Ministry of Housing and Local Government (KPKT)

PROPOSED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE THERMAL TREATMENT PLANTS AT PULAU TIOMAN , PAHANG DARUL MAKMUR Terms of References for Detailed Environmental Impact Assesment

27 MEI 2012

Project Proponent and EIA Consultant

Project Proponent
Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara, Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan, Paras 2&4, blok B (utara), Pusat Bandar Damansara, Peti surat 12579, 50782 Kuala Lumpur

SMART Consulting Group Sdn Bhd

9-2 & 9-3 Jalan USJ 21/6 47630 Subang Jaya, MALAYSIA Tel: 603-80242287 Fax: 603-80242320

DEIA Study Team

Area of study Soil control Sedimentation control Name Dr. Muhamad Hafiz b Mat Kasa

Air quality assesment

Dr. Zaifah bt Che Wil

Noise impacts assesment

Ir. Asyanatul Awin Bt Ahmad Termizi

Water quality & Wastewater

Dr. Nurul Hanna Attiya Bt Baharuddin

DEIA Study Team

Area of study Social and Economic Impact Assessment Name Prof. Dr. Nur Hafiza Bt Ahmad

Health Impact Assessment

Land use Traffic

Dr. Mohd Afdhal Bt Abd Razak

Norhaliza Bt Hashim

Occupational Safety and Health

Ecological Assessment

Asilah Bt Mohamad Ali

Dr. Nazhirah Bt Mohd Mera Shoib

Overview
Objective Project Background Statement of Need Project Description Existing Environment Potential & Magnitude Impacts Conclusion

Project Background
Proposed thermal treatment plant Replaced Incinerator which no longger operate for disposal of Municipal Solid Waste Overal capacity = 15MT/day Located at Lot 145 , Kg tekek, Less than 2 Acres
Project Location ( Pulau Tioman )

Statement of Need
Need of replacing the existing incinerators Current incinerator are under capacity and stopped since 2007- breakdown Wastes transported back to mainland for final disposal- potential pollute Current incinerator site- used for temporary storage- improper

Statement of Need
Has impacts- reducing the adverse impacts Surface and groundwater pollution Health risk Air polution Odour aesthetic

Statement of Need

Existing condition of waste stored/ disposed at the Project Site (southwest)

Existing condition of waste stored/ disposed at the Project Site (west)

Project Location

Aerial Image of Project Site

Existing Environment
Road to the existing waste disposal ground Marine Park Centre

Houses at 220m from project Site (west)

Sg. Hantu during low tide

Existing Environment
Bamboo tree
(Phyllosachys)

on the Sg. Batang Siput river bank

One of the coras species found off the river mouth of Sg. Air Hantu Monitor lizards (Varanus sp.) at the project site

Flying fox (Pteropus sp.) hanging on the tree near airport

Project Description
Project component
Waste reception facility Waste receiving bay, waste storing area :: receive MSW prior sending for seperation and treatment Mechanical seperation and sorting :: seperates combustible and non combustible Made up primary chamber (>650 C) Primary chamber ( >800 C) Continous operation Cool down flue gas temperature to 200 C Consist Neutralization tower , cyclone and baghouse fliter Mechanical and biological treatment system Treating leachate

Waste seperation faciity

Thermal Treatment Plant

Gas cooling facility Air pollution control facility Waste water treatment pant

Project Description
Proposed Layout Plan

Scope & Methodology

5 km around project option

Potential & Magnitude Impacts

Environmental Aspects
Air quality Water quality Noise Socio-economics Soil and sedimentation Ecology Land use and traffic Safety Occupational and health

Magnitude of Impacts
High Medium Low

Safety and Health

SCOPE OF STUDY
ECOLOGY SOCIO ECONOMIC

WATER QUALITY AIR QUALITY HUMAN HEALTH

SOIL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL

TRAFFIC

NOISE QUALITY
OSHA

CONCLUSION

 The Project site is generally surrounded by

overgrown grass and shrubs except at the north of the Project site where the area was bordered by trees.

Pulau Tioman is a hilly island surrounded by

the South China Sea.

There are 3 forest types within 5 km of the Project site

primary, secondary and beach forest.

Over 50% of Pulau Tioman (about 7,160 ha) has been gazetted as Wildlife Reserve
to protect the flora and fauna on the island.

 Pulau Tioman Development Guidelines and Carrying Capacity Report, JPBD, 2008.
33 species mammalian 48 species reptilian 17 species amphibian 67 species birds

Mammals
Species protected:
Binturong (Artictic binturong) Long-tailed Macaque (Macaca fascicularis) Slow Loris (Nycticebus coucang) Black Giant Squirrel (Ratufa bicolor) Brush-tailed Porcupine (Atherurus macrourus) Red-giant Flying Squirrel (Petaurista petaurista) Common Palm Civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus) Larger Mouse Deer (Tragulus napu)

Reptilian and amphibian

toad species Ansonia tiomanica lizard Gonicocephalus chamaelinotus

Birds
White bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster), White-belied Fish Eagle (Haliatur Indus) Crested Serpent Eagle (Spilornis cheela) Black-winged Kite (Elanus caeruleus). Hill Myna (Gracula religiosa) is the common bird species found on the island.

Marine
The marine ecology in general consist of diversity of marine organisms including
penyu hijau (Chelonia mydas) Blacktip Reef Sharks (Carcharhinus melanopterus), Coral Trout (Plectropomus sp.), Golden Trevally (Gnathanodon speciosus) Blue Spotted Sting Ray (Taeniura lymma)

Coral
Terdapat 111 spesies karang di Pulau Tioman.
hard coral species recorded

Porites rus, Porites cylindrical Stylophora pistillata, Pachyseris speciosa

Coverage of Coral Life Forms

Life forms Life coral Dead Algae Abiotic coral Coverage (%) 50.2 7.6 0.8 24.8

Other

2.2

Source : Coral Monitoring Quarterly Report No.3 at Teluk Tekek, Pulau Tioman, August-October 2008

BACK

IMPAK DAN MITIGASI

Sebelum operasi 1. Debu larian hoarding (3m) dan jalan diturap

Semasa operasi 1. Gas serombong hasil daripada pembakaran - model ISCST3 -Operasi normal -Keadaan paling teruk

persampelan kualiti udara 4 lokasi - tapak insinerator - 3 di kawasan berdekatan

OPERASI NORMAL

KEADAAN PALING TERUK

Di bawah keadaan paling teruk, pembebasan tidak terkawal dalam tempoh 1 jam boleh menyebabkan pencemaran udara yang teruk. - operasi TTP dijalankan oleh kakitangan yang cekap dan terlatih - KPIs - Good Housekeeping

2. teknologi ACT 3. Sistem ACP - siklon - neutralization reactor - baghouse

With the implementation of these measures, no residual impacts are anticipated.

BACK

26-28 2008
Location
LAeq (dBA) range

N1
49.9 68.1

N2
50.4 65.3

Day time

*Average LA90 (dBA)

Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible

50.8
60.8 35 % ( 21 Reading ) 53.2 - 62.9 56.9 61.9 8% ( 3 Reading )

47.8
57.8 25 % ( 15 Reading ) 44.0 57.2 45.1 50.1 86 % (31 Reading )

Sound Level
LAeq (dBA) range

Night

*Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible Sound Level

time

Inference 7- 9 oct 2008

Location
LAeq (dBA) range
*Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible Sound Level LAeq (dBA) range

N1
44.1 - 60.8
50.8 60.8

N2
47.7 - 63.2
47.8 57.8

Day time

0% 13 % ( none of the Reading ) ( 8 Reading ) 51.1 54.5 56.9 61.9 39.1 53.4 45.1 50.1

Night time

*Average LA90 (dBA) Maximum Permissble Sound Level % Exceeded Maximum Permissible Sound Level

0% 17 % ( none of the Reading ) ( 6 Reading )

BACK

 The risk assessment conducted for this Project is to identify the potential hazards associated with the TTP operation. The main risk during the operation of the TTP is identified related to fire hazards within the facility. In case of the TTP, the main hazard are: 1. the on-site diesel storage 2. Spontaneous Combustion of Solid Waste

 The safety and health aspects for on-site workers for the proposed TTP is review for both construction and operation phases of the plant. In Malaysia, the safety and health of workers is governed under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1994 (OSHA 1994) and the Factories and Machinery Act, 1967 (FMA 1967)

CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Traffic accident

Overturned crane
Safety Hazards Possible hazards may occur Health Hazards

Fall from heights

Machine/tool usage injuries Exposed to noise levels that exceed the action level of 85 dBA Dengue fever and recently chikungunya epidemics

OPERATIONAL PHASE
Common Hazards expected
exposed to potential hazardous or toxic materials

Physical injuries

Manual handling

Heat stress

BACK

IMPACTS
Construction phase
Sewage discharge Oil & grease pollution Soil contaminated Effect marine water (coral) Construction waste

Operational phase
Increase nutrients Increase coliform bacteria Increase in suspended solids Depletion of O Noxious odours (HS) Limit light penetration Oil contaminate degrade aesthetic value

Residual Impact
Not Significant

Assumption for Assessment

Effluent and river water are completely mixed at the point of discharge The BOD of the effluent does not change along the Sg. Air Hantu Other pollution sources along Sg. Air Hantu were not considered The present BOD of Sg. Air Hantu is taken as 3 mg/l under normal conditions.

The following formula has been used:-

BOD Prediction
Scenario 1 Normal Condition
Accordance to the design parameters. The low flow of Sg. Air Hantu for the 1.1 year return period and 30 day low flow is 3.33 x 10-2 MLD. The BOD concentration for Sg. Air Hantu assumed at 3 mg/L. The effluent discharge from the WWTP is 0.004 MLD. The BOD concentration of the effluent is 20 mg/L based on design parameter/ based on Standard A Therefore, Q = 3.33 x 10-2 MLD
r

Cr = 3 mg/l qw = 0.004 MLD cw = 20 mg/l C = 4.8 mg/l

Scenario 2 Abnormal Condition

failure of the WWTP and raw wastewater is discharged into the river BOD concentration in the raw wastewater is 7,731 mg/l Therefore, when cw = 7,731 mg/l

C = 832 mg/l

MITIGATIONS Construction Phase

Oil & Grease Containment
Store in large bin/tank/drums Soak with sand Construct concrete/brick containment wall Bund wall (Appendix I)

Sewage Discharge
Treat in septic tank Desludging once /2 years Leachate management

Construction Waste
On-site storage area Stockpiled at temporary storage (Figure 6-1) Construct drain flow into silt trap

MITIGATIONS Operational Phase

Control
WWTP Leachate management Engineering control

Maintenance
Inspection Testing Cleaning Lubrication Adjusting Repairing

Adequate Training
Personnel Execute duties properly

Leachate Management and Wastewater Treatment

Refer FIGURE 3-5 3 type wastewater: leachate from the stored solid waste plant washings incoming truck washings Leachate management leachate drained into collection sumps before being channelled to an onsite WWTP require washing to ensure that the area is clean at all times collection sumps drained by gravitation/pump to the WWTP Leachate from garbage trucks drained into a designated sump/pit at the waste receiving area

Figure 3-5 Proposed Layout of Wastewater Drainage Plan

Figure 3-8 WWTP Equipment Layout Plan

Figure 6-1 Location of Stockpile & Temporary Waste Storage Area

BACK

Human Health Impact

The steps of health risk assessments are: Step 1: Hazard Identification Step 2: Dose-response relationships Step 3: Exposure Assessment Step 4: Risk Characterization

Human Health Impact

Step 1 : Hazard Identification
Type of emmision Pollutants

Criteria air pollutants

Particulate less than 10 g(PM10), SO2, NO2

Toxic air pollutants

Arsenic, cadmium, chromium, HCL, lead, elemental mercury, dioxin

Human Health Impact

Step 2 : Dose-response relationships
Health Reference Values for Criteria Air Pollutants

Criteria pollutants PM10 SO2

Averaging time 24 hrs

Reference values g/m3 150 1

Annual
1hr 24 hrs 1hr Annual

50 1
350 1 105 1 320 1 40 2

NO2

Notes: 1 US National Ambient Air Quality Standard 2 Recommended Malaysian Ambient Air Quality Guidelines.

Human Health Impact

Step 2 : Dose-response relationships
Summary of Health Outcome, Relative Risk (RR) Associated with a 10 g/m3 in PM10 for Short Term Effects
Health Outcome Hospital admissions for cardiovascular causes Hospital admission for respiratory disease Occurrence of respiratory symptoms RR per 10 g/m3 1.009 1.016 1.070

Acute bronchitis (aged <15)

Asthma exacerbation(aged <15)

1.306
1.051

Asthma exacerbation(aged >15) 1.004 Source: WHO, Regional Office for Europe. Health Impact of Air Pollution in the Eight Major Italian Cities, 2002

Human Health Impact

Step 2 : Dose-response relationships
Table 3 Non-cancer toxicity Information of criteria air pollutants
Type of critical Chemical of concern Chronic RfC (mg/m3) Primary Target Organ effect for development of threshold dose SO2 ND* URT URT Irritation Source of Toxicity data (date*)

NO2
HCl Dioxin/Furan ITEQ (as 2,3,7,8-TCDD) Arsenic Cadmium Lead Chromium IV Mercury, elemental

ND*
2x10-2 4x10-5 0.03 0.02 (g/m3) NA 1x10-4 3x10-4

URT
URT Development Skin Kidney NA Respiratory toxicity Nervous system

URT Irritation
URT Irritation Systemic effect Systemic effect Systemic effect NA Systemic effect Systemic effect IRIS (20/11/08) OEHHA, 2005 OEHHA, 2005 OEHHA, 2005 NA IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08)

Human Health Impact

Step 2 : Dose-response relationships
Toxicity Information of the Carcinogenic Hazards Chemical of concern URF Type of (Hg/m3) cancer -1 EPA Weight of Evidence/Route Source of Toxicity data (date*)

Arsenic
Cadmium Chromium Lead Dioxin/Furan (TEQ) Mercury

4.3E-03
1.8E-03 1.2E-02 1.20E05 1.3 NA

Lung
Lung Lung Not reported Lung NA

A/Inhalation
B1/inhalation A/Inhalation B2 B2/inhalation D (Not classified as Human carcinogen)

IRIS (20/11/08)
IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08) OEHHA IRIS (20/11/08) IRIS (20/11/08)

Human Health Impact

Step 3 : Exposure Assessment Sensitive receptors The sensitive receptors for all three criteria pollutants emitted from the proposed TTP are clearly identified as the asthmatics, people suffering from respiratory diseases and heart disease and the elderly and very young people.

Human Health Impact

Step 3 : Exposure Assessment Exposure route Direct exposure through the inhalation route is the most important route of exposure for the health risk assessment on the identified hazards emitted from the proposed plant.

Human Health Impact

Step 3 : Exposure Assessment Exposure level The health risk was calculated based on the exposure data derived from the air quality modelling and the baseline data submitted by the air quality consultants.

Human Health Impact

Step 4: Risk Characterization The Risk Characterization integrates all information from the earlier steps. The health risk is calculated using the results of the air quality modelling. For this assessment, the health risk to the residents was estimated based on the actual or normal operation of the TTP.

Human Health Impact

Step 4: Risk Characterization
Percentage Of Health Outcomes Increment Due To Maximum 24 Hours Average Incremental Level of PM10 (Normal Operation)

BACK

EXISTING ENVIROMENT
POPULATION

ETHNICITY

AGE GROUP

EDUCATION

ECONOMIC ACTIVITY

Socio-economic
The objectives of the SIA study are: 1. To identify potential adverse impacts of the proposed development on socioeconomic aspects of the local population in Pulau Tioman. 2. To determine opportunities for enhancing the socio-economic well-being of the local population. 3. To address social issues associated with the impacts of the proposed development through the design of mitigation measures.

PERCEPTION BEFORE PROJECT

COMMENTS RESPONDENTS

AWARE OF PROJECT

56.6%

NOT INTERESTED

29.4%

Awareness of the location

There were altogether 16 positive impacts.

Perceived positive impacts

Perceived negative impacts

There were altogether 17 negative impacts.

Tourists perception

Potential socio-economic impacts

(i) During construction Discomfort due to increased level of noise and traffic Concerns for safety due to increased traffic and boat activity Decrease in monthly incomes due to environmental implications (ii) During operation Concerns for health in view of potential environmental pollution Concerns for safety in the event of failure or improper operationof the TTP

Mitigation measures and recommendations

There are a few recommended to enhance the solid waste management in Pulau Tioman:
Improvement of solid waste collection Community Education and Awareness Programmes Follow-up SIA

BACK

TRAFFIC AND MATERIAL CONVEYANCE

 Traffic volume is expected to increase during the construction phase. The impact due to traffic is minimal:
Transportation route less than 2km No public amenities located along transportation route.

Traffic impact is not significant during operational phase.

No. of rubbish trucks and trucks which transport bottom ash and sludge is small.

 Impact due to marine traffic are follow:Spillage of bottom ash, sludge and fuel Damage to corals by barge movement Collision with other boats

BACK

Soil and sedimentation control

Phases
Constructions

Impacts because of
Site clearing Phasing Sediment trap Temporary drains

Operational

No impacts because of whole area are covered

Soil and sedimentation control

BACK

Conclusion
Proposed TTP will not impose significant adverse environmental impacts during both the construction and operational stage if the required environmental management measures are implemented.