Volume 6 - MCA, BOQ and Conceptual Design

Delegation of the European Union
to the Republic of Serbia
EuropeAid/129691/C/SER/RS
Tender number: 10SER01/14/11
Preparation of Documentation for River

Training and Dredging Works on Selected
Locations along the Danube River
Phase 2 - Feasibility Study
Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ

and conceptual designs
FINAL VERSION
Delegation of the European Union
to the Republic of Serbia
EuropeAid/129691/C/SER/RS
Tender number: 10SER01/14/11
Preparation of Documentation for River

Training and Dredging Works on Selected
Locations along the Danube River
Phase 2 - Feasibility Study
Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ

and conceptual designs
reference project code status
R-0015 SER2.6 final
project manager project director date
Roberto Zanetti Stephan van der Biezen January 2013
authorisation name initials
ZANR R.A.R.O. Zanetti
Consortium Witteveen+Bos
Bulevar Mihaila Pupina 12
11070 Novi Beograd
Serbia
T: +381 112 146 368
F: +381 113 111 979
E: danube@ephydro.com
Preparation of Documentation for River Training and Dredging Works on Selected Locations along the Danube River
A project funded by the European Union
INDEX P.
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS 3

2.1. General 3
2.2. Criteria definitions 4
2.3. Theme 1 - Navigability and safety 4
2.3.1. Assumptions 4
2.3.2. Compliance with Danube Commission (DC) recommendations 5
2.3.3. Visibility of river training works 5
2.3.4. Hindrance due to changed flow patterns 5
2.4. Theme 2 - Environment 6
2.4.1. Fish population 6
2.4.2. Bird life 6
2.4.3. Flora 7
2.4.4. Water quality 7
2.4.5. River dynamics, water level changes, connectivity and climate
change 8
2.5. Theme 3 - Technical matters 9
2.5.1. Construction time 9
2.5.2. Execution of works 9
2.5.3. Maintenance level 10
2.5.4. Sustainability 11
2.6. Theme 4 - Cost 12
2.6.1. Assumptions 12
2.6.2. Construction costs 12
2.6.3. Maintenance cost 12
2.7. Overview weight factors for themes and criteria 13
2.7.1. Standard weight factors and sensitivity weight factors for themes 13
2.7.2. Standard weight factors for criteria 14
3. MULTI CRITERIA ANALYSE AND RESULTS 15

3.1. General 15
3.2. Sector 1 Bezdan 15
3.3. Sector 2 Siga Kazuk 15
3.4. Sector 3 Apatin 16
3.5. Sector 4 Civutski Rukavac 16
3.6. Sector 5 Drava Confluence 16
3.7. Sector 6 Aljmas 16
3.8. Sector 7 Staklar 17
3.9. Sector 8 Erdut 17
3.10. Sector 9 Bogojevo 17
3.11. Sector 10 Dalj 18
3.12. Sector 11 Borovo 1 18
3.14. Sector 13 Vukovar 18
3.15. Sector 14 Sotin 19
3.16. Sector 15 Opatovac 19
3.17. Sector 16 Mohovo 19
3.18. Sector 17 Backa Palanka 20
3.19. Sector 18 Susek 20
3.20. Sector 19 Futog 20
Consortium Witteveen+Bos, Phase 2 - Feasibility Study, Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ and Conceptual Designs - final version i
3.21. Sector 20 Novi Sad 20

3.22. Sector 21 Arankina Ada 20
3.23. Sector 22 Cortanovci 21
3.24. Sector 23 Beska 21
3.25. Sector 24 Preliv 21
3.26. Conclusion 22
4. CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS 25
4.1. General 25
4.2. Sector 1 Bezdan 25
4.3. Sector 2 Siga Kazuk 26
4.4. Sector 3 Apatin 26
4.5. Sector 4 Civutski Rukavac 26
4.6. Sector 5 Drava Confluence 26
4.7. Sector 6 Aljmas 26
4.8. Sector 7 Staklar 26
4.9. Sector 8 Erdut 26
4.10. Sector 9 Bogojevo 26
4.11. Sector 10 Dalj 26
4.14. Sector 13 Vukovar 27
4.15. Sector 14 Sotin 27
4.16. Sector 15 Opatovac 27
4.17. Sector 16 Mohovo 27
4.18. Sector 17 Backa Palanka 27
4.19. Sector 18 Susek 27
4.20. Sector 19 Futog 28
4.21. Sector 20 Novi Sad 28
4.22. Sector 21 Arankina Ada 28
4.23. Sector 22 Cortanovci 28
4.24. Sector 23 Beska 28
4.25. Sector 24 Preliv 28
5. BILL OF QUANTITIES 29
5.1. General 29
5.2. Investment costs 29
5.2.1. Assessment of quantities 29
5.2.2. Assessment of unit rates 30
5.2.3. Investment costs 33
5.3. Maintenance costs 34
6. LONGITUDINAL PROFILE 35
last page 35
APPENDICES number of pages.

I Results of the MCA for modelled options 21
II Bill of Quantities for the selected options 24
III Characteristics of structures for the selected option 2
IV Conceptual design drawings of the selected options and longitudinal 102
profiles
ii Consortium Witteveen+Bos, Phase 2 - Feasibility Study, Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ and Conceptual Designs - final version
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Multi-criteria assessment criteria and weight factor ................................ 4
Table 2.2. Values regarding visibility ........................................................................ 5
Table 2.3. Values regarding hindrance due to changed flow patterns .................... 5
Table 2.4. Values regarding fish population ............................................................. 6
Table 2.5. Values regarding bird life ........................................................................ 7
Table 2.6. Values regarding flora ............................................................................. 7
Table 2.7. Values regarding sediment budget and water quality ............................. 8
Table 2.8. Values regarding river dynamics, water level changes,
connectivity and climate change ............................................................. 8
Table 2.9. Values regarding construction time......................................................... 9
Table 2.10. Values regarding execution of works .................................................... 10
Table 2.11. Values regarding maintenance ............................................................. 11
Table 2.12. Values regarding sustainability ............................................................. 11
Table 2.13. Values regarding construction cost ....................................................... 12
Table 2.14. Values regarding maintenance cost...................................................... 13
Table 2.15. Weight factors for themes ..................................................................... 13
Table 2.16. Weight factors for criteria ...................................................................... 14
Table 3.1. Overview Phase 2 options (red = dredging, green = structures) .......... 22
Table 3.2. Overview MCA scores and selected option .......................................... 23
Table 3.3. Options resulting from MCA analysis .................................................... 24
Table 5.1. Assessment of quantities ...................................................................... 29
Table 5.2. Transport distances to/from Danube km 1265 to/from sector .............. 31
Table 5.3. Unit rates ............................................................................................... 32
Table 5.4. Investment costs ................................................................................... 33
Table 5.5. Yearly maintenance costs ..................................................................... 34
Consortium Witteveen+Bos, Phase 2 - Feasibility Study, Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ and Conceptual Designs - final version iii
1. INTRODUCTION
This Volume of the Phase 2 report presents the methodology used for the application of the
Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA), as well as the conceptual designs for the selected option
resulting from the MCA.
Feasibility studies discussing complex infrastructural projects result in the development and
comparison of various options. Several aspects and criteria have to be taken into account.
Due to the large number of options and criteria the information is difficult accessible and
comparable. A tool for the comparison of the options is the Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA).
The MCA is a comparison method aiming on the selection and/or comparison of options. It
uses weighing of quantitative and qualitative criteria, resulting in a clear ranking of options.
The MCA is only a tool to compare options. The MCA is useful in projects with a large
number of options and criteria. A hazard of a MCA is that it might appear to be objective,
due to the mathematical approach. As a result of experiences in the past the use of a MCA
is allowed under strict rules and it is of great importance to do sensitivity analyses. A pro is
that a selection is made transparent and that it shows which aspects are important and
which are not.
At the same time it compares options which are the input for the Feasibility Study i.e. Cost
Benefit Analysis (CBA). In this way it is avoided that technically more viable or
environmentally better options are not considered. The MCA would thus be in line with the
integrated planning principles mentioned in the ICPDR Joint statement on Guiding
Principles for the Development of Inland Navigation and Environmental Protection in the
Danube River Basin (2007). The followed approach shows that an interdisciplinary
approach was followed.
The results of an MCA largely depend on the weights that are given to the main themes.
Therefore it is important to do several sensitivity analyses to determine the sensitivity of the
selection of one specific theme. This means that when for example 4 themes are used and
1 theme (for example environment) has a high weighing, lets say 40 % (in stead of one
fourth: 25 %), the possibility exists that the option with the best values for this theme
(environment) turns out to be the best option regarding the entire MCA. But, this is not
always the case. However, a priority ranking of the proposed options is thus obtained.
To show the sensitivity of the MCA for various important themes sensitivity analyses are
performed. For the current study a sensitivity analysis is done by giving more importance to
the environment and to the costs and less to navigation and safety and technical matters
environment and cost. Environment and costs are both important aspects for the selection
of the preferred option.
The Chapter 2 of this Volume presents the selection criteria used for the current project and
the overview of the modelled options per sector within the MCA, as well as the selection of
the option for each sector.
For this selected option or preferred option the conceptual design has been prepared.
These conceptual designs have been described in Volume 6 of this Phase 2 report.
The Chapter 4 finally presents the costs estimates. The bill of quantities for each modelled
options has been prepared. For the selected option per sector separate tables have been
prepared with respectively the construction costs and the maintenance costs,
In addition, various appendices have been prepared containing information, drawings and
tables.
Consortium Witteveen+Bos Phase 2 - Feasibility Study, Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ and Conceptual Designs - final version 1
2 Consortium Witteveen+Bos, Phase 2 - Feasibility Study, Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ and Conceptual Designs - final version
2. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS
2.1. General
The MCA is applied for the different options modelled in each of the sectors. A total of four
(4) themes have been developed and for each of these themes between two and six criteria
have been distinguished.
The 4 themes are:

- navigability and safety;
- environment;
- technical matters;
- costs.
Each of the following sections discusses one of these themes and their criteria. For each
criterion the river training works are compared with each other and not with the
autonomous development. Each one of the criteria has been assigned a value, when
making the comparison. The highest value (2) is for the structure with the most positive
effect (or the least negative effect), while the lowest value (-2) is for the structure with the
most negative effect (or the least positive effect).
For each of the considered sectors various options have been developed. Not all of these
options have been modelled. The MCA has been applied to the modelled options. In case
only one option has been modelled for a sector, at least one of the proposed (not modelled)
options is included in the MCA without having been modelled. This approach was followed
to enable the comparison of options and to enable the preparation of the MCA for the
sector.
Each of the options may consist of various works. To evaluate an option the values given to
each of the criterion and to the theme have been taken into account. These values are
weighed. The values can differ from the value that is stated in this section as the local
conditions might differ, for example very shallow or deep river bed levels.
Table 2.1 presents the themes used in the MCA with their weighing factors. The criteria for
each theme are presented with their weighing within the theme.
For each of the considered sectors various options have been developed. Not all of these
options have been modelled. The MCA will be applied to the modelled options. Only in
case for a sector only one option has been modelled, at least one of the proposed (not
modelled) options is included in the MCA without having been modelled. In this way the
MCA for the sector can be prepared.
Table 2.1. Multi-criteria assessment criteria and weight factor

number theme standard criterion weight
weight factor
1 Navigability
and safety 25%
1.1 comply with DC recommendations 20%
1.2 visibility of structures 40%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40%
2 Environment 40%
2.1 fish population 20%
2.2 bird life 20%
2.3 flora 10%
2.4 water quality 20%
2.5 river dynamics and water level 30%
3 Technical
matters 25%
3.1 Construction time 10%
3.2 execution of the works (level of difficulty and safety) 10%
3.3 maintenance level 40%
3.4 sustainability 40%
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30%
4.2 maintenance costs 70%
2.2. Criteria definitions

Each of the following sections discusses one of the themes and their criteria. For each
criterion the river training works are compared with each other and not with the
autonomous situation for a general situation. The criteria have been assigned a value,
when making the comparison. The highest value (2) is for the works with the most positive
effect (or the least negative effect), while the lowest value (-2) is for the works with the most
negative effect (or the least positive effect).
For each option in each sector the values given from 2 to -2 relate to the comparison of the
proposed works to each other.
Each of the options may consist of various types of river training works i.e. dredging and
structures. To evaluate an option the values given to each of the criteria and to the theme
have been taken into account. The local conditions influence the values. Therefore, these
conditions will be taken into account when assigning a value for the criteria considered.
2.3. Theme 1 - Navigability and safety
2.3.1. Assumptions
Closure bunds are not taken into account regarding visibility and change of flow patterns,
because these are located in side channels where vessels do not enter and sail.
2.3.2. Compliance with Danube Commission (DC) recommendations

This criterion is always met, because the options are optimised to comply with these
recommendations.
The sector Opatovac (sector 15) and sector Mohovo (sector 16) have a narrow fairway of
100 metres due to the presence of rock outcrop. This fairway width is possible within the
available DC recommendations for these types of sites. However, to comply with the DC
recommendations applied for the entire project stretch (width either 180 m or 200 m)
construction activities are required and have been proposed.
2.3.3. Visibility of river training works

The visibility of the river training works (structures and dredging) is important for the
captains sailing the vessels safely. The values attached to the river training works are
presented in Table 2.2 and are as follows:
- the highest visibility has the value 2,
- the visibility reduces when the value decreases to -2.
The details are presented in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2. Values regarding visibility

ranking river training crest level explanation general
work value
1 chevron DLNL + 2,6 m visible most of the time 2
2 groyne DLNL + 1 m visible most of the time 0
3 guiding bund DLNL + 1 m visible most of the time 0
4 bank protection at DLNL bank protection is hardly visible, -1
erosion can be observed
5 sill these structures are always submerged and not visible -2
6 dredging not visible if dredging has occurred -2
note: closure bund not stated, because is constructed in the side channel
2.3.4. Hindrance due to changed flow patterns

The structure may cause hindrance due to change of flow patterns. This is important for the
captains to manoeuvre their vessels. The values attached to the works are as follows:
- the least change of flow patterns results in the minimum hindrance and has the value 2;
- with increasing change of flow patterns and hindrance the value decreases to -2.
It has been taken into account that the experience with the behaviour of sills and chevrons
is not as familiar as the experience with other river training works and structures listed in
the Table 2.3.
Table 2.3. Values regarding hindrance due to changed flow patterns

ranking river training explanation general value
work
1 bank protection no change in flow patterns 2
2 dredging only temporary changes in flow patterns 1
3 guiding bund no sudden change in the flow patterns and a familiar structure 0
4 groyne no sudden change in the flow patterns and a familiar structure 0
5 sill larger changes in the flow pattern -1
6 chevron larger changes in the flow pattern and less familiar structure -2
note: closure bund not listed, because it is constructed in the side channel
2.4. Theme 2 - Environment
2.4.1. Fish population

Regarding the fish population the following aspects are taken into account:
- spawning;
- migration;
- growing;
- living.
The values attached to the works taken these aspects into account are as follows:
- the least change to the existing habitat of the fish or even an improvement of the habit
has the value 2;
- with increasing negative effects the value decreases from 2 to -2.
Table 2.4. Values regarding fish population

ranking river training spawning migration growing living general
work value
1 chevron new spawning area n.a. sheltered sheltered 2
2 bank new spawning area n.a. sheltered sheltered 1
protection
3 guiding bund n.a. n.a. sheltered sheltered 0
4 groyne n.a. n.a. sheltered negative due to 0
siltation
5 closure bund new spawning area negative sheltered negative due to -1
siltation
6 sill n.a. negative n.a. reduction of -1
shelter
7 dredging continuous continuous continuous continuous -2
destruction destruction destruction destruction
n.a. means not applicable
2.4.2. Bird life

Regarding the bird life the following aspects are taken into account:
- nesting;
- wintering.
The values attached to the works are as follows:

- the least change to the existing bird life or even an improvement of the habit has the
value 2;
Table 2.5. Values regarding bird life

ranking river training nesting of birds wintering of birds general
work value
1 chevron sheltered sheltered 2
2 dredging n.a. n.a. 1
3 groyne n.a. n.a. 0
4 bank n.a. n.a. 0
protection
5 sill erosion of existing areas erosion of existing areas -1
6 guiding bund negative, future connection negative, future connection with -1
with surroundings surroundings
7 closure bund negative, connection with negative, connection with -2
surroundings surroundings
2.4.3. Flora
Regarding the flora the following aspects are taken into account:
- flora in river;
- flora on embankment.

- the least change for the existing flora or even an improvement of the habit has the
value 2;
Table 2.6. Values regarding flora

ranking river training river embankment combined general
work value
1 chevron creation of new area new area created positive 2
2 sill small negative erosion of existing less positive 1
areas
3 closure bund negative due to siltation small negative neutral 0
4 groyne negative due to siltation small negative neutral 0
5 guiding bund negative due to siltation small negative neutral 0
6 dredging negative n.a. less negative -1
7 bank small negative negative negative -2
protection
2.4.4. Water quality

Regarding the water quality the effect from dredging polluted sediments is taken into
account. The values attached to the structures are as follows:
- the least change for the water quality or even an improvement of the habit has the
value 2;
Table 2.7. Values regarding sediment budget and water quality

ranking river training work polluted sediments stagnant water general
value
1 sill n.a. n.a. 2
2 groyne n.a. local stagnant water 0
3 guiding bund n.a. local stagnant water 0
4 chevron n.a. local stagnant water 0
5 closure bund n.a. stagnant water -1
6 bank protection slightly negative, as excavation can n.a. -1
mobilise pollutants or organic rich
materials
7 dredging slightly negative, only sandy material n.a. -2
with low concentration of pollutants
2.4.5. River dynamics, water level changes, connectivity and climate change
Regarding the river dynamics, water level changes, connectivity and climate change the
following aspects are taken into account:
- physical diversity;
- canalisation;
- connectivity between flood plains and main river course;
- water level changes;
- climate change.

- the most positive effect on river dynamics, water level and climate change has the
value 2;
Table 2.8. Values regarding river dynamics, water level changes, connectivity
and climate change
ranking river training physical diversity canalisation water level general
work value
1 sill high n.a. large rise 2
2 chevron high n.a. rise 1
3 dredging n.a. n.a. n.a 0
4 guiding bund limited canalisation rise -1
5 bank limited canalisation n.a. -1
protection
6 groyne limited strong canalisation rise -2
7 closure bund limited, stagnant water strong canalisation rise -2
2.5. Theme 3 - Technical matters
2.5.1. Construction time

The construction time depends on:
- the number of activities;
- the amount of equipment required;
- the quantity of material.

- the shortest construction time has the value 2;
- with increase of the construction time the value decreases from 2 to -2.
Table 2.9. Values regarding construction time

ranking river training activities amount of equipment quantity of material general
work value
1 dredging only dredging dredger, barge only dredging 2
2 sill construction below pontoon, excavator, limited quantities 1
water barge
3 closure bund construction above and pontoon, excavator, average quantities 0
below water, option for barge
various layers
4 groyne construction above and pontoon, excavator, average quantities 0
various layers
5 guiding bund construction above and pontoon, excavator, large quantities -1
various layers
6 chevron construction above and pontoon, excavator, large quantities -1
various layers
7 bank construction above and pontoon, excavator, very large quantities -2
protection below water barge
2.5.2. Execution of works

The level of difficulty to execute the works depends on:
- the requirement of precise installation of the structure;
- the precise installation of stones above river water level, under the river water level or
at large water depth, the last is most difficult;
- the various types of construction material required.
The values attached to the implementation of works are as follows:

- the least difficult construction work has the value 2;
- when the level of difficulty increases the value decreases from 2 to -2.
Table 2.10. Values regarding execution of works

ranking river training activity level of precision required materials general
work value
1 dredging excavation limited precision required sand 2
2 bank supply and install of some precision required grading 150/450 mm 1
protection armour layer above grading 63/150 mm
water and at various option of geotextile
depth
3 closure bund supply and install of precision required grading 150/450 mm 0
armour layer above grading 63/150 mm
depth
4 groyne supply and install of precision required grading 150/450 mm 0
depth
5 chevron supply and install of more precision required grading 150/450 mm -1
depth
6 guiding bund supply and install of more precision required grading 150/450 mm -1
depth, the connection
between head and body
is difficult
7 sill supply and precisely high precision required grading 150/450 mm -2
install at deep water grading 63/150 mm
option of geotextile
2.5.3. Maintenance level

The maintenance level depends on:
- the frequency maintenance is required;
- the difficulty of carrying out maintenance.
All structures require (under water) inspection. This can be done by either a single or multi-
beam survey or a visual inspection under water and above water.
- the maintenance with the lowest frequency and least difficulty has the value 2;
- when the level of frequency and difficulty increases the value decreases from 2 to -2.
Table 2.11. Values regarding maintenance

ranking river maintenance maintenance difficulty materials to be used general
training frequency value
work
1 sill low low dumping/placement of rock or 2
sand bags (especially at roots)
2 bank low average dumping/placement of rock at 1
protection transitions and toe
3 closure low high dumping/placement of rock 0
bund (especially at roots and gaps)
4 groyne average, after average dumping/placement of rock at 0
high discharges head
5 guiding low high dumping/placement of rock 0
bund (especially at roots and gaps)
6 chevron average, after high dumping/placement of rock at -1
high discharges head
7 dredging high low removal of sand -2
2.5.4. Sustainability
The sustainability depends on:
- if the structure can be damaged by people or nature (due to ice loads and occurrence
of high flow velocities);
- if the measure is abolished by nature (dredging results in sufficient depth, but
sedimentation will occur and reduces the depth again on the long run);
- if the structure functions as it is designed or that adjustments are required continuously
(learning by doing).
All structures (except the sills and dredging) are vulnerable to ice loads.
- the most sustainable structure has the value 2;
- the sustainability reduces when the value decreases from 2 to -2.
Table 2.12. Values regarding sustainability

ranking river training damage general
work value
1 sill high flow velocities 2
2 chevron ice load, high flow velocities 1
3 bank ice load, high flow velocities, material can be removed by people 0
protection
4 closure bund ice load, high flow velocities, material can be removed by people -1
5 groyne ice load, high flow velocities, material can be removed by people -1
6 guiding bund ice load, high flow velocities, material can be removed by people -1
7 dredging dredging is frequently required to maintain the required depth -2
2.6. Theme 4 - Cost
2.6.1. Assumptions
The structures have to be constructed during water levels above DLNL +1 m in order to be
able to use the floating equipment, as these need sufficient water depth. This means that at
low water levels the construction of structures like chevrons might be hampered as the
equipment cannot reach the construction site or the river bank where structures are
scheduled to be constructed. This will increase the construction period and thus the costs.
This means that:

- the crest of chevrons are above the water level;
- the crest of embankments, groynes and guiding bunds are below the water level
The crest of the sills is at all times under water.
2.6.2. Construction costs

The construction costs are the cost to execute the works and to be paid to the Contractor
and taken into account are:
- purchase of construction material;
- supply and installation of material including transport;
- labour and equipment.
The comparison is made between total construction costs per option. The following
approach has been followed:
- if the difference between the cost of the options is limited (less than 5 % ) the same
value is awarded for the compared options;
- if the difference between the cost is between 5 % and 15 % the difference between the
values for the compared options is 1;
- the lowest construction cost has the value 2 (more favourable) and with increasing cost
the value decreases to -2 (high costs thus less favourable).
Table 2.13. Values regarding construction cost

ranking construction cost general value
1 low 2
2 medium 0
3 high -2
2.6.3. Maintenance cost

These cost concern the cost to maintain the structure according to the original design.
The maintenance cost is taken as a percentage of the construction cost. This results in the
same values as for construction cost. Options with dredging require more maintenance,
therefore these options have lower values than options without dredging.
The following has been taken into account:

- purchase of construction material;
- supply and installation of material including transport;
- labour and equipment.
The comparison is made between maintenance costs per option. The following approach
has been followed:
- if the difference between the maintenance cost of the option is limited (less than 5 % )
the same value is awarded for the compared options
- if the difference between the maintenance cost is between 5 % and 15 % the difference
between the values is 1.
- the lowest maintenance cost has the value 2 and with increasing cost the value
decreases to -2.
Table 2.14. Values regarding maintenance cost

ranking maintenance cost general value
1 low 2
2 medium 0
3 high -2
2.7. Overview weight factors for themes and criteria
2.7.1. Standard weight factors and sensitivity weight factors for themes
Table 2.15 presents the relative weighing between the themes. The weighing does not
differ per sectors (e.g. in a sector with a nature reserve more emphasis on environmental
aspects). The table also shows the weighing that is used for the sensitivity analysis.
In this sensitivity analysis the themes environment and costs have a higher value and
navigability and technical matters a lower value.
Table 2.15. Weight factors for themes

theme standard weight sensitivity analysis
Navigability and safety 25% 10%

Environment 40% 60%
Technical matters 25% 10%
Costs 10% 20%
2.7.2. Standard weight factors for criteria

Table 2.16 presents the weighting factor weighing for the criteria within each of the four (4)
themes. For the sensitivity analysis the weigh factor per criteria has not been adjusted.
Only the weight factor of the 4 themes is presented.
Table 2.16. Weight factors for criteria

number Theme 1 - Navigability and safety weight factor
criterion
1.1 comply with DC recommendations 20%
1.2 visibility of structures 40%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40%
Theme 2 : Environment
criterion
2.1 fish population 20%
2.2 bird life 20%
2.3 flora 10%
2.4 water quality 20%
2.5 river dynamics and water level 30%
Theme 3 - Technical matters
criterion
3.1 construction time 10%
3.2 execution of the works (level of difficulty and safety) 10%
3.3 maintenance level 40%
3.4 sustainability 40%
Theme 4: Costs
criterion
4.1 construction costs 30%
4.2 maintenance costs 70%
3. MULTI CRITERIA ANALYSE AND RESULTS
3.1. General
The Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) has been prepared for all sectors along the Danube
stretch Hungarian border - Belgrade. A total of 24 sectors have been identified. The sector
20 at Novi Sad has not been subject to the MCA as works have not been proposed at this
sector. The limitations to navigation will be solved within the near future when the presently
under construction Zezelj bridge will be completed and the temporary bridge be removed.
The MCA has been applied to the modelled options only. Details about the procedure to
select the options to be modelled are presented in Volume 5.
With respect to the environmental issues of the modelled options details are presented in
Volume 6 Environmental study. The construction costs have been derived from the Bill of
Quantities prepared for each of the modelled option; quantities were multiplied with the unit
rate. Similarly the maintenance costs have been determined for each modelled option.
The technical matters have been evaluated by the experts who have based their
evaluation on experience gained in previous projects and have applied these to the current
situation on the Danube. it is considered that the works will be tendered through an
international tender and as such international practices have been applied in combination
with common practice on the Serbian Danube.
The navigability and safety aspects have been discussed with captains and on the spot
interviews were held to assess the impact of the proposed works on shipping activities.
In the sections below the considerations and/or assumptions to evaluate the criteria will be
elaborated upon.
The Appendix I presents the full MCA details for each of the modelled options per sector
presented in this chapter 3.
3.2. Sector 1 Bezdan

For Bezdan a total of three options were modelled and thus subject to the MCA. The option
3 scores best on the theme environment and technical matters, for the standard weigh
factor for the themes.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 3 scores also better than the other two
modelled options. Hence option 3 has been selected.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of 4 sills. The conceptual design of the option 3
has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.2.
3.3. Sector 2 Siga Kazuk

For Siga Kazuk a total of two options were modelled and thus subject to the MCA. The
option 3 scores best on three of the 4 themes, inclusive of environment, for the standard
weigh factor for the themes. For the theme navigability and safety this option scores
second best.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 3 scores also better than the other
modelled option. Hence option 3 has been selected.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of dredging and 1 sill. The conceptual design
of the option 3 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.3.
3.4. Sector 3 Apatin

For Apatin a total of two options were modelled and thus subject to the MCA. The option 3
scores best on three of the 4 themes, inclusive of environment, for the standard weigh
factor for the themes. For the theme technical matters this option scores second best.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of 2 chevrons, 1 groyne and 5 sills and bank
protection. The conceptual design of the option 3 has been prepared and is presented in
the section 4.4.
3.5. Sector 4 Civutski Rukavac

For Civutski Rukavac only one option, option 2 was modelled. Hence, the MCA cannot be
carried out for this sector. However, in order to carry out the MCA two other proposed
options that were not modelled have been evaluated and taken along in the MCA. It
appears that the option 2 scores better than the option 2 (consisting of sills), but not as
good as the option 3 consisting of dredging activities. However, as dredging is not a
sustainable option, it scores in the overall standard weighing of the themes as second best
and option 1 as the third best. Option 2 scores best on technical matters and better than
the option1 in environmental terms.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 2 scores also better than option1 but not
as good as the dredging option (option3). However, the outcome of the standard weighing
is taken. Hence option 2 has been selected.
The option 2 consists of the implementation of 11 sills and a partially closed closure bund.
The conceptual design of the option 2 has been prepared and is presented in the section
4.5.
3.6. Sector 5 Drava Confluence

For the Drava Confluence a total of two options were modelled and thus subject to the
MCA. The option 4 scores best on three of the 4 themes, inclusive of environment, for the
standard weigh factor for the themes. For the theme navigability and safety it scores
second best.
3.7. Sector 6 Aljmas

For Aljmas only one option, option 2 was modelled. Hence, the MCA cannot be carried out
for this sector. However, in order to carry out the MCA one other proposed option that was
not modelled has been evaluated and taken along in the MCA. It appears that the option 2
(dredging and excavation) scores better than the option 1 (reconstruction of existing
groynes and construction of detached groynes). The quantity to be dredged is very limited
and thus the environmental impact.
Despite the fact that dredging is not a sustainable option, it scores better in the
environmental aspects, as the impact of the proposed works in that sector will have a major
impact.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 2 scores also better than option 1. Hence
option 2 has been selected.
The option 2 consists of the implementation of dredging and excavation works. The
conceptual design of the option 2 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.7
3.8. Sector 7 Staklar

For Staklar a total of two options, option 1 and option 3 were modelled and thus subject to
the MCA. The option 3 scores best on three of the 4 themes, inclusive of environment, for
the standard weigh factor for the themes. For the theme technical matters this option
scores second best.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of 6 sills and reconstruction of bank protection
works. The conceptual design of the option 3 has been prepared and is presented in the
section 4.8.
3.9. Sector 8 Erdut

For Erdut only one option, option 1 was modelled. Hence, the MCA cannot be carried out
for this sector. However, in order to carry out the MCA one other proposed option that was
not modelled has been evaluated and taken along in the MCA. It appears that the option 2
(dredging) scores better than the option 1 (reconstruction of existing groynes and
construction of detached groynes). The quantity to be dredged is very limited and thus the
environmental impact.
Despite the fact that dredging is not a sustainable option, it scores better in the
environmental aspects, as the impact of the proposed works in that sector will have a major
impact.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 1 also scores also better than option 2.
Hence option 1 has been selected.
The option 1 consists of the implementation of dredging and excavation works. The
conceptual design of the option 1 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.9
3.10. Sector 9 Bogojevo

For Bogojevo a total of two options, the option 1 and option 4 were modelled and thus
subject to the MCA. The option 1 scores best on three of the 4 themes, exclusive of
environment, for the standard weigh factor for the themes. However, the scores are fairly
close to each other.
The option 1 consists of the implementation of 2 sills and a partially closed closurebund.
The conceptual design of the option 1 has been prepared and is presented in the section
4.10.
3.11. Sector 10 Dalj

For Dalj a total of three options were modelled and thus subject to the MCA. The option 1
dredging), the option 2 (5 sills) and the option 3 (dredging and the construction of 3 sills)
have been evaluated. The option 2 scores best on the theme environment and technical
matters, for the standard weigh factor for the themes.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 1 scores better than the other two
modelled options. However, option 2 has been selected.
3.12. Sector 11 Borovo 1

For Borovo 1 a total of four options, the options 2, 3, 4 and 5 were modelled and thus
subject to the MCA. The option 3 and 4 are similar except that in option 3 groynes are
proposed and in the option 4 chevrons, as proposed structures. Out of the 4 options the
option 2 scores best on three of the 4 themes for the standard weigh factor for the themes.
Only on technical matters the option 5 scores best.
The option 2 consists of the (re)construction of bank protection works and dredging. The
conceptual design of the option 2 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.13.

For Borovo 2 a total of two options, the option 1 and option 3 were modelled and thus
subject to the MCA. The option 1 scores best on all of the 4 themes for the standard weigh
factor for the themes.
The option 1 consists of the implementation of detached groynes and reconstruction of

bank protection works. The conceptual design of the option 1 has been prepared and is
presented in the section 4.14.
3.14. Sector 13 Vukovar

For Vukovar a total of two options, the option 4 and option 5 were modelled and thus
subject to the MCA. The option 4 scores best on 2 out of the 4 themes for the standard
weigh factor for the themes. For the theme environment the scores deviate.
The option 4 consists of the implementation of upstream dredging, partial closure bund and
four (4) sills. The conceptual design of the option 4 has been prepared and is presented in
the section 4.15.
3.15. Sector 14 Sotin

For Sotin a total of three options, the options 3, 5 and 6 were modelled and thus subject to
the MCA. The option 6 is a combination of the options 4 and 5. Out of the 3 options the
option 6 scores best for the standard weigh factor for the themes. Only on technical matters
the option 5 scores best.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 6 scores second best. The option 6 has
been selected.
The option 6 consists of the construction of a guiding bund,, chevrons and sills. The
conceptual design of the option 6 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.16.
3.16. Sector 15 Opatovac

For Opatovac the rock removal on the river bed is considered. Two options were
considered, being option 1 - “rock removal to obtain a fairway of 180 m” and option 2 “Apply
Danube Commission Recommendations for rocky bottoms”. The MCA has not been carried
out for this sector.
For both options the work method has been established and the costs were prepared.
In the Volume 6- Environmental Study the pros and cons of the two options have been
analysed. The option 1 has been considered for implementation in the Volume 7 - Financial
and Economic Analysis.
The option 1 consists of the implementation of rock removal activities. The conceptual
design of the option 1 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.17.
3.17. Sector 16 Mohovo

For Mohovo the rock removal on the river bed is considered. Two options were considered,
being option 1 - “rock removal to obtain a fairway of 180 m” and option 2 “Apply Danube
Commission Recommendations for rocky bottoms”. The MCA has not been carried out for
this sector.
For both options the work method has been established and the costs were prepared.
In the Volume 6- Environmental Study the pros and cons of the two options have been
analysed. The option 1 has been considered for implementation in the Volume 7 - Financial
and Economic Analysis.
The option 1 consists of the implementation of rock removal activities. The conceptual
design of the option 1 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.18
3.18. Sector 17 Backa Palanka

For Backa Palanka a total of two options, the option 4 and option 5 were modelled and thus
weigh factor for the themes, inclusive of environment.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 5 scores better. However, the option 4
has been selected.
The option 4 consists of the implementation of bank protection works, guiding bund and 2
chevrons. The conceptual design of the option 4 has been prepared and is presented in the
section 4.19.
3.19. Sector 18 Susek

For Susek a total of two options, the option 3 and 4 were modelled and thus subject to the
MCA. The option 4 considers the upstream part of the sector and the downstream part of
the sector, as two parts. The option 3 scores best on all four themes, for the standard
weigh factor for the themes. The option 3 has been selected.
The option 3 consists of the construction of a guiding bund, chevrons, sills and bank
protection works. The conceptual design of the option 3 has been prepared and is
presented in the section 4.20.
3.20. Sector 19 Futog

For Futog a total of two options, the option 1 and option 3 were modelled and thus subject
to the MCA. The option 1 and 3 are similar, with the difference that for option 1 the
construction of groynes is considered and for the option 3 chevrons are considered.
The option 3 scores best on 3 out of the 4 themes for the standard weigh factor for the
themes, inclusive of environment.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 1 scores better. However, the option 3
has been selected.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of bank protection works, 2 sills and 4
chevrons. The conceptual design of the option 3 has been prepared and is presented in the
section 4.21.
3.21. Sector 20 Novi Sad

No works have been proposed for this sector.
3.22. Sector 21 Arankina Ada

For Arankina Ada a total of two options, the option 1 and option 3 were modelled and thus
weigh factor for the themes, inclusive of environment.
When applying the sensitivity analysis the option 1 scores also better. Hence, the option 1
has been selected.
The option 1 consists of the implementation of a series (in total 4) sills. The conceptual
design of the option 1 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.23.
3.23. Sector 22 Cortanovci

For Cortanovci a total of three options were modelled and thus subject to the MCA. The
option 1 (sills), the option 2 (dredging) and the option 4 (sills and dredging) have been
evaluated. The option 1 scores best on 3 out of the 4 themes, inclusive of the theme
environment, for the standard weigh factor for the themes.
modelled options.
3.24. Sector 23 Beska

For Beska a total of three options (option 2, 3 and 4) were initially modelled and during the
modelling activities also the option 5 was developed and modelled. These options have
been subject to the MCA.
The option 3 scores best on 3 out of the 4 themes, inclusive of the theme environment, for
the standard weigh factor for the themes.
modelled options.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of 2 chevrons. The conceptual design of the
option 3 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.25.
3.25. Sector 24 Preliv

For Preliv a total of three options (option 2, 3 and 4) were modelled. These options have
been subject to the MCA.
The option 3 scores best on 3 out of the 4 themes, inclusive of the theme environment, for
the standard weigh factor for the themes.
modelled options.
The option 3 consists of the implementation of 2 chevrons. The conceptual design of the
option 3 has been prepared and is presented in the section 4.26.
3.26. Conclusion
The Table 3.1 presents the overview of the options modelled and the colours indicate
whether the option considered relates to the implementation of dredging activities or
structures.
The Table 3.2 presents the overview of the MCA per sector listing the values for each
option.
Table 3.1. Overview Phase 2 options (red = dredging, green = structures)

# Sector Option total of options
SER-CRO SER
1 2 3 4 5 6 border territory
1 Bezdan X X X 5
2 Siga-Kazuk X X 4
3 Apatin X X 4
4 Čivutsku Rukavac X 3
5 Drava confluence X X 5
6 Aljmaš X 2
7 Staklar X X 3
8 Erdut X 2
9 Bogojevo X X 4
10 Dalj X X X 3
11 Borovo (1) X X X X 5
12 Borovo (2) X X 4
13 Vukovar X X 5
14 Sotin X X X 6
15 Opatovac 0
16 Mohovo 0
17 Bačka Palanka X X 5
18 Susek X X 4
19 Futog X X 3
20 Novi Sad 0
21 Arankina Ada X X 3
22 Čortanovci X X X 4
23 Beška X X X X 5
24 Preliv X X X 4
Total 60 23
Table 3.2. Overview MCA scores and selected option

standard sensitivity
25% 10% Navigability and safety not modelled options
40% 60% Environment highest score at sector
25% 10% Technical matters different options have highest score
10% 20% Costs
selected works selected
SECTORS options option option
SECTOR 1 - BEZDAN option 2 option 3 option 5 option 3 4 sills
standard -0.795 -0.025 -0.155
sentivity -1.21 -0.01 -0.05
SECTOR 2 - SIGA KAZUK option 2 option 3 option 3 dredging
standard -0.47 0.175 1 sill
sentivity -0.36 0.41
SECTOR 3 - APATIN option 3 option 4 option 3 2 chevrons
standard -0.43 -0.75 1 groyne
sentivity -0.76 -0.84 5 sills
SECTOR 4 - CIVUTSKU RUKAVAC
option 1 option 2 option 3 option 2 11 sills
standard -0.075 0.085 0.02 part. closure bund
sentivity -0.15 0.09 0.32
SECTOR 5 - DRAVA CONFLUENCE option 4 option 5 option 4 6 sills
standard -0.185 -0.77
sentivity -0.15 -1.2
SECTOR 6 - ALJMAS option 1 option 2 option 2 dredging and
standard -0.44 -0.39 excavation
SECTOR 7 - STAKLAR option 1 option 3 option 3 6 sills
standard 0.115 0.155
sentivity 0.19 -0.13
SECTOR 8 - ERDUT option 1 option 2 option 1 dredging and
standard -0.5 -0.57 excavation
SECTOR 9 - BOGOJEVO option 1 option 4 option 1 part. closure bund
standard -0.16 -0.28 2 sills
SECTOR 10 - DALJ option 1 option 2 option 3 option 2 5 sills
standard -0.18 -0.03 -0.275
sentivity 0.16 0.06 -0.33
SECTOR 11 - BOROVO (1) option 2 option 3 option 4 option 5 option 2 dredging and
standard 0.055 -0.405 -0.05 -0.315 excavation
sentivity 0.21 -0.53 0.08 -0.29
SECTOR 12 - BOROVO (2) option 1 option 3 option 1 detached groynes
standard -0.115 -0.185
SECTOR 13 - VUKOVAR option 4 option 5 option 4 4 sills
standard -0.42 -0.585 part. closure bund
SECTOR 14 - Sotin option 3 option 5 option 6 option 6 4 sills
standard 0.09 -0.045 0.25
sentivity 0.18 -0.03 -0.06
SECTOR 15 - OPATOVAC option 1 rock removal
SECTOR 16 - Mohovo option 1 rock removal
SECTOR 17 - Backa Palanka option 4 option 5 option 4 Guiding bund+

standard 0.27 -0.125 2 chevrons
SECTOR 18 - SUSEK option 2 option 3 option 4 option 3 3 sills
standard -0.43 -0.16 -0.47 Guiding bund+
sentivity -0.52 -0.46 -0.76 2 chevrons
SECTOR 19 - FUTOG option 1 option 3 option 3 4 chevrons
standard 0.515 0.59 2 sills
sentivity 0.79 0.72
SECTOR 20 - NOVI SAD no works
SECTOR 21 - ARANKINA ADA option 1 option 3 option 1 4 sills

standard -0.065 -0.325
SECTOR 22 - CORTANOVCI option 1 option 2 option 4 option 1 5 sills
standard 0.19 -0.56 -0.435
sentivity 0.44 -0.56 -0.67
SECTOR 23 - BESKA option 2 option 3 option 4 option 5 option 3 2 chevrons+
standard -0.7 0.05 -0.025 -0.35 dredging
sentivity -1.04 0.12 -0.07 -0.68
SECTOR 24 - PRELIV option 2 option 3 option 4 option 3 2 chevrons
standard -0.04 1.18 0.98
sentivity -0.32 1.26 0.96
Note: bank protection has not been modelled and therefore it is not included in the works
Table 3.3 shows the details of the options that are subject to detail design. Within the
current study only the sector 18, 19, 21, 22, 23 and 24 are subject to detail design. The
detail design of the remaining sectors will be made in the future under a separate project
and when funding is available.
Table 3.3. Options resulting from MCA analysis

No. Sector name Selected Short description of river training
option
1 Bezdan 3 4 sills
2 Siga-Kazuk 3 1 sill + dredging
3 Apatin 3 Groynes + 2 chevrons + 5 sills + bank protection
4 Čivutski Rukavac 3 11 sills – partial closure bund
5 Drava mouth 4 6 sills
6 Aljmaš 2 Dredging
7 Staklar 3 6 sills + bank protection
8 Erdut 1 Dredging at two locations
9 Bogojevo 1 2 sills + partial closure bund + bank protection
10 Dalj 2 5 sills + minor dredging
11 Borovo 1 2 Dredging at two locations + bank protection
12 Borovo 2 1 3 detached groynes + dredging + bank protection
13 Vukovar 4 4 sills + partial closure bund
14 Sotin 6 Guiding bund + 2 chevrons + 2 sills
15 Opatovac 1 Rock removal
16 Mohovo 1 Rock removal
17 Bačka Palanka 4 Guiding bund + 2 chevrons + bank protection
18 Susek 3 3 sills + bank protection + guiding bund + 2 chevrons
19 Futog 3 4 chevrons + 2 sills + bank protection
21 Arankina Ada 1 4 sills
22 Čortanovci 1 5 sills
23 Beška 3 2 chevrons + dredging
24 Preliv 3 2 chevrons
4. CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS
4.1. General
The conceptual designs have been prepared for the options that based on the results of the
MCA came out as the option with highest overall value at each sector. The conceptual
designs have been prepared with scales as required within the Serbian legislation.
The Appendix IV to this Volume 4 presents the conceptual design drawings prepared for
each of the selected option at each of the sectors, as wel as the corresponding longitudinal
profile.
For the bathymetric conditions at the sectors use was made of the survey results provided
by Plovput. For the geotechnical parameters an extensive desk study was carried out using
the results of soil investigation activities carried out in the past along the project area for
different occasions. Based on these parameters and the location where the field
investigation was carried out, Consortium prepared for each one of the sectors soil
parameters. These are presented in the Volume 3 of the Phase 2 report. Based on these
soil parameters calculations were made to determine the stability of the structures. At the
same time use was made of the experience of Plovput gained during the construction of the
works along the Danube in previous years.
Typical drawings were made for the following structures:

- bank protection;
- groynes;
- guiding bund;
- chevron;
- sill;
- closure bund.
The conceptual drawings present the cross sections, topview and longitudinal section of the
structure together with the cross sections for the major components of the structures. The
applied construction material is indicated.
For the dredging works the plan view is presented with the required cross section, inclusive
of the dredging depth and required cross sectional profile.
The description of the scope of the works is presented in Volume 5 - Chapter 4, together
with the quantities.
In a separate table on each of the conceptual drawing for the sector the characteristic
values for the structures are presented in a table. The full details of the characteristics are
presented in Appendix III.
Hereunder a description of the proposed works for the selected option per sector is
presented.
4.2. Sector 1 Bezdan

The works consist of the construction of 4 sills. These are numbered as indicated in the
Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and values
(water levels, structures levels and dimensions) of the works considered are presented in
the Appendix III.
4.3. Sector 2 Siga Kazuk

The works consist of dredging and the construction of 1 (one) sill. These are numbered as
indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The
characteristics and values (water levels, structures levels and dimensions) of the works
considered are presented in the Appendix III.
4.4. Sector 3 Apatin

The works consist of the construction of 2 (two) chevrons, 1 (one) groyne and 5 (five) sills
and of bank protection works. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on
the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and values (water levels,
structures levels and dimensions) of the works considered are presented in the Appendix
III.
4.5. Sector 4 Civutski Rukavac

The works consist of the construction of 1 (one) partially closed closure bund and 11
(eleven) sills. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual
drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and values (water levels, structures levels and
dimensions) of the works considered are presented in the Appendix III.
4.6. Sector 5 Drava Confluence

The works consist of the construction of 6 (six) sills. These are numbered as indicated in
the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and
values (water levels, structures levels and dimensions) of the works considered are
presented in the Appendix III.
4.7. Sector 6 Aljmas

The works consist of the execution of dredging works. These are numbered as indicated in
4.8. Sector 7 Staklar

The works consist of the construction of 6 (six) sills and bank protection works. These are
numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The
4.9. Sector 8 Erdut

The works consist of the execution of dredging works. These are numbered as indicated in
4.10. Sector 9 Bogojevo

The works consist of the construction of 1 (one) partially closed closure bund, 2 (two) sills
and bank protection works. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the
conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and values (water levels, structures
levels and dimensions) of the works considered are presented in the Appendix III.
4.11. Sector 10 Dalj

The works consist of the construction of 5 (five) sills. These are numbered as indicated in

The works consist of the execution of dredging works and the construction of bank
protection works. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the

The works consist of the execution of 3 detached groynes and the construction of bank
protection works. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the
4.14. Sector 13 Vukovar

The works consist of upstream dredging, the construction of 1 (one) partially closed closure
bund and 4 (four) sills. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the
4.15. Sector 14 Sotin

The works consist of the construction of 1 (one) guiding bund, 2 (two) sills and 2 (two)
chevrons. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual
4.16. Sector 15 Opatovac

The areas where rock removal is required are presented. These are numbered as indicated
in the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and
4.17. Sector 16 Mohovo

The areas where rock removal is required are presented. These are numbered as indicated
in the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and
4.18. Sector 17 Backa Palanka

The works consist of the construction of 1 (one) guiding bund, bank protection works and 2
(two) chevrons. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual
4.19. Sector 18 Susek

The works consist of the construction of 1 (one) guiding bund, bank protection works, 3
(three) sills and 2 (two) chevrons. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and
on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The characteristics and values (water levels,
structures levels and dimensions) of the works considered are presented in the Appendix
III.
4.20. Sector 19 Futog

The works consist of the construction of bank protection works, 2 (two) sills and 4 (four)
chevrons. These are numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual
4.21. Sector 20 Novi Sad

No works have been proposed.
4.22. Sector 21 Arankina Ada

The works consist of the construction of 4 (four) sills. These are numbered as indicated in
4.23. Sector 22 Cortanovci

The works consist of the construction of 5 (five) sills. These are numbered as indicated in
4.24. Sector 23 Beska

The works consist of the construction of 2 (two) chevrons and dredging. These are
numbered as indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The
4.25. Sector 24 Preliv

The works consist of the construction of 2 (two) chevrons. These are numbered as
indicated in the Appendix III and on the conceptual drawing Appendix IV. The
5. BILL OF QUANTITIES
5.1. General
The Appendix II to this Volume presents the detailed Bill of Quantities for the modelled
options. The quantities have been derived from the available maps and cross sections,
while the unit rates have been determined taking into account the type and the origin of the
materials, the transport and installation method.
Details of the work method are presented in the Volume 3. In the following sections the
assessment of the unit rates and quantities are presented, as well as the overall investment
and the related operation and maintenance costs.
5.2. Investment costs
5.2.1. Assessment of quantities

For each of the selected options for the 24 sectors, the dredging, excavation and rock
removal quantities, as well as the volume of stone works for the various structures to be
implemented at each sector have been determined. These are presented in the table 5.1.
Table 5.1. Assessment of quantities

Crushed Crushed
Selected
Sector Sector # Stone Stone Dredging
option
Ø15-45 Ø6-15
[m3] [m3] [m3]
Bezdan 1 3 16,221 7,994
Siga-Kazuk 2 3 1,887 1,508 6,559
Apatin 3 3 195,911 34,735 15,388
Čivutsku Rukavac 4 2 75,811 35,305
Drava confluence 5 4 24,430 11,141
Aljmaš 6 2 3,057
Staklar 7 3 79,423 18,477
Erdut 8 1 15,685
Bogojevo 9 1 154,651 11,580 469
Dalj 10 2 12,125 8,528
Borovo (1) 11 2 178,254 2,793 160,515
Borovo (2) 12 1 23,598 6,865
Vukovar 13 4 11,195 8,342 7,021
Sotin 14 6 75,928 29,856
Opatovac 1) 15 1 1,556
Mohovo 1) 16 1 40,729
Bačka Palanka 17 4 77,158 24,348
Susek 18 3 140,255 23,147
Futog 19 3 118,298 35,297
Novi Sad 20 no works
Arinka Ada 21 1 27,368 15,065
Čortanovci 22 1 8,074 6,632
Beška 23 3 28,472 13,415
Preliv 24 3 29,290 16,279
Totals 1,278,348 311,305 250,979
Note 1): quantities relate to rock removal
5.2.2. Assessment of unit rates

The assessment of the unit rates depends largely on the quantities, as well as on the work
method applied. The work methods are described hereunder.
i. Dredging and excavation

The method of dredging selected for the purpose of the current project is presented in the
Volume 3 and consists of:
- an excavator on a pontoon that loads barges;
- at both sides of the pontoon barges can berth and be filled;
- with a boat these barges are sailed within a dumping area within 2 km distance of the
excavation area;
- the unloading of the barges is also done by a pontoon on a barge.
- when emptied these barges are sailed back to the loading pontoon.
The total amount of dredging/excavation material totals 208,694 m3.
ii. rock removal

For the rock removal at Opatovac and Mohovo a different work method than mentioned
above is proposed. This is presented in detail for each of the two sections below in the
Volume 4, where also the design options are presented. In general the removal of the rocky
material will be done by means of blasting. It is assumed that holes will be drilled with an
interval of 5 m till a depth of 5 m. Assuming a drilling capacity of 10 m/day, the amount of
working days has been calculated for each of the two locations, taking into account an
efficiency of 0.6. The holes will be drilled with a rig mounted on a pontoon. The clearing of
the material will be done with a crane on a barge and deposited within a distance of 2 km.
The total amount of rock to be removed at the two sectors amounts to 42,285 m3.
iii. Stone works

The loading facility for the rock is located along the Danube at rkm 1265, while the rock is
trucked from the quarry to the loading facility. The load-out facility at rkm 1265 is designed
to receive and load barges. The rock can be either directly driven on board of a barge or
loaded from the stock pile using a hydraulic excavator. It is assumed that all the rock will be
loaded from the stock pile due to the large quantity of stone required. The transport
distances within the batch are given in Table 5.2. The interval taken is 25km.
The maximum total amount of the stone works is presented in the Table 5.1. The stone
works consist of two grades, being diameter of Ø 06-15cm and 420,000 m3 rock with a
diameter of Ø 15-45cm, with respectively 388,499 m3 and 1,484,199 m3.
The total volume of stone works is significant. But within the different sectors multiple
structures need to be constructed. Thus relatively small amounts of rock are to be placed
per individual structure. Therefore it is assumed that rock is placed both under and above
water by a pontoon with cable crane or excavator on tracks and is not dumped under water
by a dumping barge.
Table 5.2. Transport distances to/from Danube km 1265 to/from sector

Distance between
Transport Average
km 1265 and
distances Sector Location Chainage chainage of
average chainage
from km 1265 Sector
Sector
[km] [km]
18 Susek 1,287.0 1,281.0 1,284.0 19.0
19 Futog 1,267.4 1,261.6 1,264.5 0.5
0 – 25 km 20 Novi Sad 1,255.4 1,254.2 1,254.8 10.2
21 Arankina Ada 1,247.0 1,244.8 1,245.9 19.1
22 Čortanovci 1,241.6 1,235.0 1,238.3 26.7
15 Opatovac 1,315.4 1,314.6 1,315.0 50.0

16 Mohovo 1,311.4 1,307.6 1,309.5 44.5
25 – 50 km
17 Bačka Palanka 1,302.0 1,300.0 1,301.0 36.0
23 Beška 1,232.0 1,226.6 1,229.3 35.7
12 Borovo 1,340.6 1,338.0 1,339.3 74.3

13 Vukovar 1,332.0 1,325.0 1,328.5 63.5
50 – 75 km
14 Sotin 1,324.0 1,320.0 1,322.0 57.0
24 Preliv 1,207.0 1,195.0 1,201.0 64.0
9 Bogojevo 1,366.2 1,361.4 1,363.8 98.8

75 – 100 km 10 Dalj 1,357.0 1,351.0 1,354.0 89.0
11 Borovo 1,348.6 1,343.6 1,346.1 81.1
5 Ušće Drave 1,388.8 1,382.0 1,385.4 120.4

6 Aljmaš 1,381.4 1,378.2 1,379.8 114.8
100 - 125 km
7 Staklar 1,376.8 1,373.4 1,375.1 110.1
8 Erdut 1,371.4 1,366.4 1,368.9 103.9
3 Apatin 1,408.2 1,400.0 1,404.1 139.1

125 – 150 km
4 Čivutski Rukavac 1,397.2 1,389.0 1,393.1 128.1
1 Bezdan 1,429.0 1,425.0 1427.0 162.0

150 – 175 km
2 Siga-Kazuk 1,424.2 1,414.4 1419.3 154.3
iv. Unit rates

The unit rates have been determined and are listed in the table 5.3. For the rock removal at
Mohovo and Opatovac it is assumed that these works will be executed at the same time
and that for each site mobilisation is required. Due to the limited quantities at Opatovac the
unit rate is far higher than at Mohovo that has larger quantities.
Table 5.3. Unit rates

Unit rate
m3 stone works ton stone works dredging excavation rock blasting
No Sector EUR/m3 EUR/t EUR/m3 EUR/m3 EUR/m3
1 Bezdan 76.1 19.5 19.5

2 Siga - Kazuk 86.7 19.5 19.5
3 Apatin 75.2 19.5 19.5
4 Čivutski Rukavac 76.9 19.5 19.5
5 Ušće Drave 78.9 19.5 19.5
6 Aljmaš 19.5 19.5
7 Staklar 69.9 19.5 19.5
8 Erdut 19.5 19.5
9 Bogojevo 65.7 19.5 19.5
10 Dalj 69.6 19.5 19.5
11 Borovo 1 69.7 19.5 19.5
12 Borovo 2 77.1 19.5 19.5
13 Vukovar 69.5 19.5 19.5
14 Sotin 69.3 19.5 19.5
15 Opatovac 1,791.73
16 Mohovo 76.20
17 Bačka Palanka 70 19.5 19.5
18 Susek 63.5 37.34 19.5 19.5
19 Futog 63.8 37.52 19.5 19.5
20 Novi Sad
21 Arankina Ada 65.4 38.48 19.5 19.5
22 Čortanovci 66.2 19.5 19.5
23 Beška 71.2 41.9 19.5 19.5
24 Preliv 71.5 42.03 19.5 19.5
5.2.3. Investment costs

Based on the quantities listed above and the established unit rates the Bill of Quantities has
been prepared. The investment costs are presented in the table 5.4
Table 5.4. Investment costs

No Critical sector Option selected Investment
acc. to MCA in Euro
1 Bezdan option 3 1.842.752,63
2 Siga-Kazuk option 3 422.172,16
3 Apatin option 3 18.034.659,79
4 Čivutski Rukavac option 2 8.550.092,26
5 Ušće Drave option 4 2.806.544,88
6 Aljmaš option 2 59.620,83
7 Staklar option 3 6.933.875
8 Erdut option 1 305.862
9 Bogojevo option 1 11.208.699
10 Dalj option 2 1.437.458
11 Borovo 1 option 2 16.024.512
12 Borovo 2 option 1 2.388.487
13 Vukovar option 4 1.495.576
14 Sotin option 6 7.333.457
15 Opatovac option 1 2.787.746
16 Mohovo option 1 3.103.376
17 Bačka Palanka option 4 7.198.627
18 Susek option 3 10.563.844
19 Futog option 3 9.890.909
20 Novi Sad -
21 Arankina Ada option 1 2.775.070
22 Čortanovci option 1 973.565
23 Beška option 3 2.982.356
24 Preliv option 3 3.258.142
Total investment costs 122.377.402
5.3. Maintenance costs

The maintenance costs have been established assuming that 1.5% of the investments
costs per sector for the structures is required on a yearly basis.
With respect to the dredging costs the backfilling rate results have been used as presented
in the Volume 4. On average it means that dredging is required on a yearly basis.
The overview of the yearly maintenance costs per sector is presented in Table 5.5.
Table 5.5. Yearly maintenance costs
No Critical sector Option selected in MCA Maintenance

costs in Euro
1 Bezdan option 3 27.641
2 Siga-Kazuk option 3 115.958
3 Apatin option 3 391.835
4 Čivutski Rukavac option 2 128.251
5 Ušće Drave option 4 42.098
6 Aljmaš option 2 24.743
7 Staklar option 3 104.008
8 Erdut option 1 242.955
9 Bogojevo option 1 173.617
10 Dalj option 2 21.562
11 Borovo 1 option 2 537.256
12 Borovo 2 option 1 35.827
13 Vukovar option 4 195.459
14 Sotin option 6 110.002
15 Opatovac 1) option 1 41.816
16 Mohovo 1) option 1 46.551
17 Bačka Palanka option 4 107.979
18 Susek option 3 158.458
19 Futog option 3 148.364
20 Novi Sad - 0
21 Arankina Ada option 1 41.626
22 Čortanovci option 1 14.603
23 Beška option 3 44.735
24 Preliv option 3 48.872
Total investment costs 2.804.218
Note 1: these areas have rock bottom. It is assumed that some maintenance works have to be executed in future, as
sedimentation might occur in these sectors.
6. LONGITUDINAL PROFILE
The longitudinal profile of the project stretch at each sector has been prepared. Use is
made of the center line of the fairway, indicating the bed level at the centreline of the
fairway in the cross section.
The cross sectional profiles used are the NO_2011 profiles at an interval of 200m. For the
river length the 200m profile have been used to indicate the river length of the sector.
When following the thalweg the river length distance could differ, from the length of the river
length using the NO profiles.
In total 23 drawings (Sector 20 Novi Sad is excluded as works are not proposed)
presenting the longitudinal profile of the sectors are included in Appendix IV. The positions
as well as other information of the structures are indicated.
APPENDIX I RESULTS OF THE MCA FOR THE MODELLED OPTIONS
Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 1 - BEZDAN
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 2 option 3 option 5
% % score value score value score value
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.1 comply with DC recommendations 20% 2 2 2
1.2 visibility of structures 40% -1 -2 -2
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 1 -1 0
Total of weighed score 100% 0.400 -0.800 -0.400
Ranking of option Navigability 1 3 2
2 Environment 40%
Fish population (spawning, migration,
2.1 growing/living) 20% -2 -1 -1
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% 0 0 0
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% -1 1 0
Water quality (incl. effect from dredging
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% -1 -1 -1
River dynamics and water level
(including physical diversity,
canalisation, closure bunds, guidance
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -2 1 -1
Total of weighed score 100% -1.300 0.000 -0.700
Ranking of option ENVIRONMENT 3 1 2
3 Technical matters 25%
3.1 Construction time 10% 0 1 2
3.2 execution of the works (level of difficulty and safety)
10% 1 -2 -1
3.3 maintenance level 40% -1 1 0
3.4 sustainability 40% -1 1 0
Total of weighed score 100% -0.700 0.700 0.100
Ranking of option TECHNICAL MATTERS 3 1 2
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% -2 0 2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% -2 0 2
Ranking of option COSTS 3 2 1
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE -0.795 -0.025 -0.155

RANKING OF OPTIONS 3 1 2
standard SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

25% 10% Navigability and safety
40% 60% Environment
25% 10% Technical matters
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING -1.21 -0.01 -0.05
3 1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 1 BEZDAN

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 2 - SIGA KAZUK
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 2 option 3
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.1 comply with DC recommendations 20% 2 2
1.2 visibility of structures 40% -2 -2
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 1 0
Total of weighed score 100% 0.000 -0.400 0.000
Ranking of option Navigability 1 2
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -1 0
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% 0 0
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% 0 0
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 1
Ranking of option ENVIRONMENT 2 1
3.1 Construction time 10% 2 1
10% 2 0
3.3 maintenance level 40% -2 0
3.4 sustainability 40% -2 0
Ranking of option TECHNICAL MATTERS 2 1
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% 1 2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 0 1
Total of weighed score 100% 0.300 1.300 0.000
Ranking of option COSTS 2 1
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE -0.47 0.175 0

RANKING OF OPTIONS 2 1

40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING -0.36 0.41 0
2 1
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 2 SIGA-KAZUK

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 3 - APATIN
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% 2 -1
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% -1 0
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -2 -2
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% -2 -2
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% -1 -1
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% -1 -1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -2 -2
Total of weighed score 100% -1.700 -1.700 0.000
3.1 Construction time 10% -1 0
10% -1 0
3.3 maintenance level 40% 0 -1
3.4 sustainability 40% 0 -1
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE -0.43 -0.75 0


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING -0.76 -0.84 0
1 1
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 3 APATIN

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 4 - CIVUTSKU RUKAVAC option 1 option 3
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 2
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% -1 0 1
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% 1 1 0
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% 1 0 2
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 0 -1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 1 0 2
10% -2 -1 2
3.3 maintenance level 40% 1 0 -2
3.4 sustainability 40% 1 0 -2
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% -2 -2 2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% -1 -1 -2
Total of weighed score 100% -1.300 -1.300 -0.800
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.085 -0.075 0.02


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.09 -0.15 0.32
2 3 1
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 4 CIV. RUKAVAC
Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 5 - DRAVA CONFLUENCE
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% -2 -2
2 Environment 40%
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% 0 -1
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 -1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -2 -2
10% -2 0
3.3 maintenance level 40% 1 0
3.4 sustainability 40% 1 0
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% 2 -2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 2 -2
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 5 DRAVA CONFLUENCE
Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 6 - ALJMAS option 1
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% -2 0
2 Environment 40%
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 0 -1
10% 2 0
3.3 maintenance level 40% -2 -1
3.4 sustainability 40% -2 -1
4 Costs 10%
4.2 maintenance costs 70% -1 0
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 6 ALJMAS

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 7 - STAKLAR groynes sills
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
2 Environment 40%
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 -2
10% -1 -2
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.115 0.155 0


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.19 -0.13 0
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector7 STAKLAR

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 8 - ERDUT option 2
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 1 not modelled
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
2 Environment 40%
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% -1 0
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% -1 -1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 -1
10% 2 1
3.3 maintenance level 40% -2 -1
3.4 sustainability 40% -2 -1
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 8 ERDUT

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 9 - BOGOJEVO
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% 0 2
2 Environment 40%
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 -1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -2 -1
3.1 Construction time 10% 0 -1
10% 0 1
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 9 BOGOJEVO

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 10 - DALJ not in Cost model, dredging assumed cheapest
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 1 -1 0
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -1 0 -1
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 0 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 0 -1 -1
10% 2 -2 0
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% 2 1 0
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 2 1 0
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.16 0.06 -0.33
1 2 3
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 10 DALJ

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 11 - BOROVO (1) cost model states option 1
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 2 option 3 option 4 option 5
% % score value score value score value score value
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.1 comply with DC recommendations 20% 2 2 2 2
1.2 visibility of structures 40% 0 -1 2 -2
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 2 0 -1 -1
Total of weighed score 100% 1.200 0.000 0.800 -0.800
Ranking of option Navigability 1 2 3 4
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -1 -2 -1 -2
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% 0 0 1 0
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% -1 -2 -2 -1
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 0 0 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 0 -2 -1 -2
Total of weighed score 100% -0.300 -1.200 -0.500 -1.100
Ranking of option ENVIRONMENT 1 4 2 3
3.1 Construction time 10% 1 0 -2 -1
10% 2 -1 0 -2
3.3 maintenance level 40% -2 0 -1 1
3.4 sustainability 40% -2 0 -1 1
Total of weighed score 100% -1.300 -0.100 -1.000 0.500
Ranking of option TECHNICAL MATTERS 4 2 3 1
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% 2 1 2 2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 2 1 2 2
Total of weighed score 100% 2.000 1.000 2.000 2.000
Ranking of option COSTS 1 4 1 1
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.055 -0.405 -0.05 -0.315

RANKING OF OPTIONS 1 4 2 3

40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.21 -0.53 0.08 -0.29
1 4 2 3
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 11 BOROVO 1

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 12 - BOROVO (2)
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 0 -1
2 Environment 40%
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 -2
10% 1 -2
3.3 maintenance level 40% -1 1
3.4 sustainability 40% -1 1
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 12 BOROVO 2

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 13 - VUKOVAR
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% -1 -1
2 Environment 40%
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% -2 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -2 -1
10% -1 0
4 Costs 10%
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 2 -2
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 13 vukovar

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 14 - Sotin
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% -2 2 2
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 0 -2 -1
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -1 1 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 1 -1
3.1 Construction time 10% 0 -1 -1
10% -2 0 -1
3.3 maintenance level 40% 1 -1 1
3.4 sustainability 40% 1 -1 1
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% 2 -2 -1
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 2 -2 -1
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.09 -0.045 0.25


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.18 -0.03 -0.06
1 3 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 14 Sotin

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 17 - Backa Palanka
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 1 -1
2 Environment 40%
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 0 -2
3.1 Construction time 10% -1 1
10% -1 -2
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% -2 2
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.27 -0.125 0


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
2 1
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 17 B.Palanka

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 18 - SUSEK option 4 option 2
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 3 option 4 option 2 - dredging
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% 2 2 0
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% -1 -2 1
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -2 -1 -1
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% 0 -2 0
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% -2 -1 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 -2 -1
3.1 Construction time 10% 0 -1 1
10% 0 -1 1
3.3 maintenance level 40% 0 0 -2
3.4 sustainability 40% 0 0 -2
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% 0 0 2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 0 0 -2
Total of weighed score 100% 0.000 0.000 -0.800
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING -0.46 -0.76 -0.52
2 3 1
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 18 Susek

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 19 - FUTOG
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% 1 2
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% 1 1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 1 2
10% -1 -1
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.515 0.59 0


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.79 0.72 0
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 19 Futog

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 21 - ARANKINA ADA
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% 0 0
2.5 bund etc.) 30% -1 -2
10% -2 -1
4 Costs 10%
Total 100%


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 21 Arankina Ada
Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 22 - CORTANOVCI
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% -1 1 0
Total of weighed score 100% -0.800 0.000 -0.400
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% 0 -1 -1
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% -1 0 0
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% 0 -1 -1
2.5 bund etc.) 30% 1 0 0
10% -2 2 0
3.3 maintenance level 40% 1 -2 0
3.4 sustainability 40% 1 -2 0
4 Costs 10%
4.2 maintenance costs 70% 2 -1 -2
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE 0.19 -0.56 -0.435


40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING 0.44 -0.56 -0.67
1 2 3
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 22 Cortanovci

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 23 - BESKA
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
No. Theme part In Criteria factor option 2 option 3 option 4 option 5
% % score value score value score value score value
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.1 comply with DC recommendations 20% 2 2 2 2
1.2 visibility of structures 40% -2 0 0 0
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 2 0 -1 -1
Total of weighed score 100% 0.400 0.400 0.000 0.000
Ranking of option Navigability 1 1 3 3
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -2 0 0 0
2.2 Bird life (nesting, wintering) 20% 0 1 1 1
2.3 Flora (in river and on embankment) 10% -1 -1 -1 -1
2.4 polluted sediments) 20% -1 0 0 0

(including physical diversity, canalisation,
2.5 closure bunds, guidance bund etc.) 30% -1 -2 -2 -2
Total of weighed score 100% -1.000 -0.500 -0.500 -0.500
Ranking of option ENVIRONMENT 3 1 1 1 1
3.1 Construction time 10% 2 1 0 -1
10% 2 1 -1 -1
3.3 maintenance level 40% -2 -1 0 0
3.4 sustainability 40% -1 0 1 1
Total of weighed score 100% -0.800 -0.200 0.300 0.200
Ranking of option TECHNICAL MATTERS 4 3 1 2
4 Costs 10%
4.1 construction costs 30% -2 2 1 -2
4.2 maintenance costs 70% -2 2 1 -2
Total of weighed score 100% -2.000 2.000 1.000 -2.000
Ranking of option COSTS 3 1 2 3
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE -0.7 0.05 -0.025 -0.35

RANKING OF OPTIONS 4 1 2 3

40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING -1.04 0.12 -0.07 -0.68
4 1 2 3
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 23 Beska

Date:
Name sector: SECTOR 24 - PRELIV
MODELLED OPTIONS
weight
Navigability and
1 safety 25%
1.2 visibility of structures 40% 2 2 2
1.3 hindrance due to changed flow patterns 40% 2 -1 -1
2 Environment 40%
2.1 growing/living) 20% -1 2 1
Water quality (incl. effect from dredging polluted
2.4 sediments) 20% -1 0 0
River dynamics and water level (including
physical diversity, canalisation, closure bunds,
2.5 guidance bund etc.) 30% 0 2 1
execution of the works (level of difficulty and
3.2 safety) 10% 2 0 0
4 Costs 10%
4.2 maintenance costs 70% -2 2 2
Total 100%
TOTAL WEIGHT SCORE -0.04 1.18 0.98

RANKING OF OPTIONS
3 1 2
40% 60% Environment
10% 20% Costs
SENSITIVITY RANKING -0.32 1.26 0.96
3 1 2
Volume 6 - Appendix I - MCA sector 1- 24-final version ver 2 sector 24 Preliv

APPENDIX II BILL OF QUANTITIES FOR THE SELECTED OPTIONS
Unit rate Total
Works Description of works Unit Quantity
(€) (€)
Sector 1 Bezdan (km. 1428 - 1425.6)
Option 3 MCA selected option
Construction of Sills at RB
1.3.1 Supply, transport and installment of Crushed stone - size Ø 15 - 45 cm m³ 2,446 76.10 186,139.22
Supply, transport and installment of Crushed stone - size Ø 06 -15 cm m³ 1,547 76.10 117,720.61
Subtotal 1,296,204.15
Construction of Sills at LB
Subtotal 546,548.49
Total 1,842,752.63
Volume 6 - Appendix II -BoQ Page 1 / 24

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 2 Siga-Kazuk (km. 1422.8 - 1415.0)
Construction of Sill
Subtotal 294,276.13
Dredging
2a Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to the river at 2 km distance m³ 6,559 19.50 127,896.02
Subtotal 127,896.02
Total 422,172.16

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 3 Apatin (km. 1407.8 - 1400.6)
Dredging
3b Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to the river at 2 km distance m³ 1,497 19.50 29,194.67
Subtotal 329,251.19
Construction of Bank Protection

3.3.1 Supply, transport and installment of Crushed stone - size Ø 15 - 45 cm m³ 27,411 75.20 2,061,342.00
Supply, transport and installment of Crushed stone - size Ø 06 -15 cm m³ 720 75.20 54,174.56
Excavation (from water - floating dredger) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance m³ 18,435 19.50 359,482.50
Subtotal 10,414,143.31
Construction of Groyne
Excavation (from water - floating dredger) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance m³ 70 19.50 1,365.00
Subtotal 929,643.81
Construction of Chevrons
Subtotal 3,850,390.52
Construction of Sills
3.3.6 Supply, transport and installment of Crushed stone - size Ø 15 - 45 cm m³ 326 75.20 24,536.82
Subtotal 2,511,230.96
Total 18,034,659.79

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 4 Čivutski Rukavac (km. 1396.8 - 1389.2)
Construction of Sills RB upstream

Subtotal 954,398.83
Construction of Sills LB upstream

Subtotal 1,458,736.82
Construction of Sills RB downstream

Subtotal 1,140,509.09
Construction of Sills RB downstream NO_210

Subtotal 228,619.49
Construction of Sills LB downstream

Subtotal 930,889.95
Reconstruction of Closure Bund

Supply, transport and installment of Crushed stone - size Ø 06 -15 cm m³ 14,079 76.90 1,082,666.09
Subtotal 3,836,938.08
Total 8,550,092.26

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 5 Drava Confluence (km. 1386.4 - 1382.2)
Construction of Sills RB
Subtotal 578,835.15
Construction of Sills LB
Subtotal 2,227,709.73
Total 2,806,544.88

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 6 Aljmaš (km. 1379.8 - 1379.4)
Dredging
6 Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to the river at 2 km distance m³ 3,057 19.50 59,620.83
Subtotal 59,620.83
Total 59,620.83

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 7 Staklar (km. 1376.4 - 1374.0)
Construction of Sills RB
Subtotal 2,184,200.53

Subtotal 3,130,672.58
Construction of Sills LB
Subtotal 1,619,002.33
Total 6,933,875.44

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 8 Erdut (km. 1370.8 - 1367.4)
Dredging
8b Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to the river at 2 km distance m³ 10,800 19.50 210,599.96
Subtotal 305,862.30
Total 305,862.30

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 9 Bogojevo (km. 1365.8 - 1361.6)
Dredging
9c Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to the river at 2 km distance m³ 469 19.50 9,144.93
Subtotal 9,144.93
Construction of Closure Bund

Subtotal 640,631.76

Subtotal 282,460.17
Reconstruction of Bank Protection

Subtotal 9,446,865.61
Subtotal 829,596.16
Total 11,208,698.63

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 10 Dalj (km. 1356.6 - 1351.8)
Construction of Sills RB upstream

Subtotal 1,256,130.30
Construction of Sills RB downstream

Subtotal 181,328.10
Total 1,437,458.40

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 11 Borovo 1 (km. 1348.2 - 1344.0)
Dredging
11a Excavation (from water - floating dredger) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance m³ 105,138 19.50 2,050,181.71
11b Excavation (from water - floating dredger) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance m³ 55,378 19.50 1,079,864.53
3,130,046.23

Subtotal 12,894,466.22
Total 16,024,512.45

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 12 Borovo 2 (km. 1339.6 - 1338.6)

Subtotal 1,514,934.09
Construction of Detached Groynes

Subtotal 873,553.03
Total 2,388,487.13

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 13 Vukovar (km. 1331.6 - 1325.8)
Dredging
13b Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to the river at 2 km distance m³ 871 19.50 16,986.41
Subtotal 136,908.32
Construction of Closure Bund

Excavation (from water - floating dredger) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance m³ 45 19.50 877.50
Subtotal 405,045.95
Subtotal 953,621.97
Total 1,495,576.24

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 14 Sotin (km. 1323.0 - 1321.0)
Construction of Guiding bund

Subtotal 2,276,553.07
Subtotal 4,139,523.61
Subtotal 917,379.86
Total 7,333,456.53

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 15 Opatovac (km. 1315.0)
Removal of rocky material at 1315.0 - rock blasting and excavation with floating excavator (grab buscet) incl. of transport and deposition of
15 m³ 1,556 1,791.73 2,787,745.53
excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance
Subtotal 2,787,745.53
Total 2,787,745.53

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 16 Mohovo (km. 1311.0 - 1308.0)
16a + 16b + Removal of rocky material between 1311.0 and 1308.0 - rock blasting and excavation with floating excavator
m³ 40,729 76.20 3,103,376.00
16c + 16d (grab buscet) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material to deeper sections of the river at 2 km distance
Subtotal 3,103,376.00
Total 3,103,376.00

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 17 Bačka Palanka (km. 1301.2 - 1300.6)

Subtotal 2,221,535.17

Subtotal 3,243,873.84
Subtotal 1,733,217.54
Total 7,198,626.55

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 18 Susek (km. 1285.6 - 1281.4)
Subtotal 1,901,182.68

Subtotal 6,965,653.62

Subtotal 342,751.14
Subtotal 1,354,256.25
Total 10,563,843.69

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 19 Futog (km. 1266.2 - 1265)

Subtotal 1,996,159.40
Construction of Chevrons upstream

Subtotal 4,902,746.68
Subtotal 485,144.03
Construction of Chevrons downstream

Subtotal 2,506,858.72
Total 9,890,908.82

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 20 Novi Sad (km. 1253.3 - 1252.9)
No options proposed except Traffic reguations -

Subtotal -
Total -

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 21 Arankina Ada (km. 1248 - 1246)
Subtotal 2,775,069.83
Total 2,775,069.83

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 22 Čortanovci (km. 1241.6 - 1235.0)
Construction of Sills upstream

Subtotal 668,218.63
Construction of Sills downstream

Subtotal 305,346.07
Total 973,564.70

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 23 Beška (1229.7 - 1227.9)
Subtotal 2,982,355.66
Dredging
23a Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material into the river at 2 km distance m³ 12,597 19.50 245,650.11
23b Dredging (with CSD) incl. of transport and deposition of excavated material into the river at 2 km distance m³ 9,532 19.50 185,880.30
Subtotal 431,530.42
Total 2,982,355.66

Unit rate Total
(€) (€)
Sector 24 Preliv (1199 - 1197.7)
Subtotal 3,258,142.05
Total 3,258,142.05

APPENDIX III CHARACTERISTICS OF STRUCTURES FOR THE SELECTED

OPTIONS
Volumes per structure
Project: River Training and Dredging Works along the Danube
Client: The European Union
Projectcode: SER2-6 Notes
Prepared by: R.S.D. Ruhulessin - masl = Mean Adriatic Sea Level
Status: 9/20/2012 - contingency taken into account to compensate stone loss during construction and transport
Sector No. Structure Section Water levels Structure levels Length Height Width Slopes Volumes
Contingency
DLNL DHNL CL TL1 TL2 BL1 BL2 L1 L2 ∩L h1 h2 h3 H1 H2 A B C D E a b c Crushed Crushed Crushed Crushed
Stone Stone Stone Stone
Ø15-45 Ø6-15 Ø15-45 Ø6-15
(+Conting (+Conting
ency) ency)
NO [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m3] [m3] [m3] [m3]
Bezdan 1.3.1 Sill NO_0025 80.58 86.77 75.00 72.39 71.84 84.50 2.61 0.55 3.16 0.55 3.92 3.00 7.83 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,957 1,238 1.25 2,446 1,547
Bezdan 1.3.2 Sill NO_0028 80.56 86.71 75.00 70.13 69.58 112.00 4.87 0.55 5.42 0.55 7.31 3.00 14.61 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 7,613 2,819 1.25 9,516 3,524
Bezdan 1.3.3 Sill NO_0036 80.55 86.69 72.50 70.39 69.84 87.00 2.11 0.55 2.66 0.55 3.17 3.00 6.33 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,422 1,068 1.25 1,778 1,334
Bezdan 1.3.4 Sill NO_0038 80.54 86.66 73.00 70.44 69.89 88.50 2.56 0.55 3.11 0.55 3.84 3.00 7.68 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,985 1,271 1.25 2,481 1,589
Siga-Kazuk 2.3.1 Sill NO_0090 80.27 86.26 72.50 70.57 70.02 106.50 1.93 0.55 2.48 0.55 2.90 3.00 5.79 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,509 1,206 1.25 1,887 1,508
Apatin 3.3.1 Bank protection NO_0129 79.95 85.91 80.95 79.95 73.00 1215.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 21.98 3.16 1:3 16,224 576 1.25 20,279 720
Apatin 3.3.2 Bank protection NO_0145 79.65 85.73 80.65 79.65 73.50 4930.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 19.45 3.16 1:3 58,969 2,339 1.25 73,712 2,923
Apatin 3.3.3 Groyne NO_0141 79.80 85.77 80.80 76.65 77.45 76.10 76.90 140.00 80.00 4.15 0.55 3.35 4.70 3.90 0.55 4.15 2.00 6.23 5.02 1:1 1:1.5 1:1 6,147 3,728 1.25 7,684 4,660
Apatin 3.3.4 Chevron NO_0142 79.77 85.76 82.20 77.29 76.74 100.00 257.08 4.91 0.55 5.46 0.55 9.82 3.00 14.73 1:2 1:3 1:1 20,754 6,800 1.25 23,434 8,500
Apatin 3.3.5 Chevron NO_0144 79.70 85.74 82.20 78.76 78.21 105.00 269.93 3.44 0.55 3.99 0.55 6.88 3.00 10.32 1:2 1:3 1:1 11,321 5,060 1.25 12,943 6,325
Apatin 3.3.6 Sill NO_0155 79.35 85.59 73.40 72.85 72.30 112.00 0.55 0.55 1.10 0.55 0.83 3.00 1.65 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 261 586 1.25 326 732
Apatin 3.3.7 Sill NO_0157 79.29 85.58 74.29 73.72 73.17 143.00 0.57 0.55 1.12 0.55 0.86 3.00 1.71 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 349 757 1.25 436 946
Apatin 3.3.8 Sill NO_0159 79.23 85.54 73.40 70.67 70.12 124.00 2.73 0.55 3.28 0.55 4.10 3.00 8.19 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 3,095 1,844 1.25 3,869 2,305
Apatin 3.3.9 Sill NO_0161 79.21 85.50 73.00 68.62 68.07 145.50 4.38 0.55 4.93 0.55 6.57 3.00 13.14 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 8,192 3,251 1.25 10,240 4,064
Apatin 3.3.10 Sill NO_0163 79.20 85.47 71.40 68.15 67.60 117.50 3.25 0.55 3.80 0.55 4.88 3.00 9.75 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 3,938 2,035 1.25 4,923 2,544
Čivutsku Rukavac 4.2.1 Sill NO_0181 78.96 85.27 72.30 70.60 70.05 69.00 1.70 0.55 2.25 0.55 2.55 3.00 5.10 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 801 726 1.25 1,001 907
Čivutsku Rukavac 4.2.2 Sill NO_0183 78.92 85.24 70.20 67.20 66.65 76.00 3.00 0.55 3.55 0.55 4.50 3.00 9.00 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 2,223 1,266 1.25 2,779 1,583
Čivutsku Rukavac 4.2.7 Sill NO_0199 78.78 85.05 73.78 73.54 72.99 175.00 0.24 0.55 0.79 0.55 0.36 3.00 0.72 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 149 680 1.25 186 850
Čivutsku Rukavac 4.2.12 Closure bund NO_0200 78.77 85.04 82.00 77.55 77.00 535.00 4.45 0.55 5.00 0.55 6.68 2.00 13.35 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 28,599 11,263 1.25 35,748 14,079
Drava confluence 5.4.1 Sill NO_0233 78.46 84.54 70.50 69.47 68.92 71.00 1.03 0.55 1.58 0.55 1.55 3.00 3.09 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 389 527 1.25 486 659
Drava confluence 5.4.2 Sill NO_0235 78.44 84.51 70.00 67.89 67.34 75.50 2.11 0.55 2.66 0.55 3.17 3.00 6.33 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,234 935 1.25 1,543 1,168
Drava confluence 5.4.3 Sill NO_0237 78.42 84.52 69.90 67.72 67.17 93.50 2.18 0.55 2.73 0.55 3.27 3.00 6.54 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,611 1,173 1.25 2,014 1,466
Staklar 7.3.1 sill NO_0284 77.96 83.95 72.96 72.56 72.01 157.00 0.40 0.55 0.95 0.55 0.60 3.00 1.20 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 245 717 1.25 306 896
Staklar 7.3.2 sill NO_0286 77.93 83.93 72.93 72.25 71.70 166.00 0.68 0.55 1.23 0.55 1.02 3.00 2.04 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 511 954 1.25 639 1,193
Staklar 7.3.3 sill NO_0288 77.89 83.91 72.60 70.05 69.50 162.00 2.55 0.55 3.10 0.55 3.82 3.00 7.65 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 3,609 2,250 1.25 4,512 2,813
Staklar 7.3.4 sill NO_0290 77.88 83.86 72.88 69.59 69.04 215.00 3.29 0.55 3.84 0.55 4.93 3.00 9.87 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 7,358 3,659 1.25 9,198 4,574
Staklar 7.3.5 Bank protection NO_0287 77.91 83.92 78.91 77.91 69.50 1550.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 26.58 3.16 1:3 24,622 735 1.25 30,777 919
Staklar 7.3.6 sill NO_0294 77.88 83.82 66.70 60.84 60.29 101.50 5.86 0.55 6.41 0.55 8.79 3.00 17.58 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 9,627 3,090 1.25 12,033 3,863
Staklar 7.3.7 sill NO_0296 77.87 83.79 67.90 64.00 63.45 87.00 3.90 0.55 4.45 0.55 5.85 3.00 11.70 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 3,995 1,817 1.25 4,994 2,271
Bogojevo 9.1.1 Closure bund NO_0339 77.48 83.36 78.50 75.06 74.51 153.00 3.44 0.55 3.99 0.55 5.16 2.00 10.32 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 5,126 2,656 1.25 6,408 3,320
Bogojevo 9.1.2 Bank protection NO_0339 77.48 83.36 78.48 77.48 76.00 200.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 4.67 3.16 1:3 767 95 1.25 959 119
Bogojevo 9.1.3 Bank protection NO_0341 77.47 83.33 78.47 77.47 65.50 1785.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 37.84 3.16 1:3 39,410 847 1.25 49,263 1,058
Bogojevo 9.1.4 Bank protection NO_0347 77.43 83.24 78.43 77.43 66.50 700.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 34.58 3.16 1:3 14,197 332 1.25 17,747 415
Bogojevo 9.1.5 Bank protection NO_0353 77.41 83.19 78.41 77.41 66.00 2045.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 36.09 3.16 1:3 43,180 970 1.25 53,975 1,213
Bogojevo 9.1.6 Sill NO_0347 77.43 83.24 70.10 68.35 67.80 192.50 1.75 0.55 2.30 0.55 2.63 3.00 5.25 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 2,337 1,987 1.25 2,921 2,483
Bogojevo 9.1.7 Sill NO_0349 77.43 83.23 70.20 67.99 67.44 193.00 2.21 0.55 2.76 0.55 3.32 3.00 6.63 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 3,401 2,378 1.25 4,251 2,972
Dalj 10.2.1 Sill NO_0390 77.10 82.81 68.40 67.44 66.89 145.00 0.96 0.55 1.51 0.55 1.44 3.00 2.88 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 718 1,009 1.25 898 1,262
Dalj 10.2.2 Sill NO_0392 77.10 82.83 62.10 58.70 58.15 148.00 3.40 0.55 3.95 0.55 5.10 3.00 10.20 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 5,359 2,632 1.25 6,699 3,290
Dalj 10.2.3 Sill NO_0393 77.10 82.81 61.00 58.52 57.97 135.00 2.48 0.55 3.03 0.55 3.72 3.00 7.44 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 2,873 1,846 1.25 3,591 2,308
Dalj 10.2.4 Sill NO_0405 76.98 82.68 70.90 69.96 69.41 96.00 0.94 0.55 1.49 0.55 1.41 3.00 2.82 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 462 667 1.25 577 834
Dalj 10.2.5 Sill NO_0407 76.96 82.65 70.70 70.17 69.62 130.00 0.53 0.55 1.08 0.55 0.79 3.00 1.59 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 289 667 1.25 361 834
Borovo (1) 11.2.1 Bank protection NO_0430 76.82 82.39 77.82 76.82 66.90 1620.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 31.37 3.16 1:3 29,997 768 1.25 37,496 961
Borovo (1) 11.2.2 Bank protection NO_0442 76.74 82.27 77.74 76.74 62.80 3090.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 44.09 3.16 1:3 78,832 1,466 1.25 98,539 1,832
Borovo (2) 12.1.1 Bank protection NO_0466 76.64 82.04 77.64 76.64 69.00 680.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 24.17 3.16 1:3 9,898 323 1.25 12,373 403
Borovo (2) 12.1.2 Groyne NO_0466 76.64 82.04 77.60 76.41 74.16 75.86 73.61 220.00 80.00 1.19 0.55 3.44 1.74 3.99 0.55 1.19 2.00 1.78 5.16 1:1 1:1.5 1:1 2,979 2,994 1.25 3,724 3,743
Borovo (2) 12.1.3 Groyne NO_0468 76.63 82.02 77.60 77.18 76.89 76.63 76.34 215.50 80.00 0.42 0.55 0.71 0.97 1.26 0.55 0.42 2.00 0.63 1.06 1:1 1:1.5 1:1 403 1,241 1.25 504 1,551
Borovo (2) 12.1.4 Groyne NO_0470 76.61 81.97 77.60 76.38 77.55 75.83 77.00 117.00 80.00 1.22 0.55 0.05 1.77 0.60 0.55 1.22 2.00 1.83 0.07 1:1 1:1.5 1:1 511 935 1.25 639 1,169
Vukovar 13.4.1 Closure bund NO_0525 76.09 81.37 78.00 74.55 74.00 90.00 3.45 0.55 4.00 0.55 5.18 2.00 10.35 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 3,031 1,621 1.25 3,789 2,026
Vukovar 13.4.2 Sill NO_0529 76.03 81.30 68.50 66.88 66.33 75.00 1.62 0.55 2.17 0.55 2.43 3.00 4.86 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 807 757 1.25 1,009 946
Vukovar 13.4.3 Sill NO_0531 76.01 81.28 69.40 67.71 67.16 112.50 1.69 0.55 2.24 0.55 2.54 3.00 5.07 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,293 1,150 1.25 1,617 1,438
Vukovar 13.4.4 Sill NO_0536 75.96 81.21 69.50 67.92 67.37 168.00 1.58 0.55 2.13 0.55 2.37 3.00 4.74 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,740 1,615 1.25 2,175 2,019
Volume 6 -Appendix III - final version 1/2

Volumes per structure
Project: River Training and Dredging Works along the Danube
Client: The European Union
Projectcode: SER2-6 Notes
Prepared by: R.S.D. Ruhulessin - masl = Mean Adriatic Sea Level
Status: 9/20/2012 - contingency taken into account to compensate stone loss during construction and transport
Sector No. Structure Section Water levels Structure levels Length Height Width Slopes Volumes
Contingency
DLNL DHNL CL TL1 TL2 BL1 BL2 L1 L2 ∩L h1 h2 h3 H1 H2 A B C D E a b c Crushed Crushed Crushed Crushed
Stone Stone Stone Stone
Ø15-45 Ø6-15 Ø15-45 Ø6-15
(+Conting (+Conting
ency) ency)
NO [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [masl] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m] [m3] [m3] [m3] [m3]
Vukovar 13.4.5 Sill NO_0537 75.95 81.18 69.20 67.08 66.53 126.50 2.12 0.55 2.67 0.55 3.18 3.00 6.36 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 2,084 1,530 1.25 2,605 1,913
Sotin 14.6.1 Guiding bund NO_0549 75.88 81.12 78.20 73.33 72.08 72.78 71.53 50.00 220.00 4.87 0.55 6.12 5.42 6.67 0.55 4.87 3.00 7.31 9.18 1:1 1:1.5 1:1 18,882 7,368 1.25 23,603 9,210
Sotin 14.6.2 Chevron NO_0550 75.87 81.12 78.20 72.59 72.04 85.00 218.52 5.61 0.55 6.16 0.55 11.22 3.00 16.83 1:2 1:3 1:1 23,014 6,774 1.25 25,783 8,468
Sotin 14.6.3 Chevron NO_0555 75.81 81.08 78.20 73.94 73.39 100.00 257.08 4.26 0.55 4.81 0.55 8.52 3.00 12.78 1:2 1:3 1:1 15,940 5,918 1.25 18,085 7,398
Sotin 14.6.4 Sill NO_0559 75.75 81.01 69.80 67.05 66.50 99.00 2.75 0.55 3.30 0.55 4.13 3.00 8.25 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 2,501 1,500 1.25 3,127 1,875
Sotin 14.6.5 Sill NO_0561 75.75 80.98 69.20 66.19 65.64 145.00 3.01 0.55 3.56 0.55 4.52 3.00 9.03 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 4,265 2,324 1.25 5,332 2,905
Bačka Palanka 17.4.1 Bank protection NO_0660 74.55 79.89 75.55 74.55 59.30 1515.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 48.23 3.16 1:3 42,102 719 1.25 52,628 898
Bačka Palanka 17.4.2 Guiding bund NO_0657 74.59 79.92 77.00 73.10 71.44 72.55 70.89 105.00 360.00 3.90 0.55 5.56 4.45 6.11 0.55 3.90 3.00 5.85 8.34 1:1 1:1.5 1:1 26,125 10,896 1.25 32,657 13,619
Bačka Palanka 17.4.3 Chevron NO_0660 74.55 79.89 77.00 74.01 73.46 115.00 295.64 2.99 0.55 3.54 0.55 5.98 3.00 8.97 1:2 1:3 1:1 9,634 4,852 1.25 11,075 6,065
Bačka Palanka 17.4.4 Chevron NO_0663 74.52 79.88 77.00 75.51 74.96 125.00 321.35 1.49 0.55 2.04 0.55 2.98 3.00 4.47 1:2 1:3 1:1 3,280 3,013 1.25 3,855 3,766
Susek 18.3.1 sill NO_0738 73.81 79.01 66.70 65.03 64.48 71.45 1.67 0.55 2.22 0.55 2.51 3.00 5.01 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 806 740 1.25 1,008 925
Susek 18.3.2 sill NO_0740 73.77 78.96 68.77 65.48 64.93 122.00 3.29 0.55 3.84 0.55 4.93 3.00 9.87 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 4,175 2,131 1.25 5,219 2,664
Susek 18.3.3 sill NO_0742 73.76 78.97 68.76 64.96 64.41 151.15 3.80 0.55 4.35 0.55 5.70 3.00 11.40 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 6,634 2,963 1.25 8,292 3,704
Susek 18.3.4 bank protection NO_0740 73.77 78.96 74.77 73.77 59.30 3175.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 45.75 3.16 1:3 83,910 1,506 1.25 104,888 1,883
Susek 18.3.5 Guiding bund NO_0753 73.68 78.88 75.90 0.00 74.17 0.00 73.62 0.00 216.00 0.00 0.55 1.73 0.00 2.28 0.55 0.00 3.00 0.00 2.60 1:1.5 1:1 2,097 2,195 1.25 2,621 2,743
Susek 18.3.6 chevron NO_0755 73.64 78.85 75.90 74.45 73.90 160.00 411.33 1.45 0.55 2.00 0.55 2.90 3.00 4.35 1:2 1:3 1:1 4,007 3,751 1.25 4,718 4,688
Susek 18.3.7 chevron NO_0757 73.62 78.83 75.90 73.83 73.28 131.50 338.06 2.08 0.55 2.63 0.55 4.15 3.00 6.23 1:2 1:3 1:1 5,884 4,058 1.25 6,848 5,072
Futog 19.3.1 bank protection NO_0834 72.87 78.09 73.87 72.87 68.50 1565.00 0.40 0.15 0.55 13.83 3.16 1:3 13,885 742 1.25 17,357 928
Futog 19.3.2 chevron NO_0830 72.95 78.13 75.20 68.73 68.18 75.00 192.81 6.47 0.55 7.02 0.55 12.94 3.00 19.41 1:2 1:3 1:1 27,131 7,117 1.25 30,134 8,896
Futog 19.3.3 chevron NO_0834 72.87 78.09 75.20 69.25 68.70 85.00 218.52 5.95 0.55 6.50 0.55 11.90 3.00 17.85 1:2 1:3 1:1 25,772 7,205 1.25 28,809 9,006
Futog 19.3.4 sill NO_0837 72.83 78.06 67.83 66.77 66.22 173.00 1.06 0.55 1.61 0.55 1.59 3.00 3.18 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 988 1,275 1.25 1,234 1,593
Futog 19.3.5a sill NO_0840 72.80 78.03 67.80 67.80 67.25 50.00 0.55 0.00 0.55 0.00 0.82 3.00 1.65 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 117 0 1.25 146 0
Futog 19.3.5b sill NO_0840 72.80 78.03 69.50 67.85 67.30 110.00 1.65 0.55 2.20 0.55 2.48 3.00 4.95 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,218 1,106 1.25 1,523 1,382
Futog 19.3.6 chevron NO_0851 72.72 77.95 75.00 70.50 69.95 105.00 269.93 4.50 0.55 5.05 0.55 9.00 3.00 13.50 1:2 1:3 1:1 18,464 6,516 1.25 20,925 8,145
Futog 19.3.7 chevron NO_0855 72.67 77.92 75.00 72.82 72.27 105.00 269.93 2.18 0.55 2.73 0.55 4.36 3.00 6.54 1:2 1:3 1:1 5,133 3,413 1.25 5,956 4,266
Arankina Ada 21.1.1 sill NO_0933 72.00 77.13 69.00 64.84 64.29 146.00 4.16 0.55 4.71 0.55 6.24 3.00 12.48 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 7,507 3,112 1.25 9,384 3,889
Čortanovci 22.1.1 sill NO_0962 71.81 76.88 62.00 59.27 58.72 63.50 2.73 0.55 3.28 0.55 4.10 3.00 8.19 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,585 989 1.25 1,981 1,237
Čortanovci 22.1.2 sill NO_0963 71.81 76.87 64.00 62.28 61.73 113.00 1.72 0.55 2.27 0.55 2.58 3.00 5.16 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 1,335 1,170 1.25 1,669 1,463
Čortanovci 22.1.4 sill NO_0976 71.75 76.76 70.00 68.61 68.06 70.00 1.39 0.55 1.94 0.55 2.09 3.00 4.17 1:1.5 1:3 1:1 596 635 1.25 745 794
Beška 23.3.1 chevron NO_1020 71.37 76.44 73.70 69.61 69.06 110.00 282.79 4.09 0.55 4.64 0.55 8.18 3.00 12.27 1:2 1:3 1:1 16,181 6,199 1.25 18,407 7,749
Beška 23.3.2 chevron NO_1022 71.31 76.42 73.70 70.80 70.25 110.00 282.79 2.90 0.55 3.45 0.55 5.80 3.00 8.70 1:2 1:3 1:1 8,751 4,533 1.25 10,065 5,667
Preliv 24.3.1 chevron NO_1166 70.44 75.28 72.60 69.57 69.02 160.00 411.33 3.03 0.55 3.58 0.55 6.06 3.00 9.09 1:2 1:3 1:1 13,568 6,685 1.25 15,633 8,357
Preliv 24.3.2 chevron NO_1168 70.43 75.27 72.60 69.85 69.30 165.00 424.18 2.75 0.55 3.30 0.55 5.50 3.00 8.25 1:2 1:3 1:1 11,818 6,337 1.25 13,657 7,922
Volume 6 -Appendix III - final version 2/2

APPENDIX IV CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DRAWINGS OF THE SELECTED OPTIONS AND

LONGITUDINAL PROFILES

Volume 6 - MCA, BOQ and Conceptual Design

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Volume 6 - MCA, BOQ and Conceptual Design

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Delegation of the European Union

to the Republic of Serbia

Preparation of Documentation for River

Phase 2 - Feasibility Study

Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ

Preparation of Documentation for River

Phase 2 - Feasibility Study

Volume 6 - Multi Criteria Analysis, BoQ

reference project code status

R-0015 SER2.6 final

project manager project director date

Roberto Zanetti Stephan van der Biezen January 2013

authorisation name initials

ZANR R.A.R.O. Zanetti

2. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS 3

3. MULTI CRITERIA ANALYSE AND RESULTS 15

3.21. Sector 20 Novi Sad 20

APPENDICES number of pages.

2. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR MULTI-CRITERIA ANALYSIS

The 4 themes are:

Table 2.1. Multi-criteria assessment criteria and weight factor

2.2. Criteria definitions

2.3. Theme 1 - Navigability and safety

2.3.2. Compliance with Danube Commission (DC) recommendations

2.3.3. Visibility of river training works

The details are presented in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2. Values regarding visibility

2.3.4. Hindrance due to changed flow patterns

The details are presented in Table 2.3.

Table 2.3. Values regarding hindrance due to changed flow patterns

2.4. Theme 2 - Environment

2.4.1. Fish population

The details are presented in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4. Values regarding fish population

2.4.2. Bird life

The values attached to the works are as follows:

The details are presented in Table 2.5.

Table 2.5. Values regarding bird life

The values attached to the works are as follows:

The details are presented in Table 2.6.

Table 2.6. Values regarding flora

2.4.4. Water quality

The details are presented in Table 2.7.

Table 2.7. Values regarding sediment budget and water quality

The values attached to the works are as follows:

The details are presented in Table 2.8.

2.5. Theme 3 - Technical matters

2.5.1. Construction time

The values attached to the works are as follows:

The details are presented in Table 2.9.

Table 2.9. Values regarding construction time

2.5.2. Execution of works

The values attached to the implementation of works are as follows:

The details are presented in Table 2.10.

Table 2.10. Values regarding execution of works

2.5.3. Maintenance level

The details are presented in Table 2.11.

Table 2.11. Values regarding maintenance

The details are presented in Table 2.12.

Table 2.12. Values regarding sustainability

2.6. Theme 4 - Cost

This means that:

2.6.2. Construction costs

The details are presented in Table 2.13.