H DI R \L DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA
M IN 1ST RY OF WATER RESOURCES
BARO-AKOBO RIVER BASIN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT m aster plan study
FINAL REPORT
Annex 1
WATER RESOURCES
Part 4
May 1997
TAMS
.\
New York
ULG CONSULTANTS LTD
Warwick, U.K                «> ■ * '■*FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES
5^ i’*-
BARO-AKOBO RIVER BASIN INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT
MASTER PLAN STUDY
ANNEX 1
WATER RESOURCES
Part 4
Annex III
Annex II
Annex 1J
Irrigation Projects
Water Supply Projects
Hydropower Projects
T.AMS-ULG Baro-Akoho Riser     Basin Imegraicd De,do|lKrcin Ma,, “pj^--------------------------- -------- “'ZSc?£ U vt€-R
:r
INDEX OF VOLUMES AND ANNEXES
Volume I;......................................................EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Volume II:RESOURCE Base AND DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS Volume m:MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT
Volume TV:PROJECT AREA MAPS
Volume VPRE FEA SIB IL TTY STUDIES
ANNEXES
1.        B'-l TER RESO URCES
.Annex 1A Climatology
Annex IB............................................ Hydrology
Annex IC
^ood Studies
Annex ID Ground W ater
Annex IE Reservoir Operation Studies Annex IF Sediment Studies
Annex 1G Water Resources Cost Estimating
Annex IH
Annex II.
Irrigation Projects
Annex 1J Hydro power Projects
’ NATURAL RESOURCES
Annex 2A
Water Supply Projects Land Evaluation
Annex 2B                 Soils and Soil Conservation
Annex 2C
Annex 2D
Annex 
.Annex 2F                                 Wildlife Annex 2G  Tourism
Geology
Mineral Resources 2EForestry 
.Annex 2H Annex 21 . .
Annex 2J 
Annex 2K
Annex 2L
,            Apiculture
........................xAgriculture Renewable Energy Fisheries
............. .......... Livestock
J. S0CJ(>EC(?MW7GS Annex 3 A
Population Aspects
Annex 3B Socio-Ethnic Groups Analysis
Annex 3C ............................................ Economic Infrastructures Annex 3D Social Infrastructures
Annex 3E*
Annex 3F... Institutional Support 4          EATT/fftVWEVT
Economic and Financial Analysis
Annex 4
Environment
TAMS-llLG Barv-Akobo Rivrr Baiin LnlegTated Development Muter PlanWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
ANNEX 1H
IRRIGATION PROJECTS
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo Lniegnted Development Master Flan/ \JWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1 H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
CONTENTS
1 1
1.2
1 3
14
2.
introduction
Objectives and Approach
The Study Area
Institutional Setting
Government Policies
AVAILABLE DATA AND PREVIOUS STUDIES—4
2.1        Previous Studies
2 2        Basic Data ........... .................. ...... — 2 3        Potential Irrigation Areas
3.      UPPER BASIN PROJECTS
1 1 1
.2 2
4
...  4
. 4
, • .5
3.1 32
4,
4.1 42 43 44 45 4,6 47
Inventory of Projects...
Appraisal and Screening
LOWER BASIN PROJECTS
Inventory of Projects......................... .. Agriculture and Cropping Patterns irrigation Water Requirements Reservoir Operation Studies
Layoutsand Costs ............................... Project Ranking ....
Preliminary Economic Review
■ *1
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDICES
TABLES
...........5
............ 5
9
11
.. 11
12
...14
16 ...16
18
1       Upper Basin Potential Irrigation Sites Characteristics (2 sheets)
2        Upper Basin Potential Lmgation Sites Land Resource Assessments .
3        Upper Basin Preliminary Cost Estimates
4        Lower Basin Irrigation Systems investigated
5        Irrigation Water Requirements - Typical Cropping Pattern
6        Irrigation Projects Main Technical Characteristics (2 sheets)
Irrigation Project Cost Summary'....................................................... ...........................
8       Irrigation Projects Cost Ranking.......................................................................................
FIGURES
1
Potential Irrigation Projects
2
Upper Basin Preliminary Assessment of potential Sites 
3        Lower Basin Potential Irrigation Systems Layout
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akolxi Integrated Development Master PlanWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
I. INTRODUCTION
1.1      Objectives and Approach
The present document describes the studies made regarding the Master Planning of Irrigation in the Baro-Akobo River Basin
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential for irrigation development, to define and formulate possible projects, to estimate the cost of these projects, and to identify the best projects suitable for inclusion in a series of Master Plan Proposals The cost estimates of the top ranking projects will also serve for preliminary economic evaluation of these projects and will be the basis  for proposals  by  the consultant concerning the project that will be recommended for subsequent prefeasibility  level study  within the framework  of the present contract The economic analysis is given in .Annex 3E
i.2  The Study Area
The study area is located in the southwestern part of Ethiopia It covers approximately 75,912 km5 The area includes  all or part of four Administrative Regions  SEP.AR in the south, Oromiva in the NE, Gambela in the central western portion and Benshangul in the north western extremity
The land comprises high plateaux at elevations ranging from 1500 and 2000 m and mountains with peaks exceeding 2500 metres in the easternmost and southern portions of the basins The Gambela plains lie west of the escarpment, with elevations ranging from 400 to 600 metres, forming the central westernmost part of the basin.
The mam rivers within the basin include the Baro. its left tributary the Alwero, the Akobo and its right tributary the Gilo. These rivers are part of the Pibor Sobat River System, a major tributary' of the White Nile in Sudan
Present population in the basin is about 2.2 million with some 90% in the highlands and the remaining pan in the lowlands  About 92% of the present population is  rural and the remaining 8% is classified as urban
Most of the agriculture is subsistence farming in the highlands, where most of the 4^^
population is also located and coffee is a major crop
The urban population is growing at a very high pace, about 3 
of the rural population By the end of the planning period, year 2035. the total population is expevied
10  be  in  the  order  of  5  3  million  people  including  about  85°  o  rura  an  o  ur  an  At time, it is anticipated that 77% of the population (4.1 million) will be in the hig ands and
11 2 million) will be in the lowlands
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Devckipment Muter
1H-1WATER RESOURCES
annex ih irrigation projects
The area has a moderately developed road system and several airfields The major airport is at Gambela which includes a first class paved runway
Navigation  in  the  Baro  which  used  to  link  the  Gambela  region  to  Sudan  was  discontinued years ago
Power infrastructure includes  the 5 MW Sor hydropower station, the 0 75 MW Dembi hydro power station and several Diesel installations  The Sor station supplies  Metu. Gore. Gambela and Dembidolo via a 66 kV transmission system The Dembi station supplies  Tepi, Mizan Teferi
Annual  precipitation  in  the  area  varies  from  750mm  in  the  lowlands  to  over  2000mm  in  the highlands
The climatology  and the hydrology  of the basin are discussed in Annexes  1A and IB, respectively  Groundwater is  discussed in Annex  ID The land resources  are discussed in
.Annexes 2A and 2B Agriculture is discussed tn .Annex 21.
1.3       Institutional Setting
In the recent past, the institution in charge of irrigation in Ethiopia was  the Ethiopia Valleys Development Studies  Authority  (EVDSA) This  institution was  superseded by  the Water Resources Development Authority
Recognising the importance of water resources for the development of Ethiopia, the
Government recently created the Ministry of Water Resources This is the highest institution
related to water sector policy, development and management
The  agricultural  aspects  of  the  irrigation  subsector  are  the  responsibility  of  the  Ministry  of Agriculture
In addition, within the administrating regions, a Bureau of Water, Mines and Energy, a Bureau
of .Agriculture and other sector Bureaux and offices implement the Government Policies 
Water project development is generally the responsible of an ad-hoc Project Office A more
detailed desenption is found in .Annex 3F
1.4    Government Policies
The main government policy  is  to develop the agricultural sector within a free market orientation Another important policy  concerns  the promotion of agricultural development considering the need for food security  Further, opportunities  are open to investment by  the private sector in the production of agricultural produce, with the intent of supplementing the governmental initiatives in this sector
The irrigation subsector recognises  the need to develop the intensive irrigated farming potential of this country Several projects of this nature which are an important contribution to the economy exist in the .Awash V alley, Fincha and elsewhere Construction of additional
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated development Master Plan
1H-2annex ih irrigation project
WATER RESOURCES
p^cs is pursued in .he more and areas and of supplementary rrrigation in the wet pan „f lh[ count ry.
_ a .tnnment of irrigation in
T
The development _
the Baro-Akobo
over basin has commenced with ,h[
Tbs projecI dKlgned t0 imga|e |04Ql)
b t£ initial phase to develop this subsector in the study area and should have „
T on its  economic development In addition, the regional administration »
Xg polities for
developing imgation near  Lake Tata in the Gio river basin and ut the the Baro River basin As much as possible, this has been taken into account»
this study
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo lnttXrai'd Dtvclopmern Waiter Pl>"WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX IH IRRIGATION PROJECTS
2. available data and previous studies
2.1     Previous Studies
The most complete and recent data concerning the imgation possibilities  in the study  area is the report by  ARDCO-GEOSERV for the Upper Basin, dated May  1995 and the comprehensive Master Plan Study  by  Seikhozpromexport of the former Soviet Union (Russian Master Plan), dated 1990, for the Lower Basin Other previous  studies  in the Lower Basin which include a proposal for irrigation development in the Gambela Plain are the study carried out by T.AMS in the 1970's, and a report by a Dutch firm EUROCONSULT
The ARDCO-GEOSERV, the Seikhozpromexport and the TAMS report were reviewed tn the course of this assignment The EUROCONSULT report was not available However, the
Russian study provides general information on its findings
2.2     Basic Data
Baseline information and the Master Plan Studies  were used as  required and arc  discussed elsewhere in this  Report These include information concerning the population, climate, hydrolog}', geology, soils, land use. agriculture and other resources that may have an impact on the potential for imgation development and the possibilities  for flow regulation, dam and hydropower development within the basin which would have a direct effect upon flow availability
Other information used extensively in this study includes
•    existing topographic maps at 1 250000 and 1 50000.
•    the layouts and designs of the projects in the Russian Master Plan.
•    information on the Alwero project including the Abobo dam presently under construction,
•    data on several irrigation projects elsewhere in Ethiopia and
•    miscellaneous cost information obtained from various government sources
2.3      Potential Irrigation Areas
ARDCO-GEOSERV identified 18 potential irrigation areas in scattered locations in the Upper Basin and presented preliminary information on these areas In contrast, under the Russian Study, a comprehensive master plan was developed for the lower basin which included several areas located along a band of land above the flood prone zone
All the potential imgation areas identified in the previous studies are shown on Figure 1
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo In iterated Development Master Plan
1H-4rTHlCP'A
Baro-Akobo River Basin
Integrated Development
Master Plan Project
FIGURE H-1
POTENTIAL
IRRIGATION
PROJECTS
r
For the M
inistry of Water Resources
of the Gov
ernment of Ethiopia
Produced
on: July 20, 1996
Sources:
TAMSJJLG: ARDCO/Soyuz, Topo (1:250 000}
GIS Filename: damsite apr
34’I
I
!
1
I
1
I
IANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
WATER RESOURCES
3. UPPER BASIN PROJECTS
3.1 Inventory of Projects
The  IS  potential  projects  identified  by  ARDCO  GEOSERV  in  the  Upper  Basin  were  assessed with respect to
•    Location
•     Population
•     Land resources
•    Water resources
•    Possible diversion and conveyance
•     Access conditions
In  as  much  as  they  impact  on  the  availability  of  water,  potential  storage  sites  identified  for irrigation and for hydropower were considered in the assessment.
Their location is presented on Figure 1. The project characteristics are given in Table 1.
3.2 Appraisal and Screening
Various land resources assessments of the candidate projects are given in Table 2 in terms of irrigation suitability, land capacity, soils and present farming systems The analyses and
preliminary assessment is shown graphically on the matrix on Figure 2
.Among  the  candidate  projects,  17  were  found  to  be  unsuitable  for  irrigation  for  a  variety  of reasons
•    The  projects  located  in  the  highlands  have  abundant  precipitation  and  any  supplemental irrigation  in  this  area  would  not  be  economically  justified  as  compared  to  dry  fanning improvements which can have a high Economic Rate of Return (EIRR) of more than 30% as demonstrated in Annex 3E This category includes most of the candidate projects: Fani, Gumero, Alwero, Godere, Beko and Meni, Guy. Achani, Bebeka, Kilu, Akobo I.
•   The land resources assessment indicates that most of the candidate projects are unsuitable or   marginal   for   irrigation   This   category   includes   candidate   project   Lafo   Kotu,   Fani Alwero. Guy, Achani. Awaya, Guracha, Bebeka, Sako Guda, Beko and Meni. Kulu, Birbir, Godere. Gumero. Akobo I, Akobo II
•    Several of these projects are located in forest areas and their construction would therefore involve  the  destruction  of  these  forests  This  category  includes  the  Fani.  Alwero,  Guy, Achani, Awaya. Guracha, Bebeka, Beko Meni. Kilu, Godere. Gumero and .Akobo I.
An approximate cost estimate and cost ranking was developed for all candidate projects The estimate is presented on Table 3. This shows that cost per hectare varies from USS 10,200 to
CS $143,600 The majority of projects are too costly and could not be justified economically TAMS-ULG Barn-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1H-5ANNEX ih irrigation projects
WATER RESOURCES
Based on the above, the following candidate projects are considered non viable for the rea indicated below
Candidate Project Main Reason(s) for Non viability
Koji LafoKotu Fam
Aiwero
Guy Achani Awava Guracha Bebeka Sako Guda Beko/Meni Kilu Godere Gumero Akobo 1 Akobo II
High Cost
Unsuitable land, high cost
High rainfall, unsuitable land, forest destruction, high cost
High rainfall unsuitable land, forest destruction, high cost
High rainfall, marginal land suitability, forest destruction, high cost High rainfall, marginal land suitability , forest destruction, high cost Unsuitable land, forest destruction, high cost
Marginal land suitability, forest destruction
High rainfall, marginal land suitability, forest destruction, high cost. Unsuitable land
High rainfall, unsuitable lands, foiest destruction, high cost High rainfall marginal land, high cost
High rainfall, unsuitable land, forest destruction, high cost High rainfall, marginal land, forest destruction, high cost High rainfall, marginal land, forest destruction, high cost Most of the land is marginal, high cost
This assessment was confirmed during the field reconnaissance visit and is shown graphically 
on the matrix presented in F ure 2 In view of
lg
the above, no further consideration was given
to the above 17 cand.date projects considered non-viable on the basis of available data and field reconnaissance
.
in the Lower Basin would be flooded by a dam at Gambela and its
The   BarK  EXXXhe  schemes  in  the  Lower  Basm.  For  these  reasons  this  cand.date cost IS high                rcd th€ Master plan The small Bonga area (400ha) being studied by
Jh^Smbdaregion is part of the Baro candidate project area and should have a similar cost ranking
TAMS-ULG Baro*Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
IH-6UPPER BASIN POTENTIAL IRRIGATION SITES CHARACTERISTIC
FROn-VT AKLA.J
Apprai Con^aBuc
PrqmtC-T^H-IS fl*
WtEtEUA
Sei No
d
I 5000
J Stair
CjJdS
Impbl
t
AjCl
(ku]tb
Aiengc:
Skm: 111
Source d
*iutr RjvctO)
Appro v Dnerwcn 5»iee Local inn ill
I KOJI
I.AFOKOTU
EdlftlfiM d Frown! Wrltdi Town PupuluLI
(1)
43
4 Ai.wi.jtn 5 GUY
I ! 9WJ
i£)4AJ
UA34A1
i il I
07J4B4
u?urM
O7J5C1
Kdjl 1 Grtrt
El .Wim
On.Faw R MEI 1.100-11*3*
I w* c;bJ opijan tsJih__________
On  Atacin  B  m  El  640m;  on  lower area ah site Is M El 562 M
Al LI t?OUM CXI both mm
Oft Aduni FL at El. 1,000-1 iMOib
Oft LH. BK-rn lortt
AMflv
;■*£ a Jar
Tiog 4 Jui
Mum iHJ
Bulk al GiJq
Ou LB 2QKJI1 taf Jwvwrwl pmubiiLiiQi
!Kra k>o| gn LB, 7 km on LB +
X n              r—~u~
OaGitj FL.JtB, ISKn
On Ljciiuul H. LH uKlh
Oft  LB.  ikjn  iGiifcir,  ai  an  all.  IKm luf on till
- Aft'AYA
Gun I u'Jj
Gun Ficds
Awn'l
H-B, IAKjli tuag (ko*w aliHiuic i
3.H. Ik-Tl liuHIg I d^l-K I allCt hJIJVC I
K GFRACKA
Gun F.ndi
lAlSAJ
UiutkIu
<*i GuikIu k m Li 65 Mb
On I h 6Km to<i£
) BFREKA
(WT3AJ
□etetab
On Gcirhcb R at El *£5«n
Oft RB I Itfli low
In SAKOCfDA
Gnmfeeilj
UlHDJ
saku Lula
SUU GuiU
Ca-iil ph Klldt Cr«t
Ibtiru Pcne
II HLKOMEKI I? Kil l
|1 I1AKO
Gcdrrc
OT.BDI
WJ5B1
■U*^5B4
QU 11 Di
Iteib A Ment
No
LMi BckjR it EL t .IRJm On Mau it * El I laim
GcsJa                  jio
SJwwn Gimlma Gunibdd
Shrai
2 71)5
rLinrfrIi
njw
U. HIlliJirl
|4.CODFR£
b GlAfTMO 17. AKO&QI tv aKWOH
iMleWatera Godtrt
2N |J-» 66.3 111
iftJSAJ
mm
WD5CI
DH1M 4
0615C1
0615GJ
tflJCl
WJ3A3
Etublf & Ktte
Gukir
0-rtil L1- S
Hj dea
GiltOElO |
Gei3«
210
Gun Fitda
Akufec
Kilu, Uliiu
Kathu
I Meo Pmtcr
I'unipi iLg fjiuftt llajuj H <xi boOi tanks AN iriUli b;S d TAMS
DAM IjuUi US gj Cumfeeh Ehiin
On  Binwt  R  Small  pumping kUIjciu bcic-w El L 2'Xlm
Un GaJnt k. m LI
Oft  tl  I  .W'ni  or  from  iIk   Jjji’i   jx EU I 620m
On NebiR. ni 'EI *}|*hl
On  Kily  R  tDinu^i.  dcMiicx  io  be dclcmiinrJ
55 Kra |png on LB GT
2Q Kiu I j-i±; un IB ^ili
Pirwu it pipe line oc Kni tanks <ii IIKjn k«g LB ^w>l Io Tkjn|p phu
jrwunft w im&ME ft Ll
Jotral  prKsure  pipet  Fruwi  n*er  cir loo^ caiuii ________________
J4F-J5 km cr. LR
LB* .mu^io HRu4t
taw
Oft  LB  7  K.M  ktfi|  *  kj  Topo  On KB I 5Km L l t__________
Oik PR fcx|iu K111 liiug Inu^ fa
i! luiublr pumping <jf lLilIi, Utt a Euuudl
llHc n-1 (1 dl)!■UPPER BASIN POTENTIAL IRRIGATION SITES CHARA^TER I ST 1.2
r'KOfECT
AREA fl)
I KOJI
E^juini
Accent?'
Na nt
Required Aesti* RaaiS Lchfilh 1.2 J <hrt Mi Km from CirilirtU - Or-               Shen Nc «^Et
Population fit
1 npopubwl
Sparest tapiiiabOR CrnLtr (2j|
Go.  Ghiimi  -  50  w  ka*  Fast  Malih lbmln -1000 Km South
REMARKS 12 k
Binfrt. wmt bulk area if tl V5m a l« f* i*d* fro*                                      Alt *rci if El 4Bu - 4*MJ miv be
bciiti l-y dlveiVK-fl purpmn
----------
Urp/fuljird
Kun - 40 » Km l-asi
1*4.1 Ten. wnC 1lUfc*i requittl w*ig edinn 1KC CifinJ
2 Lam 1 kum J FANI
Of r 10 IL31 fic*n Uirc-torw-TXlii M p*uv new bndp On 0d*v
UnpopuUrtcd
Burr 20.00Kirt North
Fkxw4e humfeu L0.00 Km 5£ b*rrw. minxided tv fore *1 pnhibli no mote than too uo K* of UmJ n uiiutde Tor irr.pbondue » rtixp slope
J Al WhRO
None
Otf KI fall £*sl from At»br
Few Hunkti
Abobe Ni IKI Km Wert Area
Feeraed vea. ichk hiraJcb, broken                             Milder lopctrxphv kvalcd ^"5 ihc M*t and the irca is 1n*jKd LJ.'S of DwubcmB
Sol*
Orr IW Km
L 'rtpupuLlwd
Too Fn bull* Am Place
5. GUY
Aid ±ucvicil Ip Gullies, ott ruin« afl El ft W -?Wm, wnoujided fen lurevled Joev xppcui
vuhie
6 AtHANI
Na«
Sow I i Kl» rnxw Tept - Meb R*»d
SpATK
Ttp-Mcit
<iti  pjopcwJ  its   ARDCO-Gcokrv  fin  LH  u  punK  (oresud  xnd  it  IM  sleep  lYrtltf  Jdienui^c  wu  RB iienLljris fcHdJCd
T AWAYA
None
Ch W 60 Km riomGitn Fadi SIkci Na 0613AI
Lnfmfrulrtfd
Gun Fadi • Latal lUtnfch
Aiti n m«Lh fwmeL btubco, ou uot cdjp: of until puebev U.'S of Au>>* lUinkt ir_n be
irnpT ;
3 GUMM HA
S'4!«
On 60 Km StaUi. from G-u Ftftli l>w Mirvi RdufK
CUTfll
1 npc^uJaled
Gl*ra frrdj
Small paid* of buih hud mu 1 uunded tn lurc»i at aG«flucrtLt uf GiirKfeu K A Ake*o R_
5. nrhe kA
Nw
About 1J Km NW of BebeU * Mlur Tefcn Rd -nd Undue
Crtjuinr
L'apopuLMfil
VLlEy        hjIBikU        uiMudc        Bcbclu.        erffat pi.JJI.WM
Ferm im. hi|ih kkipe umulLiblc Cm impixe Jud ninth ut Hcfe<*.j ,mHc< pLumiJon
11* samjguda
Fwi
Near CambrlU-LVtnbi EX?k? Forth Riwil and reed R
Adyu-eal la
G»b<)la
Giflbella
Locibed <m RBcf Bjioal lhe Kiich Cnxi jiui rill uf Gambell* however mosJ» l*At xvru
]| tU-.KOMEM
Sow
Swib of Tept - Shaihindt Road Requite* Appro* l5Km Road Ctjnirructirjr
Spun*
Reek. Oda ind Mam Hindcu
Leered  «*  LB  of  Beta  R  below  tl  l,  lUJm  al  Komi  Fomt  amj  oa  ibe  RB  erf  Mttu  R  botan  tj  1,11» in ai Cluhi Fortit >rui Iwjted tn iwnm of Ekko puuti dam wie
]2 Mill
Nww
About 15 Km SW ul fcflW. Reqmrel Approv X) Km R-Od Ccftilructic®
''npupualed
Icenu plja Severn Kanucia Within IU 00 Km LhsLuitt
EortsL ? IM) km north of Luchu Mountain Area ^.oJd wi be u^pliol fen KaUw p^wcr dam
tj. BAKU
Yes
■ LB onlv 1
Twat, im R B ?-S would rpqwirt ill Krr- read from GamtxJIa pi bndjc MIHM Jlaru ficn [k>r.pj
SfHtM
LiiitibclLi Ikrtip Refugee
C imp
Along Gartbcih - Gwe iqm! on kh aud ng!n baaki. d tUnw '• aikv Ansa would be needed by
Gujiibclii hm
|4 HJREilK
Npm
Kbriul 20.25 kail licra Gimfct - DernMpIo Rn*d IX fruffi Ldo- Dipo rmd
I'^jpulaied
Chacuka. entf 20 Ofl Km Nutfih
steep broken dcfcitmnl budiy wd iceky area, not uwLabk for imgauoA e^rp fur mull lejtUinJ uut Ofl m«i lerraecsu which could be irngatcd by purapma from Hufri Cdialljct siiih
pLii. er ‘rt-Ki.!
15. GODERE
J
Nefic
Abort 15 -XI K in from GaFj - Tepi fl-wd 10 lhe SE
Ven Spaiw
TtpkWOQ - WWKmSE rnd
1 «cil Harden
Fixt»l vortic bui-hn pMchci
It, QUMFRO
Nolic
About 20 Km from Gore oo GiutIkIj 'Jere Raid CJ) Sen road io Haruita. kiMproicmeni Tram Bamuio Metu h icqwed
Mini kural KimleH
Mrtit
The *lLcy i> fcreahd and swampy HlIU ait irauy, denrh poputned Projetl n kKald x Gulirro- 1 HhIjo Po**tr Raenox Ih* heajwairn include feral, imnipv oi (jumcro Dam imc and tainfftl tu pkinlaiion
I? AKOBOI
None
(Ker W Ktn lo Mjjl • 5c«.u Road
UopojhjLaipd. w<k ktmltii |5 Km East
MinuTcfcri over 60 DO Km NE ind Hamkii |$ Km tail
..and ki lucainJ wt both tunkv of Akota Mjvrr and n XI Kxrwcd
11 aKOBOJI
None
Chtr JO Km lo Chmn - NUeih Ttferi Road fiww center of utji
Unpopulated
MIzAIi Icfcti. met ?uuo km
Buity Mel Rnei bl mt*.h lower would require p<Ln»!ijL ffluwr
jn*e Jxra
NOTFS 1 Scuicr ARDCO-GEOSER V (|«5) 2 AppnMfdU TAMS-UI.G 119961f-fliTB H - 2Table 2 Lipper Bnsin Potential Irrigation Sites Land Resources Assessments (I)
Project
Irrigation Suitability
Land Capacity
Soils Types
Farming Types
Non Rice
Rice
Koji
Suitable
Unsuitable
Annual. Non Agricultural
5
Wooded open
Lafo Kotu
Marginal (topo)
Unsuitable
Annual, Non Agricultural
5,9
Wooded, open
Fani
Unsuitable
Unsuitable
Perennial crops, over grazing
2
Forest, very disturbed
Alwero
Unsuitable
Unsuitable
Annual, non agricultural
4
Forest, disturbed
Guy
Marginal
Unsuitable
Annual, non agricultural
7
Wooded, dense
Achani
Marginally unsuitable
Unsuitable
Annual
7
Wooded, dense
Awaya
Marginally unsuitable
Unsuitable
Annual
8,2
Wooded, dense
Guracha
Marginally unsuitable
Unsuitable
Annual
4,7
Wooded, open
Bebeka
Marginally unsuitable
Unsuitable
Ajinual
7
Perennial crops (coffee)
Sako Guda
Unsuitable
Unsuitable
Non Agricultural
1.3,9
Wooded, open
Beko & Meni
Partly unsuitable
Unsuitable
Annual. Non Agricultural
6,10
Perennial( coffee)
Kilu
Marginal (topo)
Unsuitable
Annual
7
Wooded open
Baro
Partly suitable
Part suitable
Annual
11
Wooded, open
Birbir
Maiginal (topo)
Unsuitable
Annual
6
Wooded, open
Godere
Unsuitable
Unsuitable
Annual
4
Forest very disturbed
Gumero
Marginal (topo)
Unsuitable
Annual
9
Cultivated >60%
Akobo 1
Marginal (topo)
Unsuitable
Annual, non Agricultural
8
Wooded, open
Akobo 2
Marginal (topo)
Unsuitable
Annual, non Agricultural
■ 5, 7
Wooded, open
Note (J) See respective annexes, maps in Vol. 4.Table 3             Upper Busin Potential Irrigation Projects Preliminary           Cost Estimate - USSM
Candidate
Project
Koji
I ai o Koto Fan i Alwero Guy^ Achani Awaya Guracha Bebeka
I Diversion
Storage
Dam
I Pumping        Conveyance        Irrigation
Cost Hanking
1 °1_ k 02-
^0.3
Sako Guda (2)     0 5 Beko/Meni
Kilu
Baro (4)(5)
BirbiH42(7)     0     0 Cioderc
Gumcro Akobo I Akobo H(3)
170 100 72 72.0
12 5 1.4 12.6 1I2
]90 14 0 24 0
Deforest
0J
002
03
0.6
01
06
02
0.2
10
2.0
Access
10
IB__
3.0
0.5
20
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.5
Total (1)       | 5 54 _
2 44
5.81_
7 66
7 66
3.30
3.70
211
5 54
25 48
6 86
<9 0
2.0
ITs
6.0
06
0.0
1.0
12
Net        Aren (Ha)(6)
245
17
250
200
100
260
110
120
360
2500 _____ 460
4200
1700        __ 500
30
8.0
15 0
0.6
1.5
4.0
41 84
20 86
8 31
48 05
69.43
42 50
154 44
2800
3800
3400
6000
Cost Per Hectare
USS_______ 22,630
143^00
23.200
38.300
76.600 ___ 12,700
33.600
17.600
15,400
10,200
14.900
10.000
J 2.300
16,600
17,200
18,300
12,500
25,700
(1) including project features plus 20% physical contingencies plus 10% engineering and administration (2) Depends on construction of Sako Guda Hydropower Project
O) Depends on construction of Kasliu Hydropower Project
(4) Including pumping station, penstock and power
(5) Area located in the Lower Basin
(6) Areas considering water resources
(7) For topographically suitable area in the valley Other schemes would be more costly
1
n *r c 
--°L _'-X
Baro-Akobo River Basin
Integrated Development
Master Plan Project
FIGURE H-3
POTENTIAL
IRRIGATION
PROJECTS
■■ Dam (existing)
l i Dam (polcntal)
Pumping station
Canal
Tunnel
G Siphon
/X/ Lower limit of study area
*       Project under constructron Reservoir
River
Road
Town
Dikes not shown
Dumboog
TAMS Consultants, Inc. (USA) and
ULG Consultants Lid (U.K.)
For the Ministry of Water Resources
of the Govemmcnl of Ethiopia
Produced on. July 24. 1996
Sources.           TAMS-ULG; Selkhozprpmexport GlS Filename polirr aprW ATER resources
4. LOWER BASIN PROJECTS
4.1 Inventory of Projects
annex ih irrigation proje
CTs
In contrast with the Upper Basin, the Lower Basin, specifically the Gambela plain area mostly above the seasonally flooded areas, between elevations 425 and 550 metres above sea level, offer many  promising possibilities  for the development of irrigation This  was  previously recognised in the studies  made by  TAMS and EUROCONSULT and more recently  in the Russian Master Plan As a result of the latter, the Ethiopian Government decided to undertake the development of the 10,400 hectare Alwero project that includes the Abobo dam, which construction is nearly completed This project is conveniently located in the centre of gravity of the extensive imgable areas
Based on available data, 14 basic irrigation systems and 8 vanants were identified, laid out. sized and costed The list of these potential projects is given in Table 4 The location of the 14 irrigated areas is shown on Figure 3
The irrigation sysiems include
1)         dams  for  storing  and  regulating  the  available  flows  and  for  diverting  and  making possible to take water from these reservoirs at desirable elevations for command of the
areas to be irrigated,
2)
pumping stations either as an alternative to diversion intake structures at the
regulating dams or to gain command of higher areas,
3)
Conveyance systems including canals, tunnels, siphons, chutes and other structures,
4)
irrigation systems including land development, water distribution systems, roads 
drainage, flood protection dikes and drainage pumping
Because of the hydrological regimen and the environmental requirements to maintain minimum flows  in the rivers, storage and regulation dams  were favoured over run-of-river diversion dams
For the same reason, schemes which use river pumps need the existence of adequate flow regulation to service the pumped areas  as  well as  the river environmental requirements estimated at 8% of the av erage flow
The area investigated comprises a gross surface area of about 631,000 hectares Based on water and land resources, the net area that can ultimately be developed is about 480,000 hectares
The use of groundwater for irrigation was examined and rejected due to the low yield of the aquifers and resulting high cost as compared to surface water based irrigation
TAMS IILG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1H-9WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX IH IRRIGATION PROJECTS
Table 4 Lower Basin Irrigation Systems Investigated
r             —---------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------------
------------- —
1
Svstem/Project Description                              ___ BARO RIVER
Gross Area  ha
, 
---------- ----------
1
111
Baro River Right Bank. Itang Dam. Gravity Conveyance
66.581
41.267
2
Baro River, Right Bank, Itang. River Pumping, Gravity Conveyance
----- —
2A
3
SvsiFm 2 nius relift station, plus additional canal
57.495
pamPivw Rjphi Rank Gambela Dam. Gravitv Conveyance
17,338
J/ 1AT
u 3B
Svctrm 3 plus low lift station plus additional canal
41,016
Svstem 3 A Hus high lift stations, plus additional canals
67.740
4
Sv siem 3 with Gambela River Pumping Station in lieu of dam
17.338
4A
System  3A with Gambela  River  pumping  station in  lieu of
dam
-- -----------------------
41.016 ----------------------------- -
4B
1
System 3B with Gambela River pumping station in lieu of
dam
67,740
------------------ 5
Baro River, Left Bank Itang Dam Gravity conveyance
61,900
|6
Baro River Left Bank, Itang River Pumping Sta.. Canal
15.832
Baro River Left Bank, Gambela Dam, Gravity conveyance
57.018
I8
Baro River. Left Bank River Pumping Station in lieu of dam. canal conveyance
57.018
Sub Total, Baro River
326.566
ALWERO RIVER
9
Alwero Project, Abobo dam under construction, gravity
13,600
10
Alwero River R B . Chiru Dam, Gravity conveyance
17,054
10A
Alwero River, right bank. Dumbong Dam. Gravity 
Conveyance
23,192
10B
Alwero River right bank, Chiru and Dumbone Dams, gravity
34.665
Sub Total Alwero River
48,265
GILO RIVER
11
Gilo River Right Bank. Gilo 1 Dam, Gravity
81,346
12
Gilo River, Left Bank. Gilo 1 Dam Gravity
79.652
12 A
Gilo River, Left Bank, River Pumping, canal
65,538
13
Gilo River, Left Bank. Gilo 2 Dam. Gravity
33.855
14
Gilo River, Ri«ht Bank, Gilo 2 Dam Gravity
61,325
Sub Total, Gilo River
256,178
Approximate Total Gross Area (ha)
631,009
The net imgable areas for the most part were estimated on the basis of the gross areas 10%
was  deducted  and  assumed  to  be  non  irrigable  due  to  being  occupied  by  streams  roads 
towns  rocky'  areas,  and  farther  reducing  the  resulting  area  by  15%  to  account  for  irrigation
and other infrastructure, in the irrigated areas.
~
TAMS liLG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1H-1UANNEX 1H IRRIGATION projects
WATER RESOURCES
4.2 Agriculture and Cropping Patterns
For the purpose of master planning and ranking of potential projects  tn the lower basin. a
[“Shed crop ro.at.on was used Crops ineluded are the followtng:-
% Area
--------------
Crop__________ __________ Cotton
Drv Season
Wet Season
25
15
—
Maize
40
15
---------------------- ------------
Sorghum
19
io                      n
| Soya Bean
10
10
1
Vegetables
1
i
H1
Green Manure (fodder)
5
Groundnuts
15
1
1 Sub-Total %
100
66
Total cropping intensity
166%
Other crops considered were sugar cane and rice Sugar cane is a permanent crop. Two rice crops are possible Crop intensities would vary depending upon the areas planted in each crop A more detailed discussion of irrigated agriculture is given in Annex 21
4.3    Irrigation Water Requirements
The net imgation demand was estimated on the basis of the monthly field water requirements based on the crops under consideration, minus the 80% reliability monthly (effective) rainfall at Gambela based on analysis of about 80 years of monthly records al Gambela station since 1905 The gross imgation requirements were estimated by dividing the net requirements by 
the  assumed  irrigation  efficiency  For  the  purpose  of  this  Master  Plan  overall  irrigation efficiency including on-farm, conveyance and distribution losses was taken at 50%
The overall gross imgation requirement for the typical diversified rotation is 13,106 m' per hectare per year and the peak monthly flow per hectare is 1 22 litres per second However, for planning purposes the peak was taken at 13 1/s/ha Thus the irrigation systems were sized on the basis of this peak flow rate per hectare and the net areas obtained as described above The irrigation water requirement calculations are presented on Table 5 The resulting monthly imgation water requirements per 10,000 ha of net irrigated area for the typical diversified rotation are presented in the following tabulation
Irrigation Water Requirements for 10,000 ha in m /s
3
Jan
9.4
Feb
46
Mai
Apr       May
1 2        0             0
Jun
76
July Aug
9f0
Sep
0
Oct
0
Nov Dec
5.8 12 2
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1R-11water resources
annex ih irrigation projects
4.4       Reservoir Operation Studies
For the purpose of sizing the various  potential projects, a reservoir operation study  was carried out to determine the maximum areas  that could be irrigated from individual poientiaJ storage dams  This  included Itang and Gambela on the Bare River Basin. Chiru and Dumbong in the Alwero River Basin and the Gilo I and Gilo 2 sites  in the Gilo River Basin According
to this study, the maximum net irrigable lands, not including return flow, are as follows
Dam
_
Net Area (I) (ha)
Itang
Gambela
Chiru
Dumbong
Gilo 1 (Irrigation)
Gilo 1 (multipurpose)
Gilo 2
95.000
110,000
12.000
15.000
160,000
52.400
100,000
(I) Considering environmental releases at 8% of mean flow
Likewise,  a  low  dam  about  50  m  high  was  considered  at  Gambela  Its  potential  for  irrigation may be increased by increasing the height of the dam
The   above   regulation   studies   were   based   on   the   anticipated   monthly   outflows   from   the assessments of irrigation water requirements
Finally, a multiple reservoir systems  analysis  was  carried out considering the various  potential storage dams  in each of the major rivers, in order to find the total maximum areas  that could be irrigated under the typical diversified rotation. As  a result, the maximum imgable areas, considering the environmental releases  and excluding return flow were found to be as follows'
River____
Maximum Net Irrigable Areas (ba)
Bare
Alwero
Gilo
Total (ha)
250,000
34.000
196,000
480.000
These  areas  would  be  reduced  if  high  water  consumption  crops  such  as  rice,  sugar  cane bananas or citrus were introduced in the study area
The reservoir operation studies are presented in .Annex IE
TAMS LLC Bira-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
iH-nTable 5
Irrigation Water Requirements -Typical Cropping Pattern
Annual
t   U   raiccuvc   raimau.   renaonny.   based   on   approx (2) Field Water icquircmcntt minus effective rainfall
JU) years of records at Ganibcki
(3) For 50% irrigation efficiency, including field, distribution and conveyance losses and waste
JWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
4.5 
I jyouts
and
 Costs
The
layout
or
the
systems  was  based  on
the
lie  of
the
land,
available  water,
land
reso
urces 
infor
mati
on,  and  approximate  con
veya
nce  ca
paciti
es  det
ermined on  the
basis 
of the net areas and the peak design flow rate of 1.3 L s/ha
The hydraulic design of canals was based on the peak flow rates, conveyance capacities and maximum velocities  ranging from 0 9 1/s  to 1 1 Vs  for the typical canal sections shown on Annex  1-G. Water Resources  Cost Estimating The same information and criteria was also used for estimating project costs.
The  channel  gradients  used  were  1/10,000  for  the  larger  flows,  2/10,000  for  the intermediate flows and 5/10,000 for the smaller flows.
The irrigation intakes at the dams were located high enough to assure command of the land and adequate flow regulation at the reservoir
The choice between linecLuniined canals  was  made on the basis  of available eeotechnical information m the Russian study, observations during field reconnaissance and on a geological assessment
For tunnels, it was  assumed they  would be fully  lined, mostly  supported by  shotcrete, wire mesh and rock bolts along 90% of the tunnel length and use of steel supports in
10% of the length, mainly in the vicinity of the portal areas The tunnels w ere sized for a partially  full (80%) hydraulic  section, the peak  flows  and a 3m/s  flow velocity. The tunnels were assumed to be horseshoe shaped.
The pumping stations were sized on the basis of the peak design flow, estimated dynamic head including losses in the steel penstocks (pressure pipes) and surcharge
The penstocks were sized for a 3 m/s flow velocity The surcharge was assumed to be equal to 10-15% of the velocity head.
The siphon crossings were sized on the basis of the peak design flow and a lm/s flow velocity.
The main technical characteristics  of the projects  studied are summarised in Table 6 whereas  their cost estimates, including 20% physical contingencies  and 10% for engineering and administration costs are summarised in Table 7. Costs are given in US Dollars  (January1 1996) These costs  include both local and foreign currency requirements
The summary of the gross and net irrigable areas in hectares, of the cost estimates in US Dollars and the resulting project ranking based on unit cost in US Dollars pet net hectare are given in Table 8 The overall layout is presented on Figure 3
TAMS ULG Haro-Akobo tnlefcnMed Development Master PIJTable H-fi
Irrkgidcwi Projects Mam Technical Cjiaratlermllca < Sheet 1 of 2)
r
Sin
System F-Oy#ri CttCf p xn
Rt^rPiimp ilali&rs
P<| rfl Suuarik
1 Flow
T laMv.iuipr Line
TiW’USS.Qn I'rw
1
□y*
1 * >.*s
T
—
P
' PwMtoca
NO
PenstocK
□**m.
tm
P««ittoc*
L«ng*
Accew
Hnad
kfl‘
No
p
MA
^wnikX-.
•ftjth f
___
KV
km
Ao.*is
Hoad
Km
Access
Rev!
•c
Dim
Irm
1
tii-O-R E lang 7jti. Gra ■•
■
-
■
-
DQ 1 2
|                --------   ----- —‘“—‘7’
34
2
EJaiO- RB.Itinq Plvst l‘ r-p.ny
-
•
*
-
-
2A
15rs!« m 2 p R»l*^ SraJion
57 2
51
3
jl
31
69
25
3
1
If
1
M.5
20
a
3
jBdro A & Gamtwlla LMm G»*. ty
*
*
...
-
-
-
-
7
0
3A
1 System 3*La** lire I ‘un-pirj
.
-
1
•4b
&26
»
40
a
0
3?
jGyste"’ 3A« ’I rjli 1+ Pvrftpr •*
-
-
-
-
-
3
40?
17
69
43
3
0
4
lEa-g RB Ri^m r*ump-g
172
7
1*7
 T
3
05
69
15
5
-
-
-
4A
|SYste<* 4- iw IINpur-f.‘4ig
40 2
st
**
7
3
1
t9
15
5
11
14 6
2x26
w
40
a
-
4B
SyUe -n 4A* h ■?' “ *Mbor
—
MA
SJ
3
3
IS
■
69
77
S
3
40 7
V
W
«
3
-
u
Parol- 0 to--Q Dan gia**N
-
Ll
-
0
s
L.3. Kano              'g
♦
95
1
26
4
691
M
K
30
7
fM -O l B Geffl±k04lA Dari G' a \
■
-
*
-
-
*
-J                         *
«
— -------- ----------
blip L B RwsrPuT.p^y
M7
65
55 3
3
26
69
>
t
-
*
V
Am 0 Abeba U*-i
-
.
-
*
10
AlwH-'S O-ni (JahHi
•
-
*
-
——J
+
ns
IUA
A.«e-2 Dumb ar, Da*"
*
-
-
-
«
20
1D0
AlwsrD Oirv " EVnt-jr-5 Dan-*
-
-
-
1
375 '
11
[>iD HBGta ’ Dim
■
■
-
1----- ‘------
«
12
Sile.LB Gila 1              ">»» ’>
-
-
-
-
1------ ’-------
M
12A
7 Id L £? --vtr Pumping
r
651 1
ITO
571
1
2.6
i
69
10C
2
►
13
3tic LB.&Id 2 Dim Gi*r k
.
*
.
11
H
11D PS G-o2w*n G’-avilV
*
—:—i—
L. '
*
-
•
-7
1
des^ pro aid **<» e'larade
risUc* 4|uyii?ri in Apper.d-w
2
Emling used tnlytar =amprison
pro*w
J
Tra-i-r is-’&r
x-a iaO^aiGjLT bwlli i «
1f(xn 1hi| town
4 7*e rar alt ifl syilnm 12 indue* a 25'Xrn. 65 1 m3 s chute slmeftro.
rrab'« H b
lifigalioci Main Technical Chaiactenaiics iShe^t 1 or 2)
r .6$ J m3fc chut* By
a
£
I 4=
5
i
? 5-i iTH n
*I
a
a
tr
£
J!
■4
L>
i
FK
i
5
1£
f1
*
*1Table h?
'lrngatio* Project! -Cad Soairy
0* Mifco- US Dalian)
SvMefn-'Prnjeci
*
3
2A
3
3A
IB
4
4A
4B
5
6
7
1
9
10
IDA
JOB
11 |
12
12A
u
14
Preliminary
414
314
57.2
206
314
70 8
15.1
40 2
11 6
44 5
12 3
4b 4
60
86
132
124
28 6
909
100
M>2
32 9
42 7
Darraf f )i 1)
40 7
0
0
67 3
67 3
67 3
13
0
0
40 7
0
67.3
0
13 5(6
49 )
14
66 5
84 9
84 9
0
M> 1
56 1
Access Read to Dam If)
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.4
0
0
0
0 H6j
15
08
2J
6
6
0
I
1
River Pumping Sratton |2j
0
119
168
0
0
u
42 J
97
160
0
27
0
183
0
0
0
0
0
0
239
0
0
Main Canal Conveyance i 3)
m
25 7
26 6
22.2
16 3
416
101
18 J
206
54.7
9.7
76 7
52
45
87
17.7
37 2
216
283
•M 2
44 1
41 5
Rcldl Pumping Stiltons (4 k
0
0
126
0
28 6
155
0
216
155
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Conveyance* from Rehft Pumping Station 14j
0
<1
126
0
10.1
20 1
0
10 1
20 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
Irrigation System (5)
203
112
161
41 1
114
188
48 1
114
138
195
45.7
165
165
393
21.4
1 50 6
85 6
299
293
241
113
186
**ub Total
111
494
438
158
295
54)
116
308
626
337
94 6
356
460
662
114
95 5
220.2
W7
766
06l
252
327
Physical Caniingenoci -20%
63 5
519
17 7
31 6
519
109
23 2
61 6
125
67 3
188
I 71 2
92
13.2
22.9
19 1
44
139
153
132
50.4
65.5
Empneering & Administration -10%
31 1
35 3
52 6
19
354
6$ 2
13 9
37
7$ 1
404
M4
42 7
552
79
13 7
111
26 4
83 6
92
79J
30 2
.19 2
Total
419
349
579
209
389
717
153
407
826
444
125
470
608
87 4
151
126
291 1
| 920
1012
872
333
432
I Includes the dim itself, the river diversion works (cofferdams, diversion tunnel, canal), the spillway. the tow-level ouikt works uto lhe imgfliuii intake works
2. Includes il» pumping Miixm nseff the fleet penstock (*), the mcch road Io the siilton, lire power trajwfeMKM) liner, lhe present value of power and the present value of i eplacing equipment
3  Includes the mam canal, tuimdi, siphom and <Xha structures along the nun conveyance
4  Includes the staixm and gnsclure
5  Includes find clearing land tevdlsng, Errigntton system, surface drainage, Hood protection dike* and drainage pumping stauons Tmgalion and surface drainage include both on-farm and off-farm System*
6  Earning dam and road. Included for comparison purposes onhWATER RESOURCES
annex ih irrigation projects
Table 8 Irrigation Projects Cost Ranking
System
Description
Gross
Area Ha
Nel Area
Ha
Total
Cost
USSxlO*
Unit
Cost
USS/ha
Cost
Ranking
<
Baro RB Hang Dam gravity
66600
50900
419 1
8235
i
T
,
Baro RB. Itang. Pumping
1(1>(2)
41267
31569
388 6
12309
£ ?A
io
System 2 * Re lift Station
57495
43983
578.5
13153
15
5
Baro RB Gambela Dam
17338
13264
208.98
15748
19
Jft
- --------- ---- iR
U
St stein 3+ Low lift
.
Svstcm JA+High hft
41016
31378
388 9
12393
11
67740
51821
716 8
13833
16
4
Bard RB River Pumping
17338
13264
152 8
11520
9
4A
Svstcm 4+-Low I.th
41016
31378
406 6
12958
'14
4B
Svstem 4 A “High Lift
67740
51821
826.0
15939
20
5
Barn. LB. [rang Dam Gravity
61900
47400
444 2
9371
5
6
Baro LB PumpinR
15832
12100
124.9
10324
6
'7
Barn LB. Gambela Dam
57018
43619
469 7
10767
7
l8
Baro LB Rjyer Pumping
57018
43619
607.5
13927
17
9
Alwera, Abobo Dam
13600
10400
874
M05
2(D
10
Alwero. Chiru Dam
17054
12000
151 0
12584
12
I0A
Alwrro, Dumbong Dam
1 23192
15000
126.1
8408
3(1)
10B
Alwcro. Chiru + Dumbong
Dams
34665
26550
290 7
10947
8
11
Gilo. RB Gilo I Dam
81346
62230
919 9
14^82
18
12
Gilo, LB Gilo 1 Dam
79652
60934
1011.6
L6600
21
12A
Gilo LB. Rr.tr Pumping
65538
50167
8”1 9
17370
22
13
Gilo, LB. Gilo 2 Datn
33855
25900
332.5
12830
13
14
Gilo. RB. GiId 2 Dam
61325
46900
432.0
9212
4(1)
(1)      Proposed for Master Plan
(2) Proposed for Prefeasibility Study
TAMS (JLG BaroAkobo Integrated Development Master Plan
IH - 15W ATER resources
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
4.6 Project Ranking
The ranking of the 14 potential imgation areas in the basis of costha is given in Table 8 The unit cost figures are comprehensive and include costs of storage dams, pumping stations, main canals, land clearing, preparation and levelling, irrigation system and structures, drainage system and flood protection system The unit costs  thus  reflect fully the physical characteristics of the various irrigation areas The irrigation system itself was designed to support a mix of crops that could typically be developed in most parts of the potential irrigation areas At the Master Plan level of analysis there are no grounds for selecting different cropping mixes on a geographic basis. It is possible of course to adopt various  irrigation strategies  such as  meeting local food needs, or aiming for high value cash crops Broadly speaking such strategies can be applied in all the potential imgation areas
If follows therefore that project ranking at the master plan level can be under taken using unit costs as the ranking criteria On this basis the following preferred projects can be identified
System  Description
Net Area
Jha)
Unit Cost
US$/ha
Ranking
1             Baro RB, ltang Dam, gravity                 50,900          8,235             1
9             Alwero, Abobo Dam 10 A       Alwero, Dumbong Dam. 14           Gilo RB, Gilo 2 Dam
10,400       L 8,405             2
15,000        ' 8,408             3
46.900          9,212            4
The total net area of these projects amounts to a little over 123,000 ha which would require an implementation rate of over 4000 ha'vear over a 30 year period Such a sustained rate of implementation is in excess of the maximum sustained that could be obtained in practice
4.7 Preliminary Economic Review
An economic analysis of irrigated agriculture is presented in Volume 11. Chapter 5
3 his analysis concentrated on the top three ranked projects, namely Baro RB with ltang Dam, the ongoing Alwero-Abobo Dam Project Three types of imeated agriculture were examined,
diversified crops aimed at the local market
nee
sugar with other diversified crops
The diversified cropping pattern is given in Section 4 2 above The results were as follows -
TAMS ITLG Baro-Akobo Iniegraled Development Master PlanWATER RESOURCES
Irrigation Project
Alwero-Abobo Dam AJwcro-Dumbong Dam Baro RB-ltang Dam
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
Agricultural Scenario     Economic Rate of Return
_________ ___________ _(EntRlt%)______________________
Local food production          11 4
Rice Sugar
10 0
12 6
The EIRR for the Alwero-Abobo Project includes  the investment already  made in the dam If this  investment were assumed as  a bunk  cost, the EIRR of this  project would be considerably  greater, possibly  in the order of 25%. This  confirms  that this  is  an economically  attractive project and implementation should be completed as  soon as possible
Likewise,  the  above  results  confirm  the  previously  found  relative  ranking  among  these three projects based on the investment requirements
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo liilqjr^ Develop™? Mauer PLiiT
1H 17WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The irrigation study  clearly  indicates  that the potential for irrigation development lies  in the Gambela Plain in the Lower Basin where the ultimate development potential is  in the order of 600.000 hectares gross area or 480,000 hectares net area
Fourteen basic systems have been laid out. sized and their costs have been estimated at the Master Plan level In addition, eight variants  were studied As  shown in Table 8, the resulting unit costs  in USS per net hectare vary  from about USS 8,200 to about USS 17,400 with an average of about USS 12,800 per net hectare
Based on these unit costs, a ranking of possible projects has been established as shown on Table 8 This  ranking indicates  that the most promising projects  in terms  of cost
are:
(1)           The right bank of the Baro River, including the Itang Dam and gravity system with  command  of  about  66,600  hectares  (gross)  and  50,900  hectares  (net)  at a cost of about USS 8,200 per hectare
(2)        The Alwero Project which has already been designed and for which Abobo dam is  presently  under  construction  and  expected  to  be  completed  shortly,  with command of about 10,400 hectares (net), at a cost of approximately USS 8,400 per hectare
(3)       The Alwero Dumbong System, upstream of the Alwero Project (2), above, in
the Alwero River Basin, including the Dumbong Dam and a gravity system
This project could irrigate a further 15,000 hectare net area in the Alwero
Valley at a cost of approximately USS 8,400 per hectare.
(4)        The right bank of the Gilo River in the vicinity of Agenga, where a net area of about 47,000 hectares of land could be irrigated at a cost of about USS 9,200 per  net  hectare  This  project  would  involve  the  construction  of  the  Gilo  2  Dam and a gravity conveyance
Based on the above, it is  recommended that the Master Plan scenarios  include the above projects  as  being the most favourable among those options  identified Of these, the Alwero Project under construction would be the logical initial phase of irrigation development
Further, it is suggested that the Baro right bank-Itang Dam project with a potential for about 50,900 hectare irrigation development be considered for prefeasibility  level studies
The Project Profiles for projects described under (1). (3) and (4), above are attached to this Annex
In  addition,  the  profiles  of  the  other  dams  considered  are  also  given  in  the  same Appendix ..Jv
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated De>clopmcBt Master Plan
1H-18WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX IH IRRIGATION PROJECTS
APPENDICES
PROJECT PROFILES
Appendix I
Appendix  2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6
Bare River, Right Bank, Itang Dam Gravity Irrigation Project System 1 AJwero River Right Bank, Dumbong Dam, Gravity’, Irrigation System 10a Gilo River, Right Bank, Gilo -2 Dam. Gravity, Irrigation Project
(System 14) China Dam Gambela Dam Gilo-1 Dam
FIGURES
I  1 Irrigation System 1 Baro River Right Bank, Itang Dam, Gravity Lavout
1 2     Itang Reservoir Area-Capacity Curve
1 3     Itang Dam Layout
2.1         Irrigation  System  10A  .AJwero  River  Right  Bank,  Dumbong  Dam,  Right  Bank Gravity-Layout
2.2       Dumbong Reservoir Area-Capacity Curve
2 3      Dumbong Dam Layout
3 1 Irrigation System 14 Gilo River Right Bank Gilo 2 Dam, Gravity Layout
3.2       Gilo 2 Dam Layout
3 3      Gilo 2 Reservoir Area-Capacity Curve
4 1     Chiru Dam Layout
4 2      Chiru Reservoir .Area-Capacity Curve
5 1     Gambela Reservoir .Area-Capacity Curve 5  2     Gambela Dam Layout
TABLES
11
12
13
2.1 22
2.3
3.1 32
’V "V J 3 4i
4.2 51
5.2 6I
6.2
Baro River, right Bank, Itang Dam, Gravity Irrigation Project Characteristics 
Baro River Right Bank Itang Dam Gravity Irrigation Project Cost Estimate
Itang Irrigation Scheme-Earth Dam Cost Estimate
Alwero    River,    Right    Bank,    Dumbong    Dam    Gravity    irrigation    Project Characteristics
Alwero   River,   Right   Bank,   Dumbong   Dam   Gravity   irrigation   Project   Cost Estimate
Dumbong Irrigation Scheme-Rollcrete Dam Cost Estimate
Gilo River Right Bank Gilo 2 Dam Gravity irrigation Project Characteristics Gilo River Right Bank Gilo 2 Dam Gravity Irrigation Project Cost
Gilo 2 Irrigation Scheme Earth Dam Cost Estimate
Chiru Irrigation Dam Characteristics
Chiru Irrigation Scheme-Earth Dam Cost Estimate
Gambela Irrigation Dani Characteristics
Gambela Irrigation Scheme Dam Cost Estimates
Gilo 1 Irrigation Dam Characteristics
Gilo I Hydroelectric Dam Cost Estimate
TAMS IJLG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Marler Plan J H Appendices - 11W ATER resources
annex ih irrigation projects
APPENDIX 1
BARO river right bank itang dam gravity
irrigation project
This'irrigation project, called Itang-Lare in the Russian report, is  located on the right bank  north of the Baro river between approximate elevations  430 and 420 metres above sea level and approximately  between co-ordinates  j3 5TE-34°30E and 8 lOTi- 8° 25*N The main project features  include the Itang Dam, a gravity  conveyance and the irrigation works The project layout is presented on Figure I I, Table 1 1 gives (he main project characteristics and Table 1 2 gives the estimated cost.
Dam Site Geology
The hang Dam site is  on the Baro river 10km upstream of the town of Itang in the flood plain, and 26 km downstream from Gambela Geological section 08-12 shows the site to be in lacustrine-alluvial deposits  of clays  and loams  overlying intrusive trachytes  and syenites  at depth The section indicates  five drillholes  The site is  not covered by aerial photos, but photos from upstream and downstream of the site show the river to be an unstable meandering system with a wide floodplain with point bars and back swamp areas For this reason the site is not considered to be a good one, but it may  be possible to construct an earthfill dam Impervious  fill would probably  be available to the north west of the site as residual clay, approximately 4 km away from the site
Project Description
a. Itang Dim
The Itang dam would have a maximum height of 1 I metres, and. because of the poor foundation conditions and undeTseepage problems, would also have very flat upstream and downstream slopes The cost estimate has been prepared on the basis of an earth dam, with I V on 5 H upstream and downstream slopes  which should give a reasonable estimate The spillway  would be located on the left bank  flood plain and would be 250 metres  long ungated to pass  the spillway  design flood of 1,400 m3/s with a 2 metre surcharge It would have an upstream impervious blanket to protect the structure from uplift pressures. The river diversion during construction w-ould be accomplished with a low cofferdam across the main river channel and a diversion canal on the left river flood plain After building the bulk  of the 5,100 metre long dam, the section above the diversion channel would be filled during the low flow season Two irrigation intakes would be provided for this project, one on each bank, with a capacity of up to 100 mVs  each The right bank  intake would serve this  irrigation project The left bank  one may  serve for supplying a future development on the left bank  Actual capacities were estimated at 66 nft/s on the right bank and 62 m’/s on the left bank However because of its  relative low cost implication the intakes  were oversieed for Master Plan level studies
The  reservoir  would  flood  some  presently  farmed  lands,  but  the  imgation  benefits  to areas downstream of the dam would offset these losses,
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan IH Appendices - 2WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
Table  1  1  presents  the  principal
characteristics  of  the  hang  Dam  The  cost  estimate  for
the dam and appurtenant works is given on Table 1 3. The total cost including the dam and appurtenant works  and 30 km long access  road improvement is  estimated at USS 63.859,000.
.An area-capacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 1 2 A layout of this dam is presented on Figure H.1-3.
b. Conveyance and Irrigation Systems
The conveyance system would consist of a 56km long main canal, mostly unJined, on the right bank  designed for a maximum flow of 66.2 mJ/s  at the origin just downstream of the irrigation intake works  This  canal would supply  the irrigation system from several off take structures  along the main canal The off take structures would supply a mostly unlined canal distribution system by gravity, serving a net area of about 50,000 hectares In addition to the gravity irrigation system, the irrigated area would be provided with a road system, mainly  along the main canal and distribution system A surface drainage system would also be included. This  system would discharge any  excess  flows  from irrigation and storm water to the natural drainage creeks in the area
The irrigation project area would be protected from flooding by  an extensive dike system and seasonal pumping stations A project cost estimate is presented on Table 1 2 This includes all project features
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan 1H Appendices - Jwater resources
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
Table 1.1 Hang Irrigation Project Characteristics (System I, Itang-Lare) dam
Catchment Area:                                     24.420 km2
Mean .Annual Flow; Dam Type.
Dam Height
3W 0 m3/S Eanhfill 11 m
Crest Level:                                             El 436 0
Normal Max Operating Level
EI43I 6
Normal Min Operating Level:                  El 428 5
Active Storage: 157 9 mem
Dead Storage
88.6 mem
Reservoir Surface Area:                         71 0 km2
Spillway Design Flood: 1,397 mVs
Gates
Max Flood Level.
Ungated
El 434 0
Irrigation Outlel Capacity:                       100 m3/s max each bank (1)
Gates
Access Road to Dam
8-5.00 m xS.OO m high
30 km long improvement
Intake requirements for schemes considered arc 66m 3/s on the right bank an 62 ni Vs on the left bank
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Cross Area
Net Area
Canal Conveyance
Type Sidesiopes Length (total)
66,600 ha
50,900ha
Mostly unlined earth canal 1WH- IV
56 km
Flow at initial section (max)      66 2 m Vs
Major crossings
Irrigation Distribution
Approx 300 m at main creeks
Gravity, open, mostly 
unlined canal system,
Flood Protection Dikes
60 km Iona
Drainage System
Surface, open canals, unlined
Road System
Mostly along hydraulic infrastructure
TAMS CLG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan 1H Appendices *4WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
TABLE   1.2   BARO   RBTR,   RB,   ITANG   DAM   GRAVITY’   IRRIGATION PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
Item
Description
Unit
LS
-
Qty
Unit
Cost
USS
1
2
3
4
5 51
Preliminary( 15 % of all items) Itang Dam (See Table 1 3) Access Road to Dam (See Table 3 3 Pumping Station
Main Canal conveyance Section 1    66 2 n?/s
I
-
-
-
Total Coy USS
41,416.89^ 40,657.659
km                 30      47,000           L410.000
kW                  0
•
m            13000           900
52       Section 2 58 5 m’/s
53       Section 3    56 0 mJ/s
54       Section 4 49 7 m7s
5 5      Section 5 45.3 m3/s
56       Section 6 37 0 m7s
5.7      Section 7 20 5 m3/s
5.8      Section 8 7 0 m3/s
I 59 Major Crossing Structures
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
LS ha ha ha
8000           500
1500
3500
480
0
11,700.000
4.000,000
720,000
450          1.575,000
420          4,200,000
400          3,600,000
6 6.1
6.2
63
64
65
66
67
Irrigation system
Land Clearing
Land 1 .evelling
Destoning
Distribution System Gravity Irrigation Surface Drainage
Flood Protection Dikes Drainage Pumping (200 000 ha)
Sub Total
Physical Contingencies 20% Engineering and Administration 10% Total. CSS (Jan 1996)
ha ha m
kv»
10000 9000 5000 6000
1
13,300 50,900
0 50,900
66,000
60,000
42,000
350 300
- 600 800
0 2000
200 100 800
i
L
1,750.000
1,800.000
1,500,000
7,980,000
40,640.000
0
101,800,000
13,200,000
6,000,000
33,600.000
317,819.558
63.505,912
38.103,547 419.139.0171
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan 1H Appendices - 5fFANG
SCHEME - EARTH DAM COST ESTIMATE
H * 13 (Sheet 1 qC 2-'
e mh.nkfnoHl Dim
Da^ TyP** E^iw,L n t A= Lftlla. B= M»d«urn. C= High) :
Da'lv erf Prions :
Ejchan^ Rata
Jan J5, J4
j.00
rt
A
U;55I&P
*HV-
5.00
5.00
D ) S Slap* I
H
■
11
Lcnw Rr»*rvoir L*v»l Jmj =
Dim Haight 1m] =
Lflngth nf Grant End In End |m| Lc 2 Widir O< Vsltay lor Full Haight of Darn Bv*
Dapth ol cut-Dff-lnneh (m) ■ Depth al common axcivstlon (m) ■
C m: Dam EfoviUon (mJ =
421.50
f f-00
5. TOO 00
7.500.06
500
0 50
4J6 00
* QiM**PPV"r,M*’,'Tw0''Ki
______ ___________
u
M
------------------------- -----------—------------------ - --------- _ ---------
3CiC«l«*
UNIT LOSal
C&teWAE*”
IT FMM-I <L13 A PdflEICW eawawrwt
'LOCAL
TOTAL 5UA.wrrr»' CO«*MDST
FOUjC-M
CQMFCwLwT
rat al
—------------------- - ------------------------ “------------------------ X
11
ripiwi'i  --j ---------- ---------- ---------------------
13 X                   1S.OO
15.KI
'212 030
3.0M H9
6410 *V
V ZJ
1
v — 1 Earth Dim ~
--------------------------- L---------- --------------------
y-------- ~[y^jn>/n*rrt DM"                      ............................. ....................—
■i— -------- ^Tf-fc—Mr-Lrwi rf igniter
1
0
0
0'
Jf ______
1 j-j
1J _
14 ______
l^-jnw                     _     -----------  ----------------------- -------------
1 l£
Fo^wbwi Cjeiwrtnn ■ Corvncr                              1 ml ^iCl^fcan ■                                        1
1
2
1
I
3
4.00               445353
MJtl
T 4}5 111
1 Til 413
-----------------—.
I                         W 00                 15.5J9
Ejcn'ratic" ■ FirtnlW
FB PI4C*—*nl ■
gcrrwC^M^*
n3
3                          4 00
•     725.755
1 ri -
""3
3                          4 lW        i 725 759
31.071 ’ .Ml ,Lj4 1 311 4-Zil
,
1 2*312 9525 4.30 5 526 030
4.907 oy
4 W7 OM .
15
’ll
4 00               517.250
413.100
' 555200
LOOT 30C 4*yi rXX
17
11
PUrttan vid l-j^aeno*- zX Mm
FfcnBMDnilnt ihnvKrt ah< Plett
•
I “□
2
5
B 00
24:00
517,^50 J72M5
427,800
1 Tf7 **9
7 ’*9.757
- f*-nrrtdE an£ Pl«» CHIiro sM Gra*xr
**
? 1 £J0 5 00
52*. J* J
a.OT.746 1 ’“rf 1? u?s
LI
1
3s
W.45!
1 J78. W
.
».H3 255
J. If
L^uncBS^Wd ttera
*9
_
5 00
361.H*
1 *4753*
1 Kfl 411
Sufih>IMd i. Darn
7.3*3,172
21,173,0*7
AWWT "VI ft
u^nr
n«MD
M1CPTO
URTT PSJinS -JS i
LOCAL 1
<;EiMF«»<.wnr; C©M«H*t¥T total
u&Cjh..
■..tMUPCwS-WT
• GWiBJSM
tjaHTOHEtfT
WTJU
3                 Acttii Road 5
11
ft wri fTortsrffTTflnl
I Km             a.«o do
37 400 X             47MD.X? 1           JOOO                   212 OOC
1 1?fl OOG                                        1 410 0ft
jj
Nr- S Mfl
I Mfl                    QW
000
0OG                     o.tw
0
01
c
|H
Sirem OPUw'-fl
Wa   1           OX
000                          oog                       0.00
<J
sd
0
Sub- w<*r ilMnT J. Ac co is Audi
2V7.XW
1.171,000
1,410 £W
1 UHTTMtCE |U1 l|
UM?        LDCJU..           Fon-EJeA.
LDC*t
JMKMJMt UA ||
IciatraH
ITEM «.
1
1
CtJM*O*<NT                lOTii            Qua-HTm1                 c e***ajw»T                   C0-M-&MXT                       is? JUL
l±      Dhraraion Tunntl
I
4.1              Tkrtraar Tunr^i Cjm HI. Lr«c
ri
DX                       000                         0.00                  000
D
0
<1               □"-TTinr Tunfit: ~ijii IV -■«
i*                     □ X                       o.t»
000               boo                     0
C
0
C
4J             'C*rtnrari Turwi<i £1*1* W L ■-**!
IF
0 oc                       0.00                        0.00
0 0G                             0                                          0
c
4 PA-irtlW TuHrM^
r
1
■
fun m
D00
JLM&jitfT rt«| m
-TUifC
-*T         lOqu.           FlJMjCh
&<3C1CPTl£3«
1
rnTAL
CQ«1 J*iAJWT
|T---
TOTAL
Spillway
“r-------
I
1
1  fO^x.
It.0*0
5XH0QC
y.xx
4 &M K*-
4,CM<JiX
trrgi'Uon lnLik<
Jntati Sructunt
Jw.Owi a
TunraCHiiV i^ho
Turem V_ umri
Shrtt Clqm a -ji *-3
jShrtl ElMLi.JV
_ 5.H jK Cl mu y Up^7
JOwC<« Wort-j
*Cv see op _.
‘5 xi i
I0PCO
1H,OW
AM P#
Totif ffcmi 2 fo 6
Grand Tgfj/
□3,654327                    4 2,067.6 5
^575.562            JB.702,246
4fl.377.80'ITANG IRRIGATION SCHEME - EARTH DAM COST ESTIMATE
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (US S)
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
1,262.030
______________ 5 048 119
6.310.149
2.
Earth Dam
7.243,272
28.973,087
36.216,359
3
Access Roads
282,000
1.128,000
1.410.000
4.
Diversion Tunnel
0
0
0
5.
Spillway
808,260
3,233.040
4.041.300
6.
Low Level Outlet
80,000
320,000
400.000
SUB-TOTAL A:
9,675,562      38,702,246       48.377,808
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
r
AMOUNT (US 1)
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
0
0
0
2- I
Access Roads
0
0
0
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
0
0
Power Tunnel
~■■ 0
0
5.
0
Surge Shaft
0
£
_______
7.
0
0
0
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8.
Penstock & Manifold
0
0
0
9.
Powehouse & Equip.
0
0
1                    oi
SUB-TOTAL B:                                          0                      0
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT |US 1)
LOCAL              FOREIGN
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION                     COMPONENT
COMPONENT            TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
0
00
2.
Switchyard
0
0
3
Transmission Line
0
0
0                       CI
SUB-TOTAL C:
0
0
0
TOTAL BASE COST :
9,675,562
38,702,246
48,377,808
Physical Contingencies
1.935.112
7,740.449
9,675,562
Sub-total
11.610.674
46,442,695
58,053,369
Engineering & Admin.
1,161.067
4,644,270
5.805,337
GRAND TOTAL :
12,771,741
51.086,965
63,858.706
20
Engm  10MAIN PROJECT DAI*
GAOU AKA -H* _ _
W.4W
<7 AftEA HA........................r.__«W
■raj**
,__M
l^*4L ll****
____ 6
MAJOR CRDSikW *H---------------- ■ J
□ IKIS **
J
1
■ J Ne«d> fc bi rviijffiiid  Sdied an rtrore derail td aftilytrs of a forqi jh<| rfrrr
LffiOfO
AWMJXW Of PROJECT AMA EXISTING DAM / RESERVOIR PROPOSED 0AM f RESERVOIR
PROPQ5EO I
_»-<X PROPOSED
HAIM CANAL
DIKES
conveyance
O        PROPOSED IRRIGATION
-*-------- PROPOSEC
IRRIGATION
I■—-—J
Swli
INTAKE
OFFTAKE / BRANCH CANAL
K*b
LAYOUT
i
IRRIGATION SYSTEM 1
BARO RIVER RIGHT BANK.
ITANG DAM. GRAVITY
Figure ,¥?        1
H-f.1             iElevation in meters
Area in km2
itang reservoir
Area-Capacity Curve
Figure 1H-1,2LAYOUT
ITANG DAM
1
Figurt Ma
H-1.3I
I
IWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
APPENDIX
2    ALWERO    RINER. 
RIGHT    BA
NK. 
DUMBONG
DAM
GRAVITY IRRIGATION PROJECT Genera!
This  project  is  located  on  the  nght  (north)
bank  of
the  A
lwero
river,  upstream,
of  the
Aiwero  Project  presently  under  constructio
n  The
project
lies 
approximately  b
etween
elevations 510 and 460 metres above sea level and approximately between co-ordinates 34 0 33'E - 34°40 E and 8° OO’N-7'45*N The main project features  include the
r
Dumbong Dam. a gravity  conveyance and the irrigation works  The project layout is presented on Figure 2 I Table 2.1 gives  the main project characteristics, Table 2.2 gives the estimated cost
Dam Site Geology
The Dumbong dam site is located on the Alwero River 26 km upstream of the Abobo dam, currently  under construction, and 55 km south of Gambela According to the AG 1 250,000 geological map the site is in biotite gneiss A geological cross section 08-13 shows  the site to be in granitoid gneiss  Overburden is  negligible The cross  section shows  12 drill holes  The rock  is  strongly  weathered to 10 m and moderately weathered to 20 m The section also shows  the rock  to be fissured Slightly  fissured, practically impermeable rocks occur at a depth varying from 35 to 50 m. There are no aerial photographs  available which cover the dam site where some material for rockfill or concrete aggregate could be obtained Photos to the south of the site show the area to be forested with very shallow relief. There does not appear to be rock exposed near the site except in hills  to the south of the site, where some material for rockfill or concrete aggregate could be obtained Impervious  fill can probably  be obtained from residual soil on the upper hill slopes. A diversion tunnel should be easy to construct in the gneiss with support of shotcrete wire mesh and rock bolts. A rollcrete dam seems to be the most appropriate choice of dam type for this site
Project Description
a. Dumbo ng Dam
The Dumbong dam would be 48 metres high and of rollcrete construction It would be developed for irrigation alone, but consideration would be given to the installation of a small power plant The spillway  would be ungated, 100 metres  long located on the
J
dam crest, and designed to pass  the maximum flood of 600 m 7s  with 2 metres  of surcharge The spillway  chute would taper to 20 metres  wide, terminating in a roller bucket 15 metres  deep Diversion during construction would be provided by  a 15- metre high cofferdam and two 5.80 metre diameter diversion tunnels through the right abutment. The irrigation outlet, on the right abutment, would be designed for a maximum release of 20 nri/s and would have two 5.00 m by 2.50 m high gates. A low- level outlet would be provided by  a shaft leading to one of the diversion tunnels equipped with gates for emergency' operation.
The  site  is  located  in  a  virtually  unpopulated  forested  region  and  its  ecological  and enxironmerual impact would appear to be minimal
TAMS VLG Baro-Akobo Lnte^ruicd Development Master Plan 1H Appendices - 6WATER resources
annex 1H IRRIGATION PROje^
Table 2 I presents the particulars of the Dumbong irrigation project. A layout of thc dam is presented on Figure 2.3.
An area-capacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 2.2
The  total  dam  construction  cost  is  estimated  to  be  $27,432,000  A  detailed  cost estimate of the dam is presented on Table 2.3
b. Conveyance and Irrigation Systems
The 37 km long conveyance system would consists of a 34 km long mostly unlined canals  with command of the irrigable land, and two major river crossings  The conveyance would be designed for a maximum flow rate of 19 5 m /s at the origin
3
The flow rate would be reduced proportionally to the command area The Ney and
Chiru river crossings would consist of siphons designed for 17 6 m /s and 10 7 m /s,
3
]
respectively  The combined length of the two river crossings  is  about 3km. The conveyance would supply  the irrigation distribution system from several off-take structures along the main canal
The off-take structures would supply a mostly unlined canal distribution system by gravity, serving a net area of about 15,000 hectares
In addition to the gravity distribution system, the area would be provided with a road system, mostly along the main canal and distribution systems
A surface drainage system would also be included This system would discharge any excess flows from irrigation and storm water to the natural drainage/creeks in this area
It appears that this project area is high enough and does not need to have a dike system to protect it again floods However, a study of the back water effect from floods entering the Abobo dam should be done It is likely that the Dumbong Dam could have a beneficial effect up on the Abobo dam in terms of flood attenuation and sedimentation and would thus prolong the life of the Abobo Dam
TAMS ULG Biro-Akobo Integrated Development Muter Plan
IH Appendices ■ 7water resources
annex ih irrigation projects
Table 2.1 Dumbong Characteristics
I DAM
Catchment Area
1.100 km2
Mean Annual Row:
7 80 m’/s
Dam Type
Roilcrete
Dam Height
48 m
Crest Level
El 518 0
Normal Mat Operating Level
El.513.5
Normal Min Operating Level
El 506 0
Active Storage
93 3 mcm
Dead Storage
66 2 mcm
Reservoir Surface Area
13 9 km1
Spillway Design Flood
600 m3/$
Gates.
Un gated
Max. Flood Level
El 515.5
Irrigation Outlet Capacity 
20 mVs (1)
Gates:
2-5 00 m x 2 50 m high
Access Road to Dam
20 km long road improved
.Actual required capacity was found to be 1
.5 m7s.
2. IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Cross Area
23 200 ha
Net Area
IS.OOOha
Canal Conveyance
Type
Mostly unlined canal
Sideslopes
1WH: IV
Length (total)
37 km
Flow   at   initial   section
(max)
19 5 m
Major crossings
Ney River crossing
17 6 3/s  1 5 km long siphon
w
Chiru River crossing
10 7 m3/s, 1.5 km tong siphon
Irrigation Distribution
gravity,    mostly    unlined    open   canal
Drainage System
Surface, open canals, unlined
Road System
Mostly     along     hydraulic     infrastructure
Flood Protection Dikes
Apparently not required
TAMS LLG Baro-Akobo Integrated De\ek>pment Master Plan
1H Appendices - SW ATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H irrigation projects
TABLE 2.2 ALWERO, RB. DUMBONG GRAVITY IRRIGATION pRorr
COST ESTIMATE
J£CT
1 Item '
Description
Unit
Qtv Unit
Cost
USS
Cost
USS
1
2
3
4
5
51
52
53
54
5.5
56
57
J reliminary
58
59
6
61
62
63
64
6.5
66
67
Dumbong Dam (See Table 2.3) Access Road to Dam (See Table 2.3 Pumping Station
Main Canal conveyance
Section 1     19 5m’/s
Section! I7 6m3/s
Section 3        10.7 m3/s
Section 4        10.0 m 7s
Section 5         7 2 m3/s
Section 6          5.8 m 7s Siphon 17 6m’/s(NeyR Crossing) Siphon 10 7 m'/s (Chiru R Crossing Miscellaneous Structures
Irrigation system
Land Clearing
Land Levelling
Destoning
Distribution System Gravity Irrigation Surface Drainage
Flood Protection Dikes Drainage Pumping Station
Sub Total
Physical Contingencies 20%
L.S
KM
KW
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
LS
ha
ha
ha
ha
ha
m
kW
J
20
0
7,000
7.000
5,000
11,000
3,000
4.000
1,500
1,500
1
9,300 15,000
0
15.000 15,000
0
0
12.461,77
14.005,9$ 40,000             800,00*
(
1
350       I 2,450.000
350         2.310,000
240         1.200,000
240         2.640,000
210            630.000
200            800,000
2,600          3,900,000
2,175          3,262.500
•            500.000
600         5.580.000
800       12,000,000
-1                     0
2,000 '      30.000.000
0
1
)
200
60
800
Engineering  and  Administration  10% Total. USS (Jan 1996)
3.000.000
0
0
95,540.234
19,108,047
11,464.828
1 26.113.108 |
TAMS ULG Biro-Akobo Iniefrited Do clopmrnt Mailer Plan
in Appendices • 9Tab/e 1H-2.3 - Project Cost Estimate (page 1 of 2)
CottLewl _»rv *ry !9»5
TAJMS CoftiurtiMt, Inc.
□eta               14-OclX
J
DUMBONG DAM
Reservoir Max. Level El 513 5
A SUMMARY DAM A APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (l/Sf)
rrEMMO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMFONTMT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
11----------
Preliminary
444 179
1.776 716
2 220 895
9
Roctrfill Dam
2 163 193
8 652 771
10.815 964
Access Roads
160 000
640 000
800 000
Diversion Tunnel
108,000
432.000
540.000
Spillway
O
0
0
4             _______
Low Level Outlet
530 000
2.120 000
2.650 000
Si/b-rots/ A.
3.405.372
13.621.487
17.026.858
Physical Contingencies
Engineering A Administration
total construction COST
681,074
408.645
4.495,091
2.724.297
1.634.578
17,990,363
3.405.372
2.043,223 22,475.453TaH* 1H4J • Project Co$ ‘ Irttrndi | PW* ? o< 2)
BARD’AKOBO project
dumbongdam
INTEGRATED master plan
irrigation project
Rrwrvov Mu Lt¥*l: Ei 513-$
DCTAILED COST ESTIMATE
Erflrw' Jifianr ' **
(W HrtT
wn„»<T
LH'
IJJMOT |IJh
i-KM.
cd»<xjh
FOUMM
CDWOKRT
TCT1L.
CiMMITTY
LCKM
±1S^CT<W*
IMlKN
rSHMM-JMEX’
rr*
4.
ttaron Tm»
<T
Cj ■— Tfam 'll
IF
□ JC
IM
0 GO
E<
D
0
Ebml^Oiu V L»wi
■
MUM
Llfflt
3 ’waw
IDS KM
ilJd.--
1*
ki
a ■ »■■ *>*»• dan tf l»h
H
SO
her
>3 ra
o
3
a
IM MV
lwt cnrr
MfeWT
LWT
rfKtariG
omrncM
LOtAk
CtWOfOTT
CtMWHDfT
'□T*.
WMrtTrr
UUL
cocoon
r<*p»
SWMWT
TWT*
L
It
nJ
i3E
S ic
:x
i
J
----------
LT
m
LICC
:H
lie
a
c
n
U
IJU-J
w,
K
: to
Pw
P
J
t
U
H,
1 .31
1 W.
s»
j
SJ
fitaln
LB
:.x
Aae
:k
fl
0,
oDill I AN.............................. ... ........... g
NAIL *□ -MV---c
LEGEW
APPfiOXlIMrr UF PROJECT AREA
tXISFlMj uAM / RESERVOIR
PROPOSED DAM / RESERVOIR
PROPOSED MAIN CANAL CONVEYANCE PROPOSED TUNNEL
PROPOSED SIPHON
PROPOSED IRRIGATION INTAKE
PROPOSED rRfilQAT’CN OFFTAKE / HNANCM CANAL
*___ •          S        w
~
J—
sen* tWfl.ii:
LAYOUT
IWIGATKN SYW T A
ALWERO RIVER
XMKK LlAK R1(J«T 4WP GRAVITY
N • ?       1Elevation in meters
Area in km2
0
100
200
Reservoir Capacity (man)
300
400
DUMBONG RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity Curve
Figure 1H-2.2LAYOUT
OUMBONG DAM
DU.M0ONG CAW PLAN
rI Jtir * Mq
H-1.3Iw aTER RESOLIRCES
ANNEX iH IRRIGATION PROJECTS
NDIX 3 GIL0 RBEK RIGHT BANK. GILO-2 DAM GRAVITY'
^TGAHON project
General
■ nation project, called Ubela-Pashala in the Russian Report, is located the right TIUt r^orth) of the Gilo river between approximate elevations 425 and 460 metres 
b *;. e | vel and co-ordinates 34° OO'E - 34 30' E and T 50’N-T 30'N The main
C
o
'ect features include the Gilo-2 Dam. a gravity canal conveyance and the irrigation P orks The project layout is presented on Figure 3 1. Its main characteristics are given in Table 3.1 The estimated cost is provided in Table 3.2.
<
Dam Site Geology
The Gilo 2 dam site is  on the Gilo River approximately  33 km upstream from the village of Agcnga and 85 km south of Gambela The Russian engineering geological map shows  the site to be in colluvial and alluvial deposits  overlying volcanic  and basement metamorphic  Geological cross  section 08-04 shows  the dam site to be in mixed alluvial and eluvial clays  and sands  overlying basalts  at the upper abutments, overlying biotite gneisses. The clays  and sands  are up to 10 m thick  Weathering of the bedrock  is  15 to 20 m deep Five drillholes  are shown on the section The site is  shown on aerial photo, ship 29,photo 385, but no stereoscopic  coverage is  available According to the 1.50,000 topographic  map the site has  moderate relief On the photo there appears  to be no rock  exposed in the vicinity  of the dam site If basalt or gneiss were to be found nearby  it would be suitable as  rockfill Impervious  fill is  probably available as  residual soil on the upper hill slopes  A diversion tunnel can be constructed in the gneiss  bedrock  without difficulty  and support would be shotcrete, wire mesh and rock  bolts  An earthfill dam would appear to be the most appropriate type of dam at this site
Project Description
a. Gilo-2 Dam
The Gilo-2 dam would be 36 metres high and constructed of earthfill It would be developed for irrigation alone with the possibility of considering a small hydroelectric 
power plant at a future stage The spillway would be ungated, designed for a maximum ischargc of 665 m7s with 2 metres of surcharge Due to the wide floodplain at the
site, and considerable sediment overlying bedrock, river diversion would be handled by a channel on the right bank, with final closure being carried out behind a high
cofferdam that would eventually pass the river over one of the irrigation outlets The irrigation outlets, one on each bank, are designed for a peak flow of 45 m7s and would
ave four 5.00 m by 2.50 m high, low head gates leading to the irrigation canals of the ^me capacity (These flows need to be modified to actual irrigation requirements
s  on  the  right  bank  and  34  nV/s  on  the  left  bank  However,  because  of  its  minor cost   implication,   the   capacities   were   not   modified   for   Master   Plan   level   cost   estimating Purposes)
TAMS CLG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan IH Appendices - 10WATER RESOURCES
annex ih irrigation proje
Cts
The resetM* ar« »
bonom “* ‘J*’-* ahhough "« 1*86
photogrammetric   maps   do   not   ahow   any   houses   Nevertheless,   construct,on   of   the   dam Will result in the loss of some agricultural land
Table   3.1   presents   the   particular   of   the   Gilo-2   irrigation   project   A   layout   of   the   dan, and appurtenant works is shown on Figure 3.2
.An area-capacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 3 3
The   total   construction   cost   is   estimated   to   be   US$86,679,000   A   detailed   cost   estimate of the dam is presented on Table 3.3.
b. Conveyance and Irrigation System
The   conveyance   system   consists   of   61km   long   main   canal,   lined,   on   the   right   bank, designed  for  a  maximum  flow  of  61  nri/s  at  the  origin,  just  downstream  of  the  irrigation intake   works   at   the   dam   The   upper   50%   approximately   is   a   "dead   canal"   strictly   for water   conveyance   purposes   The   lower   half   approximately   is   the   main   irrigation   canal itself   This   canal   would   supply   the   irrigation   system   from   several   off   take   structures along    the    main    canal    The    off    take    structures    would    supply    a    number    of    lined distnbutanes   and   the   remaining   distribution   system   conforming   a   canal   network   (the lining   or   not   of   this   network   needs   to   be   carefully   considered)   The   distribution   system would serve a net area of up to 46 900 hectares
In  addition  to  the  distribution  system,  the  area  would  be  provided  with  a  road  network mostly   along   the   main   canals   and   distributaries   A   surface   drainage   made   of   unlined canals   would   also   be   provided.   The   area   needs   some   protection   against   flooding   At this   state   of   master   planning   a   conservative   approach   of   surrounding   the   entire   area with   protective   dikes   has   been   taken   Imgation   return   flows   and   storm   flows   would   be pumped   to   the   adjacent   natural   drams   and   river   A   project   cost   estimate   including   all features is given in Table 3.2.
In the future this  project could be expanded to provide irrigation of some 25,900 ha (net) on the left bank  However, an intake would need to be built at the dam in the event this expansion would be adopted prior to dam construction.
At present the regional administration is  considering the possibility  of developing irrigation in part of this  project area Local consultant S ire studying an area of 7000 ha supplied by  pumping from Lake Tata With proper planning and engineering the main canals in this scheme may be incorporated in the large gravity scheme described above
TAMS ll.G Baro-Akobo integrated Development Master Plan 1H Appendices -11watek resources
ANNEX IH FRRIGATION PROJECTS
Table 3.1 Gilo-2 ,rri6ation Pr°iect Characteristics (System 14. UbeJa-Pashala)
DAM
Catchment Area
Mean Annual Flow:
Dam Type
Dam Height
Crest Level.
Normal Max  Operating Level Normal Min Operating Level: Active Storage
Dead Storage
Reservoir Surface Area Spillway Design Flood
Gates
Max Flood Level Irrigation Outlet Capacity
Gates: Access Road to Dam
9,640 km2
92 3 m3/s
Earthfill
36 m
E! 478.0
El 473.0
Ei. 460 0
1,427.6 mcm
564 I mem
150 7 km3
665 m3/s
Ungated
El 475 0
90 m'/s (2045m’/s intakes were assumed) (I)
8 - 5.00 m x2.50 m high New 11 km long road
(1) Actual capacities were found to be 61 m /s on the right bank and 34m
3
5 /s on the left bank
2. IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Gross Area
Net Area
Canal Conveyance
Type
Sideslopes 
length (total)
Flow at initial section (max) Major crossings
Irrigation Distribution Drainage System Flood Protection Dikes
61,300 ha
46,900 ha
Lined Canal
JWH IV
61 km
61 mVs
Apparently, no major crossings Gravity, mostly lined canal System Mostly along hydraulic infrastructure L'p to 110 km long
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan 111 Appendices -12WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJTq^
TABLE 3.2 GILO, RB, GILO 2 DAM GRAVITY IRRIGATION ppn COST ESTIMATE
KO.IEq
Ilem                          Description
Unit Qty Unit
Cost
USS
TotaT^^' Cost Us$
1         Preliminary
2          Gilo 2 Dam (See Tabic 3 3)
3        i Access Road to Dam (See Table 3 3
4         Pumping Station
5          Main   Canal   conveyance
5 1       Section 1          61 mJ/s
5.2       Section 2          23 9 m Vs
53        Section 3          20 5 m 7s
54        Section 4         10.0 m Vs
5.5       Section 5           7 8 m
56       Section 6           7.8 in 7s (final)
6           Irrigaricin system
6.1       Land Clearing
62        Land Levelling
63       Destoning
64       Distribution System Gravity Irrigation 6.5       Surface Drainage
66        Flood Protection Dikes
67      Drainage Pumping Station
Sub Total
Physical Contingencies 20% Engineering and Administration 10%
L          Total, USS ( Jan. 1996|
L.S
km
km
m
m
m
m
m
m
1
11          87,000
0
32,500 875
2.000 825
5.000 625
690,091"
56,143,609
957,Ofc,
0
28,437,500
1.650,000
3,43 7.500
ha
ha .
ha
ha
ha
ha
kW
11.000              425           4,675,000
6,000              330           1,980,000
4,000              330           1,320,000
49,000 |             600         29.400,000
46,900               800        37.520,000
0
0
I
46.900           2,000         93,800,000
46,900               200           9,380,000
110,00                 60          6,600,000
11,625               800           9,300.000
1
327,290,700
65,458,140
39,274,884
132,023721.
J <
TAMS LTLG Baro-Akobo Integrated De^-dapnxrQC Master Plan
I Fl Appendices - 13<(U‘H9'S9 
6SS'93>7f 2tJ'riff'll
CU6'9
>
fl
In
o
Si E
n
3
F
___
5
FGU.02 irrigation scheme
EARTH DAM cos I tSHMAit
Table h .
, summary o.^‘^“"jn‘NTWORKS
AMOUNT iUSS)
d£s:<'*tion
LOCAL
COMPONENT
1 540 541
FOREIGN COMPONENT
6.194.164
TOTAL
8 565 091
p—
Preliminary
Earth Dam
7.488.505
29.954.019
.
42 925.101
I A- _
J
_
Access Roads
191 400
765,600
957.000
r ""
IJ
Diversion Tunnel
0
0
0
<
Spillway
1.336 502
5,346.006
6.682.508
1
[Irrigation Intake
1.307 200
5.228.800
6 536,000
SUB-TOTAL A:
11,872,147    47.488,589      65.665,701
8 : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (US S)
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
0
0
0
r
Access Roads
0
0
0|
r
4.
Power Intake
0
0
0I
Power Canal
0
0
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
1.
[Surge Shaft
°1
0
0
oj
7.
| Pressure Shaft
0
0
01
••
Penstock & Manifold
0
0
oj
_____
Powehouse & Equip.
0
0
01
SUB-TOTAL 0 :
0
0
0
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
-------
item no
1
AMOUNT (US S|
description
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
0
0
0
1
Switchyard
0
0
0
3
-
Transmission Line
0
0
01
SU8-TOTAL C:
O0
0
total base COST :
11,872,147
47,488,589
65,665,701
Physical Cvntingtncias
2.374,429
9,497,718
13,133,140
Subtotal
14.246,577
56,986,307
78,798,841
Phginoehng 4 Admin.
1,424,658
5,598,631
7,879,884
grand TOTAL :
15,671,234
62,684,937
86,678,725
20
Engm 10MAIN PROJECT DATA
UHJll MUA
KT AMA **_______ ...... ♦A*1
AttUl
■    IVU    W*    11A cjuua                        o
- «N I lUlAk I ........ **
fl'iLfl I
*
-  HOW I MAX I • •»/.______ il
1IAMI LUMlM
HAJCH LMUIWO
•
*J“*
r • J
»1U AM         ______ _____ «i
ORA I MA M PUIVIM «ti....nt r ■ J r« o« raaaoaiaad
ja
jnd ri*«*
rtf
JflAl/sla af
ICGEND
AmcxuHiTtf mjta ajma CXISriMQ QAM / UMIIVQIB FMPOMQ OAM / HMlhiJil
I
H A LIGATION SftlCR
MOTt -
p-Aaplnp tfUt&fti
'LaoI  ih&wiM  to  ba  InciTtd  al '•hl (»wf/ intf af Rih d^i’ri
NONIfD MAIM CANAL COMVMAtoCI
J-*.' PtorOUD DIMS
o FftUrtHtO IMIOAVI0M nt I AM
MtWOUU IMMkdATlM e*A l*lt / MANCH CANAL
1 ■ - 1 _ *_
Um «.-MM
LAYOUT
IRRIGATION SYSTEM 14 GUO RIVER RIGHT BANK,
GILO 2 DAX. GRAVITY
*10Kf MJ
*1 J T ..Elevation in meters
Area in km2
GILO-2 RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity Curve
Figure 1H-3.3WATER RESOURCES
AN
NEX 1H IRRI
GAT
ION
PR0«c
r
s
APPENDIX 4 CHIRU DAM
projec
t
Site Geology
The   Chiru   dam   site   is   on
the   Chiru
River
15
km
upstream
of
its 
c
onflu
ence   with
th
Ah»ero   and   42   km   south
of   Gambel
a   Ac
cord
ing
to
the   1
250,
000
AG
geological
m/
the site is  in granite Geological section 08-09 shows  the site to be in QuaternarJ deposits  overlying gneisses  A badly  crushed zone 800 m wide and up to 76 m deep which is  severely  fissured occurs  at the dam site and geological conditions  are not favourable The site is  covered on aerial photos, strip 22. photos  188,189 The river follows  a major lineation almost perpendicular to the dam axis  This  correlates  with the crushed zone shown on the geological section Much of the area is  forested and relief is  gentle Upstream of the dam site some of the uplands  show striations  indicating gneisses  and schists. However no large areas  of rock  are seen on the photos  and it appears  that there is  no suitable quarry  site Impervious  fill can probably  be obtained from residual soil in the grassland areas  near the dam site An earthfill dam would seem to be the most appropriate type for this  site A diversion tunnel in granite could be constructed easily with support of shotcrete, wire mesh and rockbolts
Project Description
The Chiru dam would be 37 metres  high and as  suggested above constructed of earthfill Due to the 800 metre wide crushed zone in the foundation, a 400 metre long impervious  blanket would be placed upstream of the dam and tied in to the dam's impervious  core The spillway  would be ungated. 16 metres  wide, with a capacity  to pass  the design flood of 100 m3/s. A spillway  chute, 10 metres  wide and 150 metres long, would lead to a small stilling basin River diversion would be handled by  two 4 metre diameter tunnels  and a 15 metre high cofferdam The irrigation outlet on the right bank, would be a 4 metre diameter tunnel with a single 3-metre square intake gate
The reservoir area is  generally  forested with some small homesteads  and small areas  of cleared land, presumably  used for farming, however, the ecological effects  of the dam and reservoir appear to be marginal
Table   4   1   presents   the   particular   of   the   Chiru   irrigation   dam   project   A   layout   of   the dam and appurtenant works is shown on Figure 4 1.
An area capacity  curve of the reservoir is  presented on Figure 4 2 The total construction cost is  estimated to be $77,095,000. A detailed cost estimate is  presentea on Table 4.2
4
Note:- The Chiru dam is part of irrigation systems 10 and 10B which are not pr°posed in the Master Plan because of their relative high cost with respect to other possib However the proposed system 10A, based on the construction of the Dumbong (which was retained in the Master Plan as being among the most economical opt*0 for development of irrigation) could be expanded in the future This could occur
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan 1H Appendices - J4WATER resources
economically viable, by construction of the Chin, dam taftsBwmre.
ANNEX Iff IRRIGATION PROJECTS
t '”n‘ dam "P^on or the rm?atM„
Table 4.1 Chirn Irrigation Dam Project Characteristics
DAM
Catchment Area
Mean Annual Flow:
Dam Type
Dam Height
Crest Level:
Normal Max Operating Level Normal Min Operating Level Active Storage
Dead Storage. Reservoir Surface .Area Spillway Design Flood: Gates
Max. Flood Level Irrigation Outlet Capacity Gates
733 km2
5 50 m’/s
Earthfill
37 m
El. 517 0
El. 512.0
El. 504 0
132 5 mcm
115.1 mcm
21.8 km*
100 m’/s
L’ngated
El 514 0
18 m’/s
2-5 00 m x 2 50 m high
(1) Actual requirement is 15 6 m’/s but the intake capacity was not modified due to its minor cost implication at Master Plan level cost estimating
TAMS (JLG Blrtj-Akobo          Integrated Development Master Plan 1H Appendices - ISCHtRU IRRIGA T10N SCHEME - EARTH DAM COSTESTJMA TE
••
DataofPncat :
Ei charge Rato:
Dam Type; EfT'.ftink/rxnl Dam
Grade ol Foundation (A» LitUe. 9» Medium. C« High)
•'-»«-■ u i • 
U / 5 S'op* (M 1 v)
0/sStop* (H : i V)
2.SO
2.00
Table H
Low RworwXfU,,,
□am H»i.
Length of Crest End to End (m)
Width o< Valley for Full Height o<
Depth ol cut-oh.tr
Depth of common excavation
Crest Dam Elevation
(m|
4 yM I APPUR TtMAMT WO** 5
uKTHUCtM I)
COMMMte
Preliminary
Earth Dam
LT
J
I'JOCCCX        •2 aiC 00000 1             T56DC.OOC                     1
Fcurcxrr Eu^eoon ■ Can men
lS i
mJ 1
1I
3                         <00 T          512 452
3 1 20 000
AC9.97C
n          ^xrow Eovttion - RoO
m3                             2
1                      TO 001                >73
3<
J<          h<jt* txcaiiuon - EjTTfi
t 1 11
4 00        1.113.131
LS
2< Ur-M tv* MmwW
mJ
-3
m3
.
t 3 430 475 554
3                         4.00
; n3 13?
--------------- -—1*3
1 *31
----------------- 35o£r
380 525
IT           Rxamwr me Camwdcn d Care
m3                             2                                6 1
8 X             475 654
Ml 05C
U           F*wi rtDrrs ^wor«»Ki
1   m3                             5
tt
24.00              88 *25
J &442fc
423 001
■ 192 3®~~
LI           Rs Rao - PXi and Puea
•   m3                             2
• |                   TT.OO              28 247
62 143
241P J
Lte        JQrCr- jnC r»Txang
\                             2$
25
25 00
»Masri
ur         znuunenn
%
5
5
5.00
<33 628
1 14 511 I
i^otn I Da«
s,ne.2i4
nX4HJ
1
urn rmet iua 11
A MOUNT (Lflh
1
-OCU.
FCCDQN
total            0UAMTTTV
LOCAL
eoMFrmwT
rCAUC*.
comeo»er a
I 1     Access Roads
I-'
31             Rene ri3W<n|
cm                        300
0.00                         0 00                 0 00
0
°L.
ly      Naw Road
«.*    '        •-? apOOD                   W 500 00             07.000 00                17 50                      304 SOC
12’ica
33              inm '.“itri;
• X                        Q.CO                           ooo                         0 00                 0.00
0
2
Suh-tocN flam 3. Aceaai *oad«
xu,$do
UiM»
um! pnci ui u
IU> U
m* ■fl                               OUCWI'O*
WT           LOCAL                  lOOtICW
::«FMEjr               COMMENT
11
1
total
LOCAL
auAirm cowFO-txr
roadisa
COMTOMtWr n
1
a         10.version Tunnel
4f
>»an<nT^nWCa»i 5 LraC
1 3»
Im
:x                              ck
000                0.00
1 T 500 X 1.00000
—
42         ='»v'Le- T-mw Cmi fV u-»c
120 X                    1 2WM
0
320 000
TjwaxTL-"
Z’vcricr T<jvwt Can V Lrtc
3 00
JM.000
1.JK.®*1
"laoyT V» >'
I
LOCAL
COWAOMNT
i
15 pill way
' >06 00
1,7*4 00
1230 00
j.w ec
3.372 00
j-rr '«t ,ui t,
raMM
i»
’Inflation intake
L2 _
_fUA**'.-VXXfW
!»>
;twwiq— 1.1#
,*-*
TwrWQ—a/ lr
_ | irwtQ— V. lt
1 MX
I14
T
11
vmc cw. in t-
111-
It
2 000 00
Sulu mm riant 4 bn*ai«
MjAUK»
91.900
Totof item* 2 to 6
6.627.474
Grand Total
7,421.595
M.S'”*’5
3 0.4S‘'3TiKRISATIOH SCHEME - EARTH CAM COST ESTIMATE
Table H
..summary dam a appurtenant works
Ar
AMOUNT [US 1|
DESCRiPTlOH
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
1_
3.
£
5.
&
Preliminary _______ __
Earth Dam _______
Access Roads__
reversion Tunnel
Spillway
Irrigation Intake
SUB-TOTAL 4
994,121
5.575,214
304.500
320,000
343,960
92.BOO
1,290 OOP 1.375.840
331.200
7,621,595         30.486,379           58,405,301
0 : SUMMAS POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
4MOUNT [US S)
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN COMPONENT
TOTAL
it.
Preliminary
0
0
0
J.
Access Roads
0
0
0
1
Power Intake
0
a
o
4.
Power* Canal
0
0
0
L5
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
6.
Surge Shaft
0
c
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
_______
[9-
£
Penstock & Manifold
0
c
0
Powehouse & Equip.
0
0
a
SUB-TOTAL Sr
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
a0
a
AMOUNT (US SI
ITEM ho.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
!
----------------- -
11. Preliminary
0
0
HZ,
0i
It
Switchyard
0
0
0
Transmission Line         ----------------- r
0
0
SUa-TOTAL C.
0
0
0
total sAse cost .
7,621,595
30.486J79
56,405,301
Pfiys/ea/ Cont/figenaes
1,524.319
6,097,276
Tl.65t.a6fl
Sub-tola/
9,145,514
36.531655
TO, 085,361
En 0rneermg A Admin,
Sf<59J
3.658,365
7,008,636
GRAND total
10,060,505         40.242,920          77,094,997I
II
I.'I (pelt
Ll. 512
■srftiJnp
’
Tunnels 35 •
CHIRU DAM
LAYOUT
FMJ  J
1jiElevafion in meters
Area in km2
CHIRU RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity Curve
Figure 1H-4.2WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
EFENDI* 5 GAMBELA DAM PRO.IECT
Site Geolog?
This site is on the Baro river, situated 16 2 km east of the town of Gambia The AG I -|50 000 geological map indicates that the site is granite to the nonh and biotite uneiss  and calc-silicate gneiss  to the south The published 1 250.000 Gore sheet indicates  granites, granitoid gneiss  and biotite gneiss  The geological section 08-03 shows the site to be underlain by granite and gneiss Weathering on the section is indicated as 30 m No drillholes are indicated on the section so this estimation is rather conjectural It is likely that the depth of highly and moderate weathering is only 10-20 m The site is covered by aerial photos, strip 16. photos 1282-1283 Bula mountain to the north is in granite and rock occurs close to the surface A good contour quarry' could be developed in this location Impervious fill can be obtained from residual soil on sloping ground at the dam site or in the reservoir area A sample of this material was obtained with a hand auger to the left of the road at the dam site. The materia! was from 0 I to 0 85 m and was red brown silty clay. Al depth 0 85 m the augering stopped in weathered yellow granite A diversion tunnel could be constructed in the granite or gneiss  without difficulty  with support of shotcrete, wire mesh and rock bolts  The dam is  very  long and a rockfill dam would appear to be the most appropriate type. (Note - The 'very long dam" refers to the dam height proposed by the Russians, it may be possible to construct a smaller dam for irrigation, as described below),
Project Description
The Gambela dam would be 50 metre high and constructed of rockfill, as suggested above. It would be developed for irrigation alone but consideration would be given to the  installation  of  a  power  plant  in  the  future  The  spillway  would  be  ungated.  250 metres long, and designed for the maximum discharge of 1,749 m7s with 2 metres of surcharge and would utilise a stilling basin 225 metres wide and 12 metres long by 4 metres  deep  for  energy  dissipation  Dunng  construction  of  the  dam,  two  9  6-metre diameter  diversion  tunnels  through  the  right  abutment  would  be  convey  the  river around the site A 15 metre high cofferdam would also be constructed to protect the w orks^ The irrigation outlets, both in colls on each abutment would have a capacity of 100 m /s each (the required capacities would be 57 m 3/s on the left bank and would
v ary  from  17  m7s  to  67  m3/s  on  the  right  bank  Because  of  their  minor  cost implication, the intake capacities were oversized at the Master Plan level of study)
The reservoir inundates bottom land which is  sparsely cultivated or used for grazing The construction of the dam would probably  result in loss  of some agricultural land an d natural habitat
Table 5 1 presents the principal characteristics of the Gambela Dam An area-capacity SUrve the reservoir is  presented on figure 5.1 A layout of this  dam is  presented on Figure 5.2.
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1H Appendices -16WATER RESOURCES                            ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROjjq The  total  construction  cost  is  estimated  to  be  $102,114,000  Detailed  cost  ew'
presented on Table 5 2
Note - This dam was not selected in the Master Plan but appears to be of' future development Thus, in order to preserve this site for the future for infrastructure that would hamper its development should be built in the revi^"
tlfna'ei$
^ervoir area
0 m Or
^
Table 5.1 Gambela Irrigation Project Characteristics
I. DAM
Catchment Area Mean Annual Flow Dam Type
Dam Height
22,740 km2 372 m’/s Rockfill
50 m
Crest Level:                                                        El 490 0
Normal Max Operating Level. Normal Min Operating Level Active Storage
El 485 0
El 482 0
214 mcm
Dead Storage:                                                    1,239 mcm
Reservoir Surface .Area Spillway Design Flood
Gates
Max Flood Level Irrigation Outlet Capacity
Gates
74.5 km2
1.740 m’/s
Ungated
El 487.0
200 m’/s
8 - 5 00 m x 5 00 m high
Note This dam was studied as part of irrigation systems, 3,3 A, 3B, 7, 7A and 7B, not retained in the Master Plan
(1) Actual intake capacities would be as follows
Left Bank Right Bank 
57 m3/s
variable from 17m3/s to 67 m 7s depending upon scheme considered
TAMS ULG Baro-.Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1H Appendices - 17J>ble H - S 2 ISfieet 1 Qf >
p»r               □L
3 *g______
ci j*
jjsapji.T
—'
t ■Im f*
1.4’ 3 3QB
-
TTTf
3HTT
>!»
’"Ml 1MT
- TE
: ij i J «-
TzHTF
. j!TW
1
I* * w_ ’ -U 'HA
Td’< |*r TFifrT
Z ta i
’Tsrs*
V trail fl if
J. 1 ‘                        J          ------ —.    *---------------
-rqT—" 'hrf-dMurlfl^ .
------------------------------------ ! *i
=X
T7?S Tit
1X
U ■-£■*
' J L3 M ’
' ktt 43 « |
K4■’£-
i—
iau/r>
Jj.JJJ.W4
i
ef|»Ml I
1
d «iti rti» B
efl
uAUL
si kJi rt*
■'          !»TH.       | iuM^f
tT“*L
1
1C44SJ HN4)
M
Sru-i
Vni^> ti*-****i
fc’H
9«
ion
‘1 Al
3S ■
i je
- 33
Jifriaw nus
5K                         2 - ------------------------------------- r
9
□
4
-------------------------------- J
Id
JLK i                                                          9
1 Aijiigj
t
D
J
9 fc
s
a
d
r
m*—-
"CI rUI B
n
IMT
LK>1
irris
■ Q*M
tHW&rrm
4.                3f¥»mKJn Tarr ■•
4F               ~»«i in ■* TufnU ZJn 'll 'uTafl
d1
1 ”’
■          ) W M  ’        - .^"T"             n Xcx
9 X                  ox
9X                        5
s
9
a
\w Z-Ail '-J- LMfl
• JS? xc
?'■ -x xc
4 J '            i?Minua' Fisrirjp ^Jnm ’/ '.^wS
>     Mi
Z3C
;3B
u
4 FmiVk*
;
fl'
<n«N0
*
FT^M^OW
3
pitfMf
| TIW Wl
StfCW»“af-
J
■jur «ac i vi p
Lfid-I | mW
r-----------------
iMUl
fciWTC"
IlMikL            .*Jjn’TT¥
1
i5gi!>
S.1               LrtdnHiM
I «-J
1 1J   ------------’m’
Ts!                m'jtz    ----------r?sr
'< id
4 XM
‘n
FiKMfl H
ffl                    T5H1F’                  .! ST           1' lir 33                      Hl;
JT-.W
a jin zrxj
■ Jci
C?%n
11
11 iGiuk
m: .
5 -M
Jc
: ?a
fliir
I     m                       a a             ■] 5n                      J ;a
: l< •         3 X
r±
=■
i
Fl
-
5
5
g
fl
JJMJK
J-
“r
L
-Sd- MKI -Trt 1
-«*
kSC-M.
I
<-r
Wt*i,
SUMJTTiri
ee^nea
ri-wl
— i
IHTiL
1
L                ungaKtOH ?ri uk i
11
*dbn ’.r. 3=i-i •■
in»C' W
jdjrox:.                 i
£X>J
jjbzjiXi
tl
T5---------
Z-ili II           ~**«r
3 u8                    3 SC
: -jc i                       3                                       3
9r
3'
4
::
^flii luii j     r’r4
Hl
jQU  -------------- nr
——r                    J
|If«A &«zi ii,
—fieri
■n                      4'5d                    ■ iW
SZh i                      3                      l
□
i
br-
i ,h<*4 CiUtii -j
. L-J- ±L»bh. ,
vim
'—/ire
-nmj
m                                                 C-3€l
ffl      -----------IX
rm 4U1 3C
□ 3i’
■mw
□ JO !
aai
; jw x
” -1
4
>21
MHO
------------------- ----------L
j
1 IF Xfl
fniur rtimi T fl'
Grand Foul1
IJ.W'fTT
f5 4TfJ2fl
1
F7,J5J.MO
i«™  Nld
t-* T Ji
3th-j
"*«««. A
•n I d , n » w
’* iVAev, a# l liwv
A ■ Lfla. 5 ■ u«ur ~ - -~y
lw _ _4rn|
strTH ar cut -orw
■U<M
un SLO^E
aaH-Wi
oCfTHcr'a—
tlCAMATfl>l
■
11 M<«*\
i r rt. ’. J
5,Ji »>i ■ J
J UM
■RCsCji.r.u L Bju-
DlitldfrCM-
iidtjnf*
Jiri 11, 11
1M
KWNWUW.I
Di-- Hai0IM ■ MGAMBELA IRRIGATION SCHEME - ROCKFILL DAM - COST
Table
A ; SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (US
1) ------------
ITEM NO.
description
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
total.
1.
Preliminary
2.018.051
8.072.206
2.
Rockfill Dam
8.000.47?
■■ —
32,033.906
------------
40 04? tT?'
3.
Access Roads
0
0
-----------
4.
Diversion Tunnel
4.320,000
17.280.000
■---------- — ____ n 21 600 Dm
5.
Spillway
,
820,200
3,280 800
4 10iOfT"
,
S.
Irrigation Intake
305.000
1,220,000
V525.Q00
SUB-TOTAL A:                               15.471,728           61,886,912 B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
T7.358.640
T
AMOUNT (US S)
ITEM NO
------------------------------------
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
0
0
o'
1
(Access Roads
0
0
O'
3.
|Power Intake
0
0
oj
k
_______
Power Canal
0
0
0
r- 8.
IPower Tunnel
0
0
0|
Surge Shaft
0
0
£
7.
^Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8.
1 Penstock & Manifold
0
0
0
9.
'Powehouse & Equip.
0
0
0
SUB-TOTAL B:                                          o
C SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
0
1
ITEM NO
----------- -------------------------------
AMOUNT (US S)__________ .___ ___
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
Q
0
0
2
Switchyard
J
0
0
3.
Transmission Line
0
----------------- ?J
0
SUfl-TOTAL C.
O
0
TOTAL EASE COST :                    15,471,728          61,886,912
Physical Contingencies
Sub-tcral
Engineering a Admin GRAND TOTAL ;
3,094,346 12.377.382
18,566,074          74.264.294
1,856,607            7.426.429
20,422,681          81,690,724
0
77.3S8.6*0 15.471^
92.830.^ 9.283.O31 1O2.^'*°S
Physical Contingency (%) =   20
Ergmeenenng i Administration (%) = 10Elevation in meters
Area in km2
GAMBE LA RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity Curve
Figure 1H-5.1I'
I
4
IkIresources
ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PROJECTS
APPENDIX 6 GILO 1 DAM PROJECT
Site Geology
The Gilo-1 dam site is  on the Gilo River approximately  75 km upstream from the \illaae of Agenga, in the flood plain, and 95 km WMV-7 from Mizan Tcfen k  is practically  impossible to reach the site According to the AG 1 250,000 geological map the site is  in granite Cross  section 08-05 shows  the dam site to be in gneiss, with weathering to 40 m However due to the inaccessibility  of the site this  depth of weathering is  highly  conjectural. The site is  just covered on the edge of the aerial photos, strip 33_ photos  2236, 2237, but the site is  only  just stereoscopic  although there is  a lot of relief displacement The valley  has  very  steep side slopes  Mountains  to the north of the site have very  sharp features  indicating a very  thin soil cover, so a rock quarry  must be possible to develop It may  however be at a higher elevation than the dam The gneiss  or granite would be suitable as  rockfill To the north of the site the photos  appear to reveal gneisses  in the mountains, with many  striations  A spillway could probably  be constructed in a coll (saddle) on the southern bank  Impervious  fill should be available downstream of the dam site in the lower-lying gently  undulating land A diversion tunnel can be constructed easily  in the gneisses  and support will be shotcrete, wire mesh and rockbolts  The most appropriate type of dam for this  site is rockfill, but if rock  was  found to outcrop sufficiently  on the valley’ slopes  at the dam site a concrete dam, even arched, might be feasible.
Project Description
The Gilo-1 dam would be a 107 metres  high and. as  indicated above would be of rockfill construction The spillway  would be on the left abutment, discharging through a coll to the flood plain below, well away  from the dam toe (see Figure J-8.1) in Appendix  J. The spillway  would have three 7.00 by  6.00 m high gales  and a short chute which would terminate at the head of a ravine on the downstream side of the abutment No concrete paving would be required beyond this  point, due to the presumed high quality  of the rock. During construction, the nver would be diverted through two 7 00 metre diameter diversion tunnel with a 15 metre high cofferdam A low lever outlet tunnel with a capacity' of 200 m’/s  and two 1 50 m by  2 50 m high pressure slide gates would also be provided
Based   on   the   1986   aenal   photography,   the   reservoir   area   is   virtually   unpopulated   and no major adverse environmental effects are anticipated
The principal characteristics  of this  hydroelectric  dam project are presented on Table 6 1 A layout of the dam and the appurtenant works  is  shown on Figure J-8 I in Appendix J
An area-capacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure J-8.2 in Appendix J The ’otal construction cost of the hydroelectric dam is estimated to be $133,179,000 A
^tailed cost estimate is presented on Table 6.2.
Tams L LG Baro-Akobo Integrated Doclopmrnt Master Plan
t
I fl A p pen dice? ISWATER RESOURCES ANNEX 1H IRRIGATION PRqjj.^
.An alternative use of this dam, for irrigation, was considered, as part
systems 11 and 12 The cost of an irrigation dam was derived from the c ° lrr*® ’°n
w
Tabie 6 2 by including the cost of imgation intakes required by systems^ ]eS,lr”aie in However, because of cost, these projects were not retained in the Master P| '
Table 6.1 Gilo-1 Hydroelectric Dam Project Characteristics
1. DAM
12
Catchment Area
7,570 km2
Mean .Annual Flow
74 1 m5/s
Dam Type
Rockfill
Dam Height
107 m
Crest Level
El. 612.0
Normal Max Operating Level:
El 606.6
Normal Min Operating Level
El 578 6
Active Storage
2,341 mcm
Dead Storage
874 mcm
Reservoir Surface Area
116.8 Ian2
Spillway Design Flood
1,065 m’/s
Gates
3-7 00 m x 6 00m high
Max Flood Level
El 609
Low Level Outlet Capacity
200 m’/s
Gates
2 - 1 00 m x 3 50 m high
Note - The characteristics  of an irrigation dam at Gilo-1 site were assumed to be essentially  the same as  for a hydropower dam However, conveniently  located imgation intakes  were included with a 100 m’/s capacity on the right bank for system 11 or on the left bank  for system 12, respectively  These structures  would be located
at EL560 masl, approximately, to allow for conveyance loss  and for command of the imgable areas by gravity When estimating the costs of systems 11 and 12, the cost of the dam, its  appurtenant structures, the irrigation intake and the access  road were included in the cost of the imgation schemes
The actual intake capacity requirements were subsequently determined to be 81 on the right bank and 79 m’/s on the left bank but, because of their minor cost implication, the intakes were oversized for Master Planning cost estimating purposes
TAMS ULG Baro-Akobo Integrated Development Master Plan
1H Appendices -19. rLCHJT
5.2                1 of j
11
■JMTT
-MT P«E1 iA II
_0CJt               | IWU
e=wWTt
*wf*L               7Ub*-?r
UK*L
Thh^wp*"
up !W --tW
GUHhJ^Tf             1
-*T4
1
ACC«B>R44^li
:r p
. ___ - |,        m"" -
—i               1
1 «-
ll XI
1
Tj
rf
hap* *a*a______________ _____ _____________________ ,
r
11
?3G j
*.? 4.x' X i
ID
i“ XU i-
4
4J~
3
1 1 Fa m~i~
7x*                 F2T             ¥1 p       —-------- T” "
-
■^nlP -—:--J
*
I
J
31
i S m JS
!i
. F j -;■:
—r
f.rttjw                 M**.**
i—r
E
UPfi
L
LM1             MCWII
W41                    3L*rn*T
1“
a W i !+ -Ml PI
FtiMba
4               1□harkfcr "urtn*l
*F
4 jt-« * X I III. Lz+fl
rft                    DOO
S3*                      ? X                        3                                   3
3  -X
Ts---------- '
Dwwi.an ** L.^*»
. ■* 1                         “i Um              T J» ft
”     i     a?     a*                        1 JW hX
——a
-a ‘u .<;
—L
1.X
3
Jpfrmil .Hfl 4. 4I*W«w
JVT      VKl E3 ri
ZftF w
VJIN 4W
H
13 £Jf X4
I
1
aMTT |      LXXM.            >5TO
■i “IMP Mtf     c-AM^iiLirT
na *L |           '-“**f—*
|             LLOk
r
1
1
A
KpiOwaw
■ ll
-<5     ----------- - >
TTT
I
iJ
L»?»-4vx
naivwatan.j|
in i
n»
■ ,                 HL >3           juu
-Ti'tfC
t*i
La ,C^mw
.L4
iTj iCjrwi
’ »* X ■
1        X                       bu ■
*i p
M M : x QM
:Vi7j'■ -        ;]i-kx       r~ ,‘+rr3ffx
L J p-J-i-r
Ki TH
• oils
J
i t La
MIL MT
413*1
:4J.xo
^*e ■ iw;
-
Jll-x 1
0 MX«M
M - MG
JliS'4
J. ■ . -L
154 - J.
p,m.£E<
|
—F
1 fiww
mci iua h
i,±ELaA    |     >0«CO
| c—a ■
UCJt
■
M K■!*-<-
li                  L3* L *V«.| Qvtrt
ii
LJ
iT c±rT
•**”* C *4» ll flM
.1               T3F------------- Fx
-mat —■afflF’ I
fl k
aX
■ ■zij* -wi Ip
LDPWMI 1
J3
■fl
ffl
3x
S3f
i
-
i
IJ             mu —*L* . .rrf
- -'X M 1               « iCtllj             iWr,X                       +K
ITiSk
J
111 J JJC
2 4J 3 -XI
T*
-awl Cl**i ■
-ad
AM
;x
' 'IS
3
5
ai
ii
-
u
aF»«     aaj ii .mi
■■
a it
OlK
a:
j
L* *
S  ft —4t4. V -JHr
M
S
'0
:
2 5*rx "
M ift X
UUXlX
if
1 Shift Zdlli 4 ri<
3X
EX
3X ■
iitrja
5l
-
»
JM
1X
'JLL
i.Mari ?.™\,
-
' !’■ MX
i I J ®»T
■ mu flc£ rt
r 1 33Q |
1 JI? XT 1
* 19Q tXf
Ulipmim ILW>'
»
"«UM
4.444IM
llli»
Tsoi rruTLi 3 fa t
Gftnar To>fJi
«7>MJff rtLfH.UJ
2O,TTB.51J9
i7.7JJ.TT~
rw.B97,a»^
DEP EM Q* iSiT-OFF
TRENCH
Uf k IL CPI ■
DIIXt*5 *
D«PTH OF !=□■ «*■
tS£AVAHC*f
jw w. r-fc
1*1W r j  -i iv
11 uv*
SQCX/ILL PflW
Daw ■< Prw»l.
Ejt h*■"f- *-•:
Jfec '1 H
14
wfwt1 Lriwi
tarn Ma>qhlKWL’i&f*!
wociwuom- ccsrtsmun
I
.PCM
co*RM«n |
«-*=-<<* 1
■ - —J
rotn
autMFr’
'.□CM
OwaowrvT
1 >*
X
n
PowtflnU**
■>rcv»
_1
xd x
in 1** urt
—
“Tioxcx
-urwan---------------------------- n
U            Qaai                                                   1
Li 1
54 rx
IT. MO
*0BfKa
CO^5wt<-
-------- “Snjr
ie* «ar
lufcJMfWwe 1 PwwWaK
—
*•
1
j TI»«1 1
van         IOOU
'OUX>
.XU
x*«rx-
mu              ■Bawnrr
*<waca
co-aouri
m*
K
Pe-v
Car*'
41
IrUU
---------- nr
m------------- nr
'5
yj--------
T -----------nr
---------------gTT
:x
r
r
3
--------------------------- f
tz-
i£?
2*3-22-------
-------------------.---------------------------------------
n
"TOI---------
--------- “5TT
50
C---------
---r
------------------------ r
"T
f
I
W*«/nw
wrmct u ■
4. PwwG*                                                        0
•
•
1           •  >• l|
lock
W*M
ou*mrrr
UXjh
coeamm
_
COwWwfwT
H
in*
L            Power Tunnel
I A*                 > /«*C
i•
nr
nr
______
&
nr                        0
fl
»
u           ’ «* C»» > IV. im
•»
• rtf Xc                        Ini'a
ll
**• C«u • jw
■»
i *“*           » adOX                IXKX                   FT              •51 xn
iX
55T
»•*««* <*• i Nwrw«
•JWCipMB
/«*«■ j
*«
fl                     3
r
!
4J1W
ukm
:on*c«>un
uil*
atao.vT vi m
!""• 1
xacvx.
I
-
1
mu
oeMmn
1«
I
'Surge S
haft
• } TT —V
•tj-- ’
—*»* II. urea
w
5x
C X 1 ---------- Tx
a X                nr
1 u •
- ■» 1            - X 1
1
]1
-------------------------- j-
------- -------------------- T--------------------
owi -iu . ,/u
m
<-r
~•
1 -JI *
1--------- - E
5
Lu^MOj^wi (
Siw*                                                             4
• 1
|
mw-o
9tx«noa
•" 1
•o’ •wci Lui i.
eaaeurT twe«r
mr*.              ttWT*
LQC*<
W^OMMT
IWC-JM-T Ml <
CDWil’’
w»*
? ’ Ul^C^ll J ->•€
1^. 1
1
—2-1
•*
—nr ---- nr
IX nr
------------ TO"
D  -------------------------- r
——-r
5®                 H5   ------------ nr
---------------r
------- r
?
j
7, r^uarv                                                          4                              0
Otcurfl.
-
WT-ar<,'.«n
LOCM lOMfea
UCIl
a
rn
nr——- ■
Sr*XU
ur>.r
PanitocK I Manlfix
■ — 
-------
•O’* MMI'n
1
1MX
^rar»
-n^owxT
------------------------ ----
’
H* I
too
tfc       U ‘.WX
yra-s
MX xri
»«*»
1
(t—
H
1—
MXkrx.
---------- -
lOCAL
PnwarrsxM * Esvic***m
r
UKM
Wu
--------------------  .1^
^•^**2-------------- -—
’—* ..
L ■■«
TF--------    *»*>.-« LA*.IM- -------------- ---------------------------------- ------
cF5e
57c
—
«ie ®
Me
--------fieri
TOT
-------- SHT
r
Pte ooTI
---------------—rt
*■     ■     ibmw      i.    rymna
Tor*J rrami ; » a
Grind Toraf Baa* Cotts
51.^
11.M.790
sco.^HVDKttacTwc WSWI - Moowutu* eo»r«Tw>rsr.]l_Ol-R HYDRO-SLZCTRTC PQV/ER SGHEMx * ROCKFILL DAM
A ; SUMMARY dam i appurtenant works
rabit H " 62 rShsft 3 °f 3J
AMOUNT (US $1
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
component
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
total
T“
Preliminary
2,631,933
10.527,933
13,159,917
2.
Rockfill Dam
12,723,288
50,893.154
63.616,442
3,
Access Roads
1.17A500
4,698.000
5,372,500
4.
Diversion Tunnel
2.097,600
0,390.430
10.48B.000
5.
Spillway
385.967
1.543,068
1.929.835
1.
Low Level Outlet
1,165.200
4.660.000
5.326.0C0
SUB-TOTAL A:                                 20,178,539        80,714,155 100.892,694
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT I US 5)
FTEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.               Preliminary
1.565.190
6.260.760
7.825.950
Z                Access Roads
0
□
0
3-
Power Intake
97.6C0              390.400
408.0C0
T                  Power Canal
0
0
0
5-               Power Tunnel
432,000
1.728.000
2,160.000
6.               Surge Shaft
0
0
0i
7.              iPressure Shaft
0
0
0'
8.                Penstock & Manifold
305.000
1.220.000
1,525.000
Ll         Powehouse & Equip.
__
9600.000
38.400,000
48.000.000
SUB-TOTAL B.
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
71999,790          47,999,160       59,995,950
AMOUNT 1 US SJ
item no.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
foreign
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
2,035 000
11,340.000
14.175.000
2,
Switchyard
0
0
a
3>             iTransmission Line
le.aoo.ooc
75.600.000
94.500,000 |
SUB-ro74L C:
21,735, MO         86,940,000      108.675.000
TOTAL BASE COST :
53,913,329
215,653,315
269.5663 644
Physical Contingencies
10.782,666
43,130,663
53,913.329
Sub-tataF
64,695,994
258,783,378
323,479,972
Engineering A Admin.
6,469,599
25.878,338
32,347.997
GRAND TOTAL :
71,165,594
284,662,376
355,827,970
Physical Conlmgency (%) = E^gineenering S Administration (%) =
20
10IpANNEX IL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
ANNEX II WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
Baro-Akob» River Basin
Development Master PlanANNEX 11. WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
CONTENTS
I I. ......... .....I... l
Object5............................. ...........................
The Study Area ;
.............................................................................................................................
fr
Instituiionai Setting
Government Policy
................+..• ."1.<.4........................
3.
31 3.2
4*
Available Data ................................................................................................................................. 4
METHODOLOGY
EXISTING supplies and current programs
Existing Water Supplies Current Programs and Projects 
.......... ..........
FUT URE W A1 ER REQ UT.REME NTS....»««««..■ ■ ■■—
4 I       Population Projections...
4.2       Consumption Levels 
43        Projected Water Requirements
5.    WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
5.1 Urban Water Supply Programs ........................................................................................................ 11
(a)       Mam Towns„-]J
(b)       Small Towns♦*...12
5 2     Rural Water Supply Program........................................................................................... .......... 12
TABLES
Table. 1
Table: 2
Table  3
Table. 4
Table: 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table R Table 9 Table   lo Table: 1]
Table 12
Table; 13
Table 14
Table: 15
Table is Table: 17
Table: |g Table; jg
Table: 20
fable; 21
Table 22
Current Water Supply Levels and Tariffs Existing W ater Supply Systems-Main Towns
r
r
Existing W'ater Supply Systems-Medium Size Towns Existing Water Supply Systems Small Towns and Villages Projected Town Populations
Projected Rural Population and Population Densities Assumed Net Daily Water Supply Demands
Projected Net Average Daily Town W ater Requirements Projected Gross Peak Daily Town Water Requirements Rural Community Waler Supply Wells Required
City Water Supply Program Cost Summary
Asosa W aier Supply Cost Estimate
Dembtdolo Water Supply Cost Summary
Gambela W'ater Supply Cost Estimate
Metu Water Supply Cost Estimate
Tepi Water Supply cost Estimate
Mizan feferi Water Supply cost Estimate
Begi Water Supply Cost Estimate
Gore Water Supply Cost Estimate
Masha Water Supply Cost Estimate
Small 50 Towns Water Supply Program Cost Summary Medium Town$_-Typical Town Cost Estimate
T AMS-L LG Bim-Akobo River Basin tacegrattd Development Master Plan
1I-i
■>WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY
Table 23         28 Small Towns-Typical Town Cost Estimate Table 24         7 Villages-Typical Village Cost Estimate
Table 25 Rural Community Water Supply Program Cost Summary
tams-ulg
r - Kratfd Maswr PJanw aTER SOURCES
ANNEX [ I, WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
INTRODUCTION
1.1     Objectives
The present Annex  deals  with the supply  of potable water in the Saro-Akobo River Basin for Master Planning purposes  It is  based primarily  on available data and information Its  intent is  to assess  the present conditions  and to identify  the future requirements  within the planning horizons
Future water supply  requirements  translate into required investment levels  to meet the perceived needs  of the population in the basin These needs  have been identified and quantified in this  Annex  and can serve to plan future water supply  development within the basin
1.2      The Study Area
The study  area is  located in the south-western part of Ethiopia It covers  approximately 75,912 km2 The area includes  all or part of four Administrative Regions  SEP AR in the south, Oromiya in the NE, Gambela in the central western portion and Benshangul in the north-western extremity
The land is  comprised of high plateaux  at elevations  ranging from 1500 and 2000 m and mountains  with peaks  exceeding 2500 metres  in the eastern most and southern portions  of the basins  The Gambela plains  lie west of the escarpment with elevations  ranging from 400 to bWmetcrs, forming the central western most part of the basin.
The main rivers  with in the basin include the Baro. its  left tributary  the AJwero, the Akobo and its  right tributary  the Gilo. These rivers  are part of the Pibor Sobat River System, a major right tributary of the White Nile in Sudan
i million with some 90% in the highlands and the
n
,L
Present population m the basini is about 2.2 millio
remaining part in the lowlands About 92 o of P
remaining 8% is classified as urban
B >'  far  most  of  the  agriculture  is  subsistence  farming  in  the  highlands  Also  this  is  the  area where most of the animal population is located Coffee is also a major crop in this area
.
pulation lS rural and the
The urban population is growing at a very nig p • .    . nace a rural population. By the end of the planning ?e
bout 3 limes the rate of growth of the
2035, the total population is
: about g5% rural and 15 % urban
expected to be in the order of 5.3 million peop e m - million) will be in the highlands 
li   n (4 1 ln"”° ’
A' this time, it is anticipated that 77 % of the P<>P“ ““ and 23 % (i 2 million) will be in the lowlands.
The area has a moderately developed road
at Ganibela which includes a first class pav e
. .everal airfields The major airport is 
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basiii Integrated Devdopmcnt Master Han
II -1!
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY WATER RESOURCES
Navigation in the Baro which used to link the Gambela region to Sudan was disconti^ years ago
PR0 <^Ms
Mizan Tefen
.Annual  precipitation  in  the  area  varies  from  750  mm  in  the  lowlands  to  over  2000  mm  in  the highlands
The climatology  and the hydrology  of the basin are discussed in annexes  1 A and IB, respectively  Groundwater is  discussed in Annex  ID The land resources  are discussed in Annexes 2A and 2B Agriculture is discussed in Annex 21
L3 Institutional Setting
The lead government institution in waler resources  in Ethiopia is  the Ministry’ of Water Resources  This  institution is  responsible for national level policy, planning, co-ordinauon and technical advisor)' capacity and is instrumental in the funding process
The Regional Governments  execute policy, implement projects, operate and maintain the main water services  and provide advise to community  owned and operated water services The administration, Operations  and Management (0 & M) and the collection of revenue from water supply is the responsibility' of the water services
A   more   detailed   description   of   the   institutional   set-up   at   various   levels   of   government   is given in Annex 3F
1.4 Government Policy
National level water policy is outlined in the Letter of Sector Policy by the Ministry' of W Resources dated January 1996 This concerns among others the quality standards the P capita water supply levels, guidelines concerning the levels/ type of services througno nation and nation-wide government targets for meeting the water needs of the population
The purpose of the Letter is to describe the sector policies that the country' plans to‘ ^°^cf during implementation of upcoming International Development Agency (IDA) an
donor funded projects
Some key issues addressed in the letter are as follows -
•           To improve the water supply and sanitation sector management O&M. regulatory framework that will allow enforcement of regulation needs to t>e crca
•           Policies, guidelines and directives so far developed include.
Harty Ako bo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
11-2WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX IL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
, Water Resource utilisation proclamation (92/94). This  is  the only  legally instituted instrument for the development, management and utilisation of water resources
<    Guidelines    for    the    establishment    of    water    commirtees    which    is    meant    to involve communities in all aspects of water supply
*   Basic   principles   and   guidelines   for   urban   water   Tan   IT   Study   has   been   recently approved by the government The regions will be implemeniers of the Policy
a     According   to   the   plan   of   action   prepared   in   August   1992   The   national   target   is   to achieve   the   following   water   supply   coverage   for   the   population   by   the   end   of   the century.
Urban :              95%
Rural                 35%
•            The  country  has  attempted  to  establish  a  quality  standards  with  the  view  of  achieving the World Health Organisation standard
■   The   quantity   standards   35-40   1/c/d   for   urban   water   and   15-25   1/c/d   for   rural   water supply   schemes   However   the   design   parameters   for   urban   centres   allow   higher values.
•          Level of service for water supply in Ethiopia
Size of
Population
Type of service               Level of service
less than 100           dug well
Provided by community self help
101-400
■101-2000
large diameter dug          Hand pump well
drilled well
2000-5000 piped supply
5000-10000 piped supply
1000-and above piped supply
Hand pump, 300-500 persons per well
95 % by public fountain - 300-350 persons per fountain
80% by public fountain - 400-500 persons per fountain
60% by public fountain - 400-500 persons per fountain
From the above
it appears that -
'           Policies are for the short term Medium and long term policies need to be established
Quality  standards are non existent No time frame exists for adopting the WHO
quality standards
There   is   no   mention   of   adopting   WHO   quantity   smndards   However   the   presnnt
standards at least for the urban population are better than t ?re*
f~
is  considered  adequate.  This  seems  to  have  been  abandoned  n  ftvour  d'  the  35-40 Ifad in urban areas However, in rural areas 15-2S bad is the prese
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo Ri'tr Basin lutegraced Development Muier PlanANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY WATER RESOURCES
More details on the above and other issues such as cost recovery, managem ordination participation of stake holders, linkages with other sector, regulato ntk ° ° Co.
dnr
integration of water supply and sanitation, and also given in the letter
1 5 Available Data
' *rarT1Cuort
. .hi. taele use has been made of available data and information from
In order to cany out tms related studies by AKUCV-m water supply 
the Ministry of Uater Re ■ the project area fata □ i j been utilised as appropriate
consu tants
|      Other sources include data On
-|
prQ ect deve opment p ans
|    provided b)
-
from regional authOnties. system operators Regional Office) at Jimma and visits to
Plan concerning population, sur o,rhf"arce°,s and presented rn Annexes 3A IB. ID and I G U
TAMS-L’LG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Pi®n
11-4watf.R resources
ANNEX IL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
. methodology
Z-
For  these  studies  the  urban  population  centres  were  grouped  in  categories  according  to  rhe projected population in 2015 as follows
•    Main Towns
•  Medium Towns
•     Small Towns
•     Villages
10.000 or more 4,000 to 9,990
1,000  to  3,999 less than 1,000
The rural population was dealt with on a wereda and regional bases
The available data on the existing urban water supplies  was  analysed for the above mentioned tfoups  of towns  Subsequently, desirable water supply  levels  were identified on a per capita average net daily basis for the projected populations throughout the planning period
The future average net daily  water demands  were then assessed on the basis  of the projected populations  and the per capita water supply  levels  The future gross  peak  daily  town requirements  were estimated from the net daily  values, increased by  an allowance for losses and assumed percentage variations  in the daily  demand patterns  Projected deficits  were then identified based on future anticipated needs and existing capacities
Unit costs  to meet the future urban requirements  were subsequently  derived from existing project cost data and total cost estimates  for major towns  and for typical groups  of the medium and small towns and villages.
Installations  were scheduled to meet the projected future demands  taking into account the existing facilities  Finally, the Operation and Maintenance costs  for civil, electrical and mechanical components, wells, pipes  were estimated based on the investment costs  of the installation Power costs  were estimated based on anticipated power requirements  and unit costs  of power and chemical costs  were estimated on the basis  of annual supply  volumes  and unit costs  of chemicals. For more information on costs, see Annex  l.G. Water Resources  Cost Estimating
Rural water requirements  were estimated on the basis  of total projected rural population, an es utnaie of number of wells  required and estimated costs  of wells  and pumps. The number of '’’ells  required was  estimated based on assumed number of people served by  each well Cost data were derived from the well costs  estimated in Annex  1-D. Groundwater, on data from
current   WIBS   project   experience   and   from   a   recent   similar   project   funded   by   the Canadian   International   Development   Agency   (CLDA)   Finally,   water   supply   programs   were fonnuiated   combining   the   main   towns,   the   smaller   size   towns   and   villages   and   the   rural Population
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Bami In levied Doelppmcni Malter ?lan
JI - 5<y
*
WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX II. WATER supply PROGk^
3. EXISTING SUPPLIES AND CURRENT PROGRAMS
3.1     Existing Water Supplies
Available information regarding the present town waler supplies has been organised and ' presented in the following tables
Table 1          Summary of Present Water Supply Levels and Tariffs
Table 2         Existing Water Supply Systems -Main Towns
Table 3          Existing Water Supply Systems -Medium Size Towns
Table 4           Existing Water Supply Systems -Small Towns and Villages
This daia has been used to ascertain the present conditions and the future needs within the planning period
Rural water supply data is practically non existent However, the limited information from
the .ARDCO-GEOSERV Hydrogeology report and estimates in the WTBS project have been used
An analysis of available town water supply systems data presented in Tables I through 4, lead to the following findings
standards of 3sX) °Vc/di ^or           ** CXtremely ,ow and far from the PrescnI
schemes lnadtquateC?n ^
f°f
311(1 ^-25 1/c/d for rural water supply
<
i wnaadteerqs uate, in many instanceS Ps 00p?eoc ptraleveltrlaovengl dloist ngandceists antocefes tchto freivetchr orirvespr roinr gspring
vS ^_.S'UdV       repons       that       most       of       ,hc       existing     supplies     are
Although financial Hau
town from ] to 4 Birr
ls tn...
rv k appears that the tariffs which vary from town to
for any cost recoven' Khem'^
Insufr'cien',0 covcr cost and do not aJI°''
studying water tariffs              Thc ^overnmenl °f Ethiopia is in the process oi
wh « «surface wSCT ffXS?-
a
e
,
e ,^.UrCC of *ater suPP*y for the small towns 
In several instances th C *S more pro*>a*),c source for the larger towns ggrroouunnddwwaatteerr dudeuten    to    low    TIT* walcrWhMacrs becnDeacnbandoned in favour o
^contnatamminiantaiotionn reliable source 0<*
services 
unree,ali^abc le yields aanndd/o/orrbbeecacauuseseooffththeehhigighhrrisk   isk ooff
aoanuuii«j    w
.
is essential for normal development of water supply
and other specialised DerJ^!u^ 8
n
a ^m’n,straI,on and finance personnel, operators 
devclopmem of these services      ^asiC requirement for proper fiinctioning
-A
1 AMS-l LG Bin>Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
11-bB  RESOURCES
ANNEX 1L WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
Table 1 Current Water Supply Levels and Tariffs (1)
Water Tarin's
Main Towns
Consumption
lilrcs/capita'd
Birr   per   mJ Connection
' Tap
1
Per Bucket
r4
2 50
Tnta
♦
rvmbidnlo
3
1 00
1 00 or 2 25
13 to 19
1 00
1 5
0 05
3
1 75
1 75
'MizanTeferi
4
1 75
1.75
Gambela
13 to 17
r  1 00
1 00
Other Towns
_             _____ Haro Sabu (Alem TeO
Mu ci
.
I6
N/A
N/A
6
-
2.5
Rob Gebia
5
-
25
Gul iso
-
-
2.0
Inanao
-
N/A
.Algae
8
-
N/A
Sigmo
7 
|
-
The above document presents a list and b s classification of the urban water supply service population, a list of completed projects from
(1) latest available data
3.2      Current Programs and Projects
The current Government programs  and projects  concerning major urban water supply services  are indicated in the document Basic  Data on Major Urban Water Supply  Services, Ministry  of Water Resources, 26 December 1995 This  document covers  the entire nation except Addis Ababa
i-   .   hacir   data   on   maior   water   supplies,   a   proposed
complexity, annual income and feasibility studies recently
. a d dcsigfV rehabilitation and
comptaed      (lune      I99S)      .      a      list      of      on-going      Pro)“s
‘‘'““J „“
d
'      „d         ratabiltaion.
construction).    a    list    of    proposed    Pl^l'“s      1S    of      10Ls    for    which    sources    of    Sind
construction), indicating the source of fundingsand. a for feasibility studies and des.gn has not yet been ldcnllft
add(tion the document lists
^ L A^
n
af
n
,t
major criteria for the selection of water supply projects pro.
T he status or the 15 given below-
main towns in the Baro-Akobo River Basin, abstracted from this document
TAMS-ULG Haro-Akobo Rher Basin Incited Development Mister PlanWATER RESOURCES
Town Region Status
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY PROGr ^
a
Be«i
Mizan
Teferi
Benshangul     Prefeasibility study completed in June 1995 as pan of the 6 Town Water Supply Prefeasibility Study Program funded by the GOE
SEPRA            Feasibility Study and Design completed in 1996 under 12 Town feasibility and design program funded by the African Development Fund (ADF) and the GOE
Metu                 Oromiya           Rehabilitation completed in 1996 with funding from the German Reconstruction credit Agency (KFW) and the
GOE, as pan of a 12 town Expansion and Rehabilitation Program
Dembidolo       Oromiya          Planned Feasibility Study, Design
Asosa and         Benshangul     RehabilitatiorvExpansion, starting 1996/97, as pan of a 25
Gambela          Gambela         Town  Water  Supply  Feasibility,  Design  and  Rehabilitation Program funded by the International Development Agency (IDA) of the World Bank, the GOE and others
Gore                  Oromiya          Feasibility and Design completed in 1992/93 under a 7 town Feasibility and Design Program funded by
ADF/ADB  ADB  has  agreed  to  finance  the  implementation from unused funds already committed to Ethiopia
Begi Tepi         Benshangul SEPRA
Feasibility studies and design are planned However, funding has not yet been identified
In addition to the above, small town projects are being implemented by the Gambela region, and rural water supply is currently being implemented in some of the weredas as part of the WIBS funded by  UNICEF. GOE and others  Likewise, NGOs  are involved in small rural projects and the UNHCR is involved in water supply to refugee camps at Bonga, Pugmdo and Dima
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development .Master PI**5sV  A TER RESOURCES____________________ ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY P ROGR.A M S
FVTIIRE water requirements
4  J population Projections
For the purpose of this  Master Plan, population in the study  area within the planning period has  been assumed to be in accordance with data provided in .Annex  3A, Population The projected town population through year 2035 abstracted from the above referred annex  are presented in Table 5 for the town categories  listed in Section 2, above Similarly, the projected rural populations  per region during the planning period abstracted from the population annex and resulting densities per sq km are summarised in Table 6
From the above, the following is concluded
The  present  urban  population  will  double  in  the  next  20  years  and  will  multiply  by four within the end of the planning period
Population densities will more than double over the planning period
4.2      Consumption Levels
In  order  to  estimate  the  foture  water  requirements,  water  supply  levels  have  been  assumed  as shown in Table 7
For  the  urban  population  it  was  assumed  that  water  demands  would  evolve  from  near  the present levels to levels compatible with current standards
From Table 1 a minimum of 8 litres  per capita per day  would appear to be the present level for the town populations  Thus, this  was  taken as  the initial point in the demand projection for all towns  except for Metu and Gambela that at present have a higher level of demand Based on existing data, the present demands  for Metu and Gambela were taken at 15 and 20 litres per capita per day, respectively .Although these values are low, it was decided to use the best available current demand data as the starting point in the demand projection
5cen   °n  Table  7  the  demand  projection  assumes  that  all  of  the  main  towns  would  meet  the J    ‘40  |/c/d  target  within  the  planning  period  The  higher  values  assigned  to  Gambela  take intu    account  the  higher  temperature  levels  in  this  town  As  can  be  seen  most  of  the  towns of°5ICio^OU^'C    watcr     supply   levels   in   15   years   which   would   indicated   a   sustained   growth ?  '  6°  °  Per   year  over  the  period  All  other  towns  and  villages  would  meet  the  15-25  1/c/d
s target for rural systems
jt^
n
rdcr 10 meet the needs of the rural population at large, for the purpose of Master Planning
l assumed that the service per well would start by a minimum of 1000 persons per well
e ^ ear 2000 and would reach a level of 350 persons per well target within the planning
Cncj° This means reducing (he travel distance from 3 3 km in year 2000 to 1 4 km at the 01 the planning period This method was preferred over the conventional method of well
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan*
WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY PROGr^
yields and per capita allocations which would have resulted in excessive travel distance
resulting waste of valuable time
4.3      Projected Water Requirements
The water requirements were projected for the urban and rural populations for the n|a
period through year 2035 in order to allow planners to establish immediate, short med’'^
and long term plans It should be emphasised, however, that the reliability of
projections decreases over time or as one departs from the present In other words fi
needs become more uncertain in the longer term horizons and thus planning should be rev’
and adjusted periodically in order to get closer to real conditions, such as increased dem n reflecting improved living standards and or economic /social development Likewise th
figures need to be revised if high water consuming industries are established
The projected net average daily  water requirements  for the townships  within the study  area are presented in Table 8 in cubic metres per day, excluding losses The figures indicate the probable evolution from the present through years  2000, 2010 and thereafter through year 2035 al 5 year intervals The townships are grouped as described in section 2. Methodology The projections are based on the projected populations presented in Table 5 and the assumed net daily water supply levels shown in Table 7
Similarly  the  peak  daily  gross  water  requirements  for  the  towns  in  the  study  area  were
5
estimated and are presented in Table 9, expressed in m  per day, including losses.
The peak day projections admit the fact that daily demands vary due to various factors, “The average daily  demand may  be subject to both daily  and season variations  From the Consultant’s  experience, it is  considered likely  that, in the Baro-Akobo situation with low levels  of per capita consumption, seasonal variations  will be negligible International experience suggests that the peak daily demand will be 30% greater than the average daily demand International experience also shows that system losses will not be less than 15% of average daily demand In other words, the gross peak daily values presented in Table 9 were arrived at by multiplying the figures presented in Table 8 by the factors 1 15 (losses) and 1.3 (ratio peak day over average day requirements)”
The purpose of establishing the peak day projections, incorporating losses, is to permit the scheduling of system development in stages according to the evaluation of the anticipated demands The staged development, however, should be revised periodically after each stage and adjusted according to actual evolution of demand
Similarly, the requirements of the rural population expressed in number of wells for each of the planning periods  is  presented in Table 10. The needs  take into account the existing installations based on current estimates and assumptions described in Section 4.2
As indicated at the foot of Table 10. the number of wells for each planning period and the number of wells required each year assume a 100% coverage of the projected rur^ population These figures can be adjusted in accordance with government targets available funding and other resources such as personnel, contractors, equipment, etc
TAMS-ULG Biro-Akobo River Basin integrated Development Mister Plan
11-10w ATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 11. WATER SUPPLY FROGRAMS
water SUPPLY programs
5.
P
] [owing the assessment of the existing water supplies and that of the future requirements, 3 ible programs developed in order to meet the perceived future needs of the urban
5
°d rural populations throughout the planning period, i.e, to year 2035 The proposed
an mentions were designed having in mind a phased development strategy All costs are
Ven in US S and reflect January 1996 cost levels They include construction costs, physical contingencies, engineering and administration Costs were estimated as discussed in Annex 
1G Water Resources Cost Estimating
5.1      Urban Water Supply Programs
The  urban  water  supply  programs  include  fl)  a  "city"  program  concerning  the  9  main  towns and  (2)  a  "Small  Town"  program  concerning  the  50  medium  and  small  towns  and  villages The  main  towns  include  Asosa,  Dembidolo,  Gambcla,  Xletu,  Tepi,  Mizan  Teferi,  Begi,  Gore and   Masha   The   small   town   program   actually   includes   15   medium   sized   towns,   28   small towns and villages as defined in Section 2, above
The purpose of these programs  is  to meet the current policy  of supplying ar least 95% of the urban population with safe drinking water Based on existing information, the assumed sources  of town waler supply  were nearby  rivers  in the case of Gambela, Metu. Tepi. Mizan Teferi, Gore and Dembidolo. All other towns  and villages  were assumed to be supplied by deep wells
(a) Main Towns
The summary  of the city  water supply  program is  presented in Table 11 whereas  the information concerning the 9 towns  that would benefit from such a program is  presented in Tables 12 through 20
The   capital   investment   requirements   to   implement   the   city   program,   expressed   in   million USS, is summarised below -
Term Immediate Short term
Years 1997-2000 2001-2015
Medium Term                  2016-2030
Investment (USS million)
26 0
14 6
27.2
Long Term
2031-2035
2.5
Total
1995-2035
70.3
Average Annual
1995-2035
1.8
sue^ Scen in Tables 12 through 20, the installations are staged in approximately equal
add deVeloPmcnt stages It also includes smaller investments between stages to provide for
at ik 'Ol1al pipe laying programs in accordance with actual town expansion The investments 
k f e Pfesent hme reflect urgent needs where these needs could be assessed In the case of
’ because of the recently completed project no new investments are planned until 2005 Tams*I:LG Baro-Akobo Rinr Baiin Intt£r»ie<l Development Master Plan
11-11WA
TER RESOURCES
ANNEX
li. W ATER SUPPLY
The
first  large  construction  projects  would
take  place
in  years  1999  and  2000
to  allow
ti
for s
ecuring funding and for completing feasibili
ty and desig
n where required
lrn '
An approximate breakdown between local and foreign costs and of annual 0 & M costs • 
recurrent costs, is also given The latter vary from USS 0 62 per cubic metre in year 200<i
reflecting the cost of the initial construction package to about USS 0 30 in subsequent yea
The average long term cost is in the order of USS 0 37.
The above suggests it would be possible to design future rates to cover not only the recu
cost but in addition to allow for at least partial cost recovery of the capital investmeT1
required
It should be pointed out that if future assessments indicate a steeper demand growth then the level of investments should also be reassessed upwards
(b) Small Towns
The small town program summary is presented in Table 21 The estimates for the 15 medium towns, 28 small towns and 7 villages comprising the small town program are given in Tables 22, 23, and 24, respectively. The investment requirements expressed in million US Dollars are summarised below -
Term Immediate Short term
Years 1997-2000 2001-2015
Medium Term                2016-2030
Long Term Total
2031-2035
1997-2035
Average Annual            1997-2035
Investment
80
7.5
80
0
23.5
06
Thus, the total requirements for the entire period would amount to about USS 23.5 million This  investment could be spread more or less  evenly  to meet the available funding and averaging about S 0 6 million per year
The annual unit running cost of water averages about USS 0 15 per m3 This suggests that the rate design should include a scheme to recover as much of the capital investment as possible The fact is that people are currently paying much more
It should be pointed out that if future assessments indicate a steeper demand growth then the level of investments should also be reassessed upwards
5.2      Rural Water Supply Program
A program for well construction to provide safe drinking water in the rural populated areas throughout the project area is presented in Table 25
The program includes the construction of shallow hand dug wells equipped with hand pumps as well as deep bore hole wells equipped in the suitable mechanical pumps It was assume
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
11-12^aterResources
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
. al     go%    of    units    would    be    shallow    wells    and    20%    WOuld    d ^^perience in similar rural projects 
We"S Thls !S bascd on
The       total    number    of    wells    and    the    investment    required    during    the    planning    period    is ^marised below -
Term
Immediate
Years
1997-2000
Investment (USS million)
7.9
Short term
Medium Term
Long term
Total
Average Annual
2001-2015
2016-2030
2031-2035
1997-2035
1997-2035
27.7
54.4
18.1
108.1
2.8
The actual number of shallow and deep wells  can not be ascertained at the present This would require an extensive hydrogeological investigation However the adopted breakdown would appear to be reasonable for the purpose of this  Master Plan If future data indicates  a different breakdown. then the estimates can be easily adjusted
The above assumes that the following % of future rural population is served
1997-2000         25%
2001-2015         50%
2016-2035         75%
Average for period        59%
The running costs  of the above program average about USS 0 12 per cubic  metre> for rhe entire 39 year period Thus  it appears  that the design of the water tariff should allow for at least partial recovery of the capital investment plus running costs
The  rural  program  is  flexible  so  it  can  be  adjusted  to  meet  the  desired  target  levels  concerning the percentage of the rural population served anchor the level of funding secured
tams-ulg Barn-Ako bo Rh<r Basin Integrated Developnwm Matter Plan■w yTTRlg<>URCES_________________ ANNEX 11 WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
tables
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo Riser Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
s
<r-
JI-Tablesk7
Table 1.2
p«ge I of 2
Lxiirkg Whirr Supply Syilcm
Milin Towns
1 Ai«a|7|
DriuhdXfa ij
Mena 4)
TcpiOhSl
Muan TdeniVi
Gaiiibdla Cl
GoreORTi                    ] B*pi3i
MatatWl
J         ' Eflunaied Puptatifln I * k
Ji
JTt.490
?o 1 JI
lf.«i
10 524
10 746
IT no
■,042                         1 6.6*1)
5.651                      I
I
Sww of Water
Grounds tar
Ground Water
Sor Rnvr
Spnnp»tticf
GnnmdWpfcT
Biro his er
Spnnt main
L (irw«d 'A'artcr
Sprnfwtar 1
ground-Mtai
j
Water PiutaiiiNi n d
Id
■h t tt)
2W(lj
15 l(2l 1
W
2*7 4i2i
N,'A
N/A
K/A
1
Wala ['onuimpMKi ra’/g
43-(2|
566(2.1
Hl(2)
Jtalj
I’M)
401|2+
1*7 4(1)
MMlIt
WA
NfA
T~
S*sicn im*n %
6
15
U
23
n
H
hUA
K<A
N/A
7
T
Apgwnt per caprta -Wer cesiqimpuan liirrvUrf
4
J
11 to IV
J
4
L5io 17
N/A
Ni'A
N/A
Wild PrudlKlfw.
(actliUEfc
Tar fi U- f implied frot* Min tap drilled
tMlU Id mo j idil ii
K 2. Vs Tk pun* •
po—rral by ■ DkkI generator TkWtac WL li 1 ?« below ipamd In nddMioM, Lk HMlUl           ■ 43ra tap well *u> rei
yield 1 PV» 10d Ik ickci an iu a Tim tap well *ii>i mw VKjld H/JL Ifah HC fata -dli iHoretoki) ‘Ihewuc WLlt l -Tmtolk
H«pul Bftd |4 1 M (be Khta
To«w h supplied Eraml-
bonhd c( fallal 1 —eU Ila rh»M lei—,
■t nd Mtaahlt I* MMtUta lherean 5 bund dwg *cLll ■■ the town Oc n evived by Ik school and 4 are pm alcly o*r»noJ Tksr depth sana from 1 w
15m Tkii dkamon u Im Ths uak
WL mm Cro«u 7 to 17m Their >idd u tafawt-t
The Lniakc is a LKlra iBg hiker plkn and a
ilirtTfc 12m fckl (MUM* stMnm tomhnt u a nxwmtaplaM The lrtatment plan cobum of Dtaidnue* lwJl.
dual Hind fl ten and a cUwltaiiaD ml The Lrtawwm capMMy U IS L-i 11 »l» n’llJ TIk
ptai u k*»cd a ZOta hahd pump iLMtoD with 2- lOVi puvpi and n 1600 is bwg 1W iWm
DI praam ■ pipe to a reaenmr
Tbc town ii applied tn i
VdLi Her h—wi ** within
Ik to-m crmjJanj of antraJ laud RMi"O tpreadMW a krpe wiRifH area wtih high nil of umoMinilioa
Ill hare Own is afoot t> tVi
Beta use of its tociitioft thn wator
■nda to be li—lad, chia n naled
Tk ton ■ u Supplied by
10 5m tap dnLlaJ well built m 1915 liimrT iickJ u 2
IA. At if Lcnta.1iH.ikk u $45 mm hmrtftk. The wriJ U equipped *uh a 13 hp ladmicTMbk eIras pomp
Tk fljlc WL li If 2m Tk
ds Wluc head to 54 m In nddrtlOU, tan la a 77m deep fata welt u tk Kbta,
with a uaUc WL at 41 4 ib klow pwJilklnti field
of 1 2 Ifc, ami a 9m tap HOW with a mn km    -U
>H
*l like pilMNi (EC-277 mrekwcm) Tk GAk aplftf s»b* abstain! !■ 1 no due to mmaBiaiiitoc
Tk in Laic u ■ juxl uuuem and fllter
t*tlcn mnh into the niar bed uid equipped with l—o ukiMiubto clcctnc pump Kun
-tar if »mrywdto a chknn,if»ca tmii a treked wntet |Miti(» utaoB Mfuipped takih i—MubmcnWc pumps. 70 hp ex h, TUhp each, dcsignal Rm fUkl
i *ia' ih These putapa ripl Lk - lief «0tim hta to a Homed MBtn roris uU New irnatmcm plant ls iKtaad ik okl pkid buiJl in 1J7J U3i du.uMi*ucd io I W1
Tk town ii
imppltodks spnikK ipme i±ktl luuIs Tk lucsdcKi And vhUMtaTKKl art mt ssqjlifato k taksen kkre are 1 sMItow Im duMieirf hand dug ncUa in ta mwu Ckc it a 10 Urn tap udl awimlby Lk tunacrc ItoKl i huul WL 6 8) Tk
laud -til, 1 i Im tap wWl Lionikfel
ta Haiti (aauc Wl. 6mt Tkre U
k dau o*i mi jtoklk
□r tjualm
Tk  tow■  n supplied Itoim 4 Tprrnt
There h mo duta oo
ktoKMNL uharancnilM-w nl Ihh. tpnnn swM ami waktr qualih
a run
.ivaiLJA!
Tk Icmik ksk wpfriwsj from 2 ifkriiMO I <44 diwkxtajluujtd ta: to CMtouninauan The *o.pnl one
(liapDtoiiitaJ becnim o4 Lt ton >tcH The town ba now supplied IruMi a twrcklc,
5*ei tap 77/T
to 14" dkiiiielei lCabc Wl 17m Ei|ujppmj w Illi 7 5 hp Skto- mrubds puop yield 1.3 bx Dkbcl gcnrakM n 10 5 KVA
1
4TI" •*' *iMiniq
66
| f iw;
UJl
1^.1 rulnv '$qio ■ualra imnwilijrf VN*®J lUfUl r*V •1’V I <‘<
U
9Mi >■u >n "vi
wve r ■"’r ” "Vi
M
I** *! TZ<| HU,TdAJLl“M! nT •=T"I^ U.
non^rA'j t
1
m w-^ii *a mi
lief - i* <^ 1^0w«»i *ff “r'pq 1 s
r *r w <9
n
I wi ” M”l W
iMinyvowti hj r«m *W Xq pjiMiw|*dni {Ml *Wf MHliVJn W ^*U fcH’U4 I T"1 ™j »
*Alf!l5U.!niWWWY M R<’a!l<» <»•“*“ ’Hl J i
HtfUl *1 Jutkwjh nr**! jo
muj rrr<] l.<
5Ml  mi  15]  HJWII  bXQ <Tft|  11
■*>inK
iM*i|Traj<=syi1rti| t»fa | »w«rj
n
p
d
*-‘N
M*i *M « fcnyray
j***»*h mi *q rsHHIT^d W T U3lMfi
F« i{*-n ld’|*4hfcHj ¥ VM.l "Jwj »
rDRpdwn 3QP V|
MHW
M
ntifWM^h
™! H«fV ‘JOY 4q hnpil'V
MI-IU 1^1 UI f»i ri|rftaH I’- tvh
mw
MllftSBJ
■mwlo
«Miiiin i’ J ’p*
,rr
9n|ilBhlt3
■llipipVI k>Hul(U,|
i% Hi tsn *«i
ji>y«£ im icnpfl
r" aoounii
IDM M *nrwi| wn*
£MI IHR»|»Wt)
»Xim ^4 ATV Sjiqu-j %4*i <r«*M
w
■qei sf^ji
•.pit1
ib<; hui n
TutpMtj -i*ifc*an jufj
.Hq p^ihwjd ?jt fHH» -qww MI||>Fm V
300
i' .vi-ni -i -6mi
hirm tfl
ti-«7TV|*ijinp;a
iminm.lw
‘ifliiwp tap’prt
'wJ^jd          |^| iittUbflF         " W
|« 3OJVCMLW «rn* d.M>l W W“ p&u
□q «1 >.^45
IKCmitMIHliU Td|M
•fcilpnjjw um-tlai mm j° thi i “-m rr p pal rr vc^w p« X“J
XVOIMA
zr)            Ifo* |M1 ■» WF7tur aq m 'T*H V|iqtre».|
iwu
tl
V/N
YW
Vjtf
LUiVh
im vr-M
H *il‘w
OOU<MI
□o im. 'tri
V4i
• «ihq vrj
tta«           Qftwl 1661 i IH^C
CU‘M
o
0
o
iro'ii
rwi wm
«l «R> JtELVil (Ift
imuj
u<r* b
r
VW
Y.M
VW
i*^.i
|JWU<KUJ
1Pl Vt >1 AIM SwrnTf
II
V<N
VN
Y/N
a iksW
• l*q fit H
•*» IMt » SMUQAilty 3|qC](lL.11
n ipy> ,ihu: &N.
1T5W JV«ihI »MTI m pM£JJ ’a sq flk                   XfBn
mr|d iiuoimu mu m qJtab j
ViW
VW
WWy
Ot
-z/i rm,
Z/l l I****11 I |w pfcfll*»|W»
*W1H
1
| podld >oq w Prt^
K- M «t«M
IKWTCKHIU, ifwo                       in orti
□51 t*Zt wugftnlm
adtd )>w pnwipfl
X> "ISM I" |W
•            IkMAIMM ad<2 m=«M t ii W*<1
•iTpuunp m me ooi «i or wo
biiw.i M-id p'tm ipmwhlfHr f jl^na
r “V. iiiJ w
r
r qi|* ^jn»^q
Mm jwpirt^
t •! iDq j
Mb! |i-> UOflipt**'- in rfn -TW«IVf«7Flp 11EFD
*<1 *o iprp no ki iwji 'iiuuq|Hdid ill -S»|Vl
V»»*PU
M<1 pafwr.MZ ihnwn?
|w jwnmM
3IDB«\-) J qiwm 'fe>< IICKOI
A
Mid jn UTn-qwn i M 3*- '•■■Mru^i^^T
'(W|>J »||
IID >W|U|t*kl H HT ml 'jaaMml pudld 11 Jum.vi
Mill. :^T, jo Jjtri N™ SuJCT ppwn FHB           MR]
E rWMJF »] ppo- l«3l[Hl [wwwnwn ipfcr» |wrij
W»« 1" •! <WF OAJBWWMJ pM4 <1 JJJTlft
radW 16
1
I at ml* Tqi go 1 p«rn>tO»r*i
1 Twrx» KMuav \ -•MX’I t««
\
1
|                   TJITkl REM
I
rjsne
| nrwu sflwpl,| M              « ■>DP °N
1
(Ml «*
U"S xw punw »v
ro?tr
1 Ml Rl WIN <■
|
1    inativii Uttwraj ’
11**
?"T5pFM| UCfl lE-lfr « F»ir%^| |M
m mj <i« mm I (OATH UTOU-mai z
kgwdri
LR»I W w JKitOM..
iMjnquBT jUll
a® pwi fT»’,iu sAnnd
|p* 3»Q
(Hl 1
1
V.N
<U3|Ld
JU pus w miuKM Mpiur-' n-HMtrt [tvjqjmu w ar |
1
req M.MOI Mfl JHJI i-w-kllr |
ll uMpo «q pap*ku i>
iO
Of l|M« UKHXKnirtOZ
____________
( ur r*>uw?v i % J
LH3JSW iMinttqur»qj |
J
5 1                          U5*fil’ taCfim.
>j
(V1T*wn“l
IFl |U3)i£ UB7-M
H maw
ii nMJV=raci J
uwc-i.wixPrnjfj ]
ss; *01 wivw
tVlLSAS A IJJI IS H11V* DNU.S1X3
r joZ»trd
m Tiav±IFaMr /-3
Existing Hafer Xapply Systems
JM/jujr Aizz Towns
I Lui Ont Welli (2|
1 Vine
r,JntUz
1 lap.k'i
N.
Da
' Onxh
m
T s«« WL m
rs idd
r
1X» r
Yield |
lei
Pump
HP
NO
rj«
Dli
si
Dep
m
SutK
WL
ra
Ywld
Pl
hw
HP
Nd
YcV 1 La>|ih* ] No | m
d« r
Materials
Tomb
No
■
J
Nool 1
'1
<H) I
h
Gldaru
1 -
J
41
44
41
10
1.0
10
14 5
|o 0
IDO
131
140
90
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NTA
N/A
■
7
1
N>'A
Nd
_
Nl A '
N/A 1
■1
2
Map
Sfl
-
-
1
Bia
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
53
10
190
ISO
N/A
N/A
I
155
N/A
Ya
N/A
N/A
N/A
4(5)
N/A
N/A
Kart
No
-
■
■
■■
2
41
49
10
10
17.0
24 2
16 0
220
N/A
N/A
WA
N/A
2
■
142
143
N/A
N/A
Nr*
N/A
N/A
4
KwoSibu (Aka Tdcri]
Y«<5)
N/A
NA
□
■■
■
im
N/A
10
120
DH
90
2
I
146
WA
Yck5)
N/A
N/A
N/A
<MN>
N/A
N/A
5
Hob Gcbu
N-
i
4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
WA
1
IM
N/A
Y«(5)
N/A
Nr'A
WA
7(5)
N/A
N/A
•
Galiao
Ya0)
N/A
N/A
!(•]
N/A
50
D.H
120
12
WA
0
0
YsM)
2196(1)
3B-T64U
N/A
Mi)
1
MB)
“T
laanfo.'
Tnaato
No
1(B)
N/A
90
N/A
2
N/A
1(51
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
O
Ya
1 uiw
N/A
641)
1
X5(l)
i
Babe
No
•
-
•
•
-
*
'■
1
117
10
16 9
19 6
NfA
N/A
1P>
N/A
N/A
No
-
-
•
N/A
N/A
U
Dopa
Ne
■
o
-
1
15
N/A
Yae
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
H N/A
10
Hansel?)
Nd
12
812
Uli
61 4
57
22 3
14.4
N/A
19
N/A
N/A
I
20
Ia
1)0
22.3
N/A
N/A
0
*
■
Ya
1275(1)
H-.i-cai
N/A
7(B)
1
11
Viju
No
•
-
*■
•
*
-
*
■
i
19
10
20 5
14 J
N/A
N/A
1
27
N/A
Ya
5 MM)
KVM-
N/A
6(B)
1
7M)
12
|iBut
Nu
2
wa<ji
r
10
N/A
15.0
N/A
DO
NA
N/A
Nr'A
Kami
Hud
1
121
NA
No
-
*
*
N/A
N/A
1b
31m
I Na
-
-
-
-•
*
■
■
Sever aJ I'm an
N/A.
M/A
N/A
WA
N/A
1
N/A
No
N/A
u
liMfj
Nh
N/A
-
in
K-A
Ki «
106
151
75
0
-
■
0
No
-
Y«
2200
3-to-V 1
GaR Uael
5
2
4/J
Mai
Nd
0
N/A
No
•
*
N/A
N/A
1■
1
1™
I.  Source: 1 Sourer: J. Sower: 4. Source: 5. Soatret; DES;
Bonbon Luc T-Wc EC IS ARDCOGEOSEJIV, May LW
Lift of Hud dug Wdh. Table LC.14 ARDCOXiEOSERV, Miy 1995
Lirt rfSpriap, Table 2X13 ARDCOGEOSERV, May IW
Tabh 2C.-L7 ARDCO-GEOSERV. May 1995 Baro-Akebo Mailer PUa Project. Much 1996 ARDCO-GEOSERV Daitwabaa
9. There are two apptrrully abandoned beretada
1 New wril, drilled in I 9?i by Retdoond Frojea
■- Source; LIN RE, Am. Dot* lowntery 1907
9. Accordht Io BN RE Jeu, 199 J Mxpply k froo 1-4 Im deep. borcbok, aetd 3 J Vt. 120m bead
10. Source: Gambda Retina UN RE, >wnr 1990
DH t tlyoiw Hc*d
11. Tool voliwIITable 1-4
Existing Waner Supply Systems SmaU Town aad Villages
Hand Dug *Hta ID
ty, JoWi
Trpo
l^kML-Uo- K>Jc>
UltfOdilalo*.
L Sourer: 2.   Saarrr J. Sourer: 4. Surer: 5. Surtrj
Barrhort Li* Tabic 1C.I5 ARWD-CEOSERV, May 1W
Liat of Ham due W««s. Table 1.C.14 ARDCO-GEOSEJIV. May 1995 al S|>n»p, r«M« LCU AJtDCO-GEOSERV. May |9«
TiMt 2C.47 ARDCCXGtOSERV, May IW Bara-Alaba Mailer Flu PrtjecL Mm ci IW
art to btraiw waler merron
7. 1*93 data from IISRE al Jmu uulkaiu 47® 47ua dm 1
•■ Sourtt: SNHEnJtaihau
DES: ARDCO-C EOSER V D»f if aaiioawATfB
resources
ANNEX IL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
Table 5 Projected Town Populations
Region
Wereda
Present
1 To^L_-—— rTT^inTowns iMa? 4_-——
Aspsa_ — —
2000
2015
2035
6
Asosa
11490
13872
28176
65853
IT-
Scyo
20121
JJC til L,27 _■——---------- : iJCatij
22273
31395
44714
Mehi
19663
i 21981
--------—■------
31858
46731
T**rsi
I epi __
Yekj
-  -———
iii
10524
1 13144
3OJ83
81729
~ kifijati Teferi
ii
Temenja Yazhi
10740
12914
25896
59601
Gambela
p2
Gambela
I95I0
25848
62376
151192
Bed
6&4
Begi
6680
7854
12442
f22756
Gore
|4
All
8042
8377
10039
12702
Masha
II
Mu ha
565]
6409
10136
18569
Sub Totals
112421
H32672
1 242481
503847
~Maiium Towns
Gidanii
6
Gadami
2872
2839
2887
2935
Mufii
4
Amfilc
4748
4879
5534
6303
Kake
4
DaJeWabera
2666
3069
5094
9952
Hisabut A.Teferi)
4
Dale Sedi
3125
3596
5969
11662
Rob Gebia
4
Hawa Gelan
2478
2852
4734
9248
Guliso
4
Ayra Guliso
4408
5074
8422
16454
Inango
4
LaJo Asabi
3665
4218
7002
13680
Bube
4
NoieKaba
3073
3399
5642
11023
Dupa
4
Darimu
2336
2688
4463
8718
Hurmu
4
Hunt mu
3389
3901
6474
12649
Yavu
4
Yayu
3437
3955
6565
12827
Bure
4
Bure
2136
2423
3832
7019
Shewa
4
Shewa Gim
2918
3310
5235
9589
[tang
12
Bang
2289
2596
4106
7523
Meti
12
God ere
2877
3263
5161
9455
LSub_ Totals
46417
52062
81120
149037
TAMS-Ii LG Bin>Akobo River Basin Integra ed Development Master Plan
11 - TablesWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY
Region Wereda
Present
2000
Small Towns
Gawa Kebe
Meloye Weld
Lalo Kile ~
Boii Cherkosa
1012
612
1357
816
1420
729
1740
1084
848
856
1337
1165
705
1562
939
1641
843
2003
1247
976
985
1539
H69
2593
1559
Yubdo
Haru
Algae
Nopa
Alenio
Becho
Supe &Sodo
3324
Bilo________
Durene
Becho _____
2070
1621
1635
Didi Lalo
Yadota
Sigmo
£
4
t   Sayiem
1328
2058
1529
2368
2554
2538
Sigmo
3931
Gatra                          4
Setema                        1360
1598
Kubabe
4
Chora
1689
2043
3392
6626
Berbsa
4
Mono
658
757
1256
2455
Gtcha
11
Anderacha
1056
1198
1895
3471
Deka
11
Gesha Tilku
1057
1199
1896
3474 1
Beta Gunet
11
Gesha Timishu
1700
1928
3050
5587
Wacha
11
Chcna
953
1080
1709
’ 3130 “I
Sheco
11
Sheco
1104
1252
1980
3627
1 Jeba
11
Biro
1853
2132
3539
6915    |
fjemu
11
Shasha
723
833
1383
2701
Kebish
11
Tirmatid
978
1126
1869
3651
j Kurgen
11
Jikawo
830
941
1488
2726
Tirgol
12
Akobo
753
854
1351
2474
Pugnido
12
Gog &Jor
1658
1881
2974
5449
Abobo
12
Abobo
1225
1390
2198
4027
n
— ■ —
_ TZj
Sub Totals
32794
37714
61683
ll«25Ln
Village
___ J
Kurmuk
6
Kurmuk
442
502
793       1
Meko
4
Meko
209
244
406
Sachi
4
Sachi
461
531
882
1723 J —'Z771
Uka
4
Halu
259
298
495 I
966
Koboicha
U
Sale
511
589
977
Biftu
11
Gura Farda
77
89
147
19Q9__- ^87
Kuju
11
Gesha
322
319
324     _
329
Sub Total
2281
2572
4024___
(TOTALS
J
193913
225020
389308 __
7460 7785?L-1
Source Raro-Akobo Integrated Master Plan Project. Population Annex 3A
TA.MS-ULG Bnro-Akobo River Bavin Integrated Development Master Plan II - TablesANNEX 11. WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
Tabic 6                  Projected Rural Population and Population Densities
Present
2000
201S
2035
6
232 273
^256153
320854
378359
4
241 170
1321943
1732388
2209IR8
11
445 530
45813'’
595491
859739
12
167 427
199717
412267
1053714
PoquI>1iO5
J
2086400
2236000
3061000
4501000
27.5
29.5
403
593
5ot/rce-’
5^0/4 fofro Jn/egrated Master Plar? Project. Popu/ation Annex 14.
Table 7 Assumed Net Daihr Water Supply Levels (1X2)
(in litres per capita per day
1------- -------
Present
2000
2015
2035
TiTJwTOWNS (4)
i ramliP‘ I FL
r
.
20
25
60
80
15
20
40
60
’"Other Main Town (3)
8
20
lo
50
Medium Towns
8
12
20
30
Small Towns
8
10
20
25
Villages
8
10
12
20
Rural (People per well)
N/A
1000
500
350
l_---------------------
i
(1) Net values, excluding losses and large water consuming industries
(2) Includes public, pm ate and msuniuonal demands
(J) Includes Tcpi, Mizan Tcfcri. Begi. Gore. Media, Asosa and Dcmbidolo (4) Population exceeding 10,000 by 2015
TAMS L LG Baro-Akobo River Busin Interned Development Master Plin 11-TablesW UF.R RESOURCES
l.hk « rROJrCTFD SET AXT.RAGF DAILY TOWS Uitt.
RIQITRFMFSTS
Ha rubtr mrlrvt per daj. excluding loitn)
ATFR
TAMS-ULG BaroAkobo River Basin Integrated Development Muter Plan
1! - TabletnfSCH f S
A.NXrX II. WATER SI PPLV PROGRAMS
Pre'em
Laio YadcU Skmci Gim Kumbabe
Berts!
Get ha Ska
Bela Gunet
Wicha Sheep Jeba _ Jerau Kebuh Kurgen Ttrgol
r\un;du
Abobo
SubTo(ah
Sfchi L'ka BiEtl.
11657     I5JM       26J44
TAMS-L'LG Biro-Akobo River Bane Inirtnirt DoetapooH Miner FUo
l J ■ T jiikaWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY PRq^
'_ Table 9 PROJECTED GROSS PEAK DAILY TOWN Wattp
REQUIREMENTS (in cubic metres per day, including losses)
>S
I Town
Main Towns
Present    2000
2010 2015
2020        2025        2030
Asosa_______ Dembidolo____
Jjambela
Metu
138
240
583
441
157
414
665
670
658
1055
1329
>532
1335
1685
1878
2319
1905
2203
2169
3875
492] 1343" 18082
Tepi________
2880
2507
6478
2824
393
^767
289T
10826
3440
4192 ~
Mizan Teferi
I Begi
160
100
Gore________
Masha______
1126
120
85
386
235
251
191
1085
973
1804
1547
743
600
605
Sub totals
2320
2447
2015
915
674
745
3320
2625
507
450
413
[45062
^3420_
2024
755
916
3878
8680
1384
846
1127
13087
17364
6109
4451
JTOf
949
1387
23431
33214
45141
Medium
Towns
Gidami
Mugi
106
Kake ___ _
H Sabu
109
127
178
(ATeferi)
348
233
217
260
303
340
397
131___
282
447
523
Rob Gebia
Guliso
142
251
Inanuo
—
185
329’
209
Bube
274
242
429
357
317
’560
467
3265
4003
5165
6679
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Masier Plan
II - TablesgjSOVRCES
Present
ANNEX II, WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
Sigmo
Gatra
229
155
Kumbabe
200
287
194
248
Berbsa Gecha Deka__ Beta Gunei Wacha Sheco Jeba Jemu Kebish Kurgen Tirgol Pugnido
Abobo
Sub Totals
Vahge_ Kurmuk
4421
10 5
22.5
10.5 
Subtotal
223_
Totals~
11822
23022       27407      42996
56464
Assumes 15% losses and a 1 3 peak factor or an overall factor of 1.15x1 3 apphed to daily voter requirements.
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akotw River Baiin Integrated Lkvelopment Maser Plan
II-TibiesWATER RESOURCES
ATER SUPPLY FROGRa^
Table 10 Rural Community Water Supply Wells Required
Region 1
Vereda 
/
997-2000      2
, 001-2015 T
2016-2035
43
Biegi
25
34
Total
38
4
Gidami
19
26
25
7n~ —
--
<
Anifiio
34
41
38
---------- —
(
> Jima Haro
2
3
5
1 Kawa Kiebi
8
11
15
J Yemeloeie
31
46
63
- 10’
—Z 34 1 An “
? Dalie Wabera
50
isy
72
99
10 Dale Sedi
48
69
96
--------
?n~
11 lalo Kile
47
67
93
12 Seyo
207
97
139
194
13 Hawa Gelan
“JU
51
74
102
14 Ayia Guliso
227
14
14
14
42
15 Boic Mukle
17
19
17
•a
<3
16 Boje Dirmeji
3
2
2
7
17 Yubdo
59
64
57
180
18 Lulo Asabi
38
41
36
115
19 Gimbi
7
8
7
22
20 Ham
20
21
19
60
21 Nole Kaba
89
95
86
270
22 Mcko
6
7
10
23
23 Sachi
7
10
13
30
24 Danmu
104
239
323
666
25 Supe &. Sode
43
116
150
309
26 Bilo
22
50
68
140
27 Durene
30
69
93
192
28 Metu
55
125
170
3501
29 Hummu
37
83
114
234
30 Yayu
36
81
110
227
31 Becho
18
42
55
115 _
32 Bure
38
63
103
204
33Halu
13
21
35
69 __
34 .Ale
42
69
112
223
35 Didi Lalo
22
36
60
118 _
36 Sa\lem
15
25
41
81
37 Sigmo
54
84
124
262
38 Setema
37
58
85
l80_.
70 Bedele
1
2
2
5
39 Chora
48
73
109
230
40 Dega
8
13
19
41 Nono
9
10
12
— “     ''             7 C|
42 Selc
8
10
12
-                         An
69 Gera
7
13
40
i Sub Total Region 4
1319
1
2145
2866
□u___• 6330
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Bavin Integrated Development Master Plan 11 - Tibies11
g£SOUR(tS
rkurrnuk_______ fAsosa___________
jjgiegi
4 Gidamj_________ 5                     Anifilo 
Sub Total Region 6
43  Masha___
44  Andreacha
45^ Yeki______
46  Gesha Tilku 47   Gauata
48  Gesha Tinis 49  Chena
50  Grnibi
51  Shewa Gimi
52  Gura Farda
53 Sheco
54 Temenja Yashi 55 Bar el Biro i
56 Korit_________ 57 Gesha
58 Gcidia ________ 59 Shasha________ 60 Tirmatid
61  Maha Maj i
Sub total Region 11
ANNEX II. WATER SUPPLY PROGRAMS
2016-2035 Total
'1*F '
549
29i J 04
49
1082
246
155
405
2459
12
62 Gambela                                                                                                                 230
63 Itang                                                                                           272                      375
64 Jikamo                                                                                        588                      810
65 Akobo___________                                                                   400                      551
66 Gog& Tor                                                                                   198                     272
67 Abobo                                                                                        203                                    280
68  Godere
Sub Total Region 12
357
2185
492
3010
[jofflZ Baro-Akobo River Basin                                                                      6762               12881 per year (2)
fl)
%
About 30 veils identified by ARDCO-GEOSERv rrntfRV and some 120 veils butll by the UNICEF’s TV7BS programme.
For 100% coverage of the rural popu^o"
TAMS-LLG Baro-Akobo River Basin Iniegnted Development Master Plan
If-TablesTable 11
City Wator Supply Program Coat EatlmatoAacib. Wdlor Supply Goul l FatkniUk
'•■ j--’
W5EW
rr n sum r /?f Ot*ww£^ r s
jTKrf .srt JiMPUj* ■ -»C«r iLcpl______________ _ jE^III'- J rr4l4' n , , rj i-JJIJdlji
feefton _
[Pffik r*if AauuiiriyM ;awy * 1 5m1
IpfriJPQSen PROGRAM
ItF-JM
JmMt
1 CDntt-jzio«l 7»ar
nviitlnwni Vmt
I LIGO 2KO 1P» JOCO
20ill?«0
an-acaa
AMMIMt Nd Suf£>'t
mU
tot» AyjIjMa
mini
UrR Cmi
USSJmJd
Eianwtt Corf for Afdioh r^yHy
OS I
1M0DC
1 - "• -.j- ■’- ".
US 1
1.DS0.DM 3TOQQQ
Eng A Adm |1NI
usi
T«44l Funriiofl
US 1 1WR
COAT •REARDOWN ■ US tpSHy
Arts l0%<0%
U$ 1
Cid xw. L 70%
M&L
rpM ieo> _____________
E »j A Adm
total corrusi im
COST BflEAftCMWffl - UI HUM |
LiHfl «Mi
JM.0DO
10-a MX
2 SB WHS
4 ' M TOO
J02.DOT
D IS OXI
ax
LOCAL pOHfiGH
44 4-J
2 10 00 163 BO
n? oo|
M.liW
IM UW
*1 7<XI
DOO
LOCAL
FOREIGN
LOCAL
40    •.
4<i 2
2 Wtt
■ will)
4 Ml1 CH:
i flwi _o
CMI 06*
751PQO
4 B*J 1X1
IMO DO
J.CtQUQ
7JTOO DO
U E. E >CrtLJ
J+4J0M
J6 6WM
7 *■J° .QU.
7 ypp -a?
?5»W GO
TO 7.*P 00
I.I7Q00
TO 720 OQ
snjmoo
p.pes 11 Jin
i wa oci
1 MM 1.0
2 fflj
7 WA pp
sft —erf<snfcLrnpbor
IL*I 109 DO
HMM
247000 00
11 • 3M LJCl
114 C 10 »
rji ttCrt CO
ntVjfldaa
G 10
_ 9.,c
77 AUO- QC
0m
0 ID
U IO
0 IQ
1OW>«J
IZIQDQOO
iftl.TO TQ
jJ 2 DOOQD
jto moro
22 J fflM M
rail
yS_|iK-«
cm
UDI
□ 01
■a id
JI
u ID
U «D
Ci si
I ITJODO
7 TOO IK
13 IDO IK
11,100 30
27 wo do,
M OHiJOO
iwicjll IW _
|US»MI
0 GO
0 DC
DOC
QQ0
OMi_______
kj*i |
I! 00
006
TOTAL    O*    MCQBt
S' 4X1 IK
*1 .’an IHJ
4^ JAflUd
« / M «.■
cAAMOO
3M CO
ion 7iaoo
UMlTEDST-USIffill
DID
0 11
0 U.
U *0
L'OflTable 13
Dombi Do Io Waler Supply Coot EstimaloTable 1S
Molu Water Supply Coal E a Urn ata
Ttg_>umv ■'EQUMtatafl5 a<o>a» ■«!»
t NOimeU rw
* ea ai»*ii N»t aujyry
:
—
■ i ii
FlIWlM C —» W A—
C plliijf no«> (fOXj
E-t A *■— l*0Xj
r»<»4Funtf •'g
■ O«T ■AfAKpCAW US 1(1              ; A»B»_______
6*4 20* A 3SH MAC 2PM a »»
••f^i acM £j»u
a*dH»
COir -51 MM
.'O>< - *55
roi; jo »a
L
___ i**
; ft
oor
__ F/ao.OOO
J OJ4-2P21
JOM A
u a t xm a ao<
>0**90*
Xu * **» as* a rw rOTAL COST two vil [1194 oi u coa»i iou^
1 099 44 I 4U 40 I Ml M
'95 90
»r' a za
?.?T» 44
___ nn
Mona
X
DC
DC
12.720 X
i oeo oo
219 00
__ a i«o ool
4 920 X
>0,240 00
5J50 00
729 490 00
125 045 X
Ml
1321440 00
I 90
LOC
loo]
00
1
t
___ 22MWK
J2S949 00
4B5 101 X
Stt 480 00
9J9M500
102 J 490 00
60S
JO»
7 06
0 1*
0 09
Gait
0=
11/09 4Q,
19 5M H
n.toooo
MM4I0
SOW* I
•i so;ra
_CMnMrai9 rato
004
1997QQ
JO 04
0 54
0 04]
T0194. O A 14 COST
.11 MM
’ -t >75 X
_ 29 J95 001
35 92 > X
l??H5O
ikjimw?
[VMltCOSI
noM »■■
i; ;m ra-
1*2 CM X
1 10
'■ 1?
a
o*ij
3 tt■
Ki n
MJ twr tilT
bkTd
IX' WC LW I
00 1_____r
IJM i“ I usij.
DE H .. I' i: i.
<11 G
00 GttUL.
on Ki1, pi
►00
■>i ognoci
is> fi______
i oa os i, - k i i
Ml
> pr. i n>j.L I
6a »i_rra I
no drt n
cn uiu'n
• » D
On ria i fi_
MCK'C
►oo _____ ;
00 ESQ »►
OOP
JX . -Q'aiB
El O
HC Bu
oo zuf.r
*6 6 ______
W GM ■£«
IM-'Q
-HO
v t»r p*
Mud'll
i $n
Rturtsn
w~
M^XI.rjQ
CHiltn 1500 *10 jiHD
____ 1503 WVO1*101
__ _________
SWJ- ■l*i****2
IXI uan.»aC
(TOI
IK'DMi
W OH 4
lXl<MK  9
OOflIIL 4
150
w sefoe
□□ note
►oo
ODO
pg  i-w a
6a a
oodulT"
m mis u
nr MQL 2
09,’. k v
00 OK
ar cHt
O'? OU
oc S4Q i <j&d&:
P9 J -‘ ^
neuwi
02 '.iOl
___ _ _52Lw * ^'
Lactlduii-ti*: miiiiiv.
0 iJj
mtD
*IHhV
V5tW»>< lW3n T □
IW Wl 1SOO TVlOl HSX »          u*’* * -^-3
■frf l MOC »M'lM
0   3 T rt
%fl *1 uot r*‘,l~'
_________ W H*V
1*301
TjTJCl IxOHtWOl W3O1
iwe r;n:                                                                                                                                                                                                  n?icroi r
OODf£_
loop CJt
□era wi
poa'm'L
MXi cy
OODftM
QXTi'
qcew.
j%|1jE 1 MfrE SlfP
dm m»
W» >n i
QWf*
%C< t^OC *3 ,
W) t %OI lu^
fowli sn -NwooMvwwitoo
DWiCE
003
r>x>oq
jX 051
Miner
XC*l£
DOOO_£E
kcTui-a
□era ofJZ. r
SOTttOg.
.-•I,* rtfr’
ooau&i *
■ -i :!'•■
xoow
XO COf L
fiHXtlCh-
5lM»iOC
OK
6&______ ,
v.11 jMl
P£ib-5Sn
Cffu-
Pffw
»oor
Ku [iUHIj |«P1
Picul wpy 'i fan!
rSDEj W(**mWPJ®D wquigi-iT «j i«^j wi9
moipn
"f|dji5 i»ud«>ppt
Sa 4
/vil imorrttiMj J fM/W& OKO*.ihL-tj
FrturJ I i'7 L LIB^P-Wib' f|UHlJ»r’fe*a ^*ET
4
— 
__________ *IPH0] “TjEwdri 3B»“ w 6jnn j
Xtirr.f jw»^i *firx»«« |«u        , f ciNiwjundJw Altins iwj w/
a|»m|||VM |im?d jS»ddirbE
•I, «| 14*1
rJa±I
1
Iiieu«i|«s WO AjcJdnip
<^3^1Table 19
Gore Water Supply Coal Eilimale
' G’0 00
29 <60 00
29 MO 00
5 790 00
.'•mi i in
11 4C0 O?
59 04000
PpnOft
11 4tCCO
59340 00
11,640 00
6-0 120 90
11 MOW
M 120 00
2 266X
? 41 ? no
2 4, >00
Walt Coiiux»g««in
4 60000
4 Me 00
4 696 «
51 MO 00
Power kwhrJrr.l/yT
109 665.00
•46 750CC
169M5 00
f 44 125 00
20fi 590 00]
>31 •■‘•ik/
1 do
Power -Quenliiy
100
1
1 00
Kwrw.'r
1 00|
1 00
r CO]
61 320 OCj
-1*4
109 B65 00
146 730 00
US VX*nr
164 61500
»*4 325 00
206 950 001
ootZ
231 775 001
-Co*
0 05
,U5 I
0 06
□ no
36430Q
0 0BI
0 06?
0 06J
Clwnc*a r*e
5M
USSlnlTd
9 677 CO|
001
11059 Wl
12 J95 30]
1J 306 00]
-eo*
0 04
004
004
2 146 00
004,
□ 04,
JOULOIBC6I1
• m*. no
0041
1JS OP
42 Ml DO
1/<1 00|
6 451 Qo|
7 73000
411
52 02100
• 112001
lUHH COST_________
90 BIB 00
o ro
W 60OCO
aa jar aoj
0 44 [
*5 6 ’4 do?
0 35
o ‘V
0 50
0 42j
0 43]Sma* 50 Towns Waler Sopt*r P»oQr«/n Cost rsllnwleMedJuni 1b I owns Wuler Supply Cost |=®hrnule
fuHrt
Jlx-ifl
I
7TTT
-■U?U
TEjk
I
,i>1u
T‘l
I
i
J WA TER SUFFLT ff EQLA'fi^flVTS
jrtJill'liAiJyefJj* fAltf LLflp'j
Jf k $ li"j n*f "*** B-eatcflrArisu-
-a
flil
mJUiJ
fpftoti________ _____________________ ,________
[fpQguy Ffqufownn ,‘4W4tfp»r. I.SaF pnAtf
PROPOSED PROG**1*
CouRnictcrt ¥*ar_____
lnrt'i#nc>r|     Tw
AdUlWl Nel 5d|.-: >
TqlalAb-ailwbre 5<»pp>r
jjmr Coil
F tbrnNetl Coil fcrf AddMoojI Nup^l?
Uiinlii'^ert£*t'» iron J
Eng A Aam 110%)
TdIjiI CorfcHrt^l ___________ _____________
C0S1 WfAKOOWN . US HUM,
TQ
1 Id
im
1HA
'M
DI
201
2013-201!
____ up 
200
l.NO
200 001*
40.000'
; 1 rirc
1
ifiuUtiu
aw.Dw
-
-
•>N«nii 10%
ULF
P»po ♦□%
Eflfi LAtfrn___________
TOTAL COSTUSI 11M
COST H«EAMDOWN - 1060 USt{1 *♦*)
,S 1
□5 1
Lift I
usi
LT55
-—I e JI
JDTJ
IWB AKK
100
JOG
2 000'
jw.oopi
4u 6iV
2O.0CLi[
2fl0,boc|
24 DOO
aopool
SD KJ
•0.000
20000
200,bool
24 Qt»
f r *11 -'■’11 • ■ ®1||
sflHRi  ............................ I
B
j — -i’j io doc M_________________
| MOfloq|
. ~~
____I
4  'll  •  I r.u ihji 11 *41. OP.11 ij*>   rnjn| 20      pul
Z60 ODO£
I
i
LOCAL    FOREIGN
LOCAL [FOREIGN LOCAL FOREIGN LOU AL
in.ro
10 D0[         42 00
FOREIGN.
LOCAL      FOREIGN          LOCAL           FOREIGN
FOREIGN
local
4 ■.
FO»E»OW| LOCAL [FOREIGN
14 2
LU
10JO
0 00
25 20
29 UU
M 40
11 25
♦ so
II DO
17 DU
•g 2d
5 00
50 00
19 20
42 00
MOO
70.00
1500
201 (Ml
44«!              ufto
310 AC. <31 io
wool 4100
i»2ot Ttta
5.001         15.00
SO 00 ] 201 DO
LOCAL
4W
IB 00
»*J 2D
4J >30
F 20              io an
ioi ao
117 OU
’2 0U               4-H C-J
w * l A 60%
~Plp4» 2DMAKH4______________ b-.y A Adm ?5% L 75%
TOTAL COST IBM US I (I IM)
O AM COS f 5 10U» liy<
_7 30
.'»60
J TO
555 TO
oia no
48 FS         140 35
io ro
SOU
74 no
15D0
4, BoF
• 40
250
?a *3
• »?0
M 40
7
_
101 IO
*
i
54 00          2C’ DO
240 001
24000
4K DD
MM&Q
DO
inooc
_J?0 CO
770 DO
OOP'66
olo oa
i «ra ixil
ODD DO
1TW0 0Q
(CO 00
jy3o DC
2 EiDO-aa
T%__________________
1Q7 DP
107 oc
5.4CM DU
1B4 aj
5 400 DC
S 400 i'.uj
3M4 1HJ
sTn 6a
Puwcr- LMwNfr g Hwivml
J DM 00
5-.ru r rju
STS DC
7.»|U UQ
Mn i»
ID 147 OC
rpLfr
UStJfrwl*
U 1 lij
U W DD
pip
if.TJXI W
21 754 CO
”   0   W
0 'a
o id
a 10
- CosL
90
I . JUT CIO
CiiemKuli -ffR.
U*l
USVi'iTd
JOT 00
ST 7 00
run do
1,015 DO
doo’
i.nfa.cw
7.1 75 W
- ttW
usi______ _
CUM
TOTAL   QAM   COST
USl.WMl
2 63« DO
3 100 00
*• IM7 (W
AOFUOQ
9 2 75 6a
1/ I 7 I DO
UNIT QAW COTT
0 W*
On
0131
QU
C11
0«V6 *R
lUrWK                         PRL
SLNf
2»JU
2020
2076
1
I.
2015
WAUR supply RFQ mMVC^TS
Tc4.i»                       «MMar ixJf-ply                     ]<nl'<J
10
F Killing pal wiMur «< ipplv capacity                 |mVl
r.«lk><«
irr.W
10
Small 28 Towes Typical Town Cost Estimate
2010
32
37
Oil
P»«a rUi'p Ratfuwmanta lO.-omgeiT 1 Sal [m.Vd
10/
I
R«OP05f P PRQQRA V
I
2000
44
<10
TOTS]
o'
1/7
20301
1W3
10C I
—f-
C on tinjcftonYear
I996-2(X>
ro»3 2016
Iml/d
Total Available Supply___________
[nW
40
40
40
1>4C<hI          _                       _________
lUSPmUi
2 500
40
7,500
Lslimmad CaaHw                        »'<pyly
100.0001
C- » ■i-tganOaa (20%;
[USJ______
us$
20 0001
IOOOO0]
20000
b,    AAdm    H    0%
10009
ioooo
Total CocUftj____________  ___________
no ot?_ ]
130 000
-oi
lOO.OOOl
?o]oOD
10000
IJOOOU
COST BREAKDOWN US S|1*Hj
VAefi TOM_______________________
US I
24 0001
Ct*a ?o%_________________________
US I
24 000
MAT 20%
U5 I
24   000
Pipat 4J%
US I
C - j A Adm
US I
40,000
100001
TOTAL COST
1194
i—
I30.000|
130 0001
COST BREAKDOWN . 1000 U5I (IMA) “J
1
LOCAL
FOREIGN
LOCAL
FOREIGN
LOCAL
FOREIGN
LOCAL
’foreign
j LOCAL
] FOR e ION
LOCAL
FOReiOl
1 LOCAL
FOREIGN
ipLOCAL
48
J FOREIGN 102
LOCAL
FOREIGN
WeAl 20% A BOX
4 00
10 20
000
000
4M
1020
46 BC
182 2C
>1
2/0
’6 BC
Civil 30% A 70S
7 20
10 BO
I0W
25 20
720
18 BO
210 M
491 4f
_________
fl
4 RO
IS X
MAE 20X A AJX
4 bo
10 20
7 20
28 50
4 Bd
19 20
103 80
685 2C
1
9 60
18 4C
P.pea TOM A OOM
IW
38 40
21 eo
B6.4D
9 to
□8 40
117 00
465 00
1
250
7 50
Eng A Adm 25X A 75%
250
7 50
3 75
11 25
2 50
2 50
48 75
146 25
L
2690
101 10
TOTAL COST 1009 US» (1NI|
28 SO
101 10
28 90
101 10
1
J
0 AM COSTS 10US lye
1%
240 00
240 00
410 00
400 00
4 BO 00
720 00
720 00'
Civil 05%
120 00
120 00
240 00
240 00
240 00
560 00
360 OOl
MAE 3 0%
72000
220.00
1,440 0?
r 440 O?
1 44000
2 »60 00?
2,180 Oof
Plpat 2%
WOO
WO J
• 92 00
102 CO
192 00
2B8CO]
2M 001
1‘owar - Quality £■!> \»wh?m3
KWwAp
5MOO
1 188 00
’ 605 01
2 008 00
2 442 00
3.102 Ml
3 869 001
•AM
U5 IMwttf
0w
010
0 10
0.10
0 10
0 101
0 101
-C4JM
lust
5B00
117 00
161 DO
201 4X1
246.00!
310 uol
167 Ml
t
1 ChamtcAii <«te
USUmVd
000
I                       coal
USS
DOO
r
VTOTALO AM COST
US 1J1W5
1 234 00
1 29) OU
2 513 001
2.3SJCK}
—1— f t ——
2 SOO 001
7 JAJdW/
r—7—1 t— /
7 »9»5 0UJ
/
\UHH O A MCOST
021
0 11
1
0 iflf
0131
0 IO/
6 12!
a to]7 VHIuges-
Typrcat ViIIgq© Cost Esi*rni*i«-
PRFSFN?
,
frFAR-
i WATFWSuRR. Y H£QUtRMCAT5 h ria1 .ricr am.i," u«wrj.Aiy«r
fl tluflnf flri w JJ»f tjpplj caf-3Qf|i JuMsfas-ii__________ __________  - [raab nal‘j RrpiIrTwnls ;awfJg4>l.l.5^l
PROPQStO PROGRAM
L aniini€t*;n
n«flabreitfTa*J
'AriafOflJl  N*  SL-yply
Trfri A* Jilnb* Surply
UrtKod__________
E ilmaL* Co>l fa Atf—nble Tus>j-t
CiH iif.flfc u~ae> (?0%J
LfrSlmW LrS I
JU S I
E^a A Adm _| 1o4j
Total CMLli'-g_______
□st
US 1 two
COST BWfAKpdWM US If 1W |
'.■rtila
ri^     i     n%
11LT   1   i**
|-||H l!lX
Ln  4 Adrfi AIWl
U
I
20,000
SSou'
a&TALCOSTlLlsi
n mju
COTT CiniAKDQWN 1D4D U«l (Util
II
LOCAL ] FOREKIM
LOCAL | FOREIGN
LOCAL
fDRUHih
LOCAL
’FDfifIGNj LOCAL
LOCAL
VJdUi 25*_SBO<_
441 ao
CM W\ »7P*
WK
7io qj
40
_H* E
S 20*- A ***-
1!>% A 7 Sty TOT* L COST 1 DM US I [I IMj
Ol M COSTS 1OUS £j£
.^n 1>
_J41 <10 M F OO
SWM 4BU <M
JWOU
CWI 05M
__
MAE JLrti
1'iykl    ZU
Pcwfll
- CaH
MflQO I JU OO euucu
JIDW
tua
I2OQ
MM wou wood
«oa is* oc
Hl liDtM
flQtt <K1 _ to CD 4JSM
ko«
_    tplM 5P
4^)00
1 JU JJ 4CG-.LI
kS L*:*-ry iu$i uSJftnlid
i wrod
□ ISELEMENT
Unit
1997-2000
4 yoars
2001-2015
15 years
2016 2035
20 years
TOTAL
(39 years)
No of wells required
urwts
2.082 0
3.884
6.782 ;
12,731 J
Assumed population served
%
25%
50%
75%
59% |
Unit Cost of Wolle & Pumps
Boreholes & Pumps
Cost of Program over Period
us $
$ 25.000
$ 25,000
j..
$ 25.000
•i         •••••»;. ,7                             .... .
V
HDWH Pumps
us $
$ 7.500
$ 7,500
5 7,500
I
Boreholes & Pumps
1000‘s us
$ 2.750
$ 9.700
$ 25.350
$      37.800
HDW & Pumps
1000’s us
$ 3.300
$ 11.640
$ 30.420
$    45,360
Contingencies 20%
1000 s us
$ 1.210
$ 4.268
$ 11,154
$    16.632
Eng A Adm 10%
1000‘s us
$      605
$ 2.134
$ 5.577
S 8316
Total Cost (1996-cummulalive)
1000's us
S 7.865
$ 27.742
,.’v ■
$ 72.501
$ 108.106
Yearly Investment
1000‘s us
$ 1,966
$ 1,850
$ 3.625
f
•» l* v /*• S j ' ,4 • . ■. •               .
$      2.772
| LOCAL |FOREIGN| LOCAL | FOREIGN] LOCAL | FOREIGN) FOREIGN | LOCAL |
Cost Breakdown
Boreholes 20% 80%
1000 s us
$ 660
$ 2.640
$ 2.328
$ 9,321
$ 6 084
$ 24 336
$      9.072
$ 36 288
HDW 60%/40%
1000’s us
$ 2.376
$ 1.584
$ 8.361
$ 15.587
S 21,902
$ 14 602
$    32.659
$ 21,773
Eng & Admin 10%
1000 s us
5      151
$      454
$      291
S 873
$ 1.394
$ 4.183
$      2079
5 6.237
Total Costs (1996)
1000 s us
$ 3.167
$ 4.678
$ 11,000
5 25.781 j
$ 29 380
S 43,121
S 43.810
$ 64 298
Annual O&M Costs
iBorehole & Pumps 1.5%
1000’s us
49 5
224 8
680 4
IHDM & Pumps 10%
1000*8 us
396
1792 8
54432
680 4P |         54432/
VTcrtat O&M Costs
1000’s us
445 5
\Annual O&M Costs
S ’ •*
2016 9
6123 6
|         61236
I
1000‘s us
1114
134 5
306 2
1           157 0[
—J
/
s
2.BJ6
j
-•«r
o
ZZ7tWTER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
TamS-Ulc B.iro-Akotx> River Basin Integrated Development Mister PlanANNEX IJ HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
CONTENTS
1.
2. 2.1
2.1
2.3
2*
3.
^trodiction............................
INTERCONNECTED system
1
.2
2 2
3 3
.4
, I Existing Situation.
' *• Electricity Load Forecast in the Basin 
4  ENERGY EXPORT......................................
...................................................5
4 ]      Interconnection with Djibouti...................................................... ....................... ........................... 6
4 2     Interconnection with the Sudan .................................................. ........................................ ..........6
4 3 Impact on Baro-Akobo planning ....................... ............. ............. ................................ ................... 7
INVENTORY OF ITYT)ROPOW ER PROJECTS
..... ......p—■■■......S
5.1      Storage Projects
......... ......................... ...........*............... .................... .......... ®
5.2  Run-of-River Projects ....................... ............ *...................  ................................. ......................
6. SCREENING PROCESS-*.......................... .. .............................™.................... ——  — 10
6 I General. 
...............  ... .............. .... .................................................. . .......................... ’0
6.2      Initial Screening.................... ...     ................... ...................... ...... ............ ............... ........— 10
6.3      Cost Screening .................................................. .... ..... ...............  -............... ......... ..............  11
6-3.1 General................. .......... . .......................... ........... • .. ............... —............................................ /J
6*3-2 Concept design . ................................................................... . •-........ ......................... ...................
14
14
14
15
16
16
17
17
IS
19
19
MULTIPL'RPO E PROJECTS..............................
S
Indices.........
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Baiia Integrated Development Master ManWATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J WAI)ROPq\yj ^ Prme.
FIGURES
1            Dam Sites
2  Schematic of Potential Dam Sites
3           Interconnected System
4 
FF1 P A Peak Power Demand Forecast
5 
EELPA Energy Demand Forecast
6 
Earthfill Dam - Tvpical Cross Section
7 
Rockfill Dam - Typical Cross Section
8           Typical Intake for Power Diversions
0         Baro-Akobo Basin Peak Power Demand Forecast
10      Proposed Transmission Network
TABLES
Table I Existing Power Stations in the ICS
Table 2 Proposed Projects in EELPA Expansion Plan..
Table 3 Existing Electricity Supplies in the Baro-Akobo Basin. 
Table 4 BaroAkobo Basin Load Forecast   ... 
Table    5    Dam    Storage    Projects    proposed    by    Selkhozpromexport. 
Tabled Dam Storage Projects Proposed by ARDCO-GEOSERV
Table 7 Run-of-River Projects Proposed by ARDCO-GEOSERV ...............................................
Table 8 Initial Screening of Hydropower Projects.......................................................................... Table 9 Cost screening of single stage hydropower projects
Table 10 Cost screening of hydropower projects with staged development .......................... ....... Table   11   Comparison   of   Baro   Akobo   projects   with   Projects   in   other   Basins Tabic 12 Energy Generation Cost Comparison with Diesel Plant.... 
Table B Candidate Projects for Energy Export
Table    14    Candidate    Projects    for    Connection    to    the    ICS Table 15 Candidate Projects for Basin Supply 
TABLES IN APPENDICES
Table I 1 Baro Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
Table 2 I Geba-A Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
Table 3.1. Birbir-A Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
Table 4 1 Kashu Hydroelectric Project Characteristics.................................. Table 5.1 Gumero Hydroelectric Project Characteristics. 
Tabled! Gumero Hydroelectric Project Characteristics (Cont .).... 
Tabic      6.1      Birbir-R      Hydroelectric      Project      Characteristics Table 7.1 Sor Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
TableS I Gilo-1 Hydroelectric Project Characteristics ■
Table 9 1      1 AMS Hydroelectric Project Characteristics....................... Table 10 1 Geba-R Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
......
TAMS-l LG BiruAkobu Rix er Basin integrated DevelopmentANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
L
piTRODVCnON
f  this  Annex  is  to  review  the  hydroelectric  power  potential  of  the  Baro-Akobo
rhe  purpO*  °  the  fijture  energy  demand  of  the  basin  itself  and  that  of  the  Interconnected tas’11 t0 including energy export to nejghbouring countries
System 3'
Xkobo   basin   was    not    included   in   some   of   the   earlier   hydropower   master   planning fi*  &afpo’r   example,  the  1982  Power  Planning  study  by  Acres  considered  only  the  Blue  Nile. stun*1    o    ,\wash   and   Wabi   Shebdli   basins   Basically   the   Baro-Akobo   basin   was   considered nEoo^emote from the main load centre, Addis Ababa
it  ness  is  indeed  a  problem  for  the  Baro-Akobo  basin  but  on  the  other  hand  the  rainfall K'the  basin  is  higher  than  in  any  other  regions  in  Ethiopia.  The  abundance  of  water  combined Mih  the  relief  of  the  basin,  from  the  high  plateau  at  above  2,500m  elevation  down  to  the Gambela  Plain  at  an  altitude  of  430m  provides  favourable  conditions  for  hydropower  in  this region   In   the   lower   basin   alone,   Selkhozpromexport   has   estimated   the   total   technically feasible hydropower potential to be 13.765 GWh per year
More recent planning studies  continue to disregard the potential of the Baro-Akobo basin However. EELPA transmission line network  expansion plan includes  connection to .VGzan and Tepi from Emma and Gilgel Gibe in the South of the Basin, to Meru from Bedelc  in the middle and Ghimbi from Nekempte and Finchaa in the north
The renewable energy studies have shown that biomass fuel
energy source for the bulk of the population within t e aro
in the basin comprise the Sor hydroelectric project, wit ani
number of installed diesel plants with a total capacity o 5
Future demand for eleemcity will depend on the rae of growth of the wonon* bann indudinn the programming of the major developments sue as.
canacity of 5 MW and a
estimated to
agriculiure   However   .he   electnmry   demand   within   the   project   area   has   been   estimated reach only 61 MW in 2020, and 115 MW in 2035
The conclusion is therefore that most of the tandidat
r oroiects in the Baro-Akobo justified in the context of
basin   would   serve   the   Interconnected   System   an   v*   snuller   hydropower   projects   can   e HELP A s least cost generation expansion p ^ d within the Basin
considered as candidates to supply electricity
At this preliminary level of study. Il appears t ah capacity a number of medium to large srze pro) considered in other basins in the country’
.he basis of cost per ** of stalled he very competitive with projee
TAMS-ULG Barr^Akcbo River Basin integrated Development Master Plan
1WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J ^DROP  W
O     ER
—----------- --------------- - ----------- ---------- ------------------------ ———
2. THE INTERCONNECTED SYSTEM
2,| Present Stilus
The present status of the interconnected system is shown on Figure 1. At present the i
capacity amounts to 378 MW made up of the plants listed in Table 1.
Table 1 Existing Power Stations in the ICS
mst4l’«
Projects
Installed Capacity (MW)
(%)
Hydropower
■—
1 Tis Abav
11 5
1 Finchaa
1000
Koka
43.2
Awash II
32.0
Awash 11!
32 0
Melka Wakana
153.0
Subtotal
378.3
98.3
Thermal
Dire Dawa
4.5
Alemaya
20
Subtotal
6.5
1.7
Total
384.8
100.0
The 230 kV line to the proposed Gilgel-Gibe project is already in place and represents tie closest 230 kV connection to the Baro-Akobo basin The nearest 132 kV connection is scheduled to reach Nekemptc and Ghimbi in 1999
2.2     Plans for System Expansion
EELPA s demand forecast for the interconnected system which covers the period until J-1 shown on Figure 2 for power (MW) and on Figure 3 for energy (GWh/yr) This exp*^.
plan to meet these demands is given in Table 2 and is almost exclusively constitute hydroelectric projects, with the exception of an aero derivative plant of 75 MW sch u 1997 and a 30 MW provision for geothermal energy planned for 2004 In addition rehabilitation of existing projects such as Tis Abay I and Koka, the plan includes the to installations
TA.MS-l LG Baro-Akobo Riser Basin Integrated Development Master PlaJ1
2r*- ■
SUOAN
Baro-Akobo River Basir Integrated Development
Master Plan Project
Poweriines-
Irrterconnected
SystemPEAK POWER DEMAND (MW)
EELPA V°^T DEMAND FORECA
Figure 1J-*ENERGY DEMAND (OWh/yr)
EELPA ENERGY
DEMAND FORECAST
Figure 1J-3WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPoWTd . ------------------------- —
Table 2 Proposed Projects in EELPA Expansion P|an
Power Plants
Aero derivative Gilgel
Gibe
Tis Abay JI ______ ___
Installed Capacity (MW)
75
’ 180 60
Commission Date
1997
1999        ~ ~ - 2000
" '-
Geothermal                                30                                                  2004
Medium HydrojGojeb}
.AleltuEast Aleltu West Halele Warebesa
165 20-4
214
68
264
2006
Chemoaa-Yeda                          580                                                2013
Total
1,825 
This plan is expected to meet substantially the projected demand in year 2015 for
capacity and energy of 1,965 MW and 9,531 GWh/yr respectively These projection
correspond to an average annual growth of approximately 10% per year for capacity and
energy
2.3        Long-Run Marginal Costs of Power
The long-run marginal costs  of power and energy  were not provided by  EELPA. it uu however possible to estimate an average cost of future power by using the proposed expansion plan scheduling (Table 2) and the estimated capital investment for each of the proposed projects All the estimated costs were convened to a common basis (January 1996) The resu.i of this  computation indicates  that the present value of the capital investment for transmission and generation is US S2.406 per kW of installed capacity
2.4        Transmission Interconnections from the Baro-Akobo Projects.
EELPA plans for extension of the transmission line network includes a 132-kV line Ghido (near the Finchaa power plant connection) to Nekempte and Ghimbi in the North o t • basin The connection to the ICS is scheduled for 1999 In the middle of the basin, the
area is scheduled to be connected to the ICS in 2000: a 132-kV transmission line bet*^ Mctu and Bedele is finalised To the South the connection to the ICS, is expected place in 2001 with the construction of a 132-kV transmission line from Jimma to Bong Nlizan
For the initial screening of large hydropower projects in the Baro-Akobo basin, ft assumed that all projects must be connected into the ICS at the 230 kV line at the oi g Project
&»ao>-/\kodo Kiver Ba«m integrated Development
3ANNEX IJ hydropower projects
ELECTRICITY supply in the Basin
3.
3  J Existing Situation
of   the   report   summarises   the   results   of   study   performed   by   ARDCO-GEOSERV
^jieciion
May j9g5 subsequent updating from the Master Plan Steering
in   their   r   p   ^Q.Akobo   basin   is   covered   by   three   regions   of   the   EELPA's   administrative Committee                 $or anj gonaa The existing supplies in these regions are presented in
divisions wonc^a-
Tible 3
In the Wollega region, only  Nekempte, Ghimbi and Asosa have an electricity  supply  There is one 2 27 MW diesel generator owned by  EELPA in Nekempte, one 1.08 MW diesel generator also owned by  EELPA in Ghimbi and one -09 kW diesel generator in .Asosa The electricity tales  for the region amounted to 4.578 MWh in 1993and 6,315 MWh in 1996 The connection to the ICS is planned for 1999
In the Sor region, Metu. Gore, Gambela and Dembidolo are currently  supplied by  the Sor Hydroelectric  power plant No other towns  have electricity’ supply  The electricity  sales  in the Sor region reached 3,552 MWh tn 1993 and had grown to 6,448 MWh by  1996 The 5 MW Sor power plant was commissioned in the early 1990‘s
In the Bonga region, Bonga is  currently  supplied in electricity  by  EELPA with a 770 kW diesel generating set the electricity  sales  in 1993 were 201 MWh and 338 MWh by  1996. In this region, the Dembi hydroelectric  power plant al the Bebeka coffee plantation near .Aman and -Mizan Teferi. has an installed capacity of 800 kW and was commissioned in 1993
Table 3                  Existing Electricity Supplies in the Baro-Akobo Basin
Location
Installed Capacity (MW)
Nekempte
2.27
Ghimbi
1.08
Asosa
0,44
Sor
5.00
Bonga
0.77
Aman
0 80
are a!so two hydroelectric projects at an advanced planning stage (feasibihty study these are lhe Sor Phase 0 Project and the Achani (near Tepi) Project The first involves 
£ creauon of an upstream regulating reservoir and an additional 5 MW of installed capacity Achani Project is a run-of-river power plant comprising three 500 kW turbine-generator
TAMS-LLG           BarD-Akobo River Basin ln<ej»ralcd Development Msurtcr Planu hydropower prOj^
at
.
in the p*5U
, mo"'-”*'i F
,.l B«(n '
ptesen" *'
„ >„ad forecast for *' penoiup » 2022. fet4, So' and Bonga The av"aE' Son-
onCO-GtOStKX rXo-A*obo ba$'n ons between 2000 and 2010 and between Ufo
co venngxbe B . b.. the three rep rnrecast presented by ARDCO-GEOSEk\ The
rate for
an d 5.95
d m 2022
For thc purpose of this study,
an d 2020 a*
xpC
cted PcaV
„  d factor of -
ia
0 Ihis extension results in a Oeit
f JcXi oveJ  Z^s V^^ondsl^ '°SSCS CSUmat6<i '°
T
Si
''
equal to \»/0
4  ’ dFO"'a”
Tabic 4
loot'
1020
Sate
Region
4H J*®’-- nS .'H*
77J_
22E31 NNEX 1J hydropower PROJECTS
energy export
4-
4 1 interconnection with Djibouti
Studies into the interconnection with Djibouti were UnH~ .
reported in December 1989 The studies concluded that interc<T . Acres ^^nubonal and the basis of Ethiop.a exporting surplus hydroelectnc enPr CC110n cou‘d be iusnfit^
£.ta»P«
available ro Djibouti dead, X
P
"f mport „f Bm Wg^
development of geothermal energy source rvL —■"—-
4.2      Interconnection with the Sudan
fix     viability     of     rhe     interconnection     tvas     r_onert        .
° e sens>tive t0 th- „
^iiy unattractive
Studies  into the interconnection of the power systems  of Ethiopia and the Sudan were undertaken by IVO International in the mid 1980’s and again in the mid I990’s The feasibility report of the latter studies was issued in 1995
The IVO studies found that the interconnection could be justified on the basis of exchange or surplus energy between the two systems rather than firm energy exchanges
Since hydropower will continue to play a dominating role in the expanding Ethiopian system, there will also be periodic  surpluses  of energy  as  each hydropower plant is  commissioned, which will be available for export to the Sudan system
There  is  also  the  possibility'  that  the  large  Mervure  m  tips
_
nro1ccl   will be implemented in Sudanese  energy  io  Ethiopia
the Sudan, giving rise to the possibility of the expo This possibility is considered somewhat remote since projects in northern Sudan
The studies by IVO into the possible route various assumptions including the timing Ethiopia such as the Gilgel-Gtbe.
i. nked to very’ ambitious irrigation nection were based on
of future large projects Obvious y ~update of
expansion plans of the power system m Et™   hi p“it Lender constant review and an u
Akl
die interconnection study may be required
The route of the interconnection recommen Rosenes dam, a d.stance of about 430 km asm*« examined by IVO was from Ghedo via Ghtmbito option could become more favourable i so
^obo basin were to be implemented
in .Fhvigure 1 ,^
Brine Markos to (VO extends fr ™ promising route
nc of 617 km This
0
o vtr ’ d‘^ ,.ms m the Baro- hydropowe
| A \ I c ■ r, 
'
■— -
t» —• ■ “— ■
~
LCr BaroAkobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
6ANNEX u hydropower
PR(
The interconnection proposed by IVO would be a single circuit 345
aluminium conductors 
.\kobo planning
, ,.,eudu, would radio faoour the larger Mg)t vn>htf** wa “XLa since these woohl be . market fo,
..
lne *ith
hinv
3]
the interconnection
„,h connecting the
hydropowm P om «cnon ■ e ■
(<> Rose„es.
h
^tbeS^^bta^^rs^T^ , o sdeart.
, M„connection between the anSita
somberly opuon «<h rf transmission eorridmacence-he^^endihelCS
projects m the Bar
-'fkMS-tLG B^AkoboANNEX 1J H\ DROPOWER PROJECTS
5 j Storage Projects
The   Russian   study   of   1990   (prepared   by   Selkh>
projects in the Baro-Akobo basin The primarv 
fydroelectnc power but all have been presented P 7°^ °f these ^oraee
identified u .
S sho^
on figure  4
5,ora
«
M TM' 5. ™
p   wer ^rnp Onet!(
e
Table * Dam s,ora?  P
r0 JeCts proposed by Selkhozpromeiport
Dam Site
Location
j^ ~~ on the Baro 10 km East ofltane
g
Gambela
Bonga_
TAMS
Birbir-R Geba-R
on the Baro 16 km East of Gambela
on the Baro 33 km East of Gambela
on the Baro 47 km East of Gambela
on   the   Birbir   11   km   upstream   of   the   confluence   with Geba
on the Geba 3 krn upstream of the confluence with Birbir
Primary
Purpose
Irrigation
Hydropower
Hydropower Hydropower
Irrigation
Sot_____ l on the Sor 30 km upstream of the confluence with Geba
Abobo
Chiru
Mey
. On_the Aiwero
on the Chiru ] 5 km upstream of the confluence with the Aiwero
on the Mey 13 km upstream of the confluence with the — Al w era
■Wbo™ Giluj Giio-2
----- upstream of Agenga
t0 ta^e ad'aniao
' a^C^erO—^u£s5?a^f3^b£ Dam
On fL.CT* 5 — UJstream of Agenga_ Z^njhe~U£~ ^ °^"£2._
e1
___
Hydropower Hydropower
Irrigation Irrigation Irrigation
* jrrigation Irrigation Irrigation Irrigation
The-
~-
5tU<^’         10 ^rst
project, as a multipurpose
sufjj ' for ^gallon Acc° J C ferule agricultural lands located near the dam site, this land is also OCnt 10 satisfy al] Do,t0 thal sn*dy the power and energy generated by this project arc 
They..
^enia^j    Pr°jcct    is    r above rn°fTtle ^th-west
ser aemandof the Gambda region up until year 2010
t0 ^Ul^1 secon^ and the Birbir-R third to meet the power
P^jects^ re®*On. Ethiopia. With regard to the hydropower potential of the
tUf huIes a $ USuah> ineSici * Ossian study also indicates thai hydroelectric power at irrigation
1 Mevandn?
^e report does not recommend the installation of
■ a Lhimbong
r A.vTs-TlLQ_
ari
>-AkQbo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
B '— —----- ----__ ___ ______• I*1’
.< -r''7’
-'
*  . C J' '
.• * ». ■ i/.
■
;v 5 T
r
i
.
Ac* Sfcndrte
-----
----- Dri^«tf»e< *»*
----- 5 nek
UmtenlM
----- Propowei kotett *©•<! to O*™ S»e
\         ■» W*da No
'              Ww
♦  OvnSU
•   '©•R*'
Ccnsultanta. Inc. tU SA.) an<^
■X.C Consultants Ltd. QJ.K ’I
\ ths Wistrf of Watet Resomces tas CcMOTnment ot Ethiopia
' ^’xXKtdon JuVjlO,A996
Topo(V.2«>^
1P.MSJJLG. WRDCOISWA*^ ^tename. damwleapt
'¥
M*1ANNEX ] J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
R ESOl'RC5-
GEOSERV study of 1995 identified a further 3 storage dam projects which are also The^ projects are listed in Tabic 6.
^onF’®"
Table 6
Dam Storage Projects Proposed by ARDCO-GEOSERV
"Location____________________ ______________________ _ ' on the Baro 75 km upstream of the continence with
the Birbir
—----------’“’on" the Birbir 70 km upstream of the confluence with
th^Geba____ _______________ ,_______________________
— r“on t
h Geba 120 km upstream of the confluence with
e
Primary Purpose
Hydropower Hydropower Hydropower
Beko Kashu Sesc
the_Bi£bir_______________ _ __________________________ .____________ on the Beko 25 km upstream of the confluence with Hydropower
the Birbir______________________ _ _______________________________ on   the   Kasha   85   km   upstream   of   the   confluence   with   Hydropower
the
on the Sese 45 km upstream of the confluence with Hydropower the Geba_____ ____________
Gumcro~              on the Gumero 35 km upstream of the confluence i with the Geba
Akobo Hydropower
Sake Guda
Sake   Guda   35   km   upstream   of   the   confluence   with
Hydropower
the Baro
5,2 Run-of-River Projects
___________________
ARDCO-GEOSERV   also   identified   four   run-of-river   hydroelectric   projects   in   the   upper   basin they are listed in Table 7.
Table 7 Run-of-River Projects Proposed by ARDCO-GEOSERV
Description
Location
•—__ ____
t _5ercsha-------- Cascade of four Power Plants
8 io 15 km from Masha
Jifa^ha --------- Cascade of four Power Plants
20 io 35 km from Uka
’          —            Single Power Plum
60 km from Dembi Dollo
----------- [ Cascade of two Power Plants
Downstream of the existing hjdropoucT plant
1 AMS-L’LG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Maslcr Win
9WATER RESOURCES
6  SCREENING PROCESS
6.1 General
A step-by-step screening process was adopted to successively identify th hvdropower projects to be included in the development of the Master pfJ ™°re processes were followed composing an initial screening to eliminate H ■ projects, a cost screening to rank the surviving projects and an economic sere •  °
nn
the projects that would be included in the master plan development Thes T8 ld'n^ processes arc described in the following sections.
6.2       Initial Screening
The purpose of this step in the screening process was to eliminate obviously - options The basis of the screening was a cost evaluation based on cost and "
Sci ^<
e three sc^
characteristics developed in previous studies For this step all costs were expressed i^*" per installed capacity, ignoring any non-hydropower benefits of the projects The resuhsofth- screening are given in Table 8
Tabic S Initial Screening of Hydropower Projects
Project
Installed Capacity
(MW)
Large project* < >150   MWl
Bonga 372
Total Cost
(10* Birri
2.496
Cost per kW (Birri
6.709
TAMS
519                              3.277
6.314
Gambela
258                              2.002
7.759 .
Geba-R
180
1.138
6.321,
Birbir-R
304
1.693
5.^9
Baro-A
270
330
1,220
Geba-A
Birbir-A
180
402
2^230
290
590
2,030..
Medium projects (>5I      MUI
Gilo-1
72
452
Sor-A
80
582
Sese
30
402
Beko                                                              100
1.340}
1
-------- ---------H 400
— —  <450
- ——'t 7 lfM I
Gumeio
Kashu
Small projcctsj>5MU i
GUo-2
^Gilo-3
Sor-R
Sako-G uda
Mini projects (<5MW) Bcrcsha
Gurachd
Golol
1
TAMS-l LG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated DevcJopII,cD
10I
Figure J-5
Schematic of Potential
Dam Sites
MEI i J
KfTTO KUN
OUWA
A Existing Dam
| Potential Dam Site , Hydrometric Station
4s
fM>ir-A
r
BLRBIR
SESE
♦
0ARO
SOBAT
ALWERO
ALWERO
Dwnbong 7
BEG WVHA
BITES WUHA
!»♦       |l$
GILO 13
* ♦
Gu/b-J
4
BEKO
♦ ’-I
KASHU
KILIJ
AKOBO
r
DLMA
p lBok
AKOBOWATER RESOURCES
annex ij hydropower PROjf ^
W fcS
 “^ecSv '“’’“"'S’Jwe
 « •« 
. 6om
VM7 (,0PUl1' im ""
upper^/'Xpo^
process       X economical return duM often shown P0*^.- remote areas such many pUCeS' S streams where the lack f
to expense maintenance and d.sconunued ope^ ' Akobo basin, these power plants have
often rewhed m overestimating the l^
season flows lower than
installed on small
flows A** WnXsequencc local users are
appears U*
t  dtesel plants
pufchase opera c
operation As 
the expense of th Qf parts have ott P
operauon m ex 
acceplable cost of energy Other pr^ the propCT operation of the pro^s Fw
powcr plants
*
such as siltanon o these reasons, it«
should al^vs be co e-
that smalI andI alc to the mast« P
Thc
value of lhesc
.. for a number of dams 
As prew®* "5“ could
tuggestedthatt^Po
stoJd * pstthed « “ ltang-cteu. Dumbong and Mr,
f the transnvss.cn line network
irrigation as primary purpose it has inefficient these sites will be evatad
“ h p„ot to considering the addmn ot t
;X« ^^'KW£damS>' ’
F iom     . •. ™ “
ate ver, expenstv.
r
unfeasible These projects, therefore were eliminated from any further consi e
In the lower basin two projects are in competition for development, i c-’ the rOof
the Bonga dam with a reservoir level at El 620 is 100 metres higher than
powerhouse at the foot of the TAMS dam It appears on technical ground t ' Bonga <*•? (S has a better potential and therefore was kept for further evaluation, an
The projects eliminated in the initial screening were Sese. Beko, Sako-Guda as well as the mini hydro projects, all of which have a unit power cost in excess of Birr 10,000 per kW
A schematic representation of the surviving dam projects is shown on Figure 5.
6.3       Cost Screening
6.3.1 General
Prior  to  prepanng  layout  and  cost  estimates  for  all  the  hydroelectric  project  with  resen storage, a detailed comparative technical review of the proposed sites was performe
Three of the upper basin projects, Sako-Guda, Sese and Beko, have Prev,ouS^J^*^ out fir be substantially more expensive than the other highland projects The review
this study indicated that compared to the other upper basin projects, the dam ^^cfSifco- nearly so favourable, the conveyances to the power plants were long, and. in 1 e a ( lio£ Guda, although developing 500 metres of head, a 2,000 metre long tunnel as w ^ononuC1ily metre long siphon, and a 5.400 metre long canal, would make the P Q)
construe1'0” **
(he f.
eliminated Similarly, but to a lesser extent, the Gambela dam would su m, -
—---------- - -------------- ------------ ---- ------------------ --- --------------- -------------------------- ---- ~—               pl £JJ TAMS-1 LG Baro-Akobo River Basin integrated Development M*5ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
x„use Therefore this project was also eliminates r„. i. .
pv'PO* ThiS danv hOWe%er can * desi8ned at a lower ^7" develoP°™t « a ^Fre^th ,he TAMS dam !ajhv,ltcr has sufficient stor,
Ration The Gambela dam has been retained for irrigation If f°
Which Would not lhe flow
'^sibtlin-of development of hydropower on a m ltip
U      urpo
S basis 
Pnmar> PurPose,
wth
Concept design
Cons esrimat® were developed for the ramming Ien hydrotdeetnc projects as™ ,he Mst
es,mating procedures descnbed ,n Annex IG In order to achieve this, for each of theseTm
a reconnaissance level des,gn was performed A set of design criler^ wL
established to size the project features These entena cover the dams spillways river
diversion during construction. low level outlet, power waterways, and power plants
Dams
Two  principal  types  of  dams  have  been  considered,  earthfill  (Figure  6)  and  rockfill  (Figure  7), depending  on  the  availability  of  materials.  Some  sites  appear  well-suited  to  concrete  faced rockfill  or  arch  dams  These  could  be  considered  in  the  next,  prefeasibility,  stage  In  a  few cases  where  good  foundations  exist  and  where  it  would  be  expensive  to  develop  a  separate channel  spillway,  a  roller  compacted  concrete  dam  solution  has  been  adopted  with  the  spillway incorporated   into   the   body   of   lhe   dam.   Small   diversion   dams,   diverting   power   flows   into canals have been designed as concrete gravity dams (Figure 8} .411 dams have been sized and designed  based  on  experience  Upstream  and  downstream  slopes  vary  with  the  height  of  the dam.  while  core  slopes  remain  constant  Both  of  these,  as  well  as  zoning  of  the  dam.  may change as material and foundation conditions become better known
Spites  . a accordance with the design entena of dbe
Hydraulic structures have generally been des,Sn U.S Armv Corps of Engineers. Spillways for (tons 
populated areas have been sized development
the    10,000-vear    flood    For    some    of    the    uPP«^    <^sm    storage    dams    have    generally 
downstream, the 1,000-year flood has been used P been designed for ungated spillways, since hea o {» Consequently the unit discharge for the spillway ar width Short chutes and stilling basins have been pro the high dams generally have gated spillways wit per metre and water velocities of 30 to 40 rrvs. or are provided for energy dissipation However, in one to be of sufficiently high quality' that a flip-buc et cou
»
deve)oped at the dam itself
o f 4 l0 io m’/s per metre of
in the lower basin,
in t j,c range of 40 to 60 m /s spillway chutes large stilling basins
(Jeba-R the rock was considered w hile at the TAMS dam and
abutment and run through
projects rhe spillway could dtscharge over cob across « natural water courses away from the dams
Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
12!©@©®@©0
D->
H
• MW e
• too e
tams d*.
u/s 0/s Slope Slope
ti IS 10 11 25 10
Impervious Core - Silty Clay from Residual Soil Borrow Rock Fill Sttell - Random Rock Fill
Silty Sand Course
D/S Firm Filter Zone - Medium to Fine Clean Sand
Stripped Ground Level to eu I table foundation for Rode Fill Shells
%
D/S Transition Zoo*
.   ROCKFILL OAM
I
typical cross-section
tfjdsring Grwnrf
XLZ^
V
—Otmtofi Sluiceway
4—
Spillway
ELEVATION
UPSTREAM ELEVATION OF SPILLWAY AND INTAKE STRUCTURE
Relief Bucket
Spillway
REFLECTED SECTION
PL AHANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
diversion during construction - whether tunnels, sluiceways or channels 
designed for the 100-year flood for earthfill or rockfill dam and for the 10-year
^r«"“«edams-
fgve/Ovt/^s
outlets  have  been  provided  for  ail  dams,  and  as  a  minimum,  these  have  a  capacity  to
LO*
ICVCrise   of   th«   reservoir   during   initial   filling   Where   reasonably   possible,   the   low   level
5stl ’ropthC    n    irv   is   sufficient   to   release   half   the   reservoir   storage   in   one   month   or   to   draw   it ^Clle-t ^half full height in two months, in case of emergency
t0
Power Plants
I  ts  were  sized  to  provide  a  plant  factor  of  60%,  Based  on  the  reservoir  storage,  the fi 0WCr'eld   i   e   the   monthly   discharge   guaranteed   with   a   98%   reliability   was   determined   to establish   the   average   energy   generating   flow   The   maximum   power   flow   was   selected   to   be 67*4  larger  than  the  yield  in  order  to  provide  a  plant  factor  of  60%  For  storage  projects,  the installed  capacity  was  established  as  the  available  capacity  when  the  reservoir  water  surface  is at  the  median  level  of  the  active  storage  Waterway  head  losses  were  assumed  io  be  6%  of  lhe gross   head,   and   the   generating   set’s   efficiency,   taking   into   account   transformer   losses,   was taken as 35%
Ail power waterways  w ere sized for the maximum discharge of the power plant The power canals  were assumed to be concrete lined and were assumed to be concrete lined and sized for a maximum velocity  of 1 m/s. All power tunnels  were assumed to be concrete lined and sized to provided a maximum velocity  of 4 m/s. The steel penstock  diameters  were selected to provide a maximum water velocity of 6 m/s
6-J. J Project layouts
Based on these criteria, layouts were developed for each of the remaining dams and presented
Wh the project profiles in the Appendices These project profiles compnse the following:
Site Geology,
Project Description,
Table of Principal Characteristics,
Tayout drawing(s),
Area-Capacity' curves, and,
Cost Estimate.
(see               the PTOiects. a reservoir operation model using the HEC-5 computer program
5r ^ v-hT 1E ’ ReseTAO'r Operation Studies), was developed first to determine the reservoir d ’ Fand theri 10 determine the project firm and secondary energy, and the dependable
Each of the projects were evaluated individually In addition, for storage projects TAMS-ULG Biiro-Akobo Rivtr Birin Integrated Development Muter Plan
13irces ______________________A__N_N__E_X_ U__m__ D__R_oj__>_o_Wr_t_>_ ._ 212°^
------------- -----------
tR  PRO,
WATERR^,^-
Le basin such »s 
0ilbir.R. or Geba-A and GebvR, older to evaluate the staging of
l^**^eration        pe^\ential        of        the        combined        sues        The        purpose^
the   combined^
constructions of
de(ennine
the   *«   *°   oire,   is   that   the   firm   energy   generated   b^
lw0 ol
sever*
combined ope* mficantly more tta» J 
of the energy generated the
systcm oftwo power plants 8entt
6.4     Project Ranking
6.4.1 General
In order to rank the projects, the cost per kWh of firm energy was calculated by add
present value of thirty years of operation and maintenance to the cost of construct;
'
dividing by the discounted annual firm energy production over the same thirty year period" discount rate of 12% was used for that purpose, in the case of the comparison of stj projects, or non-staged systems, a different discount rate would provide the exact sX
ranking
Two rankings have been considered The first ranking excludes the cost of transmission hne in order to determine the best hydroelectric projects in the Basin The second ranking includes the cost of the transmission line to the nearest point of the ICS, i e., the Gilgel Gibe Project, this ranking should principally be used to determine the first project to be developed The combination of these two rankings will assist in the selection of the project to be developed first, as well as in selection of the subsequent projects when the transmission lines to the ICS might become shorter
A third evaluation criteria was introduced to compare the projects evaluated in this report and those in other basins in Ethiopia As previously indicated, the average cost of construction, including transmission lines, of installed capacity of the planned power plants has been estimated to be US S2.406 per kW for each of the projects evaluated in this report this ri-o has also been determined.
4/2 fagk stage projects
results of the cost screak
w Wch shows the ranking of th^ Pr0CCSS ^Or s'n^e sta8  projects are summarised in Table
e
opacity cost per kW inst^JJed Pr°JCCtS W tCnns of unit CTer®>’ cos,s Per kWh
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development M»stcr ?
14Ila
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
Cost screening of single stage hydropower projects
Mi"15
Installed
(MW)
capacity
Cost (USS)
per
kWh
Cost  per  kW (USS)
L*Se p'
^ ,50?,T
0  036
171
170
0 038
0 038
508
0 050
422
465
0.055
0.060
1331
1,391
1.386
1.918
1.964
2.409
B#R(01J58)
taMS
Geba K
1,060 310
0 073
0.085
2.839
3.252
Medium Projects (>50MW)
Kashu
60
W5
0 04
Geba A 1
0 045
Birbif A(E1 1430)
Birbir A (El 1425}
Sot A&R
95
86
65
0.045
0.045
0,054
OetaA 2
66
0 059
Sor A
Gilo I
52
80
0 059
0 073
1.465
1.686
1.691
1.691
2,118
2,211
2,290
2.909
Small projects (<50MW)
Gumero 1,2.3
50
0.049
Bars 1
40
0.050
Gumero 1,2
30
0.051
Gumer o 2,3
38
0 053
Gumtro 2
18
0.063
Gumero 3
20
0 078
Gumero 1
12
0.084
SorR
13
0.147
1,833
1,908
1,923
2,030
2,399
2.973
3,211
6,090
64J
^  ged projects
ta
*4 LCSults of the cost screening process for multi-stage projects are summarised in Table 10, can, Sh°WS the raking of the projects in terms of unit energy costs per kWh and unit
pac,t5 cost
peT
TAAiS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin tatep-atrd Development Mister Plan
1?. 
ANNEX 1J HYDROK>WER p„
water   esot r«s__------ ----------------—^^ct
r
Table 10 Cost screening of hydropower projects with staged
s
.
e devel°Pmeni
Projects
Installed
capacity
Cost per kWh
(USS)
Cost per fcyy 
(MW)
(USS)
Baro river
Baro 2
170
0.038
1.386
Baro 1&2
210
0 036
1,331
Geba river
Geba A 1
105
0.045
1,686
Geba A 1&2
171
0 037
1,391
Birbir river
Birbir R
422
0055
1,964
Birbir A&R
508
0 05
1.918
Gumero river
Gumero 2
18
0 063
2.399
Gumero 1,2
30
0 051
1,923
Gumero 1,2,3
50
0 049
1,833
6.4.4     Large projects
It  can  be  seen  from  the  Table  9  that  the  following  projects  are  worthy  of  further  consideration for connection to the ICS
• Baro 1 and 2: This project includes the construction of an upstream regulating storact dam, and two downstream diversions having capacities of 170 MW and 40
respectively The total development can provide firm energy to the system at a cost cf
0 036 USS per kWh
• Geba-A 1 and 2: This project includes the construction of an UpSVC^<, MW and storage dam, and two downstream diversions having capacities o - -
66 MW respectively The total development can provide firm energy to t e sys 
cost of 0 037 USS per kWh
These two projects also present the possibility of staged development Geba in p
have a first stage of 105 MW providing firm energy at 0 045 USS per kWh
6.4.5    Media m projects
With   regards   medium   size   projects   the   best   candidate   for   connection   to   the following
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development M«*ter *’^SOURCE5
ANNEX IJ HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
oiect consists of a regulating storage dam in the upper basin of the
'Jobo "ver power Planl
[^sh°-    Pd      downstream    diversion    with    a    power    canal,    a    penstock    and    a    60    MW
project can generate firm energy at a cost of 0 04 USS per kWh This project includes the construction of an upstream regulating storage
girt>«r A: . . downstream diversion having a capacity of 95 MW This project can
dam 811(1 a S"? „
provide firm
enc,s
n rEV
-
r
to the system at a cost of 0.045 USS per kWh
a6 S^P  ^
ro
cts
scheme
. ctand out as strong possibilities for power generation in the basin
9
Gumero; This  scheme also comprises  an upstream regulating storage reservoir which will deliver water to series  of three small power plants  on the Ofa river. The 5 irnu1taneous  development of these three power plants  would result in the production of firm energy at the rate of 0 045 USS per kWh
Baro I This  project of 40MW would be one of the two power plants  proposed on the Bare river downstream of the Baro dam By  itself this  small power scheme could generate firm energy  at a cost of 0 05 USS per kWh, including the costs  of the regulating dam and the transmission line
These two small projects are located on either side of the Gore to Gambda 66kV transmission line Gumero 1, the closest to the transmission line is approximately 14 km nonh of the line iGumero 2 and 3 are 9 km and 28 km further from Gumero 1, away from the line The Baro 1 power plant is located 15 km to the south of the line
6.5 Haro-Akobo Projects in the National Grid
The preliminary criteria used to evaluate
system, i.e, the construction cost per kw of installe P - " the B^Akobo basin shouid be
per kW for the more attractive projects of*bas m projects in the country which are already considered
The review of the Baro-Akobo project is at
further investigation to confirm the conclusion o projects should be given a greater attention to b g t0 confirm the comparison of construction cost per 11 - Upon confirmation of technical merits o comparison should be conducted to select the pro] establish the prionties.
number of projects shows the cost
£ kW for 0^ level and certainly requires 
n is however obvious, that these
levd of confidencenecessary
capacity presented in Ta a fifil economic analysis an
juJude in *e expansion p an
TAMS-L' LG Baru-AkotJo River Basin Integntcd Development Mister Plan
17WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPO
Table 11. Comparison of Baro Akobo projects with Projects i
Project Name
T
Installed                 Capacity
(MW)
Baro-Akobo Basin Projects
Baro-A J&2________________
Geba-A 1&2_          _____ _
210
171
Bjrbir A&_R_________
Birbir-R H121)_______________
TAMS ______
Other basins in Ethiopia
Gileel Gibe_______________ Aieltu East 1
Aleltu West
Halelc-Warebesa Chemoga-Yeda 1 & II
455
360
1.060
580
6.6
Local Projects for the Baro-Akobo basin
As   indicated  in  Table  10,  the  more  promising  medium  and  small  projects  are  Gumero  K  di and  the  first  stage  of  the  Baro  project.  This  category-  of  small  projects  should  be  compared with   other   local   supply   projects,   namely   isolated   thermal   plants   A   comparison   of   generatio costs is given in Table 12 below
Table 12 Energy Generation Cost Comparison with Diesel Plant
Project
Installed capacity
(MW)
Energy Cost
(I SS/kWh)
Kashu                                              60                                      040
Gumero
50                                      0 049
Baro 1
40
0050
-
Diesel plant                                     50                                      0065
------- ---------------------------------------
The above costs of hydropower projects include the cost of local transmission to ' '*
line, either the existing 66k V line or the planned 132 kV line, as appropriate <
project is the most economic option overall but suffers from the disadvantage
capacity of60MW, it is relatively large for a local project and cannot be de\elope$
On the other hand the next best project, Gumero. can be developed in three stages 
and 20 MW to meet growing demands
Based on the demand projection presented in Chapter 3 above these three P^^gX-^0
meet    the    demand    of    the    three    regions    (WoUega    Sor    and    Bonga)    covering    tn^
sS 0
i oetlJ 
Basin until the year 2024 For example the first’plant of 12 MW would be co 2005 to increase the installed capacity of these regions to 38.5 MW The seco
1 AMMLb Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development m
18^TER RESOURCES
ANNEX IJ HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
on
ii     until
ne
the
year
2012   and
the   third   stage   of   20   MU'
in
the
yea
r
20
18.
need
to come
^i" ^
Fi  e9
thown
in Ffattn
J
t woU|d obvi
ously
require the installat
ion of a network of transmission lines
dcveJo
pfTl    hem   basin
as   s
hown   in   Figure
10   For   example,   the   first   leg   of
this 
netw
ork 
T ^ hin   the
nott          i  ion
transm ss
line
between   Metu
(scheduled   to   be   connected   to
the
ICS
by 
tfoJd
1 j Ghimbi which will also be connected to the ICS The circuit could continue
[be 2C*°°j riembidolo where the connection with Gambela already exists The network 
Yubdo                vended to the south bv connecting Gore to Tepi and the 132 kV line from
p
^lCS«Mizir
,, pr.JKB Suitable for Energy Export
ects  for  energy  export  to  the  Sudan  can  be  identified  from  Table  10.  assuming
favourable proj
no transmission bne costs, wiu this case is given in Table 13.
be taken tQ be fo(. options
ranking in
Table 13
Project
Candidate Projects Tor Energy Export
Installed Capacity
(MW)
Energy  cost
(TJSS/kWh)
Baro I&2
210
17!
508
0 027
Geba A 1&2
Birbir A&R
0028
0037
It  is  anticipated  that  if  a  project  like  Birbir  R,  with  a  capacity  in  excess  of  400MW,  were  to  be built, a 500 kV line to the Roseires project would be required
*•■8 Projects recommended for the Master Plan
From the screening process it can be deduc 
.
r-ort That the medium to large projects shown in should therefore be
Table 14 can be justified economically for the expansion of the ICb an included in the Master plan.
Table 14 Candidate Projects for Connection to the ICS
Project
Installed      capacity      Energy    Cost
(MW)
(USS/kWh)
Bar 1&2
210
0.027
Geba A 1&2
171
0 028
Birbir A&R
508
0 030
Kashu
60
0 036
Sor A&R
65
0.049
Total
961
-
The con.
'Udivjdu n0Wn in Tablc 14 do not include transmiss
ion line costs, since the cost attributed to
a Projects is dependent on the order
in which these projects are built This is a
T AN1S |JLG Barn-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Maser FlanDEMAND (MW)
80
----------- ^ .
BARO-AKOBO      BAS,JcriSf
Dmw-n. - — -
PEAK POWER DEMAND
r
iaMD FOREGO
Figure U-9Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development
Master Plan Project
-proposed transmission line NETWO«k FOR
the basin
-F*
Scheduled 132KV L** ----- Existing Line
------ Existing l32*v Lre
0
__ Proposed trans. i*« t**" * Potent^ pw* P'anU
TAMS  Consultants  toe  (U  SA)  ard DIG Consultants Ltd (UK.)
For the Ministry of Water Resources the Government of Ethiopia
Produced on juty 16, ^996 Sources TMAS-UL-G
Filename newroads *PT
15*VATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J              DROpOw
portfolio of projects and is sufficient for Master Planning purposes’" "
term The timing of the implementation of the projects depends^ the ^lum
financial attractiveness compared with other hydropower projects 
studies indicate that at least the Baro and the Geba projects are as if" ElbloP  Th
ecor’Orn.,° S
ia
e
any other projects under consideration for the generation exo m°’ m°re attT«cti
evaluation of the combined operation of these hydropower st* prOgrarW
additional benefits not taken into account in the above evaluation. T?
65  Which
.       re/> An
and is included in one of the development scenarios in the Master Pia^ CSCnbed in
One  of  the
a programme of medium scale hydropower projects. The most attractive
present  strategies  that  is  being  pursued  in  the  power  sectot  i
' mple,T1er«atiOn f
m   the   Baro-Akobo   basin   is   the   staged   Geba   and   Baro   projects   If   either   *??d'da,e     of   this   /
selected for early implementation then they could clearly be used tn m u well » for the supply of the ICS Since this is essentially an ‘out-X"? '°“l
J?
«
projects have also been selected as local basin projects, as shown in Table 15 <X'sion “'“I Table 15 Candidate Projects for Basin Supply
Capacity 
Ene^y 
(USSflcWh)
CM|
pTojecl
60
50
Kasha
0 040
0049
Gumero
40
0050
Baio A
which can be developed in stages to meet
The   preferred   option   of   these   three   is   Gumero
growing demand
Of all the above projects, two Gumero
stand out as candidates for pre-feasibility study, Geba and
'<
>
HANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
^LTfPl RPOSE PROJECTS
3
r /Xi toy •VC cl0Se tO the imgab]e ,and Tte P^ous studies^ . 1F ** lower
orinciP ' multipurpose projects retained by the prevtous 
.
■Sling small power plant downstream of reservoirs us.
Ha d onl
.     y reco™nended
te «?r bu‘ i»« to b
I,* MCWfaO-t,cnefil from Mrapower As indicafad in
tik! '
A™ x c FloodSoT
t
of k'rtga,io''
"I** w°u,d have a wgmfican. impact □„ lhe recurri «the aze of
^,st. an not bo jUst,fi«J economtcally. and therefore could m
multipurpose scenario
The only projects which could clearly be considered as multionnw^ nrrt
jams at the edge of the lower basin which provide suffiaent^rf Pt
hvdropower plant and large storage to regulate releases for irritation
include two dams, the Gilo-1 project and the TAMS nmim ana -/l,
At this stage of the study it is not p0SSlble Io rwoimerxl Xr
hydropower as indicated on Table 9 these projects are ranked far JvL f h projec’s for Kowe^r, these poor returns on power could bXpZXj
w ™ated under a
rc 8^mg
CC °nonuc
. principally ° f pr°^s
for irrigation purpose For example the simulation of the Gilo-1 io the production of 425 7 GWyt of firm enerev rt>
foe extent that 52 000 hectares J 
? '*
be U5ed
JeC! sbows that m addition
^otr regulated the water release to
>>*>sbility level stady for identified projects 8 agncul,ure ™  1* advanced to a
a
Ta MS-ULG Kiro-Akobo River Bwin lnte*raled Development Muter Ptin
21L■ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
t
i
r
’^■MS-XJLC
Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
1J AppendicesgjSO UR^'ES ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS APPENDIX I BARO DAM PROJECT
site is in the upper reaches of the Baro basin, about 75 km upstream of the
. -elf*; OUlCIUP
The     basin-
S 33rO h the Birbir and 30 km almost due south from the town of Gore. The 1:250,000 l  p indicates Basalt in the area of the site A geological sketch map al
. | 5 000 scale indicates fluvial deposits overlying residual clay overlying basalt, ipP^^Ltcrop on a 2 metres vertical section near the river bed The site is shown on
'
---------------- —                        Wit
22       photQ
2388.     bul       no       stereoscopic     coverage     is     available.     Most     of     this 
jcnil   Phot£?veretl     ;n     forest.   The   river   at   the   dam   site   is   following   the   tine   of   a   N-S   fault   or photo is^°.nn ^hich continues in a gully to the north. From the topographic map the relief
e-ii j* i;u«iv rn he obtained from the thick residual clav on the hill done; Sand and
pP etc wire mesh and rockbolts A sample of residual clay was obtained from near the
B^o bridge upstream of the dam site It is a red brown silty clay and considered to be
r orcscntaiive for the area The diversion weir and rhe powerhouse for diversion 1. located on
a   U-bend   of   the   river,
_ ill
will   be   founded
M Al j-kjJ -■«« k»in-nlr Tk* A'innI -nnfl
in   basalt   The   canal   and   powerhouse   for   diversion   2
>JT XL  rt n r urs r- r> rt Y
will be in biotite gneiss with possibly some basalt at high elevations
PrpM Description
The Baro dam would be 45 metre high and constructed of earthfill as  noted above The spillway  would be ungaied, 80 metre long, with a design surcharge of 2 metres  for passing rhe 1,000-year flood A chute. 135 metre long would lead to a 35 metre wide by  28 metre long
and 8 metre deep stilling basin Two 5-meter diameter diversion tunnels  along with a 15 metre high cofferdam would be used during construction One of these tunnels  would later be provided with the outlet works  for passing the regulated flows  to the downstream power diversions.
The dam project is located near the village of Gordomo and the area near the reservoir LOniains nL,merous huts and tukuls. At high reservoir levels, the flooded area covers 78 krrT p lc at low reservoir. only 10 metres lower, the flooded area would be only 17 km2
r eventive measures would need to be taken against w ater bom diseases such as malana.
r
hfi Baro project in arid if Inn th*
nfriun nna-pr nlanic Th# fir’d1 With 40 MW
T abteP
?|
n C     Pai     characteri«ics    of    the    Baro    dam    and    Hie    two    power    diversions    are    shown    on
two diVers A °f the dam and the aPPunenanl *°rks is shown 00 Figure 11 and of xhe
Slons°n Figures 1.2 and 13
1J Appendices - JANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER m>„ WATERWSOTRCE^____---------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- __
The first diversion with an installed capacity of 40 MW, is expected to Re
of firm energy and 35 3 GWh/yr of secondary energy The second diver*’ 207 6 GUv capacity of 170 MW and will generate 841 4 GWh/yr of firm energy and* ) an secondary energy The total construction cost excluding transmission |i ■3 ° WyT ,
1
G
follows 
lne ,s ’stiniat^j
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant Works 
$30,892,000
Diversion and Power Plant No I
Diversion and Power Plant No 2:
$40,164.000
$118^86,000
Total Construction Cost:                                                                              $209,442,000 A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 1 2
---------- --------------- ------------------------------ -—_
‘
. vf actcr Pl*^
1A MS-V LG Baro-Akobo River Bisin Integrated UcvelopiDCD 1J Appendices - 2ANNEX IJ HVDROpQWF.R PROJECTS Table 1.1 Baro Hydroelectric Project Characterises
DAM
I.
Catchment .Are
a.
1,620 km2
Mean Annual Fl
ow
49 9 mJ/s 
Dam Type
EarthfiU
Dam Height
45 m
Crest Level-
El   1,725.0
y'orrrul    Max 
Oper
Level
El  1,720  0
2.
yiormal Min Oper Level
Active Storage
Dead Storage.
Reservoir Surface Area.
Spillway Design Flood
Gates'
Max Flood Level
Low Level Outlet Capacity
Ciales
DIVERSION DAM No.l
Diversion Capacity:
Spillway Crest Level
Spillway Weir Dimensions
Intake Gales
Cana] (bott width x depth x length) Penstock
Powerplant
Design Head
Design Flow
Installed Capacity' Tail water Level
DIVERSION DAM No.2
Diversion Capacity Spillway Crest Level.
Spillway    War    Dimensions Intake Gales
El 1,7100 483 mcm
117 mcm
78 5 km3 460 mJ/s Ungaied
El. 1,7220 55.2 mVs
1 -200 mx200rn
55.2 m’/s
El 1,420
80 Oro lung
3 - 5 00 mx 2,50 m high 4 50mx400mx 1,300 m long
3.40 m dia. x 300 m long
95 m
55.2 n?/s 40 NW’ El 1.320
3.
Canal   (bott   width   x   depth Penstock
Powerplant
Design Head
x length):
55.2 m7s
El 1,250
80 m long
3 - 5 00 m x 2 50 m high 4 50 m x 4 00 m x 8,000 m long
3.40 m dia x700 m long
385 m
Design Flow
55 2 m5/s
Installed Capacity
170 NW
Tailwater Level.
El 860
^AMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
1J Appendices - 3
*•BAROAM OBO PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Table 1 J-1.2 - Project Cost Estimate Summa
Co«t Level January 1996
BARO DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No 1
Reservoir Max. Level; El 1720 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 40 MW
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
total
Sub-rot^ A; 4,926,621
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
J.769jgn ^307^500 -2J91.93Q _ 360,00n
19,706,463 24.433,104
AMOUNT (US$I
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
Total
1.
Preliminary
792.750
3.171,000
3 963 750
2.
Access Roads
159000
636.000
795.000
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
302.000
1.208.000
1.510,000
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
6
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
0.
Penstock & Manifold
164.000
736 000
920,000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
4.540 000
18.560.000
23,200.000
Su^rotWB 6,077,750
24,311,000       30,338,750
C SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT (USS i
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1e
Preliminary
72.885
291 540
364 425
2.
Switchyard
170.000
680 000
850.000
3.
Transmission Line
315.900
1,263.600
1 579 500
Stzh-n> w C:     558,785
Sub-tool A.&«c 11,563,156
Physical Contingencies
Engineering & Admin.
2.312.631
1,387,579
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: 15.263.366
2,235.140
46.252,623
9,250.525
5.550.315
61.053,463
2,793.925 57.815,779
11.563.156 6,937,894
76,316.829BARODAM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER D|VeRs(ON fJ[> ,
T*HS CanLurearrt^ Inc..
R«™,       i^j.
r MlXt          B
O’*- IMc*
Fowwr Rlftf Init Cntpqtcfty 45
detwlw cost estimate
(US#)
ZSTi *M
i 1 e:-
I ML *r;
nz! j‘7
1 131 UtfT
hht;
*41 II?
K«u]| FIJEHJFH
LDM-rM
uwrT
LOCJU.
©tgcR^noH
wfTHtaeE
r.-flDM
L±»O«FWT
total
BwArm
LStli
CM^WEJT
■■Dtr
CO^POMFWT
TOTAL
k    — ?i__ _ u-
uJ
sm
tm
i xa
17.4®
UM
M «r|
<r»e
trsn:
< so
if in
±lam
Sfifi
■J« wo
1 il7jKO
‘ksk
IM
Na
3
D
0
L
t
-J'
SJJ* rJYl.aiM
"7'id.iM
UWT RUCK
iiST
mw
□ESCR3^TTO<«
LOCAL
rxRFeHCWT
AMOUNT
LM*L rOHEKM
TOTAL
thuwmTT           CWWT
cDMKwrr               TOTAL
k
Crv^r-din: TifWM
p
ftwiftaW "i«Wl iEBiMi III 1 s-ifrd
sn
X»
BOW
lUBOC'
: as-
9
®
a
Jij
QwfFW! Piirwl TW.Hl IV Lr*S
A- W
lilt ®
fi.an
S.
Q
3
4£1         DMPSWi Euiwl CMss V Lr<d
-
1 TOOK
4 Lil MJ |                 ! IF ®
irtJJfl              i sersm
i Tusren
JST3Mbaro akobo project INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
BARO DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No 1
Ravervoir Max Laval; E| 17X> Powar Plant Wtat Capacity: 40 MW
DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
(USS}
Ca< Lr»*l January 1»r
a; rowm ruun a MmroiAT worm
Tnnwtvoc Syatam TodrfTable 1J-IJ - Project Cmt Estate Summary
Cm Janu*^ j<jg^
baro dam HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 2
Reservoir Mat Level: Ef 1720 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 170 MW
sumMAry dam * appurtenant works
AMOUMTlUSli
----- ------
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
cow>owea
FOfiBGK
COMP0WN7
Total
Prelitninafy
642,603
1570/11
3 213 01*
Earth Dam
2.358,232
9.432. &28
,,
11 791 16’
Access Roads
353.900
1,415.600
,
1.789.5M
Diversion Tunnel
1 tel.SOC
<246 0C0
5 307,500
Spillway
430306
1.753.544
2,191 930
Low Level Outlet
72,000
206.000
350 00€
SuMfltaM.- <926,521
B SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
f5.70S.4M 24 «J,UM
r
AMOUNT (U54)
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL COMPONENT
1
FORSGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
2.734,920
10,939.000
13.874 600
2.
Access Roads
130.000
523.200
5S4.3D0
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
4 202.000
16.508.000
21,015.000
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
6.
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8.
Penstock & Manifold
1,490.000
5,960,000
7*50. DOO
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
12.410.000
4 9.5*0.000
62 050 .000
serous 20,967,720
M.S70.S90 TM.AM.W
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT fUSS)
rr«M mo.
desciwtioh
LOCAL
COMPONENT
POR^GN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
f*
Preliminary
1.278.750
5,115.000
6,393.750
IX 7^
2_
Switchyard
300 Q00
1,200, M0
1,500, DM
Transmission Line
8.225.000
32.900,000
41.125,000
B.SOJ.750
5ub-»cW **6*c- 35.S50.O97
39.215,000 49,018,750
142.792^03 178,490,454
Physical Continences
Engineering A Admin.
7,139,510
4,283,171
20,550X77
17,135,084
35.69S.091
21,418,855
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 47,121,480
188.485,920        235.607,400baroak oeo project integrated master plan
BARODAM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No 2
Reservoir Mai. Level B 1720 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 170 MW
DET Ar ED COST ESTIMATE (USS)
Ocailr^r JinuBi>
A twe L APFUt r FN AMT W0*KS
COMPONENT
TOTAL
OUANTTTY
2/pvn
lMjy>
UMTMBCi
rOftBGN COMPONENT
local COMPQwFMT
Wa»3 rrprxiwn
u»rr ewjcr
UNIT
LOCAL
COMPONENT
roan&M
C0MPO*®T7
LOCAL
cotteomr
ro»BU»
rm no
Micwnc*
TOTAL
QUAMTTTv
rra
a
Dtwrvtan TumnM
at
l>.enser ’jvt( CMss ■ lPw<
s
20 00
WOO
JOO co
ooe
□
c
!<j
OvsaAl^vciCksx IM UnM
w
2000
woo
*00 00
500
3
k>
Zx.w-s.cr TjtHOw V ne^
M
• 130 CO
4400 0C
J 500 00
M5 0C
1 3fl’*03
4 244XC
UCU
UNFT PRIC1
XMOL'MT
MT
rm mq
□LSCRFT1OM
LOCAL
component
FOREIGN
c cop OWFMT
TOTAL
QUAMirrv
LOCAL
COMPONENT
fordo
COMFOWOr
rota
i
at
m3
077
3M
JAJ
207000
1M 5C
w
LJ
LA
11
043*] 44 —34
OUh
Mur
m
m
m
IS
•»r
1 JIX
2S5C 00
□X
W>2C
5 5C4 00
11 MO CO
ODO
ewoo
fl 900 00
14*00 00
000
»O
*35
2»
0
•« -«o
•3 MO
________ ft]
143XL
~ 0]
«E. ~ jijC.
ti
ccweowfMi
L/K*'1’ AMs CQHiuiTjjMtj Ir»c.
Dale' tft-Oet^s
DET AXLED COST E5TBUTE
tF»aNT WO1"14
niSCRlFl™
uurr putt
IOCAl
UWTFItlCC
R^BGN
CQJfSQWBMF
MK3LR1
■T?*RJME1T
KHD»
DESZWTIOH
EDMWJWThrr
gpBPOHMiT
cCTiFauEjrr
4?. 3X M
^a.w so
2,MG3G‘
4 IKGQg
o
KWXt
u
svmp* irr* -
4JRUW ‘UM»
UMT
rrM sid
.
CTS-W’FTIOW
LOCAL
CMPO»iEMT
■j*mrpra"E
TOftDG*
CQHPOIMWT
total
■a&AinTrr
LOCAL
SQOF'PhEWT
AMOUNT
* da new
coBWjiforr
TOTAL
i~|
PvwMTimntl
'
If
rj’/iH 3WS III Lr-rJ
(H
000
JM
ttt
s
3
0
y
rJTW £hss IV j"W
*
□ EC
£W
sac
a
a
0
LI
TjweQaaS V unoiX
m
□ DO
OW
-X
3
Q
D
inrrmce
MOUNT
LIWT
LCCJU.
TOONS
OtKHmOM
Local
CQMPCJMtMT
FOHBUN
i^MPCMEHT
TOTAL
QUiATHTr
IC*BM
± 3BtM5NLW I
TOTAL
t
Siry# Jriafl
ir
TanwCau in tkHBO
000
DOC
P«
3
0
0
fl
u
TjtNS             V
iP
□ DO
OK
flW
fl
Q
0
3
H
■jwhm                y lint*
IP
ECO
fl 00
OC®
a
0
D
0
UMTPIKE
MKKJBTT
Ljtii^
jf~2"— Tr~~—
UMTT
----------
local
CfflipgMElcT
FtMUGH coneQWFWT
TOTAL
SUANTTf*
LOCAL,
eaaPWiiMT
FMtKA
COMflONBirT
TOT JU
™—■--------------------------------------------------
" ' x ftfi
ojoodo
tGSOCJfl
•Tfi
ijTpaoc
- 1KOX
Mao ok
gyruj;
S  ltt
■ * «»Wltai L~~~ ... ,-—— -
f
--------------------------- —-------------- ,
-—.
»«^A 1
M.JX DO
M.'ttDO
roc KC.TQ
MXE
B3-330
Li
105 <330
r^.OM
»BcmrrioN
COMWiWT
■j.iwoge
AMEMJMT
FC HOCK
nMKiMprr
riMlJK
0
TOTAL
jn.joooe
g
n,xrfl.aw
ujzi.wc
49.MAIW
14,050 W
rf,i»c»o
nrf Appurrvnwr bVcw*! Toni
M,9lT 7N IWU*
f
LratfT »ingj
CflOMJNEML
»a do
joc rc m?
SSQCCK
TO* EG* CQHPONIMT
HOC,
-?x xx co
IC JXgO
TOTAL
' rs.oc
ySEflgO^
r/atfx
quantit*
Jis
CC-WPCWEWT-
looyc.
.^Pg,
3
t jqtoce
a 9C0 ate
TQTAL__
5 _■;« TO
■ ac xo
<i I2f rijc
S.OWJM JJ.zrS.OftD 49 (H 1.750
rI
»I
N
8Power hojse EL 860Elevation in motors
Area in km2
Reservoir Capacity (mem)
baro reservoir
Area-Capacity CurveANNEX 1J hydropower PROJECTS
APPENDIX 2GEBA-A DAM PROJECT
„      __---------- ---------- uiu iUlliLC
rested
^jugh
s te
c
j  tfo  4G report indicates that gorges cut into basement gneisses The area is dominated by Nl-S, NE-SW and E-W faults. From
r |jie
^ nble
flde   and   b'™  fs    no  indication  of  large  areas  of  outcropping  rock,  but  posable  basalt
1
jutcrops are P "®^
aerial  phpt0   1   ®  to
[he   north  of  the  site  in  the  Kombo  area  which  might  proside  a  rockfill
/instrJs' ,reT’ he c jiurn
the  hill  slopes  is  reputedly  suitable  for  impervious  fill  Due  to  the  lack  of tj
ick a* earthfill dam is recommended The nortlbsouth fault near the dam axis to ’the’Li shown on the sketch map must be investigated Sand and gravel is found in the Geba flood plains A diversion tunnel should be easily constructed in basalt with support of shotcrete wire
.
..
.
and  rockbolts.  TThhe-  canals  fofrordriiveivwrsi rwon™ s 11^nadn9d ar2(. liaWrev mlikeftalry  tk. kt„o.7f
be  partly  in  basait  and
'ATfk 1Ar >
pa-Jv  in  hornblende  and  biotite  gneisses  The  powerhouses  are  more  likely  to  be  founded  on gneisses
Project Desgipnon
The  Geba-A  dam  would  be  45  metre  high  and  constructed  of  earthfill  as  noted  above  The spillway would be ungated, 26 metre long, with a design surcharge of 2 metres It would have 2  spillway chute 26 metres wide and 420 metres long, with a stilling basin 28 metres long by 26 metres wide and 8 metres deep Two 4 5-meter diameter diversion tunnels along with a 15 metre  high  cofferdam  would  be  used  for  diversion  One  of  these  would  later  be  provided  with the  outlet  works  for  passing  the  regulated  flows  to  the  power  diversion  downstream  A  layout of the dam and appurtenant works is shown on Figure 2 1
Based on a review of the 1986 aerial photography, rhe dam and reservoir appear to be located
■o virtually unpopulated area With a maximum reservoir area of 66 km', a drawdown at 10
metres and low population density, it is unlikely to present a hazard to human health
This  project, in addition to the dam and reservoir, consists  of two power diversions  The first,
Wh 105 MW of
________ _____ - o«.n
installed capacity, «
Thc canal
i  “iXe
tK ,
develop    275    metres    of    head    with    a    canal    3,500    met        ,u.    -”v'
discharge of ac - '-
of 43 rff, Figure
j
'
penstock and powerhouse The second pow
first and would develop 175 metres of head wrth * NW The power canal would be 6 km longj^ on
an d  powerhouse   locations   Table   2   1  gi^cs c °^sidered
design flow ^aTUr.enr intake
; the
dam and P«
; ^ment
TA MS-ULG Bano-AJiobo River Basin Integrated Dewing -Master Wan 1J Appendices -4WATER RESOURCES
annex ij hydropower pro
1Fc
an installed capacity of 66 MW and will generate 336 6 GWh/yr of firm
36 1 GWh/vr of secondary energy The total construction cost excluding transud?* * estimated as follows
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant Works Diversion and Power Plant No. 1 Diversion and Power Plant No 2
8
S '°n line i$
S38-961.000
$82,163,000
$52x503,000
Total Construction Cost:                                                                  $180,627,000 A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 2 2
T/\MS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master P|an
1J Appendices • 5fE ^J° L R("l S
_______________  ___________ ____ ___ ____ Ta ble 2.1. Geba-A Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
A.NNEX 1JHYDR0poWer PROJECTS
p.aM
Catchment t Area
Mean.'*"1Annual Flow
Pam Lpe
Dani*Hei^'
Crest Loci
formal Max Oper Level
\onruilMin Oper Level
Active Storage
Dead Storage
Reservoir Surface .Area
Spillway Design Hood
Gates
Max    Flood    Level
Low Level Outlet Capacity:
Gates
DIVERSION DAM No.l
Diversion Capacity
Spillway Crest Level
Spillway Weir Dimensions
Intake Gates
Canal  (bon  width  x  depth  x  length) Penstock;
Powerplant
Design Head:
Design Flow
Installed Capacity
Tailwater Level:
DIVERSION DAM No.2
Diversion Capacity .
Spillway Crest Level
Spillway   Weir   Dimensions 
Intake Gates
Canal  (bott  width  x  depth  x  length) Penstock
Powerplant.
Design Head Design Flow Installed Capacity' Tailwater Level
1,086 km2 35 9 m}/s Earthfill
45 m
El 2,175 0
El. 2,170.0
El. 2,160 0
550 mem 315 mem
65.8 km2 270 mVs Ungated
El 2,172.0 48 3 m3/s
1 -2.00 mx2.00m
48 3 m7s
E. 2,120
26 0 m long
3 - 5 00 mx2.50 m high 4 30 m x 4 00 m x 3,500 m long
3 20mdia x700m long
275 m
48 3 m3/s 105 MW E. 1,840
Ta «S-ULG
48.3 m’/s
El. 1.680
26 m long
3 - 5.00mx2.50mhigh
4 30 m x 4 00 m x 6,000 m long 3.20 m dia. x 400 m long
175 m
48.3 m7s 66 MW
El 1.500
b.tSr«d IM-M—
IJ Appendices ■ 6BARO-AKO6O PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Table 1 J-2.2 - Project Cost Estimate Summary CoM LrvM January 1
X
GE BA-A DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 1
Reservoir Max. Level: El 2,170 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 105 MW
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTTON
LOCAL
COMPONENT
foreign
COMPONENT
total
1.
Preliminary
780.428
3.121.710
— j
X
Earth Dam
3.581 309
14 325 234
X
Access Roads
520 000
13ft 17 Qnc e «
• .9Uo,543
r
2 080.000
4.
Diversion Tunnel
— ^•ovu.Drjn
484 100
1.936.400
5.
Spillway
567 442
2,269 768
2 837 5ln
6.
Low Level Outlet
50.000
200 000
250 000
Sufc-rorWA 5,983,278
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
23.933,113
AMOUNT (US$)
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
local
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
total
1.
Preliminary
1,685,280
6.741,120
8 426 400
2.
Access Roads
69 600
278,400
348,000
X
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
1,495,600
5.982.400
7 478.000
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
8.
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8.
Penstock & Manifold
I 1,060,000
4.240.000
5 300,000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
8,610,000
34.440.000
43,050,000
Sub-toWB: 12.920.480
51,681.920             64.602,400
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT (USS)
ITEM NO.
DESCWPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
f.
Preliminary
1.032,750
4,131 000
5.163.750
2.
Switchyard
235.000
940,000
1,175.000
3.
Transmission Line
6 650,000
26 600.000
33.250 00C
Sub-tofiN C         7,917,750 Sutrocw A*e*C-     26.821.508
31,671,000          33.588,750
Physical Cont/ngoocies
Engineering A Admin.
5,364,302
3,218,581
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST                35,404,391
107.286.033
21.t57.207
12.874.324
141.617.S63
134.107.541
26.S21.608
16,092.905
177,021.964DETAILED COST ESTWUTE
(USS)
u^TFRjcr
KWMb
COMROWX?
’OMJW
£jp< r> I
ua Mt
inzin
hacae '
*M2JU
;x* ik
2 >«i tw
x^n:
■TJ*.a ]
|
UNIT
D€SCR»moN
LOCAL
COMRON KNT
UMrr ’»ri
Kmsgn
COWOW DTT
TOTAL
OUAXWV
LOCAL
coaRNOTT
AADVT
kmm
C3»*oworr
TOTAL
■9--------------------------------------------
■W
1000
J.’DOO
One
uxl
gC JOO
.OK 000
2KB XT .
Mn-
17400
69 500
rxc
tnt
8
8
-nfi
-1 *J
0
3I
-------- 51
C]
D® j
•
G
—
UWTMbCt
AMOUNT
UWF
me
oucnmoM
LOCAL
CO0POMENT
COWOWIMT
TOTAL
OUAMTTr
LOCAL
:o9oi«7
FOABCM
-OBMCT'
TOTAL
I—
OrMniM Tuiwwl
41
3rntn*»Tj»» □«$ » Uriel
HI
xoo
KX
fOCX
OX
D
J
9
*.'           j^rva-Tumd CmmPV Line»J
m
34COO
J TC»
iVCX
JtlX
04 "X
' MM 4®
2<®3UU
[U           jxw T.rrei Q»»i V
m
1 100 00
4.4oo a
• sac®
OX
0
»
0
4 OtMnion Twmw
4L«                   *,»M®                 L4SU®
tWTRRKl
AAKXAT
■WRQ
Z? i
u«rr
okkrttiom
LOCAL
CCWOOfT
‘C*DG«
caMFOMfNT
•OTAL
QUAMHTV
LOCAL
ZLMGOMOn
*0W«
TOTAL
*y   w _
,,w
H
f c*-wtai
“t^KrvYj
—
-          ------------------------------
■nJ
an
IM
JU
mo®
E
"u
m
— — — "■
rg    ac SM20
<2® 6C
3?44 80 T
IX LU IM?
4?1 M4
84 *70
®t no
xro
4 W 30
4®|
J»)®4
1.5771*
IMEEX
2.42J 20
I®;® r
U'*x
xj
a? tso
F13»
L»:*6
ex ]
9
o
c» I
0®T
*1
1
IHliri Z3.333.113 HW*BARO-AKOBO PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
GEBA-A DAM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No 1
Reirrvoir Mai. Laval: El 2,170 Power Plant Inst. Capacity: 105 MW
detailed cost estimate
(UM)
Or Lewi JmcMry 1WC
B POWIR PLANT A AWMITlXMr WOftKS
UMT PRICE
UNTT
rm NO
DC SCAR BON
LOCAL
COIBPONINT
roanoN COMPONENT
TOTAL
quanttty
LOCAL
CCNIPONFN-
»ORDQN COMPONENT          •OTM
a
ui»e« atiin
n
•(jr-Om u uhm
m
0X
OX
ooo
9
0
•
■J
TjrNCMsW jrx<
m
ooo
OX
OOC
0
9
c1
■j
Ijn-CAa V Unri
«n
000
OX
OOO
0
0
01
kASO/iMR 1
SWV
•
ANOVWT
LOCAL
COMPONENT
own PRICE
2r
■ 500 00
10 00000
C 000 00
<fl ocooo
QLI an nr T TOTAL
^M0 3C
3d 300 PC
utoo
OOP
quantity ' ’' MO
0
iifi.W
kt PRICE
oocamoN
LOCAL.
C OMPQNTMT
noo
c xjc a?
33 OX X
• J 73 000 X
T »00CX
Tran jrms«ion Sysirm TotWI               rw
Oii Uwl January 1995
GEBA*A DAM
"* jumrnary
Cc ^Mrt3rwi he.
description
LOCAL
COMPONENT
preliminary
750,426
Earth Dam________
3,581 303
Access  Roe  ds
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 2
Reservoir Max. Level: El 2J70 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 66 MW
A . SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
■
_ AMOUNT Iblj,
roRSox
COMPONENT
3 12t 7*0 1 <.325.234
2,080. mc
Diversion Tunnel
520.000
484 tOO
567 442
Low Level Outle£
50.000
1 936 4 DO 2 269766
200,000
total
3.902.13E P906 543
2,600000_ 2.420,500 2,837,210
250,000
Sub lot* A 5,983,278
23-933,113   2Z91M9f
B . summary power plants appurtenant works
ITEM NO.
LOCAL
COMPONENT
AMOUNT |U$8f
FOREIGN
CDMPCNW
total
f.
Preliminary
1.176,165
4,704 660
5.880,825
2.
Access Roads
17 400
69 SOO
87 OCO
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
1.345.700
5,382.800
6.728,500
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
6.
Surge Shaft
0
0
01
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8.
Penstock & Manifold
340.000
1,360 300
1 7W.DOO
9.
Powerhouse & Equip,
6,138.000
24.552.000
30,690.000
Sublet* 9:       9,017,265
36,089.060         45.086.325
C ; SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
amount |US1|
ITEM NO.
description
LOCAL
coMPowerr
FOREIGN
CCWPDNBNT
TOTAL
T.____
Preliminary
927 750
3711,000
4.638,750
z
Switchyard
200.000
000,000
l.flOO.OOfl
jr, _
Transmission Line
5 985,OM
23,        000
29,925.000
description
Summ^C. 7,112,750 subrootf A*fl*c. 22,113,293
26.451.000 35.563.750
86,453.173 110.566,466
Physical Conf/ngencfes
Engineering A Admin.
4,422,659
2,653.595
17.690.635
10,614361
2Z  113.293 13,267,976
YOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 29,189,547
116,758.188       145.947,735BARO-AKO0O PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No 2
DETAILED COST ESTIMATE (USSI
Jwtjiry 109C
A DAM A APPV* TENANT WORKS
UlfT PRICE
own
TOMKO
OCSCWFnON
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
QUANTITY
LOCAL
COMPONENT
AMCXJNT ■
rORDQN
COMPONENT          10TM
4.
Dmru»n Tuw*«l
41
O^rwon Tjtw              III ured
m
20 00
KOO
*00 00
000
C
c
9
4J
□Mfvan I tTTM Um W L**C
m
MO 00
1TRC00
4 txoo
5*500
4A4 100
ISM 40.
24XM6
u
Ot^rMor TirrW Mil V Uf*C
L ■■ T
« 1CC 00
4 40C00
5500 00
ooo
0
CHYDROELECTRIC power WBbioh
Rwrvetr Mix Levtt B 2,1ft Power Plant ln«i Capacity-
detailed cost estimate CUM)
Co* L«Wf -aftWfi 1
TAMs C^itoiuntj, inc DMt:       ?0-On45
LOCAL
ccwhxmt
PD*0SN
COMPOHOFT
•5 00
noc
LOCAL
SeMPON£W?
TQTAj
BEK E^TlDg
LOCAL
COWONIMT
FOR EKM
CCWP-ONE^
Z5 Tpood r.-iaax
MOX
toth
i.‘< MCj»
' roc jp
1 JX poo
a
IABJW
LOCAL
ZOUPONENT
womn
caiiroMEWT
■OCX
2BQOOX
FTWtXEAT
3 2X00
K XOM
■aeoog
JCOPO
am pu rr
JgC J%3_
•or&ao
i’w we’
J
LOCAL
gWwohimt
s lift XB
•<M3«Q
^PUHwml
r
J.PIT.M5
xMg?iyr
UHgjrpjIEl
MJREK"
total
1
1
LLJMPDwtwT
TO FA-
.H ?i r <jX
LJUI/W
15M
CgHiFOM:MT_
*1X
F!
LX PX
'
*   oanwc
2-300X00
JCT.CTJOQC
jjXJtC JO
Z3MB3K
a >x joo
Lj OX ITp
MflO0C>XGEBA A-G DAM
LAYOUTT 50,000
GEBA DIVERSION 1
PLANArea in km2
GEBA-A RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity CurveWATER RESOURCES
APPENDIX 3BIR
BTR-
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOW ER PROj^ A DAM PROJECT
Site Geologs
The  dam  site  is  on 
the  Birbir  river,  about
65  km
upstream  of  its  confluence
with 
th 
70   km   ENE   from
Dembidolo   ARDCO
-GEOSE
RV   produced   a   sketch 
geolog
ical6     ’'baail<i
on   aerial   photo   interpretation   which   covers   a   large   area   The   geological   succession 
is.    Alluvium    over    younger    Mekonnen    Basalt,    over    Mekonnen    Basalt,    over    Pre'r^6*** basement   rocks   According   to   the   1:250.000   geological   map   the   area   is   in   granite   q8”’^140 exposed  in  the  river  bed  and  forms  the  foundation  of  the  dam  site  Five  test  pits  were  ^nile   ® at  the  dam  site  which  reached  to  a  depth  of  4  metres  The  dam  site  itself  is  on  b  °Ca'e<1 biotite   gneiss   overlain   by   residual   clay   and   fluvial   fine   sand   The   site   is   covered   b"! photographs,   strip   6,   photos   1063   and   1064   The   area   has   very   gentle   relief   Rock exposed  in  large  areas  anywhere  near  the  damsite,  but  a  lighter  color  tone  area  to  the^ probably  indicates  Basalt  near  the  surface  and  it  may  be  possible  to  develop  a  quarry 
area  If  later  drilling  proves  granite  at  a  fairly  shallow  depth,  this  also  might  provide  rockfil
as the granite is likely  to  be strong  and  competent Further investigation  is required  before deciding  whether a rockfill or an  earthfill dam is to  be preferred  However on  present evidence
it seems likely  that an  earthfill dam would  be better ARDCO-GEOSERV report that impervious fill is to be found on hill slopes near the dam site and granite and basalt can be used for rock  fill,  riprap  and  concrete aggregates No  deposits of natural sand  and  gravel were found  in  the vicinity  of the dam site A diversion  tunnel can  be constructed  in  the granite and biotite gneiss with  support of shotcrete,  wire mesh  and  rockbolts If the biotite content is high, heavy support may be required
Project Description
The Birbir-A dam would  be 56  metres high  and,  as noted  above,  would  be constructed  of earthfill The spillway  would  be ungated.  30  metres long,  with  a design  surcharge of 3  metres and  a capacity  of 340  m’/s for passing  the predicted  1,000-year flood  It would  be constructed in  a coll,  some distance from the dam and  have a chute 100  metres long  ending  in  a stilling basin  28  metres long,  30  metres wide and  8  metres deep  Two  5-meter diameter diversion tunnels would  be used  during  construction  One of them would  be later provided  with  gates for releasing the regulated flows to the downstream diversions
The dam and reservoir are located in a thinly populated area, but even with a maximum surface area of 66 km2 and a drawdown of 20 metres, it does not appear to expose large area of inundated Aid at minimum pool level This is due to the relatively steep slopes of the valley at this site
rhe diversion  1  is located  14  km downstream of the dam and  would  develop  95  MU'  with  135 metres of head at the end of a 4,000 metre long canal The canal would have a design capacity cf 89  m /s.  1  he site ol the Birbii-R dam is located  approximately  41  km downstream and  could  be developed  for an  additional 360  MW,  benefiting  from the regulation  provided  by  the upstream Birbir-A dam Layout drawings of the Birbir-A dam and  the power diversion  are presented  in Figures 3 1 and 3 2 Further particulars of the project are given in Table 3 .1
An area-capacity curve of the reserv oir is presented on Figure 3.3
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development 1J Appendices - 7
Masi* r------------------------------
diversion with an installed capacity of 95 MW is Am*. 
'------
Th? P '* and 316GWTi>t of secondary enercv Th/. 
e
10gencntei r,un . 
lineis estimated as follows:                 -
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant W'oricS Diversion and Power Plant
7‘otaJ Construction Cost:
^detailed cost estimate is presented on Table3 2
^5,049.QOO
SZJSifiop SI  30,417,000
r AMs^j7r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
aro-Aknbo River
Basin Jpcegriied Dcvdopmcni Mosier Piaui
1J Appendices * 8WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROpq^
Table 3.1. Birbir-A Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
1. DAM
Catchment .Area
Mean Annual Flow
Dam Type
Dam Height
Crest Level
Normal Max Oper Level:
Normal Min Oper Level: Active Storage
Dead Storage
Reservoir Surface Area Spillway Design Flood:
Gates
Max Flood Level Low Level Outlet Capacity 
Gates
2. DIVERSION DAM No.l
Diversion Capacity:
Spillway Crest Level Spillway Weir Dimensions Intake Gates:
Canal (bott width x depth x Penstock
Powerplant
Design Head Design Flow Installed Capacity Tail water Level
3.579 km2 57 9 m3/s Earthfill
56 m
EL 1,436.0
El. 1,430.0
El. 1.410.0
827 mcm 273 mcm
65.7 km2 340 m’/s
Ungated
El. 1,433.0 89 0 m3/s
1 - 2 00mx2.00m
89 0 m3/s
El 1,360
30.0 m long
3 - 5.00 mx 5 00mhigh 5.00 m x 5.00 m x 4,000 m long
4.50 m dta x 400 m long
135 m
89.0 m3/s 95 MW El. 1,220
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Developtnen’ 1J Appendices - 9
Master P>an,3D|C
Uvt(: JWuiry
'
TAM$ Conxuftma. Inc D *'* ItHJn-M
BIRBIR-A OAM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER Diversion j
Reservoir Max. Level; a 1.430 Power Plant Iml Capacity: 9$ mw
summary DAM & appurtenant works
AMOUNT (UM)
DESCRJPnON
LOCAL
component
WR£kai
compchewt
total
■preliminary
915.486
3 661.943
4 577 429
■Earth Dam
4.434,543
17.736172
., 22.172.715
[Access Roads
204.430
417.600
1.022.000
Di version Tunnel
874.000
3.256 000
4 070.000
^Spillway
552.896
2.210,762
2.763,478
Low Level Outlet
97.600
390.400
488.000
SM-aaiH: 7,018.714
B SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
28.074897       35.093,811
AMOUNT US$|
new ho.
DESCRirmoN
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FCMSGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
1.722.795
6 891.180
8.613.975
2.
Access Roads
243.600
974.400
1.218,000
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
1.145,700
4 562.800
5.728,500
5.
[Power Tunnel
0
0
0
e.
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0i
8
Penstock & Manifold
406.000
1.624,000
2,030.000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
9,690.000
38.760.000
48.450.000
Sunor-wa 13.2OB.O95                52.S32JW         W.M0^75
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT (US$1
ITEM NO.
description
LOCAL
compokot
FQWGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
T.
Preliminary
537.435
2.149.740
2.687.175
z.
Switchyard
248 400
993.600
1.242 000_
[3?
Transmission Line
3.334,500
13.3M,<M0
16,57X500
Physical Contingencies
Engineering A Admin.
Sut^afG, 4.120435
24347,154
4,849.431
2,921,859
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 32,136,244
16,481.340
97388,617
1i.4T7.123
11,688,634
118.552,375
20,601.676
121.735,772
14347,154
14,608,293
160.W14**BARO-AKOBO PROJECT
BIRBIR-A DAM
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No.1
Reservoir Max. Level; El 1.430
Power Plant Inst. Capacity: >5 MW
DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
(USS)
GMtlevW January 1Pf)€
B . POWER PLANT A APPURTENANT WORKS
UNTTPIUCC
ABOUN’
UKT
mMMo
DE5CWPTTON
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOR DON
COMPONENT
TOTAL
QUAMTTTV
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOPOCN
coppomr •WA 1
A
Surge Sh<ft
TumeiCMst IF Une<3
Hl
000
coc
000
0
0
t
at
L
Tixnel CM4S        Une<J
m
ex
D.DC
000
0
0
3
•>
•J
luma CMs* V, Un*<
m
000
0 00
000
0
0
0i
LAinrt/r»/r • 
0
i
it rt iII
DCSCWnON
COMPONENT
iW*
Power Plant and Appurtenant Worts Total
Pfl«tTW>*Q
Swrtc hy rd
Transmission Line
Transmtssion System Total
LOCAL
COMPONENT
_________15 00
24S.400 00
.4 TOO 00
UN CT PRM2E
FQREBN COMPONENT
15
f 242 000<?-.
123 509ConiulLBRi, tav 0*8- 10-Oer-K
OCT AUD COST EITSUTF
L*ti MJ
> :■*: i-
Hfl U±T* M4W1*
* 'A3 54.1
rzm
am we
M4fT5 TVMfFl UJfUM
=Escmr™*
U*TP«t
FWflG#
CO«IFCW3fT
amxt
—
VWT
T!»W
PCMKFDOM
LOCAL
cdwwimt
LOOM.
TOTAL
ouAMTTrr
TOTAL
4
4l
£F.«ri-ai Tjry^CtoH, U
ffl
aa oc
war
lUC.DC
■J®
Q
o_
JJ
>h*j T rrw Cana V ’
m
1 icq 00
4 40C j£
4 JDS IF
r«®
114 MC
lZ*Xn
itnaoo
iJrw^r. *rrw- CJm V Ur«ti
m
1 100 00
14W30
iSMBT
3 pfl
a
a
■a
.;
***4 QMnJw Tuniwl
MAM
J/5M.W0
.JW? PfcCE
ABOUWT
□uurnn
IJ20W
f FjOSfl
1JOC Jfl
10 fiZiJJO
fi
a!
jLgCLWt
WT Pgici
fCAKN
T20QQX
fi ace®
z.tffljl* HOrtltT 31«l*u
^PPti^nanr nrOfteBLRBIR AG DAM
LAYOUTElevation in meters
Area in km2
1440
1430
1420
1410
1400
1390
■i■■iI
800 1200 Reservoir Capacity (mcm)
1600
Legend
Initial
After Sedimentation
birbir-a RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity Cu^eCKCES
ANNEX u hydropower projects
APPENDIX 4 KASHU DAM PROJECT
, ,Geg^' _;
4
IP  is on the Kashu River (a tributary of the Kilu Riveil « U-, _
r '  I2
km  SSE ,he Akobo  1 is
n     °f
Tefm ,he 125O'WO
>" a" area °f “■             ™ Can‘C “d pyrKlB,,« Tht ieolojcal slBchwp
"L scale ah”"5 Swamp day and Allu™ra OVB|>™« Residl
“  elay. The area is
l
jt 1'^’ _aeria] photos. Strip 42, photos 39 ■ 1 and 3972 The Kashu reservoir is an ideal
; °ve  a °rtservoh and the dam site is good Topographs surrounding the reservoir bowl is
x?e  i'nd eroded There is no indication of large rock outcrops on the acnal photographs
| day on the hill slopes will probably provide impervious fill, and the most suitable dam
R  f this site is earthfill Sand and gravel may occur in the Kashu flood plain upstream of
j°\i(e It is clear on the aerial photos that alluvium occurs along the river upstream of
tb= X site with swamp clay in the flat areas and colluvial deposits on the lower hill slopes
^ll vium may also provide a fill material. A diversion tunnel can probably be constructed in 
•° volcanic flows and pyroclastics but considerable support of shotcrete, wire mesh and 
rtkbolis is likely to be necessary and steel arches may locally be required 
tiiiectDescnpilon
The Kashu dam would be 30 metres high and constructed of earthfill. The spillway would be cngited, 25 metres long, separated from the dam by a rock knob on the right abutment, A Htijle diversion tunnel and cofferdam would be used during construction. This tunnel would bier be convened to a low level outlet for release of the regulated flows
Based on the review of the 1986 aerial surveys, the surrounding area is virtually unpopulated. However,  the reservoir is presently  a swamp  which  could  be of ecological value in  terms w’Jdlifie and aquatic resources The proposed reservoir would flood this area with probably lome loss to the natural ecosystem
The Kashu power diversion is located 12 km downstream of the dam and would consist of an concrete gravity overflow,' weir and a typical canal intake structure as shown an Figure 8. 
canal is 12,000 metres long with a discharge capacity of 14.4 m /s and includes a syphon (ar J for a stream crossing 900 metres long .Al the end of the canal, a penstock 1,200 metres long 
h'>cutt0 p16 POv'crh°use, developing 530 metres of head for a generating capacity of 60 MV* A
3
rainchLr^
^ am's shown on Figure 4 1 and of the power diversion on Figure 4.2 The
ac teristics of the project are given in Table 4.1
opacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 4.3, 
Tierj
ftin XT diversion Wh an installed capacity of 60 MW, is expected to generate 298.5 GWhyr of 5i -5GWvt of secondary energy. The total construction cost excluding 
luie ’  estimated as follows:
s
Regulating Dam and .Appurtenant Works Diversion and Power Plant.
Total Construction Cost:
cost estimate is presented on Table 4.2
T *MS-ULG
517.347.000
S63J43JO0
S80.790.000
1J Appendices - WBARO-AKOBO PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Table 1 J-4.2 - Project Cost Estimate Summary
Cost Level January 1996
KASHU DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 1
Reservoir Max. Level: El 1,565 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 60 MW
T *MS
c
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
AMOUNT (USS)
foreign
COMPONENT
total
1.
Preliminary
343,181
1.372,724
2.
Earth Dam
870.269
V1 71*5I Joac3"05
Access Roads
Diversion Tunnel
3 481 077
.
4 3A1 141
3.
267.000
1 068 000
4.
224 480
1.335 Don
5,
Spillway
897 920
835 524
1 122 40o
3.342 094
6.
Low Level Outlet
.
4 177
90 600
362 400
"453,000"
Sub-wowA. 2,631.054
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
10,524,215          13,155,219
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
AMOUNT (USS)
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
total
1.
Preliminary
1.253 828
5.015,310
6.269.138
2.
Access Roads
0
0
0
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
1.451.850
5.807,400
7.259.250
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
6
6.
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8.
Penstock & Manifold
2,887.000
11.548.000
14.435.000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
4.020.000
16 080.000
20.100.000 I
SutpfMB: 9,612,678
38,450,710          48,063,388
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT (USS)
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
7.
Preliminary
139.650
558.600
698 250
2
,
3.
Switchyard
190.000
760.000
950.000
Transmission Line
741.000
2,964.000
3.705,000
Sub-toMC:       1,070,650 Sub-tout a*b*c. 13,314,381
Physical Contingencies
Engineering A Admin.
2,662,876
1,597.726
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 17,574,983
4,282.600
53,257,525
10.651,505
6,3M.9O3
70.299.934
5.353.250
66,571.907
13,314.381
7,988,679
87,874,917HYOROeLECfftM: POWER DSVER5FON No 1
Reservoir Mil. Level B 1 5«5
TAW 5 "oftskrilinti Wit.
Du*. IB^Gn-K
Power In fl. CipKrv: W W
DETAILED COST ESTATE
(TO)
CnfllfMf jbWi 13W
2
MSW
UMT
TQ.MO
DBiCMjenoM
LOCAL
tC*H*9»<EKT
IWTPRK1 FOftfi&M
cmpwh
TOTAL.
<ywrrTTv
LOCA
:on«rwwr
ukxt
FOHKM
COBKXWT
TOTAL
icLM*
----- -----------
Hahj
*»
R DCC
HOM
*?»C
21541
•K5K
’XCW
'U
H
wRiad
PT*
17 *X
ttMQ
■f J0P
SOD
■>' 3t
m an
4SEXX
*U
jjrr ’.rasing
Ma
Q
L                L--------
201
e
D4
- »'*• ’**> *‘~
lOT WKC
wcurr
uw
rrauci
DE SCftfP TM*
LOCAL
tOi«*<WT
FOAEKN
CDiiFONEMT
TOTU
GHJAMTT
lOCJW. T*  iOBFMtH-
LOWCh&T
TOTAL
4
CWr*ralm> Ty^nei
—
41
■ Lr»*C
ra
3&cc
■fiCC
■»05
70
D
5
a
>«nwnT^r*ChAAfV r»ed
IWXtf, •  Qmj j
v wn<(
t
W.0C
1»«
J2K30
?M JC                 >m -aj
*Jj L*.
■bm
LJ
ffl
1 MX
I 4H<E
-aoEJO
1*00                 M EH
Z1JIC
Hi kh
IuMwJich 4 Crwertjm Tunnrt
*r-« r,a*
^**3.
XSJI.SM tA*4W* ii.rSS.MJfiARCXAKOBO PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
HYDROELECTRIC POWER D4VERSION No.1
DETAJ LEO COST ESTIMATE
(U«$)
Cml L«vw Jaruer. W
item no.
UWT
DESCRIPTION
t.
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOR BON
COMPONENT
TOTAL
|Rlvr Cressing
LOCAL
COMPONENT
total
FT EM HQ,
Wake SPucArr
Power Cane
ATtert^y
SAjR-oocN/n
5
LOCAL
COMPONENT
11 WO 00
COMPONENT
11 1440 000
l<r«‘
•JMM
UNTT
ITEM NO
B
LOCAL
COMPONENT
UNO PRICE
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
ARomr
DESCRIP DON
TOTAL
Power Tunnel
QUANTITY
LOCAL
COMPONENT
hjrbgr
coMPr—n
_WTA 1
6.1
Tunner (Jess ID. Uned
n»
m
000
ooo
OOC
000
8J
000
ooo
=d
Turd CMu V Une<1
0
0
0
0
m
000
000
ooo
0
0
c
-- ------- .
Sub-totaf /lent 5 Power Tun/m/
a
•«
UNIT PRICE
AMOUNT
UNTT
ITEM NO
DESCRPnON
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
QtlANTTTY
LOCAL
LOMFONENT
FOREIGN
COM FC KMT UTA
a
Surge Shafi
• t
Timci Qatt III Lme^J
m
000
0.00
ooo
0
0
02
Tix-oei Class IV Lined
m
0 00
ooo
ooo
0
0
AJ
Turmd Class V Uncd
m
000
0.00
ooo
0
a
0•
COMMENT
UNIT PRICE
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
COMKXXT
COM*CHc?C
Prmuf Shafi
SnaH Class III urec Shaft CJaM IV. Lined Shafi Qm> V Uned
UNTT PRICE.
QUANTITY
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
TOTAL
PowthOiiU A Equipment
ice £jncavalar.
4.MO.9M
JJ.^
jM***
Powr Plant and Appurtenant Work* Total
C TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
jWT PRICE
FOR DG N
COMPONENT
1500
rsoooooo
MB 400 00
total
QUANTTTV
123 30000
J
PrUntmary
Switch
TrahemJeslon L»n* Transm/ssjon System Total
LOCAL
COMPONENT
15 DO
IMO 000 00
24 TOO 00KASHU DAM
LAYOUT
■**» Ma Fira
C*ta*faMr l*f«#->■! If Mil'*'!
HpLT+ A*
A4»Diversion Dam
and Intake
EL 1460
Penstock
Power house
EL 920
KASHU DIVERSION
PLANArea in km2
1570
1560
1550
1540
KASHU RESERVOIR
Area-Capacity Curve Figure 1J-4.3WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYPROPOWERpRnrKr^ APPENDIX 5 GUMERO DAM PROJECT
Site Geology
The Gumero damsite is on the Gumero River 35 km upstream of the junction L and 28 km northwest of Gore The dam site is shown on the geoloacal X
1 60,000 scale and is on Mekonnen Basalt overlying hornblende and biotite “ map al I 250,000 geological map and the published Gore sheet only gneisses are shov^*  °
5   n the
The site is covered by aerial photos, strip 14, photos 1584 and 1585 The areah 
relief and the valley sides are forested at the dam site The uplands in the vicininT fmodera,e site are cultivated and have rounded slopes No large areas of rock are seen i J"
the dam site, but approximately 6 km north northwest of the dam site at Gu^Ki''* near basement gneisses with distinct foliation striations outcrop and a rockfill quanv h ' ’°Untai11- easy to develop. The gentle slopes outside the steep valley rim reputediv Sve^u** residual clay for imperious fill. Basalts may also be available for a rockfiU quarrv N ' and gravel deposits occur in the area. A rockfill dam is recommended for this
diversion tunnel should be easily constructed in either basalts or gneisses with <□ A shotcrete, wire mesh and rockbolts
ppon 0,~
Project Description
Gumero  dam would  be 23  metres high  and  would  probably  be constructed  of rockfill With  the proposed  quarry  site located  6  km away,  the type of fill material would  have be re-evaluated  at the feasibility  stage The spillway  would  be 15  metres long,  ungated,  and  separated  from the dam,  with  a chute 60  metres long  and  a stilling  basin  20  metres long  by  15  metres wide and  8 metres deep  A single diversion  tunnel and  cofferdam would  be used  for river diversion  during construction  The tunnel would  be subsequently  converted  to  a low level outlet for releasing power flows.
The reservoir is in a flood plain 10 to 20 metres below a sparsely populated area with considerable agricultural development There appears to be no agricultural development of the flood plain area a! the time of the 1986 aerial surveys It has been proposed that a storage dam be constructed upstream to develop the flood plain for irrigation The Gumero power project would flood this area permanently and prevent any irrigation development Under maximum drawdown conditions the
exposed area does not appear to be excessive
The   Gumero   dam   could   release   water   for   hydroelectric   power
generation 
at
three
'ocaboru   The
first diversion located 8 km downstream of the dam, would have a canal 2, 
K  The
capacity of 13 m /s to develop a head of 120 metres, for an installed 
3
° "      f]8C
heado
second, 4 km farther downstream has a canal 6,000 metres long and wo 
o
f 205 meres
metres for a capacity of 18 MW The third, a further 13 km downstream, 
pfinap^
at the end of a 6,000 metres long canal with a generating capacity o  f dam proj^
o
characteristics of the dam and power plants are shown on Table 5.1. n* ay is shown on Figure 5.1 and of the power diversions on Figures 5 2, 5.
.An area-capacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 5.5.
61  2  GVW  .
The    first    diversion    with    an    installed    capacity    of    12    MV/,    is    expected    t0      •flstaUed 
cap# ^' 
3
firm energy and 4 8 GWh/yr of secondary energy The second 
18 MW and will generate 918 GWh/yr of firm energy and 7 2 G yr
third diversion has an installed capacity of 20 MW and will generate -
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development M»sterP
o ndary energy
o f firm eneri-
-
1J Appendices - 12annex u hydropower projects
yhe   total  construction  cost  excluding  transmission  line  is 
rf °’ etsy-
. „ dot a^Appunerant Works
fteP>lannS^  o««Pta'
i?
No ';
$20^9,000
514,50,000
518,582,000
power Ptart No
$30,912.000'
$84,946,000
del3iled cost
es
u ,aiefeP'eWn'edOnTlb'e5’
n
I
1WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PRo^
Table 5.1. Gumero Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
1.         DAM
Catchment Area Mean Annual Flow: Dam Type
Dam Height:
Crest Level
Normal Max.  Oper
Normal Min  Oper
Level
Level;
Active Storage
Dead Storage:
Reservoir Surface .Area
Spillway Design Flood:
Gates:
Max Flood Level. 
Low Level Outlet Capacity:
Gates
443 km2
8 70 m’/s Rockfill
33 m
El 1,613  0 El 1,608  5 El. 1,600.0
160 mcm 140 mcm
30.9 km2 60 m3/s
Ungated 
El. 1,610 12 8 m3/s
1 - 0 80 mx 0 80 m
2. 
DIVERSION DAM No.l
Diversion Capacity Spillway Crest Level
12.8      m*/s
Spillway Wetr Dimensions
Intake Gates:
Canal  (bott  width  x  depth  x Penstock
Powerplant
Design Head
Design Flow:
Installed Capacity 
Tailwater Level;
3.            DIVERSION DAM No.2
Diversion Capacity
Spillway Crest Level
Spillway Weir Dimensions
Intake Gates
Canal  (bott  width  x  depth  x  length)
Penstock:
Powerplant:
Design Head Design Flow Installed Capacity Tailwater Level:
El 1,465
15 0 m long
2 - 5 00 m x 2.50 m high 2 60 m x 2.50 m x 2,600 m long 
2.00 m dia x 400 m long
120 m
12.8      m3/s
12 MW
El 1,340
12.8      m3/s
El. 1.305
15m long
2 - 5.00 m x 2.50 m high 2 60 m x 2 50 m x 6,000 m long
2 00 m dia x 400 m long
180 m
12.8      m3/s 18 MW El. 1,120
TAMS-ULG         Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master 1J Appendices - 14sOvr2!—— 
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
—     —
TJ ible5 t °U
VERS‘0N
tncr0 hydroelectric Project Characteristics (Com.)
pAM No.3
p)
Diversion Capacity:
Spillway Crest Lev el:
Spillway Weir Dimensions:
Intake Gates
Canal (bott width x depth x length) Penstock
Powerplant
Design Head
Design Flow-
Installed Capacity
lailwater Level:
12.8 m3/s
E. 1.010
15 m long
2 - 5 00 m x 2.50 m high 2 60 mx2 50mx6,000mlong
2 00mdii x 400 cn long
205 m
12.8 mVs 20 MW El. 800
Inlegnted Dneiopmeiit Masier Plan
1 A MS~U LG Baro-Akobo Riwr Basin
Appendices -15BAKO A KOBO PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Table 1J-5.2 - Project Cost Estimate
Cost L»*» January
GUMERO DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 1
Reservoir Max. Level: El 1.60B 5 Power Plant Inst Capacity 12 MW
A • SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
rreMNO.
1.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
amount tusi]
foreign
COMPONENT
total
Preliminary
2.
Rockfill Dam
2 142.918
1 655.549
8,571 672
________ 2.069,437~
3.
Access Roads
80,000
320.000
4.
Diversion Tunnel
384 000
1 536 000
5.
Spillway
109 091
1 920 000
436 363
6
Low Level Outlet
54^ AR4
43240
172.960
216,200
Sub-total A: 3.173,136
APPURTENANT WORKS
12.692.544
19.865.880
Sub-total B:
2.196.743
8.794,970
10,993,713
C ; SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
AMOUNT (USS]
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1
Preliminary
60 726
242 904
303.630
2
Switchyard
110 000
440 000
3.
Transmission Line
294 840
1.179 360
1 474.200
Sub-total C:
Sub-total A+B+C:
Physical Contingencies
Engineering & Administration TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
465.566
5,837,445
1,167,489
700.493
7,705,427
1.662,254
23.349.778
4.669.956
2.801.973
30.821.707
550 000.
2.327.830
29.187.223
5,837.445
3.502.487
38,527,134r uircn U1VtH5IONNa. 1 Rn*wt «*■. Lml. B !,*ntA
Frrww *lm| M. CjpuWjf 11 Mw 0TTMLID COTT ermilTE
f lWl
Jd im -*>>n lUH
■M-
ITr\
TotalCoi? Lr*e Jinu*r> •
GUMERO DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 2
Reservoir M<i. Level: El 1.we 5 Power Plant Inti Capacity 18 MW
0AM * APPURTENANT WORKS
A . SUMMAS
local
oescmPTto*
CONPONEMT
Preliminary
2 069 437
RockfiH Dam_____
6.571672
320,000
10 714 590
Access      Ro»d»—
Diversion Tunnel
40CQOO
" 536 Q0Q
1 92CXC
Spillway__________
<36 363
545 454
Low Leve£Outlet
43 240
:72.960
216-200
Sub-total A;
3.173,139
12992544
ISiMSlMO
B SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WOWS
Sub-total B
2,690,363
10,721.460             13,401.913
C SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
amount -JM]
rruiNo
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
coMPOierr
FOR DON
CDMKWNT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
89 907
3S9 62B
449 535
2
Switchyard
115000
460,000
575.000
3.
Transmission Line
484 380
1937.520
2 421.900
Sub-total C. Sub-total A*6*C;
U9.267
2757,148               3,449.435
9,542,796              26,171,142
P^ysrca/ Cont/ngenc/ss
&i& *aring < Admintatnbon
n
1.309,557
785,134
5234.228
3140,537
32,713,929
9,5427"
3,925871
total construction COST           8.636,477          34545,908        43,192,384BARO-AKOBO PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
GUMERO DAM
HYOROELECTRJC POWER DIVERSION No 2
»■■■. L«V»* B i
FwNfPWwiMt Ca«i«««r
M-TAAtD COTT ESTWATVHTUMWCLEVi WL. rWfcH
J~r
rw— rm *t* eWWPr ,IHM
_
” ’-*J
wtwed Borr errmn
VBJ
C«i LI— -mmBARO-AKOBO PROJECT
integrated MASTER PLAN
Tabic 1 J-6.4 - Project Cost Estimate
CoM Le*»l January 10Q*>
GUMERO DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 3
Reservoir Max Level; El 1.608.5
Power Plent Inst. Capacity: 20 MW
A SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT US1]
"------------------
item no
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
foreign
COMPONENT
total
1.
Preliminary
413.887
1 655 549
z
Roc kill I Dam
2 069 437
2 142.918
8 571 672
3.
Access Roads
1D 71 A Enn
80.000
320 000
4Pm nrw*i
4,
Diversion Tunnel
384 000
1 536 000
5.
Spillway
1 9?0 000
109.091
436 363
/Ex
6.
Low Level Outlet
43.240
172 960
21fi 200
Sub total A:
3,173,136
12,$92,544
15.B65.6BO
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (UM)                                    —
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
610 643
2.442 570
3 053.213
2.
Access Roads
310.000
1 240 000
1 550 000
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
1,568.950
6.275 800
7.844 750
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
6.
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8
Penstock & Manifold
408.000
1.632 000
2 040 000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
1 784 000
7.136 000
8920 000
Sub-total B
4.681.593
18,726,370
23,407.963
C . SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
amount (US1)
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
1
Preliminary
150.678^
602 712
2
Switchyard
120,000
3.
Transmission Line
884,520
3,538 080
Sub-total C:
Sub-total A*a*C
Physical Contingencies
Engineering & Administration
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
1,155.190
9,009,927
1,801.985
1,081,191
11,893,103
480 000
4,620.792 36,039.706
7,207,941 4.324.765
47.572,412
TOTAL
753 390 ~ 500 000J
4,422 6t»]
5,775.990
45,049.633
9,009.927
5.405.956
59,465,515Iu
***•""* *■- *-*•* e 1.B4U Fww rtate*
XTM.EP CQIT UTMTV
W)
Emk*« -■■»*-. im
*•*■
IjniM
,iMi’u“BARO-AKOBO PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
GUMERO DAM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No 3
Rmwvmt M«_ Lw«< n 1 M| $
ruw                c rty >» (*v.
DT-TAJLf D COST UT««ATt
IUMJJ
cs<u*»              >m
■ roM<M ri j*n »,GUMERO DIVERSION 3 PLAN
-4---------- --
frffiri i*
J-5-3Elevation in meters
Area in km2^nhng to the aenal photographs  (strip 9, photos  917.918,919) rock  is  exposed at a high fatten (Bene Mountain) to the north of the dam site in several areas  There are many ^ions  with four main trends  near the dam site and a fault or major Imeation controls  the intr at the dam site. Rock  appears  to be near the surface upstream of the dam site on the jcrth side It should be relatively  easy  to find a quarry  site for rockfill A spillway  and runnel
would  be  preferable  in  the  granite  Impervious  fill  will  probably  be  available  as  residual ir,on  the  plateau  areas  Tunnelling  conditions  to  the  south  of  the  site  for  the  beadrace umel  should  be  good  with  support  of  shotcrete,  wire  mesh  and  rockbolts  Excavation  should bt  possible  by  either  drill  and  blast  or  TBM  A  rockfill  dam  is  recommended  for  this  site  The fouidation is not considered to be good enough for a concrete dam
•Lroiect Description
Th dam, as proposed in the Selkhozpromexport, would be 190 metres high and as suggested icove would be a rockfill dam The spillway would have three 6 00 metre by 4 00 metre high Ptts, a chute 22 metres wide and 655 metres long with a stilling basin 48 metres long ard 14
be  •wed  to  W°  7'2°’meter   diameter  diversion  tunnels  and  a  15  metre  high  cofferdam  would
***•— ‘
_J--------- IJ
J| -med ihrou0^0*
fl °WS dunng construction. At this project power flows are
develonj     f 7 ^5'meter diameter concrete lined tunnel, 6,700 metres long to a power
'°ukj  be  nr   metres  of  head  A  low  level  outlet  tunnel,  with  2  gates  1  83  m  by  3  66  m escharto flush sediment from the power tunnel intake This runnel would
> c into the spillway stilling basin
Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated
1J Appendices -16WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant Works Power Plant
Total Construction Cost:
A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 6.2.
5540,553,000
£190j47£0p
5930.900,000
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan
1J Appendices - 17R< ES-------------------------------------^^o
PnwtRpito
T«bk 6.1. Birbir-R Hydroelectric Proien cl
J  ‘ Ctun»«*ri t
1  ics
Caid«JKnt Area
vlean Annual Flow
DamT^'pe
Dam Height
Crest Level
Sonual   Max   Oper   Level x(0rnial Oper Level:
Active Storage
Dead Storage
Reservoir Surface .Area Spillway Design flood.
Gales:
Max Flood Level Low Level Outlet Capacity
Gates
6.840 W
105 9
Rockfi|| 190m
El. 1,163 El- L158 El. 1.056 2.490 mem
ISOmcm
.57.5 km2 726 m7s
3-60Cmx4 00tnliigh
EL 1,160
360 m3/s
2- 1 83 mx3 66mhigh
POWER PLANT
intake Gates P°w'er Tunnel Penstock.
s,J nge Shaft
^erplant
design Head
i-^sign Flow
£««aUed Capacity
^•ater Level.'
2*3.60(nx725m high
7 25 m dia. x 6,700 m long
2 - 4 10 m dii x 700 m long
7.25 m dia x 154 m high
341 m
175 m’/s
465 MW
El 766
r ‘Uls-CL7^'—-___________ —_________ ____-______ ————-
Bar^Akotn> River Basin luttpated Dc'clepmcnt Mister Plan 1J Appendices -18BARO-AKOBO PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Lev»l January 1996
Table 1 J-6.2 - Project Cost Estimate
BIRBIR-R DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER SCHEME
Reservoir Max. Level. El 1.158 Power Plant Inst. Capacity; 465 MW
“Mi
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (USD                               '------------------------ 1
ITEM NO.
1.
DESCRIPTION
[Preliminary
LOCAL
COMPONENT 10 683 444
foreign
COMPONENT
TOTAL           |
2-                          Rockfill Dam 3.                          Access Roads
42 733 775
58 327 657
762 400
4.
,
233 310 628 3 049,600
Diversion Tunnel
291 638 286^ 3 R19 nm
5.240 000
20 960.000
5.
Spillway
26 200 00Q
3 639 701
14 558 805
8.
.Low Level Outlet
1           1”8 IGA Cj-ic;  I
3.253.200 I               13,012.800
1             16 266.000 I
Sub-total A 81,906.402
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
327.e25.eoe                  409.532,010
Sub-total B
59,143,350               236,573.400
295.7ie.750
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
ITEM NO
1.
DESCRIPTION
Preliminary
LOCAL
COMPONENT
3 744 375
AmUUNl
FOREIGN COMPONENT
14.977.500l
TOTAL
18 721 875
2 312.500
2.
13.________ ____
Switchyard
Transmission Line____________
Sub-total C. Sub-total A+B+C:
Physical Contingencies
Engineering & Administration
total construction cost
462.500 24 500 000
28.706.875 189,758.627
33,951,325
20.370,795
224,078.748
98,000.000
114,827,500
679.026,506
135.805.302 31,483.181
896,314,991
122.500 000 _
143,534.3^5
848,783.135
169,756.627
101.653.976
1,120.393.739'«MM|
M
WW
IEMM.
LM<
W
—
»   *T7  1  ->•• 
------------
•
»z
»,
- — *
■
I**"
■<*««
•■
u
•
—2*5.
US-
—
12-
«
w
• M
im
■■
1
1
• -
■
****** r<M*fLWT COTT
rrwMo
««------------
-
LOCAL
---------------------------- -
■HrtM.
LOCAL
—r~
TWU4
4.
til
TlMW CM«a ■ UM4
m
■ M
•«
IM
0
■
I
u
'im«                    N LM*S
■
1 MS M
SIMM
HMM
4 *M
usss m
ItSMM
u
’ LTTiai CXI V ltm
•
>M
• M
IM
•J«
1
------------
ill!Elevation in meters
Area in km2
Legend
Initial
After Sedimentation
BIRBIR-R       RESEp^eR Area-Capacity CurvT
APPENDIX 7 SOR DAM PROJECT
eife is on the Sor River about 30 km upstream of the Geba and io
t»S“ "”«lwcal sec,ion °8'06 ShOWS lhe Si" 10 W in P«“ Th= AG gtloSi ™ 
:i X> lhe Pub,ishe<i °ore theet ’f ““ T0™"
1 ',„ a '«"°n WiCa,M 3 m ° wea,henn8 of ,hc rack « «>e dam sta. bul fe, 1S r.
•* of anv drillholes being put here so this may be mnjttture. Snd it is Mew) .hat
itnnB is muCh lcss The “ C°VerKl by aenil ph°'0S s“’p l! pl,olos ;4!; "d IW
r“ .hole of the valley area is forested with cultivated land on the upland plateau areas 
of the valley are moderate. There is no evidence of rock outcropping at the surface
r-n the photos The darr should be earthltl11 suitable impervious fill can be found on the
ppsr hill slopes A diversion tunnel should be easily constructed in lhe gneisses with support
■■shotcreie, wire mesh and rockbolts 
f^cctDescription
Tte Sor dam would be 66 metres  high and as  suggested above would be of earthni: construction The spillway  would have three 6.00 m by  5 50 ra high gates  on a low overflew jest leading to a chute 21 metres  wide and 200 metres  long with a conventional stilting basin 4 metres  long and 14 metres  deep River diversion during construction would be provided by luotunnels  7 0 metres  in diameter by  565 metres  long and a cofferdam 15 metres  high one of the runnel would later be used to house a 2 70 metre penstock  with an intake shaft and gate -tO metres  square A low level outlet with 200 mVs  capacity  and two 1.80 m x  2 80 in high pressure slide gates would also be provided
■i-the Sor dam a small powerhouse, with an installed capacity of 13 MW would be provided downstream of the Sor dam, a diversion weir and canal intake would be constructed
X V0 311 11 km lonE canal and penstock with a 52 MW powerhouse, utilizing 210 metres 
at this site
projecta at the dam sne is limited in height by development around the town or Mem tltatbv i11 C°Uld be made tosh" without disturbing the main commeroal development there a) ^ Hii5cal]v?freaTn® substantially the regulated flow. If such a development were soa >
t
S ^iiTh'o ‘T faises the P°^hiLity of 3 SoT whKh
J° ^ “S^knuw
r
«
^^the S 50° metres lower Such a project would also require reconstru Or al and relocation of 8 km of the Metu^Nopa road
^dra^^^^sbes of the Sor project, dam and divtfsron
?°W pOSsibly rauch 35 42 m3/s-through 3 t01 *
of a bndtt
X^7 2
i
the Sor dam is shown on Lire 7 .1, and ofthe Scr.^r onF^ lt ^ Curv® of the reservoir is presented on Figure 3
« lhe Sor dain an installed capacity ot 13
power plam aL ,he
finr
21 OGWhvT of secondary f - ri 2 GW>t offim-
U and gg i^On 30 installed capacity of 58 M*
?xC:-.)cmg trarsimsaor.
lSest4L
of ^ondary energv. The total construction cos*
as follOvvs tam^-“*""
_
IJ Append*?**’19WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant Works:
Power Plant at the dam site:
Dicersion and Power Plant No 1
Total Construction Cost:
A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 7.2.
556,636,000
516.921,000
554,009 000
5127,566,000
PI*"
TAMS-ULG Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development
1J Appendices - 20ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS T bit 7 ' $or Hydrodectric Project Characteristics
I
dam
Catchment Area
Mean Annual Flow.
Dam Type:
1,770 knr 53.7 n? 5
Earthfill
Dam Height
66 m
Crest Level :
El. 1544
Normal    Max 
Oper
Level
El. 1539
Normal    Mm
Oper
Level.
El 1513
Active Storage
Dead Storage
Reservoir Surface Area Spillway   Design   Flood
Gates
Max Flood Level Low Level Outlet Capacity
Gates
194 ment
59 mem
13.6 km1
672 m’/s
3 - 6.00 m x 5.50 m high El. 1541
200 m3/s
2 -1.80 mx2 80 m high
1 POWER PLANT
Intake Gates
Power Tunnel. Penstock.
Surge Shaft Powerplant.
Design Head Design Flow
Installed Capacity
Tailwater Level.
1          DIVERSION D AM No.1
Diversion Capacity
Spillway Crest Level.
Spillway    War    Dimensions 
Intake Gates
Canal  (bott  width  x  depth  x  length) Penstock;
Powerplant
Design Head Design Flow: Installed Capacity Tailwater Level.
1 - 2.50 mx 2.50 m high 2.70 mdia. x 300 m long
52 m 31.3 m3/s
BMW
El. 1,474
J
210m
31 3 mvs
52 MW
Ta                  LG Baro-Akobo River Basin Int^raCed Devdopmenl Master Plan
1J Appendices * NBARO-AKOBO PROJECT
integrated master plan
Tabl^ 1 7 o o
W 1J'7'2 ~ Pro^ect Cost Estimate Summary
Coil Level January 1996
SOR DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No. 1
Reservoir Max. Level: El 1,538 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 52 MW
‘
tAMs
0
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (USD                           --------------
ITEM NO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
foreign
COMPONENT
total
1.
6 134.298
3.
Preliminary Diversion Tunnel
1.197.501
2.
Earth Dam
4 790 005
5 987^07
Access Roads
,,
24,537 192
30 671 490
40.000
4.
160 000
200 000
180,800
5.
Spillway
723.200
904 000
933724
3 734,897
6.
Low Level Outlet
4 668 521
694.520
2.778.080
.
3,472.600
Sub-total A. 9,160,843
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
36,723,374        45,904.217
AMOUNT (US$)
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
f.
Preliminary
1.015,170
4.060680
5.075.850
2.
Access Roads
288.800
1,155 200
1,444 000
3.
Power Intake
0
0
0
4.
Power Canal
1.399.000
5.596.000
6 995.000
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0
0
.
7.
6
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8
Penstock & Manifold
504.000
2,016.000
2.520 000
18.304.000
22 880.000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
4 576 000
7,782,970
31,131.880            38.914.850
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION
Preliminary
Switchyard Transmission Line
LOCAL
COMPONENT
140.565
200,000
737,100
Sub-total C: 1,077,665
SuO-tot***^ 18,041,478
3,608,296
2,164,977
AMOUNT (USS)
foreign
COMPONENT
562 260
800.000
2,948.400
physical Contingencies
Engineering A Admin.
4,310,660
72,165,914
U,433,183
8,859.910
95,259,006
TOTAL
702 825
Tooo^oo
3 685 500
5,388,325
90,207,392
18,041.878
10,824,887
119.073,758
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: 23,814,752WFRI1I
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION Nc.1
T «S
Rrt»r/W Mai.. LWI D 1.S1B
Toort*
Poww
‘
-
DCTAM.ED GOST ESmiATE
flW
^MtJRta^JH
-Ji _ J.
^snre-             ------------- —------------ ------------------- J
*
ifc                       lX
iat
1 D*n
32 *B
CMJN
'1Ma
MXV FQ
■ *®j4r
■ CH^I
UNIT
Duciyron
LOCAL
GCtaBPCA®<T
LOCAL
CflMPONEWT
TGFTAL.
ouAtaTfr'
W3UT
carxxr        TOTAL
1
AilFHV
Ljli          R » 0 ii-npr L.v*-* *-r
tan
I.WC
1Z.M
ii? SW
3.W
MW
t.LJ
NeaiMta
tan
LT MP
Mi
.njw
ma
S
--------------
1
i=J
?hn tiwwjjrg
Ma
0
♦
BM
K
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'-----------------
UMTHOtt
AMOUNT
UtaTT
nuiHEj
<
OtFLlUP 1K9H
LOCAL
GQ^OtaeUT
LOCAL
CCtFOMItaT
TOTAL
CHAHTm
CmtKWOfT
TOTAL
Tt^rai
jLr
I'^nlvra j*  HL -«h
w
Hl
_________ »K
Ch*’*’TirwlCI»™h/ jw
IGD IE
_________
Mi X
r«®
lEDCC ,
ex
r 1»«
fl
KAM
P
7T5.M
d
•> KM
■-L
Ty gm Stasa -,■
■,1«M
1JX« i
PJfl
1
*--------- --------------- 1B AR O-AKO BO PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
SOR DAM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER DIVERSION No.1
Reservoir Max Laval: El 1,538
Power Flam Inrt. Capacity: 52 MW
detailed cost estimate
(USS)
Coil Lrw« JinjBfy •«<
B : POWER PLANT A APPURTENANT WORKS
_________ DESCRIPTION
■   - sTisn
TmndOm in txigl
Tunnrt CUn N U»»0-
Tmwl Qm> V
Sub-tonr/W" * SarprSaNi
pKT PRICE.
fORBGP
COUPON t>T
Pwnstoct
M«rtfc*3
Tr^^onSy^^'sor dam
'*“5 ConnKUrtj,
l&Oei-is
HYDROELECTRIC POWER Plant at the dam
Reservoir Mai. Level: EJ1531 Power Plant Inst Capacity: 13 mw
SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
A■
AMOUNT iijjff--------------------------
ITCTINO.
description
LOCAL
COMPONENT
forsgn
:0MP0N9T
TOTAL
4
Preliminary
1.197.501
4.790 DCS
5 9® 7 507
2
, 3
Earth Dam
6,134,291
24 537 192
4
30.671490
Access Roads
40.000
150.000
230 OCiD
Diversion Tunnel
130,000 ;
4'
5.
723 200
904 000
Spillway
933,724
3,734,0-97
4.B6B 621
7
Low Level Outlet
694,520
2.770 060
3.472.600
Sub-ZDCrfA.
M,723,374         45,9«M 2f 7
(
H : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (USS)
ri£M no.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREGN
ccmfwent
TOTAL
f.
Preliminary
314.022
1,256.068
1.570.110
2.
Access Roads
0
0
0
3.
Power Intake
119.ABO
477.920
597.400
4.
Power Canal
0
0
0
5.
Power Tunnel
0
0|
0
a.
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0'
0
0
a.
Penstock & Manifold
154. DM
516.000
770.000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
1.820 ODD
7 280,000
9J 00.000
$i*wa 2,407002
c : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
9030,004        12037,510
item no,
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
ccmMBfT
AMOUNT i U5*>
FORSGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
T
Preliminary
53.M2
212.328
265 410
Switchyard
110.000
4(0.000
550.000
Transmission Line
243,800
975.520
1,219.400
SUfr-fDO/C.-
406,962
11,995,307
1,627,949
47,961330
Physical    Contingencies
£ nstinewmg & Admin.
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST:
1,399.™
1.439,437
f5,M3,aO*
9,5*6,244
5,757,749
59,971.53?
Tf, 9*5,307
7.1*7,184
(3.335,223[cteteW
BARO-AKOBO PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
SOR DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANT AT THE OAM
Re*erv«r Mix. Lewi: B 1^38 Power Plant Irwt Cijucity 13 MW
DETAILED COST ESTIMATE
UNIT PRCI
MCMT
UNIT
FT DC HO
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOtBON
COMPONENT
TOTM
auAjrrrrr
LOCH
COWON PH
FCMKa
CCW0NWT w
X
11
Road Irroc ovcrrwrt                           __ ________________
•m
8 0(K
32 000
M CM
<3 000
97000
SOO
000
45 W
0
'ttXM
1
as
X2
JJ
New Road
No
C
0
0
000
0
1
DESCRIPTION
Dlvmlon Tunnel
OvWTon TtfmN OW HI Lxied [>vern<y T jm« SMM M L™j_
jpvtrtion Ttf<nNO»* v im«g_
UKT PRICK
FORDO
component
DESCRrnoN
l,OCAL
TWlCfcM II: Ljwj Tjirel CMw IVUned
o»ii can v
Wor«
Sub-Mllfm i. iMLrrtOvt*
Total 2 ro 6
Da/n and Appurtanant WorKi Tola.'- - - «r-w«Wl
HYDROELECTRIC power plant at the dam
R wrtolr Mel Urto 0 1531 Poww Mint hnt Capacity 1J Nft
detailed COST ESTIMATE
ru»t)
™“ GMMtertK, bt H-CkM,
U*T
txicwrrKm
LOCAL
CDHrtMlIWT
UWT riUCf
FQ*«P     — ccno^cwr         TOTH
1KM.
MOUNT
*ncca
1
Quurrm
1*^*1
Hwr Ling
---------------- ----------------
PBU »X^»
11
0 09                            C«
__________
a
•
i
l
u PM
dd Wttr
■m
0«
fl *
oto
a
>
E
9
IS
OM
1*J
Oto
a
f
e
■
*-^frOftorn J *=—*■ Cams'
I
>
I
UWT *«E?
AKNH3
imt
rm as.
□EKRiPriaw
LOCAL
cewoHBr?
FaRBM
iMPOMLWl
FATAL
gsiLNm
L3EA1
-i-woHirr
*aR3«
CMtoGMTH*
!TOT*i
1                 P'rtrM "rnrrt
ju
■ tiwiaHi ■ jn«
m
DM
GM
I to*
3
9
1
*S
£—
TarttbruW Unas
m
DM
CM
Ito
1
1
•
a
□
r^wICSm V LifMia
rn
0«
BJto
flJP
3
1
i
L
sorrow trws 1 Pe-wr Tun™-'
•
flSOR DAM
LAYOUT
J-T-tElevation in meters
Legend Initial
SOR RESERVEe Area-CapacityAPPENDIX 8 GILO-1 DAM PROJECT
Ability of the site thlS depth of weathcnn8 is highly conjectural The sie is just * on the edge of the aerial photos, stnp 33. photos 2236.2237, but the site is onlv just
although there is a lot of relief displacement The valley hs very steep side '"'^Mountains to the north of the site have very sharp features indicating a very thin soil
so a rock quarry must be possible to develop k may however be at a higher' elevation ^the dam The gneiss or granite would be suitable as rockfill To the north of the site the
W5   appear   to   reveal   gneisses   in   the   mountains,   with   many   stnanons   A   spillway   could nr'babh be constructed in a coll (saddle) on the southern bank Impervious fill should be
mailable downstream of the dam site in the lower-lying gently  undulating land A diversion tusiel can be constructed easily  m the gneisses  and support will be shoicrcte, wire mesh and rwibolts. The most appropriate type of dam for this  site is  rockfill, but if rock  was  found to Ktcrop sufficiently on the valley slopes al the dam site a concrete dam, even arcbed, might be feasible
Prciect Description
The  Gilo-1  dam  would  be  a  107  metres  high  and,  as  indicated  above  would  be  of  rockfill mstmction. The spillway would be on the left abutment, discharging through a coll to the
floodplain below, well away from the dam toe (see Figure 8 I) The spillway would have three " m by 6.00 m high gates and a short chute which would terminate at the bead of a ravine
downstream side of the abutment. No concrete paving would be required beyond this 
■JX due to the presumed high quality of the rock During constriction, the river would be l  F‘«wircu rugn quamy or me tock uuiuij$ w.™—
tv, ^°ngh two 7 00 metre diameter diversion tunnel with a 15 metre hig co er am
j-
turinpl
i____ _ z- _______ IpaHiriff to tWO 3.60 inetfC
°rks is shown on Figure 8,1
curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 8.2
IJ Append***WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
Total Construction Cost:
$212,377,000
A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 8
 2^sources
Table 8-1. Gilo-1 HydroelectncProjec1( h4rafteTii( C5
.
pAM
Catchment Area.
Mean Annual Flow
Dam Type
Dam Height
Crest Level:
Normal Max Oper Level: Normal Min Oper Level Active Storage
Dead Storage:
Reservoir Surface Area Spillway Design Flood
Gates:
Max Flood Level Low Level Outlet Capacity
Gates
7,570 km2 74.1 nr/; Rockfill
107 m
El  612.0
El   6068
El 578.6
2,341 mem 874 man 116.8 tan2
1,065 mJ/s
3 - 7 00 mx6 00mhigh El 609
200 m!/s
2-1 50 mx 3,50 m high
POWER plant
Inlake Gates
Power Tunnel' Penstock
Surge Shaft Powerplant:
Design    Head. Design Flow
Installed      Capacity Tailwater Level;
2-3.14mx6.28mhigb
6.28 m dia. x 270 m lore
2 - 3.60 m dia x 600 m Jong
84m 124 m’/s 83 MW El 508.6
l AMS-VLG Ban>-AkoboKwrB^oln^  ^
ra
nofl‘>plIie,’tMlIlf ”
14
U Append' ®''baro-akobo project INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Table 1 J-8.2 - Project Cwt Estimate
Level January 1996
GILO-1 DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER SCHEME
Reservoir Max Level. El 60S.8
Power Plant Inst. Capacity: 80 MW
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
ITEM NO.
1.
2.
DESCRIPTION
Preliminary Rockfill Dam
LOCAL
COMPONENT
2 632 023
‘AMOUNT (USS)
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
10 528 090
total
13,160 113
3.
4.
Access Roads
Diversion Tunnel
1 2 . <23 550 1 174 500 2 097,600
5.
Spillway
50.894 199
4 69B.000
8 390.400
_______ 63 ,617 749 5.872500
10 488 Offi
365 967
6.
1 543 868
Low Level Outlet
1
1.165 200
4 660 800
5 826 000
Sub-total A:
20,178.839
80.715.357               100,894.197
B : SUMMARY       POWER PLANT 8 APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT (USS)
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
1.565 190
6.260 760
7 825 950
2.
Access Roads
0
0
0
3.
Power Intake
97 600
390.400
488 000
4.
Power Canal
0
0
0
5.
Power Tunnel
432 000
1,728 000
2.160 000
6
Surge Shaft
0
0
0
7.
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8
Penstock & Manifold
305 000
1.220.000
1 525.000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
9600 000
38 400 000
48 000.000
Sub-total B
11.999.790
59.998.950
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
Preliminary
Switchyard_________ __ Transmission Line
Sub-total C:
Sub-total A+B+C:
Physical Contingencies Engineering 8 Administration TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
402.000
210.000
2 470 000
3,082.000
35,260,820
7,052.126
4.231.278
47.999.180
AMOUNT (USS)
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
1606 000
840 POP
9 880 000
12,328.000
141.042,517
28,208.503
16.925.102
186,176,123
TOTAL
2.010.000. 1 050.000
12 350.000
15,410.000
176.303,1ST
35.260,629 21,156,378
232,720,154
46.544,031mew , —i
r*T*uu ton HTtMTiBARO-AKOBO PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
»*•'-CtT
IWT COTT
LOCK
otscwnoN
L0C4
Ttrf**,
•toumrv
r           c«m« ~
«>
4J
L»
■
OM
D«C
»»
««
• ••
• 0.
•
■
•
•
—
4J
DM
1M
1
1
•
•
1 - nnrau 1 rwa Cimn-
•
• •
j* cor»
*-*'•*’
mm
LOCM.
rCMMK
LOCM
rm no
CXl^NIFTKW,
TOTM
k
—
not
» **
• ••
•
■
■
------- .
4J
u
TurnN o—i nr, m—
TiMftN uwrt V L*"»« ____________________ ■ —____
1 *O»00
• ••
•M
• OR
■M
i.n
•
•
VM*
47.JMW
Appurtenant War** Tofat
II
s
8
i.
*-Elevation in meters
Area in km2
iANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
jjjptNDIX 9 TAMS DAM PROJECT
is  on  the  Haro  River  47  km  east  of  Gambela  It  is  situated  On   the   river   wurse fl*  s,I   .er   lS   narrowest  and  the  valley  is  quite  steep-sided  and  V-shaped  Rock  outcrops 
w hefe
dlC nV
.    sues,  and  the  site  is  considered  to  be  suitable  for  a  conventional  rockfill  dam
,-n the valley               geophysical investigations, a concrete-faced rockfill dam or even an arch considered. Upstream of the dam site are a series of rapids The site is shown or,
!   5 slrjp 17, photos 1358,1359 but the stereoscopic coverage is poor because the XU*! edec of photos, producing much relief displacement Geological section 08-
si,t 'S 3t 1 he site to be underlain by gneisses, crystalline schist, granites and granitoid gneisses 
02 sho*s l
- s Hicic^ted as 30 m but from the observations made at the site this would
IWth  °  'be  an  exaggeration  as  strong  rock  outcrops  are  frequently  observed  on  both  valley appear           xveaIhering may be up to 10 metres deep The rock is also shown to be jointed,
Sd<Lailv  in two directions  One drillhole was  put down at the site near tn the river, A ^irav  chute on the left side of the across  from a small saddle appears  to be a suitable i^hon md the rock  should be good A diversion tunnel should be easily  constructed with Xrt of shotcrete wire mesh and rockbolts  The 1.250,000 published geological map oi Gore indicates  the site to be in granite. The ARDCO-GEOSERV geological map indicates granites in the north and tonalite, granodiorite in the south
.Ai attempt was made to locate impervious fill upstream of the dam site but t e mat o ’ proved to be very' thin and sandy. A flat to gently sloping area north of the roa some upstream of the dam site may provide impervious fill and this will have to e irwesliga e pricing, if a rockfill dam with clay core is proposed
Project Description 
Tl,TAMS      would be 270 investigation would be required 
h  probably of r0C'^lble for a wlrfKr *e *•>*£loolWl . * «
indicated above, 
discbaiuc t
«kffl « an arch dam. The sp.B«a^“ ” wwid be abutment where a substantial roc ex tiajly returtm®*'
h
ravine downstream of the abuunen > natural waterway The
„ ,te mtr
g w m l"8 ^“ 0 lle thi’ec 6 -            unpaved* du
outlet channel* ^do*"
100-meter   long   chute.   Beyond   that   po   ^projectw0
Widpated high quality of the existing            . , 5 met# hy. ^ttX'urrotrgh the nsM abutment and 
cO
ff rdam
e
,3.^^
1 *‘ Wwer intake would have 4 4 75m bv 9            The p°^‘^liaveJ and then to two 7.60 m diant«er l0^ level
of 1,060 NW (eight 135-MW                 ?00 rrte & high pressure slide gates, with a cap^U
oneot*
-T,
2AMS reservoir would Good the Btrbtl'
w
 ^stream
nvoit a^
o5t 10
on 0310 - the Bid*
a ffle am rf
of « Km io reservoir
'*“« !>» relocation of 35 tan of the
„ rt*^ .be Bam * Lhe «idgs
^ jCn is virtually inaccessible except by fo° —- -7^1 M,sttr *
—------------ -- - - - - tn, r
TAMS-L'LG Bart>Akobo
UAffO*-'WATER         RESOURCES
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
the  damsite  With  the  reservoir,  however,  access  should  be  possible  from  the  relocated  road  fa boating and related water-based recreational activities.
The  principal  characteristics  the  TAMS  project  are  shown  on  Table  9  1  The  project  layout  •$ shown on Figure 9.1
An area-capacity curve of the reservoir is presented on Figure 9.2.
The TAMS project has an installed capacity of 1,060 MW, and is expected to generate
5,485  GWh/yr  of  firm  energy’  and  437  GWh/yr  of  secondary  energy  The  total  construction  cos excluding transmission line is estimated as follows
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant Works
$2,061,208,000
Power Plant:                                                                                          $748,311,000
Total Construction Cost:
A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 9.2
$2,809,519,000_g 
gtso^.------- ——— 
ANNEX 1J HYDROPOWER-PROJECTS
Table9*-
a            TAMS Hydroelectric Project Characteristics
daM
Catchment Area
Mean Annual Flow
Dam Type
Dam Height
Crest Level:
Normal Max  Oper Level Normal Min. Oper Level Active Storage
Dead Storage:
Reservoir Surface Area: Spillway Design Flood
Gates
Max Flood Level Low Level Outlet Capacity
Gates
20,970 km:
329 n?/s Rockfilt
270 m
□ 765
a 760
El. 705
4.807 mem
5.543 mem
l05 0kmJ
1,365 mJ/s
3 - 6,75 m x 8 00 m high El 762
1,200 m’/s
4 - 1.83 mx 3 66m high
POWER PLANT
Intake Gates
Power Tunnel Penstock
Surge Shaft: Powerplant,
Design Head Design Row .
Installed Capacity Tail water Level:
4-4.75 mx9.50mhigh
2 - 9.50 m dia x 815 m long
2 - 7 60 m dia x 420 m long
246 m
548m’/s 1.060 MW El 486
TAnisTEc
IJ Appendices - 2-baro-akobo project
INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
Table 1J^.projKlCot(Et|.ma|e
Cost Level Jrmay -gpe
TAMS DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER SCHEME
Reservoir Max. Level; El 760 Power Plant Inst. Capacity: 1.060 MW
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
description
LOCAL
COMPONENT
AMOUNT (Usti
FOREIGN
component
Prelimina
Rockfill Dam
Access Roads
Diversion Tunnel
Spillway
Low Level Outlet
40.735,082
256.780,952
___________ 0
10 800,000
1958 259
2.028000
1 027 123 909
0
43.200 000
7,833 035
8,112,000
203,675406
1.283 904 781,
__________ £
54   000X0,
.       9791,294
10.140,000
Sub^W A 312,302,293 B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
1.249,209.170             1.561,511,413
AMOUNT lUSJi
ITEM NO.
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
14,836.140
59,344 560
74.180 700
2.
Access Roads
0
0
0
3.
Power Intake
648.400
2 593 600
3 242 000
4.
Power Canal
0
0
0
5.
Power Tunnel
4.955.200
19 820 800
24 776 X0
0
6
.
2
Surge Shaft
0
0
Pressure Shaft
0
0
0
8
Penstock & Manifold
4,264,000
17 056,000
21.320 000
9.
Powerhouse & Equip.
89,040 000
356 160 000
445,200.300
Subtotal B:                113,743,740                 454.074.M0      «V*™
C : SUMMARY TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
amount
LOCAL
FORDO*
COMPONENT
COMPONENT
jO,167 500,
25,209.375
1.
2.
Preliminary
Switchyard
852.500
3,410.000
24.26Z5M
T&jlcOXC
Transmission Line
154,617,500
163.271,675
Sub-total C.
38.654.375 464.700.408
1,858.801.630
zj23.w2.tw
Sub-total A+B+C
92.940,082
55.764.049
613,404,538
371,760,326
223,056,196
2,453.618,152
464,7^.406
178,820.245
3,067,022.690
total construction costCl
IXm
qst m. tc eotr rirmAn
ru«H
-
u*? ar
H£~-*F
US£M
nw
TTM.
—
Lata.
-
-, ~
—1.«r
1- *—
!M
■
«
11
a
L—--'I
L“!
-•saw
1 K>X
<lMK
X                 "                   Jm. ■:           ^
>r  r
fflB!
3H
1
1
«
JLUI
MlXLHJ fjOJMI.1*
II—            —          rnujtCj
integrated master plan
MVHn
TAMS 0AM
HYDROELECTRIC POWER scheme
*••«>'* RU* Lw< e ?to
,2 «w OFT AM. ED COST ESTWATt
rum
a*.
■ ®**»^tAKriAFFum
Ww<Two-e,J
r
<wElevation in meters
Area in km2gIffsO^____________
APPEN DIX 10         GEBA-R DAM PROJECT
Rx k appears to outcrop on the southern side of the valley 1-1 5 km upstream of the dam site r M  could be a possible location for a rockfill quarry Weathering at the dam site, shown on a  geological  section  extends  to  20  metres  Highly  and  moderately  weathered  rock  may extend to 10-15 m depth The spillway can be founded on slightly weathered granite at 10-15 metres depth Impervious fill can probably be obtained from residual soil on the plateaux areas A aversion tunnel in granite should be easily constructed but some support of shotcrete, wire neshand rock bolts will be required Geological conditions are favorable for a rockfill dam If
□t site is indeed, in massive granite, it would be ideal for an arch dam, with a crest chord to xight ratio of 3, but if it turns out that the foundation is biotite gneiss, a rockfill dam would te preferred
Project Description
Toe Geba-R dam would be 240 metres high and is planned as a rockfill dam at this stage of sudy. Further site exploration is required to determine whether an arch dam would be more xononucal The spillway has three 8.00 m by 6 00 m high gates leading to a concrete paved
150  metres  long,  terminating  in  a  flip  bucket  If  the  foundation  proves,  indeed,  to  be t gneiss, a stilling basin would be required and the paved chute extended to river level,
I out 300 metres further on. Two diversion tunnels, 8 00 metres in diameter. 1,400 metres 
- i:o’JP' d with
e
a  15  metre  high  cofferdam,  would  be  required  during  construction  The
p.  61  Rates leading to a 7 40 metre diameter power tunnel and a 6 00 metre penstock 
,
iisch l P<’WaerThousc wou"luduhmavenavea caapcaaci ptay cioty f 3o2r0JzoMWmwThmeelolwowleiveevel oi outuleutcitunnel would have a
ii
-
itself w
8e Mpac,,y  of 400
.
U
3
™ /s with two 1 83 m by 3 66 high pressure slide gates The tunnel
biK|rM° ^ - 50 metres diameter and would discharge near the powerhouse through a flip-
i ?Pear  IS   located   a  very  steep  canyon  with  virtually  no  nearby  development  It  does  not -tCrt«jonai             ^vuonmental or ecological impact, except for possible future water re t
^dfooopmmeemnt
Geba-R project are shown on Table 10 I Uorks is shown on Figure 10 1
of the dam and
^ area-cana •
. curve of the mserunir is nreRented on Figure 10.2.
B.^Ak.bn River Brin InW^
1J Appendices
Mri.r Pi.WATER RESOURCES
ANNEX IJ HYDROPOWER PROJECTS
Regulating Dam and Appurtenant Works Power Plant
Total Construction Cost:
A detailed cost estimate is presented on Table 10 2
$621,8%, 000 
$389,526,000
$1,011,422,000-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1J
Table 10.1. Gebo-R Hydroelectric Project Characteristic!
dam
Catchment Area
Mean Annual Flow
Dam Type
Dam Height
Crest Level
Normal Max  Oper Level Normal Min Oper Level Active Storage
Dead Storage:
Reservoir Surface .Area Spillway Design Flood
Gates
Max Flood Level Low Level Outlet Capacity
Gates
6,220 Ion2
143 1 m3/s Rockfill
240 m
El 1120
El. 1115
El 1083
1,365 mcm
2,535 mcm
53.1km2
920 m3/s
3-8 00mx6 00m high El. 1117
400 m’/s
2 - 1 50 m x 3 .50 m high
1 POWER PLANT
Intake Gates
Power Tunnel- Penstock
Surge Shaft Powerplant
Design Head Design How
Installed Capacity:
2 - 3.70 m x 7.40 m high
7 40 m dia x 730 m long
1 - 6 00 m dia. x 200 m long
238 m
164 m3/s 310 MW
Tail water Level
El 861
T AMS-ULG    Barv-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan 1J Appendices - JOBARO-AKOBO PROJECT
INTEGRATED MASTER Plan
Title 13*10,2 - Project Cost Estimate
Cor. L*<wl JV-uiry 1998
GEBA-R DAM HYDROELECTRIC POWER SCHEME
Reservoir Max Level: El 1.115 Power Plant Imt Capacity: 310 MW
A : SUMMARY DAM & APPURTENANT WORKS
AMOUNT iuM
ITEM NO
description
LOCAL
COMPONENT
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
TOTAL
1.
Preliminary
12,290.316
49161,264
61 451 580
2.
Rockfill Dam
72 007,219
288,028,875
360036 093
3.
Access Roads
243,600
974,400
,
1.218,000
4.
Diversion Tunnel
6,240 000
24 960.000
31200,000
5.
Spillway
1,090 621
4,362.483
5,453,104
6.
Low Level Outlet
2 354 000
9,416 000
11.770,000
Sub-total A:
94,225,755
376.W3.O2f                 <71,128,777
B : SUMMARY POWER PLANT & APPURTENANT WORKS
DESCRIPTION
LOCAL
COMPONENT
AMOUNT (VW
FOREIGN
COMPONENT
Preliminary
Access Roads
Power Intake
Power Canal
Power Tunnel
4.356,150
_________ 0_
141800
0
1,489,200
0
17 424.600
_________ 0_
567.200
_________ 0_
5 566,800
0
21,780 750
________ 0
709 000
0
7,446000
0
Surge Shaft                                                                                       7                              0
PressureShaft
Powerhouse & Equip.
■3.750000’
750 000
26.660 000
3000 000
106 640.000
133,588,800
166,6*750
Sub-total B:                   33,397.150
C:SUMMW
SYSre"
foreign
comport
tut*.
component
item mo
100,5^'^
sub-tot*1 C.'
sub-tool **0+c
Physical Contingencies
Engineering & Administration
806,^SS°
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST1
I
uBARO-AKOBO  PROJECT INTEGRATED MASTER PLAN
geba-rdam HYDROELECTRIC power scheme
Rtwrvo* ttn.         01,11$
*oww
31 o tr«v
ocrueo corr litwuyi
fUM)
8 roriWPuwctvnjMiwwT wqkmDlvtrtion Cofferdin
*
GEBA -R DAM
LAYOUTElevation in meters
Legend
initial
After Sedimentation
geba-r reservoir
Area-Capacity Curve

Summery

Baro-Akobo River Basin Master Plan - Irrigation Projects Summary

Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan

Annex 1H: Irrigation Projects Summary

Document Overview

This document is part of the Final Report for the Baro-Akobo River Basin Integrated Development Master Plan Study, prepared for the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Water Resources. It focuses on irrigation development potential in the basin.

Date: May 1997

Prepared by: TAMS (New York) and ULG Consultants Ltd (Warwick, U.K.)

1. Introduction

The study evaluates irrigation potential in the Baro-Akobo River Basin (75,912 km²) in southwestern Ethiopia, covering highlands (1,500-2,500m) and lowland Gambela plains (400-600m). The basin includes the Baro, Alwero, Akobo, and Gilo rivers, part of the Pibor Sobat River System flowing to the White Nile.

2. Key Findings

Upper Basin Projects

18 potential irrigation sites were evaluated but most were deemed unsuitable due to:

High rainfall making irrigation uneconomical
Marginal land suitability
Forest destruction concerns
High costs ($10,200-$143,600/ha)

All upper basin projects were rejected except for further study of the Baro project in the Lower Basin.

Lower Basin Projects

The Gambela Plain offers significant irrigation potential (ultimate development: 480,000 ha net). Key findings:

14 basic irrigation systems and 8 variants identified
Typical cropping pattern includes cotton, maize, sorghum, soybeans
Gross irrigation requirement: 13,106 m³/ha/year
Peak flow requirement: 1.3 l/s/ha

3. Recommended Projects

Project	Location	Net Area (ha)	Unit Cost ($/ha)	Total Cost ($ million)
Baro RB, Itang Dam	Baro River Right Bank	50,900	8,235	419.1
Alwero, Abobo Dam	Alwero River (under construction)	10,400	8,405	87.4
Alwero, Dumbong Dam	Alwero River Right Bank	15,000	8,408	126.1
Gilo RB, Gilo 2 Dam	Gilo River Right Bank	46,900	9,212	432.0

4. Economic Analysis

Economic rates of return for top projects:

Alwero-Abobo Dam (local food): 11.4%
Alwero-Dumbong Dam (rice): 10.0%
Baro RB-Itang Dam (sugar): 12.6%

5. Conclusions and Recommendations

Primary recommendations:

Complete construction of Alwero-Abobo Dam project
Proceed with prefeasibility study for Baro right bank-Itang Dam project
Consider Dumbong Dam and Gilo 2 Dam for future development
Protect Gambela Dam site for potential future use

Implementation Strategy

The recommended projects total over 123,000 ha, requiring an implementation rate of 4,000 ha/year over 30 years. The Alwero Project under construction should be the initial phase.