Vol 1-Annex I

Annex I
Annex I
Preliminary Design Report
KEREVAT TOWN
WATER SUPPLY PROJECT
Feasibility Studies, Designs (including ESHS),

and Preparation of Bidding Documents for Four (4)
Water Supplies under Water PNG (Namatanai, Ialibu,
Aitape, Kerevat)
IDA CREDIT NO. 5940
Final Preliminary Design

Report
June 2022
HYDROPLAN
Ingenieur-Gesellschaft
mbH
Prinz-Carl-Anlage 25
67547 Worms, Germany
Tel.: +49-6241-9103-0
Fax: +49-6241-9103-10
E-Mail: [email protected]
Web: www.hydroplan.de
Feasibility Studies, Designs (including ESHS), & Preparation of Bidding Documents for Four (4) Water Supplies under Water PNG (Aitape, Namatanai,
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Preliminary Design Report for the Town of KEREVAT 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 5
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 8
2 SUMMARY OF DESIGN DATA .............................................................................................................. 9
2.1 Project area ............................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Project Horizon ........................................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Climate .................................................................................................................................................... 10
2.4 Topography and Geomorphology ............................................................................................................. 12
2.5 Geology and Hydrogeology ...................................................................................................................... 13
2.5.1 Hydrogeological investigations at Kerevat ............................................................................................... 14
2.5.2 Groundwater balance ............................................................................................................................... 15
2.5.3 Groundwater quality ................................................................................................................................ 16
2.6 Existing Water Supply Infrastructures ..................................................................................................... 16
2.6.1 Alternative source of water supply .......................................................................................................... 18
2.6.2 Potential Water supply source ................................................................................................................. 18
2.6.3 Power supply ........................................................................................................................................... 18
2.7 Population Forecasting and Water Demand Analysis .............................................................................. 19
2.7.1 Population trend ....................................................................................................................................... 19
2.7.2 Population projection ............................................................................................................................... 19
2.7.3 Landuse ................................................................................................................................................... 21
2.7.4 Per capita water demand analysis ........................................................................................................... 22
2.7.5 Unaccounted for water ............................................................................................................................ 23
2.7.6 Water demand estimates ........................................................................................................................ 23
2.7.7 Design Flows ........................................................................................................................................... 23
3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN ....................................................................................................................... 24
3.1 General description of the selected design option.................................................................................... 24
3.2 Design of well-field .................................................................................................................................. 28
3.3 Design of storage tanks ........................................................................................................................... 31
3.4 Design of Water Treatment Plant ............................................................................................................. 31
3.4.1 Generalities of Water Treatment Processes recommended for Kerevat ................................................... 31
3.5 Design of Pumping Station (from reservoir#1 to reservoir#2) ................................................................ 34
3.6 Design of Distribution Network ................................................................................................................ 35
3.7 Hydraulic Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 40
4 COST ESTIMATE ................................................................................................................................ 48
Ialibu, Kerevat)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1-1: Geographical location of Kerevat (left) and close-up of the town (right) ............................. 9
Figure 2.3-1: Temperature data for Kerevat and precipitation data for Rabaul ....................................... 10
Figure 2.3-2: Köppen-Geiger Climate Classification for Papua New Guinea for the present day ............ 11
Figure 2.4-1: Landforms and major landscape regions of PNG .............................................................. 13
Figure 2.5-1: View of the Kerevat River valley from the ridge on the east side of the valley ................. 14
Figure 2.5.1-1: Location of the bore well at Kerevat Hospital ................................................................... 15
Figure 2.6-1: Existing Water Supply Structures ................................................................................... 17
Figure 2.6-2: Borehole set up (left) and Electro-Mechanical Control Panel House (right) at Kerevat
Hospital ............................................................................................................................ 17
Figure 2.6.1-1: Typical rainwater harvester/collection system set-up ...................................................... 18
Figure 2.7.2-1: Project Area and Outskirts .............................................................................................. 19
Figure 2.7.3-1: Landuse 2020 and areas to be extended in 2040 in Kerevat ............................................ 21
Figure 3.1-1: Schematic layout of the recommended design option ...................................................... 26
Figure 3.1-2: Schematic layout of the (optionally) recommended design option ................................... 27
Figure 3.2-1: Schematic well field layout and the principle of overlapping cones of depression ........... 28
Figure 3.3-1: Reservoir #1 typical section ............................................................................................ 31
Figure 3.6-1: Water demand pattern (24 hours) .................................................................................... 36
Figure 3.7-1: Water Production – Demand Balance .............................................................................. 42
Figure 3.7-2: Scenario 1, 2030 – Pumping Trend at Water Source ....................................................... 43
Figure 3.7-3: Scenario 2030 – Water production vs. Consumption ....................................................... 43
Figure 3.7-4: Scenario1, 2030 – Storage Tank 1 Pressure Trend .......................................................... 44
Figure 3.7-5: Scenario 1, 2030 – Pressure Contour Plot at 6:00 am ...................................................... 44
Figure 3.7-6: Scenario 2, 2040 – Pumping Trend at Water Source ....................................................... 45
Figure 3.7-7: Scenario 2040 – Water production vs. Consumption ....................................................... 45
Figure 3.7-8: Scenario 2, 2040 – Storage Tank 1 Pressure Trend ......................................................... 46
Figure 3.7-9: Scenario 2, 2040 – Pressure Contour Plot at 6:00 am ...................................................... 47
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Water demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area ............................................................ 6
Table 1-2: CAPEX cost estimate ......................................................................................................... 7
Table 2.3-1: Hydro-meteorological data for Rabaul and Kerevat........................................................... 10
Table 2.6.2-1: Existing boreholes in Kerevat ........................................................................................... 18
Table 2.7.2-1: Population projection for Kerevat Project Area ................................................................. 20
Table 2.7.2-2: Population projection for the Kerevat Project Area and its outskirts ................................. 20
Table 2.7.3-1: Landuse Classes in Kerevat .............................................................................................. 22
Table 2.7.4-1: Per Capita Water Demand ................................................................................................ 22
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Table 2.7.6-1: Water Demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area .......................................................... 23
Table 2.7.7-1: Design Flows.................................................................................................................... 23
Table 3.1-1: Kerevat Water Supply Design Option ............................................................................... 24
Table 3.1-2: Water Quantity from Wells .............................................................................................. 25
Table 3.2-1: Submersible pumps parameters for the 11 wells ............................................................. 29
Table 3.4.1-1: Basic Water Treatment Processes ................................................................................... 32
Table 3.4.1-2: Effectiveness of Water Treatment Processes in Removing Impurities ............................. 32
Table 3.4.1-3: Design parameters for Post – Chlorination Unit ................................................................ 34
Table 3.7-1: Tank Design and Sizing Time Horizons 2030 and 2040..................................................... 41
Table 3.7-2: Transmission Pipelines’ Length ........................................................................................ 43
Table 3.7-3: Distribution Pipelines’ Length Network Year 2030 ............................................................ 45
Table 3.7-4: Distribution Pipelines’ Extension Length Network Year 2040 ........................................... 47
Table 4-1: CAPEX cost estimate for Kerevat ..................................................................................... 48
LIST OF ANNEXES
ANNEX A: Hydraulic Analysis Results (EPANET tool);
ANNEX B: CAPEX Detailed Breakdown
ANNEX C: Pump Curves
ANNEX D: Field Investigation Report Kerevat
Ialibu, Kerevat)
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

 CEPA Conservation and Environment Protection Authority
 CIRR Commercial Internal Rate of Return
 DLPP Department of Lands and Physical Planning
 EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
 ESHS Environmental, Social, Health and Safety
 ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
 ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan
 GIS Geographic Information System
 HC High Covenant
 IWRM Integrated Water Resource Management
 JPA Jiwaka Provincial Administration
 LC Low Covenant
 MDG Millennium Development Goals
 NC No Covenant
 NPV Net Present value
 NRW Non-Revenue Water
 NSO National Statistical Office
 O&M Operation and Maintenance
 PDO Project Development Objective
 PGK Papua New Guinean Kina
 QA/QC Quality Assurance / Quality Control
 OP Operational Policy
 PIC Pacific Island Countries
 PNG Papua New Guinea
 SCF Standard Conversion Factor
 SWR Shadow Wage Rate
 ToR Terms of Reference
 UFW Unaccounted for water
 USD United States Dollar
 WaSH Water Sanitation and Hygiene
 WB World Bank
 WPNG Water PNG
 WSS Water Supply System
 WSSDP Water Supply and Sanitation Development Project
Ialibu, Kerevat)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The legal mandate for the provision of water and sanitation services in provincial and district towns in Papua
New Guinea lies with Water PNG Limited (formerly Water Board), which became a legal public corporation on
31st March 2017, by virtue of the National Water Supply and Sanitation Act 2016.
The provision of water supply and sanitation services in provincial towns and district centres in Papua New
Guinea dates back to the middle of the 1980’s. Since then, progressive improvement has been witnessed,
resulting in the expansion of services to 23 centres in 2010.
With the financial support of the World Bank, the Government has launched early 2017 a Water Supply and
Sanitation Development Project. Component 3 of the Project will support the expansion of WSS services to
seven (7) additional district/provincial towns. Water PNG Limited has engaged Hydroplan Ingenieur-Gesell-
schaft mbH to prepare Feasibility Studies, Engineering Designs and Bidding Documents for water supply sys-
tems in the selected towns.
The Water PNG has approved the Kerevat Feasibility Study Report on September 2020, and the Consultant
has accordingly prepared the preliminary design of the water supply system of Kerevat, in line with the terms
of reference (TOR) and the approved Feasibility Study Design, the report of which is summarised in this sub-
mission, however adapted to the recently obtained results from the field investigation (See Annex D) concern-
ing the sustainable yields of boreholes/wells.
Existing Water Supply Facilities:

Keravat has no existing water supply system. The residents and public facilities depend on rainwater and
surface water from the Kerevat River and surrounding creeks, for their daily water needs. Private bore wells
and groundwater from shallow dug wells are also used as sources of water. The Kerevat Hospital has its own
bore well which has suffered from electromechanical problems. The Kerevat National High School (KNHS)
abstracts water from a creek discharging into the Kerevat River.
The Kerevat hospital well has recently been pump-tested in January 2022 and then gave a sustainable yield of
6 l/s.
Two other existing wells had been pump-tested at Vudal, a village near to Kerevat in June 2021 (UNRE2 with
a sustainable yield of 5 l/s) and in January 2022 (UNRE1 with a sustainable yield of 7 l/s)
Population Projection
Year 2011 is considered to be the base year for estimation of population and 2020 to 2040 is the projected
population period. Using the 2011 population figure for Kerevat Town and the annual provincial population
growth rate of 3.6%, the population was calculated for 2011 to 2040 for the Project Area. A projection for the
population outside the Project Area was made by multiplying the number of counted houses in the outskirts
based on aerial view with the average household size (6.2) that was derived from dividing the 2020 population
of 3,737 by the number of households counted in the field study 2019 (603).
Water Demand Estimates

Water demand estimates were determined as per the guidelines presented in the Water PNG manual. The
average daily flow is obtained by multiplying the daily consumption by 1.4, taking into account 30% of NRW.
The following table shows the water demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Table 1-1: Water demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area

Water Demand Schedule, m³/day
Population
Daily Consumption Average Daily Flow
Year Projected, per- Peak Daily Peak Hourly
son Capita Comm. & Infra. &
(ADF) = 1.4 x (A+B) Flow (PDF) Flow (PHF)
(A) Ind.(B) Instit. (C )
2020 3,737 598 1 45 902 1,082 1,947
2025 4,525 724 6 55 1,099 1,318 2,373
2030 5,506 881 11 67 1,342 1,610 2,898
2035 6,731 1,077 16 81 1,644 1,973 3,551
2040 8,268 1,323 21 100 2,021 2,426 4,366
Source: HYDROPLAN
Existing and New Boreholes

There are several existing boreholes in and around Kerevat, of which the following 3 had been pump-tested to
know the possible potential sustainable yield (in l/s) in this area and geology (the aquifer consists mainly of
volcanic ashes/pumiceous)
As above mentioned the sustainable yields obtained were: 5 l/s for Borehole/well UNRE 1in Vudal village,
6 l/s for the Kerevat Hospital well on the Hospital’s premises, and 7 l/s for the UNRE2 borehole/well also in
Vudal village.
The recommended design option (named as “Option 1b in the Feasibility Study Report, approved by the Client
on September 2020) will also utilize the existing Kerevat Rural Hospital borehole and the other proposed bore-
holes( 7 for horizon 2030, 10 for 2040, see below), to satisfy the better part of the projected water demand of
15 l/s by 2030. With the actual certitude, obtained by the recently received a.m. pumping test results
(2021+2022) concerning the sustainable possible & potential yield / borewell it is recommended to drill wells
on/or around the Kerevat Hospital on government land , and/ or around the KNHS – premises. Kerevat with the
proposed potential wellfields is situated about 7 to 8km from the sea, thus the risk of a salinity intrusion is
minimized. However, wells should not be overpumped, as to avoid a mounting of brackish water. The area of
a potential wellfield , permitting a distance of at least 150m from well to well (to avoid overlapping of the cones
of depression when being pumped) would then be about 500 x 600m, about 3 ha.
The necessary number of wells for the 2030 horizon (15 l/s – 1,300m³/day, ADF= 1,342m³/day) to be drilled
, will be a total of 7 boreholes, 6 + 1 spare well (assuming a sustainable average yield of 6 l/s per new
borehole/well to stay on the safe side) and also include the Hospital well. Thus a total of 7 + 1 spare well will
ensure the ADF up to 2030 for Kerevat town. These 6 new wells + the Hospital well = 7 wells will then be
pumped 10hrs/day, delivering 21.6m³/hr / well.
The necessary number of wells for the 2040 horizon (22 l/s – 1,900m³/day, ADF = 2,021m³/day) will be a
total of 11 boreholes (including the hospital well and the 1 spare well for maintenance purposes) that will be
required to meet the projected demand of 22 liters/sec. Assuming an average well capacity of 6 l/s with the
new drillings/wells spaced 150m to 200m apart, the water demands of horizons 2030 & 2040 should be met.
Should there be a necessity to provide more volume / day (m³), then it would be possible to either pump some
of the wells an hour longer, or pump the spare well for 5 hours/day for instance.
The drilling programme (see also Annex D, page 14) should be organized as follows: First drill up to 3 test-
wells (eventually at 2 different sites for the well field) up to 110m depth, borehole-log , then equip and pump-
test these and then decide where and how deep the other wells should be drilled/built. When drilling the
conductivity of the drilling mud must be measured every meter after obtaining a depth of 50m as to discover
(and avoid) any salinity as early as possible.
Reservoir, Tanks and Water Treatment

There is one (1) existing reservoir at the Kerevat Hospital.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
The proposed reservoir will be located on the highest elevation of the project area at UTM-coordinates 394376
/ 9318702at an altitude of about 74 m amsl.
Water Mains
There will be transmission lines from the “Source” with eventually a raw water tank to the clean water tank
uphill (=reservoir #1) with HDPVC, class 12.5 and 250mm diameter of about 477m length up to horizon 2030
and lengths of 202m up to horizon 2040. The “source” in the drawings is a collection point for the lines coming
from the wells in the well field, then conducting the raw water to the reservoir #1. Pipelines with 200mm
diameter will be laid 553m up to 2030 and 148m up to 2040. See also Figure3.2-2 for the well field and the
location of source and reservoir #1 / tank #1.
Water Reticulation System

Gravity mains will be 160 mm to 75 mm HDPE Class 12.5 running from the reservoir into the water supply
network. The pipes will be laid in trenches at minimum depth 1000 mm with Class C bedding. The reservoir at
65masl (which is the highest point in relation to the Kerevat town area) will supply the lower areas, which are
all around 25 to 35masl,
These mains will have fire hydrants, air valves, bulk water meters designating zones and gate valves installed
on them for management of the water supply network. The service pipes run from the secondary lines to the
consumers. All consumer water meters are connected on the service lines. The service or connection pipes
range from 50 mm to 32 mm HDPE.
Project Cost Estimate

The Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) values and the operation and maintenance expenditure for the KEREVAT
water-supply option of Groundwater is presented in the table below:
Table 1-2: CAPEX cost estimate
The Table is deleted

Ialibu, Kerevat)
1 INTRODUCTION
As part of moves towards implementing the National Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WaSH) behaviour Policy,
the Government of Papua New Guinea secured the financial support of the World Bank to fund the Feasibility
Studies, Designs (including ESHS), and Preparation of Bidding Documents for the Three (3) Water Supplies
(Misima, Kupiano and Kupiano) and the Four (4) Water Supplies (Namatanai, Kerevat, Ialibu and Aitape)
under Water PNG.
The Water and Sanitation sector is one of the sectors requiring critical intervention in fulfilling national devel-
opmental goals of reviving infrastructural facilities. The Government of Papua New Guinea has always been
mindful of the direct improvement this sector would bring to the living standards of Papua new Guineans.
Water PNG Limited, which was established in 1986 with the objective of providing safe water and sanitation
services in provincial and district towns in PNG has carried on well with the provision of these services. By
the end of 2016, Water PNG Limited was providing services to 23 centres.
Water PNG Limited has engaged Hydroplan Ingenieur-Gesellschaft mbH to prepare Feasibility Studies, Engi-
neering Designs and Bidding Documents (including technical specifications and bills of quantities) for water
supply systems covering the entire population of the selected towns. This includes, in particular, a compre-
hensive assessment of the source options for the selected towns including water quality and resilience to
climate change, financial and economic analysis of water supply options, and environmental and social impact
assessment.
Hydroplan Ingenieur GmbH is the fully responsible for the conduct of the studies and will take all necessary
steps for smooth implementation of the studies. Hydroplan shall exercise all reasonable skills, care and dili-
gence in the performance of the services under the contract and shall carry out all responsibilities in accord-
ance with recognised professional standards. In undertaking the studies, Hydroplan shall cooperate fully with
Water PNG Limited and liaise with other concerned organisations with a view to collecting new information,
ascertaining data, discussing development plans, criteria etc. Hydroplan shall take into account relevant com-
ments of Water PNG Limited and shall be responsible for the accuracy of his work, conclusions and recom-
mendations.
The present report deals with the Preliminary Design for the water supply of the town of Kerevat on the eastern
end of the island of New Britain in the East New Britain Province of Papua New Guinea.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2 SUMMARY OF DESIGN DATA
2.1 Project area

Kerevat Town is located in Gazelle District on East New Britain Province. The town is situated at coordinates
4° 20' 29.88" S & 152° 2' 20.7" E, about 50 kilometers from Tokua Airport via Kokopo–Rabaul Road and Rabaul-
Kerevat Road. The town is located on the Kerevat River, which traverses a wide low-lying alluvial plain area
surrounded by low mountains. Kerevat lies at an altitudinal range of 30m asl to 50m asl and is located about
8 km south-east of Ataliklikun Bay (Figure 2.1-1).
Kerevat Town can be reached by air (plane) and land (vehicle) transportations from Port Moresby. It is about
780 kilometers northeast of Port Moresby. The project team, along with the Water PNG Technical Officer and
the Water PNG Kokopo Branch Manager, travelled by air to the project area on 26 to 29 August 2019. The
travel time from Port Moresby to the Tokua Airport in East New Britain was approximately 2 hours. From Tokua
Airport the project team proceeded to Kerevat town by vehicle via Kokopo – Rabaul Road (35 km) and Rabaul-
Kerevat Road (15km). It took two hours to reach Kerevat from the Tokua airport. The roads are either asphalt
or gravel/soil paved with some pot-holes noted along the way. The highway is surrounded by vegetation, it is
hilly and there is no street lighting or proper road signage. There are several bridges along the highway which
are generally made of concrete, one lane and in good condition.
The following figure shows the location of Kerevat at the Ataliklikun Bay and a close-up of the town.
Source: HYDROPLAN
Figure 2.1-1: Geographical location of Kerevat (left) and close-up of the town (right)
2.2 Project Horizon

As stated in the Terms of Reference, the Consultant carried out an assessment of water supply needs for a
20-year horizon considering demographic and economic growth, and broken down in four user categories:
residential, commercial, industrial and institutional.
The hydraulic calculations contained in this preliminary design report take into account different supply condi-
tions such as night flow, maximum day flow and peak hour for year 2040. These calculations have been also
executed using a proper hydraulic modelling software (EPANET), in order to implement several project scenar-
ios, as discussed below.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2.3 Climate
Temperature and rainfall: The average temperature in Kerevat is 26.9 °C, varying mostly within a rather narrow
range with minimum and maximum temperatures of the order of 23 0C and 31 0C. New Britain Island receives
a high rainfall, even during the driest months of the year; 42% of the annual rainfall in Kerevat occurs during
the period June to November, which is the dry season in e.g. Port Moresby. Detailed climatological data are
not available for Kerevat, but the average rainfall and temperature distributions are similar for Rabaul at the
north-eastern tip of New Britain and Kerevat (Table 2.3-1).
The National IWRM Report (20071) provides only 12 years of precipitation data for Rabaul, for the period 1995
– 2006. The available information is shown in Figure 2.3-1 and summarized in Table 2.3-1, including percentiles
of monthly rainfall. The long-term average annual rainfall is 2,243 mm/year. While the inter-annual variation in
monthly rainfall (the coefficient of variation CV) is significant (mostly in the range of 40% to 70%), the inter-
annual variation in the annual rainfall at Rabaul is much less, albeit still significant at CV = 20%. The period
with available precipitation data for Rabaul is too short for a trend analysis of annual precipitation, but – while
the annual rainfall fluctuates significantly - there has been no significant trend due to climate change in the
annual rainfall at other stations such as Kavieng station on New Ireland.
Table 2.3-1: Hydro-meteorological data for Rabaul and Kerevat
Source: IWRM Report, 2007 and climate-data.org
Figure 2.3-1: Temperature data for Kerevat and precipitation data for Rabaul
1
National Integrated Water Resource Management, Diagnostic Report, Papua New Guinea; SOPAC Miscellaneous Report 643, National IWRM Report
- SOPAC, November 2007
Ialibu, Kerevat)
According to Figure 2.3-2 the Köppen-Geiger climate classification for New Britain Island is Af, which is clas-
sified as a tropical rainforest climate, characterized by high temperatures and an average precipitation of at
least 60 mm in every month; hence, the absence of a dry season. This climate has no natural seasons in terms
of thermal and moisture changes. The two main determinants of its climate are its topography (orographic
effects) and the seasonal latitudinal movements of two air streams separated by a low pressure system known
as the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), as well as the periodic intervention of the El Niño Southern
Oscillation (ENSO). The seasonal movement of the ITCZ with its associated tropical air masses controls the
two principal wind directions which strongly influence the rainfall patterns of the region. When the ITCZ is
positioned south of PNG, north-westerly winds predominate from late December to mid-April. These winds are
referred to as monsoons because they bring heavy rainfall. When the ITCZ is repositioned to the north of PNG
between May and October, south-easterly winds - known as the Trade Winds - predominate. During the latter
period heavy rainfall occurs in areas conducive to orographic influences such as the highlands and the wind-
ward slopes of areas exposed to the south-east, including New Britain Island.
The following figure classifies the climate for New Britain Island mostly as a tropical rainforest (Af) climate.
Source: Beck, H.E. et al. (2018)
Figure 2.3-2: Köppen-Geiger Climate Classification for Papua New Guinea for the present day
Drought periods: It is seen from the percentiles of monthly rainfall (Table 1-1) at Rabaul that the monthly rainfall
is rarely less than 60 mm/month, less than once in 10 years (10% percentile). Droughts in the Central Province
of the main land are usually associated or influenced by the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon.
It is estimated that ENSO events in PNG occur once every 8-13 years, around the 10% percentile. The most
recent severe drought occurred in 1997 (dubbed “most serious drought of the century”), when the drought
extended elsewhere into January 1998. Instead, at Rabaul the drought was mainly limited to the month of
November with a monthly rainfall of only 3 mm, even though the total rainfall for the period June – November
was at a 20-year low, around the 5% percentile level (586 mm). It may thus be concluded that the seasonal
availability of Kerevat’s sources of water, albeit groundwater or surface water, is not critical.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Evaporation: The Class-A evaporation rate at the lower altitudes of New Britain is in the range of 1,750 to
2,000 mm/year (McAlpine and Keig, 19832; page 113). For the humid conditions at sea level (80% - 90%
humidity) with moderate winds the pan coefficient is about 0.75, which yields a reference crop evapotranspi-
ration ET0 - equivalent to the Penman-Monteith method (Monteith3, 1965) - of about 1,400 mm/year. For an
annual precipitation of 2,650 mm/year, the actual evaporation rate ET is then estimated according to the Turc-
Pike (Budyko-type, see Section 1.6) model at 1,240 mm/year, i.e. 88% of ET0 and 47% of the annual precipita-
tion. The estimated runoff coefficient for the coastal plains is then 53%, yielding a runoff estimate of 1,410
mm/year, i.e. 1.4 million m3/km2/year or 44.4 l/s/km2.
Tropical cyclones: Tropical cyclones are the most significant extreme events in much of the Pacific, often
associated with heavy rain, strong winds, storm surges and large waves. Fortunately, tropical cyclones are
mostly confined to the latitudes 10°–25° in both hemispheres, where the ocean is warm enough to provide
the energy for them to form and the Coriolis effect (related to the Earth’s rotation) is large enough for cyclones
to spin-up. Most of PNG is located between latitudes 20 and 100 south of the Equator. Tropical cyclones can
cause extensive damage to communities, agriculture and infrastructure, and causing injury and loss of life.
The South Pacific experiences most of its tropical cyclones during the period November to April, with most
activity between January and March. On average, 10 cyclones occur in a season with significant year-to-year
variability.
In the 42-year period from 1969 to 2010, 64 tropical cyclones developed in or crossed into the Papua New
Guinea Exclusive Economic Zone, an average of only 15 cyclones per decade. Over this period cyclones oc-
curred in El Niño, La Niña and neutral years. In this period 23 cyclones passed within 400 km of Port Moresby,
an average of less than one cyclone per season (Figure 1-7; source: PACCSAP4, 2015). Finally, a new report
by IPCC (2019) states that the average intensity of tropical cyclones, the proportion of Category 4 and 5 tropical
cyclones and the associated average precipitation rates are projected to increase for a 2°C global temperature
rise above any baseline period (medium confidence). Even though the probability of a cyclone hitting Kerevat
is likely very small, its possibility should nonetheless be taken into account while designing the water supply
infrastructure.
2.4 Topography and Geomorphology

In his work on the geomorphology of PNG, Löffler (1977, 1979) – as summarized by Bleeker (1983) – identified
five principal landscape categories with fourteen types of land forms as shown in Figure 2.4-1. Kerevat is
located in the landscape category ‘Islands’ (# 5) and in the land form ‘Relict alluvial plains and fans’. The
alluvial Kerevat River valley is bordered on its west side by ‘mountains (> 200m)’, which are part of the New
Guinea Highlands. On its east side till the sea the valley is bordered by the landform ‘volcanoes and associated
plains’, with very good hydro-geological conditions due to the prevalence of volcanic ash and pumice (see
Section 3.1). South of Kerevat town one finds the landform ‘hills and low mountains (<200m)’.
2
J.R. McAlpine and Gael Keig, 1983: Climate of Papua New Guinea, CSIRO, ANU Press
3
Monteith J.L., 1965: Radiation and crops. Experimental Agricultural Review 1: 241–251
4
PACCSAP, 2015: Current and future climate of Papua New Guinea, Pacific-Australia Climate Change Science and Adaptation Planning Program
(PACCSAP 2015)
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Source: (Löffler 1979; National IWRM Report – SOPAC 2007)
Figure 2.4-1: Landforms and major landscape regions of PNG
The islands near the eastern tip of the mainland form an extension of the Central Ranges Region (Figure 2.4-
1). The mountain chain running through the centre of the mainland and islands to the south-east is dominated
by metamorphic and intensive igneous rocks. The metamorphic rocks found in these units are composed
mainly of altered sedimentary and volcanic rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age, while the intrusive rocks
are predominantly of Miocene Age. South–east Papua is regarded as the most geologically complicated area
of PNG, containing not only metamorphosed sedimentary rocks of Cretaceous and Jurassic Age, but also many
basic igneous Tertiary rocks. The islands of the Louisiade Archipelago have rugged mountains and are fringed
by raised fossil coral reefs. Fossil coral reefs are raised (uplifted) coral reefs and terraces.
Mountain areas are dominated by ridge and valley land forms. Owing to high slopes in the highlands a relatively
small fraction of the precipitation is usually available for infiltration into the soil. Most of it either evaporates
or quickly discharges into streams and rivers as surface runoff. The steep slopes also imply that, where there
are potentially aquiferous rocks, the water table is only accessible near rivers where it approaches the surface.
2.5 Geology and Hydrogeology

Kerevat is located in the Southern Bismarck Island Arc, which is a belt of active volcanoes running along the
coast north of the mainland into New Britain. Numerous active volcanoes are located along the north coast of
New Britain with large areas covered by ash deposits. The town of Rabaul was relocated further south to
Kokopo due to eruptions of the nearby Vulcan and Tavurvur volcanoes (15 and 20 km from Kerevat) in 1994.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
The central and southern parts of New Britain are dominated by rugged mountains formed on sedimentary
rocks, particularly lime stones which have prominent karst features.
The UN (1983) report describes a broad hydrogeological unit for the main aquifers of the Quaternary alluvial
plains and fans, which are relevant to Kerevat, i.e. unconsolidated sediments.
Unconsolidated sediments: Unconsolidated sediments (or alluvium) are Quaternary alluvial, lacustrine and fan
deposits, which are confined to valleys and depressions. In the large basins the alluvium is mainly silt and
sand with some gravel, whereas in the smaller mountain-rimmed basins and tectonic depressions coarse
gravel and lacustrine mud are abundant. Groundwater is generally obtained from clean sand and gravel aqui-
fers. Both confined and unconfined aquifers are common. Most of the water wells so far developed in Papua
New Guinea are located in this unit and the rate of successful wells is high. Wells producing 10 l/s with a
drawdown of 1-2 m are common, with often high specific capacities.
It is perceived that Quaternary (Holocene) sediments comprising of clay, silt, sand and gravel have been de-
posited over eons in the Kerevat River valley (see Figure 2.5-1, showing a flat valley surrounded by hills and
ridges). The New Britain Drillers company reported that most of the soil material around Kerevat consists of
pumiceous ash, silt, sand, gravel, pumice and coronus (derived from uplifted coral reefs). The prospect of
finding productive aquifers in the Kerevat River valley for groundwater supply of Kerevat town is thus high. In
view of the high rainfall in the area, natural recharge of the aquifers is likely also high since one does not
observe signs of erosion due to excessive surface runoff. Exploratory drilling will have to confirm these as-
sumptions.
Source: HYDROPLAN
Figure 2.5-1: View of the Kerevat River valley from the ridge on the east side of the valley
2.5.1 Hydrogeological investigations at Kerevat

In Annex 1 of the Feasibility Study Report we discussed broadly the prevailing geological, geo-morphological
and geo-hydrological conditions in the Kerevat area.
The New Britain Drillers (NBD) reported that most of the soil material around Kerevat consists of pumiceous
ash, silt, sand, gravel, pumice and coronus (derived from uplifted coral reefs). The prospect of finding produc-
tive aquifers in the Kerevat River valley for groundwater supply of Kerevat town is thus high. NBD has con-
firmed that a sustainable yield of 10 l/s per bore well, operated during 8 to 9 hours per day, should be achiev-
able in the Kerevat area, and we will use this capacity for tentative design purposes. If this capacity is indeed
confirmed, one would need by 2030 four (4) wells operated for 9 hours to provide continuously 15 l/s, and by
2040 six (6) wells operated for 9 hours @ 10 l/s to provide continuously 22 l/s. In addition, it is important to
include one fully equipped spare bore well, to allow for maintenance, borehole re-development and other oc-
casional interruptions of well operations.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
The Kerevat Hospital has its own bore well with a depth of 102 m and a sustainable yield of 10.5 l/s. However,
its operation is deficient due to electromechanical problems caused by frequent spikes in the power supply.
The borehole is located at coordinates 4° 20' 27.9" S & 152° 2' 17.94" E (see Figure 2.5-1.)
Source: HYDROPLAN
Figure 2.5.1-1: Location of the bore well at Kerevat Hospital
Recharge area and sustainable yield: Infiltration, soil moisture and groundwater are dependent on rainfall,
topography, vegetation cover, soil type and geological conditions. In Annex 1 of the Feasibility Study Report
we have estimated the potential recharge of the aquifers at Kerevat in two ways: i) the recharge as a percent-
age of the precipitation surplus (precipitation - evapotranspiration losses), and ii) recharge estimates based on
previous studies. We have estimated the runoff coefficient, i.e. the fraction of the annual rainfall available for
runoff and recharge at 53% of the annual precipitation; 47% is evaporated. When we estimate the fraction of
the precipitation surplus available for recharge conservatively at 25%, the recharge in the Kerevat River Valley
could amount to 13% of the total annual precipitation (2,650 mm/year), or about 350 mm/year. This estimate
aligns well with a global estimate provided by the World-wide Hydrogeological Mapping and Assessment
Program (WHYMAP) for Papua New Guinea as published by BGR & UNESCO (2008). High recharge rates >300
mm/year are prevalent across PNG. The average annual recharge rate for the Island Region is estimated to be
high (>300 mm/year), or > 10% of the average annual precipitation at Kerevat, albeit in a hydrogeological
environment of complex geological structure.
2.5.2 Groundwater balance

The groundwater supply option would require by 2040 the installation of 10 new bore wells (as according to
the field investigation report , Annex D, the wells in this region have a capacity of about 6 l/s only) with pumps
of a total continuous operating capacity of 22 l/s. The total annual abstraction of groundwater by 2040 would
be 0.7 million m3 per year, equivalent to an effective recharge of for example 300 mm/year (13% of the annual
rainfall) over an area of 2 km2.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2.5.3 Groundwater quality

Across Papua New Guinea, there is generally no major water quality issue related to the use of groundwater
for municipal and domestic water supply, albeit that source protection and a catchment management plan are
required for this option, particularly when the bore wells would be located near Kerevat town. Production bore
wells will need to be protected from chemical and bacteriological contamination. Since Kerevat is located on
an island created due to volcanic activity, its groundwater may contain iron and manganese, which may cause
iron bacteria in the wells, and can cause in turn clogging of the wells. However the recent water analyses of
groundwater of the 3 pump-tested a.m. wells show only small contents of iron & manganese, below the values
of the guidelines. See Annex D, field investigation report, page 14). Most groundwater in the country is hard
to very hard, according to the USGS classification (more than 180 ppm of calcium, magnesium and other
metals). This may necessitate softening before disinfection and distribution.
2.6 Existing Water Supply Infrastructures

Keravat has no existing water supply system. The residents and public facilities depend on rainwater and
surface water from the Kerevat River and surrounding creeks, for their daily water needs. Private bore wells
and groundwater from shallow dug wells are also used as sources of water.
The Keravat National High School (KNHS) abstracts water from a creek discharging into the Keravat River at
the southern end of the town. That water is then subjected to sedimentation and filtration before the water is
pumped to a storage tank at a higher elevation. No chlorination is applied. The Keravat Hospital has its own
bore well, allegedly with a depth of 200m bgl but this needs to be confirmed (ground level is at 28m amsl),
since it is unusually deep for the circumstances, see therefore the next paragraph, where the depth of the
same well is cited to be 102m bgl. The bore well has suffered extensively from electromechanical problems
caused by frequent spikes in the power supply (a strong stabilizer would be required). Similarly, the National
Agricultural Research Institute (NARI) used to operate a bore well, but this well is also long since out of order
due to loss of the pump caused by severe power spikes. NARI is now using surface water from a nearby creek.
Finally, the University of Natural resources and Environment (UNRE) is successfully using two bore wells
(UNRE 1 & 2) on its premises.
The Kerevat Hospital is located on the premises of the Gazelle District Office and has since 2012 its own bore
well. The ground level is at 28m amsl and the bottom of the well is at 74 m bmsl5; hence, the depth of the well
is 102m (or: at 102m b.g.l.). The bore well had at the time reportedly a sustainable yield of 10.5 l/s (but see
table 2.6.1-1 below). However, the bore well has suffered extensively from electromechanical problems
caused by frequent spikes in the power supply (a strong stabilizer would be required). The lack of funding for
repairs has been the main issue for sustaining its operation. It is proposed to include the groundwater well of
Kerevat’s hospital in the new system operated by Water PNG, in order to ensure the reliable long-term opera-
tion of the well for the Hospital and its immediate surroundings.
The following figure shows the Kerevat Project Area, the creek, where the Kerevat National High School ab-
stracts water (at the reservoir) and the two storage tanks at the Hospital with its own bore well.
5
Bmsl = below mean sea level
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Source: HYDROPLAN
Figure 2.6-1: Existing Water Supply Structures
The following Figure shows the existing borehole set up and the electro-mechanical control panel house at the
Kerevat Rural Hospital.
Source: SMEC PNG
Figure 2.6-2: Borehole set up (left) and Electro-Mechanical Control Panel House (right) at Kerevat
Hospital
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2.6.1 Alternative source of water supply

The residents, institutions and commercial establishments depend highly on rainwater harvesting and collec-
tion system in meeting their domestic water needs.
The residents collect the rain water from their respective house roof and store it into harvester tanks, as shown
in the figure below. The harvester tanks have various capacities and are either plastic or non-plastic. It is
understood that the majority of the residents boil the water prior to consumption in order to provide a form of
basic treatment; however, some residents drink the water without any treatment.
Source: SMEC PNG
Figure 2.6.1-1: Typical rainwater harvester/collection system set-up
2.6.2 Potential Water supply source

There is one existing borehole in Kerevat Town. The location (see Figure 2.6-1), coordinates and altitudes are
shown in the table below.
Table 2.6.2-1: Existing boreholes in Kerevat

No. Location & Coordinates Altitude (m amsl) Remarks
 Utilized as a back-up water supply during
dry season.
 Pump was replaced in November 2018
Kerevat Rural Hospital
BH-1 28  Depth: 102 m
4° 20' 27.9" S & 152° 2' 17.94" E
 Capacity 2018: 10.5 l/s
 Pump-test in 2022: 6 l/s (sustainable
yield)
Source: SMEC PNG
2.6.3 Power supply

The town’s power supply is provided by the Gazelle Peninsula System of PNG Power Limited (PPL).
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2.7 Population Forecasting and Water Demand Analysis
2.7.1 Population trend

The 2011 National population and Housing Census final figures put the population of Papua New Guinea at
7,275,324 million people6 with an annual growth rate of 3.1% since the last census in 2000.
The New Britain Province, in which Kerevat is located, recorded an annual growth rate of 3.6% between 2000
and 2011 and the population of Kerevat town was estimated at 2,682 persons.
The following developments around Kerevat are likely to impact the population growth and the demand for
water services in the town of Kerevat:
 Continued growth of Cocoa and Copra Production in East New Britain Province.
 Continued growth in tourism.
2.7.2 Population projection

Year 2011 is considered to be the base year for estimation of population and 2020 to 2040 is the projected
population period. Using the 2011 population figure for Kerevat Town and the annual provincial population
growth rate of 3.6%, the population was calculated for 2011 to 2040.
The projected population and corresponding growth rate considered are shown in Table 2.7.2-1. The projected
population refers to the Project Area. The population in the outskirts, i.e. nearby settlements, was projected
by multiplying the number of counted houses based on aerial view with the average household size of 6.2 that
was derived from dividing the 2020 population of 3,737 by the corresponding number of households (603)
from the Feasibility Study Report. The results are presented in Table 2.7.2-2.
Source: HYDROPLAN
Figure 2.7.2-1: Project Area and Outskirts
6
Source: National Statistical Office (NSO) – National Population & Housing Census 2011 Final Figures
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Table 2.7.2-1: Population projection for Kerevat Project Area

Projected Population
Growth rate (i %) (Pn), persons
Year
(Considered)
Pn= Po(1+i/100)t
2020 3.8 3,737
2021 3.9 3,883
2022 3.9 4,035
2023 3.9 4,192
2024 3.9 4.355
2025 3.9 4,525
2026 4.0 4,706
2027 4.0 4,894
2028 4.0 5,090
2029 4.0 5,294
2030 4.0 5,506
2031 4.1 5,731
2032 4.1 5,966
2033 4.1 6,211
2034 4.1 6,466
2035 4.1 6,731
2036 4.2 7,013
2037 4.2 7,309
2038 4.2 7,615
2039 4.2 7,935
2040 4.2 8,268
Source: HYDROPLAN
The following table presents the projected population for 2020 to 2040 in the Project Area and the outskirts,
that could be connected to the proposed water supply system in a future phase.
Table 2.7.2-2: Population projection for the Kerevat Project Area and its outskirts
Av. Household Size: 6.2 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Growth rate: 3.6%
Project Area Houses 603 730 888 1,086 1,334
(247 ha) Population 3,737 4,525 5,506 6,731 8,268
Outskirts Houses 237 283 338 403 481
(101 ha) Population 1,469 1,753 2,092 2,497 2,980
Total Houses 748 1,013 1,226 1,489 1,815
(348 ha) Population 5,206 6,278 7,598 9,228 11,248
Source: HYDROPLAN
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2.7.3 Landuse
The following Figure shows the current land use for 2020 and the future land use for 2040. In order to avoid
urban sprawl, it is proposed to densify low to medium density areas and non-built-up areas within the existing
urban structure. For the expected increase in population of about 4,530 inhabitants, a residential area of 29
hectares with a target density of 73 inhabitants per hectare is proposed between existing residential areas. 5
ha of existing residential areas are proposed to be densified with a target density of 80 inhabitants per hectare.
Source: HYDROPLAN
Figure 2.7.3-1: Landuse 2020 and areas to be extended in 2040 in Kerevat
The following table presents the areas of the landuse classes for 2020 and 2040 shown in the figure above.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Table 2.7.3-1: Landuse Classes in Kerevat
Avg. Population Avg. Target

KEREVAT Houses N° Households Population Population
Area [ha] Density 2020 Density
Existing & Proposed Land Use 2020 2020 2020 2040
(inh./ha) 2040 (inh./ha)
Residential Area (exist.) 5.2 77 90 556 106.9 106.9 556

Residential Area to be densified 65.5 382 451 2,797 42.7 80.0 5,240
Residential Area to be extended (prop.) 28.6 1 1 6 0.2 73.2 2,094
Institutional Area (exist.) 3.2 28 33 204 63.8 63.8 204
Commercial/Industrial Area (exist.) 0.8 3 4 25 31.3 31.3 25
Open Space 143.5 20 24 149 1.0 0.0 149
Total Kerevat Town (Project Area) 246.8 511 603 3,737 41.0 59.2 8,268
Source: HYDROPLAN
2.7.4 Per capita water demand analysis

Kerevat town water demand calculations include for the following:
Residential units.
Industrial units.
Commercial units.
Firefighting (hydrant).
Other independent buildings that have unique water requirements.
Unaccounted for water - the difference between net production and consumption.
The guidelines presented in the Water PNG Design Manual were applied to determine water demand. The per
capita water demand schedule for five categories of consumers is shown in the table below.
Table 2.7.4-1: Per Capita Water Demand

Customers’ category Per capita consumption
(liters / person / day)
Residential
Low and high covenant 160
No covenant 40
* School
Boarding students 160
Day students 70
Hospitals
Inpatients 160
Outpatients 40
Others
Commercial 10,000 liters / hectare
Industrial
Firefighting (hydrant) 7 l/s for 2 hours
Source: Water PNG Manual
Per capita water demand is as stated in the Table above for five categories of customers. Fire-fighting
water demand is based on hydrant flow of 7.5 l/s and fire time of 2 hours.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
2.7.5 Unaccounted for water

Unaccounted for water (UFW) is defined as the difference between net production and consumption, the net
production is the delivered water in the system while consumption is the legitimate consumption either me-
tered or not. Non-revenue water (NRW) is the difference between the amount of water delivered into the water
system and the billed consumption. Generally, NRW is higher than UFW, the difference being the commercial
losses. Unaccounted for water is assumed as 20% of the average daily water demand as Water PNG Design
manual.
The Consultant has adopted 30% of the average daily water demand to account for Non-Revenue water. A
system with a consumption of x m3 /day with 30% NRW will have an average day demand equal to x/(1-NRW)
= 1.4 x m3/day.
2.7.6 Water demand estimates

The water demand schedule for the whole design period is based on the guidelines in the Water PNG Design
Manual and shown in Table 2.7.6-1 for the Kerevat Project Area.
Table 2.7.6-1: Water Demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area

Water Demand Schedule, m³/day
Population
Daily Consumption Average Daily Flow
Year Projected, per- Peak Daily Peak Hourly
son Comm. & Infra. &
Capita (A) (ADF) = 1.4 x (A+B) Flow (PDF) Flow (PHF)
Ind.(B) Instit. (C )
2020 3,737 598 1 45 902 1,082 1,947
2025 4,525 724 6 55 1,099 1,318 2,373
2030 5,506 881 11 67 1,342 1,610 2,898
2035 6,731 1,077 16 81 1,644 1,973 3,551
2040 8,268 1,323 21 100 2,021 2,426 4,366
Source: HYDROPLAN
2.7.7 Design Flows

Kerevat water supply system design basis for each of the components is presented in the table below.
Table 2.7.7-1: Design Flows

Design Components Design flows, m³/day
2030 2040
Source -Minimum Yield PDF 1,610 2,426
Headworks PDF 1,610 2,426
Trunk Gravity PDF 1,610 2,426
Trunk Pumped 1.2 x PDF 1,933 2,911
Reservoir Gravity 0.5 x PDF 805 1,213
Reservoir Pumped PDF 1,610 2,426
Reticulation-Case 1 PHF 67 101.10
Reticulation-Case 2 ADF + FF 1,342 2,021
Source: HYDROPLAN
Ialibu, Kerevat)
3 PRELIMINARY DESIGN
3.1 General description of the selected design option
The recommended design option (named as “Option 1b" in the Feasibility Study Report, approved by the Client
on September 2020) will utilize the existing borehole at the Kerevat Hospital (that had been drilled some years
back, in 2012) and 7 new boreholes to satisfy the better part of the projected water demand of 15 l/s by 2030.
The boreholes will be located in a wellfield near the KNHS (Kerevat National High School). A fully equipped
spare borehole (included in the a.m. 7 boreholes) is required by 2030 to allow for maintenance, re-development
periods and other occasional interruptions of the well operations. The wells shall be pumped 10hrs per day as
per WPNG-recommendation.
By 2040 a total of 10 boreholes will be required to meet the projected demand of 22 l/s and provide some
spare capacity, assuming an average well capacity of 6 l/s and spaced 150m to 200m apart. The boreholes
will be equipped with pump and motor sets (a duty and a standby) including all required appurtenances, dedi-
cated generator sets and pump houses. The borehole areas will be provided with security fence for safety.
Pumps ideal daily operation should be from 8 to 10 hours as per Water PNG recommendation.
To verify the layout and required amount of boreholes, at least three test bores to approximately 110 m depth
are recommended and shall be carried out by the Contractor. This also includes test pumping and a ground-
water quality sample (see Section 11 of Annex D for more details).
The table below details the sizing of these water supply components in the design option.
Table 3.1-1: Kerevat Water Supply Design Option

Main Feature under the
Description
Recommended Design Option
Project Horizon: 2030 2040

Production:
Daily Consumption, m3/day = 881 1,323
ADF, m3/day = 1,342 2,021
PDF, m3/day = 1,610 2,426
PHF, m3/day = 2,898 4,366
Wells:
Daily water production from BH#1; - BH#7= 6 l/s (10h/day) -
Daily water production from Hospital BH# 6 l/s (10h/day)
Daily water production from BH#8 – BH#11= 6 l/s (10h/day)
BH#1 to BH#11 include 1 spare well (maintenance) -
Reservoir:
Optional: Raw Tank (located near wellfield) = 1,000 m3
2030 Reservoir #1 (located at new Reservoir/clean water Tanksite) = 1,300 m3
2040 Reservoir #2 (located beside new reservoir #1) = 500 m3
Reservoir #2 shall complement reservoir #1 for 2040
Water Treatment Plant:
Tanks for Chlorination = 60 m3 60 m3
Pumping Stations: 148.5 kW (total)
11 pumps at wells = 13.5kW (1+1 stand-by) submersible pump
(including the Hospital well) 22kW horizontal pump
optional 1 pumping station at the Raw Water Tank site = 24kW gen.-set
Transmission: 250mm HDPE Pipe = 477 m 202 m
200mm HDPE Pipe = 554 m 148 m

Ialibu, Kerevat)
Distribution: 160mm HDPE Pipe = 1,796 m
110mm HDPE Pipe = 4,823 m

2,300 m
75mm HDPE Pipe =
Estimated service lines

50mm HDPE Pipe = 2,000 m
1,000 m
32mm HDPE Pipe =
Considering 6 l/s from each well, the design flows are the following:
Table 3.1-2: Water Quantity from Wells

Scenario / Source Pumping Flow
Horizon 6 l/s / well Duration [m3/d]
8 wells (6 new wells & the
2030 hospital well, +the spare well, which 10 h/d 1,512
is not producing)
10 wells (9 new wells & the
2040 hospital well, +the spare well, which 10 h/d 2,160
is not producing)
In the following figure is shown the general scheme of the selected design option.
Feasibility Studies, Designs (including ESHS), & Preparation of Bidding Documents for Four (4) Water Supplies under Water PNG (Aitape, Namatanai, Ialibu, Kerevat)
Figure 3.1-1: Schematic layout of the recommended design option

Figure 3.1-2: Schematic layout of the (optionally) recommended design option

Ialibu, Kerevat)
3.2 Design of well-field

The overall objective of the design of a well field is to create a structurally stable, long-lasting and efficient
number of wells that allow ground water to move effortlessly and sediment-free from the aquifer into the wells
at the desired volume and quality, and preventing bacterial growth and material decay in the wells, and achiev-
ing:
• High yield with minimum drawdown;
• Good quality water with proper protection from contamination;
• Sand-free water;
• Long lifetime;
• Reasonable short-term and long-term costs.
Due to overlapping cones of depression (see figure 4-1) has to be avoided, to avoid increased drawdown and
unnecessary high pumping cost.
As per our estimates described in the approved Feasibility Study Report, we assume here for bore well #1 a
transmissivity T = 0.01 m2/s and a storage coefficient μ = 20%. For bore well #3 we estimated T = 0.0045
m2/s and assume also that μ = 20%. The maximum zone of influence of the well (cone of depression) at time
t is about: Rt = 2√(Tt/μ). Rt is the distance (radius) over which one well has a significant impact on the
groundwater level. Most pumping systems are designed for 8 to 10hrs (t = 28,800 sec) pumping per day.
From the above design parameters we can thus estimate the maximum the zones of influence as R t = 76 m
for bore well #1 and Rt= 51 m for bore well #3.
Bore wells thus need to be located at least 150m to 200m apart (2 to 3 times Rt). Otherwise the pumping time
would need to be reduced in order to avoid too much interference between the bore wells, causing increased
drawdown and unnecessary high pumping costs. It has been noticed that the water levels in the existing bore
wells that had been tested in 2021/2022 recovered fast after the pumping ceased. In case pumping all wells
at the same time would cause undue interference, it is recommended to pump the wells in sequence in order
to avoid undue well interference.
Figure 3.2-1: Schematic well field layout and the principle of overlapping cones of depression
Across the globe 6 to 8 inches or 152 to 203 mm is the standard casing diameter for drilled public tube wells.
Given the (potentially) high capacities of the bore wells near the existing bore well #1, a casing diameter of
Ialibu, Kerevat)
203 mm (8 inches) is recommended. This requires the drilling of a hole with a diameter of 12 inches (305 mm),
in order to install an 8 inch pipe surrounded by gravel. The length of the screen assembly is typically 1/3 to 1/2
of the depth of the aquifer, preferably for high capacity wells at least 5m.
The existing bore well at the Kerevat Hospital with a total capacity of sustainable 6 l/s (as tested in January
2022) can be run for 10 hours per day together with the new 7 wells (to be drilled) in order to meet the
projected demand of Kerevat by 2030 (15 l/s continuously). In order to enable the continuous production of
the water demand by 2030 within 10 hours, as well as to create the necessary spare capacity for the occa-
sional time-out of one of the wells, for regular pump maintenance, re-development of the wells, as may be
required from time to time, and other occasional interruptions of the well operations, a spare well will have to
be drilled also, it is included in the a.m. number of 7 wells .
To meet the water demand by 2040 (22 l/s), three more wells – #8 to #10 – will be required, assuming an
average well capacity of also 6 l/s for these new wells , each well being operated also during 10 hours per
day.
Normally, a well field should normally include at least one piezometer for the monitoring of the impacts of
groundwater abstractions on groundwater levels, and assessing the response of groundwater levels to re-
charge during heavy rainfall events. However, given the complex hydrogeological structures in the region, a
piezometer may be less useful in this case, since the various wells may not all tap the same local aquifer
(geological crack or fault line). Instead, water levels at the various wells should be monitored regularly, partic-
ularly after heavy rainfall events.
The single submersible pumps for each well will pump the raw groundwater from the well field up to the clean
water reservoir where it will be chlorinated with a chlorination device. Each well will accommodate all the
pumping and electrical switchgear. The first eight wells will feed the water supply network at the 2030 horizon;
the additional three wells will feed the water supply network at the 2040 horizon. The single flow is 6 l/s from
each well/pump.
The needed pumping power is calculated adopting the following formula:
𝐻∙𝑄
𝑃=
102 ∙ 𝑁𝑝 ∙ 𝑁𝑚
Where:
 H (m) is the total head, including topographical difference in level and hydraulic losses;
 Q (l/s) is the total flow;
 Np is the efficiency factor of the pump (ratio power output to power input);
 Nm is the efficiency factor of the motor driving the pump.
In the following table are reported the design parameters for pumps, including pumping flow, total head, dis-
tance between each well and the future reservoir, the needed power to be installed, etc.
In the Annex C are reported the characteristic curves of the selected pumps.
Table 3.2-1: Submersible pumps parameters for the 11 wells

Estimated- G.L.(masl) Total
Estimated
Distance of Flow at drilling Power
Piezome Effi-
Well/Bore ID Location BH 1 to 11 site needed
[l/s] tric Head ciency
from the [kW]
[m b.g.l.]
source [m] %
#1 Well field 350 6 25 90 71 13.5
#2 Well field 300 6 29 90 71 13.5
#3 Well field 80 6 34 90 71 13.5
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Estimated- G.L.(masl) Total

Estimated
Distance of Flow at drilling Power
Piezome Effi-
Well/Bore ID Location BH 1 to 11 site needed
[l/s] tric Head ciency
from the [kW]
[m b.g.l.]
source [m] %
#4 spare well Well field 50 6 31 90 71 13.5
#5 Well field 150 6 30 90 71 13.5
#6 Well field 350 6 29 90 71 13.5
#7 Well field 150 6 31 90 71 13.5
#8 Well field 300 6 35 90 71 13.5
#9 Well field 180 6 32 90 71 13.5
#10 Well field 100 6 44 90 71 13.5
Hospital premises 33
#11 Hospital (With already in- 3,000 6 78 71 13.5
stalled pump)
Figure 3.2-2: Well field Kerevat with 10 proposed Borehole drilling points
Ialibu, Kerevat)
(BH11 is about 3km NW-away at the Hospital). The“source”is also the point for the optional raw water storage
tank 1,000m³ (into which the wells then would pump 21.6m³/h during 10hrs/day) and a pumping station The
reservoir is at 74masl, the ground level (masl) of the drilling points is shown below the numbers (BH1 – BH10)
3.3 Design of storage tanks

The necessary storage volume is determined by the water demand and the daily and seasonal consumption
pattern and not by financial considerations. It has been calculated using the EPANET model for the two project
scenarios (2030 and 2040 project horizons). The proposed storage will be enough to provide 24-hours supply
by 2040, and more than 24-hours water supply per day by 2030. The Consultant adopted a gravity system to
feed the water supply network (ensuring minimum pressure at nodes), thus a proper elevation tank is needed
at the Reservoir area, as shown in the following figure 3.3.1-1 Reservoir #1 at new Reservoir site
A main storage ground reservoir with a 1,300 cu.m. volume (Reservoir #1) is provided at the reservoir area
(Figure 4-4) to feed the generally lower levelled areas of the reticulation system. The area served by reservoir
#1 is shown on figure A-3 in the Annex A of this report. The detailed balance calculation for this reservoir is
reported in the section 4.6 of this report (see table 4-12).
This 1,300m³ reservoir will more than suffice for the water demands up to 2030 and well into the water demand
up to 2040, however, until 2040 it might be necessary to construct a supplementary reservoir of 800m³ at the
reservoir # 1 – site to cover the risen needs then. This reservoir #2 has also been included into the CAPEX
calculation.
Figure 3.3-1: Reservoir #1 typical section
3.4 Design of Water Treatment Plant
3.4.1 Generalities of Water Treatment Processes recommended for Kerevat

The main objective of a water treatment plant is to produce water that is fit for domestic use at a reasonable
cost. Many treatment processes are linked together to form a treatment plant in order to produce water of the
desired quality. A distinction is made in some literature between unit processes and unit operations, where
the term unit processes refers to those processes where a chemical (or biological) change takes place, while
unit operations refer to changes in water quality involving physical phenomena. The combination of treatment
processes is called a process train, or a process flow diagram.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Table 3.4.1-1: Basic Water Treatment Processes

Process / Step Purpose
Screening Removes large debris (leaves, sticks, fish) that can foul or damage plant equipment
Chemical pre-treatment Conditions the water for removal of algae and other aquatic nuisances
Pre-sedimentation Removes gravel, sand, sill, and other gritty materials
Micro-straining Removes algae, aquatic plants, and small debris
Chemical feed and rapid mix Adds chemicals (coagulants, pH, adjusters, etc.) to water
Coagulation / flocculation Converts no settable or settable particles
Sedimentation Removes settable particles
Softening Removes hardness-causing chemicals from water
Filtration Removes particles of solid matter which can include biological contamination and
turbidity
Disinfection Kills diseases using organisms
Adsorption using granular acti- Removes radon and many organic chemicals such as pesticides, solvents, and
vated carbon trihalomethanes
Aeration Removes volatile organic chemicals, radon H2S, and other dissolved gases; oxi-
dizes iron and manganese
Corrosion control Prevents scaling and corrosion
Reverse osmosis, electrodialysis Removes nearly all inorganic contaminants
Ion exchange Removes some inorganic contaminants including hardness-causing chemicals
Activated alumina Removes some inorganic contamination
Oxidation filtration Removes some inorganic contaminants (eg. Iron, manganese, radium)
Source: Adapted from American \Yater \Yorks Association, /11trod11ctio11 to Water Treatme/lf, Vol. 2, Denver, CO, 1984.
Table 3.4.1-2: Effectiveness of Water Treatment Processes in Removing Impurities
TREATMENT PROCESSES
Water Quality Pa-
rameter Chemical Coagu-
Aera- Rapid Slow Sand Final
lation and Floccu- Sedimentation
tion Filtration Filtration Disinfection
lation
Dissolved Oxygen + o o - - +
Carbon
+ o o + ++ +
Dioxide Removal
Turbidity Reduction o +++ + +++ ++++ o
Colour·Reduction o ++ + + ++ ++
Taste and Odour
++ + + ++ ++ +
Removal
Bacterial Removal o + ++ ++ ++++ ++++
Iron and Manga-
++ + + ++++ ++++ o
nese Removal
Organic Matter Re-
+ + ++ +++ ++++ +++
moval
Notes: ++++ = Increasing positive effect, o = no effect, -= negative effect.
The term conventional water treatment refers to the treatment of water from a surface water source by a
series of processes aimed at removing suspended and colloidal material from the water, disinfecting the water,
and stabilising the water chemically. Conventional treatment of water for domestic use involves a number of
treatment steps aimed at achieving the following objectives:
• Removal of suspended and colloidal matter to an acceptable level by means of coagulation-floc-
culation, sedimentation and sand filtration;
Ialibu, Kerevat)
• Disinfection to produce water that is safe to drink;

• Chemical stabilisation of the water to prevent corrosion of pipelines, attack on concrete pipes and
structures or the formation of chemical scale in distribution systems and fixtures.
The conventional treatment methods for removal of suspended and colloidal material from water include chem-
ical coagulation of small colloidal particles, flocculation of the small particles to form larger flocs or aggregates,
followed by sedimentation and sand filtration. When the water contains a large amount of suspended material,
larger suspended particles such as sand particles can be removed by means of settling without coagulation
and flocculation.
Other methods that can be used include slow sand filtration, flotation, micro-filtration and ultra-filtration. The
selection of the best combination of processes to treat water from a particular source depends on a number
of factors. These factors include:
• the amount of suspended solids;
• the turbidity of the water;
• the nature of the suspended material;
• the chemical properties of the water (alkalinity and pH);
• the volume of water to be treated, and
• the availability of facilities, trained operators and supervisors.
As per the available water quality test results (summarised in the Chapter 3.5.3 of this report), the groundwater
at Kerevat has very good quality, and all parameters were found within / below the national standards for
drinking water. The only values of iron and manganese were found below the admissible limits.
Therefore, the Consultant recommended to provide a proper water treatment, consisting of a final chlorination
before the distribution as drinking water.
DISINFECTION. A large fraction of bacteria and larger micro-organisms are removed during clarification pro-
cesses, especially by sand filtration. However, many bacteria and viruses still remain in clarified water even
at low turbidity levels. It is therefore, essential to disinfect water to prevent the possibility that water-borne
diseases are spread by pathogens (disease-causing micro-organisms) in water. Disinfection of water entails
the addition of the required amount of a chemical agent (disinfectant) to the water and allowing contact be-
tween the water and disinfectant for a pre-determined period of time (under specified conditions of pH and
temperature). Physical methods of disinfection of water include irradiation with ultra-violet light and boiling.
The most commonly used disinfectant is chlorine gas, Cl2 that is dissolved in the water at a certain concen-
tration for a certain minimum contact time. Other disinfectants include ozone, chlorine dioxide and other chlo-
rine compounds such as calcium hypochlorite (HTH), sodium hypochlorite (bleach) and monochloramine.
Chlorine is a strong oxidising agent and it reacts and oxidises some of the essential systems of micro-organ-
isms thereby inactivating or destroying them. The different forms in which chlorine is used for disinfection,
have different oxidising powers and this must be taken into account to ensure effective disinfection. Chlorine
can be added to water in different forms.
 Chlorine gas, Cl2 is delivered to the plant in gas cylinders and the chlorine is introduced into the water
by means of special dosing devices (chlorinators).
 Calcium hypochlorite, Ca (OCl)2 is available in granular or solid (tablet) form and is therefore a very
convenient form in which to apply chlorine, especially for smaller or rural plants. It contains between
65% and 70% of available chlorine, it is relatively stable and can be stored for long periods (months)
in a cool dry environment.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
 Sodium hypochlorite, NaOCl (commonly known as household bleach under different brand names) is
available as a solution. Water treatment sodium hypochlorite contains 12 to 15% of hypochlorite,
which is equivalent to 10% – 12% available chlorine. Sodium hypochlorite is relatively unstable and
deteriorates fairly rapidly, especially when exposed to sunlight. It also forms HOCl and OCl upon dis-
sociation.
 Monochloramine (so-called combined available chlorine) is also used for water disinfection. It is
formed when HOCl is added to water that contains a small amount of ammonia. The ammonia reacts
with HOCl to form monochloramine, NH2Cl. It is much less effective as a disinfectant than HOCl (the
same order of effectiveness as chlorite ion). However, it has the advantage of being much more stable
in water than free available chlorine. For this reason it is often used to provide residual protection in
larger distribution systems.
One of the problems associated with chlorination is the formation of chlorinated by-products. Some of these
(so-called trihalomethanes or THM’s) have been shown to have negative health effects and for this reason the
concentration of THM’s is controlled at very low levels in drinking water. It is important therefore to control
chlorination dosages and to pre-treat the water before chlorine contact to remove organic material in the water
(so-called precursor material) to low levels.
Final Treatment Process proposed for Kerevat Town:
CHLORINATION. The chlorination using calcium hypochlorite Ca(ClO)2 in a water solution is recommended for the
use at Kerevat-town. In the following table are reported the design parameters for the chlorination units. Chlo-
rine compound will be added in a contact tank.
Calcium hypochlorite can be supplied in powdered, granular or tablet form (65% to 70% m/m available chlorine).
Calcium hypochlorite is stable when dry and several months’ supply can be stored. The resultant free available
chlorine residual should remain in the range 0.2 to 0.5 mg/l, as per the World Health Organization recommen-
dations. It is also recommended that the contact time should be at least 30 minutes. Adopting a contact tank
with a total height of 1.80 m, the plant size (square shape) will be 4.50 m wide and 7.10 m length.
Table 3.4.1-3: Design parameters for Post – Chlorination Unit
Parameter Units 2030 2040

Peak hourly flow m3/h 67 101
Peak hourly flow l/s 15 22
Hypochlorite dosage mg/l 1.0 1.0
Hypochlorite quantity Kg/d 1.3 2.6
Contact time minutes 30.0
Contact tank size m 3
28 53
3.5 Design of Pumping Station (from reservoir#1 to reservoir#2)

The Kerevat water distribution network will be connected to the new reservoir site, and the water (after chlo-
rination treatment) will flow by gravity from the reservoir.
Option 1: From the wellfield the pumps of the wells will pump the raw groundwater directly into the reservoir,
Fig 3.1-1. (as the distances are not much more than a few hundred meters)
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Option 2: Another option would be a smaller raw water storage tank with a pumping station to pump the
collected raw water from the raw water tank (1,000m³) to the elevated clean water tank uphill at 74 masl
(Figure3.1-2). This would also allow the operators from Water PNG to manage the plant from one control room.
This pump station could be constructed in Phase 1 (2030 project horizon) and provisions left for addition of
other units or expansion.
The needed pumping power is calculated adopting the following formula:
𝐻∙𝑄
𝑃=
102 ∙ 𝑁𝑝 ∙ 𝑁𝑚
Where:
 H (m) is the total head, including topographical difference in level and hydraulic losses;
 Q (l/s) is the total flow;
 Np is the efficiency factor of the pump (ratio power output to power input);
 Nm is the efficiency factor of the motor driving the pump.
Should it come to the option where the wells pump first into a raw water tank: The difference in topographical
elevation between the two reservoirs (raw-water-reservoir and the clean water reservoir #1) is 30 m, the total
flow is 67 m3/h (=15 l/s, hourly PDF at 2030) and 101 m3/h (=22 l/s, hourly PDF at 2040). The total power
needed at the pumping station is 24.0 kW at 2040, to be installed over no. 2 pumps (22.0 kW each), one duty
and one stand-by pump. Then the profile for the transmission from Wellfield to Reservoir also applies. In the
Annex C the characteristic curves of the selected pump are reported.
3.6 Design of Distribution Network

The Water Supply Network design was done using a freeware software EPANET ver 2. A schematic represen-
tation of the water supply network was drawn onto the design module, with all the attribute data such as
ground levels, tank heights, pipe sizes, pipe lengths, nodes, valves, nodal demands, nodal levels, etc. entered
physically into the EPANET model.
Water demands were grouped into and assigned to the nodes, taking into consideration the settlement and
land-use pattern. A digital elevation model was used to provide the topographic data for the model. In the
hydraulic model and calculation the Consultant has considered assumptions for water losses, water usage for
firefighting, minimum pressure at nodes and proper pipe diameter size to minimize the water losses.
General Assumptions are the following:
 The water demand was based on urban distribution, as derived from satellite images.
 The population estimation for 2040, as projected and discussed in the Chapter 3.7 of this report, is
based on the 2011 population census.
 The water demand was calculated using the Water PNG – Water Supply and Sewerage Design Man-
ual.
 The demand pattern (24hrs) is shown below and was created to show how demand varies during a
24-hour day.
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Figure 3.6-1: Water demand pattern (24 hours)
The modelling software used EPANET, is a computer code with a basic interface that allows extended period
simulations of the hydraulic behaviour and water quality inside pressurized pipe networks (EPA, 2000). For the
present project, the software is used for the hydraulic performance simulation; water quality modelling will
not be performed as it does not make part of the scope of the project.
As structured by the software, a network is composed by pipelines, nodes, pumps, valves, storage and/or
reservoirs, which will be described further.
EPANET is the calculation engine used for the hydraulic simulation, however additional QGIS plugins are used
in order to transfer georeferenced data from EPANET to a GIS environment and vice versa, for that purpose,
the QGISRED Plugin was used.
EPANET is a software that resolves pipe flow systems using mass balance equations and hydraulic loss equa-
tions through pipes.
Methodology for calculating Hydraulic Losses

For the simulations performed in this Master Plan, the Hazen-Williams equation (Formula 1) was used as a
method for calculating hydraulic losses in pipes. This equation calculates the head loss in pipes and tubes due
to friction for fluids with a kinematic viscosity of approximately 1.1 cSt.
Formula 1. Hazen- Williams:
ℎ = 10.67 𝑞1.85 /(𝑐1.85 𝑑ℎ4.866 )
where
ℎ = head loss per unit pipe (mH2O/m pipe);
𝑐 = design coefficient determined for the type of pipe or tube - the higher the factor, the smoother
the pipe or tube;
𝑞 = flow rate (m³/s);
𝑑ℎ = inside hydraulic diameter (m).
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Methodology for Computing the Network

For the complete calculation of the network, EPANET uses the gradient method. The gradient method corre-
sponds to estimate the piezometric height of each node in an initial iteration, from which the network is solved.
After this first iteration, "n" iterations are carried out until the continuity equations are satisfied (conservation
of mass) in all the nodes of the pipe. For the elaborated models, 40 iterations were carried out.
Each iteration of the matrix requires the recalculation of all the hydraulic parameters of the network (including
the h for each pipe). For further information, the reader is referred to the EPANET 2.2 User’s Manual.
Elements required in the Simulation (spatiality)

In terms of spatial distribution, several entities need to be loaded into the software. Each of them has certain
associated characteristics that allow the software to perform the calculation of pressure and flow conditions.
In the following table, each of the entities is described together with the associated parameters and the way
in which they were measured in the field and/or in the assumptions, the following are the elements descrip-
tions according to the User’s Manual.
Junctions:
Points in the network where links join together and where water enters or leaves the network. The basic input
data required for junctions are:
 Elevation above some reference (usually mean sea level)
 Water demand (rate of withdrawal from the network) in LPS
 Initial water quality (Not performed for this Master Plan)
The output results computed for junctions at all time periods of a simulation are:
 Hydraulic head (internal energy per unit weight of fluid).
 Pressure
 Water quality (Not performed for this Master Plan).
Junctions can also:
 Have their demand vary with time as consumption patterns
 Have multiple categories of demands assigned to them
 Have negative demands indicating that water is entering the network
 Have pressure driven demand
 Contain emitters (or sprinklers) which make the outflow rate depend on the pressure
Reservoirs:
Nodes that represent an infinite external source or sink of water to the network. They are used to model such
things as lakes, rivers, groundwater aquifers, and tie-ins to other systems. Reservoirs can also serve as water
quality source points.
The primary input properties for a reservoir are its hydraulic head (equal to the water surface elevation if the
reservoir is not under pressure) and its initial quality for water quality analysis.
Because a reservoir is a boundary point to a network, its head and water quality cannot be affected by what
happens within the network. Therefore, it has no computed output properties. However, its head can be made
to vary with time by assigning a time pattern to it.
Tanks
Tanks are nodes with storage capacity, where the volume of stored water can vary with time during a simu-
lation. The primary input properties for tanks are:
 Bottom elevation (where water level is zero)
 Diameter (or shape if non-cylindrical)
 Initial, minimum and maximum water levels
Ialibu, Kerevat)
 Initial water quality

The principal outputs computed over time are:
 Hydraulic head (water surface elevation)
 Water quality
Tanks are required to operate within their minimum and maximum levels. EPANET stops outflow if a tank is at
its minimum level and stops inflow if it is at its maximum level.
Emitters
Emitters are devices associated with junctions that model the flow through a nozzle or orifice that discharges
to the atmosphere.
Emitters are used to model flow through sprinkler systems and irrigation networks. They can also be used to
simulate leakage in a pipe connected to the junction. These elements will not be used in this project.
Pipes
Pipes are links that convey water from one point in the network to another. EPANET assumes that all pipes
are full at all times, hence pressurized and not open flow. Flow direction is from the end at higher hydraulic
head to that at lower head. The principal hydraulic input parameters for pipes are:
 Start and end nodes
 Diameter
 Length
 Roughness coefficient (for determining head loss)
 Status (open, closed, or contains a check valve)
The status parameter allows pipes to implicitly contain shutoff (gate) valves and check (non-return) valves
(which allow flow in only one direction).
Computed outputs for pipes include:
 Flow rate
 Velocity
 Head loss
The hydraulic head lost by water flowing in a pipe due to friction with the pipe walls can be computed using
one of three different formulas:
 Hazen-Williams formula
 Darcy-Weisbach formula
 Chezy-Manning formula
Minor Losses
Minor head losses are caused by the added turbulence that occurs at bends and fittings. They can be ac-
counted for by assigning the pipe a minor loss coefficient. The minor head loss becomes the product of this
coefficient and the velocity head of the pipe (Formula 2).
𝑣2
Formula 2 ℎ𝐿 = 𝐾 (2𝑔)
where
𝐾 = minor loss coefficient;
𝑣 = fow velocity (Length/Time);
𝑔 = acceleration of gravity (Length/Time 2).
Pumps
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Pumps are links that impart energy to a fluid thereby raising its hydraulic head. The principal input parameters
for a pump are its start and end nodes and its pump curve. In lieu of a pump curve, the pump could be repre-
sented as a constant energy device, one that supplies a constant amount of energy (horsepower or kilowatts)
to the fluid for all combinations of flow and head.
The principal output parameters are flow and head gain. Flow through a pump is unidirectional and EPANET
do not allow a pump to operate outside the range of its pump curve.
Variable speed pumps can also be considered by specifying that their speed setting be changed under these
same types of conditions. By definition, the original pump curve supplied to the program has a relative speed
setting of 1. If the pump speed doubles, then the relative setting would be 2; if run at half speed, the relative
setting is 0.5 and so on. Changing the pump speed shifts the position and shape of the pump curve.
As with pipes, pumps can be turned on and off at present times or when certain conditions exist in the network.
A pump’s operation can also be described by assigning it a time pattern of relative speed settings. EPANET
can also compute the energy consumption and cost of a pump. Each pump can be assigned an efficiency curve
and schedule of energy prices. If these are not supplied then a set of global energy options will be used.
Flow through a pump is unidirectional. If system conditions require more head than the pump can produce,
EPANET shuts the pump off. If more than the maximum flow is required, EPANET extrapolates the pump curve
to the required flow, even if this produces a negative head. In both cases a warning message will be issued.
Valves
Valves are links that limit the pressure or flow at a specific point in the network. Their principal input parame-
ters include:
 Start and end nodes
 Diameter
 Setting
 Status
The computed outputs for a valve are flow rate and head loss. The different types of valves included in EPANET
are:
 Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV): limit the pressure at a point in the pipe network.
 Pressure Sustaining Valve (PSV): maintain a set pressure at a specific point in the pipe network.
Pressure Breaker Valve (PBV): force a specified pressure loss to occur across the valve. Flow through the
valve can be in either direction. PBV’s are not true physical devices but can be used to model situations where
a particular pressure drop is known to exist.
Flow Control Valve (FCV): limit the flow to a specified amount. The program produces a warning message if
this flow cannot be maintained without having to add additional head at the valve (i.e., the flow cannot be
maintained even with the valve fully open).
Throttle Control Valve (TCV): simulate a partially closed valve by adjusting the minor head loss coefficient of
the valve. A relationship between the degree to which a valve is closed and the resulting head loss coefficient
is usually available from the valve manufacturer.
General Purpose Valve (GPV): are used to represent a link where the user supplies a special flow -head loss
relationship instead of following one of the standard hydraulic formulas. They can be used to model turbines,
well draw-down or reduced-flow backflow prevention valves.
Shutoff (gate) valves and check (non-return) valves, which completely open or close pipes, are not considered
as separate valve links but are instead included as a property of the pipe in which they are placed.
Each type of valve has a different type of setting parameter that describes its operating point (pressure for
PRVs, PSVs, and PBVs; flow for FCVs; loss coefficient for TCVs, and head loss curve for GPVs).
Ialibu, Kerevat)
Valves can have their control status overridden by specifying they be either completely open or completely
closed. A valve’s status and its setting can be changed during the simulation by using control statements.
The pipelines for the Kerevat water supply network have been designed to accommodate maximum flows at
peak demand. All pipelines will be installed on the reserves designated for services along the roads. The pipe-
lines are classified as follows:
Raw Water Rising Mains

The raw water rising mains are 200 mm Class 12.5 HDPE that will run from the wells to the reservoir (at the
new reservoir location), and from the ground reservoir (raw water tank at 32masl) to the elevated tank (the
clean water reservoir #1 with post chlorination, at 74masl), and from the reservoir #1 to the connection with
the distribution network. The pipes will be laid in trenches at minimum depth 1000 mm with Class C bedding.
Concrete marker posts will be installed at regular intervals of 200 m along the pipeline and at the air valves,
and scour points.
Gravity distribution mains (Primary and Secondary Distribution Network)

Gravity mains will be 160 mm to 75 / 50 mm and maybe 32mm HDPE Class 12.5 running from the reservoir
into the water supply network. The pipes will be laid in trenches at minimum depth 1000 mm with Class C
bedding. The reservoir (which is on the highest point of the Kerevat town area) will supply the generally lower-
levelled areas. These mains will have fire hydrants, air valves, bulk water meters designating zones and gate
valves installed on them for management of the water supply network.
Service or Connection Pipes

The service pipes run from the secondary lines to the consumers. All consumer water meters are connected
on the service lines. The service or connection pipes range from 50 mm to 32 mm HDPE.
3.7 Hydraulic Analysis

The proposed distribution system for the area to be served in the year 2040 is composed of a storage tank of
post chlorinated clean-water with a capacity of 1,300 m³ and a distribution network of over 10.3 km.
The system should guarantee water supply for 24 hours even during off-pumping hours. The storage tank shall
operate as a regulation tank for flow and for pressure. The tank will be filled up during pumping hours simulta-
neously to the network feeding; and it will exclusively feed the network by gravity with the stored volume
during off-pumping hours.
The size of the tanks was calculated in function of the water consumption pattern and the proposed pumping
operation, the minimum size of the tank to guarantee such a dynamic corresponds to the volume required to
store water during pumping hours to satisfy demand during off-pumping hours, plus a 10% reserve as safety
volume, corresponding to:
PDFregulation.vol + 10% (PDFregulation.vol) = 1,122 m³ + 112 m³ = 1,234 m³ ≈ 1,300 m³
Calculations are shown in the Table below.
It is recommended to have two tanks or one tank with two compartments operating independently, to facilitate
maintenance, cleansing and to face the possibility of having one out of service. In case of having a single
module, it is recommended to have a by-pass at the tank entrance aimed to feed the distribution network
directly in an emergency or malfunctioning of the tank’s scenario, always verifying pressure and water quality.
Pumping from the water source (boreholes) towards the Tank 1 is proposed to take place during 10 hours from
6 am to 4 pm. The distribution from the Tank 1 will be made by gravity.
The water production vs. water demand balance as well as the resulting Tank sizing is presented in the fol-
lowing Table and Figure.
Table 3.7-1: Tank Design and Sizing Time Horizons 2030 and 2040
Tank design and sizing
V1
Vol.
Water demand Hour Coef Consumption Inlet qa-qc Tank
Reservoir location Kerevat (2040) 0 0-1 0.30 0.01 30.32 -30.32 440.71
Daily water demand of the 2,426 m³/d 1 1-2 0.30 0.01 30.32 -60.65 410.38
served area 2 2-3 0.30 0.01 30.32 -90.97 380.06
3 3-4 0.35 0.01 35.38 -126.35 344.68
Reservoir Inlet 4 4-5 0.70 0.03 70.76 -197.11 273.93
Inlet flow requirement 243 m³/h 5 5_6 1.60 0.07 161.73 -358.83 112.20
67 l/s 6 6-7 1.80 0.08 181.94 242.59 -298.19 172.85
Pumping hours 10 h 7 7-8 1.70 0.07 171.84 242.59 -227.43 243.60
8 8-9 1.30 0.05 131.40 242.59 -116.24 354.79
9 9-10 1.20 0.05 121.30 242.59 5.05 476.09
Tank size 10 10-11 1.20 0.05 121.30 242.59 126.35 597.38
Necessary volume 1122.0 m³ 11 11-12 1.30 0.05 131.40 242.59 237.54 708.57
Safety factor 10% 12 12-13 1.20 0.05 121.30 242.59 358.83 829.87
Safety volume 112.20 m³ 13 13-14 1.10 0.05 111.19 242.59 490.24 961.27
14 14-15 1.10 0.05 111.19 242.59 621.64 1092.67
Calculated 1,234 m³ 15 15-16 1.00 0.04 101.08 242.59 763.15 1234.19
Tank size
Approx. 1,300 m³ 16 16-17 1.10 0.05 111.19 651.97 1123.00
17 17-18 1.30 0.05 131.40 520.56 991.59
18 18-19 1.46 0.06 147.58 372.99 844.02
h (m)* 8 19 19-20 1.20 0.05 121.30 251.69 722.72
Tank r (m) 7.2 20 20-21 0.80 0.03 80.86 170.83 641.86
dimensions D (m) 14.4 21 21-22 0.70 0.03 70.76 100.07 571.10
S (m²) 162.5 22 22-23 0.60 0.03 60.65 39.42 510.45
* it is recommended to have additional 30 cm 23 23-24 0.39 0.02 39.42 0.00 471.03
for ventilation. Total 24.00 1.00 2425.92 2425.92
Demand Satisfaction 100%

Feasibility Studies, Designs (including ESHS), and Preparation of Bidding Documents for Four (4) Water Supplies under Water PNG (Namatanai, Kerevat,
Ialibu and Aitape)
Water Production - Demand Balance

2,500
2,000
1,500
volume [m³]
1,000
500
Water
Demand
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
time [hr]
Figure 3.7-1: Water Production – Demand Balance
The topography in the area is considered convenient for water supply by gravity in the area to be served, the
tank proposed is located on an elevation of 65 masl with at least 1 m underground, height enough to provide
sufficient head and pressure over 10 m W.C. to the customers located on an elevation below – about 55 masl
and less.
The hydraulic models elaborated correspond to three scenarios:
 Scenario 1: Projected horizon year 2030 Project Area to be served.
 Scenario 2: Projected horizon year 2040 Project Area to be served.
Each scenario represents the proposed infrastructure to be constructed by the analysed year and the projected
demands based on the demographic growth and urban development.
The models include the main transmission line to be updated based on the field investigation results and dis-
tribution system designed based on the projected demands and topography. The demands assigned to the
nodes represent land use patterns as described in Figure 2.7.2-1. The models were run during an extended
period of 24 hours to evaluate the behaviour of the network along the day including hourly variations with flat
and peak hours, demand pattern, storage tanks level and pressure, pumping hours and requirements, water
availability during off peak hours, flow and pressure in the pipes and delivery points.
The following graphs present the results of the simulations. Annex 1 presents the maps containing the outputs
and results of the hydraulic analysis in detail.
The water resources and their capacity for the Kerevat water supply system have not been well defined. For
the purposes of the hydraulic model, a single and sufficient water source will be assumed, and the analysis
will rather be focused on the distribution. This Report and hydraulic model have been updated once the field
investigations results became available.
Scenario 1: Year 2030 Project Area
Transmission Lines:
As a preliminary approximation, pumping from the water source will have a duration of 10 hours towards
Reservoir #1, from 6 am to 4 pm.
Ialibu and Aitape)
Figure 3.7-2: Scenario 1, 2030 – Pumping Trend at Water Source
The gravity mains transmitting clean water from Tank 1 towards the distribution system will have a diameter
of 200 mm – HDPE, PN-12.
The transmission lines are exclusively for water transmission, and no distribution pipe or customer shall be
connected directly to these pipes. The following Table resumes the lengths and diameters proposed.
Table 3.7-2: Transmission Pipelines’ Length

Nominal Diameter (mm) Length (m)
200 (from source towards Tank 1) * 450
250 (from tank 1 towards distribution) 203
Total: 653
*The pumping transmission lines layout and length have been updated in function of the location of the water sources. From the wells the water is
pumped by their submersible pumps either directly to the tank #1 (reservoir#1), or to an (optional) raw water tank ,and from there a pumping station
shall pump through the 450m-long transmission line to the tank #1 See also Figure 3.2-2 above.
Distribution:
The infrastructure and operation proposed including the pumping to feed storage Tank 1 the water storage
capacity and supply dynamic has been designed to be sufficient to guarantee the daily water demand. The
following Graph presents the system flow balance.
Figure 3.7-3: Scenario 2030 – Water production vs. Consumption
As observed in the Figure above, during off-pumping hours, there is an important water consumption from the
population that needs to be covered by the water storage with an optimal operation during off-pumping hours.
The compensation is done by means of the Tank 1 constructed in this phase with a capacity of 1,300 m³. The
horizon year 2030 requires 820 m³ storage, however the horizon year 2040 requires the 1,500 m³ mentioned
above, investment and constructability criteria need to be analized to decide the convenciene of constructing
Ialibu and Aitape)
the entire storage capacity at once or by phases. Tank 1 will experience the following pressure variation along
the day as follows.
Figure 3.7-4: Scenario1, 2030 – Storage Tank 1 Pressure Trend
It is very important to coordinate the water supply from the water source with the pumping stations’ operation
to maintain the water availability in the system. For this scenario (2030), it is assumed that one pump (plus
one in standby) will be operating to fill the water tank and supply the system (if the single wells should not
pump directly into reservoir#1). Ten hours of operation are estimated for filling up the water tower tank. This
assumption has been evaluated once the field investigations became available: With the ascertained
sustainable yields of an average 6 l/s possible and the necessary number of new to be drilled wells the
assumption is correct. Should however more volume be needed, then the pumping hours could rise from 10
to 11hours/day, or the spare well could also be operated for a few hours / day.
It is proposed to construct the storage unit – Clean Water Reservoir #1 – located on an elevation of about 74
masl, which will have enough head to provide sufficient head and pressure over 10 m W.C. to the customers
located on the lower area of elevations of about 35 to 45 masl. The following Figure presents the pressure
plot in the area served at the peak hour.
Figure 3.7-5: Scenario 1, 2030 – Pressure Contour Plot at 6:00 am
The distribution network is composed by about 25 km of pipes with the following diameters.
Ialibu and Aitape)
Table 3.7-3: Distribution Pipelines’ Length Network Year 2030

75 1,194
110 2,813
160 1,662
200 383
Total: 6,052
Scenario 2: Year 2040 Project Area

Transmission Lines:
In the year 2040, pumping mains transmitting raw water from the water source – boreholes – to the Tank 1
will remain the same as constructed in the year 2030. Once the field investigation results become available
the location, capacity and additional water sources will be designed and updated. As a preliminary
approximation, pumping from the water source will have a duration of 10 hours towards Tank 1, from 6 am to
4 pm.
Figure 3.7-6: Scenario 2, 2040 – Pumping Trend at Water Source
The gravity mains transmitting clean water from Tank 1 towards the distribution system will remain the same
as constructed in the year 2030 with pipelines of diameter of 200 mm – HDPE, PN-12.
Distribution:
The operation of the pumps proposed including the water storage and supply is designed to be sufficient to
guarantee the daily water demand. The following Graph presents the system flow balance.
Figure 3.7-7: Scenario 2040 – Water production vs. Consumption

Ialibu and Aitape)
As observed in the Figure above, during off-pumping hours, there is an important water consumption from the
population that needs to be covered by the water storage during off-pumping hours with an optimal operation.
The compensation is done by means of the Tank 1 constructed for the year 2030 scenario, with a capacity of
1,300 m³ which will experience the following pressure variation along the day.
Figure 3.7-8: Scenario 2, 2040 – Storage Tank 1 Pressure Trend
In order to achieve the behaviour presented in the Figure above, maintaining the water availability and pressure
in the system, it is very important to coordinate the water supply from the water source with the pumping
station’s operation. For this scenario (2040), it is assumed that one pump (plus one in standby) will be oper-
ating to fill the water tower and supply the system. Ten hours of operation are estimated for filling up the water
tower tank. This assumption will be evaluated once the field investigations become available.
The storage tank operating for this scenario is the same as the one of the scenario 1, Tank 1 located on an
elevation of about 74 masl which will have enough head to provide sufficient head and pressure over 10 m
W.C. to the customers located on an elevation below about between 35 and 45 masl. The following Figure
presents the pressure plot in the area served, reflecting the adequate pressure in the entire area.
Ialibu and Aitape)
Figure 3.7-9: Scenario 2, 2040 – Pressure Contour Plot at 6:00 am
The distribution network will be extended by about 4 km of pipes with the following diameters.
Table 3.7-4: Distribution Pipelines’ Extension Length Network Year 2040

75 1,106
110 2,010
160 133
200 171
250 477
Total: 3,897
v e d
o
r em
a re
a ge
e p
f t h
s o
tent
co n
h e
T
Ialibu and Aitape)
REFERENCES
 2011 National Population and Housing Census by National Statistical Office Papua New Guinea
 Project Appraisal Document for a Water and Sanitation Development Project, International Develop-
ment Association, January 17, 2017
 Final Feasibility for proposed Ialibu-Pangia Water Supply Project. Water PNG, 2013:
 Draft Feasibility for proposed Ialibu-Pangia Water Supply Project. Water PNG, 2013:
 Resistivity survey report for Ialibu and Pangia towns, MOSWA Water Supply and Engineering, 2013:
 The study on groundwater development for water supply systems in Papua New Guinea, JICA, 2002;
http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/11684842_01.pdf
 Beck, H.E., N.E. Zimmermann, T.R. McVicar, N. Vergopolan, A. Berg, E.F. Wood Present and future
Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolutionScientific Data 5:180214,
doi:10.1038/sdata.2018.214 (2018)
 Kupiano water bore project, Technical Note, 2014
 Resistivity sounding for Kupiano town water supply Geotechnical Engineering Services, 2013:
 The study on groundwater development for water supply systems in Papua New Guinea ,JICA, 2002:;
http://open_jicareport.jica.go.jp/pdf/11684842_01.pdf
Ialibu and Aitape)
ANNEX A
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS RESULTS (EPANET TOOL)
Feasibility Studies, Designs (including ESHS), and Preparation of Bidding Documents for Four (4) Water Supplies under Water PNG (Namatanai, Kerevat, Ialibu and Aitape)
Figure A-1: Network proposed for the year 2030 – Pipeline Diameters
Figure A-2: Network proposed for the year 2030 – Nodes pressure at 06:00 AM
Figure A-4: Network proposed for the year 2040 – Pipeline Diameters
Figure A-5: Network proposed for the year 2040 – Nodes pressure at 06:00 AM
Figure A-6: Wellfield KEREVAT with proposed drilling points BH1 – BH10 (BH11 is the existing Hospital Well at Hospital site)
Ialibu and Aitape)
ANNEX B
CAPEX DETAILED BREAKDOWN
v e d
o
r em
a re
a ge
e p
f t h
s o
tent
co n
h e
T
v e d
o
r em
a re
a ge
e p
f t h
s o
tent
co n
h e
T
v e d
o
r em
a re
a ge
e p
f t h
s o
tent
co n
h e
T
v e d
o
r em
a re
a ge
e p
f t h
s o
tent
co n
h e
T
Ialibu and Aitape)
ANNEX C
PUMP CURVES
Ialibu and Aitape)
Figure C-1: Pump curves for the submersible pumps at wells BH#1 to BH#10
Ialibu and Aitape)
Figure C-2: Pump curves for the pumping station at (the optional) Raw Water Tank site
Ialibu and Aitape)
ANNEX D
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT KEREVAT
Report on
Kerevat Groundwater Supply Feasibility

Investigation
Kerevat
East New Britain Province, PNG
Prepared for
New Britain Drillers Ltd
Project No: 1011.00

March 2022
Table of Contents
Page
1. Introduction................................................................................................................. 1
2. Scope & Objectives .................................................................................................... 1
3. Site Location............................................................................................................... 2
4. Topography, Climate & Surface Water ...................................................................... 3

Topography & Drainage 3
Climate 4
Rainfall 4
Surface Water Resources & Springs 4
5. Geology & Hydrogeology ......................................................................................... 5
6. Existing Bores for Test Pumping ............................................................................... 6
7. Pumping Test Analysis ............................................................................................ 7

Pumping Test Set-Up 7
UNRE Bore 2 - Step Drawdown Test 7
Kerevat Hospital Bore - Step Drawdown Test 8
UNRE Bore 1 - Step Drawdown Test 8
Constant Rate and Recovery Tests 9
Sustainable Yield of Production Bores 9
8. Groundwater Quality ............................................................................................... 10

Field Analysis 10
9. Potential for - Viable Groundwater Supply ............................................................ 13
10. Conclusions & Recommendations ........................................................................... 13
11. Recommended Test Drilling Program ..................................................................... 14
12. References ............................................................................................................... 17
Report on Groundwater Supply Feasibility Investigation Project 1011.00

Kerevat, East New Britain Province, PNG March 2022
List of Attachments
Site photographs
Appendix A – Lithological Logs
Appendix B – Geophysical Logs
Appendix C - Available Production Bore Designs
Appendix D – Water Quality Laboratory Reports

1 of 17
Report on
Groundwater Supply Feasibility Investigation
Kerevat, East New Britain Province, PNG
1. Introduction
This report presents the results of the groundwater supply feasibility investigation undertaken for
the township of Vudal, located within the East New Britain Province (ENB), PNG. The investigation
was commissioned by New Britain Drillers Ltd (NBD) on behalf of SMEC. T
The objective of this groundwater supply investigation was to assess the suitability of groundwater
resources in the Kerevat and Vudal township areas, and to identify potential sites for the drilling of
water bores.
This feasibility study comprised a groundwater desktop study to review the existing and available
geological and hydrogeological information, as well as test pumping of three selected existing water
bores.
The details of the groundwater investigation are presented in this report, together with comments
on the potential for obtaining a viable potable groundwater supply and with recommendations for a
test drilling program.
2. Scope & Objectives
The scope of work for the investigation comprised:
• Desktop groundwater supply feasibility study of the Kerevat region;
• Test pumping of three existing bores including UNRE Bores 1 and 2, and the Kerevat hospital
Bore;
• Step drawdown test on each bore;
• A 24-hour constant rate pumping test, and a water level recovery test on each bore;
• Field analysis of the groundwater quality;

2 of 17
• Analysis of test pumping data with recommendations to assess the appropriate long-term yield
for the proposed production bore; and
• Preparation of a groundwater supply feasibility report describing the groundwater resources,

and recommendations for the test drilling program.
3. Site Location
Kokopo became the new administration and business centre of the Gazelle Peninsula after the
1994 volcanic eruptions caused extensive damage to the township of Rabaul. Kokopo is located
approximately 20 km southeast of Rabaul on Blanche Bay, East New Britain Province, PNG.
Kerevat and Vudal are is located approximately 22 km southwest of Rabaul and 30 km directly west
of Kokopo.
The location within the University was surveyed with a GPS by NBD which provided the following
coordinates (GDA94, Zone 56M):
UNRE Bore 1:
Located east of main campus, behind the generator shed and next to the storage reservoir.
• Easting 4’21’11 S
• Northing 152’02’18’ E
UNRE Bore 2:
Located within the university to the east of the main campus and administration building in a large
farming area to supply the university.
• Easting 390294.
• Northing 9519080.
Kerevat hospital Bore:

Located behind health centre near the storage tank and the old treatment shed, and is on an
elevated embankment of the creek.
• Easting 4’20’27 S
• Northing 152’02’18 E

3 of 17
Drawing 1: Location of Kerevat and Vudal in relation to Rabaul.
4. Topography, Climate & Surface Water
Topography & Drainage
The topography of the area is dominated by the Rabaul Caldera and Mt Varzin, its parasitic cone.
The Rabaul Caldera is approximately 12 km in the north-south direction and 8 km in an east-west
direction. Parasitic cones are present to the north of Rabaul, i.e. North Daughter, to the southeast,
i.e. Rabalankaia Crater, Matupit Crater, The Mother, and South Daughter. In addition on the inner
edge of the caldera to the southwest of Rabaul, is Vulcan. Topography around these cones is steep
with the elevation reaching up to 664 m at the summit of The Mother and 574 m at Mt Varzin.
Generally, the map area comprises dense, natural secondary forest in the deep ravines with
coconut and cocoa plantations established on the majority of the more gently undulating areas.

4 of 17
Climate
The climate of the Gazelle Peninsula and Kerevat is warm and humid. The temperature of the
region is consistent and has no distinct seasonal change, with the mean maximum varying between
30.4oC and 31.6oC, and the minimum varying between 23.2oC and 23.6oC (George & Pettifer,
1978). The humidity varies between 75% and 80% (9 am mean monthly) throughout the year. Winds
are generally light with the stronger winds evident between June and October.
The mean monthly evaporation for Rabaul, estimated from a HS class pan, varies between 151 mm
and 222 mm, the peak occurring in September (George & Pettifer, 1978). The mean annual
evaporation total is approximately 2,150 mm.
Rainfall
George & Pettifer (1978) indicate that the mean annual rainfall, as recorded from the Rabaul Airstrip
over a 21 year period, was 2,003 mm. Rainfall is highly seasonal with the highest rainfall occurring
between December and March with in excess of 200 mm/month recorded during this period. The
remainder of the rainfall is distributed evenly throughout the rest of the year, during which dry
periods of 20, 30 and 40 days duration are common.
Surface Water Resources & Springs
Surface water resources in the region include:
• Keravat River;
• Vudal River; and
• Springs in the more elevated regions.
Springs and seeps are common in the area and have traditionally formed the only water supply for
large numbers of people. The flows produced by the springs are generally too small to be indicative
of the regional water table and are more likely to originate from perched groundwater tables where
the vertical infiltration of water is held up by a relatively lower permeability layer within the volcanic
ash deposits (George & Pettifer, 1978). Consequently, the yields are low and may vary according
to rainfall patterns recharging the shallow perched groundwater system.

5 of 17
The Keravat River has a relatively high permanent flow and comprises a significant water resource
for the region. Whereas, Vudal River is smaller with medium permanent flows throughout the year.
Both rivers would act as groundwater drains or sinks within the various groundwater systems.
5. Geology & Hydrogeology
The soils and rocks of the Vudal / Kerevat area are all volcanically derived, with the exception of
two minor limestone deposits. Volcanic activity is the dominant geological process of the area
(George & Pettifer, 1978).
The 1:250,000 Geological Map of the Gazelle Peninsula and Explanatory Notes show the PNG
UNRE, Vudal campus and the surrounding area to be underlain by the Rabaul Volcanics Formation
of Pleistocene to Holocene age. These rocks consist mainly of pumiceous ash deposits with minor
lava. The volcanic ash is typically a mixture of silt and gravel sized particles with some coarser
layers of gravel and sand. Being composed of closed vesicles, the larger fragments have a very
low density, often less than that of water and will float. The more weathered and clayey horizons
are common and represent breaks in deposition during which the surface layer of ash began to
weather and form a paleosol. Areas of reworked pumice ash by fluvial action are common in the
valleys and along the coastline.
The hydrogeology is dominated by the physical characteristics of the volcanic ash deposits that
blanket the area. These deposits are uniform and made up of pumice silts, sands and gravels with
varying clay content. The fresh pumiceous ash deposits are permeable, however at the ground
surface bands of weathered finer less permeable material are visible. The relatively high
permeability of the formation allows rapid infiltration of rainfall, which accounts for the low number
of permanent flowing streams and indicates substantial recharge to the groundwater systems (or
aquifers).
Previous investigations by Deegan Groundwater and NBD have confirmed that the region is
underlain by pumiceous ash containing multiple aquifers with potable groundwater. The main
aquifer is generally semi - confined by overlying less permeable layers of silt/clay.
Water inputs or the majority of recharge entering the aquifer include:
• Rainfall infiltration over the entire surface area; and
• Potential salt water intruding along the coastline due to over-pumping of bores.

6 of 17
Water outputs or losses from the aquifer are:
• Evapotranspiration from the vegetation across the surface area; and
• Discharge into the ocean along the coastline.
Groundwater will generally flow from the higher topographic areas towards the coastline.
6. Existing Bores for Test Pumping
The following three bores were selected by SMEC and NBD to form part of the test pumping
program as part of this investigation. The bores selected are listed with their construction details in
Table 1.
Table 1: Vudal Bores Construction Details
Static
Casing Stainless Gravel Water
Bore Total Depth
Diameter Steel Screen Pack Level
(Date Installed) (m bGL)
(mm) (m bGL) (m bGL)
m bTOC
Kerevat Rural Hospital 78 152 67 - 73 12-73 9.70
UNRE Bore 1 48 145 unknown unknown 29.57
UNRE Bore 2 (2021) 82.3 152 76 – 82 12– 82 22.10
Notes:
m bTOC metres below top of casing
m bGL metres below ground level
Appendix A provides a copy of the lithological log of Bore UNRE Bore 2, Appendix B the geophysical
log of Bore, and Appendix C a copy of the Production Bore Design for UNRE Bore 2.
Photos taken during the drilling and pump testing of the bores are attached.

7 of 17
7. Pumping Test Analysis
Pumping tests and analysis were carried out in accordance with Australian Standard AS2368-1990
(1990) on production bore Vudal to assess the long-term sustainable yield of the bores.
Pumping Test Set-Up
For the test pumping completed in 2021 on UNRE Bore 2, a SS 65/11 submersible, three-phase
electric submersible pump with an 18.5 kW Franklin motor, powered by a Hi-Erns 65 KVA diesel
driven generator was used. The pump intake was set at 75 m below ground level, about 53 m
below the standing water level. Flow was controlled by an inline gate valve and was monitored
using a 75 mm PMS inline flow meter. Water level drawdown was manually measured using an
electronic dipmeter.
For the two pumping tests completed in 2022 on UNRE Bore 1 and the Kerevat hospital bore, a SS
16GSS5 Lowara electric submersible pump with an 7.5 kW Franklin motor, powered by a Hi-Erns
65 KVA diesel driven generator was used.
UNRE Bore 2 - Step Drawdown Test
NBD conducted a step drawdown test on Vudal comprising four, one-hour steps on 22 June 2021.
Prior to commencement of the test, the static water level was measured at 22.10 m below the top
of casing (m bTOC).
The pumping rates were progressively increased as follows:
Step 1 = 172 m3/day (2.0 L/s)

Step 2 = 259 m3/day (3.0 L/s)
Step 3 = 346 m3/day (4.0 L/s)
Step 4 = 430 m3/day (5.0 L/s)
The step test drawdown data was analysed and confirmed the appropriate pumping rate for the
constant rate test was 4 L/s.

8 of 17
Kerevat Hospital Bore - Step Drawdown Test
NBD conducted a step drawdown test on UNRE Bore 1 comprising five, one-hour steps on
29 January 2022. Prior to commencement of the test, the static water level was measured at 9.70 m
below the top of casing (m bTOC).
Step 1 = 172 m3/day (2.0 L/s)

Step 2 = 259 m3/day (3.0 L/s)
Step 3 = 346 m3/day (4.0 L/s)
Step 4 = 430 m3/day (5.0 L/s)
Step 5 = 518 m3/day (6.0 L/s)
UNRE Bore 1 - Step Drawdown Test
NBD conducted a step drawdown test on UNRE Bore 1 comprising five, one-hour steps on
21 January 2022. Prior to commencement of the test, the static water level was measured at
29.57 m below the top of casing (m bTOC).
Step 1 = 172 m3/day (2.0 L/s)

Step 2 = 259 m3/day (3.0 L/s)
Step 3 = 346 m3/day (4.0 L/s)
Step 4 = 430 m3/day (5.0 L/s)
Step 5 = 518 m3/day (6.0 L/s)

9 of 17
Constant Rate and Recovery Tests
A constant rate test was carried out to assess the hydraulic parameters of the aquifer and to assess
the presence of boundary conditions, which may increase or decrease the rate of drawdown.
Boundaries may be in the form of a barrier (impermeable) boundary, which would increase the rate
of drawdown, or recharge boundary which would reduce the rate of drawdown. This information,
together with the hydraulic parameters, allows a more accurate assessment of the long-term safe
yield of each bore.
The constant rate data for all three pumping tests show the drawdown levelling off in the bores at a
suitable level metres above the pump intake level during the 24 hour pumping test.
The drawdown data does not show any presence of a barrier or impermeable aquifer boundary that
may impact the production bore by decreasing its sustainable yield.
Sustainable Yield of Production Bores
Based on the available drawdown and the results of both pumping tests, it is recommended that
the maximum yield or sustainable pumping rate for the bores are:
• UNRE Bore 2 5 L/s or 432 m3/day;
• UNRE Bore 1 7 L/s or 605 m3/day; and
• Kerevat Hospital Bore 6 L/s or 518 m3/day.

10 of 17
8. Groundwater Quality
Field Analysis
A groundwater sample was collected at the start and at the end of each 24-hour pumping test, and
on-site measurements of water electrical conductivity (EC), salinity, pH and temperature were
conducted by NBD. Results of the field measurements are provided in Tables 2 and 3:
Table 2: UNRE Bore 2 - Field Water Quality
Field Analysis
Elapsed Time of
Date Constant Rate Test EC Salinity/TDS Temp
(hour) pH
(µS/cm) (mg/L) (0C)
24/06/21 24 7.6 183 111 30.3
Notes
µS/cm micro siemens per centimetre
mg/L milligrams per litre (parts per million)
TDS total dissolved salts
Table 3: UNRE Bore 1 - Field Water Quality
Field Analysis
Elapsed Time of
(hour) pH
23/01/2022 24 7.2 200 120 27.5
Notes
Table 3: Kerevat hospital Bore - Field Water Quality
Field Analysis
Elapsed Time of
(hour) pH
1/02/2022 24 7.4 212 130 31.4
Notes

11 of 17
The test results showed relatively low EC levels, i.e. the groundwater has a very low salt content.
For comparison, the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines (ADWG) (NHMRC, 2004) indicate a
maximum total dissolved salts level should be 1,000 mg/L in drinking water, which is approximately
equal to an EC of 2,200 µS/cm. The pH of the groundwater was slightly alkaline and within the
WHO guideline range of 6.5 to 8.5.
Laboratory Analysis
NBD collected a representative groundwater sample at the completion of the constant rate pumping
test and submitted it to NARI Laboratory in Port Moresby for chemical and bacteriological analyses.
The laboratory results are summarised in Table 3 and have been assessed against the ADWG
(NHMRC, 2011). The ADWG provides a framework for good management of drinking water
supplies to ensure safety at the point of use. They have been applied to assess the suitability of
the groundwater for human consumption purposes.
The laboratory report is attached in Appendix D.

12 of 17
Table 3: Laboratory Results – Vudal Bores Groundwater Quality
Regulatory Criteria Bore

Analyte
Kerevat
ADWG UNRE #2 UNRE #1
Hospital
General Parameters
pH 6.5 - 8.5* 6.9 7.4 6.3
TDS 600* 200 183 183
Hardness 200* 44 - -
Fluoride 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.4
Nitrate 50 7.6 - 2.9
T. Cyanide 0.08 <0.1 - -
Dissolved Major Anions

Chloride 250* 2.8 3.3
Sulfate 500 6.6 8.3
Dissolved Major Cations

Calcium ~ 9.7 3.3 7.1
Sodium ~ - 32.0 10
Magnesium ~ 4.7 3.2 4.5
Dissolved Metals
Arsenic 0.01 0.0024 0.004 <0.001
Cadmium 0.002 0.0002 0.001 <0.001
Copper 2 0.0008 <0.001 <0.001
Iron 0.3* 0.03 0.56 <0.001
Lead 0.01 0.0006 <0.001 <0.001
Mercury 0.001 <0.0002 <0.001 <0.001
Manganese 0.5 0.013 0.5 <0.001
Selenium 0.01 0.0023 0.005 <0.001
Silver 0.1 <0.0001 <0.001 <0.001
Zinc 3* 0.1 0.01 0.036
Bacteriological
Faecal
0 colonies / 100 ml 0 col / 100 ml 0 col / 100 ml 0 col / 100 ml
Coliforms
Total
~ 0 col / 100 ml 0 col / 100 ml 7 col / 100 ml
Coliforms
Notes:
Results are reported in mg/L unless otherwise indicated.
1 Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6 (NHMRC, 2011).
* ADWG Aesthetic guideline value.
~ No guideline available.
Yellow Yellow cells indicate levels of an analyte greater than the ADWG value.

13 of 17
The laboratory testing confirms the groundwater quality overall is of high quality with respect to the
parameters tested. The parameters or analytes tested were all reported to be below the ADWG
values or below the laboratory’s level of reporting.
The water quality testing indicates the groundwater quality is fit for human consumption and suitable
as a potable water supply. However, it should be noted that the bacteriological test results are
considered to be unreliable as the recommended holding times (24 hours) for the samples would
have been exceeded prior to the tests being conducted.
9. Potential for - Viable Groundwater Supply
The geology beneath Kerevat and Vudal is characterised by the Rabaul Volcanics Formation, which
is a thick blanket of volcanic ash from the Rabaul volcano. The desktop study found that previous
bores installed in the area encountered volcanic ash sediments with a high permeability and
consequently the production bores have reported high yields of generally between 5 L/s and 8 L/s.
It is considered that there is a high or very good potential for securing a viable groundwater supply
from production bores installed within the Rabaul volcanics main aquifer.
10. Conclusions & Recommendations
The groundwater supply investigation has confirmed that there is a high potential for obtaining a
viable groundwater supply at Vudal and Kerevat. The main aquifer is within the Rabaul Volcanics
at depths of between 50 m and 90 m depth and should be targeted by the test drilling program.
Previous boreholes in the region have produced high yields indicating the volcanic ash deposits
have a high permeability. The high permeability of this formation may make the drilling of the
production bores very difficult, it is then recommended that an experienced and licenced driller, with
a large truck mounted drilling rig, and with the correct drilling equipment be engaged for the drilling
program.
Groundwater quality is expected to be potable and slightly alkaline.
The total groundwater extraction for Kerevat/Vudal from the proposed bores will be significantly less
than the volume of recharge entering the aquifer, therefore the extraction from the bore field should

14 of 17
be considered sustainable. The sustainability and dynamic response of the aquifer to the extraction
of groundwater, can be more accurately assessed using groundwater numerical flow modelling.
A suitable monitoring program and a Groundwater Management Program (GMP) specific for
Kerevat/Vudal bores installed should be developed for the operational phase of the bores.
It is recommended that the drilling program outlined in Section 11 be undertaken in order to obtain
a viable groundwater supply.
11. Recommended Test Drilling Program
The recommended test drilling program for Vudal / Kerevat should comprise:
• Drilling of three test bores to approximately 110 m depth using conventional mud rotary
drilling techniques. The number of bores may change according to the town’s water demand
and the actual individual bore yields. Final bore depths should be decided by a supervising
experienced hydrogeologist. Test borehole diameter should be a minimum of 150 mm;
• The drilling and construction of the bores should be carried out in accordance with the
‘Minimum Construction Requirements for Water Bores in Australia’ (NUDLC, 2012), which is
accepted as the industry standard in Australia; and PNG.
• Experienced Licensed Driller (as defined in the Australian standard) should be onsite
supervising the test and production bore drilling;
• All bores are to be drilled using biodegradable liquid polymer drilling mud to remove the cuttings
and stabilise borehole;
• No bentonite drilling mud is to be used in any bore as it may partially block off the water bearing
layers decreasing the bore yield;
• Installation of steel surface casing to 6 m depth;
• Lithological logging of drill cuttings should be undertaken onsite by an experienced

hydrogeologist;

15 of 17
• Geophysical logging of the test bores should be undertaken using self-potential (SP), single
point resistivity (SPR) and natural gamma sondes; and
• Experienced Hydrogeologist to supervise the drilling program and to Interpret the lithological
and geophysical logs. It is critical at this stage the decision to proceed with construction and
the final bore design are the responsibility of the Hydrogeologist.
If it is considered that there is a good potential for a viable water bore, then the drilling and
installation of the production bore should proceed.
• Production Bores should be completed as per the following preliminary design:
 Reaming the borehole to at least 300 mm diameter and to at least 6 m below the base of
the identified aquifer;
 Conditioning, cleaning and stabilizing the borehole;
 Installing an inline string of 150 mm diameter steel bore casing and 150 mm diameter
stainless steel screen into the bore. The screen should be placed against the main water
bearing strata towards the base of bore;
 A filter pack comprising 4-10 mm graded sand, should be installed in the annulus between
the casing and borehole wall, from the base up to at least 10 m above the top of the screen;
 A bentonite seal of at least 2 m thickness, should be installed in the annulus between the
casing and borehole wall immediately above the filter pack material;
 A steel protective standpipe cover cemented over the top of each bore; and
 A water level monitoring tube (PVC) of 25 mm or 50 mm diameter be installed within the

bore. The base of the tube should be approximately 1 m above the top of the screen or
pump. This will more easily the monitoring of bore groundwater levels in the future.
• Bore Development of the production bores should be undertaken by airlift surging until they
produce clean, visually sand-free water. This should involve an airlift flow test upon
completion.

16 of 17
• Test pumping of each production bore in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2368-1990
Test Pumping of water wells, including:
 Four stage step drawdown test of one to two hours duration;
 72 hour constant rate test with regular monitoring of flow rate, water quality parameters
pH, electrical conductivity (EC), and temperature;
 Water level recovery test of two hours duration; and
• Collection of a groundwater quality sample from each production bore at the end of the
pumping test and be tested for:
 Field analysis for pH, TDS and EC,
 TDS;
 Major cations (sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium);
 Major anions (chloride, carbonate, bi-carbonate and sulphate);
 Dissolved heavy metals (Al, As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, Zn, Hg);
 Nutrients - nitrate, nitrite, and total nitrogen; and
 Faecal coliforms.
The laboratory results should be assessed against the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines
(ADWG) (NHMRC, 2011) or alternatively the WHO guidelines. The ADWG provides a
framework for good management of drinking water supplies to ensure safety at the point of
use. They should be applied to assess the suitability of the groundwater for human
consumption.
• Bore Sterilisation of each bore upon completion of the pumping test, each production bore
should be properly sterilized with chlorine to remove any bacteria introduced during the drilling
process. This should reduce the risk of iron bacteria growing in the bore and impacting the
water supply.
• Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) should be developed by an experienced

hydrogeologist in association with SNMEC to help manage the bores and protect the

17 of 17
groundwater resource from surface contamination, as well as the bores from over-pumping
which damage pumps and the bore screen.
12. References
Davies, H.L., 1973, 1:250,000 Geological Series – Explanatory Notes, Gazelle Peninsula, New
Britain, Sheet SB/56-2, Department of Minerals and Energy, Bureau of Minerals
Resources, Geology and Geophysics, Aust. Govt. Publ. Serv.
George, J.E., & Pettifer G.R., 1973: The Hydrogeology of Rabaul and the North East Gazelle
Peninsula, Report 78/9. Geological Survey of Papua New Guinea.
National Uniform Drillers Licensing Committee (NUDLC), 2012, Minimum Construction

Requirements for Water Bores In Australia. Edition 3. February, 2012. Project funded
by the Australian Government through the National Water Commission. ISBN 978 0
646 56917 8.
National Health And Medical Research Council (NHMRC)/ Natural Resource Management
Ministerial Council (NRMMC), 2004, Australian Drinking Water Guidelines 6.
Standards Australia, 1990: Test Pumping of Water Wells AS2368-1990, published by Standards
Association of Australia.
World Health Organisation (WHO), 2004: Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality. Third Edition,
Volume 1.
Yours faithfully,
Deegan Groundwater Consultants Pty Ltd
www.deegangroundwater.com

Page 1 of 4
Photograph 1: NBD Drilling rig set up and installing the bore casing for Vudal #2.
Page 2 of 4
Photograph 2: NBD installing the six inch (152mm) bore screen.

Page 3 of 4
Photograph 3: NBD installing the submersible pump for the test pumping.
Page 4 of 4
Photograph 4: Discharge point of groundwater extracted during the test pumping.

Photographs Page |1
Photograph 5: NBD installing the bore pump into UNRE Bore 1.

Photographs Page |2
Photograph 6: Groundwater extracted during pump testing UNRE Bore 1.

Photographs Page |3
Photograph 7: NBD installing the submersible pump for the test pumping Kerevat Hospital Bore.
Photographs Page |4
Photograph 8: Discharge point of groundwater extracted during the test pumping Kerevat
Hospital Bore.
Appendix A
Bore Lithological Logs

Page 1 of 1
LITHOLOGICAL LOG
Bore: Vudal #2 Date: 28 April 2021
Project: Bulolo Town Water Supply Project No: 1009.00
Location: Bulolo, Morobe Province, PNG Coordinates: 390294, 9519080
Client: NBD on behalf of PNG UNRE.
Depth (m) Lithology
0-6 Topsoil then silty clay
6 - 18 Brown silty clay
18 - 24 Silty pumice
24 - 54 Brown silty pumice with some clay layers
54 - 90 Silty pumice with some basalt and sand layers
90 -96 Red silty clay, oxidised and weathered
96 - 110 Silty clay with basalt and quarts sand
Bore discontinued at 110 m depth
Driller: New Britain Drillers Ltd Drill Rig: Bournedrill THD25 Logged By: NBD.
Appendix B
Geophysical Logs
Appendix C
Production Bore Designs

PRODUCTION BORE VUDAL #2
3" elbow g.i
3" s/steel socket
1 1/2" power cable grommet 1 1/2" Plug and socket

S/Steel locking screws to hold
well head on 10" conductor casing 10" well head extended
1m above ground
0.0m GL
Cement collar
6.0m 10" steel casing
Cement
12.0m Standing Water Level 22.10 mbTOC
6" casing screen
Gravel pack 6" casing
3" g.i.riser pipe

6" submersible pump
7.5kw submersible
76.0m motor 6"
6" Stainless steel screen
82.0m
90.0m
110.0m
Vudal #2 Production Bore Design PROJECT No: 1009.00
Bore Completion Report

Vudal Unviversity, ENB, PNG REVISION: 1
CLIENT: New Britain Drillers DATE: July 2021

Appendix D
Water Quality Laboratory Reports

Vol 1-Annex I

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol 1-Annex I

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vol 1-Annex I

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Annex I

Feasibility Studies, Designs (including ESHS),

IDA CREDIT NO. 5940

Final Preliminary Design

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Existing Water Supply Facilities:

Water Demand Estimates

Table 1-1: Water demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area

Existing and New Boreholes

Reservoir, Tanks and Water Treatment

Water Reticulation System

Project Cost Estimate

Table 1-2: CAPEX cost estimate

The Table is deleted

2 SUMMARY OF DESIGN DATA

2.1 Project area

2.2 Project Horizon

Table 2.3-1: Hydro-meteorological data for Rabaul and Kerevat

Source: IWRM Report, 2007 and climate-data.org

Source: Beck, H.E. et al. (2018)

2.4 Topography and Geomorphology

Source: (Löffler 1979; National IWRM Report – SOPAC 2007)

Figure 2.4-1: Landforms and major landscape regions of PNG

2.5 Geology and Hydrogeology

2.5.1 Hydrogeological investigations at Kerevat

Figure 2.5.1-1: Location of the bore well at Kerevat Hospital

2.5.2 Groundwater balance

2.5.3 Groundwater quality

2.6 Existing Water Supply Infrastructures

Figure 2.6-1: Existing Water Supply Structures

Source: SMEC PNG

2.6.1 Alternative source of water supply

Source: SMEC PNG

Figure 2.6.1-1: Typical rainwater harvester/collection system set-up

2.6.2 Potential Water supply source

Table 2.6.2-1: Existing boreholes in Kerevat

2.6.3 Power supply

2.7 Population Forecasting and Water Demand Analysis

2.7.1 Population trend

2.7.2 Population projection

Figure 2.7.2-1: Project Area and Outskirts

Table 2.7.2-1: Population projection for Kerevat Project Area

Av. Household Size: 6.2 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

Figure 2.7.3-1: Landuse 2020 and areas to be extended in 2040 in Kerevat

Table 2.7.3-1: Landuse Classes in Kerevat

Avg. Population Avg. Target

Residential Area (exist.) 5.2 77 90 556 106.9 106.9 556

2.7.4 Per capita water demand analysis

Table 2.7.4-1: Per Capita Water Demand

2.7.5 Unaccounted for water

2.7.6 Water demand estimates

Table 2.7.6-1: Water Demand estimates for Kerevat Project Area

2.7.7 Design Flows

Table 2.7.7-1: Design Flows

Table 3.1-1: Kerevat Water Supply Design Option

Project Horizon: 2030 2040

200mm HDPE Pipe = 554 m 148 m

Distribution: 160mm HDPE Pipe = 1,796 m

110mm HDPE Pipe = 4,823 m