6 Existing Environment

6 EXISTING ENVIRONMENT

6.1 INTRODUCTION

This section provides a description of the physical, chemical, biological and social aspects of the environment within the Zone of Impact (ZOI) of the proposed secure landfill Project. It highlights the components of environmental concerns of the Project site and its surroundings. The term ZOI is used to describe the area most likely to be impacted by the Project. The ZOI represents the surrounding area within a 5 km radius from the boundary of the LAMP site. The information provided within this chapter forms the basis of the impact assessment in Chapter 7.

The description provided in this chapter is based on site visits and environmental monitoring data at the LAMP site, undertaken by Permulab (M) Sdn. Bhd., a laboratory accredited by the Department of Standards, Malaysia under the Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia (SAMM), Malaysian Meteorological Department and publications by DOE, Kuantan Municipal Council, Pihak Berkuasa Perancang Tempatan (PBPT) Daerah Kuantan.

Data from past studies, including the “Preliminary EIA and Quantitative Risk Assessment of the Proposed Advanced Materials Plant in Gebeng Industrial Area, Kuantan, Pahang, by Enviro Sdn Bhd, 2007” was also referenced.

6.2 TOPOGRAPHY

Regionally, the GIE is located in the Kemajuan Tanah Merah area where Bukit Tanah Merah was flattened to construct the industrial estate. The GIE is located within the low-lying and predominantly swampy Sungai Balok catchment area with an average land elevation of 7m above mean sea level.

Several hilly areas are located beyond the 5 km ZOI including Bukit Balok, which is located about 6 km southwest of the GIE, at a height of 230 m above mean sea level (MSL) and Bukit Pangram which rises 197 m above MSL and is located 7.5 km southeast of the industrial estate. Topographically, the site is relatively flat with ground levels generally ranging between 7.4 m to 7.8 m above MSL.

6.3 HYDROLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY

6.3.1 Catchment and River System

The hydrology and drainage system of the LAMP site is characterised by the Sungai Balok catchment with the main tributaries of rivers in the area being Sg. Balok and Sg. Tunggak. Figure 6.1 shows the river network in the Balok catchment area, where the proposed Project is located.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-1 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Sg. Balok originates as Sg. Batang Panjang from the hilly area northwest of the Project site and serves as the catchment area for the Project site. Sg. Balok catchment is estimated to be 10 km long and km wide. Sg. Tunggak on the other hand originates from the Tanah Merah peat swamp forest and flows south along the eastern boundary of the Project site. Sg. Tunggak catchment is somewhat smaller than Sg. Balok; at 7 km in length and 4.2 km in width. Sg. Balok is located 3 km west from the LAMP site and flows in a south easterly direction and eventually discharges into the South China Sea. The coastline is located 3km east of the Project site.

There is no impoundment or river water abstraction for potable water supply within the catchments of Sg. Balok and Sg. Tunggak.

6.3.2 Hydrogeology

6.3.2.1 General Hydrogeology

The LAMP site is situated on alluvial deposits with very high aquifer potential based on the Hydrogeological Map of Pahang (2007) published by Jabatan Mineral dan Geosains (JMG) Malaysia (Figure 6.2). The extent, nature and composition of the alluvium vary at different localities. Along the stretch of the Gebeng coast from Sg. Ular to Beserah in the south, it is known to be highly productive aquifers of more than 20 m thick and consists of sand/gravel. However, there is no deep drilling carried out in the area, other than in Sg. Ular area where groundwater wells are capable of producing 15 – 20 m3/hour. Areas underlain by granite and sedimentary rocks have lower groundwater potential.

Generally, sand/gravel aquifers are capable of yielding up to 50 m 3/hr/well with a few metres of drawdown. For less extensive or lower transmissivity aquifers, yield of between 15 – 25 m3/hr/well is common. Along the coast, groundwater could be brackish/saline as a result of connate seawater trapped within the alluvial materials or influenced by the quality of sea water. The groundwater levels isopach indicated the lowering towards the coast line, as a consequent, the regional groundwater flows to the sea. However, the local groundwater most likely flows into the rivers (Sg. Balok and Sg. Tunggak) nearby, other than towards the sea in areas close to the coastline.

Further inland, sedimentary and volcanic rocks aquifers are represented by fractures within sandstone, quartzite, conglomerate and volcanic rocks are normally less productive, however, wells in sedimentary/volcanic rocks may occasionally yield up to 20 m 3/hr/well, averaging 5-15 m3/hr/well. Aquifers in fractures within crystalline igneous generally give lower yield of up to 10 m3/hr/well. The water from these aquifers is generally of medium to good quality but has moderate to high total dissolved solids due to soluble minerals.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-2 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.3.2.2 Site Hydrogeology

Field tests conducted in 2007 for the Preliminary EIA and Quantitative Risk Assessment of the Proposed Advanced Materials Plant within the Gebeng Industrial Area, Kuantan, indicated that the clay and silty sand hydraulic conductivity is in the range of 10-7 to 10-8 m/s, and 10-6 m/s respectively.

During this investigation, seven (7) monitoring wells (MW1 – MW7) were constructed, and measurement of groundwater levels and sample collection were carried out. The groundwater levels range from 0.95 to 3.5 meter below ground level. From the groundwater level measurements, it shows that the shallow groundwater within Lynas flows to the south or southeast. These monitoring wells were used from 2007 to 2008. From 2012, another set of monitoring well were used for groundwater sampling and analysis and some of the earlier constructed well MW4, MW6 and MW7 were decommissioned, and 3 new wells were constructed; labelled as GW11, GW12 and GW13. Subsequently, all the wells are labelled as GW instead of MW, hence, the monitoring wells are identified as GW1, GW2, GW3, GW5, GW11, GW12 and GW13. Based on the groundwater level from the wells, the deduced groundwater flows from the LAMP site to the south and southwest, as shown in Figure 6.2a.

6.4 GEOLOGY AND SOIL

6.4.1 Geology

The LAMP site is located within Gebeng Industrial Estate (GIE) which was founded on the Kemajuan Tanah Merah land. The general geology of the Kuantan area consists of three (3) main geological units. These include: (i) Quaternary Alluvium deposits; (ii) Marine Sand; and (iii) Granite bedrock

According to the Geology map of Peninsular Malaysia (2014), the Quaternary deposits consist of marine and continental sediments made up of clay, silt and gravel. The marine Gula formation occupies most of the coastal areas throughout the peninsular. In the coastal area in Kuantan, including the GIE where the Project site is located, the Quaternary deposits is estimated to be up to a depth of approximately 38 m and consist of peat, humic clay and silts of the Beruas and continental Simpang Formations. As described in the previous sub-section, the alluvial deposits in the area have an estimated potential yield of between 4,000 and 6,000 gallons/hour/well.

The Quaternary Alluvium layers overlay the granite bedrock formed in the Cretaceous period. This granite intruded into both the older Lower Carboniferous strata and older beds of the Arenaceous Series, and forms much of the bedrock underlying the GIE, with the most prominent outcrop found in Bukit Pangram, about 3 km southeast of the site. Similarly, Basalt of Pliocene

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-3 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang age (1.7 0.3 Ma by K-Ar dating) are also present in Kuantan, Pahang (Geology Map of Peninsular Malaysia 2014). The main episode of granitic emplacement took place during the Triassic period coincides with the major orogenic events during which all of the older strata were folded and deformed

The geological map of the Project site and surrounding areas are presented in Figure 6.3.

6.4.2 Soil

6.4.2.1 Secondary Soil Data

The Kuantan Series is a member of the Kuantan Family which is a very fine, oxidic, iso- hyperthermic, brown Tipik Akrolemoks. It typifies the family which developed over basalt. These are deep (>100 cm), very friable and uniformly brown soils with thin dark brown to brown A horizons and dark yellowish brown, clayey B oxic horizons. The depth of this type of soil exceeds two metres deep where iron-coated basalt parent material normally occurs. The Effective Cation Exchange Capacity (ECEC) value is less than 1.5 centimole/kg in the oxic horizon. The Reconnaissance Soil Map of Peninsular Malaysia (Figure 6.4) indicates that surface soils at the site and its surrounding areas are alluvial in nature and mainly consist of peat and underlain by alluvium to a depth of 2 meters (Table 6.1).

The soils of the Kuantan Series have very rapid permeability and internal drainage making them somewhat excessively-drained. Such characteristic may impose significant limitations in terms of moisture fixation and low nutrient content which significantly impacts the agricultural potential of the soil. Oil palm yields can be expected to fluctuate significantly during periods of drought due to this. Similarly, the establishment of cover crops and main crops is foreseen to be particularly difficult, especially if droughts are encountered. However, once vegetation has been established, with deep roots in particular, moisture availability is not expected to be that serious a problem.

Table 6.1: Characteristics of Kuantan Series Soil According to Depths

Horizon Depth (cm) Description Ap* (Surface Brown to Dark Brown (10YR4/3) clay: weak fine subgranular blocky and strong 0 – 18 soil) granular, very friable, few channels, few medium roots, diffuse boundary Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) clay, weak medium subgranular blocky breaking B1 18 – 64 to strong granular, very friable, thin coatings on ped faces, few clayballs , few channels, few fine roots, diffuse boundary Dark yellowish brown (10YR4/4) clay, weak medium and coarse subgranular, very B2 64 – 121 friable, thin coatings on ped faces, occasional clayball, few fine roots and diffuse boundary Dark Yellowish brown (10YR4/4) clay, weak medium and fine subangular blocky, B3 121 – 200 very friable, thin coating on ped faces, few clayballs, few fine roots. *p denotes disturbed by ploughing or other tillage practices

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-4 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.4.2.2 Soil Investigation

In 2017, an investigation was carried out, 8 boreholes (GWBH1- GWBH8) were drilled at the LAMP site. These boreholes were drilled for the data acquisition of geotechnical / soil information and hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer. Figure 6.5 shows the boreholes location within the Project site.

A summary of the boreholes details are provided in Table 6.2

Table 6.2 : Summary of Borehole Data for the Project Site

Borehole Well Screen Screen Termination Termination Elevation Starting Ending Depth Depth (m)(bgl) Depth (mRL) (bgl) Depth GW – BH1 8.004 7.5 11.5 30.45 -22.45 GW – BH2 7.813 20.0 26.0 30.45 -22.64 GW – BH3 7.69 8.6 13.2 30.45 -22.76 GW – BH4 7.848 9.0 12.0 39.00 -31.152 GW – BH5 7.66 8.00 13.00 30.45 -22.79 GW – BH6 7.45 21.0 26.0 30.45 -23.00 GW – BH7 7.344 18.00 24.00 30.45 -23.11 GW – BH8 7.332 6.0 12.0 30.45 -23.12

Soil description were obtained from samples recovered from boreholes and in-situ examination of the materials. It is important to highlight that the soil descriptions made were based off British Standard 5930:1999. Figure 6.6 shows the columnar section of boreholes GW-BH1 to GW-BH8.

Based on the 39-m explored depths of borehole drilled at the site, the Project site comprises of six (6) stratigraphic unit: (i) Reconstructed layer of gravelly sandy SILT or fill material which is about 1.88 m thickness. This layer is underlain by the Quaternary Alluvium and Marine Sands of the area which comprises of five main soil formations. (ii) Sandy CLAY that grades into SILT in some locations. This second layer is named as sandy CLAY/SILT and is about 4.22 m thick. Layer 3 is silty SAND (6.80 m) and the upper aquifer at the site. The Layer 4 is another sandy CLAY/SILT (5.74 m). The bottom of this Layer 4 is the top of Layer 5. Layer 5 is the deeper silty SAND aquifer (5.20 m) and the main aquifer were the greatest potential for ground water could be located. Layer 6 is SILT but grades into CLAY and is named as SILT/CLAY. The thickness is about 5.94 m.

Table 6.3 provides a generalised overview of the six (6) hydro-stratigraphic soil formation present within the Project site with Figure 6.7 providing a graphical illustration of these formations.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-5 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

It was also noted that, borehole GW-BH4, which was drilled to a maximum depth of 39 m during the site investigation failed to reach the granite bedrock of the area. It is therefore assumed that he thickness of the Quaternary Alluvium and Marine Sands in the Project site is more than 40 m.

Table 6.3: Summary of Stratigraphy Soil Layers at Project site Parameters Layer 1 Layer 2 Layer 3 Layer 4 Layer 5 Layer 6 Material Gravelly Sandy Sandy Sandy Silty SAND Silty SAND Description Sandy SILT CLAY/SLIT CLAY/SLIT SILT/CLAY Thickness (m) 1.88 4.22 6.8 5.74 5.2 5.94 Top elevation 8.02 6.51 4.02 - 1.85 - 5.62 -12.37 (MSL) Standard Penetration 0 – 13 0 – 7 0 – 50 0 – 50 4 – 50 0 – 50 Test blows (N) Reddish brown Visible colour Brownish – Medium – Medium – Medium – Medium – / brownish appearance grey light grey dark grey dark grey dark grey grey

Permeability test were conducted on selected soil types at different depths in the Project site. The focus was mainly on identifying the aquifer’s soil material/constituent in the site. This was carried out by applying an in-situ, falling head permeability test of soil flush with soil in uniform soil layer. Cased wells are open at the bottom as specified by BS 55930: 1999. This method allows for hydraulic data to be directly obtained from the boreholes.

During the site investigation in 2017, nine (9) in-situ permeability tests were conducted utilising falling head method in seven (7) monitoring wells. The tests were carried out to enable calculation of hydraulic conductivity, K of the different material at different depth as there six (6) different stratigraphic layers at the site. These K values are used for the modelling and shown in Table 6.4. The tests indicated that the lower sand aquifer has reasonably high K values and they are good aquifer, whereas the upper aquifer is lower in K values and hence potentially retarding movement of contaminants in the case that the liner is breached. The K value ranges from 5.536 X 10 ̄ 8 to 1.039 X 10 ̄ 5 and have moderate permeability and considered within the range of good aquifer. The permeability of the deeper silty sand aquifers at GW – BH6 is relatively higher at 1.03 X 10 ̄ 5 m/s.

Table 6.4 Summary of Hydraulic Conductivity of Soils No Material Description Borehole Test Depth (m) Hydraulic Conductivity (K)(m/s) FILL MATERIAL 1 Clayey Sandy SILT with GW – BH3 1.0 5.587 X 10-6 gravel UPPER ALUVIAL AQUIFER 2 Silty Fine SAND GW – BH1 6 7.0188 X 10-7 3 Silty SAND GW – BH3 8 4.260 X 10-7 4 Sandy SILT and Gravel GW – BH4 15 1.971 X 10-6 5 Silty SAND GW – BH8 15 4.163 X 10-6 Average 1.82 X 10-6

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-6 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

DEEPER ALUVIAL AQUIFER 6 Medium dense, fine SAND GW – BH1 19.5 5.536 X 10-8 7 SAND with gravel GW – BH5 25.80 7.219 X 10-7 8 Medium SAND GW – BH6 21.5 1.039 X 10-5 9 Fine SAND with clay GW – BH3 23 1.872 X 10-6 Average 3.72 X 10-6

Summary of the findings are discussed below: i) Hydraulic conductivity data are within acceptable range for the soil material type. ii) Hydraulic conductivity value ranges from 5.536 × 10 ̄ 8 to 1.039 × 10 ̄ 5 and are considered to be moderate permeability. iii) Permeability of deeper Silty SAND aquifers at GW-BH6 is relatively higher at 1.03×10-5. iv) Hydraulic conductivity (K) value for the upper and deeper aquifer are almost similar.

6.5 CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY

Gebeng town is located on the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia in the state of Pahang. Gebeng, like any other equatorial-climate town, experiences warm and humid weather throughout the year. Being under the influence of the Asian Monsoon System, two distinct monsoon seasons can be experienced; the northeast monsoon from November to March and the southwest monsoon from May to September. The inter-monsoon period, between the months of April and October, is commonly referred to as the Sumatras or Sumatra Squall Line.

The nearest Malaysian Meteorological Department (MMD) station is in the Sultan Ahmad Shah Airport (3° 46' 20" N, 103° 12' 43" E and elevation 15.23 m above MSL). This station is located approximately 40-km southwest of the proposed secure landfill Project.

6.5.1 Temperature and Relative Humidity

On average, the year 2016 recorded the highest temperature out of the four years, at an annual value of 27.6C; 1.0 C higher than the lowest annual temperature of 26.6C recorded in 2012. In terms of relative humidity, the year 2017 recorded the highest value of 87.5% while 2014 exhibited the lowest value of 82%. Table 6.5 and Figure 6.8 summarises the temperature and relative humidity profile of the area.

Table 6.5: Mean Monthly Temperature and Relative Humidity

(Temperature) Month Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 25.2 26.2 26.2 27.2 27.7 27.7 27.5 27.5 27.3 26.2 26.0 25.3 26.7 2012 25.4 26.4 26.4 26.9 27.3 27.7 27.1 27.0 27.0 26.4 26.4 25.6 26.6 2013 26.0 26.0 27.8 27.9 28.0 28.2 27.4 27.3 27.1 27.0 26.5 25.5 27.0 2014 24.9 25.9 27.1 28.5 28.2 28.6 28.1 27.5 27.4 27.2 26.5 25.6 27.1

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-7 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

(Temperature) Month Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015 25.5 25.7 27.5 28.0 28.2 28.3 28.2 27.5 27.7 27.5 26.8 26.8 27.3 2016 27.4 26.7 28.0 29.1 28.9 28.0 27.8 28.1 27.2 27.2 26.3 26.2 27.6 2017 26.1 26.1 27.0 27.6 28.1 27.8 27.6 27.1 27.3 26.9 26.6 26.0 27.0 (Relative humidity) Month Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 85.9 80.4 Def. Def. 82.7 83.6 85.0 85.6 86.4 88.8 89.8 90.5 Def. 2012 88.5 85.5 86.2 86.1 Def. 84.7 85.0 85.7 84.6 89.0 91.3 93.0 Def. 2013 89.2 91.6 80.4 82.5 83.1 80.9 81.9 81.5 83.3 83.6 85.3 87.0 84.2 2014 81.9 79.5 79.4 79.0 81.4 81.2 82.0 81.0 80.1 84.7 87.1 87.0 82.0 2015 82.1 81.2 79.6 82.0 83.2 81.9 82.8 84.5 84.7 84.8 88.9 86.4 83.5 2016 84.5 84.3 80.7 80.2 82.7 85.8 84.8 85.4 87.5 89.6 90.1 91.6 85.6 2017 91.9 90.5 85.6 85.6 86.0 85.8 85.8 86.3 86.8 88.0 88.9 89.0 87.5

6.5.2 Rainfall and Raindays

Rainfall records over the period of five years (2011 – 2017) revealed December as the wettest month for six consecutive years (2011 – 2016) while in 2017, the highest precipitation recorded was in January at 640.4 mm. In contrast, the driest month is revealed to be March 2014 with only 3.6 mm of rainfall. The highest number of rain days were recorded in December 2012 for a total of 28 days while March 2014 and 2016 recorded the least number of rain days with only 4 days of rainfall. Table 6.6 and Figure 6.9 indicates the rainfall pattern of the Project site.

Table 6.6: Mean Monthly Rainfall and Rain days

Year (Rainfall) Month Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 458.0 26.8 481.6 76.2 197.0 82.2 51.4 160.0 218.2 396.4 256.6 838.2 3242.6 2012 467.2 74.8 232.8 362.2 345.6 163.0 105.8 281.6 167.6 182.8 198.6 701.8 3283.8 2013 232.8 449.0 20.4 135.8 167.8 129.2 271.0 164.8 413.0 238.2 195.0 1075.2 3492.2 2014 277.2 22.6 31.2 77.4 288.2 178.2 182.0 206.8 70.4 347.2 288.8 1806.0 3776.0 2015 223.8 80.8 35.8 116.6 91.8 88.8 37.4 275.2 118.4 226.4 211.8 440.6 1947.4 2016 102.6 150.0 42.2 36.8 119.4 107.6 90.8 216.6 234.8 350.6 280.0 480.4 2211.8 2017 640.4 257.2 124.4 96.2 101.6 131.8 224.8 120.6 287.0 275.4 323.0 375.0 2957.4 (Rain days) Month Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 18 8 26 7 12 9 12 12 16 24 21 23 188 2012 21 12 18 19 17 8 7 12 20 20 23 28 205 2013 15 22 5 12 18 10 12 11 14 19 16 23 177 2014 10 5 4 9 15 15 8 13 10 18 20 22 149 2015 12 7 8 13 11 8 10 17 9 15 23 19 152 2016 13 17 4 11 12 11 15 17 17 20 25 24 186 2017 20 20 11 14 15 12 11 17 16 20 26 20 202

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-8 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.5.3 Wind Speed

The data from the MMD station indicated that the mean surface wind speed in the area of Sultan Ahmad Shah Airport, Kuantan fluctuates between 1.2 m/s to 2.4 m/s on a monthly basis. Table 6.7 and Figure 6.10 display the monthly surface wind speed data of the area. On average, the months of January and February recorded the highest wind speed of 2.1 m/s whilst the lowest wind speed of 1.4 m/s was exhibited in the month October and November.

Table 6.7 : Surface Wind Speed in Kuantan

Month Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.5 1.3 1.8 2.0 1.8 2.1 1.6 1.7 2.2 1.8 2012 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.7 2013 2.0 2.0 1.8 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 2.1 1.7 2014 2.4 2.1 2.2 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.3 1.4 1.8 1.8 2015 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.8 1.6 2016 2.0 2.4 2.1 1.6 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.7 2017 1.7 2.0 1.6 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.9 1.9 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.9 1.7

6.6 FLOOD RISK

Based on the Map on Risk of Natural Disaster Area in Peninsular Malaysia (Figure 6.11) in the National Physical Plan 3 (2015), Gebeng and its surrounding areas are classified as low risk in natural disaster such as flooding; with a possible frequency of a single flooding event per 100 years.

6.7 EROSION RISK

The proposed Project will be undertaken within the existing 100 hectares LAMP site in GIE. As the Project site is generally topographically flat and considerably built-up on the western portion of the LAMP site, soil erosion is not anticipated to be an area concern for the Project.

6.8 WASTE MANAGEMENT

Municipal waste, which includes office waste (paper, plastics, etc.,) generated by the existing SMR plant will be collected by a local waste collector hired by Majlis Perbandaran Kuantan (Local Authority) and disposed at an approved disposal site. Currently, Lynas does not produce significant quantities of scheduled waste apart from the NUF residue. Table 6.8 summarises scheduled waste produced in existing LAMP site.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-9 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Table 6.8: Types of Scheduled Wastes Generated Waste code Waste Name SW 305 Waste Lubricating Oil SW 206 Spent Acid SW 404 Clinical Waste SW 408 Contaminated Soil

These wastes will be collected by a DOE-licensed scheduled waste contractor for disposal in DOE-approved disposal site or for recovery/recycling by DOE-approved waste contractors.

6.9 TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY

The proposed Project site has been largely built-up and is currently located within an operating industrial plot. Therefore, terrestrial ecology is not an issue of concern.

6.10 LAND CONTAMINATION

The operation of the plant will result in the generation of two major residue steams, namely the NUF and WLP. The NUF waste streams had been classified as scheduled waste and thus will be handled and stored in accordance to the requirements of DOE. At present, these wastes are stored within the engineered residue cells constructed within the plant site.

Storage of these residues within the site may be a potential source for soil and groundwater contamination in the event the structural integrity of the residue storage cells are compromised and/or inadequate. There are however provision of soil and groundwater protection measures in place at the LAMP site.

6.11 LAND USE

6.11.1 Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA)

Under the National Physical Plan 3 (2015), Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA) are defined as special areas that are highly sensitive to any form of change to their ecosystems due to natural processes or activities in or around them, either directly or indirectly. The ESA sensitivity level is determined based on the integration of three features, namely the elements of disaster risk function, the value of living support and the value of the area's treasures and heritage as defined in Table 6.9 below.

At federal level planning, the NPP has identified a total of 36 policies; of which six refer to natural resources and biodiversity assets, which the State may want to adopt, i.e.: i) ESA shall be integrated in the planning and management of land use and natural resources to ensure sustainable development.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-10 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

ii) A Central Forest Spine (CFS) shall be established to form the backbone of the ESA network. iii) Sensitive coastal ecosystems shall be protected and used in a sustainable manner iv) Land development in the highlands shall be strictly controlled to safeguard human safety and environmental quality. v) All surface and groundwater resources are strategic assets to be safeguarded and used optimally. vi) Land utilised for main drains, streams, and rivers shall be designated as drainage or river reserves.

Table 6.9 : Environmental Sensitive Levels

Environmental Sensitivity Description Level No development, agriculture or logging activities allowed aside for low impact Level 1 ecotourism, research or educational purposes No development or agriculture activity allowed. Sustainable logging and low impact Level 2 ecotourism allowed based on current condition. Controlled development allowed with the type and intensity dependent on the current Level 3 condition Source: National Physical Plan 3 (2015)

A composite analysis of the environmentally sensitive area is further described by the three common criteria listed in Table 6.10.

Table 6.10 : Common Criteria of the Composite Analysis

Level Criteria Biodiversity Preservation • Existing and newly proposed Preservation Area 1 • Satellite habitats outside of the protected area system: Turtle landing areas, Salt licks, High value plants area, Limestone formation, Natural wetlands with high restoration value. 2 • Other forestry and wetlands outside of the protected zone 3 • Islands of the Marine Park Life Support System 1 • Catchment basin for existing or newly proposed dam 2 • Water abstraction points and groundwater recharge zone High Risk Area 1 • Areas with contours >1,000 m 2 • Areas with contours 300 m – 1,000 m 3 • Areas with contours 150 m – 300 m

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-11 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Level Criteria • Areas with risk of erosion >150 tonnes/hectares/year • Areas with critical or significant shoreline erosion Source: National Physical Plan 3 (2015)

Based on the environmentally sensitive area classification described above, the Project site does not fall within any of the three (3) categories of sensitivity criteria hence is classified as a non- environmentally sensitive area. Figure 6.12 illustrates the percentile of different level ESAs present within the vicinity of the Project site.

6.11.2 Existing Land Use

The Project site is located within an existing industrial area known as Gebeng Industrial Estate and is therefore in line with the designated industrial land use of the area. At present, the LAMP is bordered by mainly industrial build-up to its immediate northern and southern sections while to its west are mainly vegetated area and to its east is a mix of vegetated land and mining activities.

Ten (10) settlements had been identified within the 5-km radius ZOI of the LAMP site’s boundaries and consist of the following: 1. Kampung Hulu Balok 7. Kampung Berahi 2. Akademi Maritim Ahmad Shah 8. Kampung Selamat 3. Kampung Gebeng 9. Kampung Seberang Balok 4. Kampung Padang Serai 10. Kampung Darat Sg. Ular 5. Taman Balok Perdana 11. Kampung Sg. Ular 6. Taman Balok Makmur

The surrounding land use within a 5 km ZOI is as summarised and shown in Table 6.11 and Figure 6.13 respectively.

6.11.2.1 Regional Land Use Zoning

Under the Pahang 2050 State Structural Plan and Kuantan District Locality Plan 2035, the location of the proposed Project site is designated for the development of heavy industries (refer Figure 6.14). Therefore, the proposed Project by Lynas is aligned with the regional land use zoning by the Local Authority.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-12 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Table 6.11 Surrounding Land Use within 5 km of the Project site Radius Land Use (km) North South East West 0-1 Within the LAMP boundary Within the LAMP boundary Within the LAMP boundary Within the LAMP boundary • Unoccupied industrial plots • Polyplastics Asia Pacific Sdn • Petronas Gas Pipe • Kuantan Port-Kerteh railway overgrown with secondary Bhd located 50 m across the • Tanjung Rhu line runs along the railway vegetation railway line • Kampung Gebeng terminal located to the west of the site. • Gebeng Bypass • Unoccupied industrial plot • Utilities reserve runs along • Kuantan Port - Kerteh • Operating industries such as: the railway line. Railway Biodiesel Plant, Erupee • Unoccupied industrial plots Sugar, Kaneka, Flexsys, BP overgrown with secondary 1-3 Chemicals and MTBE vegetation (part of GIE). • Kampung Hulu Balok • To the south-west of the site is a Petronas Emergency Response Centre. To the west of the centre is the BASF complex. • Sungai Balok

• Secondary forest • Kuantan – Pelabuhan Bypass • Eastern coastline of • Unoccupied industrial land • Sporadic clusters of • Sungai Tunggak flows Peninsular Malaysia, about 4 overgrown with peat swamp residential and commercial approximately 5 – km south km from eastern boundary of vegetation is located to the west of the site properties are located to the of the site the site. northeast along the coastal • Sporadic clusters of • Kuantan Port facilities lie 4.5 road leading to Kuala residential and commercial km south east of the site. Terengganu. properties are located along • Cherating beach lies about 5 3-5 • Kampung Sungai Ular the coastal road from – km from the site. • Kampung Darat Sungai Ular. Kuantan to Kuantan Port • Padang Serai • Taman Balok Perdana • Taman Balok Makmur • Kampung Berahi • Seberang Balok • Kampung Selamat Source: LAMP PEIA report, 2008 and Jabatan Perancangan Bandar and Desa (PlanMalaysia) Land Use Map

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-13 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.12 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

6.12.1 Demographic Profile: Pahang

Pahang has a population of 1,500,817 in year 2010 which represents 5.3 % of the total population in the country (28,334,135). The average annual population growth rate of Pahang between the years 2000 and 2010 is 1.37%. Pahang has a considerably low population density of 41 per km2, living in a land area of 35,840 sq. km.

Presently, the population is unevenly distributed over the state. The population density varies from 12 people/ km2 in the Jerantut district, to 156 people/ km2 in the Kuantan district. Of the 11 districts in 2010, Kuantan was the most populated with 461,906 people (19.6%) and Cameron Highlands, the least populated with 38,471 (1.6%). The distinct difference between the more populated districts (Kuantan, Temerloh and Bentong) and the sparsely populated districts (Cameron Highlands and Lipis) is substantial, potentially ascribed to factors such as town hierarchy (e.g. Kuala Lumpur being Malaysia’s primate city), economic pull-push factors and terrain.

Based on the 2010 population census, the population in Pahang is made up of 111 male to 100 female ratio. In terms of ethnicity, 72% are Malays, followed by 14.8% Chinese, 4% Indian and 0.4% non-Malay Bumiputeras. Non-Malaysians constitutes a considerable percentage at 4.7%.

Details of the demographic profile of the population in Pahang are summarised in Table 6.12 below.

Table 6.12 : Baseline Demographic Profile of Pahang, 2010 Demographic Profile Negeri Sembilan Area 35,840 km2 Population 1,500,817 Number of household 349,027 Average size of household 4.3 Ethnicity Malay 72 % Chinese 14.8 % Indian 4 % Non – Malay Bumiputera 0.4 % Non-Malaysian 4.7 % Age Group Young Age (0 – 14) 29 % Working Age (15 – 64) 62.2 % Old Age (65 & above) 4.8 % Source: Census 2010, Department of Statistics, Malaysia

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-14 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.12.2 Demographic Profile: Kuantan (Gebeng)

Gebeng is located in the district of Kuantan, Pahang. Located in the north-east of Pahang, Gebeng borders the district of Kemaman in Terengganu to its north, the South China Sea to its east, districts of Jerantut and Maran to the west and the district of Pekan to its south. Kuantan is located approximately 230 km northeast of the country’s commercial capital, Kuala Lumpur.

The major towns in the district are Kuantan and Bandar Indera Mahkota. Panching, Sungai Lembing, Gambang and Beserah also located here. The district is divided into 6 mukims, which are Beserah, Kuala Kuantan (downtown Kuantan), Penor, Sungai Karang, Ulu Kuantan and Ulu Lepar. One of its major economic activities is tourism. Domestically, it is famous for the production of handicrafts, batik, keropok (dried fish crackers) and salted fish. Kuantan serves as the administrative and commercial capital of Pahang. Trade and commerce are important in the economy of the town. The timber industry, ice cream and the fishing industry also play major roles in the local economy.

There are also petrochemical industries operating in the district and mostly in Gebeng, an industrial area about 25 km north of Kuantan. Among the major companies operating in Kuantan are BASF PETRONAS Chemicals, Polypropylene (M) Sdn Bhd, BP Chemicals, MTBE, Flexsys, Bredero Shaw Eastman Chemical, Kaneka, Polyplastics, Mieco, KNM, JiKang, W.R. Grace, Cryovac, Wasco Pipeline Coatings and AMC. The presence of the petrochemical industry had increased the employment opportunities in Gebeng and also has brought about the rapid growth and development of the related trade and commercial activities as well as the supply and services industries. Details of the baseline demographic profile of the population in Port Dickson are summarised in Table 6.13.

Table 6.13 : Baseline Demographic Profile of Kuantan District Demographic Profile Negeri Sembilan Area 2,960 km2 Population 461,906 Change in population (2000 – 2010) + 2.57 % / year Gender Male 230,684 Female 213,148 Ethnicity Malay & Non – Malay Bumiputera 73.2 % Chinese 16.2 % Indian 3.0 % Others 3.6 % Age Group Young Age (0 – 14) 28.6 % Working Age (15 – 64) 63.86 % Old Age (65 & above) 4.9 %

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-15 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.13 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE MONITORING

In establishing the environmental baseline data for the Project, the periodical on going monitoring carried out by Lynas at the LAMP site has been used. This monitoring takes place on a monthly basis since LAMP’s commencement in the last quarter of 2012. Sampling and laboratory analyses were carried out by Permulab Sdn. Bhd, a SAMM accredited laboratory. This monitoring was conducted for ambient air quality, noise, water quality and groundwater quality in locations shown in Figure 6.15 a and b.

6.13.1 Ambient Air Quality

For ambient air quality, the prescribed limits for the criteria pollutants are as those found in the Malaysian Ambient Air Quality Standards, 2013 (MAAQS, 2013). The MAAQS adopts six (6) air pollutants criteria that include particulate matter with the size of less than 10 micron (PM10), particulate matter with the size of less than 2.5 micron (PM2.5), sulphur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ground level ozone (O3). Interim concentration limits for these criteria pollutants have been specified under three timescales, with the intention of progressively moving towards more stringent limits and finally achieving full compliance by 2020. The two interim targets include interim Target 1 (IT-1) (2018) and Interim Target 2 (IT-2) (2020) with the adoption of the standards in 2020 and beyond.

In addition, Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) and Lead (Pb) has been removed from the list of parameters in MAAQS 2013. The prescribed limits for TSP and Pb in the MAAQG 1989 were 260 µg/m3 and 90 µg/m3 for 24 hours and 1-year averaging time, and 1.5 µg/m3 (3 months averaging period) respectively. The summary of MAAQS 2013 prescribed standards is as shown in Table 6.14.

Table 6.14 : Malaysia Ambient Air Quality Standard 2013

Average MAAQG Standard Pollutant Unit IT-1 (2015) IT-2 (2018) Time 1989 (2020) Particulate matter with 1 year µg/m3 50 50 45 40 size less than 10 micron 24 hours µg/m3 150 150 120 100 (PM10) Particulate matter with 1 Year µg/m3 - 35 25 15 size less than 2.5 24 hours µg/m3 - 75 50 35 micron (PM2.5) 1 hour µg/m3 350 350 300 250 Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) 24 hours µg/m3 105 105 90 80 1 hour mg/m3 35 35 35 30 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 hours mg/m3 10 10 10 10 1 hour µg/m3 320 320 300 280 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 24 hours µg/m3 75 75 75 70 Ground-level Ozone 1 hour µg/m3 200 200 200 180 3 (O3) 8 hours µg/m 120 120 120 100

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-16 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Lynas currently monitors the ambient air quality at four (4) locations and details of the sampling programme are provided in Table 6.15.

Table 6.15: Existing Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Locations & Parameters

Station Coordinates Description Parameters 04˚00’ 15.0” N TSP A1 At an open space located at the southeast corner of the LAMP site 103˚ 23’ 01.6” E PM10 SO2 04˚ 00’ 29.4” N A2 At an open space located at the northeast corner of the LAMP site NO2 103˚ 22’ 53.9” E NO 03˚ 59’ 54.8” N H2SO4 A3 At an open space located at the southwest corner of the LAMP site 103˚ 22’ 24.5” E HF Ac Mist 04˚ 00’ 18.0” N A4 At an open space located at the northwest corner of the LAMP site CO 103˚ 22’ 16.0” E CO2

All the criteria pollutant parameters measured are compared against the limit stipulated in the new MAAQS, IT-2 (2018) limits published by the DOE. Hydrogen fluoride (HF) and sulphuric acid

(H2SO4) are compared against the Arizona Ambient Air Quality Guidelines and carbon dioxide

(CO2) against USEPA 1991. The results from the ambient air quality monitoring are provided in Table 6.16 and the trends illustrated graphically in Figures 6.16 to 6.21.

From the monitoring data, it can be seen that in all four (4) locations, parameters that were compared against MAAQS IT-2 (PM10, SO2, NO2, CO) were well within their prescribed limits with no exceedance recorded throughout the 6-year period. Similarly, CO2, also exhibited zero exceedance throughout the monitoring period when compared against the USEPA 1991.

However, H2SO4 and HF, that were compared against the Arizona Ambient Air Quality Guidelines, exhibited minor exceedances (1 – 2 exceedance out of 71 monitoring events) at all four (4) locations within the same period. This may be contributed by off-site emissions within the Gebeng Industrial Estate. GIE houses several companies that produces concentrated chemicals within 3.5 km of LAMP’s boundary. Among the chemicals manufactured are sulphuric acid and acid- activated catalyst that are widely used in petrochemical industries.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-17 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Table 6.16: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Results

Monitoring Results Parameters Units Period A1 A2 A3 A4 TSP - 34 – 280 31 – 133 25 24 – 196 3 PM10 µg/m 22 – 120 17 – 91 20 – 97 11 – 105 µg/m3 SO2 0 – 50.8 0 – 55.2 0 – 48.2 0 – 74 µg/m3 NO2 0 – 111 0 – 165 0 – 87 0 – 86 NO Nov’ 2012 – - 0 – 474 0 – 482 0 – 403 0 – 409 µg/m3 H2SO4 Sep’ 2018 0 – 1333 0 – 501 0 – 2442 0 – 611 3 HF µg/m 0 – 41.1 0 – 62.1 0 – 53.4 0 – 65.7 AC Mist - 0 – 2850 0 – 899 0 – 2444 0 – 911 CO mg/m3 0 – 7.5 0 – 3.8 0 – 6.3 0 – 3.8

CO2 ppm 310 – 920 280 – 931 3.8 – 980 318 – 980 IT – 2 (2018) Percentage of results exceeding IT – 2 (2018) Parameters Units limit A1 A2 A3 A4 TSP - % - - - -

PM10 120 % 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71)

SO2 90 % 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0(0 out of 71)

NO2 300 % 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0(0 out of 71) NO - % - - - -

H2SO4 365* % 1.4 (1 out of 71) 1.4 (1 out of 71) 2.8 (2 out of 71) 1.4 (1 out of 71) 1.4 (1 out of 71) 2.8 (2 out of 71) 2.8 (2 out of 71) 2.8 (2 out of 71) HF 30* %

AC Mist - % - - - - CO 10 % 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71)

CO2 1000** % 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0 (0 out of 71) 0(0 out of 71) Notes: * Parameters compared against Arizona Ambient Air Quality Guidelines ** Parameters compared against USEPA 1991

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-18 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

PM10 140

120

100

80 A1 3 A2

µg/m 60 A3 A4 40 IT - 2

0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr July July July July July 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.16: PM10 Trend Chart

SO2 100 90 80 70 60 A1 3 50 A2 µg/m 40 A3 30 A4 20 IT - 2 10 0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr July July July July July 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.17: SO2 Trend Chart

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-19 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

NO2 350

300

250

3 200 A2

µg/m 150 A3 A4 100 IT -2 50

0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr July July July July July 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.18 : NO2 Trend Chart

CO 12

8 A1 3 6 A2

mg/m A3

4 A4 IT - 2

0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr July July July July July 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.19: CO Trend Chart

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-20 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

CO2 1200

1000

800 A1

600 A2 µg/m3 µg/m3 A3 400 A4

200 USEPA 1991 0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr July July July July July 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.20 : CO2 Trend Chart

H2SO4 3000

2500

2000

A1 1500 A2 µg/m3 µg/m3

A3 1000 A4

500 Arizona Guideline

0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr July July July July July 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.21 : H2SO4 Trend Chart

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-21 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

A1 HF A2 70 A3

60 A4 Arizona Guidelines 50

40 µg/m3 µg/m3 30

0 Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Sep Sep Sep Sep Sep July July July July Nov Nov Nov Nov Mar Mar Mar Mar Mar May May May May May 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.22: HF Trend Chart

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-22 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.13.2 Stack Emission

Lynas has installed a Continuous Emissions Monitoring System (CEMS) to two stacks arising from the Waste Gas Treatment Plant to monitor flue gas released to the atmosphere. Lynas has provided the CEMS data from January 2013 to September 2018. The CEMS monitors four parameters, namely SO2, SO3, PM and HF. The results obtained were compared against current DOE limits. Table 6.17 summarises the two stack emissions CEMS results for the past 6 years and graphically shown in Figures 6.23 to 6.26.

Of the four (4) parameters monitored, only HF exhibited full compliance for both Stack 5 and Stack 34 throughout the 6-year period. The remaining three (3) parameters on the other hand, showed periodical exceedance for both stacks but otherwise complies to the prescribed limit for a majority of the monitoring period. However, gradual improvements can be seen towards the end of 2018 for the three (3) parameters due to the upgrades implemented to the existing Spray Tower in 2017.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-23 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Table 6.17: Stack CEMS Monthly Average Result for 2013 – 2018

JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Parameters Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack Stack 5 Stack 5 Stack 5 5 34 5 34 5 34 5 34 34 34 34 5 34 5 34 5 34 5 34 5 34 72.87 179.76 2013 23.24 - 19.06 - 17.76 - 6 - 33.85 - 41.27 - 22.01 - 32.80 - 56.47 - 100.64 34.08 57.42 0.38 76.16 129.02 2014 113.97 1.46 93.39 19.95 63.75 64.38 169.16 40.08 177.28 107.85 98.04 31.80 70.76 70.67 52.20 146.95 100.24 207.53 96.33 258.13 33.99 282.38 130.27 104.38 2015 30.12 73.17 101.25 207.3 78.56 80.17 158.02 71.06 103.78 181.42 240.58 125.19 304.01 193.83 174.52 270.83 154.53 213.20 246.84 102.74 116.34 206.56 SO2 219.27 274.70 2016 163.84 220.64 253.09 222.74 321.43 106.29 238.56 250.04 123.71 275.42 360.09 245.02 459.99 543.56 243.33 139.47 197.17 166.10 223.54 175.13 199.94 261.25 70.17 196.66 2017 116.46 269.80 152.32 226.01 252.32 221.72 205.48 191.20 1565.76 284.60 1960.74 347.63 1704.55 194.44 0 186.33 0 238.97 0 252.73 34.55 160.83 - - 2018 45.71 145.60 79.29 87.99 85.98 77.64 87.87 40.50 132.98 82.00 158.24 115.54 118.02 177.93 67.73 56.91 59.52 67.77 72.42 95.81 - - 0.78 29.44 2013 6.69 - 0.42 - 6.89 - 0.58 - 0.59 - 2.53 - 2.25 - 0.69 - 0.63 - 2.27 29.39 2.27 29.44 0.19 2.23 2014 0.31 29.45 0.30 29.43 0.30 29.43 0.30 30.53 0.29 25.61 3.12 7.32 0.30 2.87 0.28 1.13 0.57 2.36 0.28 3.79 0.18 2.24 0.54 2.93 2015 0.34 5.21 0.37 4.38 0.90 3.75 0.34 4.75 0.34 5.13 0.51 5.04 2.90 5.01 0.62 5.87 175.96 5.99 49.56 5.33 56.65 5.28 SO3 0.25 3.86 2016 0.52 2.60 0.46 2.29 0.47 4.36 4.18 5.20 21.72 5.51 21.66 5.30 21.73 9.38 22.62 4.14 0.47 4.01 1.08 3.39 2.81 3.07 0.31 3.39 2017 0 4.16 0 3.70 0 3.12 0 4.26 0 4.90 0 4.42 0.04 3.12 0.38 2.12 0.39 4.15 0.31 3.97 0.69 3.60 - - 2018 0.31 4.72 0.31 5.16 0.31 7.24 4.10 7.74 12.37 8.22 0.31 6.57 0.31 6.34 0.07 4.39 0 0 0.38 1.47 - - 29.44 56.18 2013 28.25 - 33.81 - 27.52 - 10.34 - 11.81 - 26.26 - 24.14 - 10.49 - 36.44 - 58.22 0 68.05 0 12.13 25.41 2014 53.83 26.95 49.67 30.92 43.98 51.51 24.36 40.19 14.84 19.14 40.52 17.71 32.08 36.24 12.43 41.04 27.71 55.04 17.28 44.32 17.91 59.70 38.42 25.05 2015 31.28 10.83 49.46 44.14 36.53 10.34 52.16 19.62 8.72 18.05 36.75 31.35 26.46 39.00 19.10 35.38 24.59 16.22 37.36 10.71 23.34 32.49 PM 9.52 22.76 2016 31.27 34.66 45.78 36.25 53.64 14.35 45.06 32.04 49.29 35.71 48.24 111.86 52.49 11.76 62.29 12.69 41.36 51.29 32.97 21.96 11.71 0 46.91 52.93 2017 28.28 19.39 30.53 23.73 51.30 10.89 52.02 15.64 45.81 31.90 37.84 40.86 47.45 41.16 36.92 37.52 123.26 43.14 44.28 48.59 39.11 48.02 - - 2018 30.61 80.57 20.54 54.24 74.11 53.85 31.89 54.24 17.73 49.43 40.59 37.92 62.19 74.97 59.56 22.62 67.78 50.16 40.23 33.74 - - 0.93 0 2013 0.70 - 0.84 - 0.06 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0.17 - 0.48 - 0.68 - 0.79 0 0.88 0 1.97 0.15 2014 6.77 0.01 4.35 0.05 5.71 0 10.05 0 4.86 0 8.74 0 8.49 0.12 0.94 15.63 1.24 11.41 1.24 11.40 0.50 0.95 2.66 0 2015 1.68 0.03 3.29 0.32 7.96 0.20 12.96 0.09 1.74 0 3.59 0 5.23 0 2.65 0 2.15 0 3.30 0 2.96 0 HF 0 0 2016 0.95 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 2017 1.13 0 3.86 0 1.71 0 2.79 0 0.21 0 1.22 1.95 0 3.42 0 4.10 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - 2018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - -

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-24 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Daily average SO2 emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Phase 1 (Stack 5) Phase 2 (Stack 34) DOE limit

2500.00

2000.00

3 1500.00

mg/m 1000.00

500.00

0.00 6-Jul 1-Jan 8-Jan 2-Jun 9-Jun 4-Oct 1-Apr 8-Apr 6-Sep 5-Feb 5-Dec 3-Aug 13-Jul 20-Jul 26-Jul 7-Nov 4-Mar 5-May 15-Jan 22-Jan 29-Jan 13-Sep 20-Sep 26-Sep 10-Aug 14-Nov 21-Nov 27-Nov 11-Mar 18-Mar 24-Mar 12-May 19-May 25-May 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Operation Timeline

Figure 6.23: Daily Average SO2 Emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Daily average SO3 emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Phase 1 (Stack 5) Phase 2 (Stack 34) DOE limit 200.00 180.00 160.00 140.00

3 120.00 100.00

mg/m 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 1-Jan 8-Jun 5-Jun 8-Apr 3-Apr 1-Feb 18-Jul 14-Jul 10-Jul 8-Mar 4-Mar 9-May 5-May 28-Jan 24-Jan 13-Jun 23-Oct 18-Oct 22-Sep 18-Sep 28-Feb 14-Sep 28-Dec 23-Dec 18-Aug 13-Aug 10-Aug 27-Nov 23-Nov 19-Nov 31-Mar 13-May 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Operational Timeline

Figure 6.24: Daily Average SO3 Emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-25 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Daily average particulate from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Phase 1 (Stack 5) Phase 2( Stack 34) DOE limit

500.00

450.00

400.00

350.00

300.00 3 250.00 mg/m 200.00

150.00

100.00

50.00

Figure 6.25: Daily Average PM Emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Daily average HF emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Phase 1 (Stack 5) Phase 2 (Stack 34) DOE limit

60.00

50.00

40.00 3 30.00

mg/m 20.00

10.00

Figure 6.26: Daily Average HF Emission from Stack 5 and Stack 34

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-26 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.13.3 Water Quality

6.13.3.1 River Water

Water quality monitoring was conducted at 11 locations (Table 6.18) along Sg. Balok as well as the unlined earth drain along LAMP’s southern boundary. Samples were collected during low-tide periods in order to emulate the worst-case scenario for the Project and analysed for 10 parameters; pH, Dissolved oxygen (DO), Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), Chemical oxygen demand (COD), Total suspended solid (TSS), Ammoniacal nitrogen (AN), Calcium (Ca), Iron (Fe), Manganese (Mn) and Conductivity.

Table 6.18: Existing Water Quality Monitoring Stations & Parameters

Station Location Description Parameters 3o 56’ 10.4 N W1 Sg Balok at estuary 103o 22’ 40.2 E 3o 56’ 18.9 N W2 Sg Tunggak pre-confluence into Sg Balok 103o 22’ 33.6 E 3o 57’ 14.1 N W3 Upstream of discharge drain from Taman Balok Perdana 103o 21’ 53.3 E 3o 57’ 49.4 N pH W4 Upstream of discharge drain from Gebeng Area 103o 21’ 47.0 E DO 3o 58’ 32.1 N BOD W5 Upstream of discharge drain from BASF 103o 21’ 26.5 E COD 3o 58’ 42.7 N TSS W6 Along Sg Balok, about 475 m north of W5 103o 21’ 25.9 E AN 4o 00’ 22.2 N Ca W7 Under the FR2 bridge (Sg Ular-Gebeng Bypass) 103o 21’ 06.7 E Fe 3o 58’ 36.6 N Mn W8 Between W5 and W6 103o 21’ 25.3 E Conductivity 3o 59’ 35.3 N W9 Downstream of bridge to Gebeng Rail Station 103o 21’ 34.1 E 3o 59’ 50.7 N W10 About 50m upstream of SRP discharge 103o 22’ 25.6 E 4o 00’ 00.9 N W11 About 850m upstream of SRP discharge 103o 22’ 49.9 E

Results from the analysis (2013-2018) were then compared against the limits of Class III of the National Water Quality Standards (NWQS), summarised in Table 6.19 and trends presented in Figure 6.27 to Figure 6.35.

It can be seen that while none of the six (6) parameters regulated under the NWQS; pH, DO,

BOD, COD, TSS and NH3-N, fully complies with their respective limits for all 11 stations. All six (6) parameters recorded at least 50% compliance out of a minimum of 30 monitoring events at each station over a six (6) year period. However, three (3) parameters; DO, COD and NH3- N, recorded constantly high values at all 11 stations which may be attributed to the peat soil and swampy nature of the area, causing regular spikes for these three (3) parameters.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-27 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Table 6.19: Summary of Water Quality Monitoring Results

Results Parameter Unit W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 W11 5.65 – 4.68 – 3.01 – pH - 5.1 - 8.41 3.31 - 8.29 6.04 - 7.68 5.12 - 7.86 0 - 7.76 5.8 – 7.85 5.1 – 7.91 3.8 – 7.2 7.96 7.92 8.84 2.53 – 1.72 – DO mg/l 1 – 7.61 1 – 8.04 1 – 5.32 0 – 10.7 1.68 – 7 1 – 7.65 1.7 – 6.73 1.32 – 7.1 1.49 – 6.6 5.46 7.41 BOD mg/l 1 – 13.2 1 – 8.4 1 – 12.4 1 – 9.6 0 – 40.3 1 – 12.2 1.9 – 11.2 2 – 14.6 1.5 – 13.1 1 – 12.5 1.1 – 8.4 COD mg/l 15 – 97 15.1 – 100 7 – 88 14 – 86 0 – 96 18.7 – 101 10 – 98 15.6 – 94 12 – 169 9.1 – 134 14.1 – 150 TSS mg/l 7 – 292 4 – 112 6 – 98 7 – 75 0 – 66 11 – 67 2 – 415 3 – 106 15 – 590 10 – 67 2 – 69

NH3-N mg/l 0 – 6.5 0 – 5.3 0 – 5.7 0 – 6.7 0 – 226 0 – 4.4 0 – 226 0 – 5.1 0 – 5.2 0.2 – 12.5 0.3 – 5.4 74.2 – 1.19 – 1.96 – 1.32 – Ca mg/l 38.2 - 643 26.2 – 672 3.08 – 383 1.46 – 420 0 – 518 76.4 – 915 2.08 – 700 1257 35.8 2935 2978 0.31 – 2.64 – 0.183 – 1.22 – 0.235 – Fe mg/l 0 – 16 0 – 6 0 – 3.92 0 – 4.44 0 – 5.23 0 – 5.27 5.08 22.8 7.97 8.99 125 0.042 – 0.036 – 0.004 – Mn mg/l 0 – 0.444 0 – 0.228 0 – 0.244 0 – 0.236 0 – 0.48 0 – 0.636 0 – 0.265 0 – 1.11 0.358 1.32 0.37 3300 – 1505 – 285 – 54.3 – 1128 – 36.2 – 1111 – 52.5 – 17 – Conductivity µS/cm 0 – 19600 29 – 7150 57200 56400 44200 28300 16360 4970 10570 35000 36800 Exceedance Unit W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 W11 pH (5 – 9) % 0 3.33 0 0 0 0 0 0 8.97 19.23 46.58 (0 / 78) (1 / 30) (0 / 51) (0 / 50) (0 / 51) (0 / 49) (0 / 78) (1 / 49) (7 / 78) (15 / 78) (34 / 73) DO % 33.77 45.45 30.61 12.24 42.55 59.57 46.67 44 41.03. 53.33 41.03 (3 – 5 mg/L) (26 / 77) (35 / 77) (15 / 49) (6 / 49) (20 / 47) (28 / 47) (14 / 30) (22 / 50) (32 / 78) (32 / 78) (32 / 73) BOD % 10.41 10.41 11.11 11.43 5.71 9.09 14.63 5.56 12.5 10.42 6.98 (6 mg/L) (5 / 48) (5 / 48) (4 / 36) (4 / 35) (2 / 35) (3 / 33) (6 / 41) (2 / 36) (6 / 48) (5 / 48) (3 / 43) COD % 50 48.71 31.37 29.41 30.61 25.53 16 34.85 37.18 26.92 16.43 (50 mg/L) (39 / 78) (38 / 78) (16 / 51) (15 / 51) (15 / 49) (12 / 47) (12 / 75) (23 / 66) (29 / 78) (21 / 78) (12 / 73) TSS % 1.28 0 0 0 0 0 5.33 0 3.85 0 0 (150 mg/L) (1 / 78) (0 / 78) (0 / 51) (0 / 50) (0 / 49) (0 / 47) (4 / 75) (0 / 46) (3 / 78) (0 / 78) (0 / 72)

NH3-N % 63.89 65.75 63.27 54.17 46 41.67 46.88 34 30.99 46.67 52.86 (0.9 mg/L) (46 / 72) (48 / 73) (31 / 49) (26 / 48) (23 / 50) (20 /f 48) (30 / 64) (17 / 50) (22 / 71) (35 / 75) (37 / 70) Ca % ------Fe % ------Mn % ------Conductivity % ------

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-28 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

pH 10

WQ1 9 WQ2 8 WQ3 WQ4 7 WQ5 WQ6 6 WQ7 WQ8 River Monitoring Data Monitoring River 5 WQ9 4 WQ10 WQ11 3 pH min

Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 pH max Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 July Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 Sept May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.27: pH Trend at the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-29 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

DO 12 WQ1 10 WQ2 WQ3 8 WQ4 WQ5 6 WQ6 WQ7 4 WQ8 WQ9 River Monitoring Data (mg/L)Data Monitoring River 2 WQ10 WQ11 0 DO min Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 Sept May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 DO max 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.28: Dissolved Oxygen Trend at the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-30 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

BOD (Low Tide) 16

14 WQ1

12 WQ2 WQ3 10 WQ4 8 WQ5 WQ6 6 WQ7 4 WQ8 River Monitoring Data (mg/L)Data Monitoring River WQ9 2 WQ10 0 WQ11 BOD Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 2013 2014 2015 2016

Figure 6.29: BOD Trend at the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-31 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

COD (Low Tide) 180 160 WQ1 140 WQ2 WQ3 120 WQ4 100 WQ5 80 WQ6 60 WQ7 40 WQ8 River Monitoring Data (mg/L)Data Monitoring River WQ9 20 WQ10 0 WQ11 Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16

Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 COD July 17 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 Sept May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.30: COD Trend in the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-32 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

TSS (Low Tide) 700

600 WQ1 WQ2 500 WQ3 WQ4 400 WQ5 300 WQ6 WQ7 200 WQ8

River Mon itoring Data (mg/L)Data Mon itoring River WQ9 100 WQ10 0 WQ11 TSS Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.31: TSS Trend at the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-33 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

AN (Low Tide) 14

12 WQ1 WQ2 10 WQ3 WQ4 8 WQ5 6 WQ6 WQ7 4 WQ8 River Monitoring Data (mg/L)Data Monitoring River WQ9 2 WQ10 0 WQ11 AN Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 Sept May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.32: Ammoniacal Nitrogen Trend at the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-34 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Ca (Low Tide) 3500

3000 WQ1

2500 WQ2 WQ3 2000 WQ4 WQ5 1500 WQ6 1000 WQ7 WQ8 River Monitoring Data (mg/L)Data MonitoringRiver 500 WQ9 WQ10 0 WQ11 Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 July Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 Sept May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.33: Calcium Trend in the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-35 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Fe (Low Tide) 25

20 WQ1 WQ2 WQ3 15 WQ4 WQ5 10 WQ6 WQ7

River Monitoring Data (mg/L)Data Monitoring River WQ8 5 WQ9 WQ10 0 WQ11 Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 Sept May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.34: Iron Trend in the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-36 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Conductivity (Low Tide) 70000

60000 WQ1 50000 WQ2 WQ3 40000 WQ4 WQ5 30000 WQ6 WQ7 20000 WQ8 River Water Monitoring Monitoring (µS/cm) Water River 10000 WQ9 WQ10 0 WQ11 Jul-13 Jul-14 Jul-15 Jul-16 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 July 17 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Nov Nov 17 Mar 17 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Mar-13 Mar-14 Mar-15 Mar-16 Mar-18 May 17 Sept 17 May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-18 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.35: Conductivity Trend in the Monitoring Stations

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-37 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

6.13.3.2 Final Discharge Quality

The final discharge point for the LAMP plant is located near surge lagoon B (Table 6.20) and is monitored by Lynas on a monthly basis. Parameters for monitoring were based upon and compared against the requirements of Standard B of the Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009.

Table 6.20: Location and Parameters for the Final Discharge Point

Station Description Coordinate Parameter pH, Temp, BOD, COD, SS, Hg, Cu, Mn, Zn, Bo, 4°00'13.6"N EF1 Final discharge point Fe, Al, Fluoride, Phenol, AN, Ag, Se, Ba, Colour, 103°22'38.8"E Chloride

In a similar timeframe as the water quality monitoring, a 6-year analysis result for the quality of the final discharge is as summarised in Table 6.21 and trends shown in Figure 6.36 to Figure 6.55.

From the results obtained, it can be seen that while most parameters are in compliance with the limits of Standard B, although several parameters including Barium (Ba), Phenol and Manganese (Mn) recorded minor exceedances throughout the monitored period. This could be due to occasional process upsets and exceedances do not last long as appropriate measures are taken to rectify the situation

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-38 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Table 6.21: Summary of Effluent Quality at the Final Discharge Point

pH Temp BOD COD SS Hg Cu Mn Zn Bo Fe Al Fluoride Phenol AN Ag Se Ba Color Chloride January February 7.40 26.51 2.00 22.29 15.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.20 0.06 0.80 0.70 3.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 194.00 March 7.52 26.64 0.00 30.21 6.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.34 0.27 0.53 0.10 3.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 475.00 April 7.39 26.65 0.00 24.27 11.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.45 0.25 0.75 0.13 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 544.75 May 7.57 26.67 0.00 36.67 5.67 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.10 0.35 1.67 0.32 0.95 0.05 0.55 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 1337.00 June 7.55 26.60 0.00 37.65 11.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.27 0.37 0.90 0.20 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1548.00 2013 July 7.58 26.61 0.00 33.93 7.14 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.30 0.21 0.27 1.03 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2104.00 August 7.58 26.67 0.00 36.57 6.50 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.05 0.48 0.24 0.31 0.78 0.13 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2999.75 September 7.73 26.63 0.00 36.55 4.85 0.00 0.02 0.13 0.05 0.50 1.46 0.40 1.07 0.03 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 3704.67 October 7.72 26.63 0.00 39.10 8.35 0.00 0.04 0.23 0.07 0.32 0.30 0.19 1.47 0.13 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.33 3943.50 November 7.86 26.62 0.00 40.73 7.37 0.00 0.03 0.50 0.23 0.95 0.25 0.22 2.68 0.03 0.93 0.02 0.00 0.00 4.50 5587.75 December 7.90 26.66 0.00 45.14 8.64 0.00 0.02 0.51 0.08 0.20 0.36 0.69 1.30 0.24 0.14 0.06 0.00 0.00 1.57 5296.14 January 7.84 26.68 0.00 45.93 4.00 0.00 0.04 0.33 0.04 0.37 0.20 0.11 0.79 0.07 0.86 0.04 0.00 0.00 1.78 5616.11 February 7.79 26.63 0.00 41.54 3.44 0.00 0.03 0.16 0.02 0.88 0.31 0.25 1.33 0.10 0.65 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.75 5795.50 March 7.52 26.41 0.00 37.00 29.86 0.00 0.02 0.11 0.01 0.50 0.12 0.47 0.60 0.30 1.90 0.00 0.00 0.06 10.00 7126.75 April 7.91 26.53 0.00 45.61 37.61 0.00 0.05 0.16 0.04 0.24 0.25 0.48 1.36 0.48 3.14 0.16 0.00 0.02 5.60 8860.00 May 7.61 26.52 0.00 47.35 36.18 0.00 0.05 0.41 0.06 0.20 0.24 0.45 1.80 0.80 3.50 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 8925.00 June 6.98 26.41 0.00 46.91 40.45 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.07 0.70 0.55 0.00 0.90 0.90 1.20 0.06 0.00 0.00 15.00 8709.00 2014 July 7.19 26.46 0.00 45.44 42.72 0.00 0.03 0.60 0.05 0.57 0.40 0.31 1.80 1.23 1.70 0.03 0.00 0.00 8.33 9215.00 August 7.37 26.32 0.00 40.17 44.13 0.00 0.06 0.11 0.05 0.63 0.24 0.47 1.50 1.15 1.08 0.22 0.13 0.50 9.25 8267.00 September 7.89 26.27 0.00 46.04 44.14 0.00 0.05 0.31 0.05 0.17 0.25 0.10 1.40 0.20 2.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 10.00 9524.33 October 8.28 26.42 0.00 39.03 36.21 0.00 0.02 0.21 0.05 0.66 0.26 0.13 1.68 0.48 3.30 0.08 0.00 0.00 9.80 9204.60 November 7.99 26.20 0.00 42.33 40.43 0.00 0.05 0.14 0.06 0.63 0.32 0.21 1.88 0.55 1.91 0.16 0.00 0.00 5.75 8620.25 December 7.85 26.29 0.00 41.65 47.48 0.00 0.03 0.10 0.05 0.58 0.32 0.28 1.36 0.14 0.90 0.03 0.00 0.00 2.40 7918.40 January 7.39 26.04 0.00 42.90 33.13 0.00 0.03 0.47 0.05 0.43 0.39 0.21 1.58 0.15 7.70 0.05 0.00 0.00 3.25 6571.50 February 7.43 25.90 0.00 43.43 47.43 0.00 0.05 0.48 0.17 0.43 0.32 0.19 0.48 0.10 1.65 0.04 0.00 0.00 3.75 8242.00 March 7.86 26.16 0.00 54.55 58.97 0.00 0.06 0.21 0.06 0.55 0.24 0.30 0.50 0.13 5.30 0.04 0.00 0.00 8.75 9378.75 April 7.74 27.13 0.00 56.00 56.59 0.00 0.05 0.27 0.09 0.63 0.23 0.29 0.50 0.10 3.95 0.06 0.00 0.00 8.75 8961.75 May 7.53 26.77 0.00 52.90 41.50 0.00 0.06 0.32 0.05 0.58 0.30 0.25 0.25 0.10 3.90 0.07 0.00 0.00 7.75 9198.00 June 7.45 27.08 0.00 50.73 50.63 0.00 0.04 0.11 0.05 0.50 0.38 0.28 0.40 0.10 5.60 0.13 0.00 0.00 9.25 10234.50 2015 July 7.01 27.19 0.00 53.65 49.23 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.09 0.54 0.29 0.32 0.22 0.10 3.92 0.04 0.00 0.00 7.80 10998.80 August 7.09 27.18 0.00 45.82 39.30 0.00 0.05 0.18 0.04 0.40 0.41 0.04 0.18 0.10 4.13 0.05 0.00 0.00 6.75 12183.25 September 7.22 27.23 0.00 55.77 11.93 0.00 0.05 0.30 0.08 0.30 0.45 0.00 1.26 0.02 2.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 18.20 10161.80 October 7.14 27.10 0.00 47.55 22.39 0.00 0.05 0.17 0.06 0.25 0.29 0.00 1.70 0.00 2.68 0.03 0.00 0.00 16.75 9054.50 November 7.11 26.82 0.00 47.67 13.83 0.00 0.02 0.21 0.01 0.23 0.35 0.13 0.83 0.00 1.78 0.01 0.00 0.00 26.25 10580.75 December 7.10 26.82 0.00 52.26 12.26 0.00 0.01 0.21 0.02 0.04 0.22 0.00 1.52 0.06 1.22 0.02 0.00 0.00 9.00 9953.80 January 7.39 26.04 0.00 42.90 33.13 0.00 0.02 0.17 0.02 0.70 1.06 0.00 1.10 0.00 1.40 0.01 0.00 0.00 16.00 9531.00 February 7.43 25.90 0.00 43.43 47.43 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.03 0.35 0.31 0.11 1.18 0.10 1.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 17.50 9786.25 March 7.68 26.27 0.00 55.13 52.90 0.00 0.04 0.16 0.02 0.56 0.39 0.00 0.46 0.08 0.86 0.01 0.00 0.00 12.00 11434.00 April 6.54 27.02 0.00 67.67 27.93 0.00 0.04 0.18 0.05 0.45 0.54 0.07 0.73 0.18 0.45 0.01 0.00 0.00 9.75 11843.25 May 6.43 26.98 0.00 66.84 27.68 0.00 0.05 0.35 0.01 0.55 0.35 0.03 1.75 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.25 11206.50 2016 June 6.14 26.87 0.00 55.27 25.63 0.00 0.05 0.58 0.01 0.74 0.46 0.00 1.62 0.00 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.40 12351.00 July 6.42 26.80 0.00 45.45 22.87 0.00 0.04 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 2.50 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.25 12169.00 August 6.22 26.68 0.00 47.82 23.94 0.00 0.03 0.38 0.00 0.45 0.33 0.00 1.25 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.50 12566.00 September 6.46 26.60 0.00 45.43 17.50 0.00 0.06 0.25 0.12 0.33 0.79 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.58 0.04 0.00 0.00 20.00 10735.25 October 6.35 26.72 0.00 46.58 17.29 0.00 0.06 0.42 0.08 0.43 0.24 0.00 4.20 0.00 0.85 0.02 0.00 0.00 18.75 11256.75 November 6.16 26.71 0.00 49.43 16.40 0.00 0.06 0.84 0.07 0.03 0.28 0.11 3.43 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.75 10482.50

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-39 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

pH Temp BOD COD SS Hg Cu Mn Zn Bo Fe Al Fluoride Phenol AN Ag Se Ba Color Chloride December 6.44 26.72 1.00 47.77 13.23 0.00 0.04 2.43 0.09 0.13 0.28 0.13 2.45 0.03 0.30 0.01 0.00 2.50 16.25 9925.75 January 6.47 26.71 0.00 46.16 14.06 0.00 0.02 0.79 0.09 0.18 0.29 0.14 2.03 0.08 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.50 6309.38 February 6.52 26.64 0.00 42.50 22.18 0.00 0.05 0.74 0.06 0.03 0.20 0.00 1.28 0.05 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.00 9872.88 March 6.40 26.65 0.00 40.26 15.97 0.00 0.05 0.60 0.16 0.14 0.67 0.00 0.94 0.00 1.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.80 7706.90 April 6.47 26.64 0.00 48.23 16.47 0.00 0.05 0.30 0.07 0.33 0.38 0.00 2.43 0.08 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.25 10710.13 May 6.70 26.65 0.00 49.58 17.13 0.00 0.05 1.11 0.01 0.40 0.33 0.00 1.24 0.06 1.02 0.04 0.00 0.00 18.20 9833.11 June 7.03 26.54 0.00 56.97 10.17 0.00 0.04 0.49 0.07 0.58 0.23 0.00 0.88 0.15 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.50 11554.67 2017 July 7.15 26.67 0.00 59.74 10.71 0.00 0.05 0.79 0.03 0.43 0.24 0.00 1.60 0.03 1.73 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.25 9569.50 August 7.16 26.53 0.00 60.42 14.55 0.00 0.06 1.24 0.07 0.80 0.39 0.00 1.52 0.08 3.14 0.12 0.00 0.00 14.40 11654.20 September 7.13 26.49 0.00 61.87 9.90 0.00 0.06 1.16 0.06 0.38 0.40 0.00 0.85 0.18 2.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 6.75 9675.00 October 7.07 26.51 0.00 64.10 13.29 0.00 0.04 0.50 0.08 1.18 0.33 0.00 1.03 0.00 3.13 0.17 0.00 0.00 8.50 9661.50 November 7.26 26.56 0.00 63.43 10.20 0.00 0.04 0.22 0.06 0.22 0.18 0.17 1.70 0.00 1.08 0.12 0.00 0.00 33.40 8777.60 December 6.79 26.59 0.00 67.68 9.19 0.00 0.04 0.50 0.15 0.38 0.39 0.18 1.15 0.00 0.63 0.06 0.00 0.00 40.25 5313.25 January 7.00 26.09 0.00 37.16 11.68 0.00 0.03 0.30 0.09 0.34 0.42 0.41 1.96 0.00 0.94 0.03 0.00 0.00 39.60 6440.80 February 7.22 25.70 0.00 43.61 13.64 0.00 0.05 0.16 0.08 0.10 0.35 0.27 2.35 0.00 1.23 0.07 0.00 0.00 42.75 10646.25 March 6.99 25.85 0.00 63.61 10.94 0.00 0.06 0.26 0.09 0.18 0.58 0.00 1.90 0.00 0.35 0.04 0.00 0.00 17.25 9856.00 April 6.96 26.01 0.00 43.23 14.77 0.00 0.06 0.20 0.08 0.33 0.39 0.24 1.63 0.03 0.90 0.20 0.00 0.00 48.75 11317.50 2018 May 6.98 26.09 0.00 51.48 10.68 0.00 0.04 0.18 0.05 0.48 0.25 0.23 1.48 0.02 1.56 0.09 0.00 0.00 61.00 11637.40 June 7.17 25.68 0.00 52.90 9.53 0.00 0.05 0.18 0.07 0.13 0.23 0.36 2.83 0.08 0.55 0.03 0.00 0.00 47.25 10731.25 July 7.09 25.34 0.00 60.03 11.94 0.00 0.04 0.26 0.08 0.56 0.24 0.27 2.10 0.02 0.50 0.06 0.00 0.00 41.20 10629.00 August 7.08 25.68 0.00 39.03 13.94 0.00 0.03 0.32 0.12 0.50 0.54 0.31 1.68 0.00 0.96 0.19 0.00 0.00 30.40 10011.60 September 7.32 25.44 0.00 50.07 12.83 0.00 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.50 0.29 0.00 0.93 0.08 0.95 0.11 0.00 0.00 36.75 6664.75

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-40 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Effluent pH 10.00

9.00

8.00

7.00

6.00

5.00 pH pH 4.00 Lower Limit 3.00 Upper Limit 2.00

1.00

0.00 July July July July July July April April April April April April January January January January January January October October October October October 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.36: Trend Chart of Effluent pH

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-41 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Effluent Temperature 45.00

40.00

35.00

30.00

25.00 oC 20.00 Temp 15.00 Limit

10.00

5.00

0.00 July July July July July July May May May May May May June June June June June June April April April April April April March March March March March March August August August August August August January January January January January January October October October October October February February February February February February December December December December December November November November November November September September September September September September 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.37: Trend Chart of Effluent Temperature

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-42 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Effluent Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 60.00

50.00

40.00

30.00 mg/L BOD 20.00 Limit

10.00

Figure 6.38: Trend Chart of Effluent BOD

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-43 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Effluent Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 250.00

200.00

150.00 mg/L 100.00 COD Limit

50.00

Figure 6.39: Trend Chart of Effluent COD

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-44 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Total Suspended Solid (TSS) 120.00

100.00

80.00

60.00 mg/L SS 40.00 Limit

20.00

Figure 6.40: Trend Chart of effluent TSS

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-45 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Mercury (Hg) 0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03 mg/L Hg 0.02 Limit

0.01

Figure 6.41: Trend Chart of Effluent Mercury

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-46 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Copper (Cu) 1.20

1.00

0.80

0.60 mg/L Cu 0.40 Limit

0.20

Figure 6.42: Trend Chart of Effluent Copper

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-47 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Manganese (Mn) 3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50 mg/L Mn 1.00 limit

0.50

Figure 6.43: Trend Chart of Effluent Manganese

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-48 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Zinc (Zn) 2.50

2.00

1.50 mg/L 1.00 Zn Limit

0.50

Figure 6.44: Trend Chart of Effluent Zinc

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-49 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Boron (Bo) 4.50

4.00

3.50

3.00

2.50

mg/L 2.00 Bo 1.50 Limit

1.00

0.50

Figure 6.45: Trend Chart of Effluent Boron

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-50 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Iron (Fe) 6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00 mg/L Fe 2.00 Limit

1.00

Figure 6.46: Trend Chart of Effluent Iron

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-51 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Aluminium (Al) 16.00

14.00

12.00

10.00

8.00 mg/L Al 6.00 Limit 4.00

2.00

Figure 6.47: Trend Chart of Effluent Aluminium

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-52 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Fluoride (F) 6.00

5.00

4.00

3.00 mg/L Fluoride 2.00 Limit

1.00

Figure 6.48: Trend Chart of Effluent Fluoride

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-53 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Phenol 1.40

1.20

1.00

0.80 mg/L 0.60 Phenol Limit 0.40

0.20

Figure 6.49: Trend Chart of Effluent Phenol

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-54 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Ammoniacal Nitrogen (AN) 25.00

20.00

15.00 mg/L 10.00 AN Limit

5.00

Figure 6.50: Trend Chart of Effluent Ammoniacal Nitrogen

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-55 Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang

Argentum (Ag) 1.20

1.00

0.80

0.60 mg/L Ag 0.40 Limit

0.20

Figure 6.51: Trend Chart of Effluent Argentum

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-56

Selenium (Se) 0.60

0.50

0.40

0.30 mg/L Se 0.20 Limit

0.10

Figure 6.52: Trend Chart of Effluent Selenium

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-57

Barium (Ba) 3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50 mg/L Ba 1.00 Limit

0.50

Figure 6.53: Trend Chart of Effluent Barium

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-58

Color 250.00

200.00

150.00

(ADMI) 100.00 Color Limit

50.00

0.00 July July July July July July April April April April April April January January January January January January October October October October October 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.54: Trend Chart of Effluent Color

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-59

Chloride 14000.00

12000.00

10000.00

8000.00

mg/L 6000.00

4000.00 Chloride

2000.00

Figure 6.55: Trend Chart Effluent Chloride

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-60

6.13.4 Groundwater Quality

A long term groundwater sampling from January 2011 to October 2018 were carried out for all the seven monitoring wells to obtain the quality variation of the groundwater in the Project site. The groundwater analysis were focussed on heavy metals as these parameters are the potential contaminants into the groundwater systems.

The groundwater quality was assessed against the Dutch Intervention Value (DIV) (2009) and Department of Environment National Groundwater Quality Standards using Conventional Water Treatment (DOE 2018). The Dutch Intervention Value is the maximum tolerable concentration above which remediation is required. This occurs if one or more compounds in the concentrations equal to or higher than the intervention value is found in more than 25 m 3 of soil or 1000 m3 of groundwater. The following table shows the existing groundwater monitoring locations and parameters tested.

Table 6.22: Existing Groundwater Monitoring Locations & Parameters

Station Location Description Parameters 4o 00’ 29.7” N GW 1 At an open space located at the northeast corner of the LAMP site 103o 22’ 59.3” E 4o 00’ 17.5” N GW 2 Located beside the eastern border of NUF GT 1.5 103o 23’ 02.0” E Ar 4o 00’ 18.1” N Cd GW 3 o Located just east of the LAMP site western boundary 103 22’ 17.0” E Cr 4o 00’ 00.3” N GW 5 Located southwest of NUF DSF 1 Cu 103o 22’ 44.8” E Pb 4o 00’ 23.8" N GW 11 Located along the northern border of the WLP RSF 3 103o 22’ 37.4” E Hg 4o 00’ 05.0” N Zn GW 12 Located along the southern border of NUF DSF 2 103o 22’ 56.2” E 3o 59’ 54.0” N GW 13 Located at the southwest corner of the LAMP site 103o 22’ 25.2” E

Figures 6.56 to 6.62 summarises the groundwater monitoring results from 2013 to 2018. Results for GW 3 were unavailable as the well dried out halfway through 2014 and as such monitoring for the particular location was discontinued

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-61

Arsenic 70

50 MW1 MW2 40 MW5 30 MW11 20 MW 12 MW 13 10 Groundwater (µg/L)Quality Groundwater DIV 0 Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.56: Trend Chart of Arsenic

Cadmium 7

5 MW 1 MW 2 4

Quality (µg/L) MW 5 3 MW 11

2 MW 12 MW 13 1 Groundwater DIV 0 Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.57: Trend Chart of Cadmium

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-62

Chromium 350

300

250 MW 1 MW 2 200 MW 5 150 MW 11 MW 12 100 DOE, 50 µg/L MW 13

Groundwater (µg/L)Quality Groundwater 50 DIV

0 Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.58: Trend Chart of Chromium

DOE, 1000 µg/L Copper 250

200 MW 1 MW 2 150 MW 5 100 MW 11 MW 12 50 MW 13

Groundwater (µg/L)Quality Groundwater 0 DIV Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.59: Trend Chart of Copper

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-63

Lead 140

120

100 MW 1 MW 2 80 MW 5 60 MW 11

40 DOE MW 12 MW 13 20 DIV Groundwater (µg/L) Modelling Groundwater 0 Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.60: Trend Chart of Lead

Mercury 12

GW1 8 GW2 6 GW3

Hg, µg/L Hg, GW5 4 GW11 GW12 2 DOE GW13 0 Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 Sep-11 Sep-12 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Sep-17 Sep-18 May-11 May-12 May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-17 May-18 Figure 6.61: Trend Chart of Mercury

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-64

Zinc 14000

12000

10000 MW 1 MW 2 8000 MW 5 6000 MW 11 MW 12 4000 MW 13 DIV Groundwater (µg/L) Modelling Groundwater 2000

0 DOE Jul Jul Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Jan Oct Oct Oct Oct Oct Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr Apr 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Figure 6.62: Trend Chart of Zinc

Barium 900 800 700 GW1 600 GW2 500 GW3

µg/L 400 GW5 300 GW11 200 GW12 100 GW13 0 DIV Jan-11 Jan-12 Jan-13 Jan-14 Jan-15 Jan-16 Jan-17 Jan-18 Sep-11 Sep-12 Sep-13 Sep-14 Sep-15 Sep-16 Sep-17 Sep-18 May-11 May-12 May-13 May-14 May-15 May-16 May-17 May-18 Figure 6.63 : Trend Chart of Barium

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-65

Most of the heavy metal parameters analysed including Barium (Ba), Lead (Pb), Chromium (Cr), Mercury (Hg) and Zinc (Zn), were not detected i.e. below their respective detection limits. The results show that most of the heavy metals were either very low or undetected, but from the year 2015 onwards, the values indicated fluctuation in the concentrations of the measured heavy metals.

The concentration of Ba in GW1 reached 839 µg/L in February 2015 and 847 µg/L in GW12 which were above the DIV. GW1, GW2 and GW12 show distinct fluctuation of Ba from the year 2015 onwards. The DOE 2018 groundwater standards do not prescribe limits for Ba.

Initially Pb reading in GW1, GW2 an GW3 showed some fluctuations but from April 2011 to early 2015 the readings seem to be constant with very low readings or non-detection. However, after January 2015 most stations indicated significant fluctuation particularly for GW1, GW11, GW12 and GW13. The concentration of Pb in GW12 reached 177 µg/L in May 2018, GW11 at 112 µg/L in August 2015 and GW1 reached 115 µg/L in August 2016 which is above the DIV. GW12 shows the most peaked values of Pb concentration. The DOE 2018 groundwater standards for Pb at 50 µg/L was breached at GW1, GW11 and GW12.

Since early 2015, Cr readings seem to be much higher than the initial monitoring in 2011 which recorded very low readings or non-detection. However, after January 2015 most stations indicated significant fluctuation particularly at GW12 and GW13. The concentration of Cr in GW13 shows the highest value at 657 µg/L in July 2018, GW 12 reached 97.1 µg/L in May 2018, which exceeded both the DIV and .DOE 2018 standards of 50 µg/L is similar to DIV

From early 2015, the Zn readings seem to be much higher than the initial monitoring in 2011 which recorded very low or not detected readings. However, in January 2015 most stations registered significantly high values of Zn with 44800 µg/L at GW3, which was exceptionally high. The Zn concentration show very little fluctuation in comparison with other monitored heavy metals. The concentration of Zn in GW13 had a high value of 7738 µg/L in June 2017, while GW2 recorded 6233 µg/L, which exceeded the DIV of 800 µg/L. The DOE (2018) value for Zn of 3000 µg/L was breached at GW12 and GW ]13.

Concentrations of Hg from January 2015 to October 2015, seem to be much higher than from the initial monitoring in 2011 which recorded very low readings or non-detection. The trend reverted back to low readings after the 10 months period in late 2015. From January 2015 to October 2015, most stations indicated significant fluctuation especially GW1, GW5, GW11, GW12 and GW13. The concentration of Hg in GW11 shows the highest value at 11.3 µg/L in March 2015, and GW5 reached 11.1 µg/L in March 2018. Significantly high values of Hg in May 2015 and October 2015 in most of the wells may indicate a surge of contamination from the source or from the surrounding areas, or contamination during either sampling and/or analysis. There is no DIV for Hg in groundwater, whilst DOE 2018 groundwater standard for Hg is 1 µg/L.

Most of the exceedances are attributed to offsite sources and natural occurrences.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-66

It may be deduced from the assessment of the past 6 years monitoring results that there seem to be an unusual buck in trend during the period from January 2015 to October 2015. This is likely due to some systemic error or contamination which resulted in unusual spike in concentrations of Pb, Cr, Zn and Hg in samples from several GW locations.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-67

6.13.5 Noise Level

Noise level monitoring is conducted on a monthly basis by Lynas at four (4) locations along its site boundary (Table 6.23). Recorded noise levels were compared against Schedule 1 of the Planning Guidelines for Environmental Noise Limits and Control with day and night time limits of 70 dBA and 60 dBA respectively.

Table 6.23 : Noise Level Monitoring Stations and Parameters Station Location Description Parameters 04˚00’ 15.0” N At an open space located at the southeast corner of the LAMP N1 103˚ 23’ 01.6” E complex 04˚ 00’ 29.4” N At an open space located at the northeast corner of the LAMP N2 103˚ 22’ 53.9” E complex LAeq 03˚ 59’ 54.8” N At an open space located at the southwest corner of the LAMP N3 103˚ 22’ 24.5” E complex 04˚ 00’ 18.0” N At an open space located at the northwest corner of the LAMP N4 103˚ 22’ 16.0” E complex

Table 6.24 summarises the findings of the noise monitoring conducted between 2013 and 2018 and is graphically shown in Figure 6.63 to Figure 6.69.

Table 6.24: Summary on Noise Level Monitoring Range of LAeq Readings Percentage of exceedance Monitoring (dBA) Date Monitored Location 70 dBA 60 dBA Day Time Night Time (Day Time) (Night Time) 0% 5.41% N1 34.0 – 67.1 37.2 – 75.3 0 / 4071 132 / 2440 0.12% 2.42% N2 33.8 – 78.7 34.6 – 73.8 5 / 4029 59 / 2428 Jan’ 2013 – Sept’ 2018 0.31% 1.31% N3 49.4 – 81.5 36.9 – 72.6 13 / 4069 32 / 2435 0.27% 0.20% N4 38.7 – 82.6 35.4 – 73.3 11 / 4102 5 / 2468

The daytime noise levels for Leq measured predominantly complied with the limits stipulated under

Schedule 1 Maximum Permissible Sound Level (LAeq) by Receiving Land Use for Planning and New Development in The Planning Guidelines for Environmental Noise Limits and Control (Dedicated Industrial Zones: 70 dBA) at all stations (0.31% non–compliance). The non – compliance was observed to be due to vehicular movements.

The night time noise levels for Leq measured complied with the limits stipulated under Schedule 1

Maximum Permissible Sound Level (LAeq) by Receiving Land Use for Planning and New Development in The Planning Guidelines for Environmental Noise Limits and Control (Dedicated Industrial Zones: 60 dBA) at all stations except at N1 station which recorded a non–compliance

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-68

Environmental Impact Assessment: Proposed Onsite Secure Landfill (Prescribed Premise) for the Storage of NUF Solids within the Existing LAMP Site located on PT 17212, Gebeng Industrial Estate, Kuantan, Pahang of 5.41%. The sources of noise at N1 during night time are most likely due to nocturnal insects and animals.

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-69

Figure 6.63: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N1 (Daytime)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-70

Figure 6.64: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N1 (Night time)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-71

Figure 6.65: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N2 (Daytime)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-72

Figure 6.66: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N2 (Night time)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-73

Figure 6.67: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N3 (Day time)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-74

Figure 6.67: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N3 (Night time)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-75

Figure 6.68: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N4 (Day time)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-76

Figure 6.69: Noise Profile at Monitoring Station N4 (Night time)

Chapter 6 : Existing Environment 6-77