RIVER GAUGING STATIONS INFORMATION (24hr Average):   0000KOB005 Driekoppies Weir 2.545 m3/s   | 0000KOB003 Enjakeni Weir 10.912 m3/s   | 0000X1H001 Hooggenoeg Weir 14.614 m3/s   | 0000KOB004 Lebombo Weir m3/s   | 0000KOB007 Mananga Weir 11.706 m3/s   | 0000KOB008 Matsamo Weir 0.933 m3/s   | 0000KOB012 Mzimnene Weir 0.326 m3/s   | 0000KOB001 Sandbult Weir m3/s   | 0000KOB002 Tonga Weir 6.170 m3/s   | 0000KOB011 Mhlume Weir 13.857 m3/s   |

Project Finance

Funding was through the Development Bank of South Africa (DBSA) loan of R488,4 million at 10% interest. Construction and Engineering totaled R418million and Relocation and Compensation cost R70million.

The DBSA, as financiers required a major effort to be made to minimize income leakage from the area where the Dam was constructed. Funding for the Dam was to be spent in and remain in the area as far as possible, to provide the maximum benefit to the local community. This required the maximum employment of local people, either directly by the Main Contractor or as subcontractors. To this end, several committees were set-up to direct and coordinate the efforts of various interested parties.

One of the first committees formed was the Local Entrepreneurial opportunities Committee (LEOC) which comprised concerned local businessmen, the Main Contractor, the Engineer and KOBWA. Subcontracts totalled R188million of which 3.3% was awarded to local entrepreneurs, 39.1% to sub-regional subcontractors and 57.6% to subcontractors outside the sub-region. Another committee involved the Main Contractor, the Matsamo Community Action Committee (MAC), the Engineer and KOBWA in the co-ordinated promotion of employing as much of the workforce as possible from the nearby communities.

This committee was called the Employment Working Group (EWG). Although the Dam itself provided only limited opportunities for the use of labour-intensive construction methods, these methods were applied whenever possible in the areas such as the construction of housing and infra-structural services for both temporary and permanent requirements. The total manpower cost comprised 23% of the costs which is well above the 15% average for this type of construction. The employment of local residents reduces the negative social impact of immigrant workers which frequently disrupts family lives in the area and results in higher incidents of community health and social problems.