851 5,382
No. 0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.5
Cost (K USD) 0 0 0 4 0 4
* One operator monitors Pump station and Tilcor industrial area from STP usually.
APP. 10 - 46
APPENDIX 10
APPENDIX 10.7
Table A10.7 Solid Waste Management O&M Cost
1. Collection Cost (2030)
Number of Operating facilities (Collection Vehicles, Skip Bins)

Tipper Truck 9
Compactor Truck 7
Multi Loader 19
Number of Skip Bin 364
Unit Cost Cost
1 Personal Cost Number
(USD/year) (USD/year)
1.2.1 Drivers of Tipper Truck 9 9,700 87300
1.2.2 Crew of Tipper Truck 72 7,300 525600
1.2.3 Drivers of Compactor Truck 7 9,700 67900
1.2.4 Crews of Compactor Truck 21 7,300 153300
1.2.5 Drivers of Multi Loader 19 9,700 184300
1.2.6 Crews of Multi Loader 57 7,300 416100
Total Cost for Operation and Maintenance Staff 1,434,500
Annual Annual
Fuel
Unit Cost of Haulage Haulage Total Annual Fuel
Consumption
2. Fuel Cost Fuel Distance (km) Distance (km) Consumed Cost
per litter
(USD/litter) per Unit for Total Fuel (Litter) (USD/year)
(km/litter)
Vehicle Vehicles
2.1 Tipper Truck 1.33 2 17,280 155,520 77,760 103,421
2.2 Compactor Truck 1.33 2 17,280 120,960 60,480 80,438
2.3 Multi Loader 1.33 2 34,560 656,640 328,320 436,666
Total Cost for Fuel 620,525
3. Repairing Cost (Base Procurement Price x 3 % : JICA nairobi Study in 2009)

33.11 Tipper Truck (USD/year) 35 910
35,910
3.2 Compactor Truck (USD/year) 27,930
3.3 Multi Loader (USD/year) 75,810
Total of Repairing Cost 139,650
4. Cost of Water to be required for Operation and Maintenance

4.1 Consumption of Water per Year
4.1.1 Water (m3) for washing vehicles (30 litter/unit/day) 78
4.1.2 Water (m3) for washing skip bin (30 litter/unit/day) 3,145 *Water Cost
4.2 Cost of Water Consumption * Minimum Water Charge: 3.9
4.2.1 Minimum Water Charge (USD/year) 46.8 USD/Connection/Month
Water Volume Charge: 0.3 USD/m3
4.2.2 Water for Washing Vehicles (USD/year) 23
4.2.3 Water for Skip Bin (USD/year) 943
Total Cost of Water Consumption 1,014
5. Primary Collection by CBOs Activity

5.1 Number of carts and staff for Primary Collection
5.1.1 Target Collection Ratio (%) 100
5.1.2 Non-Collection Service Population Ratio (%) 0
5.1.3 Primary Collection Ratio to Total Population (%) 24.7
5.1.4 Total Population 455,900
5.1.5 Population for Primary Collection 112,607
5.1.6 Number of Household for Primary Collection 12512
5.1.7 Number of Target Areas for Primary Collection 125
5.1.8 Annual Increase of Target Areas 1
5.1.9 Number of Operators for Primary Collection 250
5.2 Cost for Primary Collection
5.2.1 Procurement of Manual Carts ** (USD/year) 250 ** 250 USD/ Cart
5.2.2 Operation Cost for Primary Collection *** (USD/year) 900,000 *** 300 USD / Operator / Month
Total Cost of Primary Collection 900,250
p
Grand Total of Operation and Maintenance Cost for Collection: , ,
3,095,938 USD
APP. 10 - 47
APPENDIX 10
2. New Final Disposal Facility Cost (2030)

Unit Price Cost
1 personal Cost Number
1.1 Site Manager 1 22,000 22,000
1.2 Chief of Engineering Section 1 16,000 16,000
1.3 Weighing Bridge Engineer 1 7,300 7,300
1.4 Inspector 1 16,000 16,000
1.5 Operators 5 9,700 48,500
1.6 Secretary 1 7,300 7,300
1.7 Security Guard 1 7,300 7,300
Sub Total 11 124,400
Fuel per Working Working Annual Unit Cost Cost

2 Fuel Cost Unit
litter Hour Day Volume (USD) (USD/year)
2.1 Bulldozer 1 18 8 24 41,472 1.33 55,158
2.2 Truck Excavator 1 18 8 24 41,472 1.33 55,158
Fuel per Working Annual Unit Cost Annual Fuel
Number
litter Day Volume (USD) Cost
2.3 Wheel Loader 1 10 24 2880 1.33 3,830
Sub Total 37 85,824 114,146
Procureme Cofficient Cost per Unit Cost

3 Maintenance Cost Unit Durable year
nt Cost (α) (USD/year) (USD/year)
3.1 Maintenance Cost for Bulldozer *1 1 624,000 0.60 10.0 37,440 37,440
3.2 Maintenance Cost for Truck Excavator *1 1 637,000 0.45 8.5 33,724 33,724
3.3 Maintenance Cost for Wheel Loader *1 1 312,000 0.65 8.5 23,859 23,859
3.4 Maintenance Cost for Truck Scale *2 1 112,060 0.05 5,603 5,603
Sub Total 4 100,625
*1 Maintenance Cost Estimation for Bulldozer & Excavat Procurement Price x α / Durable Years
*2 Maintenance Cost for Truck Scale : Procurement Price x α
Capacity Working Working Annual Unit Cost Cost

4 Electricity Cost
(kWh) Hour Day Volume (USD/kWh) (USD/year)
4.1 Electricity Cost for Pump 6.6 8 365 19,272 0.12 2,313
4.2 Other Electricity Cost (Offuce, Truck scale and so on) 1000
4.3 Monthly Capacity Charge (6.84 USD/location) 82
Sub Total 3,395

5.1 Consumption of Water per Year (30 litter/unit/day)
3 Water Cost
*3
5.1.1 Water (m ) for washing equipments 35
Minimum Water Charge: 3.9 USD/Connection/Month
5.2 Cost of Water Consumption *3 Water Volume Charge: 0.3 USD/m3
5.2.1 Minimum Water Charge (USD/year) 46.8
Sub Total 57
Monitoring Annual Number of Total Items Unit Cost

6 Environmental Monitoring Cost
Points Times Items (items/year) (USD/item)
*4
6.1 Leachate Water Quality 1 4 8 32 100 3,200
*4
6.2 Groundwater Quality at 2 Monitoring Wells 2 2 8 32 100 3,200
*5
6.3 Landfill Gas Portable Instrument Maintence Cost (4 times per yrear) 1,100
Sub Total 7,500
*4 *5
pH, BOD, COD, SS, NH4+, TDS, E.Coli, Total Coliforms 6 parameters: CH4, CO2, O2, CO, H2S, Temperature,
Maintenan Average Maintenanc Unit Cost Cost

7 Road Mintenance
ce length Road e Area (USD/m2) (USD/year)
7.1 Annual Cost for Road Maintenance 100 8 800 37 29,280
Expansion of Gas Exhaust Pipecommencing Additional Number of Unit Cost Annual Cost
8 Cost (USD) Operating Year
on 2019 Height Unit (USD/m) (USD/year)
8.1 Cost for Expansion of Gas Exhaust Pipe 20 60 125 150,000 12 12,500
Grand Total of Operation and Maintenance Cost for New Final Disposal Facility: 391,903 USD
APP. 10 - 48
APPENDIX 10
3. MRF (2030)
Unit Price Cost

1 personal Cost Number
1.1.1 Site Manager 1 22,000 22000
1.1.2 Weighing Bridge Engineer 1 7,300 7300
1.1.3 Inspector 1 16,000 16000
1.1.4 Operators 10 9,700 97000
1.1.5 Secretary 1 7,300 7300
1.1.6 Security Guard 1 7,300 7300
Sub Total 15 156900
Fuel per litter Working Hour Working Day Volume Unit Cost Cost
2 Fuel Cost Unit
(litter/hour) (hour/day) (day/month) (litter/year) (USD) (USD/year)
2.1 Wheel (Front-end) Loader 1 18 8 24 41,472 1.33 55,158

Working Annual Annual Fuel
Fuel per km Working Day Unit Cost
Unit distance Volume Cost
(litter/km) (day/month) (USD)
(km/day) (litter) (USD/year)
2.2 Open Truck 1 0.5 15 24 2,160 1.33 2,873
Sub Total 2 43,632 58,031
Annual
Daily Volume Working Day Unit Cost Cost
3 Maintenance Cost (2030) Volume
(ton/day) (day/month) (USD/ton) (USD/year)
(ton/year)
3.1 Maintenance Cost for MRF 11 24 3168 2.5 7,920
Electric Annual
Daily Volume Working Day Unit Cost Cost
4 Electricity Cost Requirement Volume
(ton/day) (day/month) (USD/kWh) (USD/year)
(kWh/ton) (kWh/year)
4.1 Electricity Cost for MRF 15 11 24 47520 0.12 5,702
4.3 Monthly Capacity Charge (6.84 USD/location) 82
Sub Total 5,784

5.1.1 Water (m3) for site (100 litter per day per unit) 29
5.2 Cost of Water Consumption * *Water Cost
5.2.1 Minimum Water Charge (USD/year) 46.8 Minimum Water Charge: 3.9 USD/Connection/Month
5.2.2 Water for site (USD/year) 9
Sub Total 55
APP. 10 - 49
APPENDIX 10
4. Central Compost (2030)
Unit Price Cost

Number
1 Personal Cost (USD/year) (USD/year)
1.1 Facility Manager 1 22,000 22,000
1.2 Operator of Heavy Machines 2 9,700 19,400
1.3 Driver of Trucks 2 9,700 19,400
1.4 Labor 4 7,300 29,200
1.5 Weighing Bridge Engineer 1 7,300 7,300
1.6 Secretary 1 7,300 7,300
1.7 Security Guard 1 7,300 7,300
Sub Total 9 111,900
Fuel per Working

Working Day Volume Unit Cost Cost
2 Fuel Cost Unit litter Hour
(day/month) (litter/year) (USD) (USD/year)
(litter/hour) (hour/day)
2.1.1 Front-end Loader 2 11.50 8 24 52,992 1.33 70,479
Working Annual Annual Fuel
Fuel per km Working Day Unit Cost
Unit distance Volume Cost
(litter/km) (day/month) (USD)
(km/day) (litter) (USD/year)
2.1.2 Dump Truck 2 0.50 15 24 4,320 1.33 5,746
Sub Total 4 57,312 76,225
Working Annual
Capacity Working Day Unit Cost Cost
3 Electricity Cost Hour Volume
(kWh) (day/monthe) (USD/kWh) (USD/year)
(hour/day) (kWh)
3. Power Cost 25 6 24 43,200 0.12 5,184
43
4.3 Monthly Capacity Charge (6.84
(6 84 USD/location) 82
Sub Total 5,266
* Batangas case: 50 kW/hr for 60 ton/day, 23 kW/hr at 2026

4.1.1 Water (m3) for washing vehicles (30 litter/unit/day) 35
4.1.2 Water (m3) for composting bin (100 litter/day) 29
Total Water Consumption 63
4.2 Cost of Water Consumption *
4.2.1 Minimum Water Charge (USD/year) 46.8
4.2.3 Water for Composting Bin (USD/year) 9
Total Cost of Water Consumption 66
*Water Cost
Minimum Water Charge: 3.9 USD/Connection/Month
APP. 10 - 50
APPENDIX 11
APPENDIX 11
COST ESTIMATE AND FINANCIAL STUDY
1. Condition and Assumption for Cost Estimates

The following conditions are assumed to prepare the cost estimation for this project.
(1) Cost Construction
1) Base Year July 2012
2) Exchange Rate 1 USD = 77.98 yen
Monthly AVE
2012 1 USD = Yen
Jan 75.98
Feb 77.40
Mar 81.46
Apr 80.55
May 78.75
Jun 78.30
July 78.02
Source: Mitsubishi UFJ
3) Price Escalation Rate Foreign Currency = 3.3 %

Local Currency =5.0%
For information purpose, price escalation applied to the construction cost is estimated using the
IMF inflation (forecasted) and the obtained Zimbabwe CPI inflation from the Reserve Bank of
Zimbabwe (RBZ) to countercheck the trend of the IMF inflation. Based on the IMF external
database 1, the outlook of inflation in Zimbabwe for the next 3 years is approximately 5.0% (see
Figure A13.1). RBZ has been monitoring and published the information of CPI in Zimbabwe to
public for information sharing. According to the RBZ website, the percent changes in 2012 CPI
range from 4.0 to 4.3% that is approximately close to the IMF inflation. Therefore, the IMF
inflation of 5% is applicable figure to be used for the price escalation on the Local Currency
portion. For Foreign Currency, the price escalation of 3.0 % is recommended to be used based on
the IMF.
1 IMF: http://www.imf.org/external/data.htm
APP. 11 - 1
APPENDIX 11
Source: IMF
Figure A11.1: Price Escalation based on IMF Inflation % Change
Table A11.1: CPI from Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe
2012 Monthly Price Year On Year

All Items CPI
Month Increases % Change
Jan 100.4 0.50% 4.3%
Feb 100.9 0.50% 4.3%
Mar 101.3 0.40% 4.0%
Source: the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe
(2) Taxes
1) VAT for Local Currency: 15% of the expenditure in LC of the eligible portion for both
Construction and Consulting Service
2) VAT for Foreign Currency 15% of the expenditure in FC of the eligible portion for
Consulting Service
3) Import Tax 20 % of the expenditure in FC of the eligible portion for
Procurement/ Construction
Table A12.2 Taxes
Import Goods Non –Import Goods
VAT Customs Duty Total VAT
15 % + 5% = 20 % 15%
Custom Duty in Zimbabwe consists of the following four different taxes.
APP. 11 - 2
APPENDIX 11
• COMESA- Common Market for East and Southern Africa. Website http://www.comesa.int/
• SADC – Southern Africa Development Community
• RSA- Republic of South Africa
• SADC (ZA) –Zimbabwe is a member of the 14-nation Southern African Development
Community (SADC), which was formed to promote "regional integration."
(3) Others
1) Administration Cost 8%
2) Physical Contingency 20 %
Based on the previous bid documents obtained from the Chitungwiza Municipality, a
contingency of 10 to 15% was applied. At this stage of cost estimation without detail designs, a
contingency of 20% is applied to the project cost.
3) Engineering Cost 17 %
2. Unit Cost for Construction/Rehabilitation of Facilities
2.1 Unit Cost

(1) Labour Cost
The daily and monthly labour wage cost is collected from local consultant and contractors in
Zimbabwe as shown in Table A11.3.
Table A11.3 Labor Unit Cost
APP. 11 - 3
APPENDIX 11
3. Procurement of Materials and Equipment

The sewage, water supply and solid waste management works were mainly constructed or/and
rehabilitated by local contractors selected through the competitive tender procedure implemented by
Chitungwiza Municipality. Many civil/building contractors registered in Construction Industry
Federation of Zimbabwe (Cifoz) are qualified to provide construction services to sewerage, water
supply, and solid waste management works.
Most of the civil and building construction materials can be procured at local markets. These are
cement, fuel, gasoline, reinforcement bar, asphalt bitumen, structural steel, explosives, timber,
plywood, concrete pipe, polyvinyl chloride pipes up to 400 mm in diameter, ready mixed concrete,
aggregate, sand, building materials while mechanical and electrical equipment for the works is
imported mainly from South Africa.
uPVC pipes with a diameter up to 400 mm are available and stocked for ready to be delivered to
construction sites through local suppliers in Harare. However, uPVC pipes more than 400 mm in
diameter is required to be imported from the neighbor countries, mainly from South Africa and takes
approximately 2 weeks after date of order placed. Water and sewer pumps are available through local
distributors in Harare. However, the orders for pumps need to be placed well in advance,
approximately up to 42 weeks. According to the local suppliers, larger pump units can take as much
as 36 to 42 weeks from date of order placed, medium sized pumps take approximately 12 to 20 weeks,
and other smaller pumps take from 2 weeks up to 6 weeks. Based on the hearing with the local
consultant, the mechanical and electrical equipment for sewage and water supply works are usually
faster to order through distributors, suppliers and contractors in South Africa rather than using the
distributors in Zimbabwe. The imported materials and equipment are transported by trailer or truck from
Port Durban in South Africa to Harare., Zimbabwe
Per the hearing with the local consultants and the contractors, most heavy equipment is locally
APP. 11 - 4
APPENDIX 11
available through local contractors and local rental or lease companies in Harare, Zimbabwe. If
special heavy equipment like cranes is necessary for this project, the heavy equipment is required to
be transported from South Africa by trucks. The duration of the hauling from South Africa to Harare,
Zimbabwe is estimated approximately 30 days after payment installation, but depends on the
availability of equipment in South Africa. Import taxes are not imposed on rented or leased heavy
equipment from other countries, mainly from South Africa.
3.1 Tender Process

For the tender process of construction works in the City of Chitungwiza, Chitungwiza Municipality
Procurement Policy and Procedures is adapted, however, Zimbabwe Chapter 22:14 Procurement Act
supersedes Chitungwiza Municipality Procurement Policy. Based on the hearing with Director of
Works, the duration of the tender process is approximately 3 months.
Chitungwiza Municipality Tender Process Duration

1. Opening Bid to Closing Bid 2 weeks to 1 month
2. Evaluation of the Bids 1 week
3. Procurement Committee Meeting for Recommendation 1 day*
4. Main Counselor Meeting to Bid Approval 1 day*
5. Mobilization by Contractor Max 1 month
Total 3 months**
*After the end of Evaluation of the Bids (Step 2) to the end of Main Counselor Meeting (Step 4)
takes approximately 1 week to 1 month.
** However, bids are valid for 90 days from Opening Bid day. Therefore, the maximum duration of
the tender process can be up to 3 month from the Opening bid day to the completion of Mobilization
by Contractor.
3.2 Construction Design Standards

In the vicinity of the City of Harare including the City of Chitungwiza, the following standards listed
in the precedence order are referenced for design, installation and construction of water and sewerage
facilities.
1. City of Harare Standard
2. Standard Association of Zimbabwe (SAZ)
If materials and construction methods are not covered by the standards mentioned above, the
following standards listed in the precedence order will be referenced.
3. The British Standard
4. The South African Bureau of Standards Standardized Specification for Civil
Engineering Construction
APP. 11 - 5
APPENDIX 11
4. Unit Cost and Cost Functions for Operation and Maintenance

The unit costs are as follows:
Table A11.4 Unit Cost for Operation and Maintenance

Classification $/month $/year
Genaral Hands Grade 1 2,660 63,840
Grade 2 3,140 75,360
Grade 3 3,725 89,400
Average 3,175 76,200
Skilled Labor 4,410 105,840
Equipment Operator 5,225 125,400
Foreman/Attendant 10,705 256,920
Superintendent 18,495 443,880

Source: Chitungwiza City, June to December 2011
Unit Electricity Cost $/kWh
Energy charge per kWh $0.12
A monthly capacity charge per unit of demand (each

$6.84
location)
Source: ZETDC
APP. 11 - 6

Pilot Project Hand-Pump Installation For Shallow Well: Appendix 7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pilot Project Hand-Pump Installation For Shallow Well: Appendix 7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

APPENDIX 7

Figure A7.1.2 Location of Selected Area

Figure A7.1.2 Location of Hand Pump to be Installed Wells

Well Wall of Well

Photo A7.1.1 Elephant Pump

This pump withdraws water by rising wrings in a pipe with

4. Hand Pump Installation and Survey

Table A7.1.1 (1) Survey Sheet for No.1 Well

Table A7.1.1 (2) Survey Sheet for No.2 Well

Table A7.1.1 (3) Survey Sheet for No.3Well

Table A7.1.1 (4) Survey Sheet for No.4 Well

Table A7.1.1 (5) Survey Sheet for No.5Well

Table A7.1.1 (6) Survey Sheet for No.6 Well

Table A7.1.1 (7) Survey Sheet for No.7Well

Table A7.1.1 (8) Survey Sheet for No.8 Well

Table A7.1.1 (9) Survey Sheet for No.9 Well

Table A7.1.1 (10) Survey Sheet for No.10 Well

Table A7.1.2 Summarized Survey Results

After installation of hand pump, below changes were found:

1.2 Flow Measurement of Branch Pipes

Figure A7.2.1 Location of Measurement Points

Figure A7.2.2 (1) Area E Location

Figure A7.2.2 (2) Area F Location

Table A7.2.1 Explanation of Measurement Points

3. Leakage Survey Results

Minimun Flow: 6.5m3/hr

Daily Average Flow: 20.5m3/hr

Figure A7.2.4 Measurement Results of Area F

4. Flow Measurement Results

Figure A7.2.4 (7) Point 8 Measured Results

Table A7.2.2 Water Flow by some Conditions

2. First Stage Survey

As the results of first stage survey hiring

capacity of wells can be installed the target

Table A7.3.1 Results of Yield Capacity Tests of Test Wells

Seke Reservoir Site

Candidate Area 4 T-1

Area with Many Faults and Red-Soil Deposit

Location of Test Wells

Figure A7.3.2 Surveyed Areas for Groundwater

Table A7.3.2 Water Quality of Test Wells

From the results of the survey (Pilot Project),

Photo A7.3.2 Yield Water from Test Well T-2

Groundwater Survey Report

SOUNDING NAME : JICA PROJECT TEAM

EQUIPMENT : Abem Terrameter SAS 1000

ELECTRODE ARRAY : Schlumberger

ACQUISITION DATE : 4 to 19 September 2012

LOCATION : Chitungwiza Municipality and Surrounding areas

PROJECT : Improvement of Water Supply, Sewage and

PROCESSING DATE : 26 September 2012

2. The survey to identify cadidate site

Figure -1 Locations of Aquifers

Figure -2 Pictures of Aquifer Area and the Surveyed Points

Geology and Hydrogeology.

Table -1 Surveyed Results of Aquifer Harava

Harava Y8008765 450

28 X300153 1456 60 200 40 114

VES NO LOCATION ELEVET WELL CASING DISTANCE FROM APPROXIMATE

9 X301307 1463 50 200 35 300

11 X301346 1467 50 200 60 450

Conclusion and Recommendation:

Recommended test well specifications