Proportion of turtles using these waters is limited to nesters at Kuala Linggi and Mariam Patah (~9% of all Malacca turtles). Water area represents <0.01% of internesting turtle home range area, and none of core internesting area.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 The spatial impacts range from Tg. Dahan area to Kuala Linggi.
Magnitude -1 Impacts are minor
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 3 irreversible
Cumulativity 1 Minor impacts
Environmental Score -14
Description -B Minor negative impact
6.2.13 Painted Terrapins
6.2.13.1 Evaluation Framework The life cycle of the painted terrapin as described in Section 5-Painted Terrapins points to four key elements where development pressures may affect the population. These are:
The adults in the estuary and riverine waters of Sg. Linggi; The period of the passage of the adult females from Sg. Linggi to the estuary and thereafter to the nesting beaches; The nesting beaches; and The hatching and return of the hatchlings to Sg. Linggi
As is evident from the description in Section 5- Painted Terrapins has the biology and ecological needs of the species is not well understood; based on what is known and what may be concluded from similar species the following evaluation criteria listed in Table 6.49 are relevant.
6-164 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Table 6.49 Life cycle stages and potential development impact pressures.
Stages of Life Cycle Development Pressure
Adults in the estuary, lower river Salinity regime change Turbidity regime change
Passage of adult females to the estuary and Salinity regime change nesting beaches Turbidity regime change Increased current speed
Nesting beaches and hatchlings Change in sediment particle size Sedimentation Physical obstruction Net loss of beaches Lights Noise
Return of the hatchlings to Sg. Linggi Salinity regime change Turbidity regime change Increased current speed
One of the unique characteristics of B. borneoensis is that this species lives in the brackish and freshwater environments, but nests in marine/coastal beaches and riverine sandbanks. While B. borneoensis is able to tolerate salinity at some stages of its life cycle, Dunson & Moll (1980)/20/ and Davenport & Wong (1986)/21/ found that B. borneoensis is intolerant of long- term immersion in sea water. Davenport & Wong (1986) /21/ reported that the maximum salinity tolerance for juveniles lies between 25 and 50% sea water (i.e. 8.5 to 17 ppt). They respond to exposure to high salinity by not feeding, drinking, defaecating or urinating. On return to low salinities, they rapidly replace lost water by drinking.
At this time there is nothing known about the impact of changes in turbidity or suspended solids on the behaviour or broad ecology of the painted terrapin. Any direct impact presumably would be related to a change in visual acuity and therefore reduced exposure to predators; indirect impacts are most likely as a result from impacts on food and other secondary sources.
One approach is to use the national water quality criteria given the significantly higher background concentrations that occur in the nearshore that in this case can range up to 35 mg/L.
6.2.13.2 Construction Phase Key construction activities that are assessed that may affect the painted terrapins include:
Turbidity Lights and noise Mortality from construction activities
Much of the effects, such as siltation and a dramatic increase in suspended particles, will be on the water clarity, where it will be reduced due to the increased turbidity. The painted terrapins will venture into the sea for nesting during the Inter monsoon (IM) and Southwest monsoon (SW) periods. The suspended sediment plume predicted for SW monsoon and IM periods show that the areas of high SSC which are unsuitable for the painted terrapin are near the project site and not near the nesting sites as shown in Figure 6.109 and Figure 6.110. This will impact the painted terrapins that nest at Kuala Linggi to Tg. Serai only very slightly.
6-165
Figure 6.109 Exceedance of 25 mg/L excess TSS in % of time for SW monsoon (above) and inter monsoon (below).
6-166 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Figure 6.110 Phase 4: Exceedance of 50 mg/L excess TSS in % of time for SW monsoon (above) and Intermonsoon (below).
Even though major project components such as reclamation and dredging, the construction of marine facilities and sewage treatment plants are carried out mostly in the sea and not on the beach, these activities will directly impact the movements of painted terrapins as well as erosion of the beaches along the coast. The access bridge and sewage treatment plant will be built at the estuary, nearby to where the painted terrapins have been reported to nest (Kuala Linggi and Tanjung Serai areas).
The painted terrapins are extremely sensitive to any form of disturbances, especially to light. Lights from construction during the night may also deter or distract the movements of nesting terrapins as well as prevent the terrapins from nesting at beaches nearby. Noise from construction (Kuala Linggi -36 dBA; Tg. Serai-17 dBA) may also confuse the terrapins and prevent them from taking their normal route, exposing them to more dangers from predators.
The most direct impact these activities will have on the painted terrapins is the potential obstruction posed by the access bridge to terrapin nesting beaches south of Sg. Linggi. The critical nesting beaches of the painted terrapins are as highlighted in the map in Figure 6.111.
6-167
Figure 6.111 B. borneoensis nesting beaches in the Linggi area, based on Sharma (1997) and personal communication with Dr. Reuben Sharma and Fardiansah, DOF Padang Kemunting.
Three terrapin nesting beaches are located right at the estuary, and a few more nesting beaches down south. The construction of the access bridge (which will be connected to the shore) will take place right at the estuary. The reclamation (10 years) and piling works (1 year) of the proposed project will inevitably increase the level of underwater noise. Reclamation process uses TSHD dredgers during construction which produce sounds levels below 500 Hz with a maximum broadband source SPL at 189.9 dB re 1 µPa at 1 metre /22/. This impact is continuous throughout the project reclamation period.
It is anticipated that the painted terrapin would avoid the area where the construction sound is generated beyond tolerance thresholds. Due to these disturbances during construction (which may last for 8 – 10 years), three nesting beaches (Kuala Linggi, Tg. Dahan and Tg. Serai) may not be feasible for painted terrapin to nest, because the painted terrapins, though similar to green turtles, are even more sensitive to disturbances and may avoid the area.
The access bridge construction will take place for one year. For the remaining project development years, the terrapins may be impeded by the piled bridge structure and either take the long route to access the nesting beaches or face mortality along the way.
6-168 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
The potential loss of access to three nesting beaches as well as the loss of beach material from the beach from Tg. Che’ Amat to Tg. Bt. Supai may directly cause the loss of nesting and egg productivity, and in long term, causes the decimation of the species due to low recruitment and survival rates. Since the painted terrapins may take up to 20 years to mature, these effects will not be seen immediately.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 The effect is limited to the distribution of B. borneoensis within 10 km from project boundary.
Magnitude -2 The major construction activities will cause beach erosion at 1 nesting beach and loss of access to 3 nesting beaches out of 9 nesting beaches.
Permanence 2 The noise and disturbances is temporary, confined to the construction stage, albeit over a 10 year period.
Reversibility 3 Construction activities and sediment plume generated goes on for 10 years. However, it is possible that the turtles may decide not to go to those beaches any longer or faced mortality on its way there.
Cumulativity 3 The loss of nesting beaches does not just affect the current breeding population of painted terrapins, but subsequent generations as well. It is cumulative since these impacts could possible impair the population growth of painted terrapins.
Environmental Score -48
Description -D Significant negative impact
6.2.13.3 Operation Phase Key operational activities that are likely to affect the painted terrapins include:
Water Levels Current Speed Ship traffic Salinity Permanent loss of beaches Oil Spill Beach nourishment (Tg. Che’ Amar to Tg. Bt. Supai)
The access bridge is built on the beach where the painted terrapins have been reported to nest (Kuala Linggi and Tg. Serai areas). During operations, the access bridge may obstruct the movements of the painted terrapin from the river to the nesting beaches during the nesting season for behaviour reasons. However, there is space in between the piles for the movements of painted terrapins to access the 3 nesting beaches adjacent to the bridge if disturbance is not an issue.
Phase 3 and 4 show that some sedimentation is expected east of the reclamation at expected value of 2 cm/year as shown in Figure 6.112. It is likely that some of this fine sediments with time will deposit in the existing beaches between Tg. Serai and Tg. Bt. Supai. Changes are, however, minor and not expected to affect the stability of the shoreline but it should be expected that the coastline will change its present sandy characteristics to a silty type since there will be an increase in the content of fine sediments in the beach. The changes in the
6-169
sedimentation pattern are mainly related to the reduction in wave action due to the sheltering effect of the reclamation, waves tend to have a cleansing effect in the beach when they break.
Figure 6.112 Phase 4: Predicted changes in annual bed thickness between baseline and Phase 4.
Surface Salinity variation also varies slightly with a maximum increase of 5 PSU change from ambient conditions (Kuala Linggi Beach) and 6 PSU (rivermouth) increase over ambient conditions at the river mouth as shown in Figure 6.113. Hence, the impacts are very slight. It is also perhaps good for the terrapins since they could physiologically tolerate freshwater and seawater. However, it is not clear how terrapins navigate in water and what navigation signals leads them to the beaches and hence other impacts cannot be assessed.
6-170 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Figure 6.113 Predicted changes in mean surface salinity for existing and Phase 4 during SW (picture above) and inter monsoon (picture below).
The most direct impact these activities will have on the painted terrapins is a partial obstruction to the loss of terrapin nesting beaches by the piled access bridge. Though, there will be space in between pillars of the bridge for terrapins to swim through, it is unclear whether the terrapins would still nest on these beaches following the extended construction period. The quality of the beaches (between Kuala Linggi and Tg. Serai) will be deteriorate (from sandy to silty) hence it is also not immediately clear whether the terrapins will still nest under these conditions.
While vessel strikes will continue to pose a threat to the painted terrapins during the operational phase, vessels are expected to travel at slower speed as they approach berths therefore reducing the probability of boat strikes.
Water levels within the nesting beach areas only increase by 0.01 m to 0.02 m which is not considered a significant change and hence no significant changes to the project area.
There will be a slight decrease in current speed at Kuala Linggi nesting site waters due to the project footprint with a maximum decrease of 0.06 m/s.
6-171
Thirty thousand cubic meter of sand is proposed (Refer to Section 6.4.2 and Appendix F- Hydraulic Modelling Report) to be piled onto Kuala Linggi Beach, in an attempt to address potential erosion following Phase 1 of the reclamation. This affects a portion of the nesting beach from Tg. Che’ Amat to Tg. Bt. Supai. Beach nourishment carried out during terrapin nesting season will prevent the terrapins from nesting at Kuala Linggi nesting beach (Figure 6.108) and harm the nests that had nested prior. Furthermore, it is not clear whether the terrapins will nest on nourished beach as the origin (river sand versus coastal sand) and properties (for example, sand particle size) of the new sand is unknown.
The risk of oil spill is a common threat to the marine animals due to the nature of the operational phase in such industries. All living marine organisms including the painted terrapins, are very vulnerable to oil spills whereby they are either smothered by the oil slicks or experience physiological toxicity due to ingestion of the oil spill (e.g. ulceration of intestinal tract, damaged respiratory system, superficial lesions and eye infection) /23/. The oil spill modelling shows no impacts to the turtle nesting beaches and low impact for surface oil (0.01 g/m2-10 g/m2 hydrocarbon concentration).
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be major negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 The effect is limited to the distribution of B. borneoensis within 10 km from project boundary.
Magnitude -3 Major as mortality may affect recruitment and capacity to increase.
Permanence 3 Permanent impact over the life of the project operations
Reversibility 3 Minor affect on beachfront but permanent obstruction of painted terrapin movements.
Cumulativity 3 If there are no alternative beaches to nest, this will affect the current breeding population of painted terrapins, but subsequent generations as well.
Environmental Score -81
Description -E Major negative impact
6.2.14 Crocodiles
6.2.14.1 Evaluation Framework Under the Legislative Framework, results were based on the Wildlife Conservation Act 2010 (Act 716) for crocodiles. For evaluation criteria, impact assessments were based on Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM)
Sensitive receptors for crocodiles is the mangrove areas on the river mouth of Sg. Linggi and the project minimally will affect the mangroves along the Sg. Linggi.
The marine traffic activities is used to assess the impacts to the crocodile during operation. Apart from that, the loss of habitat due to the reclamation footprint for access bridge is quantified by the findings of the habitat modelling.
6-172 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
6.2.14.2 Construction Phase
Noise The crocodile’s ears are located immediately behind the eyes. The eardrum is protected by an elongated flap of skin. Hearing sensitivity can be altered by opening a slit in front of the flap, or lifting the flap upward. When submerged, the ears normally close, as hearing becomes secondary to the ability to feel vibrations through the water. Detectable frequencies range from below 10 Hz to over 10 kHz and sound pressure levels below 60 dB can be detected within certain bandwidths /24/. Although there is no published record on the direct disturbance from noise pollution, we ought to take into account the effect of noise during construction.
As mentioned in Section 6.2.6, the increase of noise is predicted to be confined only within the Tg. Dahan and Tg. Port Supai. This increase is expected to be between 30 dBA to 10 dBA from ambient noise levels.
Traffic Increase traffic for reclamation probably causes the crocodiles mainly at the Police Marine Jetty and across the RTC to move away to more upstream areas from the Sg. Linggi river mouth). Upstream individuals will not be affected.
Crocodile Encounter There is a remote possibility of encountering with crocodile that moved far from the Sg. Linggi estuary.
The long distance movement of crocodiles is normal and they can moved between 10-30 km daily /25, 26/. One of the incident of crocodile observed on the Melaka beach was reported by Sinar Harian (23 April 2016) /27/ and Harian Metro (14 June 2015) /28/ at Pantai Puteri, Tg. Kling, Melaka. Crocodylus porosus can tolerates salinity up to 30 part per million/29/ hence also known as saltwater crocodile, so the occasional movement of individual outside the Sg. Linggi is possible.
There are an estimated 2,000 contract workers for construction. Killing of crocodiles out of fear could happen at the construction site.
Sediment Plumes The sediment plumes show that the total suspended sediments do not impact the river, hence will not affect the crocodiles distribution.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Impacts are within 1 km of the project area
Magnitude -1 Negative change to status quo. Affected but no impact on local population status. Affected localized distribution along the Kuala Linggi estuary.
Permanence 2 Temporary Loss probably come from loss of habitat due to reclamation footprint. Once construction completed, the habitat will generates and return to as before construction and with re-planting of mangrove species, it will expedite the recovery process.
6-173
Criteria Score Rationale
Reversibility 2 Reversible Habitat will generates and return to as before construction and with re-planting of mangrove species, it will expedite the recovery process.
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative/Single Single impact from the reclamation and most disturbance will affect the estuary and mudflat at Kuala Linggi.
Environmental Score -6
Description -B Slight negative impact
6.2.14.3 Operation Phase No impacts are predicted.
6.2.15 Marine Megafauna
6.2.15.1 Evaluation Framework The focus of the impact evaluation is on the species of marine megafauna that may potentially occur in the vicinity of the project area based on previous studies. These include Ginkgo- toothed whale (Mesoplodon ginkgodens), Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins (Sousa Chinensis), Irrawaddy dolphins (Orcaella brevirostris) and blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus).
The evaluation assessment will be carried out using the RIAM approach based on the following predicted impacts:
Suspended sediments, Underwater noise and disturbance Loss of potential foraging area. Boat strike Oil Spill
6.2.15.2 Construction Phase
Suspended Sediment Plumes The second most prominent direct effect from the project construction works would be the suspended sediment plumes from the reclamation activities. The increase of turbidity in the marine waters may pose a challenge to the marine megafauna as they attempt to navigate around the waters.
Underwater Noise Underwater noise is an important issue as many marine mammals use sound as a primary means for underwater communication and sensing. The soundscapes of the ocean is hence an important aspect of marine mammal habitat, and natural and anthropogenic sounds influence the location choice and behaviours of these marine fauna.
Dolphins however are dependent on sound to understand the conditions of their surroundings and their acoustically sensitive ears are vulnerable to noise disturbances or disruption of communication signals, with impacts including displacement, avoidance, increased dive time and shortened surface intervals and changes in underwater acoustic behaviours /30/. The underwater hearing range for dolphins has been recorded to be between 75 Hz to 150 Hz /31/.
6-174 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
The zone of responsiveness predicts over what ranges animals are likely to react to boat noise; this reaction threshold may depend on a variety of factors including the noise level emissions, the bandwidth and the amount of ambient (background) noise, past experience (habituation). For marine mammals, a broadband sound pressure level of 120 dB per 1 µPa is used as a threshold of responsiveness /32/. TSHD dredgers produce sounds levels below 500 Hz with a maximum broadband source SPL at 189.9 dB re 1 µPa at 1 metre/22/.
The reclamation and piling works of the proposed project will inevitably increase the level of underwater noise in an unprecedented level. The anthropogenic noise will pose a significant disruption in a sound sensitive environment as most marine life are attuned to the changes in sound level in various aspects of their life including reproduction, feeding, avoiding hazards like predators, and navigation /33/. Commonly expected response to this is that the marine megafauna would avoid the area where the construction sound is generated. Nevertheless, the likelihood of an adverse noise impact upon a species would depend on the likelihood to which the species will be found around that area. Due to the nature of the project construction, long term detrimental effects on marine megafauna due to the project construction are not expected.
Due to the various navigation challenges posed to the marine megafauna while travelling in the waters around the project construction (e.g. limited marine area may push them out to the busy marine traffic lanes, low visibility in the water, underwater noise), these animals are further exposed to the risk of boat strike accidents that could often cause mortal wounds /34/. Boat speed also affects the severity of collision impacts with marine megafauna
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be a moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 4 Marine megafauna are of Malaysian interest since they travel along international and national coastlines.
Magnitude -1 Project activities may cause mortalities, but the risk is very low.
Permanence 2 Construction activities are temporary.
Reversibility 2 Rate of mortalities are reversible
Cumulativity 3 Mortalities can be cumulative and affect the gene pool and population size of the marine megafauna
Environmental Score -28
Description -C Moderate negative impact
6.2.15.3 Operation Phase
Loss of Foraging Habitat As a direct impact of the project reclamation, there will be a permanent loss of soft coral (67 ha / 2% of the coral distribution within the study area) and artificial reef area which has been assessed as slight negative impact.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight negative.
6-175
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Project footprint only
Magnitude -1 Affected but no impact on local population status
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -8
Description -A Slight negative impact
Oil Spill The risk of oil spill is a common threat to the marine animals due to the nature of the operational phase in such industries. All living marine organisms including the marine megafauna, are very vulnerable to oil spills whereby they are either smothered by the oil slicks or experience physiological toxicity due to ingestion of the oil spill (e.g. ulceration of intestinal tract, damaged respiratory system, superficial lesions and eye infection) /50/.
The oil spill modelling for surface oil show low impact exposure (9.99-0.01g/m2 hydrocarbon concentration) for marine mammals especially along the Indonesian side of Straits of Malacca.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 4 Oil spill impacts the Indonesian water space
Magnitude -1 Affected but no impact on local population status
Permanence 2 Not permanent
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 3 Oil spills can be cumulative depending on the number of vessel accidents.
Environmental Score -28
Description -C Moderate negative impact
Boat Strike Although risks of boat strikes will continue to pose a threat to the marine megafauna during the operational phase, vessels are expected to travel at slower speed as they approach berths therefore reducing the probability of boat strikes.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Within 5 km (working area)
Magnitude -1 Affected but no impact on local population status
6-176 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Criteria Score Rationale
Permanence 2 Not permanent
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -12
Description -B Minor negative impact
6.2.16 Fish Fauna
6.2.16.1 Evaluation Framework The potential impacts arising from the proposed development include:
Suspended sediment plumes (dredging and reclamation); Loss of habitat; Salinity Oil spill
The threshold limit for suspended sediment for fish livelihood is based on Malaysia Marine Water Quality Criteria and Standard (MMWQCS) Class 2 categorizing fisheries as part of Class 2 with the limit of 50 mg/L TSS.
6.2.16.2 Construction Phase
Suspended Sediment Increase in TSS in the marine environment is considered to be an important environmental stressor that can cause significant degradation of aquatic ecosystems. The main source of pollutant generated from the construction activities such as reclamation, dredging and piling related for this project is sedimentation as a result of disturbance of seabed which is detrimental to fish fauna as well as to marine ecosystems.
In general, fish are more likely to undergo sub-lethal stress from suspended sediments rather than lethality because of their ability to move away from or out of an area of higher concentration to a lower concentration versus sessile or less mobile species /35/.
The impacts of fish fauna livelihood due to high concentration of sediments have been identified in many studies, and includes visual impairment affecting predator-prey interactions /36/, mating and territorial behaviour patterns which are reported to be highly dependent on visual cues /37/. This could result in a reduced reproductive rate that would eventually reduce the abundance and diversity of fish. Unfortunately, little is known about the absolute sediment tolerance thresholds of most commercial fish species. For each organism, injury will occur above a different threshold concentration of suspended sediments and also vary among the different life stages (egg, larva, juvenile and adult). The younger stages of the fish would be most vulnerable and sensitive to this effect /38/.
The hydraulic study indicates that sediment plume throughout the construction phase can disperse up to around 10 km from the study area, although the duration of exposure to very high concentrations is very low.
Being the major organ for respiration and osmoregulation /39/, fish gills are directly exposed to, and affected by, suspended solids in the water /40,41,42/. Damage in integrity of gill lamellae is likely to reduce capacity for oxygen transfer and ammonia excretion, and lead to
6-177
respiratory stress and ammonia intoxication /43, 44/. Suspended sediment can also reduce growth rates, decrease resistance to disease and prevent egg and larval development. When suspended solids settle to the bottom of a water body, they can smother the eggs of fish. Settling sediments can fill in spaces between rocks which could have been used by aquatic organisms for homes /45/.
Based on the predicted exceedance of 50 mg/L TSS during the reclamation phases (Figure 6.21, Figure 6.24, Figure 6.27 and Figure 6.30 from Section 6.2.3) the zone of impact for fish fauna is limited to a narrow band around 2 km northwest of the project site and around 1 km southeast of the site, primarily during the dredging activity in Phase 4. Concentrations above 50 mg/L TSS are only predicted to occur between 5 – 10 % of the time in these areas, and up to 20% of the time in an area not more than 1 km from the project.
Prohibited Fishing Area The Prohibited Fishing Area at Tg. Tuan has only minor impacts from the suspended sediment plumes and thus the area will continue to be important nursery and fish breeding area for the fishermen.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 Areas within 10 km from project footprint.
Magnitude -1 Negative change to status quo
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative/Synergistic
Environmental Score -21
Description C Moderate negative impact
6.2.16.3 Operation Phase
Loss of Habitat Fish habitats within the project area will be permanently lost. Among the habitats affected are the coral reefs and the artificial reefs within the reclamation and dredging area shown in Figure 6.114. These reefs provide shelter and are foraging and breeding ground for a wide range of reef associated fish fauna. The reef loss is estimated to be 110 ha in total which consists of 67 ha of coral reefs and 43 ha of artificial reefs loss. The reaming area lost will be soft substrate, mainly sand and but in some places finer sediments
Fishes and crustaceans are highly mobile organisms that are most likely flee to other reefs in the surrounding area as a response to disturbances to their habitat. These disturbances however are temporary and repopulation could occur during the operation phase especially when suitable habitats nearby are provided. The impact based on the habitat loss, high mobility of fish fauna and repopulation during operation phase would therefore be considered as minimal.
6-178 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Figure 6.114 The reefs located within the reclamation and dredging area will be loss.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Reclamation and dredging areas
Magnitude -1 Loss of habitat
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -8
Description -A Slight negative impact
6-179
Salinity Several past studies have revealed that salinity affects the physiological processes and morphological developments in marine fish /46; 47/. According to Varsamos et al. (2005), the successful development of fish species in seawater depends on their ability to survive a range of salinity through osmoregulation /46/. Each fish species has a range of salinity in which it can grow or develop optimally and when it is out of this range, other physiological functions need to be expended to provide extra energy for the fish in order to maintain the desired salt concentration. The safe levels for most marine species range from 10 – 35 psu, depending on the stage of their life cycle /48/.
The finding from fish fauna monitoring found out that the majority of fish caught belong to demersal fish group which has the ability to choose the depth for deposition of eggs especially in fishes that spawn intertidally where there is danger of dessication, or exposure to temperature and salinity extremes /49/. This implies that the impact of oil spill to the demersal fish are low as the fish would respond to salinity prudently for eggs survival.
Additionally, data from the hydraulic study indicates that the salinity dispersion model did not show significant difference between the baseline and construction, for most seasons for Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 and Phase 4, with levels ranging from 10 psu at the upstream of Sg. Linggi and 30 psu in the open sea. Where salinity is concerned, this shows that there is no significant impact on fish fauna at the study area.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be no change
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 Areas within 10 km from project footprint.
Magnitude 0 No impact
Permanence 0 No change
Reversibility 0 No change
Cumulativity 0 No change
Environmental Score 0
Description N No change
Oil Spill During the operation phase, the oil spill could potentially be introduced to marine environment, consequently impacting the fish fauna as well as the rest of marine ecosystem. The oil spill could possibly be emitting to marine environment due oil tanker collision and leaking of marine facilities.
The oil contamination impacting the living organisms in many ways. Some of the soluble components and emulsions are poisonous, particularly to small organisms that do not have protective coverings or shells such as fish larvae, single celled algae and many kinds of plankton are vulnerable and these are the basic foundation of the marine food chain. In shallow water these toxic substances may directly kill algae, coral and sea grasses. These components may also be passed in the food chain or directly ingested or absorbed through the gills of fish and other larger marine organisms. The effect may be to kill the animal or contaminate its tissues /50/.
Despite the adverse impacts it may cause to marine ecosystem, the effects of oil spills are not permanent and complete. Marine systems show remarkable resiliency and as the oil becomes sequestered in less active forms (tarballs, buried oil etc.) and is broken down by sunlight and
6-180 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
bacterial action, the systems recover. Survivors reproduce and recolonize habitats. Some creatures adapt to tar and oil covered substrates and some crabs and mollusks actually eat the tar and the bacteria and fungi growing upon it, and aid its degradation. The oil in its several forms is dispersed, diluted and broken down until only small pockets and particles remain. Marine systems are by their very nature open- that is connected by the sea, wind and currents to distant uncontaminated regions. Many marine organisms have mobile life phases (floating eggs, larvae) that recolonize and re-establish populations. Some of the creatures affected by a spill also routinely suffer catastrophic mortality from other causes (e.g. some colonial nesting seabirds) and are well adapted to recover. Large mobile animals like sharks, sea turtles, large fish and whales that moved away from the spill move back. Although there may be significant mortality of some of these animals, overall the impact on their populations is usually not permanent /50/.
The result from the oil spill modelling simulating the impact of surface oil exposure, coastal contact and minimum time of arrival of oil at sensitive receptor locations are as followed;
Surface oil exposure- The impact shows the low impact predicted along the Indonesian coast from P. Rupat to the north without impacting the Malaysia coastline. Impact zone of shoreline contact- The impact shows the low impact predicted along the Indonesian coast from P. Rupat to the north without impacting the Malaysia coastline. Arrival of oil reached key receptors ranging between 1 to 5 hours
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 4 The oil spill extends along the Indonesian coast from P. Rupat to north
Magnitude -2 Significant negative change
Permanence 2 Temporary as the oil spill is degradable
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative
Environmental Score -56
Description -D Significant negative impact
6.2.17 Plankton Communities
6.2.17.1 Evaluation Framework The proposed project comprises of land reclamation and development of marine facilities (access bridge, liquid product jetty, shipyard piers), and sewage treatment plant with a proposed outfall. In general, these entails reclaiming a large area of the coast which will change the existing condition of the area permanently. Moreover, treated effluent will also be discharged into the open water. These changes are expected to affect the existing water quality in the area, for example through reduced flushing with possible consequent changes in nutrients, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen.
Impacts to plankton communities are assessed for the four development phases of the project. The potential issues addressed in this section include water quality and oil spill.
The evaluation of impacts towards planktonic organisms was carried out based on the boundary of the reclamation area and results of the suspended sediment plume and water
6-181
quality modelling. Suspended sediment plume impacts are expected to occur during reclamation and dredging. All these impacts were carried out based on the available literature on the tolerance level of the planktonic organisms towards these pressures.
6.2.17.2 Construction Phase
Water Quality No significant pollutant discharges to the marine environment is expected to occur during the construction. Enrichment of nitrogen and phosphorus, and some trace metals due to accidental releases, as opposed to routine discharges to the marine water around the proposed project, may occur sporadically over the lifetime of the proposed project. However, given the good water exchange (flushing) in the area (as stipulated in Section 6.2.3), this is not expected to result in any phytoplankton blooms. Furthermore, it is highly likely that the phytoplankton community at the site is presently light-limited due to the existing high ambient suspended sediments in the area such that algal blooms would be unlikely to occur even with significant nutrient enrichment. Therefore, marine water pollution is not considered forthwith.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is no change. No specific mitigation measures are recommended apart from the general control of water quality as outlined in Section 6.4.2.2 (Water Quality).
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Areas within 5 km from project footprint particularly around the STP outfall
Magnitude 0 No change plankton communities
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score 0
Description N No change
Sediment Plume Turbidity is a major factor mediating bacterial and primary productivity in marine waters. The increased load of suspended solids would reduce light penetration and thus reduce the depth of photosynthetic activity by phytoplankton. In addition, high sediment loads can cause water temperatures to increase due to greater heat absorption, in turn, reducing dissolved oxygen concentrations. This would affect negatively on zooplankton.
Similar to fish, the turbidity may also reduce the hunting success of zooplankton. On the other hand, the turbidity associated with the reclamation activity may cause temporary increases in the level of organic matter and nutrients, which may increase productivity outside the plume areas to some extent.
Based on the hydraulic study, the predicted sediment plume excursion is quite localised with excess concentrations within the recommended safe limit for aquatic organisms which is <80 mg/L. During the peak of Phase 1 which involves both dredging and reclamation, the zone of impact during intermonsoon extends beyond the project boundaries to a very limited extent (up to Tg. Bulat).
6-182 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Furthermore, the hydraulic study also reported that changes expected in Phase 1 are localised around the development to up to 4 km on each side of the proposed reclamation footprint. The changes expected includes reduction in current speed on the sides of the reclamation footprint and also slight increase of speed in the southern part of the reclaimed area, may reduce the overall current speed around the project site which can lead to higher siltation rates and reduction on the water exchange (flushing) capacity (Section 9.1 Coastal Hydraulics).
Hence the impact to phyto- and zooplankton communities due to the suspended sediment plumes is expected to be low.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative impact, no specific mitigation measures required apart from control of sediment plume as outlined in Section 6.4.2.2 (Water quality).
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 The furthest point of plume excursion is Tg. Tuan (northwest) and between Tg. Dahan and Tg. Keramat (southeast).
Magnitude -1 Minor change in plankton communities
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -18
Description -B Minor negative impact
6.2.17.3 Operation Phase
Water Quality No significant pollutant discharges to the marine environment is expected to occur from the effluent discharge from the proposed STP during construction and operation. As stipulated in Section 6.3.3.2, the predicted changes in nutrients is rather negligible which would less likely to cause algae blooms.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be no change.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Areas within 5 km from project footprint particularly around the STP outfall.
Magnitude 0 No change in plankton density
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score 0
Description N No change
6-183
Oil Spill In the event of oil spill, the plankton in the affected area will experience massive die off and this would profoundly weaken the local ecosystem as plankton is the foundation of food chain. However, the die-off are rather species-specific as the different species of plankton have difference responses to crude oil. For example, the phytoplankton species Coscinodiscus centralis and Ceratium trichoceros have higher tolerance towards the toxicants released from the crude oil compared to Chaetoceros socialis. Therefore, the phytoplankton community within an area affected by crude oil is important in determining the survival of the local ecosystem.
On another note, high nutrient concentrations in crude-oil-contaminated water could increase the biomass of phytoplankton. This is due to the complex relationship between hydrocarbon- degrading bacteria and phytoplankton. Phytoplankton are able to provide dissolved oxygen and other organic substance to bacteria which, in turn, provides carbon dioxide, nutrients, enzymes and iron to phytoplankton from the breakdown of hydrocarbon /51/.
As the local ecosystem depends profoundly on phytoplankton as the primary producer, it is assumed that the zooplankton density would also increase. However, the opposite effect was found to occur. Zooplankton biomass was found to decline during the first 5 days after a spill. It is assumed that the physiology of zooplankton was greatly affected following the ingestion of dispersed oil droplets by herbivorous zooplankton that feeds on phytoplankton. There is also evidence that oil droplets affect not only the feeding but also growth and reproduction of zooplankton /52/.
The oil spill modelling showed that a large area could be affected from the dispersion of oil through wave and current action. This would greatly affect the plankton communities for a long duration. The direct impact to plankton in the area would be massive die-off of species that are intolerant to the toxicants released from the crude oil. The cumulative effect of this would be the breakdown of the food chain which would take a long period of time to recover.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 4 Oil spill would have a cross-border effects (Malaysia and Indonesia)
Magnitude -2 Mass die-off of plankton, changes in physiology particularly of zooplankton and potential collapse of food chain
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -56
Description -E Significant negative impact
6.2.18 Macrobenthos
6.2.18.1 Evaluation Framework The proposed project comprises of the land reclamation which would directly affect the macrobenthic community through permanent loss of habitat. Sediment communities have been found to play a critical role in the food chain for the marine organism. Sediment
6-184 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
communities also relate closely with primary and secondary productivity along the entire coastline. Therefore, the potential loss of macrobenthic fauna either through reclamation or construction works would not only negatively impacting the fish fauna around the project area but also other higher trophic levels in the adjacent areas which depends on microbenthic communities for food.
Impacts to macrobenthic communities are assessed for the four development phases of the project. The potential issues addressed in this section include permanent loss of benthic habitat, sedimentation, suspended sediment and potential bioaccumulation of heavy metals from reclamation and oil spill.
The evaluation of impacts of macrobenthic community was carried out based on the boundary of the reclamation area and results of sedimentation and water quality modelling. These impacts are expected to occur during reclamation (construction phase). All these impacts were carried out based on the available literature on the tolerance level of the macrobenthic organisms towards these pressures. The threshold used to assess the impacts due to suspended sediment which primarily affecting filter feeders is 25 mg/L.
Upon sediment settlement after reclamation, the benthic condition such as sediment composition would play a much larger role in the rehabilitation and recolonising process. Therefore, the potential issue or impacts address during operation phase would take into account on the sedimentary conditions. These impacts are based on available literature on macrobenthos.
6.2.18.2 Construction Phase
Loss of Habitat Benthic communities within the area being reclaimed and dredged will be disturbed and most of them will be completely lost. The area that will be lost are dominated by the blind pea crabs (Xenophthalmus pinnotheroides), snapping shrimps (Alpheidae), gobies (Gobiidae), brittle stars (Ophiuroidea), annelids (Lumbrineris sp.) and the sipunculan worms (Sipunculus robustus).
The sediment condition in the area most highly impacted are mainly heterogenous (a mix of sand, silt and clay) which supports higher diversity of benthic organisms compared to homogenous sediment. There will be 251 ha of this habitat lost with the reclamation but similar habitats are present in the nearby area. Moreover, the macrobenthic species found in the area are quite common therefore the impact from the loss of macrobenthos is quite minimal.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Reclamation and dredging areas
Magnitude -2 Loss of habitat
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -16
Description -B Minor negative impact
6-185
Suspended Sediment Suspended sediment associated with reclamation and dredging such as the release of sediment during in-filling and resuspension of sediment during settlement due to wave activity will impact the benthic communities by impairing respiration, feeding, and visual foraging due to the increase in turbidity.
The sensitivity of benthic invertebrates to suspended sediment is species specific. The direct physical impacts (gill clog, impairment of respiration and feeding) from suspended sediments can be more vulnerable to suspension feeders such as various polychaete worms and bivalves (e.g. mussels, cockles). Persistent high suspended sediment and turbidity levels could result in changes in benthic community assemblages from dominance by suspended feeders to dominance by deposit feeders. Mobile species such as polychaetes, bivalves, gastropods and crustaceans will also have a higher chance of survival compared to sessile species as mobile species are able to migrate whereas sessile organisms are most likely to be smothered or suffocate from the increase in suspended sediment. Nevertheless, the increase in suspended sediment and associated turbidity levels would reduce the diversity and abundance of benthic communities.
Some studies have also shown positive impact from the small increase in suspended sediment to various macrobenthos such as cockles and mussels. Hewitt and Norkko /53/ found that cockles benefitted at suspended sediment concentration up to 400 mg/L before their condition starts to decline. Nevertheless, the impacts are largely dependent on the type of sediment being suspended. For example, persistently high concentration of suspended sediments dominated by clay could have a more significant impact on the benthic communities. In short, mortality of most benthic species will be low in sand and higher in silt or clay.
Considering the current conditions, the benthic communities in the close proximity of the project area have already been subjected to high loads of suspended sediment and high turbidity levels. The benthic communities in these areas could already be a community that is highly adapted to thrive in a disturbed environment.
The predicted sediment plume excursion has been presented in Section 6.2.3 above. Concentrations above 25 mg/L for more than 5% of the time is expected to be confined to about 4.3 km towards north-west and south-east from the source and the maximum width of the plume is about 0.4 km. Even though the plumes are relatively widespread towards the north-west and south east of the project area, the suspended and settled sediment would be temporary since the reclamation activities are to be carried out in phases. The benthic population would recover on a time scale of months to a few years post reclamation and dredging /54/.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 The furthest point of plume excursion is Tg. Tuan (northwest) and between Tg. Dahan and Tg. Keramat (southeast).
Magnitude -1 Minor change to communities
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -18
Description -B Minor negative impact
6-186 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Sedimentation There are several potential direct effect of sedimentation to benthic communities and these include smothering, reduce growth and feeding efficiency of invertebrates. Vulnerable macrobenthos would be the small and recently settled life-stages of many species and so are organisms that mainly dwell on sediment surfaces due to their need to be in contact with the sediment-water interface.
Mobile species such as polychaetes, bivalves, gastropods and crustaceans have been shown to migrate between 2 cm and 26 cm during 8 days after burial by 32 cm of sand /55/.
The impact to the benthic communities will largely be dependent on the amount and type of sediment settled. The sedimentation of fine sediment on sediment surface decreases the substrate particle size distribution, resulting in a change from a heterogenous substrate to a more homogenous substrate. The type benthos present in the area would also determine the scale of impact. Mobile species such as polychaetes, bivalves, gastropods and crustaceans have been shown to migrate between 2 cm and 26 cm during 8 days after burial by 32 cm of sand /56/.
Morphological modelling of fine sediment has shown that phase 1 and 2 is expected have sedimentation in the mudflat areas, north of the project area with an expected increase of 2 cm/yr. While the activities from phase 3 and 4 show similar behaviour, sedimentation is expected to also occur on the east side of the reclamation. Nevertheless, benthic communities are highly adapted to episodic and extreme event of sediment transport such as erosion and deposition and considering the amount of deposition, the impact is likely to remain low.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be no change.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Change in morphology within 5 km from the project footprint
Magnitude 0 No change as sedimentation is very minimal
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score 0
Description N No change
Bioaccumulation Bioaccumulation is the process of biological uptake and retention of chemical contaminants derived from various pathways. It is thought that benthic invertebrates exposed to dissolved and particulate contaminants may accumulate metals directly from the water column and ingested particles. Filter or suspension feeders such as bivalves usually bio-accumulate from seawater whereas sediment are the principal source for deposit feeders /57/.
The fill material and sediments in the dredging area have low levels of contaminants (heavy metals) except for the area around station S7 where arsenic was elevated (see Section 5.1.4). Because of this, the risk of bioaccumulation is there however it is still considered as low.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to have slight negative.
6-187
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 The impact is expected to be within the immediate area of the project boundary
Magnitude -1 No change in community structure however bivalves such as cockles may not be safe for consumption in the immediate area from the project footprint
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -6
Description -A Slight negative impact
6.2.18.3 Operation Phase
Change in sediment texture The reclamation and dredging could lead to a change from heterogenous (a mix of gravel, sand or mud) sediment to a homogenous type of sediment, presumably sand dominated. The change in sediment texture would change the type of macrobenthos that would eventually recolonise the area. The different composition of macrobenthic organisms could subsequently change the communities of predator and prey in the area. Nevertheless, most invertebrates are highly adaptive to its surrounding and most of the recolonization will be executed by the macrobenthos present in the area. Therefore, regardless of the change in sediment texture, the recolonization will occur after the settlement of sediment.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight positive.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Affect only within the project footprint
Magnitude +1 Recovery through recolonization process
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 0 Not applicable
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score 5
Description A Slight positive impact
Oil spill As outlined in Section 6.2.3.3, the oil spill would affect the food chain from decrease in plankton biomass. Most of the microbenthic communities relies on primary and secondary producers for food particularly filter feeders such as bivalves. Deposition of oil droplets could also affect the physiology of macrobenthos organisms due to ingestion particularly the deposit feeders.
6-188 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 4 Oil spill would have a cross-border effects (Malaysia and Indonesia)
Magnitude -1 Negative change to the benthic communities
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -28
Description -C Moderate negative impact
6.2.19 Integrated Ecological Impacts
6.2.19.1 Construction Phase The assessment of integrated impacts needs to take into account the cumulative effects on connected ecological processes within the Sg. Linggi estuary, the nearshore coastal waters and the Malacca Straits. Impacts on many biotic elements such as macro fauna such as turtles, terrapins, crocodiles and other wildlife have been assessed separately above.
Connectivity within these ecosystem compartments is best understood with respect to key benthic species such as fish and prawns. All have similarities in that at different stages of their life cycles they move and utilise the resources within different compartment. Many species of fish and prawns breed offshore and the larvae are carried by currents into the estuary where the mangroves and associated mudflats are used as nursery areas. The sub adults and adult’s subsequently then move out of the estuary back offshore.
The likely impacts from the development are largely going to be a change in the physical characteristics of the water column and to some extent the sediments. These factors are water movements within the coastal zone and in and out of the estuary, changes in salinity regimes, turbidity, suspended solids concentrations and sedimentation.
Any likely changes in water movements and salinity are seen as long term and are assessed as Operational Impacts (see below). Likely impacts from suspended solids and sedimentation are considered as a result of construction impacts. It is see from Section 5 changes in suspended solids concentrations during the reclamation are very small in areal extent and do not affect the estuary nor any significant area of the nearshore coastal. During the dredging phase concentrations are higher and more widely spread but again do not affect the estuary nor are they long lasting.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered a slight negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Overall area of reclamation impacts very small. Dredging changes are more extensive but also only for a very short time period
6-189
Criteria Score Rationale
Magnitude -1 Minor impact on plankton communities, therefore some larvae
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -6
Description -A Slight negative impact
6.2.19.2 Operation Phase The likely long term impacts from the development are largely going to be a change in the physical characteristics of the water column and to some extent the sediments. These factors are water movements within the coastal zone and in and out of the estuary and changes in salinity regimes. The operational phase turbidity, suspended solids concentrations and sedimentation impacts are not anticipated.
Any likely changes in water movements and salinity are seen from Section 5 to be very small and well within the naturally occurring variations. Estuaries are naturally very dynamic and no impact is expected in diurnal through tot seasonal paters in water movements not in salinity structure.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be no change/ status quo will prevail.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 0 No Impact
Magnitude 0 No impact
Permanence 2 Temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score 0
Description N No change/status quo
6.2.20 Socio-Economic
6.2.20.1 Evaluation Framework The socioeconomic impacts are evaluated based on indicators such as the impact on the livelihood of the local community and the permanence of this impact.
The assessment of the magnitude of an impact has been guided by the DOE guidelines of impact assessment as well as their expert opinion based on the social survey and various technical report; i.e. Hydraulic Report, Noise and Air Modelling, etc. (please Refer to Appendix F).
6-190 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
6.2.20.2 Construction Phase
Local Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector There are a total of 608 fishermen that fish within the potential zone of impact (345 Malacca fishermen and 263 Negeri Sembilan fishermen). As described in Section 5.3.5 and shown again in Figure 6.115 below, the reported fishing grounds cover a large area from around Tg. Panchor south of the project site to the boundary of the prohibited fishing zone at Tg. Tuan in the north. Fishing is carried out in the nearshore areas extending to around 15 km offshore.
Figure 6.115 Indicative locations of reported fishing grounds in the study area.
Decrease/Loss in Fish Catch During the construction phase, the suspended sediment plumes from the dredging and reclamation could potentially result in avoidance of the affected areas by fish. This has been assessed in Section 6.2.16 as a minor negative impact on the nearshore fishing grounds. As the TSS plume stays well off the coast and does not enter the Sg. Linggi estuary, no impact is anticipated on the mangroves, the mangrove fauna, nor the aquaculture activities in the estuary. For the duration of the dredging activity in Phase 4 there is some possibility of a TSS impact on the present single aquaculture facility offshore of Tg. Selamat.
Possible Bioaccumulation of Pollutants in Fish As discussed in the section on macrobenthos impacts (Section 6.2.15) the fill material and sediments in the dredging area have low levels of contaminants (heavy metals) except for the area around station S7 where a single sample showed elevated concentration of arsenic (see Section 5.1.4). The extent of any arsenic contamination is to be more thoroughly investigated prior to the dredging taking place in Phase 4. Overall though, the risk of bioaccumulation is considered low.
Navigation As a result of the proposed project, the increase in marine traffic also increases the risk of exposure to accidents for the fishermen and their fishing tools. Fishing gear could however be damaged and small boats may be damaged or sunk by a collision with larger vessel. In terms of navigating around the area, the dredging vessels will be moving at a low speed of 8 knots, thus minor impacts in terms of ship wake or risk of collision is anticipated. However, tug boats may go at a higher speed and may cause higher waves to form increasing the risk to the fishermen.
6-191
Fishermen will not be able to utilise the marine working area at the project site for fishing during construction as their equipment and personal safety will be at risk. Fishing activities are not permitted within the Port Limits, however, there is still some fishing carried out by small local fishing boats in the vicinity of the port. Fishermen do not frequent the areas adjacent to the entrance and approaches to the channel.
The construction of the access bridge will restrict the direct fishermen navigation pathway from Linggi estuary to the south east coastal areas of Kuala Linggi.
The dredging may interfere with existing aids to navigation; such aids to navigation may need to be temporarily removed, then re-sited, perhaps in a new location, once the dredging is completed. Temporary aids to navigation may be established during the duration of the Proposed Project.
Prohibited Fishing Area The Prohibited Fishing Area at Tg. Tuan is predicted to be exposed to only minor impacts from the suspended sediment plumes and thus the area will continue to be important nursery and fish breeding area for fisheries resources for the fishermen.
Overall Impacts The fishermen will need to avoid the marine working area during the construction period. Restricted areas will be marked with buoys. The zone of sediment plume impact to fish fauna is predicted to be a minor negative impact as mentioned above.
The fishermen will incur higher monetary cost if they decide to fish further away from their common fishing grounds. The fishermen whom choose not to go further away to fish will probably receive less allowance and subsidies from the Department of Fisheries. Overall, fishermen income will decrease and may not be able to continue their livelihood as fishermen. Aquaculture operators should have the same level of income as during the construction phase.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 Livelihood of both Malacca and Negeri Sembilan fishermen
Magnitude -2 Loss of livelihood of fishermen is a significant risk but not for aquaculture operators.
Permanence 2 The impact is temporary for an estimated 10 years
Reversibility 2 Reversible, after reclamation and construction stage ends
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -36
Description -D Significant negative impact
Job Opportunities for Local Community During the construction phase, in particular for the topside developments, an estimated 2500 job opportunities will be created for Malaysia and international workers. At this time within the local community, there are only 0.4% of the working population involved in construction and within the 5 km radius of the project area unemployment is estimated to be less than 1 per cent (0.4%). It is therefore unlikely that the construction employment opportunities will be of direct benefit to the local community.
6-192 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be of no importance.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Community within 5 km of the project footprint
Magnitude 0 Not important as there is low unemployment rate in local communities
Permanence 2 Construction work is temporary
Reversibility 2 Reversible, after reclamation and construction stage ends.
Cumulativity 1 Not applicable
Environmental Score 0
Description 0 No importance
National Job Opportunities During construction, there will be 2500 job opportunities for those in the construction line for those within Malaysia and international workers.
However, the employment needs will benefit the construction industry throughout Malaysia, as well as internationally (legal foreign workers from Indonesia etc.), as there is a only limited number of large construction projects planned to take place in west Malaysia at this time. Hence, those within the industry stand to benefit as their expertise will be required.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor positive.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 4 Malaysia as a whole and cross border effect on countries of origin for legal foreign workers
Magnitude +1 A small number of construction industry workers may gain continued work for 10 years.
Permanence 1 Not applicable
Reversibility 1 Not applicable
Cumulativity 1 Not applicable
Environmental Score 12
Description +B Minor positive impact
Business Opportunities for local community Business opportunities should flourish with the addition of 2500 construction workers within the area. Shopkeepers (4.7% of the working population) stand to benefit, as well as other locals that would like to earn extra income by setting up services to cater for these construction workers.
The anticipated entry of foreign workers for the proposed project will further increase the existing number of foreign workers that are living in the local area. Some locals (10.8%) are rather optimistic that this may bring a potential spin-off effect to the local small business community. They foresee an increased demand for residence (e.g. homestay, rental of rooms and houses), food (e.g. restaurants and grocery shops), and other services which the local
6-193
traders are able to provide. It is estimated that the daily expenditure spent on food alone for an average of 2,500 workers in the proposed project area would amount to about RM30, 000 daily.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant positive.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Local communities and Local Businesses
Magnitude 3 Businesses should be flourishing with the increment of working people
Permanence 3 Beyond construction period
Reversibility 2 Reversible if abandonment
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative as economic spinoff will trigger other businesses to flourish
Environmental Score 48
Description D Significant positive impact
Influx of Foreign Workers It is anticipated that the construction workforce will largely be foreign workers legally registered with the government of Malaysia. Illegal immigrants (PATI) are frequently attracted to come to Malaysia illegally to seek job opportunities in construction; however it will be a requirement of all contracts let by the proponent that all workers are legally obtained and registered.
Even so, the total population in the study area (cumulative of seven villages), is 2,438 people in 692 households and hence the construction workforce at its fullest extent represents a doubling of the local population. In addition, some workers, depending on the length of the contract may also bring families, further increasing the size of the population influx. In addition, it is not uncommon for different jobs to be given to different ethnic groups. The net effect is a significant increase in demand for housing, medical facilities, transport and access to other facilities including schools and places of worship, not to mention utility services such as power, water and solid waste disposal. Cultural conflicts are also possible, as is the likelihood of some crimes, increased risk of some disease, and impacts on wildlife.
As with all construction activities in an area that does not have adequate social and economic resources to absorb the demand, it is envisaged that all social facilities and amenities will be fully utilised.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 Project site neighbouring communities
Magnitude -2 Pressures on amenities and other resources, security and hygiene concerns
Permanence 2 Temporary during construction phase
Reversibility 2 Reversible, after reclamation and construction stage ends
Cumulativity 2 Not cumulative
6-194 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Criteria Score Rationale
Environmental Score -36
Description -D Significant negative impact
Tourism Most of the chalets and homestays are located at the coastal areas. With the implementation of the project, operators believe that the altered landscape views will no longer be attractive to tourists.
Construction activities such as piling and dredging will cause the touristy areas along the beach front to experience noise and air pollution (Refer to Section 6.2.4.3 and Section 6.2.6). Sediment plumes will occur, hence making the area visually less attractive and not pleasant for swimming. As the present tourists in the area value tranquillity, and beach and sea views, it is forecasted that during the project construction, there will be less tourists of this nature.
Based on the sediment transport model results, it is considered that the erosion observed at the beaches north of Tg. Che’ Amar may worsen after the phase 1 of the project.
Recreational fishing in the sea will be impacted, as there will be limited areas to fish during the construction period of 10 years. However, tourism should not be affected for mangrove and riverine fishing as these areas will not be impacted.
Most likely, there may not be a need for any mitigation measure because it is very likely that there will be a huge demand for accommodation by those involved in the construction of the port. The character of their clientele will certainly change and it is likely that there may even be pressure to convert more residential homes to meet the additional demand.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Chalet owners and other tourism related operator/activities
Magnitude -2 No longer attractive to tourists
Permanence 3 Beyond construction stage
Reversibility 3 irreversible
Cumulativity 1 Not applicable
Environmental Score -28
Description -C Moderate negative impact
Health and Safety Health risk is considered in greater detail below for air and noise quality. While materials are to be carried in by barges there will be limited impact on land traffic from that activity, but a significant impact in terms of worker transport needs and therefore likely increase in road accidents and a decrease in pedestrian safety.
Some level of health risk to the local population is always associated with the importation of large numbers of workers and the spreads of infections, as well as an increase in the numbers of insect and rodent vectors for diseases is to be expected.
The safety of the local fishermen may well be an issue with respect to marine traffic usage.
6-195
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Local and regional populations
Magnitude -2 Risk of road accident; infectious diseases, vessel movements
Permanence 2 Temporary during construction
Reversibility 2 Reversible, communities adapt to traffic volume after few months
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score -24
Description -C Moderate negative impact
Aesthetics
Evaluation Framework The aesthetics impact will depend on the total suspended solids plumes generated from construction activities.
Potential Impacts The visual impact due to the Project will vary depending on the visual absorption capacity of the landscape, viewing distance, relative number of viewers and period of view. In principle, the further the distance away from the proposed Project, the less the visual there will be for the existing settlement structures and vegetation cover.
The visual impacts from the development are largely concentrated along the coastline. There will be a change in the landscape – from the current sea view of shipping lanes to a 10 year sea view of port construction activities with sediment plumes and some vertical structures – tanks, loading arms, cranes and some 2-3 story buildings.
The local view inland will generally have a low or zero visual impact as the existing natural vegetation and agriculture areas along the coastal zone hide it.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Local villagers, tourist, chalets and F&B Operators
Magnitude -1 Local community will face port construction landscape for the next 10 years
Permanence 2 Aesthetics is dynamic and is temporary for construction
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 1 Not applicable
Environmental Score -12
Description -B Minor negative impact
6-196 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
6.2.20.3 Operation Phase
Local Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector
Loss of Common Fishing grounds Fishing is an important income source to the people of the region. From past experience, such as the development of RTC and reclamation at Klebang, fishermen believe that their catches have decreased tremendously over time due these events.
The reclamation footprint of 258 ha (620 acres) represents a direct loss of fish habitat, but based on our surveys it was not specifically donated as a key fishing area by the local fishermen.
In addition, there will be a permanent loss of an additional 110 ha in total, made up of 67 ha of coral reefs and 43 ha of artificial reefs due to the dredging footprint in what is part of the common fishing ground area.
Marine Traffic Fishermen do not frequent the areas adjacent to the entrance and approaches to the shipping channels and Sg. Linggi channel the increase in size of the Port area and in marine traffic increases the risk of exposure to accidents for the fishermen and their fishing gear. Fishing activities are not generally encouraged or permitted within the Port Limits, however, there is still some fishing carried out by small local fishing boats in the vicinity of the existing port.
The marine facilities are designed for a range of tanker sizes between 2,000 DWT and 200,000 DWT. Based on a market survey performed by the Ocean Shipping Consultants (OSC) (a company of Royal Haskoning DHV), an estimated 55 vessels could utilise the KLIP facility per year
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be major negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 3 Fishermen livelihood of both Malacca and Negeri Sembilan fishermen
Magnitude -3 Major adverse impact, loss of fishing grounds, increased operational risks and consequent loss of income
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 2 Change in port limit boundary will rehabilitate the fish population.
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative
Environmental Score -72
Description -E Major negative impact
Job Opportunities It is estimated that there are 2,000 job opportunities within the area when this project is fully developed. However, there is little unemployment in the area and so the job creation is unlikely to benefit the local community significantly.
However, the local demographis profile points to an emerging youth unemployment issue as 14% of the present population is less than 14 years of age. Younger generations may seek opportunities to work within port development industry with a higher income bracket instead of migrating to urban environments such as Kuala Lumpur to make a better living.
6-197
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor positive.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Local community
Magnitude +1 Not important at present as locals might not have the qualification to serve the industry but in the longer term youth employment may become increasingly important
Permanence 3 Permanent, until project closure
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative
Environmental Score 16
Description +B Minor positive impact
Business Opportunities Business opportunities should flourish with the addition of 2,000 project workers within the area. Shopkeepers (4.7% of the working population) stand to benefit as well as other locals that would like to earn extra income by setting up services to cater for these construction workers.
The anticipated entry of foreign workers (people outside the 5 km boundary) for the proposed project will further increase the existing number of foreign workers that are living in the local area. Some locals (10.8%) are rather optimistic that this may bring forth a potential spin-off effect to the local small business community. They foresee a demand for residence (e.g. homestay, rental of rooms and houses) and food (e.g. restaurants and grocery shops), among others of which the local traders are able to provide.
National food chains will also start to invest in the area due to the increment of potential customers.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant positive.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 The local community and local businessmen
Magnitude +3 Businesses should be flourishing with the increment of working population
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative as economic spinoff will trigger other businesses to flourish
Environmental Score 54
Description +D Significant positive impact
6-198 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Cost of Living and Change in Social Fabric The Port development stands to bring in highly paid employees and customers with the power to spend. Hence, these employees spending power is higher than the average local within the community. The result is more inflation which is undesirable and punitive on the wage earners and low income self-employed found in the community (5 km radius). Prices of land, services and amenities generally are all anticipated to rise.
With the anticipated doubling of the population the social character of the region will change as there is a shift from an essentially rural and fishing society to an increasingly urbanised society with a demand for more facilities and the need for better utilities. The multiplier effect may lead to other industries being attracted to the area, leading to further changes in the area.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be significant negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Local communities
Magnitude -3 increase in demand will drive increases in living cost and increasing urbanisation
Permanence 3 operations
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative
Environmental Score -54
Description -D Significant negative impact
Tourism Most of the chalets and homestays are located at the coastal areas. With the implementation of the project, operators believe that the altered view will no longer be attractive to the tourists. Moreover there will be a considerable period of construction activity and increased prices following an increased demand for construction worker accommodation which may flow on to the operational workforce.
The Tourism profile is expected to change from week stay to week end or day trippers visiting the coastal and historical features of the region.
Most likely, there may not be a need for any mitigation measure because it is very likely that there will be a huge demand for accommodation by those involved in the operations of the port. The character of their clientele will certainly change and it is likely that there may even be pressure to convert more residential homes to meet the additional demand.
Recreational fishing as a service demand can be expected to increase with the increase in local and regional populations.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Chalet and other tourism related operator/activities
Magnitude -2 No longer attractive for tourism
Permanence 3 permanent
6-199
Criteria Score Rationale
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 1 Not cumulative
Environmental Score -28
Description -C Moderate negative impact
Health and Safety
Traffic Accidents During the operations stage, there will be a significant increase in vehicle usage with on the region. The safety of the villagers is at risk and inconvenient for them in their daily activities. It can also be anticipated that roads may be damaged and increase the risk of road accidents.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Road users
Magnitude -2 Traffic volume
Permanence 3 Permanent
Reversibility 2 Reversible as communities adapt to traffic volume after few months.
Cumulativity 3 Cumulative
Environmental Score -32
Description -C Moderate negative impact
Aesthetics
Evaluation Framework Evaluation is based on the social survey interviews with tourist operators, the listing survey and the hydraulic modelling.
Potential Impacts The sea view will still be attractive as it is a visual change from the current sea view of shipping lanes to a landscape of port activities. However, there will definitely be a change in tourism customer profile.
It is predicted that the sheltering effect of the development will see a reduction of the sediment transport rates particularly during SW monsoon conditions and the beach will stabilize. However, the beach composition will change from fine sand to silty sand hence decreasing the beach quality value.
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative.
6-200 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 2 Local villagers, tourist, chalet owners and F&B operators
Magnitude -1 Current view turns into a port
Permanence 3 Operations
Reversibility 3 Irreversible
Cumulativity 1 Not applicable
Environmental Score -14
Description -B Minor negative impact
6.2.21 Health Impact Assessment The health impact assessment was conducted based on the modelling exercises for both air dispersion and noise dissipation studies. The proposed plant practiced zero effluent, therefore no risk assessment is need with respect to waste water discharges.
6.2.21.1 Evaluation Framework The health impact assessment was carried out to determine any additional burden to the existing health issues and health indicators due to construction and operation of the proposed project. In addition, excess risks from any potential hazards in environments within and around proposed project area also were assessed. The key steps involved in this assessment are as follows:
Identification of potential health hazards Determination of hazards exposure Assessment of the health risks
Ambient Air Quality The nature of the project which involves reclamation activity, construction and operation of tank storage facilities may affect the ambient air quality which eventually results in airborne diseases among human population within the study area. Considering this, ambient air quality and the potential hazards posed by each air quality parameter was assessed and compared against the respective guidelines to check on its compliance and safety level to people. The followings were the related guidelines used under this assessment:
Recommended Malaysian Air Quality Guideline (RMAQG), Department of Environment Malaysia Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQCs) by Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) Canada, 2012
The potential hazard was measured in terms of hazard index (HI) value with assumption that a hazard value less than one (1) as healthy or poses no risk. The HI value was determined for each of the measured parameters. For non-carcinogenic substance (PM10), the HI was determined by dividing its concentration with the limit specified under the guidelines. For carcinogens substance (benzene), lifetime cancer risk (LCR) was calculated by multiplying the concentrations with the inhalation unit risk guidelines. The recommended limit and associated health effect of the potential pollutants are outlined in Table 6.50.
6-201
Table 6.50 Types of pollutants and their corresponding recommended limit.
Pollutant Health Effect Guideline
Particulate matter smaller than Respiratory system 150 µg/m3 (24 hours) by 10 micron (PM10) RMAQG VOC (Benzene) Reproductive problem and 400 µg/m3 (1 hour)* by AAQCs carcinogenic Inhalation risk unit: 8.3 X 10-6 µg/m3
Ambient Noise Level In addition, the proposed project was predicted to affect the ambient noise level during the construction and operation phase. Therefore, the assessment of potential impacts of noise on public health was carried out based on baseline data compared against Schedule 2 for the operations stage. The related guideline and schedules are as listed:
The Planning Guidelines for Environmental Noise Limits and Control 2007 by Department of Environment, Malaysia
Schedule 1: Maximum Permissible Sound Level (LAeq) by Receiving Land Use for Planning and New Development; Schedule 2 Maximum Permissible Sound Level
6.2.21.2 Hazard Exposure
Air Quality Five air stations were selected within 5 km radius from the proposed project area. They include Kg. Sungai Raya, Kg. Kuala Linggi, Kg. Tg. Serai, Kg. Tg. Dahan and Kg. Bt. Iboi. Those locations were the suitable representative of the whole communities within the zone of impact.
For the respective locations, the individual pollutant predicted cumulative concentrations were determined based on the air dispersion study. Without any controlled measures, the PM10 concentrations were predicted less than 10 µg/m3 at all locations. And with control measures in-situ, the concentrations were lesser than 1.0 µg/m3 at all locations (Table 6.51). VOCs in such industries contained highest constitute of benzene. Therefore, the benzene health limit was used in this exercise. VOCs only present during the operational phase.
Table 6.51 Predicted incremental maximum for ground level concentrations at the five air sampling stations.
Location Without mitigation (µg/m3) With mitigation (µg/m3)
PM10 VOC PM10 VOC
Kg. Sungai Raya 10 ND 1.0 53
Kg. Kuala Linggi 10 ND 1.0 41
Kg. Tg. Serai 10 ND 1.0 37
Kg. Tg. Dahan 10 ND 1.0 23
Kg. Bt. Iboi 10 ND 1.0 38
Noise Level All community areas were considered as suburban residential areas with a medium density population based on The Planning Guidelines for Environmental Noise Limits and Control,
6-202 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
2007 by DOE, Malaysia. Nearly all locations sampled were found to have existing high ground noise areas (Table 6.52). Thus, the study areas were considered as a high ground noise area. High background noise was recorded likely due to road traffic and human activities.
Table 6.52 Existing high ground noise level
Location LAeq (dBA)
Day (55 dBA) Night (45 dBA)
Kg. Sg. Raya 56.3* 55.3*
Kg. Kuala Linggi 51.5 49.2*
Kg. Tg. Serai 56.7* 53.6*
Kg. Tg. Dahan 53.9 50.6*
Kg. Bt. Iboi 59.2* 54.1*
Table 6.53 Maximum permissible sound level in existing high background noise
Location LAeq (dBA)
Day time Night time
L90 Day time (+ 10) L90 Night time (+ 5)
Kg. Sg. Raya 53.0 63.0 52.5 57.5
Kg. Kuala Linggi 44.2 54.2 45.9 50.9
Kg. Tg. Serai 54.6 64.6 53.0 58.0
Kg. Tg. Dahan 49.9 59.9 49.3 54.3
Kg. Bt. Iboi 57.6 67.6 53.3 58.3
6.2.21.3 Construction Phase
Air Quality During construction, assessment was carried for particulate matter 10 µm (PM10), the likely substances that will be hazardous to the health in term of irritant to the respiratory tract mucosal lining, in the area during this phase. Beside this, noise during this phase was also foreseen as one of important community hazard.
The hazard index for each location for PM10 during the construction were less than one (Table 6.51), which indicated that the areas are predicted to be clean and safe for exposed communities. Furthermore, hazard index with mitigation for PM10 showed that indexes at all sampling locations is 0.01.
Noise Level All stations were expected to be exposed to relatively acceptable noise from the proposed project activities during construction phase for both day and night (Table 6.54).
6-203
Table 6.54 Predicted noise level during construction phase
Location LAeq (dBA)
Day Night
Kg. Sg. Raya 56.3 56.3
Kg. Kuala Linggi 51.6 51.6
Kg. Tg. Serai 56.7 56.7
Kg. Tg. Dahan 53.9 50.6
Kg. Bt. Iboi 59.2 54.1
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Area assessed in accordance to the air and noise area of assessment. Within 5 km from project footprint
Magnitude -1 Negative impact to the community health.
Permanence 2 Temporary impact during construction phase
Reversibility 2 Reversible with implementation of mitigation measures
Cumulativity 3 Impact is cumulative with the surrounding environment.
Environmental Score -7
Description -A Slight negative impact
6.2.21.4 Operation Phase
Air Emission Few substances are expected to be emitted particularly during the operational phase with the highest emission hazard to the community health being the volatile organic compounds (VOC) substance. VOC is also an irritant to the respiratory tract mucosal lining. Table 6.55 shows the hazard indexes for VOC substance at each location is less than one, indicated that the areas are predicted to be clean and safe for exposed communities.
Table 6.55 Calculated hazard index with mitigation for VOC.
Location VOC (µg/m3)
Kg. Sg. Raya 0.13
Kg. Kuala Linggi 0.10
Kg. Tg. Serai 0.09
Kg. Tg. Dahan 0.06
Kg. Bt. Iboi 0.09
6-204 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
For the lifetime cancer risk (LCR) assessment, all locations have LCR of less than 10-4, which indicated the LCR is within the acceptable risk of exposure for normal operation emission.
Table 6.56 Calculated hazard index with control.
Location VOC (µg/m3)
Kg. Sg. Raya 4.4 X10-4
Kg. Kuala Linggi 3.4 X 10-4
Kg. Tg. Serai 3.1 X 10-4
Kg. Tg. Dahan 1.9 X10-4
Kg. Bt. Iboi 3.1 X 10-4
Noise Emission Noise generated during operation is also assessed as one of the important community hazard. All stations were expected to be exposed to relatively acceptable noise from the proposed project activities during operation phase for both day and night (Table 6.57).
Table 6.57 Predicted noise level during operation phase.
Location LAeq (dBA)
Day Night
Kg. Sg. Raya 56.3 55.3
Kg. Kuala Linggi 51.5 49.2
Kg. Tg. Serai 56.7 53.6
Kg. Tg. Dahan 53.9 50.6
Kg. Bt. Iboi 59.2 54.1
Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight negative.
Criteria Score Rationale
Importance 1 Area assessed in accordance to the air and noise area of assessment. Within 5 km from project footprint
Magnitude -1 Negative impact to the community health.
Permanence 3 Permanent emission throughout operation phase
Reversibility 2 Reversible with implementation of mitigation measures and installation of up to date technology throughout the operation phase.
Cumulativity 3 Impact is cumulative with the surrounding environment.
Environmental Score -8
Description -A Slight negative impact
6-205
6.2.22 Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) The objectives of the QRA study are to identify and quantify the probability and consequences of the possible accidents that may escalate from the proposed project to the surrounding offsite areas; to calculate the level of risk; and to suggest measures to reduce the level of risk if higher than the allowable level in compliance with DOE’s risk criteria stipulated in the Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for Risk Assessment, December 2004, EG 1/04.
6.2.22.1 Evaluation Framework
Definitions The risk assessment of the proposed project have been conducted in accordance with the elements described in the following sections. The main stages of the QRA evaluation are as follows (Refer to Appendix J, Section 1.3):
Stage 1- Hazard Identification: Identification of initiating release events and major hazards that require further evaluation; Stage 2- Frequency Analysis: Determination of the frequency of initiating events and the frequency of hazardous event outcomes; Stage 3- Consequence Analysis: Determination of the consequences of hazardous events Stage 4- Event Tree Analysis: Representation of how the initiating event may develop and the resulting likelihood of the hazardous outcome; Stage 5- Risk Summation: Calculation and evaluation of individual risk level and as well as comparison against the risk criteria established for the study; and Stage 6- Risk Mitigation: Recommendation of risk mitigation measures, as required.
6.2.22.2 Predicted Risks
Identified Hazards The identification of possible major accident hazard in the proposed project is based on the physical and chemical properties (i.e. flash point, boiling point, heat of combustion) of substances stored in this project site. Other than that, the design parameter of the vessels which store the hazardous substance has also been considered as one of the factor in deciding the possible scenario of major accident hazard.
Occupational Health Hazards The impact of other hazards, such as occupational hazards which are limited to personnel working within the proposed project site and external hazards (earthquake, air plane crash etc.) have not been reported as these hazards are not within the scope of this QRA.
Hazardous Substances
The substances that subjected to this QRA study are listed in Table 6.58. The materials are chosen based on high mass percentage in each unit (equipment) and its physical and chemical properties (explosive and flammability).
Information on the characterization for each hazardous substance is summarized in the following tables in subsequent pages. It should be noted that maximum quantities/ inventories and worst case operating/ processing conditions are used in the QRA to ensure conservatism.
6-206 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Table 6.58 Characterization of Hazardous Material
Hazardous Material Characterization
Crude Oil Flammable Fuel Oil Flammable Diesel Flammable Gasoline Flammable
Physical and Chemical Properties of Hazardous Substances Crude Oil Crude oil is a thick light yellow to dark black coloured liquid and has petroleum hydrocarbon odour. It is classified as highly flammable liquid. Table 6.59 shows the physical and chemical properties of Crude Oil
Table 6.59 Physical and Chemical Properties of Crude Oil
Parameters Units
Boiling Point (ºC) <=35
Flash Point (ºC) <38
Auto – ignition Temperature Point (ºC) 310
Vapour Pressure (psi) 0.6-10.0
Lower explosive limit (LEL) (%vol) 1.1
Upper Explosive Limit (UEL) (%vol) 6.0
Fuel Oil Fuel oil is a black viscous liquid with characteristic strong odour of petroleum/asphalt type. It is classified as flammable liquid. Table 6.60 shows the physical and chemical properties of fuel oil
Table 6.60 Physical and chemical properties of fuel oil.
Parameters Units
Boiling Point (ºC) 177-371
Flash Point (ºC) 55
Auto – ignition Temperature Point (ºC) >263
Vapour Pressure (psi) 0.007 at 38ºC
Lower explosive limit (LEL) (%vol) 0.5
Upper Explosive Limit (UEL) (%vol) 5
Gasoline Gasoline is a light straw to red clear liquid with characteristic strong odour of Gasoline. It is classified as flammable liquid. Table 6.61 shows the physical and chemical properties of Gasoline.
6-207
Table 6.61 Physical and Chemical Properties of gasoline
Parameters Units
Boiling Point (ºC) 37.8-204.4
Flash Point (ºC) -45
Auto – ignition Temperature Point (ºC) >280
Vapour Pressure (psi) 5 to 15 at 37.8ºC
Lower explosive limit (LEL) (%vol) 1.4
Upper Explosive Limit (UEL) (%vol) 7.6
Diesel Diesel is a colourless to dyed red, light green or yellowish liquid and has petroleum hydrocarbon odour. It is classified as combustible liquid. Table 6.62 shows the physical and chemical properties of
Table 6.62 Physical and chemical properties of diesel
Parameters Units
Flash Point (ºC) >52
Auto – ignition Temperature Point (ºC) 257
Vapour Pressure (psi) 0.009 psia at 21ºC
Lower explosive limit (LEL) (%vol) 0.6
Upper Explosive Limit (UEL) (%vol) 7.5
Representative Release Scenarios Leaks can range in size from a pinhole leak to a catastrophic failure. In general smaller leaks have higher accident likelihood but lower consequence distances. On the other hand larger releases have lower accident likelihood but longer consequence distance. The representative scenarios considered in this study are:
Atmospheric Tank;
Small leak (15 mm); Medium leak (50 mm); Catastrophic; Pump;
Small leak (15 mm);
Medium leak (50 mm); Catastrophic; Flexible hose;
Small leak (15 mm); Medium leak (50 mm); Catastrophic; Pipeline;
Small leak (15 mm);
6-208 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Medium leak (50 mm); Catastrophic; Valve;
Small leak (15 mm); Medium leak (50 mm); Catastrophic
Flange;
Small leak (15 mm); Medium leak (50 mm); and Catastrophic.
The events identified for further analysis in this study has been divided into isolatable sections (which represent sections of the process that have various hold up inventory, pressure and temperature) as tabulated in Table 6.63.
Table 6.63 Listing of release and outcome events for consequence analysis
No. Isolatable Sub- Description Note Potential Section ID Outcome
1 IS01_CRUDEOIL_ Release of crude oil due to 15 mm, 50 Pool Fire, TANKBUND_L leak/catastrophic failure of tanks mm and Boilover catastrophic
2 IS02_FUELOIL_TA Release of fuel oil due to 15 mm, 50 Pool Fire, NKBUND_L leak/catastrophic failure of tanks mm and Boilover catastrophic
3 IS03_DIESEL_TA Release of diesel due to 15 mm, 50 Pool Fire, NKBUND_L leak/catastrophic failure of tanks mm and Boilover catastrophic
4 IS04_GASOLINE_ Release of gasoline due to 15 mm, 50 Pool Fire, TANKBUND_L leak/catastrophic failure of tanks mm and Boilover catastrophic
5 IS05_CRUDEOIL_ Release of crude oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool PIPEJETTY_L leak/catastrophic failure of pipeline to mm and Fire jetty and associated fittings/pipings catastrophic
6 IS06_FUELOIL_PI Release of fuel oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool PEJETTY_L leak/catastrophic failure of pipeline to mm and Fire jetty and associated fittings/pipings catastrophic
7 IS07_DIESEL_PIP Release of diesel oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool EJETTY_L leak/catastrophic failure of pipeline to mm and Fire jetty and associated fittings/pipings catastrophic
8 IS08_GASOLINE_ Release of gasoline oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool PIPEJETTY_L leak/catastrophic failure of pipeline to mm and Fire jetty and associated fittings/pipings catastrophic
9 IS09_CRUDEOIL_ Release of crude oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool FLEXIBLEHOSE_L leak/catastrophic failure of flexible hose mm and Fire at the catastrophic
10 IS10_FUELOIL_FL Release of fuel oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool EXIBLEHOSE_L leak/catastrophic failure of flexible hose mm and Fire at the catastrophic
6-209
No. Isolatable Sub- Description Note Potential Section ID Outcome
11 IS11_DIESEL_FLE Release of diesel due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool XIBLEHOSE_L leak/catastrophic failure of flexible hose mm and Fire at the catastrophic
12 IS12_GASOLINE_ Release of gasoline due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool FLEXIBLEHOSE_L leak/catastrophic failure of flexible hose mm and Fire at the catastrophic
13 IS13_CRUDEOIL_ Release of crude oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool PUMP_L leak/catastrophic failure of pump mm and Fire catastrophic
14 IS14_FUELOIL_P Release of fuel oil due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool UMP_L leak/catastrophic failure of pump mm and Fire catastrophic
15 IS15_DIESEL_PU Release of diesel due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool MP_L leak/catastrophic failure of pump mm and Fire catastrophic
16 IS15_GASOLINE_ Release of gasoline due to 15 mm, 50 Jet Fire, Pool PUMP_L leak/catastrophic failure of pump mm and Fire catastrophic
Frequency Analysis
Release Frequencies Equipment Failure Rate Generic failure rate data for equipment item have been taken from Offshore Hydrocarbon Release Database /58/ and Lees 1996 /59/. The table below summarizes the generic equipment failure data used in this study.
Table 6.64 Historical Onshore Equipment Failure Rates
Equipment Item Failure Size Failure Frequency
Storage Tank (>3 ft) Small 1.10 x 10-3 per year
Medium 6.46 x 10-4 per year
Catastrophic 3.64 x 10-5 per year
Pump (> 3ft) Small 5.81 x 10-4 per year
Medium 2.79 x 10-4 per year
Catastrophic 1.26 x 10-5 per year
Flexible Hose (450 mm) Small 8.54 x 10-3 per year
Medium 2.73 x 10-3 per year
Catastrophic 4.10 x 10-4 per year
Piping (D> 11 inch) Small 3.73 x 10-6 per year
Medium 2.61 x 10-6 per year
Catastrophic 5.52 x 10-7 per year
Actuated Valve (D<3 inch) Small 1.15 x 10-4 per year
6-210 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and
Mitigation Measures
Equipment Item Failure Size Failure Frequency
Medium 2.03 x 10-5 per year
Catastrophic 0
Actuated Valve Small 4.89 x 10-5 per year (3 Catastrophic 7.24 x 10-6 per year Actuated Valve (D>11 inch) Small 6.52 x 10-5 per year Medium 4.57 x 10-5 per year Catastrophic 9.65 x 10-5 per year Small 1.07 x 10-5 per flange per year Flange (D <3 inch) Medium 1.89 x10-5 per flange per year Catastrophic 1.00 x 10-6 per flange per year Flange (3 Medium 4.75 x 10-6 per flange per year Catastrophic 1.00 x 10-6 per flange per year Flange (D>.11 inch) Small 1.45 x 10-5 per flange per year Medium 1.01 x 10-5per flange per year Catastrophic 2.14 x 10-5 per flange per year It should be noted that the equipment listed above are not subject to any lifting operations once installed at the proposed project. Hence the possibility of failures due to lifting operations are deemed not credible. These generic failure data were derived from statistical analysis of historical accident data from the chemical industry as a whole and take no account of the current safety engineering standards which are generally higher than the historical average. Furthermore, no account was taken of clients’ engineering design standards nor safety management systems. The data can be considered as conservative for the purposes of assessment. Ignition Probabilities The probability of ignition depends on the availability of a flammable mixture, the flammable mixture reaching an ignition source, and the type of ignition source (energy, etc.). The possible ignition sources on the facility include: Hot work; Faults in electrical equipment; Faults in rotating equipment; Ignition caused by combustion engines/ hot surfaces; Automatic ignition in the event of a fracture/ rupture; Static electricity; and Lighting. According to Cox, Lees and Ang /60/, generic ignition probabilities are given as below: 6-211 Table 6.65 Immediate and delayed ignition probability distribution Scenario Probabilities of ignition for release rate categories 0.1 to 1.0 kg/s 1.0 to 5.0 kg/s >50 kg/s Gas Leak 0.01 0.07 0.3 Oil/Condensate Leak 0.01 0.03 0.08 Depending on the time of ignition after release, the ignition can be “immediate ignition” or “delayed ignition”. The following assumptions have been made for distribution of overall ignition probability into immediate and delayed ignition: Table 6.66 Immediate and Delayed Ignition Probability Distribution. Release Rate (kg/s) Immediate Ignition Delayed Ignition 0.1 to 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 to 50 0.5 0.5 > 50 0.6 0.4 The probability of explosion depends on factors such as location of leak source, gas concentrations (presence of vapour clouds), location and energy of ignition sources, area geometry, and ventilation of the area and equipment congestion. Cox, Lees and Ang /60/ provides probabilities for explosion used in the assessment in lieu of the detailed information required for estimation. Table 6.67 Probability of explosion given gas cloud ignition. Release Rate (kg/s) Immediate Ignition 0.1 to 1.0 0.1 1.0 to 50 0.5 > 50 0.6 Event Tree Analysis The event frequencies can be obtained by applying the ignition probabilities above to event tree as shown in the figures below: 6-212 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Immediate Boilover Release Ignition Yes Ignition Yes occurs Immediate Pool Fire Unignited Ignition No Ignition No Release Figure 6.116 Event Tree Model for release of flammable liquid > 2 bar. Immediate Jet Fire Release Ignition Yes Ignition Yes occurs Immediate Pool Fire Unignited Ignition No Ignition No Release Figure 6.117 Event Tree Model for small and medium release of flammable liquid > 2 bar 6-213 Immediate Pool Fire Release Ignition Yes Ignition Yes occurs Immediate Pool Fire Unignited Ignition No Ignition No Release Figure 6.118 Event Tree Model for catastrophic release of flammable liquid> 2 bar Consequence Analysis Hazard Zones The following hazard zones have been analysed via consequence modelling (Methodology and events are detailed in Appendix J, Section 1.6.2). The criteria for each hazard zone are as follows: Table 6.68 Hazard Zones Criteria Hazard Criteria Thermal Radiation (Fire) 37.5 kW/m2 – This radiation level may result in up to 100% fatalities in the total population exposed and cause significant damage to process equipment 12.5 kW/m2 – This radiation level may result in up to 50% fatalities in the total population exposed and cause damage to process equipment 4 kW/m2 – This radiation level does not result if fatalities. However for the purpose of conservatism, this QRA model has assumed that this radiation level may result in up to 3% fatalities in the total population exposed, but below which no injuries or damage would be expected All consequence results can be found in Appendix J:- Appendix 1-A while the frequency results can be found in Appendix J:- Appendix 1-B. Risk Summation The results of risk summation are presented in terms of IR which, in the context of the DOE Risk Guidelines, is defined as the risk of fatality to a person in the vicinity of a hazard. This includes the nature of the fatality to the individual, the likelihood of the fatality occurring, and the period of time over which the fatality might occur. The individual is assumed to be unprotected and to be present during the total time of exposure (i.e. 24 hours a day, every day of the year). The individual risk value, Ri, at a particular distance, i, due to the occurrence of a particular event outcome, j, is calculated by the following equation: 6-214 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Ri=Ʃfeo,j.Pfat,I,j.Pweather,j, where: feo,j is the frequency of event outcome j obtained from event tree analysis and historical data; Pfat,i,j is the probability of fatality at distance i produced by event outcome j from consequence analysis; and Pweather,j is the probability of the weather conditions required to produce the event outcome at j (from meteorological data, 1 for weather independent event outcomes). The IR profile for the site under study is calculated with the Consultant's in-house spreadsheet based on the above equation. It is represented as a function of distance from the source of potential risk upon the surrounding environment. Risk summation involves combining the frequency of a given event outcome with its associated consequences to determine the IR levels associated with the site. The worst case findings can be summarized as follows: Table 6.69 IR contour findings summary. IR Contours Max Distance to Contour (m) 1x10-5 per year 451.2 1x10-6 per year 452.2 The representation of IR contours of various iso-sections for the proposed Project is shown in Figure 6.119. 6-215 Figure 6.119 Individual risk contours 6.2.22.3 Conclusion Salient findings of the QRA study The credible scenario consequences assessed does not reach involuntary recipients of industrial risk surrounding the project, which is in compliance with DOE’s risk acceptance criteria. That the following hazard zones contour for credible scenarios does not reach involuntary recipients of industrial risk: - 37.5 kW/m2 heat radiation hazard zone IR Contours - The 1 x 10-5 per year IR contour of the proposed project goes beyond the project boundary but does not encompass involuntary recipient; and - The 1 x 10-6 per year IR contour of the proposed project does not encompass involuntary recipients of industrial risks such as residential areas, schools, hospitals, and places of continuous occupancy, etc. 6-216 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures The above results are in compliance of the requirements stipulated by the DOE risk criteria. Table 6.70 Risk contour findings summary. IR Contours Max Distance to Confirmation Contour (m) 1x10-5 per year 451.2 The contour goes beyond the project boundary but does not encompass involuntary recipient 1x10-6 per year 452.2 The contour does not encompass any sensitive receptor area It is noted that the risks have been assessed on a conservative basis, both in terms of consequences (e.g. use of the maximum inventories of hazardous substances in vessels, worst case process conditions, releases are modelled based on initial maximum (rather than average) release rates, no account taken of site drainage/ emergency spill containment systems to limit the spread of liquid releases etc. using published computer models that are inherently conservative), and frequency – i.e. no account has been taken of project site safety systems (e.g. isolation valves, detectors), operator intervention to prevent or minimise releases and no credit has been taken to account for the site Safety Management System. A worst case scenario (WCS) is the scenario which entails the farthest consequence distance amongst all the scenarios irrespective of the frequency. While a worst case credible scenario (WCCS) is a credible scenario (with event frequencies > 1 × 10-6 per year) with furthest consequence distance. The WCS and WCCS for the study is the same event and envisaged to be the pool fire arising from the leakage of the fuel oil storage tank, diesel storage tank and gasoline storage tank. The WCS and WCCS resulting from an ignited release at 33oC and 1.013 bara pressure at weather condition 5D. This resulted in a hazard zone of 37.5 kW/m2 thermal radiation level of up to 193.80 m. Meanwhile for hazard zone of 4kW/m2, the distance extends a maximum of 465.0 m. Refer to Figure 6.120, Figure 6.121 and Figure 6.122 for the WCS/WCCS contour. 6-217 Figure 6.120 Worst case scenario fire event for fuel oil storage 6-218 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Figure 6.121 Worst case scenario fire event for diesel storage 6-219 Figure 6.122 Worst case scenario fire event for gasoline storage Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be moderate negative. Criteria Score Rationale Importance 1 Area affected is within 1 km of the project area Magnitude -3 Although limitation to the project area, the potential severity within the area impact can be high. Permanence 3 Impacts could be severe Reversibility 3 irreversible Cumulativity 3 Impact is cumulative if several incidents occur at the same time. Environmental Score -27 Description -C Moderate negative impact 6-220 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 6.2.23 Land Traffic Vehicle movement to and from the project area will impact on the existing land traffic pattern at and around study area. This impact varies during construction and operation stage due to the difference in project-related traffic volume during these stages. Among the apparent impacts are the impacts to general traffic condition including traffic volume and composition, roadway performance and junction performance. 6.2.23.1 Evaluation Framework Assumptions Most of the heavy bulk of construction materials (e.g. steel plate for tank construction piles, gravel, sand etc.) will be delivered to proposed project site primarily by barge. The only activities which likely to affect the land traffic during construction stage are the transportation of workers and construction materials for onshore facilities. Traffic ingress and egress to the proposed project area during operation stage is primarily due to movement of employee working at the operating facilities. Few assumptions were made as follows: Zone of impact (ZOI) is 25 km radius from the proposed project area Worker’s camp will be located at chalets found between Kuala Linggi and Tg. Serai (Figure 6.125) Number of workers who will be involved during construction stage was forecasted based on number workers involved in similar project during construction stage (Table 6.72) Construction of onshore facilities will be carried out in 2018 after completion of reclamation. Construction materials for onshore facilities will be transported via Jalan Kuala Sungai Baru / Kuala Linggi (138) (see Section 5, Figure 6.125) The traffic accessing the project site will comprise of light vehicles (motorcycles, cars and vans) Number of worker who will be involved during operation stage was forecasted based on number workers involved in similar project during operation stage (Table 6.73) The proposed project was assumed to operate in year 2025 Based on these assumptions, traffic impact assessment for construction stage was focused on coastal road which connects to workers camp and roads which will be used to transport the construction materials. Development of Evaluation Tool – Traffic Model Impacts to land traffic was assessed using a software package called EMME. This software provides a robust traffic forecast on roads which are likely to be affected by the proposed project. Identification and classification on several key inputs for the traffic model were done as detailed in Section 5 of Appendix M and as summarised below:- a) Traffic Zone - The study area was classified into smaller area (zones) to accurately replicate the traffic generation based on land use and population - There are 37 traffic zones which were segregated based on Mukim level within study area (see Figure ) 6-221 Figure 6.6.123 Traffic zones covered under traffic assessment b) Development of Base Year c) Trip Matrix - Developed based on observed traffic count along roadways and junctions within study area; and - Derived from socioeconomic data including information on population and employment by traffic zone - There were 37 zones modelled for the study area including 13 external traffic zone and 24 traffic within study area d) Traffic Assignment - Traffic model identifies point at which the demand exceeds the road capacity which was indicated in terms of delay time for travelling - Subsequently, the model will reassigned the traffic to alternative routes based on volume-delay function - The volume-delay function used in the traffic model took into account delay encountered when travelling along the road and junctions e) Link Flow Calibration - The model was first calibrated by comparing observed and modelled traffic flows across the screen lines of interest for the proposed project. - The comparison of observed and modelled traffic flows shows that the overall calibration is generally satisfactory and the individually observed sites were validated adequately for the purpose of traffic demand forecasting. - It is conventionally accepted that modelled traffic flows should be at least within +/- 10% of observed traffic flow across the key screen line or cordon count in study area. 6-222 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Traffic Condition Background Traffic Background traffic condition comprised of traffic passing through the affected routes in the vicinity of the project site. This traffic does not include traffic movement from the proposed project area. The future background traffic was determined based on normal traffic growth trends recorded at the nearest Highway Planning unit (HPU) traffic census stations as described in Section 5.3.9.1. Based on this trend, the normal traffic growth around study area was assumed to be from 1.5% to 2.5% per annum as detailed in Table 6.71. Table 6.71 Traffic growth assumptions based on data from HPU stations around project area Forecast Year Growth Factor 2015 - 2018 2.5% 2018 - 2020 2.0% 2020 - 2025 1.5% The background traffic condition during operation stage was forecasted based on 1.5% growth factor deduced from historical data collected at nearest Highway Planning Unit (HPU) traffic census stations. Site-specified Traffic Site-specified traffic refers to traffic directly generated from and attracted to the proposed project area during both construction and operation stage. This type of traffic was forecasted based on number of employees involved in similar project considering both construction and operation stage as shown in Table 6.72 and Table 6.73. Table 6.72 Proposed staff during construction Stage Phase Maximum staff Approx. time period for peak numbers at peak period period activity of activity Forming land mass and slope 150 including dredging 24 months protection vessel staff Construction of highway link bridge 200 24 months and island road infrastructure including M+E Construction of Ship Repair Yard 1500 36 months Construction of Heavy Fabrication 150 18 months Yard Construction of LNG berth 100 18 months Construction of Tank farm 150 18 months Construction of Academy 100 6 months Construction of Admin complex 100 8 months Construction of Bomba station 30 5 months Construction of Water tower 20 3 months Construction of other general 75 60 months (total duration) facilities, services, etc. Source: Royal Haskoning DHV 6-223 Table 6.73 Proposed staff during operation stage Location Maximum staff 24 hour activity numbers Ship Repair Yard 350 -500 Yes – 50% staffing level during night time shift Heavy Fabrication Yard 150 - 200 Yes – 50% staffing level during night time shift LNG berth 25 - 50 Yes – 50% staffing level during night time shift Tank farm 10 -20 Yes – 50% staffing level during night time shift Academy 300 (including students) No Admin complex 80 Yes – 10 staff Bomba station 20 Yes – 10 staff Other: Service Facilities 150 Yes – 50% staff Govt. land Unknown – assume 500 Yes – 50% staff Source: Royal Haskoning DHV Information on number of employees, their activities and proposed land use were converted to trips based on Trip Generation Manual Code published by Highway Planning Unit /61/. Summary of the trip production during construction stage by project activities / land use is given in Table 6.74. Table 6.74 Summary of trip production during construction stage Construction Total Total AM Trip PM Trips Maximum Peak Activities Trips Trips (AM) (PM) IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT Ship Repair Yard 1050 600 679 307 109 464 679 464 Heavy Fabrication 105 60 68 31 11 46 68 46 Yard LNG Berth 70 40 45 20 7 31 45 31 Tank Farm 105 60 68 31 11 46 68 46 Academy 264 282 239 42 63 210 239 210 Admin Complex 70 75 64 11 17 56 64 56 Fire Station 42 168 18 12 60 73 60 73 Total 1548 1116 1038 429 240 801 1080 801 Site specified traffic during operation stage was forecasted based on number employees involved in similar project during operation stage. Information on number of employees, their activities and proposed land use were converted to trips based on Trip Generation Manual Code published by Highway Planning Unit. Summary of the trip production during operation stage by project activities / land use is given in Table 6.75. 6-224 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 6.75 Summary of trip production during operation stage Operation Total Total AM Trip PM Trips Maximum Peak Activities Trips Trips (AM) (PM) IN OUT IN OUT IN OUT Ship Repair 175 100 113 51 18 77 113 77 Yard Heavy 70 40 45 20 7 31 45 31 Fabrication Yard LNG Berth 18 10 11 5 2 8 11 8 Tank Farm 7 4 5 2 1 3 5 3 Academy 264 282 239 42 63 210 239 210 Admin 70 75 64 11 17 56 64 56 Complex Fire Station 28 112 12 8 40 49 40 49 Total 632 623 490 140 147 434 517 434 Roadway Performance Location of stations (a total of 14 stations) assessed under roadway assessment is shown in Figure 6.124. 6-225 Figure 6.124 Survey station for roadway assessment Historical data from nearby HPU census station was used to establish existing traffic condition as described in Section 5.3.9. Assessment on impacts to roadway performance was carried out based on the volume/capacity of the road sections, road hierarchy, lane capacity and travel 6-226 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures speed of the roads found around the proposed project site. Subsequently, the assessment criteria was compared against its corresponding Level of Service (LOS) to summarise performance of the road sections. Characteristics of LOS related to road performance is given in Table 6.76. Table 6.76 Characteristic of LOS to reflects road performance Level of Service (LOS) Characteristic A Free Flow Speed (FF) operation B Reasonably free-flow Ability to manoeuvre is only slightly restricted/delay Effects of minor incidents still easily absorbed C Speed at or near free-flow/stable flow Freedom to manoeuvre is noticeably restricted Queues may form D Speed decline slightly with increasing flows Density increase more quickly, approaching unstable flow Freedom to manoeuvre is more noticeable limited Minor incidents create queuing E Operation near or at capacity, unstable flow No usable gaps in the traffic stream Operations extremely volatile Any disruption causes queuing F Forced or breakdown in flow Queues from behind breakdown points Demand is greater than capacity Junction Performance Evaluation of the existing junction operational performance was carried out using the Signalised and Un-signalised Intersection Design and Research Aid (SIDRA) program. This methodology determines how well an intersection, approach to an intersection, or movement at an intersection operates. Performance of each junction was measured based on vehicle delay (in seconds) as detailed in Table 6.77. Level of Service (LOS) A reflects the best operating condition while LOS F reflects the worst. Table 6.77 Level of service (LOS) criteria used to describe junction performance Level of service Control Delay per Vehicle (sec) (LOS) Signalised Stop / Give Way Roundabout A d ≤ 10 d ≤ 10 d <=10 B 10 ≤ d ≤ 20 10 ≤ d ≤ 15 10 < d <= 20 C 20 ≤ d ≤ 35 15 ≤ d ≤ 25 20 < d <= 35 D 35 ≤ d ≤ 55 25 ≤ d ≤ 35 35 Sensitive Areas (ESAs) Sensitive receptors found along the affected roads which are likely to be affected by the change in traffic condition, junction and roadway performance during construction stage were identified. These sensitive receptors were identified based on vulnerability to be affected by 6-227 potential noise pollution, air pollution and accidents which might arise due to increased traffic growth. Among the sensitive receptors are schools or colleges, religious buildings, clinics, recreational places and human settlements as shown in Figure 6.125. Figure 6.125 Sensitive receptors along the affected roads 6.2.23.2 Construction Phase Potential impacts to land traffic during construction stage is described in terms of impacts to traffic condition, roadway performance and junction performance as further described in the following subsections. Traffic Condition Predicted background traffic condition in 2018 is shown in Figure 6.126 while combination of predicted background traffic and traffic generated during construction stage of the proposed project is shown in Figure 6.127. In general, traffic volume at secondary distributor roads, primary distributor road and some parts of the highway extending beyond 5 km radius was predicted to be affected during construction stage. Traffic volume at secondary distibutor roads comprised of S138 – Jalan Kuala Sungai Baru/Kuala Linggi, M161 - Jalan Ayer Molek/ Lubuk Cina and M10 was forecasted to increase almost doubled the background traffic. Whereas, traffic volume at primary distributor roads covering Federal Route 5 was forecasted to 6-228 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures experience considerably high traffic volume compared to the background traffic. On the other hand, Jalan Pintasan Teluk Kemang connected to Plus Highway via E29 was predicted to experience slight increase in traffic volume during construction stage. Figure 6.126 Predicted maximum peak hour background traffic volume (pcu) for year 2018. 6-229 Figure 6.127 Predicted maximum peak hour traffic volume (background traffic + traffic from construction activities) (pcu) for year 2018 Roadway Performance The roadway performance considering background traffic only was mainly within LOS A (free flow speed) at all the stations except at station 3 (Federal Route 5) where it was categorized as LOS B. During construction stage the roadway performance is expected to deteriorate at most of the stations where station 3 (Federal Route 5 – direction 5 and 6) and at station 11 (Jalan Kuala Sg. Baru / Kuala Linggi – direction 21 and 22) is expected to operate at LOS C to D as shown in Figure 6.128. Thus freedom to manoeuvre will be noticeably limited and the driving speed will decline slightly with increasing traffic flow during peak hour. 6-230 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Figure 6.128 Stations where roadway performance is affected during construction stage. Junction Performance The junction performance assessment shows that Junction 1 will be operating at acceptable LOS ranged between LOS A to LOS B as shown in Figure 6.129. Traffic flow from the proposed project area towards Kuala Sg. Baru is expected slightly slower compared to other direction at Junction 1. 6-231 Figure 6.129 Predicted junction performance at Junction 1 during construction stage 2018 Performance of Junction 2 is shown in Figure 6.130. Traffic flow from Kg. Sg. Baru at peak hour is expected to cause vehicles queues at this junction during peak hours as it will operate at LOS C. 6-232 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Figure 6.130 Predicted junction performance at Junction 2 during construction stage 2018. 6-233 Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be minor negative. Criteria Score Rationale Importance 2 Areas within 5 km from project footprint. Magnitude -1 Minor negative changes. The traffic condition deteriorate LOS from acceptable level of LOS A –B (background condition) to LOA C – D with the presence of vehicle movement for construction of proposed project. Permanence 2 Temporary as impact to land traffic is expected as long as there are movements of vehicles to get access to proposed project site. Reversibility 2 Reversible as the impact is limited to during construction stage only. Cumulativity 3 Cumulative impact as traffic congestion may delay travelling time of people to get to work place or to school. This will eventually affect their performance. Environmental Score -14 Description -B Minor negative impact 6.2.23.3 Operation Phase Potential impact to land traffic during operation stage is described in terms of traffic condition, roadway performance and junction performance as further described in the following subsections. Traffic Condition Forecasted background traffic condition in 2025 is shown in Figure 6.131 while the traffic condition with the presence of proposed project is shown in Figure 6.132. In general, traffic volume during operation stage is lower than construction stage and the impact was limited to roads found within 5 km radius only. Similar to construction stage, secondary distributor, primary distributor and some parts of highway may experience change in traffic volume but at a lower scale than the construction stage. Traffic volume at secondary distibutor roads comprised of S138 – Jalan Kuala Sungai Baru/Kuala Linggi and M161 was forecasted to increase almost double to considerably high than the background traffic. Whereas, traffic volume at primary distributor roads covering Federal Route 5 was forecasted to experience slight increase in traffic volume compared to the background traffic. 6-234 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Figure 6.131 Predicted maximum peak hour traffic volume (background traffic) (pcu) for year 2025. 6-235 Figure 6.132 Predicted maximum peak hour traffic volume (background traffic + traffic from activities of operation phase) (pcu) for year 2025. Roadway Performance The roadway performance considering background traffic only was mainly within LOS A at all the stations except at station 3 (Federal Route 5) where it was categorized as LOS B. During operation stage the roadway performance at most of the road section is expected to be LOS A where land traffic flow will be smooth. However some road sections at station 3 (Federal Route 5), station 9 (Federal Route 5 – direction 18), station 11 (Jalan Kuala Sg. Baru/ Kuala Linggi) and station 12 (Jalan Kuala Sg. Baru/ Kuala Linggi) were expected to experience roadway performance of LOS B. However this is negligible as the traffic will be reasonably free-flow and only slight delay is expected during manoeuvre and minor accidents. 6-236 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Junction Performance During operation stage, Junction 1 is expected to operate at LOS A to B similar as construction stage. Junction 1 performance during operation stage is shown in Figure 6.133. Traffic flow from the proposed project area towards Kuala Sg. Baru is expected slightly slower compared to other direction at Junction 1. Figure 6.133 Predicted junction performance at Junction 1 during operation stage 2020 Performance of Junction 2 is within acceptable LOS A to B as shown in Figure 6.134. As compared to construction stage, the traffic flow during operation stage from Kg. Sg. Baru towards proposed project area has improved from LOS C during construction stage to LOS B during operation stage. 6-237 Figure 6.134 Predicted junction performance at Junction 2 during operation stage - 2025 Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be no change. Criteria Score Rationale Importance 2 Areas within 5 km from project footprint. Magnitude 0 The roadway and junction performances are still acceptable (LOS A and LOS B) Permanence 3 The traffic will not change since the project is in place. Reversibility 2 The impact is reversible when the project being abandoned. Cumulativity 2 Non-cumulative. Environmental Score 0 Description N No change 6-238 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 6.2.24 Marine Traffic and Navigation 6.2.24.1 Evaluation Framework and Methodology The Project has the potential to impact the existing marine traffic and navigation due to the additional shipping traffic during both the construction and operation phases of the project. In addition the reclamation and dredging for the project may impact currents in the existing navigation channel and port areas. There are no set standards against which the impact of these changes can be assessed. An evaluation has therefore been made of the changes from the existing conditions and how these changes will impact existing navigation. The scope of work for the Marine Traffic and Navigation studies is to: Assess the potential impacts of the project on adjacent navigation routes navigation to nearby marine facilities. Make an initial assessment of the safety of navigation to the proposed berthing facilities for the Project A desktop assessment of the potential impacts of these issues of the adjacent marine facilities, and of the safety of navigation during construction and operation of the Project has been carried out. This is reported in Appendix H. Desktop navigation simulations have also been carried out to assess navigability to / from the proposed jetties. This is reported in Appendix I. 6.2.24.2 Sensitive Receptors The existing marine facilities in the area and navigation routes are described in detail in Section 5.3.10. The key sensitive receptors in respect of navigation are listed below and shown in Figure 6.135. The navigation route between the through the Malacca Straits as defined by the IMO traffic separation scheme. Ship-To-Ship Transfer Operations and Linggi International Floating Transhipment and Trading Hub (LIFT-HUB) Kuala Sg. Linggi Port 6-239 Figure 6.135 Sensitive receptors for navigation 6-240 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 6.2.24.3 Construction Phase The key potential impacts to navigation during the construction phase are linked to the additional shipping traffic for the marine construction works. This will include: Trailer Suction Hopper dredgers during the reclamation and dredging activities. It is expected that these will generate 3 to 4 shipping movements per day between the working area and the designated sand source and disposal areas to the south of the Kuala Sg. Linggi Port Limit. Crane barges and other barges operating close to the oil jetty and wharfs during their construction. The key potential impacts of this shipping during the construction phase are: Marine Traffic Congestion. The marine traffic during construction will have a direct impact to the current STS operation. The current pilot boarding ground will be used by the construction traffic, which will increase congestion in this area. With good coordination this is not expected to cause significant traffic congestion. Port Safety. The increase in marine traffic will be a potential added risk to the safety within port. The dredging work itself with the movement of ancillary craft connected with the work will potentially add a greater degree of danger. Fishing. Fishing activities are not permitted within the Port Limits, however, there is still some fishing carried out by small local fishing boats in the vicinity of the port. Fishermen do not frequent the areas adjacent to the entrance and approaches to the channel. Fishing gear could however be damaged and small boats may be damaged or sunk by a collision with larger vessel. Damage to Navigation Aids. The dredging and other vessel movement related to construction activities may interfere with existing aids to navigation; such aids to navigation may need to be temporarily removed, then re-sited, perhaps in a new location, once the dredging is completed. Temporary aids to navigation may be established during the duration of the construction works. Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be a slight negative. Criteria Score Rationale Importance 1 The construction traffic only affects the areas close to the project site. Magnitude -1 The additional marine traffic volumes are small but they do potentially impact existing facilities and activities. Permanence 2 Only occurs during the construction phase. Reversibility 2 Impacts cease if marine traffic ceases. Cumulativity 2 A limited number of ships so no interaction between shipping movements. Environmental Score -6 Description -A Slight negative impact 6.2.24.4 Operation Phase The key potential impacts to navigation during the construction phase are linked to the following: The additional shipping traffic to the new facilities at KLIP. Once fully operational it is expected that there will be approximately 4 ship calls per day at the oil jetty and general 6-241 cargo area. In addition there will be approximately one ship call per week at the shipyard and occasional ship or barge movements to the fabrication yard. The presence of the reclamation and dredging will impact hydrodynamic conditions (current flows) in the area. Additional Shipping Traffic The key potential impacts of this shipping during the operation phase are: Marine Traffic Congestion. The passage from the Pilot Station to KLIP is about 7 nautical miles. Vessels accessing KLIP may encounter other vessels entering or departing from the STS. This can lead to a crossing situation that may affect the positioning of the vessels approaching KLIP. The pilot will help in communication and co-ordination with other vessels and to resolve any situation that may affect vessels approaching KLIP. Fishing. Fishing activities are not permitted within the Port Limits, however, there is still some fishing carried out by small local fishing boats in the vicinity of the port. Fishermen do not frequent the areas adjacent to the entrance and approaches to the channel. Fishing gear could however be damaged and small boats may be damaged or sunk by a collision with larger vessel. Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be slight negative. Criteria Score Rationale Importance 1 The additional traffic only affects the areas close to the project site. Magnitude -1 The additional marine traffic volumes are small but they do potentially impact existing facilities and activities. Permanence 3 Occurs throughout the project operation. Reversibility 2 Impacts cease if marine traffic ceases. Cumulativity 2 A limited number of ships so no interaction between shipping movements. Environmental Score -7 Description -A Slight negative impact Changes to currents in the existing navigation areas The currents in the area prior to the development of KLIP are uniform and relatively weak giving good conditions for navigation. The numerical modelling of the impact of the development of KLIP on these currents is small and limited to the immediate vicinity of the reclamation and dredging. No current instabilities of eddies are caused by the development of KLIP. It is therefore concluded that the development of KLIP will: Not have any impact on the navigability of the approach channel to the existing port facilities; Not have any impact on ships manoeuvring in the vicinity of the STS Impact Evaluation Based on the RIAM, the impact is considered to be no change. 6-242 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Criteria Score Rationale Importance 1 Potential impacts to the STS area within the existing port limits and the Sg. Linggi river mouth. Magnitude 0 No significant change to the currents Permanence 3 Once the reclamation is constructed this impact is permanent Reversibility 3 Impact is not reversible unless the reclamation is removed and the existing bathymetry restored. Cumulativity 2 This is not cumulative with other impacts. Environmental Score 0 Description N No change 6.3 Project Evaluation Due to the substantial capital investment in port facility and subsequent operation, the project is expected to provide substantial economic and business opportunities to market participants. However, the construction and operation of the proposed project are also likely to cause some negative environmental impacts. Contained in this EIA report is commitments of the project proponent to mitigate many of the expected environmental impacts. As is common for any proposed development of this nature, some of the negative impacts cannot be completely mitigated thus justifying the need to quantify, and to the extent possible in monetary terms, the degradation in services obtainable from the disturbed natural environment. Such valuation serves to demonstrate the significance of the environmental values of the services thus providing some measure of trade-off that will be incurred if the project were to be implemented. The flows of environmental services that will be foregone following project implementation are real economic loss to different stakeholders and hence must be quantified so that informed decisions can be made. The valuation process is facilitated by recent progress in the methods and protocol of environmental resources evaluation that allows for the computation of reliable monetary estimates of the value of losses in environmental services. This section outlines the methodology and presents the results of the economic valuation of the environmental impacts of the proposed project. The aim is to quantify the gains and losses in environmental services that can be attributed to the project. 6.3.1 Methodology The valuation in monetary terms of the changes in environmental services arising from project implementation is carried out over an assessment period of 50 years. A critical step in the valuation process revolves around the need to ensure valid attribution of impacts on environmental services to the proposed project. In order to satisfy this requirement, the approach required is the establishment of a clear link between project impacts on the physical functions of the environment and the alteration of the quality and quantity of streams of environmental goods and services. The Guidelines on the Economic Valuation of the Environmental Impacts for EIA Projects /62/ is very clear in this regards, where it specifies that: 6-243 “… a key issue is to identify and quantify the changes in the flow of goods and services produced by the environment which are impacted by a development project, and then to monetize these changes into costs or benefits.” The valuation process can be divided into nine steps as follows: 1 Identify the project stakeholders: The stakeholders are determined by establishing clear links between the degradation in environmental services to the impacted parties. 2 Define the “with project” and “without project” scenarios: for the current project, the “with project” scenario is defined as the situation where the project is implemented that entails reclamation works, and the construction and operation of the proposed port development. “Without project” scenario is depicted as the situation in which the proposed project is not implemented i.e. maintenance of the status quo. 3 Describe the physical impacts: A listing of potential physical impacts of the project that can be reliably attributed to the project is prepared and described by focusing on the physical extent of the impact and the link between the project and its impact on the flow of environmental services 4 Quantify the impacts on the environment over the duration of the project: The physical impacts of the project on the environment is explained and quantified via scientific assessments of the study team that include among others marine biologists, air and water quality specialists, and hydraulic specialists. 5 Monetize the impacts: The quantified impacts produced in Step 4 are monetized using market and non-market valuation techniques. Value parameters of similar environmental services obtained in other studies are used as reference points for evaluation. 6 Discounting: Costs and benefits over time (25 years) are discounted to present values using several discount rates (4%, 6% and 8%). Twenty five years are typically used as the standard period of evaluation since the present value of future benefits/costs beyond 50 years tend to become quantitatively insignificant. 7 Determine the Net Present Value: The net present value is computed in this step by adding up the discounted values of the losses and gains in environmental services. 8 Perform sensitivity analysis: Sensitivity test is conducted for different discount rates to demonstrate the impact of variation in rates on the net present value of the environmental costs and benefits. 9 Make a recommendation: An overall assessment is made based on the magnitude of Net Present Values at different levels of discount rates. 6.3.2 Identification of Changes in Environmental Services Based on the findings of other EIA study team members, Table 6.78 summarises the environmental services that may change as a result of project implementation. The table describes the type and spatial extent of the impacts. From among these potential impacts, mitigation measures are considered, and only those that remains to be significant are evaluated in this study. Table 6.78 Environmental services potentially affected by the project. No. Environmental Service Location and Impacted Spatial Extent Remarks Individuals/Communities 1 Marine Biology - Loss of seabed The reclamation footprint. Footprint of the Total loss of habitat due to the reclamation Fishermen and local reclaimed area seabed habitat. footprint. This area serves as communities deriving (620 acres=251 The productivity crustacean feeding ground and benefits from the marine hectares). loss method is macrobenthos habitat. This resources within 10 km of used to evaluate activity will result in some loss in the project site. the loss in the amount of resources important environmental to support marine life since such 6-244 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures area serves feeding grounds or services and refuge for fishes. functions. 2 Marine Biology - Loss of seabed Part of the straits fronting Dredging area A three year impact habitat due to dredging. Removal the wharves along the (470 acres=188 period is assumed, of seabed during dredging with reclaimed land. Fishermen hectares). which is the effects as outlined above. and local communities anticipated time deriving benefits from the required for the marine resources within seabed life to 10 km of the project site . recover. 3 Terrestrial Biology - Loss of Causeway component of Approximately Not all mangrove mangrove area due to the access the access bridge off Tg 0.36 acre = 0.15 services are bridge causeway footprint. Bt. Supai. hectare of produced by this Mangrove areas generally are Fishermen and local mangrove will be small area of known to provide environmental community deriving lost due to the mangrove. For services including (a) Production benefits from the marine construction of example, no of charcoal and poles, (b) resources as well as the the embankment charcoal and poles Provision of feeding and breeding general population that for bridge. are produced from grounds for shrimp, fish, crab and benefit from carbon the area, and the molusc, (c) Provision of traditional sequestration function. patchy nature of goods (d) Carbon sequestration this particular area function, (e) Shoreline protection, of mangrove and (f) Option, existence and means that its biodiversity value. shoreline protection function would be limited. However, for complete valuation the full potential of mangrove services are evaluated in this study. 4 Marine Biology – Loss of Causeway component of One small patch Although relatively seagrass patches thus causing the the access bridge off Tg out of the three small in size, loss of a range of services Bt. Supai. identified patches evaluation is including carbon sequestration, Fishermen and local will be directly conducted for biological support (e.g. fish community deriving affected (lost to completeness. feeding ground), nutrient recycling benefits from the marine the causeway and maintenance of system for resources as well as the footprint); future use. general population that however, the benefit from carbon other patches sequestration function. may experience high sediment loads during construction. The total area of the patches is approximately 173 m2. 5 Marine Biology – Reduction in Aquaculture along Sg Entire Aquaculture the water quality of aquaculture Linggi: Negeri Sembilan aquaculture and operation along Sg and mussel farm areas during side – Three sites mussel farm Linggi and mussel reclamation thus potentially comprising 48 cages for sites. farm off Tg reducing its productivity and fish farming; Melaka side - Selamat are not health. Two sites with operation predicted to be of about (1) kilometre in affected. The length. sediment plumes Several mussel farms will not impact Sg (one registered) off Tg Linggi nor the Selamat: mussel farm off Tg Selamat. No valuation is necessary. 6-245 6 Socio-economy – Loss of fishing The reclamation footprint All of the Although the area ground and hindrance of access to and port operations area reclaimed area is presently a port the sea. Reduction in the size of as given in Section 4 of plus the limit, fishermen fishing ground because part of the this report. additional area routinely fish in the straits will be reclaimed. The The directly affected declared as port area and will have fishermen will be forced to find stakeholders are the limit. to find other alternative fishing ground/s, coastal (Zone A) locations. The potentially increasing operational fishermen from Kuala Sg additional cost of costs. Linggi and Tg. Agas. It is fishing involves the During operations, expansion of estimated that the number increase in cost of the port limit will be declared. of fishing vessels traveling to and operated in the sea areas back from the is 90. alternative fishing ground. They may have to travel further afar because conflict may arise as they encroach into traditional fishing grounds of other fishermen. 7 Coastal Morphology – Erosion or Hydraulic modelling The beach area Later phases of the sedimentation due to the results show that erosion betweenTg. Che’ project will see a introduction of reclaimed land to observed north of Tg. Amar to Tg Bt reduction of the the existing coastal area. Che’ Amar may worsen Supai sediment transport after phase 1 of the rates particularly project until phase 4, due during SW to a change in the monsoon sediment transport conditions when condition. wave action in the / Residents, visitors and area is more tour operators deriving significant and the benefit from the beach beach will stabilize. front. Furthermore, during phase 1 of the project, it is proposed that sand nourishment (30,000 m3 of sand) is carried out in the beach area between Tg. Che’ Amar and Tg. Bt. Supai. No valuation is therefore necessary because the impact is mitigated. 8 Aesthetic - Change in the form of Coastal areas near the The shore area Results of the intrusion of man-made structures reclaimed land. Apart where the socio-economic into the view scape following from residential properties reclaimed land survey suggest that project completion. in Kuala Sg Linggi, there plus built impact on aesthetic are also 9 chalets (e.g. structures are is not of much NDK Chalet, Rizalan visible. concern to the local Chalet, KM Chalet and residents. The Kembang Sejati Chalet) chalet and resort with 172 rooms, 1 resort operators along the (Desa Balqis Resort) with shoreline show a 78 rooms and 50 bit more concern homestays that could but is significantly potentially be affected. compensated by their opinion that the project can in 6-246 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures fact increase room occupancy as economic development of the area is enhanced. Therefore no valuation is necessary. 6.3.3 Valuation of Significant Changes in Environmental Services As outlined in Table 6.78, eight environmental services can potentially change as a result of project implementation, namely (i) loss of seabed habitat due to reclamation, (ii) loss of seabed habitat due to dredging, (iii) loss of mangrove patch, (iv) loss of seagrass bed, (v) reduction in water quality, (vi) loss of fishing ground and access to sea (higher cost of fishing effort and psychological stress), (vii) potential erosion and accretion, and (viii) change in area’s aesthetic. Of the eight potential changes in environmental services, five are considered to be significant enough for the economic evaluation. These are: i) loss of seabed habitat due to reclamation; ii) loss of seabed habitat due to dredging; iii) loss of mangrove patch; iv) loss of seagrass bed; v) loss of fishing ground and access to sea (higher cost of fishing effort and psychological stress). The nature of losses in environmental services for each of the impact is described and evaluated below. 6.3.3.1 Loss of Seabed Habitat Due to Reclamation and Dredging Reclamation will result in permanent loss of the seabed habitat. The loss of seabed will result in some reduction in the amount resources important to support marine life. The total area that will be affected is 436 hectares. Of this total, the impact on 248 hectares (reclamation footprint) is permanent. For the remaining 188 hectares (one time capital dredging), the impact is only temporary. Following dredging work, the habitat is expected to recover. In this case, a three year impact period is assumed, which is the time required for the seabed life to recover. Muddy seabed provides habitat for some fishery resources like cockles, bivalves and gastropods/snails and shrimps. In addition, sediment communities play a critical role in the food chain for both marine organisms as well as shorebird populations (Chong et al., 1990 /63/). Sediment communities are crucially important food source for marine fish and shorebirds /64; 65; 66/. Past valuation studies have tended to use average nationwide average productivity as a basis for valuing the loss of environmental services produced by mudflats. The use of this approach is understandable because local studies are typically non-existent. This study initially uses such an approach, but subsequently makes some adjustments to the values to better reflect local condition. Sasekumar et al. (1998) /67/ produced an estimate of the value cockle production for mudflats of Peninsular Malaysia in a study conducted in 1995. The said study estimated the total gross value of production at US$26.4 million. The same study also estimated the values of production for bivalves, gastropods/snails, shrimps, and fish at US$17.6 million, US$0.3 million, US$2.9 million and US$2.2 million respectively. The values were obtained by 6-247 multiplying the estimated quantity of production by the unit prices of US$2,600/ton (bivalves), US$600/ton (gastropods/snails), and US$200/ton (shrimp and fish). To arrive at the net value of production the researchers then applied the net revenue factor of 60% for cockle and bivalves, 30% for gastropods/snails and shrimps, and 25% for fish. Total size of mudflats in Peninsular Malaysia is estimated at 35,064 hectares. Dividing the estimates on the annual value of the production of cockles, bi-valves, gastropods/snails, shrimps and fish by the total size of mudflats, the estimated environmental service of mudflats in the form of direct use value (adjusted for price increase at the rate of 4% per year) is provided in Table 6.79. The direct use value for mudflat is therefore estimated at RM 6,632.18/hectare per year. Table 6.79 Estimated direct use value of environmental services (per hectare per year) from Muddy Seabed by Service Type. Environmental Services (Production) Unit Value (RM per hectare per year) Cockles 3,757.16 Bi valves 2,513.26 Gastropods/snails 24.57 Shrimps 206.59 Fish 130.60 Total 6,632.18 The annual value of environmental services forgone from the loss of mudflat is obtained by multiplying the size of the affected area by the estimated value of environmental service produced per hectare (i.e. RM6,632.18/hectare/year). The annual loss that is permanent applies to 248 hectares that constitute the reclaimed land. Temporary loss is assumed to the dredging area (188 hectares) by anticipating a recovery period of three years, implying a total loss in the first year followed by linear recovery of services up to three years until full recovery by the beginning of the fourth year. 6.3.3.2 Loss of Mangroves due to Construction of Bridge Embankment The estimated size of mangrove area that will be lost to make way for the project is very small (0.15 hectare). The impact is confined to the strip of mangrove that will have to make way for the construction of the bridge embankment of Tg. Bt. Supai. Mangrove areas in general produce a variety of ecological services that are economically valuable as mentioned above. However, in this case, not all mangrove services are produced by this small affected area of mangrove. For example, no charcoal and poles are produced from the area and its function for coastal protected would be extremely limited. However, the full potential of mangrove services are evaluated in this study as a conservative measure. Table 6.80 provides the estimated environmental cost of mangrove removal per hectare which amounts to a total of RM16,110.54 per year. The value derived for each ecological service is summarised below; further details are provided in Appendix K. 6-248 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table 6.80 Estimated environmental cost of mangrove removal by service type (2010 price). Type Environmental Services Unit Cost (RM per hectare per year) Direct use value Production of charcoal/poles 2,121.26 Feeding and breeding ground and habitat for 4,991.02 shrimp/fish/crab/molusc Tourism and recreation 2,291.05 Traditional use - Indirect use value Carbon sequestration 507.36 Shoreline protection 6,014.14 Option/Non-use value Biodiversity values 185.72 Total 16,110.54 Production of Charcoal and Poles Estimates of value for charcoal and poles from mangroves are available from previous valuation studies conducted in the region (e.g. Thailand, Sri Lanka and Sumatra). Annual net return estimates range from US$91.97/ha/year (Thailand) to US$392.20/ha/year (East Sumatra). After an incorporating inflationary factor (4%) and exchange rate conversion, this study adopts a current value of RM2,121.26/ha/year for charcoal and poles production from mangrove area. Shrimp, Fish, Crab and Mollusc Production Mangroves provide habitats for a variety of marine organisms, some of which are economically valuable. The economic value of fisheries production attributed to mangrove areas has been reviewed or estimated by many researchers and the values found in these studies vary anywhere from US$66 to almost US$3,000 /ha/yr. For this study the loss associated with a reduction in the mangroves habitat for fishery feeding and breeding ground is evaluated based on above-mentioned studies with adjustment made to account for rising prices (4% per year) and current exchange rate. Further computation reveals that the current value that should be adopted to represent the loss in fishery resources is RM4,991.02/ha/year. Goods for Traditional Uses There is a dearth of studies on the value of environmental service from the harvesting of mangrove forest product for traditional uses. The most common examples of these products are nipah shingles, resins, medicines and cane products. Possibly the only published study on the value of traditional use products that are relevant for the current valuation exercise is the one by Ruitenbeek (1992) /68/ which estimated the annual net benefit produced by harvesting medicinal plants from a mangrove forest in Indonesia to be $15/ ha/ yr. Given that the value derived from traditional products from mangroves in the study area is very small, as confirmed by local residents, this present evaluation does not include the traditional use value of mangrove forest. Tourism and Recreation Recreation is another environmental service obtainable from mangrove area. The economic value of this recreational benefit is typically measured by the implied values revealed through domestic and international visitors’ behaviour and expenditure patterns. Avoiding degradation or loss in mangrove areas increases the opportunity for recreational activities and the value created thereof. 6-249 Various studies have attempted to value mangroves from a tourism perspective, including one Malaysian study (see Appendix K). Based on these studies, and after adjusting for price increase over time, the value adopted for this EIA is RM2,291.05/ha/year. Carbon Sequestration Mangrove forest plays an important role in reducing climate change impact by absorbing large quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through sequestration. The value of carbon sequestration is determined in this study by referring to the market price for carbon currently traded in the emission market. Conceptually, the market price for carbon should capture the essence of the valuation approaches since a market has been created to internalize the external costs of carbon emission. There are currently active trading programs in several pollutants. For greenhouse gases, the largest is the European Union Emission Trading Scheme. Data for 2015 shows that the price had been fluctuating between €6-8/tonne for the months leading up to July 2015. At the same time, there was a perceptible downward trend in the price level thus warranting the use of the latest early July 2015 price of €7/ton for the purpose of valuation in this report. Carbon sequestration benefits of the mangrove forest can then be estimated by calculating the total biomass per hectare and then applying appropriate conversion factors to obtain carbon equivalents. The daily net CO2- fixations of several dominant mangrove species have been estimated in studies in Thailand and Sri Lanka; an average value for carbon-fixation of mangroves in Kanjanadit District in Thailand was estimated at 15.1 tonC/ha/yr. Based on these estimate, the value of mangrove forest service obtained in the form of carbon sequestration function in the study area is estimated at RM507.36/ha/year. Shoreline Protection Mangroves protect shorelines from damaging storm and strong winds, waves, and floods. Mangroves also help prevent erosion by stabilising sediments with their prop root systems. In this regards, it serves to naturally protect the shoreline from erosion. The shoreline protection value is estimated by using the replacement cost approach i.e. the cost of building artificial structures to protect the shoreline under threat of erosion. The cost of constructing protective structures has been estimated at RM 1.36 million/km in Malaysia and based on this estimate, the value of this function is estimated RM6,014.14/ha/year for the present evaluation. Biodiversity Values Several studies have in the past produced estimates of the economic value of biodiversity maintenance by estimating several functions of mangroves. These range from US$15/ha/year for mangrove forest in Indonesia /68/ to US$ 61/ha/year based on plant-based pharmaceutical values /69/. The present evaluation uses an adjusted figure of RM 185.72/ha/year for the biodiversity value of the mangrove areas. 6.3.3.3 Loss of Seagrass An embankment or causeway for the access bridge will be constructed off Tg. Bt. Supai to connect the reclaimed land to the mainland. Three small patches of seagrass, approximately 173 m2 in size, will be lost to make way for the construction of the embankment and potentially due to sedimentation impacts. Although relatively small in size, evaluation of environmental services derivable from seagrass bed is conducted for completeness. Seagrass beds provide a range of services including aquarium trade (e.g. seahorses), tourism and recreation, carbon sequestration, biological support (e.g. fish and dugong feeding ground), nutrient recycling and maintenance of system for future use. 6-250 62801230-RPT-02 Evaluation of Impacts and Mitigation Measures No valuation study has been conducted for the value of environmental services provided by seagrass beds of Malaysia. Internationally, although not as abundant as valuation studies on mangrove, several published studies on the value of environmental services provided by seagrass beds are available. Unit values from these studies were converted to the current 2016 price to determine the respective values of environmental services. The total is environmental service value contributed by seagrass beds per hectare per year is RM 61,889.45 as indicated in Table 6.81. This is based on a sum of the various ecosystem services of seagrass as briefly summarised in the following subsections. Further details are provided in Appendix K. Table 6.81 Estimated Environmental Service Value (per hectare per year) seagrass bed by service type Category Environmental Services Unit Value (RM per (Production) hectare per year) Direct Use Value Fisheries 2,731.22 Tourism* - Education & Research 134.09 Indirect Use Value Nutrient Cycling 58,912.40 Carbon Sink 121.73 Total 61,899.45 * Note: Tourism value, although is typically part of seagrass environmental service valuation, has not been included since the seagrass bed considered in this study is not a tourist destination. Direct Use Value Estimates of the direct use values of the seagrass is taken from a study by Dirhamsyah (2007) /70/ who attempted to estimate the values of seagrass beds based on their contribution to the coastal communities of East Bintan, Kepulauan Riau, Indonesia. Findings of this study are particularly suited for the present evaluation because of its geographical proximity and similarity of climatic condition of the two locations. The estimated service value per hectare per year by type is provided in Table 6.81 above. All the values are directly converted from the study into Ringgit using the prevailing exchange rate. However, the tourism value has been removed since the seagrass bed considered in this study serves no tourism function. Nutrient Cycling Value Based on a synthesis of referenced studies, Costanza et al. (1997) grouped ecosystem services into 17 major categories. One of the ecosystem services listed in this study is nutrient cycling which is defined as storage, internal cycling, processing and acquisition of nutrients. The study also noted that this ecosystem service is particularly significant for seagrass beds where the estimated value is USD19,004/ha/year. For the present evaluation, this value is directly converted into Ringgit using the prevailing exchange rate. Understandably, this figure is an average figure for all types of seagrasses based on studies done around the globe. In the absence of a local study, this average global estimate can be considered as reasonable measure of value. Carbon Sequestration Value Seagrass beds play a role in regulating carbon dioxide in the global atmosphere by absorbing CO2 and storing it in their biomass. The carbon dioxide emission trading price (usually quoted in tonne carbon dioxide equivalent) provides a good basis for the quantification of the impact of greenhouse gases on the environment. This study adopts a value of €10 (RM40)/tonne. 6-251 Carbon sequestration benefits of the seagrass bed can then be estimated by calculating the total biomass per hectare sequestered per year and then applying appropriate conversion factors to obtain carbon equivalents. Laffoley et al. (2009) /71/ produced an estimate of carbon sequestration rate for seagrass of 83 gC/m2/yr. Based on this estimate, the average amount of carbon-sequestered by seagrass bed is 0.83 tonneC/ha/yr. Using the estimated carbon dioxide equivalent value of RM40/tonne, the estimated carbon sequestration value of seagrass bed is RM121.73/ha. 6.3.3.4 Loss in Fishing Ground and Increase in Fuel Cost for Fishermen The directly affected stakeholders are the coastal (Zone A) fishermen from Kuala Sg Linggi and Tg. Agas, with an estimated 90 fishing vessels operated by these fishermen. More specifically, the area to be reclaimed is part of the fishing ground as well as a navigation route to the fishing grounds further offshore. The fishermen will be directly impacted through the loss of fishing ground or navigation routes to offshore fishing grounds, and they will have to travel longer distances to alternative fishing grounds, which incurs higher costs. It is noted that in estimating the impact of reclamation, double counting the loss in catch due to a reduction in fish feeding ground must be avoided since it is already captured in the computation of the loss of seabed habitat. The travel costs have been estimated through consultation with several representatives of the fishermen community, on the type of engines utilised and fuel usage. For this study a market price of RM2.00 per litre is applied to determine fuel cost. In order to assess the likely increase in the cost of fuel as a result of the reclamation, the following assumptions are employed: The average number of fishing days is 19 trips in a month. This figure is derived from the survey conducted on the fishermen. The proportion of boats belonging to the 60, 75 and 115 horse power categories is approximately 30%, 30% and 40% respectively. This is based on observations made at the jetties. The additional fuel cost for trips to alternative fishing ground is 25% higher than the current cost. The resulting total additional fuel cost per year is estimated at RM 887,490. 6.3.3.5 Overall Assessment The total value of changes in environmental service flows for a 50-year valuation period at three discount rates are provided in Table 6.82. The complete list of annual accounting is provided in Appendix K. The 8% rate is chosen to reflect the market rate of interest conventionally use for project evaluation while 6% and 4% are more appropriate rates for social evaluation. When discounted at the rate of 8%, the total present value of the stream of annual loss amounts to RM35.9 million over a period of 50 years. The corresponding values for 6% and 4% discounts rates are RM44.8 million and RM59.1 million respectively. It is noted that these sums should not be construed as indicating project feasibility. They rather provide some indication of the magnitude, in monetary terms, of the reduction in the flow of environmental services as a result of the implementation of the project over the evaluation period. 6-252 62801230-RPT-02