Muramba Phase II Final Report

8/14/2019 Muramba Phase II Final Report

1/88

Engineers Without Borders USA. All Rights Reserved Page i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Analysis of EWB-UW W ater and Renewable

Energy Projects in Muramba, Rwanda

July 2005

Students from the University of Wisconsin - Madison chapter of Engineers Without Borders(EWB-UW) returned to Muramba, Rwanda, in July 2005 to continue developing sustainable waterand energy infrastructure. Civil, geological, and chemical engineering students, an economics student,two journalists from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and faculty advisor Peter Bosscher collaboratedwith students from the University of Surrey in the United Kingdom, the University of Butare inRwanda, and the community of Muramba on several initiatives including solar cooking and waterpasteurization, fuel briquetting, and expansion of the communitys water supply.

In past trips to the community in April 2004 and July 2004, EWB-UW teams identified thelack of potable water as the communitys greatest need. The team found the current water distribution

system to be seriously inadequate with deficiencies in system operation and maintenance, waterquality and water quantity. Broken tap stands and a damaged piping network were in critical need ofrepair and posed a public health threat. The team provided local technicians with logistical andtechnical support during the construction of a system expansion that added two water sources andincreased total flow from 37 liters per minute to 83.8 liters per minute. However, the team estimatedsystem losses at 50% or more. The team identified several items that require maintenance andproposed a maintenance schedule to reduce system losses. Finally, the team discussed withcommunity leaders future work on the village water supply and the formation of a Water Board toestablish and govern system water usage, oversee maintenance, and acquire funds for maintenanceand future system expansion.

To address Murambas energy shortage, teams worked with community members toinvestigate alternative fuels. The shortage of fuel wood and a country-wide ordinance limiting woodharvesting has jeopardized the communitys ability to cook and boil water. A solar cooking project

involving a womens cooperative group and the vocational school encouraged villagers to build, testand market a device that harnesses solar energy to purify drinking water and to cook food. To furtheraddress energy needs, teams implemented a fuel briquetting process with local leaders and carpentrystudents. Contributors identified local biomass sources, built wooden presses, and began creatingbriquettes suitable for cooking fuel.

These efforts require follow-up and additional work in several areas to ensure long-termproject sustainability. Future teams will need to observe the condition of the implemented watersystem and examine the effectiveness of the proposed maintenance schedule and Water Board.Further assessment may reveal additional potable water sources critical to the communitys long-termneeds. The solar cooking and fuel briquetting projects necessitate additional EWB-UW andcommunity involvement for complete project implementation. Most critical is the establishment oflocal entrepreneurs willing to invest, market, and distribute the technology throughout the community.EWB-UW will need to assist local leaders and interested community members in creating effective

briquette mix designs and determining appropriate composting times. Information collected in theHealth Assessment Survey will help subsequent EWB-UW teams identify future community needs.Finally, EWB-UW will identify and contact interested distributors to market handcrafts made by theMuramban womens cooperative.


2/88

Engineers Without Borders USA. All Rights Reserved Page ii

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1

1.1 Background.......................................................................................... ...................................................... 1

1.2 Participants ........................................................................................................ ........................................ 11.2.1 Engineers Without Borders Involvement...............................................................................................11.2.2 Community Involvement........................................................................................................................1

1.3 Community.................................................................................................................................................3

2 WATER PROJECT...............................................................................................3

2.1 Project Description....................................................................................................................................42.1.1 Description and Route of Pipeline .................................................................................... .....................42.1.2 Source Development...............................................................................................................................5

2.1.2.1 Source 1.........................................................................................................................................52.1.2.2 Source 2.........................................................................................................................................6

2.1.3 Spring Box design .............................................................................. .................................................... 72.1.4 Source Protection....................................................................................................................................82.1.5 Local Supply...........................................................................................................................................92.1.6 Connection of Source to Pipeline.........................................................................................................11

2.2 Discussion ...................................................................................... ........................................................... 112.2.1 Status on Leaving ............................................................................... .................................................. 112.2.2 Use of New Supply...............................................................................................................................122.2.3 Maintenance Schedule..........................................................................................................................122.2.4 Role of EWB-UW in the Project..........................................................................................................132.2.5 Recommendations ................................................................................... ............................................. 14

3 VILLAGE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ASSESSMENT........................................14

3.1 Description of System..............................................................................................................................15

3.2 Methodology.............................................................................................................................................17 3.2.1.1 Walkover.....................................................................................................................................17 3.2.1.2 Flow measurement......................................................................................................................173.2.1.3 Water Testing..............................................................................................................................17

3.3 Results of Methodology...........................................................................................................................173.3.1 Infrastructure.........................................................................................................................................17

3.3.1.1 Pipelines ......................................................................................... ............................................. 173.3.1.2 Reservoirs and Junction Boxes...................................................................................................183.3.1.3 Tap Stands...................................................................................................................................19

3.3.2 Water Quantity......................................................................................................................................20

3.3.3 Water Quality........................................................................................................................................21

3.4 Current Maintenance Practices.............................................................................................................22

3.5 Recommendations....................................................................................................................................23 3.5.1 Required Maintenance Work................................................................................................................23

3.5.1.1 Infrastructure...............................................................................................................................23 3.5.1.2 Leakage and Exposed Pipe ................................................................... ...................................... 243.5.1.3 Water Flow..................................................................................................................................25

3.5.2 Future Sustainability of System ........................................................................................ ...................25


3/88

Engineers Without Borders USA. All Rights Reserved Page iii

4 SOLAR PASTEURIZING & COOKING PROJECT ...........................................27

4.1 Background.......................................................................................... .................................................... 27

4.2 Testing the Water Quality in Muramba........................................................................... .................... 28

4.3 Solar Cooker Preparation in Wisconsin ............................................................................ ...................29

4.4 Solar Cooker Implementation................................................................................................................304.4.1 General Strategy ............................................................................... .................................................... 304.4.2 Workshops .............................................................................................. .............................................. 314.4.3 Microbusiness.......................................................................................................................................32 4.4.4 Design Testing......................................................................................................................................324.4.5 Outcomes ....................................................................................... ....................................................... 33

4.5 Further Work in Muramba....................................................................................................................33

5 FUEL BRIQUETTE INITIATIVE .........................................................................34

5.1 Project Background.................................................................................................................................34

5.1.1 Overview of the Fuel Briquette Process .................................................................................. ............34

5.2 Biomass Availability................................................................................................................................35

5.3 Preparing Biomass for Composting ................................................................................... ...................36

5.4 Press Construction...................................................................................................................................37

5.5 Pressing Briquettes..................................................................................................................................38

5.6 Appropriate Burning Techniques..........................................................................................................39

5.7 Further Project Work in Muramba......................................................................................................40

6 WOMENS CRAFT GROUP OVERVIEW ..........................................................41

7 DEMOGRAPHIC AND HEALTH SURVEY ........................................................42

8 FUTURE PLANS FOR UW-MADISON EWB INVOLVEMENT .........................50

9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................50

10 APPENDICES .................................................................................................51

10.1 A: Flow Measurements for New Source ............................................................................................ ...5110.2 B: Observations and Flow Measurements For Village Survey...... .................................................... 52

10.3 C: Water Testing Results........................................................................................................................56

10.4 D: Site Assessment Sketches...................................................................................................................57

10.5 E: English-Kinyarwanda Field Dictionary...........................................................................................60

10.6 F: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Articles from Summer, 2005 Trip...................................................69


4/88

Engineers Without Borders USA. All Rights Reserved Page iv

A way to save trees, and improve villagers' lives................................................................................................69 UW students hope briquettes can become a sustainable fuel.......................................................................69 Tricky business ..................................................................................................................................................71

Beyond help in Rwanda.........................................................................................................................................71Geography puts AIDS treatment just out of reach for most........................................................................71 'Land of a thousand problems' ........................................................................................................................75

Transforming a village......................................................................................................................................76

Bringing water to Rwanda.............................................................................................. ...................................... 77UW team works to ease town's thirst..............................................................................................................77 The challenge begins .........................................................................................................................................79 A meeting of the minds .....................................................................................................................................82

Ugandan priest answers call to help ease suffering in Rwanda........................................................................83


5/88

Engineers Without Borders USA. All Rights Reserved Page 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

The community of Muramba lies in the province of Gisenyi in northwestern Rwanda, borderingthe Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Muramba refers to the geographical area under theinfluence of the local Catholic Deanery, including four parish churches. The village encompassesseveral primary schools and three nationally-renowned secondary schools. A vocational schoolteaches community members, many of whom cannot afford tuition at the secondary schools, basicvocational skills.

In July 2005, members of EWB-UW, EWB-UK, and the University of Butare - Rwandapartnered with the community of Muramba, Rwanda to implement water supply infrastructure.Members also assessed the communitys existing water supply, provided technical support andrecommended improvements to local technicians. The assessment focused on weaknesses in the tapstands and piping networks and identified sources of leakage. EWB-UW coordinated with localleaders about the formation of a water board to govern water usage throughout the community

1.2Participants

1.2.1 Engineers W ithout Borders Involvement

The July 2005 trip to Muramba involved two teams from the University of Wisconsin -Madison and one participant from the United Kingdom. They worked in Muramba for a total of onemonth, with Team 1 arriving at the beginning of July and leaving mid-July; Team 2 arrived one weekafter Team 1 and stayed until the end of July. The teams worked together for five days. The EWB-UKstudent stayed for the duration of the trip to provide continuity to the project work undertaken by bothteams. In addition, two journalists from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel embraced the opportunity to

travel with EWB-UW in an effort to increase awareness of the plight of the Rwandan people, andAfrica as a whole, in their struggle to develop. Table 1.1 lists the individuals who participated.

Table 1.1: Participants in the July 2005 trip

Team Name Project Organization

Team 1 Megan Bender Solar Cooking EWB-UW

Prof. Peter Bosscher Water EWB-UW faculty advisor

David Joles Photo Journalist Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Susanne Quick Journalist Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Evan Parks Fuel Briquetting EWB-UW

Ryan Wilson Fuel Briquetting EWB-UW

Team 2 Jon Armah Community Survey EWB-UW

Bill Brower Solar Cooking EWB-UW

Sam Jorgensen Fuel Briquetting EWB-UWAdrienne Kuehl Solar Cooking EWB-UW

Tim Miller Water EWB-UW

Ryu Suzuki Fuel Briquetting EWB-UW

Others Andre Steele Water EWB-UK

Emmanuel Tuombe Water University of Rwanda - Butare

1.2.2 Community Involvement


6/88


Community members played a crucial role in the development and implementation of thewater project. Village leadership provided direction and supervision during the design andconstruction of key water infrastructure. During project implementation, leaders of Muramba Parishand the College of Muramba worked with EWB-UW members on the design of the system. Projectleaders are depicted in Figure 1.1. Community members volunteered many hours to dig the pipelinetrench. Involving community volunteers ensured that Muramba would have a significant stake in theproject and furthered the long-term sustainability of the project.

Figure 1.2: Project leadership (l-r) included Frederick, Sadi, Jean Paul Basansanga, InnocentKabande, Peter Bosscher, and Louis

Sadi and Frederick represented the community in the water project. As former sector chief,

Sadi was responsible for day-to-day digging operations. He personally directed volunteer personneland provided some technical input into project design. While Sadi supervised daily trenching,Frederick assumed responsibility for the long-term maintenance of the system. He will continue towork with Innocent, Louis, and Sadi on system operation and maintenance.

1.2.2 Parish Involvement

Individuals from Muramba Parish contributed significantly to the water project as well. FatherJohn Bosco Musinguzi, Innocent Kabande, and Louis spearheaded Parish efforts. While Father Boscoprovides spiritual leadership to Muramba, he also contributed logistical support to the water project.He helped locate tools for the EWB-UW team and frequently shuttled the team to the site.

Innocent Kabande, the resident technician for the parish, has extensive knowledge of theexisting water system in Muramba. Innocent is the resident engineer for the water project, having the

final say on the construction process. He is a capable, friendly man who was more than willing tolisten to suggestions made by EWB-UW. He ably responded to issues posed by EWB-UW withpractical solutions. He is the most qualified technician in Muramba, though employed by the parish.Hence, his primary concern lies with the infrastructure directly affecting the Parish.

Louis is the primary technician for the College of Muramba. Like Innocent, he maintains a keycomponent of the water system, but does not have the same technical competence as Innocent andrefers to him frequently in decision making. Louis is also employed by The College of Muramba, sohis primary concern is the operation and maintenance of the College infrastructure.


7/88


1.3Community

The community of Muramba is approximately 12,000 strong. The community is in a low stateof development as evident in deteriorating water infrastructure and few commercial or industrialactivities. There is evidence of textile manufacturing and carpentry, and a few private establishmentsservice the community with grocery shops and bars. However, subsistence farmers comprise the

majority of the community.Community members regularly volunteered intervals of time to assist in the water project.

Each sector committed a number of volunteers daily to help dig, flag the pipeline route and transportpipe; most of the volunteers were women. While volunteers contributed significantly, skilled laborersalso provided invaluable help in mixing concrete, building masonry junction boxes, and connectinghydraulic elements. These people, mostly men, were paid for their efforts.

President Paul Kagame recently institutionalized a community work day throughout Rwanda.One day each month, able-bodied community members commit a half days work to collectivelyimproving local infrastructure. In Muramba, the community work day focused on the water project.Over 1000 people volunteered to dig pipeline trench. The community turned out in full force tosupport the water project, as pictured in Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3: Nearly 1000 community members turned out to help dig pipeline trench.

2 Water P roject

The existing water infrastructure in Muramba is in poor condition and is currently failing to meetinternational World Health Organization standards for quality and quantity. While past EWB-UWprojects have focused on improving water infrastructure for the Parish and College, expanding thesystem to increase quantity available to the community is the primary objective of this project. It isestimated that the new source will double the quantity of water entering the village system.Approximately 10,000 individuals will ultimately benefit from this project, including students,widows, orphans and villagers. EWB-UW worked with the community to facilitate construction of thesystem addition and to impart skills and knowledge regarding system maintenance and operation.


8/88


2.1 Project Description

2.1.1 Description and Route of Pipeline

The system is comprised of two main collection areas that are connected to a pipelineapproximately 5 km in length. The pipeline connects the new sources to the uppermost villagecollection box; the elevation drop accounts for nearly 100 m of head. A cross-sectional depiction ofthe land where the pipeline is trenched is represented in Figure 2.1. The local geology is primarilyclay topsoil underlain by fine sandstone and interspersed with deposits of kaolinite and mica. The landimmediately surrounding the sources is highly cultivated as the local population is primarilysubsistence farmers. Tile workshops are located near each of the sources to make use of the abundantwet clay deposits. Severe deforestation is prevalent as the needs for fuel and farmland compromiseremaining timber stands. The government, in an effort to halt this process, has introduced measures tostop timber harvesting and the use of wood as a fuel.

The pipeline parallels the main road leading to Muramba for much of its length. Based ondesign calculations, the necessary pipe diameter needed to carry flows from the two collection areaswas 63 mm. Roughly 5 km of PVC pipe transports water from the two sources to the village. Pipe waslaid in 6 m lengths at a trench depth of roughly 1 m and connected using ordinary pipe epoxy. Inseveral instances, the pipeline crosses small ravines and gorges in which the pipe is precariouslyexposed and open to the effects of weathering. To bridge these gaps, technicians constructed steel-trussed encasings to protect the line.

Figure 2.1: New supply cross-sectional schematic

The two sources are situated by each other to the south west of the community. The firstsource is located above the main road leading to Kabaya and just off a smaller road that leads to a teaplantation. The pipeline begins at Source 1 and travels down a small valley to meet the tea road. It

crosses the road and runs parallel to it before traversing a steep forested slope before crossing beneaththe main road. The pipeline then runs parallel to the road until it reaches the junction box betweenSource 1 and Source 2. Figure 2.2 illustrates the sources in relation to the village.


9/88


Figure 2.2: Schematic of New Water Source for Village

2.1.2 Source Development

2.1.2.1 Source 1

Source 1 is comprised of two subsidiary sources referenced as Source 1A and 1B. They issuefrom the ground as natural seeps and result from the high water table within the area. Source 1Ayields nearly double the flow of Source 1B. Initially, only Source 1A was to be developed, butproject leadership excavated source 1B with little notice. Source 1 is depicted below in Figure 2.3.Both sources were found to be contaminated with Coliform, as indicated by a positive result in theColilert ONPG test, though there was no indication of either being contaminated with E.Coli, asindicated by a positive result in the Colilert MUG test.

Table 2.1: Source 1 Flowrates and Water Quality Results

Flow Rate Quality

Source L/s L/min Colilert ONP G(yellow)

Colilert MUG(UV)

1A 0.35 20.88 + -

1B 0.19 11.28 + -

Figure 2.3: Source 1 schematic

Source 1A

Source 1B

Junction Box

Local Tap StandRiver

Pipeline to Muramba

SOURCE 1

Ridge Line

Road

River

Pipeline

SOURCE 2

SOURCE 1

Entry JunctionBox

Source JunctionBoxMuramba

Kabaya

Gitarama


10/88


The local community relies on

Source 1 as their primary water source.To accommodate the needs of thesepeople, it was agreed that a tap would beprovided at this source to allow thecommunity to continue to collect water.Installing a tap at the source would alsoeliminate any incentive for vandalism orsabotage as the local supply would be

jeopardized as well. Source 1A isdepicted in Figure 2.4 beforedevelopment.

F

igure 2.4: Source 1A in use before development

2.1.2.2 Source 2

Three seepages flow into the Source 2 collection box. Each site was excavated in a mannersimilar to that of Source 1, with volunteers doing much of the physical labor and techniciansconducting most of the skilled labor. As with Source 1, water seeps to the surface at a number ofplaces in the hillside; the three sources issuing the most water were subsequently tapped. Watercollected from each source contained Coliform; source 2D also registered E.Coliin apresence/absence test. However, a later Colilert test for a fecal Coliformcount yielded no presence.Further investigation of this source may be necessary if a treatment system is to be considered. Flowrates and water quality results are listed in Table 2.2. The sources are also shown in Figure 2.5 andFigure 2.6.

Table 2.2: Source 2 Flowrates and Water Quality Results

Flow Rate Quality

Source L/s L/min Colilert ONP G(yellow)

Colilert MUG(UV)

2B 0.10 5.94 + -

2C 0.08 5.05 + -

2D 0.06 3.60 + +

Figure 2.5: Source 2 Schematic

Source 2DSource 2C

Source 2B

Junction Box

SOURCE 2


11/88


Figure 2.6: Sources 2D, 2C, and 2B (l-r)

2.1.3 Spring Box design

Each spring box was crafted to fit the specific location. Similar boxes have been replicatedmany times in Muramba as technicians are skilled at masonry and understand basic fluid dynamics.Once the seepage site had been located, excavation to expose the source commenced. Once exposed,the source was dammed with local clays and filled with washed gravel as pictured in Figure 2.7. Anexit pipe embedded in the clay and gravelserved as the outflow pipe. The source iscovered with plastic to preventcontamination and then sealed with moreclay and backfilled with gravel. In the caseof Source 1A, a concrete cover was placedover this second layer of gravel and sloped

down to further drainage points in thewall. Gravel and soil serve as the drainagebed and will effectively filter surfacerunoff.

Figure 2.7: Spring box construction

Protecting the source from overflow is a concern as surface runoff could undermine theintegrity of the entire spring box structure. To remedy this, technicians constructed a concrete apronaround the base of the retaining wall to channel the drainage water away from the foundation andlimit potential erosion. The source pipe exited below the apron directly into the trench. This design

was implemented on Source 1A, 2B, 2C and 2D and possibly Source 1B. Source 1A is illustratedbelow in Figure 2.8 and Figure 2.9.

2D

2C

2B

Junction Box


12/88


Figure 2.8: Schematic of Source 1A spring box

Figure 2.9: Emmanuel Tuombe inspects the spring box at Source 1A.

The spring box at Source 1B was likely completed in a similar fashion. However, thestructure was completed and buried before EWB-UW could view the construction. From discussionwith the construction manager, the spring box consisted of a gravel body overlying the source, whichwas encased in an impermeable clay layer. A masonry box covered the source, with the catchmentpipe running from the center of the dammed seep into the Source 1 junction box.

2.1.4 Source Protection

Masonry

Retaining Wall

Grass

Soil

GravelDrainage

Drainage Apron

Clean Gravel

Clay Layer

Source

Pipeline

Concrete cover

Gravel

ELEVATION

Clay enclosures

Drainage Apron

Pipeline

Connecting Pipeline

PLAN

Drainage Pipes

Source Outflow


13/88


Protecting the sources from potential sources of contamination will improve the overall waterquality. Ensuring that the sources are adequately protected from human interference and surface run-off will help extend the life of the system as well. The protection methods discussed included drainageditches, fences and planting vegetation; all were designed to prevent erosion and sourcecontamination. Each site was discussed individually, and a general path for the drainage ditch wasindicated. Though the sources are mostly invulnerable due to the nature of construction, they arelocated in agricultural areas and near local tile industries. While plans for protection were discussed,leaders took no immediate action.

Two options for diverting surface runoff included a clay ditch and a dry stone channel. WhileEWB-UW felt that a simple clay ditch would be sufficient, local technicians believed that a dry stonechannel would be more durable and effective at deterring farmers from encroaching too closely to thesource. Despite the initial capital cost, a dry stone channel would also require less long-termmaintenance. The final decision was left in the hands of the local community, which they agreedwould also depend on the remaining funding. It was agreed that regular maintenance would berequired to maintain the integrity of the drainage channels. Clearing the channels after the rainyseason and regularly removing overgrown vegetation are two primary maintenance tasks.

Slope stabilization and cultivation of a grass slope will provide additional protection to thesource. Large trees with deep root structures are not desirable near the source, as the roots mayinterfere with infiltration into the spring box. However, it is important above steep slopes that theslope face is stabilized to prevent erosion above the source and to keep top soil from being depositedon the spring box. Cultivating grass on the slope and surrounding the area with a wood lattice fence isone to curb erosion. Rather than acting as a prevention of entry, the fence will more likely notifypeople of the location of the springs and indicate that they are not to use the area for crop production.Future EWB-UW teams should check to see if villagers completed source protection schemes.

2.1.5 Local Supply

At Source 1 and Source 2, local populations use the seeps as a primary water source. It wasagreed that the local community should continue to have access to this water after the addition of thenew sources. To provide water to both Muramba and local farmers, a tap stand was to be constructedon the side of the junction box that combined Source 1A and 1B, but had not been constructed by thetime of EWB-UWs departure. While both sources empty into the junction box, only the smaller of

the two flows (from Source 1B) was to be tapped. A portion of this flow is redirected to thecommunal tap stand through a T-junction fitted with a restrictor valve. The remaining water flowsinto the junction box and feeds the new line. This design ensures minimal water is lost if the tap is leftopen or is broken as the flow to Muramba will not be affected by damages to this tap stand. The tapstand is pictured in Figure 2.10.


14/88


Figure 2.10: Source 1 tap stand schematic

Two issues arose concerning the use of the tap stand. The first issue concerned how muchwater should be available to the local population. Jordan (2000) recommends a flow rate of 13.5 l/minto serve a population of about 200 people; the local population was estimated to be less than half thatnumber. Therefore, it was agreed that a flow rate of approximately 6 l/min would be adequate, but thisamount can be adjusted as leaders see fit. With a combined flow of 32 l/min from Source 1A and 1B,roughly 26 l/min would pass on Muramba with the tap was in use. A tear-drop tap will be installed sothat when it is not in use, the tap will automatically turn off and allow the full flow to pass toMuramba. It is recommended that the flow at the Source 1 tap is measured by a future EWB-UWteam and adjusted to ensure satisfactory flow if necessary.

The second issue of concern was the location of the junction box and tap stand with respect to

the river. EWB-UW believed that the tap stand could be flooded during high flow of the streamduring the rainy season. The local inhabitants indicated that the box was situated above the high flowof the river. At present the base of the junction box is approximately 30 40 cm above the dry flow

conditions. Construction had commenced on the junction boxbefore EWB-UW discussed the issue with the project leaders,making it difficult to question the location. If high flowconditions do pose a threat to the integrity of the junction boxand tap stand, the stream could be dredged along a 3 msection as it runs past the tap stand. This would pass waterthrough the area faster, and provide a greater height betweenthe wet season flow and the tap stand. The Source 1 junctionbox is pictured in Figure 2.11 under construction. A futureteams should check the condition of the tap stand to ensure

that it is accessible to locals and that drainage and flow areadequate.

Figure 2.11: Source 1 junction box and tap stand

Tap Stand

T Junction

From Source1A

From Source1B

To Muramba

Junction Box

RestrictorValve

River

Junction Box

Tap stand


15/88


2.1.6 Connection of Source to Pipeline

Flows from Source 1 and 2 connect to the main pipeline at the junction boxes. Individualflows from Source 1A and 1B and Sources independently of each other. One advantage of this designis that it combines the individual flows without requiring complicated piping. A major disadvantage,however, is that a larger junction box effectively lowers the source head. This was not an issue at

Source 2 but did pose a problem as Source 1.The pipeline from Source 1 travels down a small valley before crossing the tea road. The

pipeline then rises to a height only 15m below source 1A. There was concern over whether sufficienthead existed to pass water over the hill even without the construction of the junction box. To examinethe potential, pipes were connected temporarily and, as expected, the water did not flow over the rise.Consequently, laborers decided to re-dig a portion of the trench at a lower elevation rather than adjustthe junction box design.

Because Source 2 is situated high above the road leading to Muramba, the lowering of theeffective head with the introduction of the junction box was not an issue. The pipe from Source 2travels down the valley and joins the road just prior to the junction box. The two sources combine inthe junction box, pictured in Figure 2.12, which acts as a break-pressure tank. Upon exiting this

junction box, water flows to the village in a single pipe. The new source will enter the village at theentry junction box. The village system is described in further detail in Section 3.

Figure 2.12: Water from Sources 1 and 2 enter this junction box before flowing to the village.

2.2 Discussion

2.2.1 Status on Leaving

Upon EWB-UWs departure, an estimated 2 to 3 months of work remained. Source 1 wasnearly complete, with only the junction box between A and B requiring completion. The foundationsand walls of the box had been completed, but the tap stand and the roof of the box still needed morework. The pipeline from Source 1 to the junction box pictured in Figure 2.12 also neared completion.Laborers had begun laying pipe and connecting joints, and the entire distance could be laid within amatter of days. More substantially, a number of special crossings requiring iron trussing andprotection pipes still needed to be fabricated. Material availability and need for additional fundingmay hinder completion on these lengths. (Additional monies are being sent to continue this work.)


16/88


Source 2 was in a similar state of completion. At the source, only the junction box requiredfinishing work. The trench from Source 2 to the junction box, however, had not been dug. Thesteepness of the slope on which the trench was to be dug could limit the effectiveness of the laborforce in laying and connecting pipe.

An additional 200 m stretch of trench was to be dug from the source junction box and theentry junction box to the village. Due to the extremely tough rock and soil layer, digging theremaining trench length could take several days to complete.

The remaining work lies in the connecting the system addition to the existing village system.Once the system addition is connected, project managers plan to walk the route of the water from theentry junction box to Esecom Reservoir and check for signs of leakage. After assessing the existingsystem, the new source will be disconnected so that repairs to the main line can be undertaken. Oncecompleted, the new source will be reconnected directly to the Esecom reservoir and the renovatedClinic reservoir.

2.2.2 Use of New Supply

The community plans to use the new supply to enhance flow to the village and to ensure thatthe clinic always has a constant supply of water. Community members plan to renovate the clinicreservoir and use it as storage as needed. It is predicted that there will be abundant supply, and that the

clinic will not need all the water. To this end, technicians will install three additional lines to theParish, the Muramba College and the Maria Goretti school. A restrictor valve will be placed on eachof these lines to restrict flow while bolstering current supplies.

While the use of the water was not discussed in depth, EWB-UW was concerned about theparish and the two schools receiving additional water when clearly the village could benefit from thefull supply. Though there was assurance by parish and college leaders that the additional water wouldonly be dispersed if needed, the design was open to abuse or neglect. It is predictable that an openedvalve leading to one of the schools could easily drain the clinic reservoir, leaving no water for theclinic. There appeared to be very little that the remaining EWB-UW students could do to influencethis decision. It was felt that someone with more influence in the community needed to broach theconcern with the community leaders.

2.2.3 Maintenance Schedule

It is important that source technicians institute a maintenance schedule. Establishing a regularroutine before the system begins to visibly degrade will facilitate long-term system sustainability. Theschedule has been divided into required regularity and is laid out in Table 2.3. System maintenanceshould be carried out under the supervision of Frederick and may entail hiring additional laborers toeffectively maintain the system.

Table 2.3: Recommended system maintenanceRegularity Task Description

Tap Stand Flow Measurement

Acquire flow rates at all community tap stands.Reductions in flow will indicate problems requiringimmediate attention.

Weekly

Water TestingTest water being supplied to the community at tap stands.Contamination as one tap stand will indicate moresignificant quality issues.

MonthlySystem Walk-Over

Visual review of system, taking note of saturated soilsnear the pipeline and degrading tap stands and reservoirsedimentation levels.

Bi-annualRenovation of source protection

Clear vegetation, clear drainage channels and repairfences.

System Flush Flush all pipes and shock entire system.Annual

Reservoir FlushRapid drawdown of all reservoirs for detailed inspectionand cleaning of interior walls.


17/88


2.2.4 Role of EWB-UW in the Project

EWB-UW and Muramba each contributed significantly in bringing the water project tofruition. EWB-UW supported the project by financing the material cost, providing technical supportto project managers, and supervising the design and construction of key structural and hydrologicinfrastructure. Muramba provided skilled laborers, knowledge of local natural systems, and sweat-

equity. The community assumed responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the system,which will help give the community a sense of ownership and responsibility. For the most part, theindividuals in charge of the project were very capable and able in their work, working efficiently andeffectively. Work progressed rapidly throughout EWB-UWs time in the community; at one time itwas even thought that the project may be completed prior to EWB-UWs departure. On more than afew occasions, the presence of EWB-UW was apparent in the project progress.

The community expected that all people involved would be paid for their work. It was agreed,however, by the project managers both from EWB-UW and the community that this was acommunity development project and that only skilled laborers would be paid. Skilled laborers wouldnot be able to earn wages for the duration of the project as their skills would only be needed forcertain intervals. Consequently, all masonry work and construction was paid, but digging was not.Insufficient funding in the original budget to pay for unskilled labor gangs encouraged volunteerlabor. More significantly, this project is a community development project, and as such, it was hoped

that a sense of village ownership could be achieved through volunteer labor.EWB-UWs presence can be viewed from multiple viewpoints. From one perspective, the

project was being pushed forward by foreigners who were also volunteering their time to help thecommunity. From another perspective, these were rich foreigners who had brought a substantialamount of money into the community and could afford to pay for the work they were asking of thecommunity. The predominant perception was that the project was an overwhelming success and thatmuch less would have been accomplished without EWB-UWs presence and the communitysdetermination to better the villagers livelihoods. On a number of occasions the entire communityworked together. The EWB-UW team members joined in these community dig days, and werereceived well, even if their presence often slowed the digging process.

One issue that challenged EWB-UW and village leadership to reach consensus concernedgetting water from Source 1 over the high point on the tea road. It was apparent to EWB-UW that thiswas going to be a difficult task, and some time was taken to ensure that there was enough head from

the source to the high point to drive the water. There was great concern when the issue was discussedand it was discovered that the project managers planned to lower the effective head of the sources byusing a junction box. It became apparent that further discussion would not change the plan proposedby village leadership. The only way to demonstrate this issue was to connect the source to the highpoint and show that the water would not flow over the hill. Once the problem was illustrated, therewas a good understanding and alternatives were discussed. However, the situation highlighted areluctance to seriously consider what EWB-UW said when it involved changing the design of thesystem. Though complications with communication existed, this situation highlighted potentialcomplications future EWB-UW teams should be aware of.

One such complication arose over the proposed use of the new source. After supplying villagetap stands with additional water, the water was to supply the clinic, which currently has no water.Everyone agreed that this was very important. The dispute arose from the plan to link the new source,stored in the renovated reservoir, to the parish, the college and the Maria Goretti School. EWB-UWfelt that any water not used by the clinic should be made available to the community who currentlylack a satisfactory supply. Throughout this discussion, the community representative was silent,allowing the individuals who worked for the parish and college to voice the needs of these facilities.This situation illustrated the allegiance of the educated technicians in the community to theiremployers and the reluctance of the community to challenge their wants. Furthermore, it illustratedEWB-UWs impotence in helping determine the eventual use of the water. Project managersmaintained that the best use for the water was to help boost the supply for the parish and college.

These points highlight a number of issues that future EWB teams may wish to consider:


18/88


A villagers main concern is to be able to work to earn money to support themselves and theirfamilies, and any proposed volunteer work must take this into account,

Problems based on theory may be difficult to explain, but practical examples and illustrationshelp in gaining understanding.

It is important to discuss potential problems as soon as possible, as the project leaders had thehabit of completing work before EWB-UW was aware of it.

The individuals EWB may be working with will be affiliated with the parish or the schools.This could lead to a conflict in ideas and objectives, and result in difficult situations whereEWB is unable to influence decisions made by the project managers despite being financersfor the project. One potential outcome is that large community projects require a direct benefitto the parish or the college, with the community being a secondary consideration.

These are purely discussion points, based on dealings with the local community. It must bestressed that the parish is instrumental in the community development, and the enthusiasm of theparish leaders, namely Father Bosco, are precisely what the community needs. However, future EWBteams may find it beneficial to consider the points made if only to prepare themselves for alleventualities.

2.2.5 Recommendations

The water project was progressing well as EWB-UW departed from Muramba, but a fewconcerns still remained. These included:

Tap stand at Source 1: A brief assessment of the tap stand at Source 1 is needed to ensure itis sanitary and structurally sound, with easy accessibility and good drainage. Flowmeasurements need to be taken to ensure the flow is adequate. The apron should rise abovethe stream so it is not flooded during the wet season.

Tap stand at Source 2: Some confusion existed at Source 2 as to whether a tap stand was tobe built. The outcome should be checked and, if necessary, the supply may be tappeddepending on the funding and materials.

Protection of Sources: A brief assessment of the protection of each source is needed to

ensure they are adequately protected. No surface runoff should wash over the infrastructureand local inhabitants should not be farming within the source area. Above each source theslope stability needs to be assessed and vegetation within the source area needs to be checked.

Water Testing: An accurate water testing regime is needed once the system has beencompleted to ascertain the cleanliness of the supply and the potential need for a central watertreatment facility. Current testing showed contamination ofColiform, and an absence E.Coli.

Maintenance: A maintenance schedule needs to be drafted and refined with the communityto ensure there is constant observation of flow and the condition of infrastructure. Apreliminary maintenance schedule is given in Table 2.3.

Use of Additional Supply: There is a need for discussion between EWB and the communityleaders about the proposed use of the new supply. This should be between someone ofleadership within EWB for instance Peter Bosscher and the village leaders, including theSector Chief and the parish leaders.

3 Village Distribution System Assessment

In addition to working with village leadership to implement new infrastructure, EWB workedto assess current infrastructure. After assessing the communitys current infrastructure, EWB-UW willprovide recommendations to village leaders in an effort to better maintain and operate the system. Afull assessment of the village distribution system was carried out on 20 July 2005 by EWB membersTim Miller and Andre Steele and University of Butare student Emmanuel Tuombe. The assessment


19/88


was an effort to gauge the condition of the village system and its ability to cope with the introductionof the new source, which is estimated to more than double the current water entering the system.

3.1Description of System

While components of the current system vary in age, the oldest infrastructure dates back over

75 years. With the exception of Muramba Parish, the College of Muramba and the Maria GorettiSchool all three of which have alternative water sources the community is home to approximately7,000 individuals. Many households rely on alternative sources that result from a locally high watertable to meet their individual needs.

Currently, three major sources feed the Muramba area. One source directly feeds the CollegeOf Muramba, and then links to the village primary school. The primary school currently has no waterbecause the tap stand situated in the school has been sealed off. The tap was most likely sealed due toleakage or a broken tap. This leaves about 500 primary school students without any source of waterthroughout the day. The closest tap stand to the primary school is within the parish compound, an areawhere children are not allowed. The closest water source is a large leak in the parish line near theEsecom reservoir. The leak pools in a hole in which the children play in and almost certainly drinkfrom.

The second source feeds the parish, with a subsequent line leading to the Maria Goretti

School. This subsidiary line has recently been turned off. Students from the Maria Goretti Schoolcollect their water from the parish, evident in the long lines of school girls queuing every morning tofill their water containers. Another line runs from the parish to the vocational school where threeadditional taps are located. None of these taps are in a usable condition. Technicians havepermanently sealed two taps by clamping the pipe. The third tap is broken, but is still used byunscrewing the tap.

The third source feeds into the village system and is the focus of this investigation. The originof this source is discussed in Section 2; the village system is depicted in Figure 3.1. Water is collectedseveral kilometers away and enters the village at the entry junction box (J01). From this point the flowis divided with a subsidiary line running to the village reservoir (R01) to feed a total of three taps.Only one of these taps now functions (T01). The main line runs from the entry junction box to theEsecom junction box (J05). From here the flow is divided with the majority of water flowing into theEsecom Reservoir (R02). The remaining flow is diverted to two Esecom tap stands (T06 and T07).

The Esecom reservoir represents the main storage point for the village. Three lines issue fromthe reservoir. One line runs back into the village center to feed four taps (T02 T05). The second linefeeds water to the pre-Esecom tap (T08) and the clinic taps. The third line runs directly to the parishsystem and is stored in the parish water tower.


20/88


College of

Muramba

Goretti

School

Entry Junction Box

(J01)

Reservoir 1 (R01)

Over Flow 1

Village Tap 1

(T01)

Washout

Village Tap 2

(T02)

Mosque Tap

(T03)

Mosque

Sector HQ

Village Tap 3

(T04)

Esecom Tap 2 (T07)

Esecom School

Esecom Junction Box (J05)

Carpentry Guild Tap (T05)

(Private)

Esecom Tap 1 (T06)

Esecom Reservoir

(R02)PreEsecom Tap (T08)

Reservoir 2 (R03)

(disused) Cinic Taps (T09)

Nurses Tap (T10)

Village Tap 4 (T11)

(unused)

Primary Scool Tap (T12)

(Cut Off)

Store Room Tap (T13)

Vocational School

Vocational School Tap (T14)

(Cut Off)

ParishToilet Block Tap (T19)

(Cut Off)

Goretti School Reservoir

(Disconnected)

Reservoir 3

(Unused)

Parish Tap 1 (T15)Parish Tap 2 (T18)

Pastoral Tap (T16)

Parish W ater Tower

College Water Tower

Sand Filter

College Reservoir

Teachers Quarters

Alternative Distribution

Line

Source B & C

Source A

(J02)

(J03)

(J04)

Road

Pipe

Figure 3.1: Schematic diagram of the village system


21/88


Buried PVC pipe constitutes much of the system. Metal casing shields the pipe in areas whereadditional protection is required. Junction boxes and access boxes are constructed of masonry andmortar, and the reservoirs tend to be constructed of dry stone masonry. The only exception is themetal parish water tower. The system is maintained by the combined efforts of Innocent and Louis,who are employed respectively by the Parish and the College of Muramba. Frederick will assumeresponsibility for the system when the new addition is completed.

3.2Methodology

The assessment included a walkover and visual inspection, flow measurements and watertesting.

3.2.1.1 Walkover

The walkover followed the line of the pipes from their entry into the village. It began at theentry junction box (J01) and followed the main pipelines, picking up the infrastructure as itprogressed through the village towards the main reservoir at Esecom School. From here the line led tothe parish. A superficial survey examined the alternative sources used by the parish and the college.As these two systems were not the main focus of the assessment, they are not mentioned here in greatdetail but have been discussed in previous summary reports.

3.2.1.2 Flow measurement

Where possible, flow measurements were taken to gain an idea of the flow quantity throughthe system. The flows were measured using a basic stopwatch, a wide mouth bottle with 100 mLmarkings, and coordinated recording. Multiple flows were measured in an effort to achieve a moreaccurate average. In instances of low flow, fewer measurements were necessary. Flow measurementsare listed in Appendix 8.2 B.

3.2.1.3 Water Testing

Water testing was carried out in two phases. Initially, a basic presence/absence test was used toascertain the presence of contamination from Coliformand E.Coli. If the sample tested positive, thesample was re-tested for the concentration ofColiformand E.Coli.

3.3Results of Methodology

Overall, the system was in poor condition. Recommendations for immediate maintenance workare described in subsequent sections. The system will be described in terms of infrastructure, tapstands and water quality.

3.3.1 Infrastructure

There appears to be a lack of maintenance throughout the system. In general, theinfrastructure that is located in the village was in a worse condition than the more remoteinfrastructure.

3.3.1.1 Pipelines

In many instances, pipes throughout the village were exposed and leaking. It was not possibleto make an accurate estimation of the extent of water loss throughout the system; however, total water


22/88


loss could be as high as 50-75 %. The most significant losses occurred in subsidiary lines and alongthe length of the Esecom line. The subsidiary line feeding Reservoir 1, for example, had a breakwhich lost nearly 100% of the flow when exposed. Obviously, breaking the line was deemedappropriate at this location in order to make clay bricks. This break requires immediate attention, asthe subsidiary line was calculated to carry 0.2 l/s, roughly one third of the water entering the villagethrough the entry junction box (J01). The leak is depicted in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2: Leak (L01) in subsidiary line to Reservoir 1 (R01)

The Esecom Line had numerous leaks, referenced as L02 L08. The major breaks are locatedjust south of the village center (L05) and at the road junction in the middle of the village (L07). Theseleaks result from exposed pipes that are deteriorating from sun exposure and human activity. As themajority of these pipes are PVC, the pipeline is susceptible to damage if not sufficiently protected.Direct sunlight will reduce the lifespan of the PVC pipe and will exacerbate the damage caused byhuman traffic.

3.3.1.2 Reservoirs and Junction Boxes

The reservoirs generally appeared to be in good condition from the exterior. However, theonly accessible reservoir required internal resurfacing. This was Reservoir 1 (R01) located at the top

of the village. Structurally the reservoir was in good condition, but the internal waterproofing layerhad developed cracks which could be seen externally in seepage through the masonry.

Uncovered pipe

Water pools for

making clay bricks


23/88


Figure 3.3: Cracking in internal surface of Reservoir 1 (R01)

Of the remaining reservoirs, the Esecom Reservoir (R02) was inaccessible as the incorrectkey was supplied during the survey. No obvious leaks were visible from the exterior. There was alsoan unused reservoir (R03) that was being renovated for storage of the new source.

A brief overview of the college and parish reservoirs showed that though structurally sound,basic maintenance work would be a beneficial. Clearing sediment and scrubbing the biological growthfrom the walls would extend the lifespan of the reservoirs and the quality of the water. All the

reservoirs had access boxes covering the exit pipes, but none of these access boxes were locked. Noneof the exit pipe valves included taps that could be easily adjusted.

Other than the entry junction box and the box at Esecom, none of the junction boxes werelocked. The general public could easily access these junction boxes, and there was often rubbishdeposited in the boxes. None of the valves housed by the boxes had usable taps, though this may havebeen a method of preventing interference by local residents. Each of the locked boxes acted asbreakwater pressure tanks; therefore, it is important that these boxes stay locked. They were in goodcondition with little sediment and no visible cracking.

3.3.1.3 Tap Stands

There were no satisfactory taps stands being used within the village. Faults fell into one of

three areas: protection, taps and drainage.The ideal tap stand design provides a good drainage channel for excess water and a relativelyhigh support post for the pipe. Most tap stands within the village lacked a sufficiently wide apron andan adequate support for the tap itself. In most cases, the width of the stand is not large enough toprevent water spilling over the sides and causing pools of standing water, erosion and churned mud,all of which pose a public health and safety risk. The ideal width should be approximately 1 m,allowing for access to the tap from the side while users stand on a designed drainage surface. Atypical tap stand is shown in Figure 3.4. Note the spray of water and the erosion undermining theapron. Because the pipe is unprotected and unsupported, the tap could easily be broken.


24/88


Figure 3.4: Erosion around the apron and spraying water are exhibited in Village Tap 1 (T01).

Future maintenance schedules should include replacing all village tap stands with tear droptaps provided by EWB-UW. A future EWB project could involve the detailed design and constructionof an ideal tap stand within Muramba, which could then be copied replicated throughout the village.This could be done in conjunction with the Vocational School. Much of the water from the newsource will not reach its destination unless tap stands are improved.

3.3.2 Water Quantity

Flow measurements were taken at key points throughout the village system. Some of the

results are displayed in Table 3.1. About one third of the total flow is presently routed from the EntryJunction Box to Reservoir 1 for use in the upper village. Originally Reservoir 1 was designed to feedthree tap stands, though currently only one exists: the second tap has been removed and the third wasnever constructed.

Table 3.1: System flow rates at key points.

Flow RateSite

L/s L/min

Entry Junction Box (J01) 0.62 37.2

Reservoir 1 (R01) 0.22 13.4

Esecom Junction Box (J05) 0.30 17.9

Village Tap 1 (T01) 0.30 17.8

The remaining flow is transported directly to the Esecom reservoir (R02). It was not possible toestimate the loss of flow through this pipeline because the reservoir was locked. It was, however,noted that only two of the public tap stands being fed from the Esecom reservoir had any flow at all,both of which were too low to measure. The other remaining three taps had no observable flow on theday of the assessment. Later observation showed a similar poor flow from these taps, resulting insome innovative catchment systems utilized by villagers to ensure minimal water collection time. Onemethod is pictured in Figure 3.5.


25/88


Figure 3.5: Villagers often use banana leaves to collect water at Village Tap 2 (T02).

Three lines exit the Esecom reservoir, of which two supplied public tap stands and the villageclinic. The third conveyed water directly to the parish. It was obvious that the parish had ample wateron the day of the assessment, as the parish gardener was busy watering the grass during the hottestpart of the day. It was not possible to say how much water was entering the parish system from theEsecom reservoir, as the point of entry was unknown. A flow of approximately 0.22 l/s entered theEsecom reservoir, and a combined flow of 0.08 l/s was routed from the Esecom reservoir. This wouldsuggest an inflow of roughly 0.14 l/s into the parish system.

It is apparent that the current water distribution in Muramba does not ensure the villagealways has an adequate supply of water. There appears to be a high water table in the area, and manyof the households situated off the ridge line of the village, away from village system, use naturalsprings. These are not satisfactory water collection points for the villagers however, due to thedistance they are required to walk. Thus, it is imperative that the system continues to supply constant

quantity of water to the village.From the brief investigation undertaken by EWB-UW, it would appear that the waterdistribution currently favors the parish. The only village tap to receive an adequate water supply wasVillage Tap 1 (T01), which was the only tap not connected to the Esecom reservoir. This indicatesthat the valves controlling flow to the village need to be adjusted to ensure adequate water reaches thevillage tap stands.

3.3.3 Water Quality

Water testing showed the water entering the system to be contaminated with Coliformbacteria, a bacterial contaminant that is not necessarily harmful but is used as an indicator of otherpotentially harmful bacteria. E. colipresence is more serious as it indicates fecal contamination.While samples collected in the village system were contaminated with Coliform, none of the watersampling areas returned consistent E. Colicontamination and most showed no contaminationwhatsoever. This would suggest that the village system is not part of a fecal-oral route. Therefore, it islogical to assume that there is no water entry into the system outside of the main supply. The waterfrom the village supply cannot be deemed safe though, as high concentrations ofColiformdo exist.Currently the water being supplied does not conform to WHO guidelines of 0 Coliformper 100 mL.This would suggest that preliminary treatment is required to treat the water prior to being supplied tothe community or after it is dispersed to individuals.


26/88


Samples were taken from jerry cans at several sources. In most cases, there was an increase inthe number of bacteria compared to the water sampled directly from the source. For example, waterfrom the tap in the parish courtyard used by the kitchen contained no E. coli; water from the tapcollected first in a jerry can had 3 E. coli per mL, or equivalently 300 E. coliper 100 mL. Thishighlights a common problem in village water supply: despite the quality of the water supplied, thewater containers used result in the spread of disease. One advantage of a centralized treatment facilityis that residual chlorine content would remain in the water until consumption or use in the home.

Figure 3.5: Dirty water containers contribute to the spread of disease.

Current practices in the village indicate that the villagers are aware of the need to treat thewater they consume. Home chlorination kits are available for purchase at local pharmacies, thoughthey are too expensive for most villagers to afford. The individuals surveyed mentioned a lack of time

and fuel to disinfect water through boiling; during EWB-UWs stay, neither of the two villagepharmacies had chlorination kits in stock. This is an aspect of the water supply that has beenrecognized by EWB-UW and is currently being addressed by the Solar Pasteurization project1. Ondays with good to excellent amounts of sun, there was sufficient energy to effectively pasteurize waterwithin a few hours. However, many of the days were overcast and not suitable for waterpasteurization. The water within the system should not be trusted for drinking or cooking purposes,unless boiled, chlorinated or pasteurized first.

3.4Current Maintenance Practices

The current maintenance regimen is not adequate if the distribution system is to be sustainable.Under the current system, the community has responsibility for monitoring the system and identifyingproblems. Once a problem as been identified, village leadership is notified and generally contacts theparish to request assistance. Thus, the village relies on parish technicians to maintain theirinfrastructure. This may change as the new system is completed and Frederick is assignedresponsibility for the village system. Since the parish benefits from the same water line as the village,the parish and village have agreed that the parish will help maintain the village system withoutrequiring payment, provided the identified problem is not a result of vandalism. For example, if the

1 reference to solar cooking summary


27/88


problem is a broken tap, then the families who directly use that tap are required to raise the fundingrequired to purchase a replacement tap. The repairs are then carried out by a parish technician.Practice has shown that maintenance does not get done. In many instances, problems are eitherproblems not reported, or reported problems are left unattended. There may also be a reluctance toreport broken taps, as the users must pay for a new tap. Most often, it is easier to walk a greaterdistance to fetch water than raise money for a new tap.

Some problems that are reported do get dealt with rapidly, but often in a non-sustainablemanner. When it was noticed that the toilet block tap (T19) was broken, the tap was removed, and thepipe sealed by clamping it shut with a pair of pliers. No attempt was made to repair the tap. EWB-UWhad recently brought 40 tear-drop taps into the community, but these were not considered, despitehaving been purchased to replace faulty taps in the village. Once a pipe has been sealed, it is difficultto affix other fixtures to the pipe.

No community organization holds responsibility for the water system, and it appears thatmaintenance work is done when it affects the water supply for any organized body of the community.As a result, the system directly supplying the community does not get repaired, and is only dealt withwhen a substantial loss occurs. Generally the responses in these cases are terminal. The exception iswhen the problem relates to faults in a private system: when the Mosque tap was sealed, it was doneusing a screw cap until a replacement tap could be bought. Likewise, a faulty tap in the carpentryguild was replaced by the users at a price of 3000 FRW.

3.5 Recommendations

At present the village system and the parish and college systems are in grave disrepair. Theysuffer from an extended period of lack of maintenance and provide a poor service to the community asa whole. Often, local women queued early in the morning at the parish gate to be allowed access tothe internal parish taps. In long term, a shift in operational and maintenance behavior is needed. Evenwith the addition of a new source, the functionality of the community water supply is not guaranteed,with current losses amounting to at least 50% of the total inflow volume throughout the system.

3.5.1 Required Maintenance Work

The following is a list of recommended maintenance work needed to bring the village systemup to a good working standard.

3.5.1.1 Infrastructure

R01: Top Village ReservoirThe internal surface of the reservoir is cracking, and loss of water is visible as leaks in the masonrywall on the exterior surface of the tank. It is recommended that the reservoir is resurfaced on theinside to extend the life of the tank.

J02: Junction Box

This junction box had no means of locking, required to prevent public access. Providing a lockingmechanism will allow only maintenance personnel to check flows and discourage tampering.

T01: Village Tap 1The tap stand is inadequate. The tap valve is poorly adjusted and sprays water in a large radius. As aresult, the soil around the apron has eroded, causing pools of standing water and churned mud. Thedrainage for the tap stand is also inadequate. The tap should be replaced with a tear drop tap and theapron should be extended on each side. The drainage channel could be extended with dry masonry for2-3 m beyond the current apron.


28/88


J03 and J04: Junction boxThis junction box had no means of locking. Installing a locking mechanism would preventunauthorized public access.

T02: Village Tap 2The tap stand is currently performing well, but due to insufficient flow there is a collection of debris

in the aprons main drainage channel. The stand does not extend far enough laterally and results instanding water. Replacing the current tap with a tear drop tap and extending the apron laterally willimprove the long-term durability. The apron drainage channel should be cleared as well.

T03: Mosque TapThis tap has no stand or protection. The tap is broken and shut off. It is recommended the tap isreplaced with a tear drop tap and a complete tap stand is constructed around the tap.

T04: Sector Headquarter TapThe apron is sufficient for the flow observed at the tap. The extended drainage is inadequate and themud pool used for water collection poses a public health risk. It is recommended that the apron isextended laterally on either side and a dry stone masonry channel is constructed to a point beyond theimmediate area. The current tap should also be replaced with a tear drop tap.

T06 T07: Esecom Taps 1 & 2These taps supply water to the Esecom School. They currently have very low flow. They arestructurally sound, but require extended drainage channels to prevent further erosion of the slope.

T08: PreEsecom TapThe tap has no protection around the pipe and though a steeply sloping apron is present it isinsufficient for the usage of the tap. The earth drainage channel conveys water down the road throughthe village, and has been damned to pool water for brick making. The tap stand would benefit from anew apron. Furthermore, a dry masonry drainage channel is needed to channel the water away fromthe village down slope. The tap needs to be replaced with a tear drop tap.

T10: Nurses TapThe nurses tap was not designed for public use, but the local community still uses it. It has insufficientdrainage, as the main sink drain has been broken. The apron channels water to the side of the building.Water was added to the building after construction was completed and the feeder pipe ran over theapron. The sink is elevated, putting it beyond the reach of children. The drainage pipe for the sinkshould be fixed, and a tear drop tap used to replace the current tap. If the tap is not to be a public tapthen an alternative public tap should be constructed nearby to provide water for residents in theimmediate area.

3.5.1.2 Leakage and Exposed Pipe

There were many instances of leaking and exposed pipes in the community system. Adescription and location of each recorded leak is listed in the Appendix. In almost all instances leakshave developed at poorly connected joints. Either a previous repair was incorrectly finished, or apoorly finished joint at the time of construction was not noticed. At no location was a leak noticedfrom a cracked or broken pipe. Some leaks were only evident in the dampness on the ground surfaceabove the pipe. It would be logical to assume that these leaks also result from poor joints. It is criticalthat maintenance is conducted to fix these joints using proper cementing techniques. Observation of

joint cementing techniques during the new pipeline construction indicated that technicians possessed


29/88


sufficient technical aptitude to join pipes; however the pipe ends were not roughed before applicationof the glue.

In many cases the leaks had developed at locations where the pipe was exposed to the surface.Exposure of the pipe will increase the degradation of the pipe line, as sunlight degrades PVC and thepipe will be subjected to increased human traffic. In all instances of leaks, the pipe needs to be cut andrefitted with good joints. The pipe must remain dry during this operation, so the water supply willneed to be cut briefly. This may pose problems, and it might be wise to ensure reservoirs are full priorto interrupting supply, especially if the repair is being undertaken on the main Esecom line.

All exposed pipe and repaired leaks should be reburied to a depth of at least 60 cm below theground surface. The depth may need to be deeper for leaks L04, L05 and L07, where the pipes runalong a main thoroughfare. If this depth is not achievable, it may be necessary to encase the pipe in ametal cover pipe to ensure protection. The PVC pipe should enter and exit the metal cover pipe belowground to prevent accelerated fatigue from sunlight exposure and human activity.

3.5.1.3 Water Flow

From the survey undertaken, it appears that there is insufficient water reaching the villagetaps. A total flow of 0.62 l/s enters the system from the current village source, while only a flow of0.32 l/s is seen in the actual village taps. The remaining 0.3 l/s is fed to the parish and lost through

leaks. It is recommended that on completion of maintenance work required in the village system, acomprehensive water balance is undertaken to assess the distribution of water resources. Dependingon the results of that balance, the appropriate valves should be adjusted to ensure there is an adequatesupply to all village taps.

Repairing the system could take months to complete, as financial support will most likely bethe limiting factor. It may be wise for an EWB team to carry out the water balance and then makesrecommendations to the community. From recent experience, any recommendations that involvereducing the water supply to the parish may require the support of both the parish leadership and asenior member of the EWB team.

3.5.2 Future Sustainability of System

The maintenance and operation of the village system is currently not sustainable. Specifically:

A comprehensive assessment of the village system is rarely undertaken, and maintenance isperformed sporadically as funding permits.

Water is currently free to users of public facilities, so the cost of repairs and maintenance isnot equally distributed amongst those using the system.

The community currently lacks an entity to govern the use of the water system and to takeresponsibility for repairs and maintenance.

In response to these issues, a water board could be institutionalized to encourage sustainability andpromote responsible use of the system. The conceptual organization of the water board is illustrated inFigure 3.7. Elements of this system may already exist, but currently the system is disjointed and lacksholistic integration.


30/88


Figure 3.6: Muramba Water Board Organization

In this system, entities using the village water supply are responsible for the maintenance andoperation of the system. Currently, the parish, College of Muramba, Maria Goretti School, Esecom,and the Vocational School all use portions of the village water supply. In some instances, the supplyfor the schools is routed through the parish reservoir, though these schools also have additional watersources. In addition, smaller entities like the clinic, the Mosque, and the carpentry guild use thevillage supply. Taxing the water supply based on usage will ensure that the water is equitablydistributed to those who need it. As it currently stands, taxes are levied one time for the installation ofa private tap, as in the case of the carpentry guild tap.

Each entity being taxed would be represented on a Board of Governors. Sector chiefs, parishleaders, school representatives, the womens cooperative, and the carpentry guild, among others,would represent their respective entities and be responsible for guaranteeing a portion of the watersupply for the body they represent. Ensuring that women are allowed on this board is critical inachieving mutual consensus. From this board, a financial manager and a technical manager could beelected.

The financial manager could act as the liaison between the board and the labor force. Inmanaging the finances and taxes related to the water system, the financial manager would be in chargeof hiring a labor force as public works projects develop. For example, the financial manager couldhave hired the skilled laborers (carpenters, masons, etc.) for the water expansion project. Additional

Board of GovernorsSector ChiefsParishSchools: Goretti, Esecom, College, Vocational, PrimaryWomens GuildOther: Carpentry Guild

Other:VillageTeachers

NursesMosque

Source of Funding: Taxes

Parish College Goretti Esecom Vocational

Technical ManagerOperators

Financial ManagerCollector

Maintenance and Expansion of

System

Purchasing of Materials andLabor


31/88


responsibilities could include purchasing materials needed for maintenance and basic upkeep of thesystem.

The financial manager would work closely with the technical manager, another boardappointee. The technical manager would be responsible for the technical design of the current systemand would have the final say in all expansion projects. Communication between the financial managerand the technical manager is critical, as the technical manager will undoubtedly need skilled laborers(hired by the financial manager) to complete public works projects. System maintenance andoperation would be overseen by the technical manager as well.

These remarks are made with the best intentions of helping Muramba maintain and operatethe water system. Granted, Murambas political situation is not fully understood and theserecommendations must be seen from the perspective of an outsider to the community. Expanding thesystem to include new sources will do little good if the system is not properly maintained andoperated, and establishing a water board could promote community and responsibility and individualaccountability. The system is doomed to fail unless the community takes collective responsibility forthe system and is proactive in seeking equitable distribution of the current water resources.

4 Solar Pasteurizing & Cooking Project

4.1Background

Much of Rwanda is heavily deforested (Figure4.1). Its population density of 320 people per squarekilometer puts a tremendous strain on what little energysupplies are available. In Muramba and the surroundingregions, families rely on the firewood they collect orpurchase for cooking. Collecting firewood requires asignificant amount of time; buying firewood puts anadded strain on families already limited budgets. Also,local leaders indicated that theft of firewood is a

problem in the community. Simple devices that usesolar energy in lieu of firewood for cooking food havebeen successfully implemented in similar areas aroundthe world (including neighboring Kenya on a largescale) and were chosen as a EWB-UW project in hopesof diminishing the areas dependence on firewood.

These solar cookers can also be used forpasteurizing water, which we felt was likely to be theprimary use in an area where people are aware that theyshould be heating their water to make it safe to drink butare unable to purchase the extra firewood. Preliminary

water tests performed on earlier trips indicated the presence of harmful pathogens. In order todetermine the extent of contamination, further testing was performed this summer throughout the area

using tests that provide quantifiable results.Water in Muramba is generally available in one of four forms: from the river, tap stands

throughout the community, leaks in the ageing pipeline and rainfall. Although it does not appearmany people collect their daily drinking water from the river, Muramban children were found to drinkthe water without hesitation when crossing it. Not surprisingly, this was found to be one of the mostcontaminated sources of water, showing E. coli presence each of the three times it was tested with upto 12 E. coli per milliliter.

Figure 4.1: Example of deforestation inMuramba


32/88


4.2Testing the Water Quality in Muramba

The primary source for water is the various tap stands located throughout the area. There area few public taps located along the roadside (Figure 4.2) and in the hills and others located outside onthe property of Esecom school, the vocational school, the parish, the nurses station and the

carpenters guild building which are used by the generalpub

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ewbuw-madison
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Muramba Phase II Final Report

Documents