eia for hazardous waste storage site

COMPANY: SOHAR REFINERY COMPANY L.L.C.

PROJECT: SRC TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY - LIWA

CONTRACTOR: Geo-Resources Consultancy

AUTHORISED BY

DOCUMENT NO: SRC-001-2007_006_spe.doce

REPORT NO: R818

REV/VERSION NO:

Ver 1, 20 April 2007 Geo Resources Consultancy

SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Facility - Liwa

REPORT

SRC TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY - LIWA

APRIL 2007

Geo Resources Consultancy

SRC-001-2007_006_V1_spe.doc: SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa i

DISCLAIMER This document is published in accordance with and subject to an agreement between GRC/ATA Environmental (“GRC/ATA”) and the client for whom it has been prepared, Sohar Refinery Company L.L.C.(“Client”) and is restricted to those issues that have been raised by the client in its engagement of GRC/ATA and prepared using the standard of skill and care ordinarily exercised by Environmental Scientists and Engineers in the preparation of such Documents. Any person or organisation that relies on or uses the document for purposes or reasons other than those agreed by GRC and the Client without first obtaining the prior written consent of either party, does so entirely at their own risk and GRC denies all liability in tort, contract or otherwise for any loss, damage or injury of any kind whatsoever (whether in negligence or otherwise) that may be suffered as a consequence of relying on this Document for any purpose other than that agreed with the Client. QUALITY ASSURANCE GRC has implemented a comprehensive range of quality control measures on all aspects of the company’s operation. An internal quality review process has been applied to each project task undertaken by us. Each document is carefully reviewed by core members of the consultancy team and signed off at Project Director level prior to issue to the client. Draft documents are submitted to the client for comment and acceptance prior to final production.

REVISION CONTROL

Rev Date of

Issue Details of Revision Reviewed by

GRC/ATA Project Manager

Reviewed by Client Project Manager

Approved by Client Project Manager

0 20/04/07 In-house review

1 20/04/07 Provided to SRC for comment

2 Corrected and issued to the MRMEWR for advice

3


SRC-001-2007_006_V1_spe.doc: SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................................... III

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................... 1

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................. 4

1.1 The Proponent............................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Purpose of Report ......................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Scope of Works............................................................................................................. 5

1.3.1 Scope........................................................................................................................ 5 1.3.2 Description of Wastes .............................................................................................. 6

1.4 Storage and Transport Overview .................................................................................. 6 1.4.1 Spent Catalyst .......................................................................................................... 6 1.4.2 Biosolids .................................................................................................................. 7 1.4.3 Miscellaneous Hazardous Wastes............................................................................ 7 1.4.4 Transport .................................................................................................................. 7

1.5 Project Benefits ............................................................................................................. 8 1.6 Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework .............................................................. 8

1.6.1 Commitment ............................................................................................................ 8 1.6.2 Sultanate of Oman Environmental Legislation........................................................ 8

2. HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE WASTE MANAGEMENT ................................... 10

2.1 Hazardous Storage Waste Management Principles .................................................... 10 2.1.1 Waste Hierarchy..................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Siting of Temporary Storage Facility .................................................................... 10 2.1.3 Best Practice Design .............................................................................................. 11 2.1.4 Construction Quality Assurance ............................................................................ 14

2.2 Water Management ..................................................................................................... 15 2.3 Site Security and Fencing ........................................................................................... 16

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT................................................ 17

3.1 Location ...................................................................................................................... 17 3.2 Utilities........................................................................................................................ 17

3.2.1 Water Requirements............................................................................................... 17 3.2.2 Other Utilities......................................................................................................... 17

3.3 Human Environment ................................................................................................... 17 3.3.1 Waliyats ................................................................................................................. 17 3.3.2 Agriculture ............................................................................................................. 18

3.4 Physical Environment ................................................................................................. 19 3.4.1 Topography and Landscape ................................................................................... 19 3.4.2 Geology and Soils .................................................................................................. 19 3.4.3 Meteorology........................................................................................................... 19 3.4.4 Groundwater .......................................................................................................... 20 3.4.5 Biological Environment ......................................................................................... 21


SRC-001-2007_006_V1_spe.doc: SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa iii

4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES.......................................................................................... 24

4.1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 24 4.2 Summary of Issues...................................................................................................... 24

4.2.1 Environmental Issues Not Further Considered ...................................................... 29 4.2.2 Key Environmental Issues ..................................................................................... 33

4.3 Field Survey and Data Recorded ................................................................................ 34 4.3.1 Rapid Scan Survey................................................................................................. 34

5. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, PROPOSED SAFEGUARDS AND MITIGATION........................................................................................................................... 35

5.1 Groundwater Quality .................................................................................................. 35 5.1.1 Objective ................................................................................................................ 35 5.1.2 Baseline.................................................................................................................. 35 5.1.3 Discussion of Potential Impact .............................................................................. 35 5.1.4 Proposed Mitigation and Commitments ................................................................ 35 5.1.5 Predicted Outcome................................................................................................. 36

5.3 Hazardous Waste ........................................................................................................ 36 5.3.1 Objective ................................................................................................................ 36 5.3.2 Baseline.................................................................................................................. 36 5.3.3 Discussion of Potential Impact .............................................................................. 36 5.3.4 Proposed Mitigation and Commitments ................................................................ 37 5.3.5 Predicted Outcome................................................................................................. 39

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................... 40

REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 41

LIST OF TABLES

A1. Environmental Impacts Considered and Conclusions on Significance Determined for the Proposed SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa

A2. Mitigation Measures Proposed to be Implemented during Operations of the Hazardous Waste

Storage Facility 1. Key Characteristics Table – Proposed Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa 2. Hierarchy of Aspects to be Considered in the Selection of the Proposed Site 3. Summary of Different Geo-membrane Materials 4. Demographic Profile (2003 Census Data) 5. Human Settlements Near Liwa 6. Groundwater Quality Classification


SRC-001-2007_006_V1_spe.doc: SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa iv

7. Vertebrate Fauna Associated with A. tortilis Vegetation 8. Summary and Management of Environmental Issues that may Result in Environmental Impact 9. Estimated Emissions to Air – Liwa Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility 10. Noise Limits for Public Places 11. Summary of Design Criteria and Mitigation Features against Best Practice 12. Summary of Design and Operational Mitigation Features against Best Practice 13. Environmental Impacts Considered and Conclusions on Significance Determined for the

Proposed SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Regional Location 2. Hazardous Storage Facility Proposed Footprint 3. Conceptual Design 4. Site Layout. 5. Waste Storage Area Layout

LIST OF APPENDICES 1. Copy Krooki for Site 2. Copy of Paper, European Cracking Catalysts Producers Association 3. Indicative Transport Vehicle and Truck Mounted Crane Specification 4. Results of Rapid Scan Assessment 5. Test Pit Logs. 6. Guidelines Concerning Provision of HDPE Liners for Impoundment & Storage Areas 7. Catalyst Acid Leachate Test Results 8. Atmospheric Emissions Calculation Sheet. 9. Screening Noise Assessment Sheet.


SRC-001-2007_006_V1_spe.doc: SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa iii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS oC Degree Celsius Cd Cadmium (metal element) CO Carbon monoxide (gas) cond Conductivity CO2 Carbon dioxide (gas) Cr Chromium (metal element) Cu Copper (metal element) dB(A) Decibels (A weighted) EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMP Environmental Monitoring Plan Ha Hectare (area) IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources kg Kilogram (weight) kj Kilojoule (energy) km Kilometre (distance) MD Ministerial Decree Mg Magnesium (metal element) MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet MRMEWR Ministry of Regional Municipalities, Environment and Water Resources m Metre (length) m3 Cubic meter (volume) N Northing Ni Nickel (metal element) Na Sodium (element) NNR National Nature Reserves NOX Oxides of Nitrogen (gas) NRR National Resource Reserves NSR National Scenic Reserves Pb Lead (metal element) pH pH (negative hydrogen ion concentration) ppb Part per billion (concentration) ppm part per million (concentration) RD Royal Decree SO2 Sulphur dioxide (gas) TDS Total dissolved solids Tot N Total Nitrogen (non metal element) Tot P Total phosphorus (non metal element) VOC Volatile organic carbon (gas) v/v Volume for volume (concentration) Zn Zinc (metal element) % Percent µg/l Microgram per litre (concentration)


SRC-001-2007_006_V1_spe.doc: SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility - Liwa 1

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Sohar Refinery is located adjacent to the coast within the designated industrial area of the Sohar Industrial Area (SIA). The SIA covers a total land area of 132 km2 and is located on the Batinah coast about 20km from Sohar town and about 220km from Muscat (see Figure 1). The Sohar refinery site adjoins the Sohar Industrial Port (SIP) site, the construction of which commenced in late 1999. The Sohar Refinery is a newly constructed integrated refinery facility incorporating a range of process units capable of refining crude oil into a range of products. Refinery operations produce a range of wastes that must be stored pending the construction and operation for the National Waste Repository. The Sohar Refinery Company (SRC) proposed to develop a temporary hazardous waste disposal facility to store no less that 18 months accumulated solid hazardous wastes at an allocated site in Liwa, approximately 14.1km from the refinery. Service projects are specifically identified as Group Five by the MRMEWR requiring for approval, amongst others:

• The submission of an environmental permit and if appropriate the production of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) document; and

• Submission of project designs. The purpose of this scoping document is to present information in support of an application to construct the above facility, including concept and preliminary engineering diagrams. The following criteria have been provided in the scope:

• Storage site area should be developed according to waste generation. • SRC is generating around 20 tons/day. • The proposed storage time is 1.5 year • Consultant should advice SRC in the appropriate method to store the hazardous waste.

Waste proposed for temporary storage area are as follows:

• Solids 16 tons/day (RFCC fine powder Catalyst) – in bulk bags. • Sludge 4 tons/day (Wastewater Treatment Plant –spadable Oily and Bio-Sludge). • Others 0.1ton/day (some industrial waste e.g. chemical waste drums, cartridges, filters, oil

polluted material etc.). It is proposed the facility will consist of a fenced HDPE lined and bunded storage pad of unspecified size sufficient to temporarily store 18 months waste inventory consistent with good engineering practice. The facility is to be constructed of 1.5 mm High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), to be securely fenced and located in an area of assigned land comprising a portion of the larger hazardous waste storage area currently under consideration by the Diwan. Other municipal waste management activities in the area include the Liwa landfill and Sewerage Treatment Plan (STRP). The location of the proposed site is indicated in Figure 1. As inputs to the design process, a topographic survey of the subject land has been undertaken, together with a rapid scan ecological assessment. Soil pits have also been constructed and shallow lithological sequence logged.



The results of monitoring and predicted or modelled concentrations of various potential pollutants have been compared to relevant Omani standards. Limited noise monitoring has also been undertaken. A desktop study of critical environmental aspects is presented in this report. Environmental impacts considered in this report and predicted impacts consistent with World Bank protocols, are summarised in Table A1.

TABLE A1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CONSIDERED AND CONCLUSIONS ON SIGNIFICANCE

DETERMINED FOR THE PROPOSED SRC TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE FACILITY - LIWA

ASPECT PREDICTED

IMPACT CONFIDENCE

IN PREDICTION Biophysical

Groundwater Quality Low High Vegetation Communities and Fauna Low High

Pollution Management Air Quality Low High Soil Contamination Low High Hazardous Waste Low High Noise and Vibration Low High Site Decommissioning Low High

Social Surroundings Risk and Hazard including Road Transport Low High

Each of the environmental impacts listed above is addressed within this document with a view to providing sufficient information to the MRMEWR to identify significant impacts and accordingly appropriate mitigation. Significant environmental impacts considered in this report include an objective(s) against which they can be measured, a brief description of the existing environment and constraints, potential impacts, and proposed mitigation strategy, as well as a statement describing predicted impact. These significant environmental impacts are considered to be:

• Groundwater Quality • Hazardous Waste

As a result of the feature survey and being proposed to be located within a Municipal services area, it is concluded that no sensitive landscapes or significant flora and fauna will be threatened by the operations of the temporary storage facility. The social and environmental impacts of the operation of SRC Liwa temporary hazardous waste facility are minimised by: i) Design to incorporate a HDPE liner; ii) Separation of waste types; iii) Provision of a leachate / rainfall collection/ evaporation pond for each of the major waste types

designed to accommodate a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event; iv) Provision of a 1.0 m bund around the facility perimeter; and v) Safeguards and mitigation proposed. Specific safeguards include (amongst others):



• transport of all transported wastes under a docket system; and • incorporation of a geo-textile layer above the HDPE liner.

On the basis of the specialist studies and other work associated with the preparation of this EIA document, it is concluded that the construction and operation of the proposed temporary waste storage facility at Liwa can be managed to meet all Oman Government permitting environmental objectives, and as a result cause minimal environmental and social impacts.

GEO-Resource Consultancy


1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 The Proponent Contact Person: Dr Juma Al Obeidani Environmental Manager Postal Address: Sohar Refinery Company L.L.C.

P.O. Box 282, Falaj Al Qabail – 322 Sultanate of Oman Phone: ++968 2685-1600 Facsimile: ++968 2685-1103 Email: [email protected]

1.2 Purpose of Report Environmentally sustainable development has become one of the most important challenges facing governments and corporations today. Correct storage of hazardous wastes minimises the potential for losses to the environment, and in this case will make on-shipment to the permanent National Waste Repository achievable within minimal repackaging and costs. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a mechanism by which projects can be enhanced by helping prevent, minimise, mitigate or compensate for any adverse environmental and often social impacts, through improvement of the project. The EIA then becomes a ‘blueprint’ for environmental improvement to the requirements both to reasonable industry standards and regulatory requirements. GRC has been engaged by Sohar Refinery Company L.L.C (SRC) to prepare a design for a hazardous waste storage site at LIWA to good engineering and waste management practices. The site should be sized to accommodate wastes produced during 18 months production. This scoping document presents the conceptual engineering drawings and sites assessment for consideration by the MRMEWR. Detailed drawings are also being prepared for the tender process. This EIA document describes the SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility Design and presents: • what comprises the proposal; • the anticipated environmental impacts arising from implementation of these components; and

• how these impacts are proposed to be managed for the life of the project such that the environment

will be protected. The Regional Location of the SRC Temporary Hazardous Waste Storage Facility is presented in Figure 1. Figure 2 presents the proposed facility footprint overlaid on the larger storage site, and topographic contours. Site works will be undertaken such that fall and evaporation ponds are away from the minor wadi channel to the northwest.



1.3 Scope of Works Key characteristics of the project are presented in Table 1

TABLE 1 KEY CHARACTERISTICS TABLE – PROPOSED TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE

STORAGE FACILITY - LIWA

Project Proponent Description Proponent Sohar Refinery Company L.L.C. Location Liwa Al Jadidah Proposed Action 1. Construct an HDPE lined temporary hazardous waste storage facility of

nominal storage area of 1100m2. 2. Design for separate leachate/stormwater stormwater /evaporation ponds

of a combined 110kl volume. 3. Provide secure fencing. Zone Easting Northing west 40Q 448346 2708433 north 40Q 448427 2708522 east 40Q 448566 2708413

Site Description

south 40Q 448448 2708329 Construction methodology Construction will use normal earthmoving and compaction equipment and

use procedures and practices common to civil and road construction practices. Topsoil form the site will be removed and excavated to achieve a 1:100 to 1:200 fall to the southeast. Pockets for the dams will be prepared, as will the intermediate bund. The sub-base will then be compacted, and a layer of up to 100mm of screened bedding sand. Bedding sand will be compacted prior to installation of the HDPE liner to manufacturer’s specifications, and under a CQA. A geofabric will be laid over the liner, and aggregate placed and compacted to form trafficable and storage areas. The site will be fenced.

Maximum Area Disturbed Maximum area to be disturbed for the construction is approximately 1.5ha. Implementation Duration Implementation should commence and be completed within the 2tnd Q 2007. Life of Project Maximum 18 months storage. 1.3.1 Scope The following criteria have been provided in the scope:

• Storage site area should be developed by the Consultant and according to waste generation. • SRC is generating around 20 tons/day. • The proposed storage time is 1.5 year. • Consultant should advice SRC in the appropriate method to store the hazardous waste.

Waste proposed for temporary storage area as follows:

• Solids 16 tons/day (RFCC fine powder Catalyst) – in bulk bags. • Sludge 4 tons/day (Waste Water Treatment plant –spadble Oily and Bio-Sludge). • Others 0.1ton/day (Some Industrial waste e.g. chemical waste drums, cartridges, filters, oil

polluted material etc.). It is proposed the facility will consist of a fenced HDPE lined and bunded storage pad of unspecified size sufficient to temporarily store 18 months waste inventory consistent with good engineering practice.



The facility is to be constructed of 1.5 mm High Density Polyethylene (HDPE), to be securely fenced and located in an area of assigned land comprising a portion of the larger hazardous waste storage area currently under consideration by the Diwan. The location of the selected site is identified in Figure 1. The Krooli Map is included as Appendix 1. 1.3.2 Description of Wastes Hazardous wastes are so classified when a component of the waste stream which by its characteristics poses a threat or risk to public health, safety or the environment (includes substances which are toxic, infectious, mutagenic, carcinogenic, teratogenic, explosive, flammable, corrosive, oxidising and radioactive. Hazardous wastes are generally unsuitable for conventional landfill disposal and should be stored pending establishment of the National Hazardous Waste Facility. Management of hazardous wastes in Oman are specified within the Regulations for Management of Hazardous Waste (MD 18/93) SRC generated wastes that need to be stored include:

1. Fluidised Residue Catalytic Cracker Unit (RFCC) spent catalyst. Catalyst is used in breaking long chain heavy oils into a range of simpler hydrocarbons that can be used in formulating fuels such as gasoline. Approximately 16 tonnes is produced daily as a white powder and stored in bulk bags of approximately 1.75 tonne capacity. Equilibrium FCC catalyst, not suited for further refinery use, is a silica/alumina zeolite-containing material with contaminations of heavy metals like nickel and vanadium.

2. Oily waste sludges and biosolids waste sludges from the wastewater treatment system. These are spadable consistency residues from a dehydration process, and are produced at a rate of approximately 4 tonnes daily. Oily waste sludges are stored in a bulk bag with a plastic liner. Biosolids sludges are placed directly into a bulk bag.

3. Miscellaneous Wastes. These include oily rags, oil contaminated absorbent sheets, spent toner cartridges and similar waste generated at a volume of approximately 0.1 tonne daily. These wastes are generally stored in 200L capacity steel or plastic drums.

1.4 Storage and Transport Overview The Sohar Refinery is a newly constructed integrated refinery facility incorporating a range of process units capable of refining crude oil into a range of products. Refinery operations produce a range of wastes that must be stored pending the construction and operation for the National Waste Repository. A range of liquid and solid wastes is produced, including spent RFCC catalyst, biosolids and general hazardous waste. Wastes generated are currently stored at an area within the refinery adjacent to the wastewater treatment area, principally in bulk bags. 1.4.1 Spent Catalyst Catalyst is used in breaking long chain heavy oils into a range of simpler hydrocarbons that can be used in formulating fuels such as gasoline. Equilibrium FCC catalyst, not suited for further refinery use, is a silica/alumina zeolite-containing material with contaminations of heavy metals like nickel and vanadium. Opportunities for re-use of are described in section 2.1.1 and Appendix 2.



Fresh RFCC catalyst is relatively inert material with only small percentages of some rare earth or precious metals. The active sites in the catalysts tend to have an affinity for metals and so in use the catalyst can become poisoned with metals, particularly vanadium and nickel. Close interval particle size analysis of the catalyst indicates all particles occur in the range 28.25µm to 178.25 µm with an average of 69.857µm. All particles were above 10µm. Although in the respirable range, the indicated catalysts size range would be trapped in the upper respiratory tract and is unlikely to be inhaled. An average 1.75 tonnes of spent catalysts is loaded dry into bulk bags. On standing, catalysts filled bulk bags have a ‘footprint’ of 1.1m by 1.1m, and are stackable (up to 5 at the refinery).

1.4.2 Biosolids The refinery waste water treatment system collects oily water, tank bottoms, sludges etc and directs them to the waste water treatment plant (WWTP). Treatment includes the removal of water (found both as free water or bound water) in the dehydration section. Two separate products from the dehydration section are oily sludges and biological sludges, approximately in equal quantities. Biosiolids are spadable consistency residues from a dehydration process, and are produced at a rate of approximately 4 tonnes daily. Oily waste sludges are stored in a bulk bag with a plastic liner. Biosolids sludges are placed directly into a bulk bag. There is however some variation in the water content of the products to the extent that storage in bulk bags does not present good practice. An average 1.75 tonnes of biosolids are loaded into bulk bags. On standing, biosolid filled bulk bags, being higher moisture content, have a ‘footprint’ of 1.2m by 1.2m, and must be stored in single layer. 1.4.3 Miscellaneous Hazardous Wastes These include oily rags, oil contaminated absorbent sheets, spent toner cartridges and similar waste generated at a volume of approximately 0.1 tonne daily. While in various forms, it is proposed this waste be stored in sealed 200L steel or plastic containers and on wooden pallets. 1.4.4 Transport The Sohar Refinery is WWTS is located approximately 23km from the proposed hazardous waste storage site by a combination of sealed roads (18.1km) and graded tracks (4.9 km). Intersections with the Muscat to Sohar-Dubai expressway occur at roundabouts. The design standard for transport vehicles is of nominal 14 tonne capacity and wheel centre to wheel centre distance of 5.7m. Type design for the truck-mounted crane is a lifting capacity of a nominal 2.0

For the design of the hazardous waste storage facility, and average catalyst weight of 1.75 tonnes is assumed (maximum 2.0 tonnes), and a footprint of 1.1m by 1.1m. Double stacking only is proposed to limit mechanical stress on bags and limit occupational hazards.

For the design of the hazardous waste storage facility, and average biosolids bag weight of 1.75 tonnes is assumed (maximum 2.0 tonnes), and a footprint of 1.2m by 1.2m. Single stacking only is proposed to limit mechanical stress on bags. Where sludges exhibit too high moisture content, these must be returned to the process for reworking.



tonnes at 6.35m. A copy of a typical vehicle specification sheet and indicative truck mounted crane specifications are presented in Appendix 3. 1.5 Project Benefits The project has a number of direct and indirect benefits both to the environment and the people of Oman. These include: • Supporting Oman’s economic and industrial growth consistent with the Sultanate’s Vision 2020,

which sets targets for economic development in gas and oil. • Through implementation of this proposal and following optimisation, approximately 14000 tonnes

of waste will be temporarily stored in a safe manner. • Savings to both the economy and environmental sustainability. • Creation of employment. 1.6 Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework 1.6.1 Commitment This section of the report details the environmental legislation, regulations and other requirements currently applicable to environmental management in Oman. The tables provide a summary of the legislation, regulations and other requirements. SRC will comply with relevant legal requirements at all times. 1.6.2 Sultanate of Oman Environmental Legislation The basic law governing protection of the environment within Oman is the Law on the Conservation of the Environment and Prevention of Pollution, promulgated by Royal Decree (RD) 114/2001. This Law is applicable to all ‘owners’. The responsibility for implementation of this basic law rests with the Ministry of Regional Municipalities, Environment and Water Resources which, through Ministerial Decisions (MD), has promulgated the following regulations amongst others (Bolded legislation is particularly relevant to this premise): • Regulations for Air Pollution Control from Stationary Resources (MD 5/86) • Regulations for Septic Tanks and Holding Tanks (MD 421/98) • Regulations for Noise Pollution Control in Public Environment (MD 79/94) • Regulations for Noise Pollution Control in Working Environment (MD 80/94) • Regulations for Management of Solid Non-hazardous Waste (MD 17/93) • Regulations for Management of Hazardous Waste (MD 18/93) • Regulations for Wastewater Re-use and Discharge (MD 145/93) • Prevention OF Ripping Green Trees or Collecting and Transporting Desiccated Trees (Timber) (MD

128/93) • Ban on Hunting, Catching, or shooting Animals or Birds (MD 207/93) • The Issuance of Environmental Permits (MD 300/93)



• Obligatory for Industrial, Commercial and other Establishments to Adhere to the Environment Conditions of the Environmental Licences Issued to them (MD 209/95)

• Regulations for the Management and Control of Radioactive Materials (MD 249/97) In addition to the above Legislation, the following laws, regulations and procedures have been promulgated: • Petroleum and Mineral Law (RD 42/72) • Law on Development of Water Resources (RD 76/77) • Law on National Parks and Protected Nature Areas (RD 26/79) • Law on the Protection of Natural Heritage (RD 6/80) • Considering the Water Resources as National Wealth (RD 82/88) • Law of Civil Defence (RD 76/91) • Law of Handling and Use of Chemicals (RD 46/93) • Regulations for the Registration of Chemical Substances and Permits (MD 248/97) All used mineral oils are classified as waste under the definition in MD 18/93. This means that there are restrictions on used oil movement, treatment and disposal.



2. HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE WASTE MANAGEMENT 2.1 Hazardous Storage Waste Management Principles Hazardous waste storage best management principles can be discussed in terms of site selection, facility construction and management. Key principles and how they have been applied in the case of the SRC facility designed for Liwa (comments in the box at the end of the overview) are described below. 2.1.1 Waste Hierarchy When making decisions regarding the management of all wastes, good practice dictates the following hierarchy must be followed at all times:

1. Avoidance; 2. Minimisation; 3. Recycling; 4. Treatment; and 5. Disposal.

Good hazardous waste management principles require consideration of alternatives to disposal. With respect to the major volume waste, The European Cracking Catalysts Producers Association has prepared a recent summary of (EU) legislation and management of this waste. Examples for re-use of the material cited include:

• Construction work; • Use in cement manufacture; • Use as insulation material; and • Use in the metal casing industry.

2.1.2 Siting of Temporary Storage Facility The appropriate siting of a hazardous waste storage faciility is the primary environmental control, so a preliminary investigation of all possible sites should be conducted to identify those sites with the best potential to be developed for the purpose. The hierarchy of aspects to be considered when screening for potential storage sites is summarized in Table 2.

TABLE 2 HIERARCHY OF ASPECTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE SELECTION

OF THE PROPOSED SITE

Factor Consideration at Liwa Site

1 Community needs SRC presents an opportunity for value adding to Oman’s natural resources. A well managed refinery benefits community in limiting the

SRC should continue to look at opportunities for re-use of catalyst materials in preference to disposal. A copy of the paper is included in Appendix 2.



potential for environmental and health impacts and maximized return to the community.

2 Waste storage type Lined purpose built facility to limit potential for leachate loss, provision of leachate / storm water controls. Pond located as far from the wadi as design would allow.

3 Buffer distances 82km to Harat Shaykh. Isolated houses may be closer. 4 Groundwater None evident to at least 2.2m below bgl. 5 Surface water None, however minor wadi stream to NW of proposed site. Pond located

as far from the wadi as design would allow. 6 Flora and fauna Very occasional A tortillis in poor condition, heavily modified due to

gravel extraction. Landform and vegetation common locally and regionally, with much better examples elsewhere. Vegetation descriptions and photographs are presented in the report of the rapid scan field assessment provided in Appendix 4.

7 Infrastructure Graded track entry, otherwise none. Power to Lima STRP 4.1km to the north-northeast. Mobile phone coverage.

8 Geology Late tertiary-quaternary alluvial deposits on the gravel flats, with un-cemented alluvial wadi sediments in the modern wadi channels typically consisting of cobbles, gravels and silty sands of variable composition. Soil pits indicate silty clays at approximately 1.7 bgl.

9 Land ownership Owned by Municipality (?) Buffer areas are not an alternative to providing appropriate management practices, but provide for contingencies that may arise with typical management practices. Where this buffer is not available, management practices need to be significantly improved to provide the same level of protection to sensitive land uses. While buffers have traditionally been used to protect residential amenity, the buffer for a hazardous waste storage facility may also protect different segments of the environment such as wadis.

The most preferred site for a hazardous waste storage facility is one that reduces the risk of groundwater pollution by providing a natural unsaturated attenuation layer beneath the liner for contaminants that may leach through the liner. This means that sites with naturally attenuating soils, such as sites in clayey areas, are preferred to those that do not have such soils, such as sites in sandy areas.

2.1.3 Best Practice Design Once sited, the hazardous waste storage facility must be designed to ensure that it is able to protect the environment. Where the waste facility designer believes that alternative measures can achieve the objectives and required outcomes, these must be supported by a risk assessment. The design of a hazardous waste storage facility will be influenced by the existing natural environment, adjacent land uses, available infrastructure, waste to be received and regulatory requirements. It must be

A buffer of approximately 8.2km to Harat Shaykh exists to the east. Construction of municipal buildings including a water tower is currently being undertaken on the entry road from the Dubai Muscat Highway approximately 5.4km from the proposed site. Other land uses within 5.0km include quarrying, the Liwa sanitary landfill and the Liwa STRP.

A sandy clay layer was observed in the gravel extraction pit at approximately 1.7m bgl. Soil logs are included as Appendix 5.



based on a thorough understanding of the existing environment and address all of the site-specific circumstances of each site. The hazardous waste storage site and associated facilities should be designed to:

• minimise potential environmental impacts; • minimise health and safety risks for landfill operators and the public; and • make the most efficient use of resources onsite.

Liners The primary function of a landfill liner system is to protect groundwater from impacts of leachate. Table 4 shows indicative best practice landfill liner performance standards, which would generally provide a high level of protection to the environment; ‘Groundwater impacts from liner designs’ (see Appendix 2) indicates basic modelled impacts on groundwater from the various seepage rates that may seep through the liner. Liners comprise up to five components:

• sub-base; • clay layer; • geomembrane and protection layer; • drainage layer/leachate collection system; and • geotextile.

Sub-base The integrity of the landfill liner and leachate collection system is fundamentally reliant upon the integrity of the sub-base that lies beneath. The sub-base must be well-consolidated with minimal settlement, in order to supply a firm platform for the compaction of the clay layer, to protect the geomembrane from excessive strains and to ensure that the drainage system drains effectively throughout the life of the hazardous waste storage site.

The proposed liner at Liwa will consist of a 1.5mm HDPE geomembrane to be installed on a layer of compacted bedding sand on the sub-base. A geotextile membrane will be laid over this, and gravel trafficable and storage areas developed.

Compacted in-situ sub-base

geotextile layer over geomembrane under

(1.5 mm HDPE)

100 mm compacted bedding sand

Aggregate, 600 mm on roads, 150 mm over storage



Clay layer The ability of clay to retard water movement and absorb exchangeable cations makes it a suitable natural material for a low-permeability liner. To meet the performance standards of the whole liner, the clay component needs to be at least one meter thick, with a hydraulic conductivity of less than 1 x 10-9m/s

Membrane Table 3 (from Frobel and Sadlier, 1997) summarizes the properties of different geomembrane materials.

TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF DIFFERENT GEO-MEMBRANE MATERIALS

Attribute HDPE LLDPE PVC EPDM EIA-R CSPE-R FPP

General chemical exposure Excellent Good Fair Good Excellent

Excellent (when cured) Excellent

Hydrocarbon exposure Good Good Fair Good Excellent

Good (when cured) Good

Weathering (UV exposure) Excellent Fair Poor Excellent Excellent

Excellent (when cured) Excellent

Thermal stability Poor Poor Good Excellent Good

Excellent

Good - excellent when reinforced

Tensile performance Good Good Good Good Excellent

Excellent

Good - excellent when reinforced

Uni-axial elongation performance

Excellent

Excellent Good Good Fair Good Excellent

Multi-axial elongation performance Poor

Excellent

Excellent Good Fair Good Excellent

Puncture performance Fair Excellent

Excellent Good

Excellent Good Good

Installation damage resistance Fair Fair

Excellent

Excellent Good Good Excellent

While sandy clays occur at approximately 1.7m bgl at the site, soils above consist of small fist size angular cobbles grading to pebbles deeper in the profile. To protect the geomembrane from possible puncturing and strain, a layer of compacted bedding sand of nominal 100 mm thick is proposed. While this is not best practice (provides a drainage layer between the liner and sub-base), given the location and depth to groundwater, integrity of the liner is considered a premium.

No clay layer is proposed to be installed under the liner. Sandy clays exist beneath the site at approximately 1.7 m bgl. Hydraulic conductivity has not been tested. While this is not best practice, given the location, depth to groundwater and length of time the facility will be in use, a clay layer has been omitted.



Notes: HDPE High density polyethylene LLDPE Linear low density polyethylene PVC Polyvinyl chloride EPDM Ethylene propylene diene monomer EIA-R Ethylene Interpolymer Alloy – Reinforced CSPE-R Chlorosulphonated polyethylene – Reinforced FPP Flexible polypropylene

Geomembranes are supplied in rolls and must be fitted and joined at the site. To avoid stress on seams, the rolls are joined with the seams parallel to the slope. As some geomembranes may be affected by long exposure to UV light or by premature wetting, the manufacturer’s recommendations for the storage of the geomembrane should be followed. Care must be taken in the installation of the geomembrane to avoid deformation due to heat stress or the underlying sub-base/padding sand. The installation must be performed under a CQA plan (see section below), testing of not only the geomembrane but also of the quality of the joins between the geomembrane sheets.

Leachate collection system The leachate collection system can be an integral component of the overall hazardous waste storage facility liner system. The design objectives of the leachate collection system are to ensure that it is:

• able to drain leachate such that the leachate head above the liner is minimised; • appropriately sized to collect the estimated volume of leachate (predicted by water balance

models); • resistant to chemical attack, and physical, chemical and biological clogging; • able to withstand the weight of waste and the compaction equipment without crushing; and • able to be inspected and cleaned by readily available video inspection and pipe-cleaning

2.1.4 Construction Quality Assurance The development and implementation of a Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) plan provides a means of demonstrating to the public and regulating authorities that the landfill being constructed meets its design requirements. The CQA plan must be able to verify:

HDPE lining has been chosen due to its generally acceptable properties, ready availability in Oman and increasing experience of installers. Technology suppliers will be required to prepare a CQA plan (see section 1.4.4 below) and comply with MRMEWR Guidelines Concerning Provision of HDPE Liners for Impoundment & Storage Areas (Appendix 6).

An under membrane leachate collection system has not been included in the facility design due to the low leachability of the principal material stored (see acid leachate testing results of catalyst samples presented in Appendix 7), low ambient rainfall (minimise hydraulic head) and distance to the water table. Separate membrane surface leachate collection systems (aggregate) and separate evaporation ponds for each of the catalysts and biosolids storage areas have been provided for, and an intermediate bund included. (see Figure 3).



• materials used comply with specifications; and • method of construction/installation is appropriate and, as a result, design requirements have been

met. The CQA plan must contain the material/construction specifications, testing methods, testing frequency, corrective action and provide for appropriate documentation procedures. The CQA plan for a geomembrane must specify procedures for:

• recording condition of materials when unloaded at the site (ie. whether rolls are wrapped); • documenting how rolls are stored, that is, undercover and when used; • inspection of the sub-base upon which geomembrane will be placed to remove any objects that

may damage the geomembrane; • inspection of the geomembrane for defects; • minimising tensile stresses on geomembranes that result from thermal expansion or contraction of

installed components; • testing of the seams; and • inspection/testing of anchoring points of the geomembrane provided on surfaces with a gradient

exceeding 10 percent. The geomembrane should generally be installed and tested under the recommended quality assurance guidelines provided by the geomembrane manufacturer.

2.2 Water Management Water management relies upon the management of three water streams with the intention of minimising the volumes to be managed and avoiding mixing the streams. The three components to be kept separate are:

1. stormwater; 2. leachate; and 3. groundwater.

When considering means of managing water on the site, reusing water onsite is always preferred to discharging the water to the environment. Stormwater Management Good stormwater management design incorporates interception drains that direct stormwater away from the hazardous waste storage cell, storage ponds and other drainage. It is recommended measures should be designed to contain and control rainfall runoff for a 1-in-20 year storm event for a hazardous waste storage cell. Events up to 1-in-100 year recurrence intervals should also be considered to ensure that they do not result in any catastrophic failures such as flooding of the hazardous waste storage cell or failure of dams.

SRC will require the construction contractor to develop a CQA to encompass all aspects of the construction project.

Design will include a stormwater cut-off drain between the hillside to the south west and facility. At the request of the MRMEWR Ponds have been designed to store a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event.



Leachate management As leachate from the biosolids area may contain high levels of nutrients or hydrocarbons, it requires management. Leachate must be stored and managed in a manner such that it will not escape into surface water or groundwater, will not cause offensive odours and will minimise human contact with the leachate. Management options for leachate are:

• evaporation; • discharge to sewer, with or without pre-treatment (if available); • treatment; • surface irrigation of treated leachate outside the waste disposal area and subject to salinity

management; and/or • dust suppression in the hazardous waste storage cell.

In deciding upon any of the above management options, a water balance should be modeled over at least two consecutive wet years to ensure that the proposed system has sufficient capacity to deal with all leachate generated over the operational life of the hazardous waste storage cell. Any ponds containing leachate should have a freeboard of at least one metre to guard against wave action causing leachate to overtop the banks, as well as to provide capacity for any unforeseen events. To prevent seepage from the treatment system into groundwater, ponds should be lined to the equivalent performance standard as the hazardous waste storage cell.

2.3 Site Security and Fencing Active hazardous waste storage cell sites can present a safety risk to the public and livestock. The site should be securely fenced to prevent the unauthorized entry of people or livestock. When unattended, the gates should be securely locked. Fencing should be regularly inspected and any damage to the fence that would allow unauthorized access be repaired as quickly as possible.

The cell has been designed with a 1:100 to 1:200 slope falling to a separate stormwater / leachate collection ponds for each of the catalysts storage and biosolids cells. Design volume is for a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event. A 1m high bund surrounds the entire facility. There will be provision to pump out the collection ponds and transfer to the nearby STRP in the event of potential overtopping.

The hazardous waste storage facility will be designed to be fully enclosed by a 2.0m high secure fence with a lockable gate.



3. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT 3.1 Location The project if approved will establish at Liwa approximately 4.1km south-southwest from the Liwa STRP. 3.2 Utilities 3.2.1 Water Requirements Drinking and Sanitary Requirements The drinking water is sourced from the bottled water and the other water requirements are met by either tanker supply or the municipal water supply. It is anticipated a peak construction workforce of 20 persons will be present at the site for up to six weeks working a single shift. Assuming a water requirement 30L per person per day 12.6kL of suitable water will be required for sanitary purposes during project construction. Watering during compaction may require a further 10,000kL. The number of people at site during operation will be limited to daily visitation by the truck driver. Operational water required for sanitary purposes monthly is estimated to be 1.0kL. ‘Black’ water will be stored and transported to the nearby STRP. 3.2.2 Other Utilities Electricity Construction requirements can be met by portable generator sets. As the evaporation ponds are located down gradient of the collection areas, no electricity will be required for operation. Telecommunications The site has mobile coverage. Chemicals No chemicals will be required on-site following liner installation. 3.3 Human Environment 3.3.1 Waliyats Liwa area falls under the Batinah region, which is one of the most populated areas in Oman. The population data for this region are available from the most recent census data (Year 2003). The demographic profiles of the Wilayat of Liwa are presented in Table 4.



TABLE 4 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE (2003 CENSUS DATA)

Area Geographical

Area Number of Households

Male Population

Female Population

Total Population

Batinah region 12,500 km2 90,077 351,189 302,326 653,505 Wilayat of Liwa 2,325 km2 3,391 13,625 11951 25,776 The details of human settlements near Liwa are presented in Table 5 below.

TABLE 5 HUMAN SETTLEMENTS NEAR LIWA

Area Location Significance

Al Hadd village About 3km north of the Sohar Industrial Estate.

Largest village in this area with 322 households and a total population of 2491 (1993 census data).

Al Mukhaylif village About 3.5km northwest of the Sohar Industrial Estate.

A large village of 220 households and a total population of 1749 (1993 census data).

Harmul village Adjacent to the Sohar Industrial Area about 6.5km to the northeast of the Sohar Industrial Estate.

A large (fishermen?) village on the coast with 177 households and a total population of 1571 (1991 census data).

Annual population growth has historically been considerable and is currently estimated at 3%. 3.3.2 Agriculture Liwa occurs near the northeastern extent of the Batinah Plain. The Batinah Plain is of critical importance to the agricultural economy of the Sultanate, accounting for up to 60% of all the agricultural products in the Sultanate (Al-Zidjali, 1995; Al Harthi, 2003). The availability of water is the governing factor for Omani agriculture. The cultivated area in Oman is 2.2 million ha, which is 7% of the total area of the country (Water Resources of Oman (in preparation). Present cultivated area is 61,550ha, of which about 54,617ha is currently cropped. Cultivation is expected along wadi where there is a permanent water source. Scattered farms were noticed in the vicinity of the plant. The main cultivation is primarily datepalms (Phoenix dactylifera) and lime (Citurs aurantifolia). Other species of citrus such as “naranj” (C. aurantium, sour orange), “sagargal”, (C. limettoides, sweet orange), “shamoon” (C. paradisi, grapefruit), “burtagal” (C. sinesis, orange) may also be cultivated. Papaya (Carica papaya), banana (Musa paradisiaca) and fig (“teen”, Ficus carica), are also frequently cultivated on the larger date-palm orchards. Subsistence vegetable farming with garlic, onions, tomatoes, watermelons, cucumber, lettuce is also to be expected.



3.4 Physical Environment 3.4.1 Topography and Landscape The general topography of the subject is quite similar to the other undeveloped areas along the Batinah coastal zone. Natural vegetation dominated by Acacia spp can be seen along the wadi plains and in the agricultural areas associated with the settlements. The concession area comprises only one distinctive geomorphologic zone, being a piedmont/plain zone consisting of bedrock ridges and foothills with associated small alluvial fan and coastal plain areas and minor sabkha deposits adjacent to the coast. Field record sheets including plates are presented in Appendix 4. 3.4.2 Geology and Soils The Liwa area comprises piedmont and coastal zones where late tertiary-quaternary alluvial deposits dominate. The piedmont zone comprises of the slightly elevated Batinah plain that extends between the coastal plain and the western Al-Hajar mountain foothills. The un-cemented alluvial wadi sediments in the modern wadi channels typically consist of boulders, gravels and silty sands of variable composition. The piedmont areas are composed primarily of ancient gravel terraces, incised by active wadi channels and subsequently covered with recent alluvium. These alluvium deposits vary in thickness from a few meters to tens of meters. The coastal zone in which comprises the subject area consists of extensive sand and gravel plain extending between the piedmont zone and the gulf of Oman. The coastal zone is extremely flat and is covered by finer sediments (sand and silt). Immediately adjacent to the coast, aeolian sands of recent to sub-recent age predominate. However intermingled deposits of clay and silt are common. The Sohar area is known for its agricultural produce, which include dates, citrus fruits and vegetables. Generally the agricultural zone does not extend to the coastline because of saline water intrusion. Within the sand and gravel plains, the soil cover is extremely thin and low in organic matter. In the mountain area and Wadi Jizzi the soil cover is completely absent. 3.4.3 Meteorology Oman is an arid country with Muscat Governate generally being characterised by hot and dry summers and mild winters. Temperatures in the study area can reach 48oC in summer, with mean temperatures in winter ranging from 15oC to 24oC. Summer occurs during May to October, with the hot weather generally resulting from thermal low-pressure systems established within the region with the core thermal low-pressure system being concentrated over northwestern Pakistan, western India and Oman. During the winter season (November to April) the Arabian Peninsula is dominated by a high pressure ridge extending from Siberia over central Asia. Rainfall sometimes occurs due to thunderstorm activity or in association with low-pressure systems from the west. The annual rainfall near the subject area has fluctuated greatly over the past 25 years from as little as 1mm to as high as 126mm. A review of 30 years rainfall data from the gauge at Sabhka (DN417300DF) indicates and annual average rainfall over this period of 50.72mm. Most of the year’s rainfall occurs between December and April. High variability and unpredictability of rainfall in the Sultanate leads to an inability to rely on assured water supply at any given time (Al Harthi, 2003)



3.4.4 Groundwater All wadi of Oman are ephemeral and their flow is usually of short duration only, although subsurface flow or underflow persists for longer periods, and usually at depths of several metres. Alluvial deposits in wadi beds contain good quality water that is exploited by wells and falaj. The Batinah region has a coastal aquifer system, which provides most of the current water demands of the region for agricultural and urban developments along the coast. The current system of water supply is provided by the abstraction of groundwater through the use of hand-dug wells and pumps. The current rate of abstraction and the proximity of the wells to the coast have led to increasing salinity in the local groundwater. Surface drainage extends from the western Jabal Harjar towards the sea. Surface water infiltration is variable throughout the region. Typically alluvial deposits found in wadi channels will allow surface water to quickly dissipate; however high rainfall events will effectively transport these alluvial deposits along the wadi course. The subject land is adjacent to a minor catchment that feeds the lower reaches of Wadi Bani Umar Al Gharbi. These wadi channels are occupied mainly by the unconsolidated, loose wadi alluvium, which comprises coarse sands and gravel. Groundwater quality classification Groundwater is classified according to its electrical conductivity in µS/cm into four categories. This classification of groundwater quality is summarised in the following Table 6.

TABLE 6

GROUNDWATER QUALITY CLASSIFICATION

EC Range (µS/cm) Groundwater Classification Potential Use 0 - 2500 Fresh Municipal and village water supply

use 2500 - 6000 Low Brackish Selected crop agriculture and all

livestock 6000 – 10000 High Brackish Selected livestock and industrial

(oil fields) >10000 Saline Oil field applications

Source: Assessment of the Hydrogeology and Water Resources of the Fars Aquifer Al Dhahira Region, MWR 1993 in HMR 2000.

The total concentration of dissolved minerals in water is also a general indication of its suitability for any particular use (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). The results of water quality analysis from representative wells in areas surrounding the Sohar Industrial Estate, indicate total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in the range 340 to 3780 mg/L (Omani Water Quality criterion of < 800 mg/L, putting it in the fresh to low brackish classification and making it suitable for uses ranging potable to selected industrial/selected livestock use. A well is currently being developed adjacent to the proposed temporary hazardous waste storage site, and will be sampled following completion.



Groundwater Protection Groundwater is a resource under increasing risk from human activities. Protection of groundwater quality from the impacts of human activities is a high priority for land use planners and regulators. The overall objectives of well field protection is to safeguard and protect the existing groundwater resource against over extraction and pollution, and prohibit activities which may lead to adverse impacts. The alluvial aquifer of the Sohar coast has only marginal storage capacity in upper catchment areas and is already heavily exploited. Groundwater vulnerability is classified according to presence and nature of overlying soil, nature of strata and depth to watertable. Soils in Oman are usually thin and do not provide much attenuation. The most vulnerable strata are the un-cemented coarse wadi gravels in active wadi channels and fractured limestone. In order to protect groundwater and prevent pollution, Oman has implemented a system of groundwater protection schemes. Colours determine relative risk and identify acceptable practices within the designation. The nearest groundwater protection area occurs in Wadi Jizzi up gradient of the subject land. 3.4.5 Biological Environment Reserves Oman has a system of reserves for the protection of species of national environmental importance based on recommendations arising from the Sultanate of Oman Proposals for a System of Nature Conservation Areas (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 1986). The recommendations distinguish between National Nature Reserves (NNR), National Resource Reserves (NRR) and National Scenic Reserves (NSR). The IUCN recommendations have been incorporated into a national system of reserves for Oman with reserves having either been proclaimed by Royal Decree or pending reserve status. NNR’s are the most important reserves for the management of wildlife, the protection of geomorphologic phenomenon and for scientific study. Land use and development would be controlled and managed by the Directorate General for Wildlife and Nature Conservation. Permanent settlement unrelated to management would be excluded. The exceptions to this concern oil exploration and exploitation and national security. In NSR and NRR, human settlement and development of associated infrastructure would be permitted, and the Directorate General would have partial management powers. No NSR or NRR’s occur at or near the proposed site. Flora The presence of vegetation is crucial in maintaining a balance in the fragile and dynamic semi-arid to arid desert ecosystem. In this environment, flora serves to bind the shallow soils, maintaining substrate stability. Moreover, vegetation acts as both food and a haven for the varied fauna inhabiting the area. Many of the plants found at or near the proposed site are highly adapted to the extreme environment in which they grow. The natural vegetation along the Batinah coast is highly modified, and either destroyed or removed in some areas. There are many villages and towns and cultivated farms along the highway. All undeveloped



areas are used for pastoralism. Where there is no housing or roads, small pockets of natural vegetation do exist on the coast. The proposed site mainly comprises shrubs with widely spaced sammer trees (Acacia tortilis). Descriptions are presented in the rapid scan field report provided in full as Appendix 4. Being in a Municipal services area, the vegetation has been highly modified and as a consequence now exhibits low conservation values. Fauna The MRMEWR prepared a National Conservation Strategy in 1992, which included a comprehensive survey of the fauna of Oman. The document also identified areas to be designated for nature conservation. This was, in part, based on the findings and recommendations proposed in the International Union for Conservation of Nature and natural Resources (IUCN) proposals for a system of nature conservation areas within the Sultanate of Oman (IUCN, 1990). No Nature Conservation Areas (NCA) occurs within the subject land. There are no regionally endemic mammals in the area. However a number of mammalian species are expected to inhabit area surrounding the project site. They include red fox (Vulpes vulpes arabica), Sundevall’s jird (Meriones (Meriones) crassus), Egyptian spiny mouse (Acomys cahirinus), house mouse (Mus musculus), house rat, black rat (Rattus rattus) and Ethiopian hedgehog (Paraechinus aethiopicus). Of the species outlined above, none of the mammals is on the IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2000) or on the Oman Red List. With farming being a traditional industry along the Batinah coast, several species of livestock are present in the area including camels and goat. Some 92 species of birds including gulls, terns, flamingos are known to occur in this area. Further, numerous small reptiles and micro-invertebrates are also known to occur. Published data indicates a range of fauna characteristic of A. tortilis associations in Northern Oman (Eriksen and Eriksen, 1996; Fisher et al., 1999). These are summarised in Table 7.

TABLE 7

VERTEBRATE FAUNA ASSOCIATED WITH A. tortilis VEGETATION

MAMMALS BIRDS REPTILES Camelus dromedarius Gazella gazella Capra aegagrus Ovis musimon Felis silfvestris Equus africanus

Lapped-faced Vulture Long-legged Buzzard Golden Eagle Collared Dove Turtle Dove Laughing Dove Striated Scops Owl White-cheeked Bulbul Yellow-vented Bulbul Rufous Bush Robin Graceful Prinia Scrub Warbler Arabian Babbler Purple Sunbird House Crow Brown-necked Raven House Sparrow Yellow-throated Sparrow Indian Silverbill

Trapelus flavimaculatus Heimdactylus leshenaulti Hemidacthylus turcicus Pristurus carteri Pristurus rupestris Pristurus minimus Mabuya tessellata Psammophis schokari Telescopus dhara



Source: Eriksen and Eriksen, 1996; Fisher et al., 1999 The establishment of agricultural practices, urban settlements and road infrastructure has resulted in irreversible changes in animal population distributions and numbers. Noise from urban centres and roads, the introduction of new predators, as well as stock and feral animals can lead to the migration or out competing of many native species. By virtue of the extensive human development in and around the Waliyat, few species of large non-stock related mammals are expected to be present.



4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 4.1 Introduction Based on previous similar projects within Oman and elsewhere, and in consultation with industry professionals, the potential environmental issues identified as relating to the operation of a temporary hazardous waste storage facility within the existing Sohar Industrial Estate are considered to be: Biophysical • Groundwater Quality • Vegetation Communities and Fauna

Pollution Management • Air Quality • Soil Contamination • Hazardous Waste • Noise and Vibration • Site Decommissioning Social Surroundings • Risk and Hazard including Road Transport 4.2 Summary of Issues An objective for each of these factors, brief overview of the existing environment, potential impact, proposed management and mitigation, and predicted outcome is presented in Table 8 following. Further information is presented on those factors considered to be relevant in Section 5 (Discussion of Environmental Impacts, Proposed Safeguards and Mitigation).

GRC/ATA Environmental _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


TABLE 8 SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT MAY RESULT IN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

ENVIRON-

MENTAL ISSUES OBJECTIVE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT POTENTIAL IMPACT ENVIRONMENTAL

MITIGATION PREDICTED OUTCOME

Biophysical: Groundwater Quality Maintain the quantity

of groundwater so that existing and potential users are protected.

The temporary hazardous waste storage facility will meet its construction requirements from municipal supplies. These are estimated to be 10,00kL principally for compaction and dust control. Water requirements in the Sohar area are principally supplied from the Wadi Jizzi alluvial wellfield, and combinations of pumped and hand dug wells.

A minor wadi occurs to the NW of the proposed site. Groundwater flow from the site may travel in this direction, or follow the E gradient to the coast. Existing groundwater resources have elevated TDS. Direct impacts on groundwater are anticipated to be minimal due to the provision of an impermeable liner and leachate capture / evaporation system. Local groundwater supplies are abundant will little potential for conflict with the local community.

Leachates and contaminated storm water will be captured and evaporated. The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Install an impermeable geo-

membrane under the storage area and pond;

• Provide a minimum 1.0m bund around the entire facility;

• Construct the liner under CQA protocols; and

• Operator to prepare a site operation plan to include inspection protocols.

Based on the review of the available literature, monitoring results and knowledge of reasonable operational practices, the potential for impacts on groundwater quality is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence, and can be managed to minimise environmental harm. This environmental impact is relevant and will be further considered

Vegetation Communities and Fauna

1. Maintain the abundance, species diversity, geographic distribution and productivity of vegetation communities.

2. Comply with all relevant Omani legislation including MD 207/93 and RD 26/79.

The proposed Liwa site is situated in a heavily modified coastal plain sandy environment. Vegetation over the site is dominated by sparse. Acacia tortilis, with occasional groundcover of Maerua crassifolia. The facility occupies a portion of an existing municipal area with limited environmental values. Large mammals are limited to domestic species. A range of small mammals and rodents are known from the area, as a number of birds.

No NRRs or proclaimed area occur at or near the proposed site. Landforms and accordingly vegetation associations are well represented both locally and regionally. Fauna can be disturbed by the noise and general activity (vehicle movements, lights) associated with the hazardous waste site. As the impacted area is widespread, few species other than stock, feral domestic (goat, cat) or rodents (black rat, house mouse) are anticipated.

The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Where possible, retain any

remaining overstorey vegetation.

The potential for impacts to flora and fauna are considered to be low with a high degree of confidence and can be managed to minimise environmental harm.

Pollution Management:



ENVIRON- MENTAL ISSUES OBJECTIVE EXISTING

ENVIRONMENT POTENTIAL IMPACT ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION

PREDICTED OUTCOME

Air Quality • Ensure that dust and gaseous discharge resulting from plant operation including fugitive emissions do not adversely impact upon the welfare and amenity of nearby communities.

• Ensure greenhouse gas emissions do not cause environmental harm or human health problems.

Dust is a naturally occurring phenomenon in arid conditions with high levels caused by unstable surface, abundant fine sand and wind conditions. Limited additional dust may be generated during construction activities. The site will be located within an existing industrial and municipal services area that includes quarrying, STRO and landfill operation. The study area is approximately 13km from the Sohar Industrial Estate.

Air emissions are limited to mobile plant fuel consumption during construction. Minor amounts of vehicle emissions and dust will be generated during related transport activities, and along the length of transport routes.

Air emissions during construction are low and extended over the proposed site and length of transport routes. The following mitigation measures are proposed to further limit impacts: • Identify measures for improving

operation and management; and • If possible, select lower emitting

equipment.

Given the size of the project and anticipated emissions, the potential for significant impacts on air quality is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence and can be managed to minimise environmental harm.

Soil Contamination Ensure that soil contamination is limited, and rehabilitation of contaminated areas is to an acceptable standard consistent with the intended land use.

The subject land lies in the Battinah plain of Waliyat Liwa on sandy clay soils. Sohar generally has a high population density relative to other areas of Oman, although the subject land occurs well away (about 9 km) from any significant residential areas. The plant occurs within a municipal service area including STRP and unlined landfill.

A minor wadi occurs to the NW of the proposed site. Groundwater flow from the site may travel in this direction, or follow the E gradient to the coast. The soil profile grades to increasing clays, with sandy clays being encountered at approximately 1.7m bgl. Direct impacts on soils are anticipated to be minimal due to the provision of an impermeable liner and leachate capture / evaporation system.

The following mitigation measures and good housekeeping are proposed to limit impacts: • Install an impermeable geo-

membrane under the storage area and pond;

• Provide a minimum 1.0 m bund around the entire facility;

• Construct the liner under CQA protocols;

• Operator to prepare a site operation plan to include inspection protocols; and

• Ensure emergency response plans, spill clean up plans and equipment, MSDS availability and emergency training are up to date.

Good housekeeping and preventative maintenance will aid prompt actions.

The potential for significant impacts on soils are considered to be low with a high degree of confidence and can be managed to minimise environmental harm.





PREDICTED OUTCOME

Hazardous Wastes 1. Comply with Regulations on hazardous solid waste management issued by Ministerial Decision No. 18/93.

2. Ensure wastes are managed in accordance with the waste management hierarchy.

Wastes to be within the proposed temporary hazardous waste storage area include: - Spent catalyst; - biosludges; and - miscellaneous

hazardous wastes. Approximately 9 bulk bags will be produced each day, together with 1 200l drum. Wastes will be treated at the Sohar refinery, properly contained and transported to the site under waybill protocols.

All materials are awaiting transhipment to the National Waste Site when developed. Major environmental risks relate to container (bag) failure during transport due to bag mechanical damage or following extended exposure to extended sunlight (old bags). Measures will need to be taken to ensure extensive re-bagging is not necessary for transhipment when the National facility becomes available.

The following mitigation measures and good housekeeping are proposed to limit impacts: • Hazardous wastes shall be stored,

managed and disposed of in a manner consistent with the management protocols developed by the facility manager;

• Educate employees and contractors in hazardous waste management and ensure correct procedures are followed; and

• Ensure emergency response plans, spill clean up plans and equipment, MSDS availability and emergency training are up to date.

The potential for impacts arising from hazardous and non-hazardous solid wastes is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence and can be managed to minimise environmental harm. This environmental impact is relevant and will be further considered.

Noise and Vibration 1. Protect the amenity of the nearby residents from noise and vibration resulting from the plant operations.

2. To ensure that plant operations comply with by Ministerial Decision No. 97/94 & 80/94.

Noise due to operation is limited to potentially to 2 deliveries (4 truck journeys) daily. Noise limits specified for daytime and nighttime activity in MD 97/94 is 45 and 35 dB(Aeq,T). respectively. Daytime background noise levels in the area have been measured between 40.1 and 44..8 dB(A) slow due principally to water drilling occurring on site Maximum noise levels during construction will result from FEL operations.

Operational activities will occur continuously 300 days per year. The results of a screening noise assessment indicate operational noise criteria would meet the most stringent day and night time criteria within 1260 m and 3985m of the proposed site. The nearest noise sensitive area occurs over 5km from the proposed site.

The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Contractor to carry out operation

and maintenance to minimise noise.

The potential for significant noise impacts on communities is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence and can be managed to minimise environmental harm.





PREDICTED OUTCOME

Site Decommissioning Return the environment to as near as possible to the pre-existing condition following plant decommissioning

The industrial plant occurs in an area that has been highly modified by human activity, and used for a range of municipal purposes including landfill and STRP.

Premise constitutes an industrial landscape in an otherwise mixed services semi rural setting. Retention of the liner, ponds and trafficable area reduces visual amenity and presents a hazard (pond). Sludges within the pond and some aggregate making up the storage areas may be contaminated and need treatment / disposal.

The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Undertake a site-specific

assessment of decommissioning requirements;

• Remove surface and sub-surface structures consistent with outcome of site-specific assessment;

• Clean-up and validate sites of contamination;

• Rip and regrade compacted subsoil; and

• Where feasible, restore surface contours to pre-construction profile.

Impacts post commissioning are considered to be low, with a high degree of confidence that they can be managed to minimise environmental harm.

SocioEconomic Environment:

Risk and Hazard including Road Transport

Ensure that the public risk associated with operation of the temporary hazardous waste storage facility is as low as can be reasonably achieved.

Storage of catalyst and biosolids presents minimal hazard to local communities. The proposed site is located within an existing municipal services area with significant separation to sensitive premises. Hazardous wastes will be transported on public roads (about 4 additional heavy vehicle movements daily) and the risk of collision with light traffic is increased accordingly.

Given the location and method of storage, the risk posed by the facility is considered low. Operational transport, present a hazard to local communities and other road users. However the road system (divided roads) and entry / exit from the Sohar – Dubai expressway reduces this risk as low as reasonably possible, particularly when considering the limited number of additional truck movements

The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Erect sufficient warning signs,

barriers and fences for safety; • Inductions and auditing; and • Ensure proper maintenance

schedules for transport vehicles.

The potential for an unacceptable level of risk to impact on individuals or the community is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence.

GRC/ATA Environmental


4.2.1 Environmental Issues Not Further Considered Flora and Fauna The proposed Liwa site is situated in a modified coastal plain sandy environment. The area now supports a range of industrial and agricultural land uses. As a consequence, large tracts of land have become cleared and other areas heavily modified. No NRRs or proclaimed area occur within the region. Landforms and accordingly vegetation associations are well represented both locally and regionally. Vegetation at the site is dominated by Limonium spp. Acacia tortilis, Prosopis cineraria, Salvadora persica with a ground cover of Suaeda spp. and Maerua crassifolia. Wadi channels and floodways retain A. tortilis vegetation complexes, although these have been modified by grazing activities. The proposed facility will occupy an area of approximately 1.5ha within the larger as yet undeveloped hazardous waste management area being initiated by the Diwan. Agricultural farmlands continue near the Sohar Dubai expressway. Typical landscapes and flora associations can be seen in Appendix 4 and further described in section 3.4.5. A variety of generally small mammal species are known to exist in the coastal plain region of the Batinah, together with a range of reptiles. Published data indicates a range of fauna characteristic of A. tortilis associations in Northern Oman (Eriksen and Eriksen, 1996; Fisher et al., 1999). These have been previously summarised in Table 7. Due to the extent of disturbance, only domestic and feral animals (goat, cat,) or rodents (black rat, house mouse) can reasonably be anticipated at the site. Fauna can be disturbed by the noise and general activity (vehicle movements, lights) associated with the plant operation. The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Where possible, retain any remaining over story vegetation. By virtue of the characteristics of the flora and fauna, subject area and mitigation identified, impacts on significant biological groups are considered to be low, and it is predicted with a high degree of confidence that this issue can be managed to minimise environmental harm by implementing the above management strategies. It is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised. Air Quality The discussion in section 3.3.4 is relevant to this factor, as is Table 8. Potential air quality impacts relate to the potential to generate dust from construction activities and gaseous emissions to air from mobile plant. While no plant is proposed for the site, construction personnel will contribute to atmospheric emissions regardless of location. Due to the lack of major industrial emission sources in the immediate vicinity and relatively low population density, gaseous air quality within the subject land will be generally good and ambient air quality will not vary significantly from background. Dust is a naturally occurring phenomenon in arid conditions with high levels caused by unstable surface, abundant fine sand and wind conditions. Limited additional dust may be generated during construction activities. It is estimated 82kL of diesel fuel will be used during construction. Operational fuel usage is estimated to be 10kL/year.



The site will be located within an existing industrial and municipal services area that includes quarrying, STRP and landfill operation. The study area is approximately 13km from the Sohar Industrial Estate. Air emissions are limited to mobile plant fuel consumption during construction. Minor amounts of vehicle emissions and dust will be generated during related transport activities, and along the length of transport routes. Projected vehicle and stationary source emissions have been calculated based on USEPA (Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, or manufacturers specifications, see Appendix 8) and are summarised in Table 9 assuming an approximate six-week construction period.

TABLE 9 ESTIMATED EMISSIONS TO AIR -

LIWA TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE FACILITY

Pollutant Whole of Survey (tonnes) CARBON MONOXIDE 1.2 OXIDIES OF NITROGEN 2.8 PARTICULATE MATTER - PM10 1.3 SULPHUR DIOXIDE 0.1 HYDROCARBONS 0.2

These estimates include power generation requirements at the contractor camp-site (off–site) for 20 persons over the construction period. Air emissions during construction are low and extended over the proposed site and length of transport routes. The following mitigation measures are proposed to further limit impacts: • Identify measures for improving operation and management. • If possible, select lower emitting equipment. By virtue of the characteristics of the limited emissions generated, subject area and mitigation identified, impacts on air quality are considered to be low, and it is predicted with a high degree of confidence that this issue can be managed to minimise environmental harm by implementing the above management strategies. It is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised. Soil Contamination The discussion in section 3.4.2 is relevant to this factor, as is Table 8. The subject land lies on sandy clay Battinah plain soils in the Waliyat of Liwa, and well away (about 9km) from any significant residential areas ands within a municipal service area including STRP and unlined landfill. A minor wadi occurs to the northwest of the proposed site. Groundwater flow from the site may travel towards the wadi, or follow the east gradient to the coast. Appendix 6 presents the results of test pit logs that indicate that soil profiles grade to increasing clay content, with sandy clays being encountered at approximately 1.7 m bgl.



Direct impacts on soils are anticipated to be minimal due to the provision of an impermeable liner and leachate capture / evaporation system. The following mitigation measures and good housekeeping are proposed to limit impacts: • Install an impermeable geo-membrane under the storage area and pond. • Provide a minimum 1.0m bund around the entire facility. • Construct the liner under CQA protocols. • Operator to prepare a site operation plan to include inspection protocols. • Ensure emergency response plans, spill clean up plans and equipment, MSDS availability

and emergency training are up to date. Good housekeeping and preventative maintenance will aid prompt actions. By virtue of the characteristics of the limited emissions generated, subject area and mitigation identified, impacts on soils are considered to be low, and it is predicted with a high degree of confidence that this issue can be managed to minimise environmental harm by implementing the above management strategies. It is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised. Noise and Vibration Table 10 is relevant to this factor, as are the results of a screening noise assessment presented as Appendix 9. Noise due to operation is limited to potentially to 2 deliveries (4 truck journeys) daily. Daytime background noise levels in the area have been measured between 40.1 and 44.8dB(A) slow due principally to water drilling occurring on site The most important factors affecting noise propagation are: • Type of source (point or line); • Distance from source; • Atmospheric absorption; • Wind; • Temperature and temperature gradient; • Obstacles such as barriers and buildings; • Ground absorption; • Reflections; and • Rain and humidity. Distance from source and frequency content of the noise is the most influential in atmospheric (or free field) attenuation of noise. In particular, low frequencies are not well attenuated by atmospheric absorption (Brüel and Kjær, 2000). Table 10, taken from MD 79/94, specifies noise levels for the public environment.



TABLE 10 NOISE LIMITS FOR PUBLIC PLACES

L Aeq,T(dBA)

Type of district TIME PERIOD

A- WORKDAYS:

DAYTIME 0700 to1800 HRS

B- WORKDAYS:

EVENINGS 1800 to 2300 HRS

C- HOLIDAYS & NIGHTS:

2300 to 0700 HRS

Rural residential recreational 45 40 35

Suburban residential 50 45 40

Urban residential 55 50 45

Urban residential with some workshops or business; city hub

60 55 50

Industrial and commercial 70 70 70

Source: MD 79/94 Regulations for Noise Pollution Control in Public Environment Noise limits specified for activity in MD 97/94 is 45dB(Aeq,T) and 35dB(Aeq,T) for day and night time respectively. Construction activities will occur over a period if six weeks during day shift only. Construction activities may occur on weekends. Maximum noise levels during construction will result from earthmoving, and in particular Front End Loader (FEL) operations. The results of a screening noise assessment indicate construction noise criteria would meet the most stringent day and night time criteria within 1260 m and 3895m from the site. The nearest noise sensitive area occurs over 5 km from the site. The following mitigation measure is proposed to limit impacts: • Following the standard operating procedures in carrying out operation and maintenance to

minimise noise. By virtue of the noise generated (principally during daytime construction), subject area and mitigation identified, noise impacts on the community will be low, and it is predicted with a high degree of confidence that this issue can be managed to minimise environmental harm by implementing the above management strategies. It is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised. Site Decommissioning The summary presented in Table 8 is relevant to this factor. The project has an anticipated life of 18 months and the site is generally isolated from sensitive communities. While SRC’s use of the site may have finished, the construction and implementation will be such that its presents a valuable resource for other potential users (as a hazardous waste transfer station for example). Whole of lifecycle project environmental management requires early consideration of site decommissioning procedures. Temporary waste storage facilities can be completely remediated with the



removal of aggregate and membrane, and return of the site to natural contours. Contaminated sludges and aggregate would need to be recovered and properly treated however. Decommissioning procedures will be established consistent with industry practice at the time of site closure and requirements set by and agreed with MRMEWR. The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts:

• Undertake a site-specific assessment of decommissioning requirements. • Remove surface and sub-surface structures consistent with outcome of site-specific assessment. • Remove and dispose of all unnecessary markers, signage and rubbish. • Cleanup and validate sites of contamination. • Regrade disturbed areas. • Rip compacted subsoil and temporary access trails. • Where feasible, restore surface contours to pre-construction profile. Over the operating life of the temporary hazardous waste storage facility, improved methods of decommissioning or requirements will no doubt occur. With implementation of contemporary techniques for decommissioning, it is considered these impacts will be low, and are predicted with a high degree of confidence that they can be managed to minimise environmental harm. It is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised. Risk and Hazard including Road Transport Storage of hazardous materials presents a potential hazard to the environment and local communities. The proposed site is however located within an existing municipal services area with significant separation to sensitive premises. Transported and stored hazardous wastes exhibit either low flammability (catalyst) or a high moisture content limiting both explosion and fire risk. Given the location and method of storage, the risk posed by the operation of the temporary hazardous waste storage facility is considered low. Used oil and products will be transported on public roads (about 4 additional heavy vehicle movements daily) and the risk of collision with light traffic is increased accordingly. Operational transport will present a hazard to local communities and other road users. However the road system (divided roads) and limitation of intersections reduces this risk as low as reasonably possible, particularly when considering the limited number of additional truck movements The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Erect sufficient warning signs, barriers and fences for safety. • Inductions and auditing. • Ensure proper maintenance schedules for heavy vehicles. Based on the size and scope of the proposed activity, relatively low residential density surrounding area, low truck numbers identified and mitigation proposed, it is believed individual and societal risk and road transportation impacts will be low, and it is predicted with a high degree of confidence that risk generally can be managed to minimise public risk. It is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised. 4.2.2 Key Environmental Issues The following issues are considered relevant to this proposal and are more fully considered in Section 5:



• Groundwater Quality • Hazardous Wastes 4.3 Field Survey and Data Recorded 4.3.1 Rapid Scan Survey A` rapid scan assessment of the site has been undertaken and a site inspection conducted using a combination of four-wheel drive vehicles and on foot. GPS locations were recorded at all observation points. Written observations, data and photographic records were taken at major turning points, regular intervals in the subject area, and at features of interest and are recorded in full in Appendix 4.



5. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, PROPOSED SAFEGUARDS AND

MITIGATION 5.1 Groundwater Quality 5.1.1 Objective Maintain the quantity of groundwater so that existing and potential users are protected. 5.1.2 Baseline The summary in Table 8 is relevant to this factor, as is section 3.4. Access to portable water is extremely important in Oman. Oman relies on groundwater and desalination plants to meet water requirements for water for domestic, agricultural and industrial requirements. There is limited availability of fresh groundwater due to salt water intrusion as a result of municipal and farm usage. Ground water quality for the area surrounding the Sohar Industrial Estate varies and is described in section 3.4.4. In summary, water samples analysed from areas surrounding the Sohar Industrial Estate, indicate total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in the range 340 to 3780 mg/L (Omani Water Quality criterion of < 800 mg/L), putting it in the fresh to low brackish classification. Water of this quality is it suitable for applications ranging potable to selected industrial/selected livestock use. The alluvial aquifer of the Sohar coast has only marginal storage capacity in upper catchment areas and is already heavily exploited. There are no operational water requirements. The nearest beneficial users of the groundwater are the municipal facilities (STRP and landfill) that occur the north-northeast. Leachates lost to Wadi Banut Umar Al Ghabi will however be carried to the east-northeast past Harat ash Shaykh to the Gulf of Oman. The nearest live falaj (F0705 at N 2699729.0, E 457268.0) occurs up gradient and over 8km from the subject land (National Falaj Inventory). 5.1.3 Discussion of Potential Impact The risk of fuel and chemical spillage is elevated due to the operation and has the potential to impact on shallow aquifers. Leachate or contaminated stormwater may contain hydrocarbons or elevated metals. Generally the potential to generate leachates is very low for the bulk of the stored material (catalyst) and acid leachate testing has indicated metals are tightly bound and unlikely to be mobile (see Appendix 7) . The balance of the material stored is either in sealed drums (miscellaneous) or is a spadable solid. In order to protect groundwater and prevent pollution, Oman has implemented a system of groundwater protection schemes. Colours determine relative risk and identify acceptable practices within the designation. The nearest groundwater protection area occurs in Wadi Jizzi up gradient and to the south of the subject land in a separate catchment. Existing groundwater resources have elevated TDS and limited beneficial use. The storage area will be underlain by an impermeable geo membrane of HDPE. Storage and trafficable areas will be constructed with a fall of between 1:100 and 1:200 to the evaporation ponds sized to accommodate a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event. In addition, a 1m bund will surround the entire facility. 5.1.4 Proposed Mitigation and Commitments



Leachates and contaminated storm water will be captured and evaporated. The following mitigation measures are proposed to limit impacts: • Install an impermeable geo-membrane under the storage area and pond. • Provide a minimum 1.0 m bund around the entire facility. • Construct the liner under CQA protocols. • Operator to prepare a site operation plan to include inspection protocols.

5.1.5 Predicted Outcome Based on the review of the available literature, monitoring results and knowledge of reasonable operational practices, the potential for impacts on groundwater quality is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence, and can be managed to minimise environmental harm. Given the potential to generate significant volumes of leachate is small and limited beneficial use of groundwaters down gradient (no municipal wellfields), it is further believed any adverse impacts will be short-term and localised. 5.3 Hazardous Waste 5.3.1 Objective

1. Comply with Regulations on hazardous solid waste management issued by Ministerial Decision No. 18/93.

2. Ensure wastes are managed in accordance with the waste management hierarchy. 5.3.2 Baseline The summary in Table 8 is relevant to this factor, as are sections 1.4 and 2.0. Wastes to be within the proposed temporary Hazardous Waste storage area includes: • Spent catalyst; • biosludges; and • miscellaneous hazardous wastes. Approximately nine bulk bags will be produced each day, together with a single 200L drum. Wastes will be treated at the Sohar refinery, properly contained and transported to the site under waybill protocols.

5.3.3 Discussion of Potential Impact All materials are awaiting transhipment to the National Waste Site when developed. Major environmental risks relate to container (bag) failure during transport due to bag mechanical damage or following extended exposure to extended sunlight (old bags). Measures will need to be taken to ensure extensive re-bagging is not necessary for transhipment when the National facility becomes available. An overview of design criteria is presented in section 2.0 above and summarised in Table 11.



TABLE 11 SUMMARY OF DESIGN CRITERIA AND MITIGATION FEATURES AGAINST BEST

PRACTICE

Design Criteria Mitigation Features Catalyst For the design of the hazardous waste storage facility, and average catalyst weight of

1.75 tonnes is assumed (maximum 2.0 tonnes), and a footprint of 1.1m by 1.1m. Double stacking only is proposed to limit mechanical stress on bags and limit occupational hazards.

Biosiolids For the design of the hazardous waste storage facility, and average biosolids bag weight of 1.75 tonnes is assumed (maximum 2.0 tonnes), and a footprint of 1.2m by 1.2m. Single stacking only is proposed to limit mechanical stress on bags. Where sludges exhibit too high moisture content, these must be returned to the process for reworking.

Miscellaneous Hazardous Wastes

These include oily rags, oil contaminated absorbent sheets, spent toner cartridges and similar waste generated at a volume of approximately 0.1 tonne daily. While in various forms, it is proposed this waste be stored in sealed 200L steel or plastic containers and on wooden pallets

Transport The design standard for transport vehicles is of nominal 14 tonne capacity and wheel centre to wheel centre distance of 5.7m. Type design for the truck mounted crane is a lifting capacity of a nominal 2.0 tonnes at 6.35m.

Siting of Temporary Storage Facility

1. A buffer of approximately 8.2km to Harat Shaykh exists to the east. Construction of municipal buildings including a water tower is currently being undertaken on the entry road from the Dubai Muscat Hwy approximately 5.4km from the proposed site. Other land uses within 5.0km include quarrying, the Liwa sanitary landfill and the Liwa STRP.

2. A sandy clay layer was observed in the gravel extraction pit at approximately 1.7m bgl.

The risk of fuel and chemical spillage is elevated due to the operation and has the potential to impact on shallow aquifers. Leachate or contaminated stormwater may contain hydrocarbons or elevated metals. Generally the potential to generate leachates is very low for the bulk of the stored material (catalyst) and acid leachate testing has indicated metals are tightly bound and unlikely to be mobile (see Appendix 7). The balance of the material stored is either in sealed drums (miscellaneous) or is a spadable solid. 5.3.4 Proposed Mitigation and Commitments The hazardous waste storage site and associated facilities is designed to: • minimise potential environmental impacts; • minimise health and safety risks for landfill operators and the public; and • make the most efficient use of resources onsite. An overview of proposed design and operational mitigation measures is prevented in section 2.0 above and summarised in Table 12.



TABLE 12

SUMMARY OF DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL MITIGATION FEATURES AGAINST BEST PRACTICE

Element Incorporation in Design Liner The proposed liner at Liwa will consist of a 1.5 mm HDPE geomembrane to be installed

on a layer of compacted bedding sand on the sub-base. A geotextile membrane will be laid over this, and gravel trafficable and storage areas developed

Sub-base While sandy clays occur at approximately 1.7 m bgl at the site, soils above consist of small fist size angular cobbles grading to pebbles deeper in the profile. To protect the geomembrane from possible puncturing and strain, a layer of compacted bedding sand of nominal 100 mm thick is proposed. While this is not best practice (provides a drainage layer between the liner and sub-base), given the location and depth to groundwater, integrity of the liner is considered a premium.

Clay layer

No clay layer is proposed to be installed under the liner. Sandy clays exist beneath the site at approximately 1.7 m bgl. Hydraulic conductivity has not been tested. While this is not best practice, given the location, depth to groundwater and length of time the facility will be in use, a clay layer has been omitted.

Membrane

HDPE lining has been chosen due to its generally acceptable properties, ready availability in Oman and increasing experience of installers. Technology suppliers will be required to prepare a CQA plan

Leachate collection system

A under membrane leachate collection system has not been included in the facility design due to the low leachability of the principal material stored (catalyst), low ambient rainfall (minimise hydraulic head) and distance to the water table. Separate membrane surface leachate collection systems (aggregate) and separate evaporation ponds for each of the catalysts and biosolids storage areas have been provided for, and an intermediate bund included.

CQA plan SRC will require the construction contractor to develop a CQA to encompass all aspects of the construction project. Design will include a stormwater cut-off drain between the hillside to the south west and facility. At the request of the MRMEWR Ponds have been design to store a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event.

Water management

The cell has been designed with a 1:100 to 1:200 slope falling to a separate stormwater / leachate collection ponds for each of the catalysts storage and biosolids cells. Design volume is for a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event. A 1m high bund surrounds the entire facility. There will be provision to pump out the collection ponds and transfer to the nearby STRP in the event of potential overtopping.

Site Security and Fencing

The hazardous waste storage facility will be designed to be fully enclosed by a 2.0 m high secure fence and lockable gate.

Transport Management Transport contractor to provide a transport management plan covering all aspects including emergency response and clean-up.

The following mitigation measures and good housekeeping are proposed to limit impacts: • Hazardous wastes shall be stored, managed and disposed of in a manner consistent with

the management protocols developed by the facility manager. • Educate employees and contractors in hazardous waste management and ensure correct

procedures are followed. • Ensure emergency response plans, spill clean up plans and equipment, MSDS availability

and emergency training are up to date.



5.3.5 Predicted Outcome Based on the review of the available literature, monitoring results and knowledge of reasonable operational practices, the potential for impacts arising from the transport and storage of hazardous wastes is considered to be low with a high degree of confidence, and can be managed to minimise environmental harm. Providing appropriate site and transport management protocols are initiated, it is further believed any adverse impacts will be short term and localised.



6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of field assessment and associated desktop review, it is considered operation of the Liwa temporary hazardous waste storage area can be managed to meet all of the objectives as specified in this document. Environmental impacts considered in this report and predicted impacts consistent with World Bank protocols, is summarised in Table 13.

TABLE 13 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CONSIDERED AND CONCLUSIONS ON SIGNIFICANCE

DETERMINED FOR THE PROPOSED SRC TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE FACILITY - LIWA

ASPECT PREDICTED

IMPACT CONFIDENCE

IN PREDICTION Biophysical

Groundwater Quality Low High Vegetation Communities and Fauna Low High

Pollution Management Air Quality Low High Soil Contamination Low High Hazardous Waste Low High Noise and Vibration Low High Site Decommissioning Low High

Social Surroundings Risk and Hazard including Road Transport Low High

As a result of the feature survey and being proposed to be located within a Municipal services area, it is concluded that no sensitive landscapes or significant flora and fauna will be threatened by the operations of the temporary storage facility. The social and environmental impacts of the operation of SRC Liwa temporary hazardous waste facility are minimised by: i) Design to incorporate a HDPE liner; ii) Separation of waste types; iii) Provision of a leachate / rainfall collection/ evaporation pond for each of the major waste types

designed to accommodate a 100mm 24 hour rainfall event; vi) Provision of a 1.0m bund around the facility perimeter; and vii) Safeguards and mitigation proposed. Specific safeguards include (amongst others): • transport of all transported wastes under a docket system; and • incorporation of a geo-textile layer above the HDPE liner. On the basis of the specialist studies and other work associated with the preparation of this EIA document, it is concluded that the construction and operation of the proposed temporary waste storage facility at Liwa can be managed to meet all Oman Government permitting environmental objectives, and as a result cause minimal environmental and social impacts.


______________________________________________________________________________________________________


REFERENCES Al-Harthi, L.S.A. (2003). Vegetation Assessment in Relation to Grazing in the Eastern Batinah, Sultanate

of Oman. M.Sc. Thesis. Sultan Qaboos Univarsity.

Brüel & Kjær (2000). Environmental Noise. Brüel&Kjær Sound & Vibration Measurement A/S, Stockholm. .

DG-WRA (1994). Water Resource Assessment Five Year Plan, 1996 – 2000. Eriksen, H. and Eriksen, J. (1996). Birdlife in Oman. Al Roya Publishing, Oman. Fisher, M. and Membery, D. (1998). Climate. In Ghazanfar, S. and Fisher, M. (eds).

Vegetation of the Arabian Peninsula. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London. Frobel R., Sadlier M. (1997). Geomembrane properties – A comparative perspective, Proceedings

GeoEnvironment 97, Melbourne, November 1997. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (1990). Sultanate of Oman:

Proposals for a System of Nature Conservation Areas, IUCN World Conservation Centre, Gland Switzerland.

Ministry for Regional Municipalities, Environment and Water Resources (in prep.) Water Resources

of Oman. Ministry of Regional Municipalities and Environment (1992). National Conservation Strategy, Vol II.

Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (1990). Soil map of the Sultanate of Oman. Petroleum Development Oman (2002). Health, Safety and Environment Specification SP1005 Emissions

to Atmosphere.

vertical ex 2:1

basement1.5 mm HDPE Liner

100 mm screened compacted sand

150 mm aggregate

450mm compacted aggregate

6.0 4.0 3 to 12 5.5 7.0 7.07.0 12.011.0 5.5 2.0 6.0 7.0 7.0 6.0 8 to 1.0

1.0

AA 1

A A 1

B

B 1

B 1B

CATALYST STORAGE AREA EVAPORATION PONDDEPTH 1.2 M

BIOSOLIDS STORAGE AREA EVAPORATION POND DEPTH 1.2 M

FALL

1:1

00 T

O

2 0

316

3 20

6

110

88

35 8 to 12278 to 12

1 1

11.0

SOHAR REFINERY COMPANYHAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE SITE - LIWA

CONCEPTUAL LAYOUTFIGURE 3

FIGURES

APPENDICIES

APPENDIX 1 COPY KROOKI FOR SITE

Henk_vanderWiele

Note

Points shown in other PDF's

Henk_vanderWiele

Pencil

Henk_vanderWiele

Pencil

Henk_vanderWiele

Note

Wadi (dry river bed, lowest point in landscape, drains to NW

Henk_vanderWiele

Pencil

Henk_vanderWiele

Note

Note hilly area (high point)

APPENDIX 2COPY OF PAPER, EUROPEAN CRACKING CATALYSTS PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION

EUROPEAN CRACKING CATALYSTS PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION

(ECCPA)

FCC Equilibrium Catalyst (including FCC catalyst fines) finds safe reuse/rework outlets in Europe

Issued 4 January 2006

1.0: Introduction Under the auspices of the European Chemical Industry Council, or Cefic, a taskforce of European Cracking Catalyst Producers was established.

It provides a forum for debating questions, problems, facts and topics arising during the generation, storage, transport, use and reworking of FCC–Equilibrium catalysts, as well as any other subject related to the interests of EH&S-tasks. It ensures that its views are made known to the oil refining industry, to other technical groups and organisations, official bodies, and national and international authorities.

The primary objective of the taskforce is to study and promote viable and environmentally safe handling storage, transport, rework or reuse options for equilibrium FCC catalyst and FCC catalyst fines. At present, approx. 500 thousand metric tons of FCC catalysts are used worldwide, of which 20% in refineries with FCC units (FCCUs) in Europe. Approx 75 thousand tons of used catalyst is generated from European FCC’s in two types:

• Catalyst fines • Equilibrium FCC catalyst

The proximity of the equilibrium catalyst source to the point-of-reuse/rework is critical, because this determines the transportation costs – the major element in the cost of reuse/rework. This is why a balanced geographical spread of reuse outlets throughout Europe is sought. Usages in the area of construction materials and steel mills offer potential outlets for the reuse of equilibrium fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) catalyst that far exceeds the supply from European refineries. Of the 75 thousand tons of fresh FCC catalyst purchased annually by European refiners, only a relative small portion is either reused in-house or sold to other refineries as catalyst (E-cat). Ultimately, a high volume needs to be reworked in a safe and environmentally acceptable way. Equilibrium FCC catalyst, not suited for further refinery use, is a silica/alumina zeolite-containing material with contaminations of heavy metals like nickel and vanadium. This material has to be treated as waste. . The following information is provided for a better understanding of the current status:

• EU Legislation • Examples of reworking routes

Page 1 of 3

Chemistry making a world of difference European Chemical Industry Council Avenue E. van Nieuwenhuyse 4 B - 1160 Brussels Belgium Tel: +32 2 676 73 64 Fax: +32 2 676 73 01 [email protected] www.cefic.org

of 3


2.0: EU legislation With tightening legislation, land filling, with possible associated liabilities, is not allowed anymore. The EU directive on land filling overrules the less stringent national legislations, thus constituting the minimum requirement in all EU member states. For the purpose of land filling, (hazardous-)waste acceptance criteria and procedures will apply. Treatment or rework of equilibrium catalysts may involve a transboundary (international) movement, and in this context it is important to be aware of any further regulations covering the movement of such materials between countries. The Basel Convention of 22 March 1989 describes procedures that must be followed in making transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal. The Basel Convention applies in several countries in- and outside Europe. Movement between countries where only one country has ratified the Basel Convention is prohibited without the existence of special bilateral or multilateral agreements. Detailed information can be found at the following Internet address: http://www.basel.int (Secretariat of the Basel Convention) (Status Jan. 2006) The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) decision of 30 March 1992, No. C(92)39 final, replaced by C(2001)107/final on 21 May 2002 and amended by C(2004)20 on 09 March 2004, which is in accordance with the provisions of the Basel Convention, applies to transboundary movements of waste within the OECD area. It covers both hazardous and non-hazardous wastes, but only when they are destined for recovery operations. Detailed information can be found at the following Internet address: http://www.oecd.org Select in “Browse”: topic. Under “Topics” select: Environment and than under its topic “Waste”: “Transboundary Movement of Waste” can be found. (Status Jan. 2006) The OECD categorises waste in three different lists: green, amber and red.

• The green list covers non-hazardous wastes, which will be subject only to the controls normally applied in commercial transactions.

• The amber list covers wastes, which exhibit hazardous characteristics or contain

hazardous components, and for which prior notification of the proposed movement is required to authorities in all concerned countries (those of export, transit and import). A tracking document is required for the movements of the waste. The transport can take place as soon as express authorisation is given or an objection period has passed after receipt of the notification by the authorities concerned unless objections have been raised (tacit consent).

• The red list covers hazardous wastes, which require the same notification as for the

amber list, but for which written consent must be obtained from all concerned authorities before the transport can take place.

The international transport of waste relating to countries within the EU is, with effect from 6 May 1994, covered by the Council Regulation (EEC) No. 259/93 of 1 February 1993, replaced on 10 June 1998 by the Commission decision 98/368/EC, on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community. The EU regulation implements the

http://www.unep.ch/basel/index.html%20basel.int

http://www.oecd.org/

of 3


above-mentioned international agreements in Commission regulation (EC) No 2557/2001 to reflect OECD guidelines C(2001)107/final. Detailed information can be found at the following Internet addresses: (Status Jan. 2006) http://europa.eu.int/index_en.html. Select under activities: “Environment”. Select “waste” under the heading “A comprehensive guide to European Law”. Under hazardous waste chapter all relevant information can be found with links to official texts. Or: http://europa.eu/int/eur-lex/lex/en/repert/index.htmlSelect: Environment, consumers and health protection Select: Waste management and clean technology or go directly to the address: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/lif/reg/en_register_15103030.html Equilibrium catalyst is listed on the OECD green list (code GC050). However, a green listed equilibrium catalyst must be treated as amber or red list if contaminated with 0.1% of other materials, according to EU Regulations, which increase the risks sufficiently to meet the criteria for the amber or red list, or which prevent recovery in an environmentally sound manner. Also the possibility exists for OECD member countries to classify wastes differently than the OECD lists if required by their national legislation or according to their national testing procedures. Important annexes (lists) to the EU Regulations are regularly revised by the EC Commission. In the event of doubt on the correct categorisation or classification, it is recommended that the local regulatory authorities are consulted with respect to their requirements or contact your local fresh catalyst sales representative for support. 3.0: Examples for routes of reworking The area of construction work – a traditional outlet for industrial residues – has been investigated as an outlet for the rework of equilibrium catalyst. Potential reuses identified include:

• Constructional work • Cement • Insulation material • Metal casting industry

4.0: Taskforce members

4.1 Albemarle Catalysts Company B.V. 4.2 Engelhard Corporation

4.3 GRACE Davison Refining Catalyst Europe 5.0: Disclaimer

“This document is intended for information only and sets out advice for the safe

reuse/rework and outlets of FCC equilibrium catalyst. The information contained in this article is provided in good faith and, while it is accurate as far as the authors are aware, no representations or warranties are made with regards to its completeness. For guidance on individual circumstances specific advice should be sought and in all cases the applicable national, European and international regulations should always be complied with. No responsibility will be assumed by Cefic in relation to the information contained in these guidelines.”

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/lif/index.html

http://europa.eu/int/eur-lex/lex/en/repert/index.html

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/lif/reg/en_register_15103030.html

APPENDIX 3 INDICATIVE TRANSPORT VEHICLE AND TRUCK

MOUNTED CRANE SPECIFICATION

APPENDIX 4 RESULTS OF RAPID SCAN ASSESSMENT

Environmental Impact Assessment – SRC Hazardous Waste Storage Facility Field Record Sheet

SRC Page 1 of 8

No sensitive human land uses. Existing gravel pit to SE. Bore being developed 200m to SE. Municipal landfill (unlined) and STRP to NE.

Location ID: S001 OTHER ID: 338

GPS Coords: E: 448458 N: 2708412 Auditor: PJa HVw Date: 14/04/07 Time: 10:25

Alignment by Orientation along feature

Cardinal angle

Photo 1 ( ) 2744 (N)

Photo 2 ( ) 2745 (W)

Photo 3 ( ) 2746 (S)

Photo 4 ( ) 2747 (E)

Photo 5 ( )

Photo 6 ( )

Mining X S & G plain Veg Feature

Road X’ing Archaeological Wadi

Other

Zone 40R Sand and gravel plain adjoining minor wadi channel. Upper central portion of proposed hazardous waste site. Occasional Acacia tortilis showing browse lines. Very sparse ground covers and grasses amongst rounded cobbles. No evidence of species of national environmental importance (NES).

PHO

TO

GR

APH

ID

SIT

E ID

LO

CA

TIO

N ID

C

OM

ME

NT

S

X

⇑


SRC Page 2 of 8

⇑ N

W ⇓

⇑ E

S ⇓


SRC Page 3 of 8

No sensitive human land uses. Existing gravel pit to SE. Bore being developed 230m to SE




Cardinal angle

Photo 1 ( ) 2748 (N)

Photo 2 ( ) 2749 (W)

Photo 3 ( ) 2750 (S)

Photo 4 ( ) 2751 (E)

Photo 5 ( )

Photo 6 ( )


Road X’ing Archaeological Wadi

Other

Zone 40R Sand and gravel plain adjoining minor wadi channel. Mid central portion of proposed hazardous waste site. Occasional Acacia tortilis showing browse lines. Very sparse ground covers and grasses amongst rounded cobbles. No evidence of species of NES.

PHO

TO

GR

APH

ID

SIT

E ID

LO

CA

TIO

N ID

C

OM

ME

NT

S

X

⇑ ⇓


SRC Page 4 of 8

⇑ N

W ⇓

⇑ E

S ⇓


SRC Page 5 of 8

No sensitive human land uses. Existing gravel pit to SE. Bore being developed 280m to SE




Cardinal angle

Photo 1 ( ) 2752 (N)

Photo 2 ( ) 2753 (W)

Photo 3 ( ) 2754 (S)

Photo 4 ( ) 2755 (E)

Photo 5 ( )

Photo 6 ( )


Road X’ing Archaeological X Wadi

Other grades to minor wadi

Zone 40R Sand and gravel plain grading to minor wadi channel. Lower central portion of proposed hazardous waste site. Occasional Acacia tortilis showing browse lines. Very sparse ground covers and occasional shrubs amongst rounded cobbles. No evidence of species of national environmental importance (NES). Goat tracks present.

PHO

TO

GR

APH

ID

SIT

E ID

LO

CA

TIO

N ID

C

OM

ME

NT

S

X

⇑ ⇓


SRC Page 6 of 8

⇑ N

W ⇓

⇑ E

S ⇓


SRC Page 7 of 8




Cardinal angle

Photo 1 ( ) 2760 (N)

Photo 2 ( ) 2761 (W)

Photo 3 ( ) 2762 (S)

Photo 4 ( ) 2763 (E)

Photo 5 ( )

Photo 6 ( )

Mining S & G plain Veg Feature

Road X’ing Archaeological X Wadi

Other minor wadi channel

Zone 40R Proposed access track in minor wadi channel beyond proposed hazardous waste storage site. Occasional Acacia tortilis showing browse lines. Very sparse ground covers and shrubs amongst deeper sands. No evidence of species of national environmental importance (NES). Goat tracks present.

PHO

TO

GR

APH

ID

SIT

E ID

LO

CA

TIO

N ID

C

OM

ME

NT

S

X

⇑ ⇓


SRC Page 8 of 8

⇑ N

W ⇓

⇑ E

S ⇓

APPENDIX 5 TEST PIT LOGS

GEO-Resources Consultancy

Environmental Impact Assessment – SRC Hazardous Waste Storage Facility

Completion Report

Test Pit 1Summary

Location Liwa Temp Haz waste Sorage SiteMeasurement Method (i)

Coordinates 0448458 E 2708412 N 1Elevation 88 mamsl 1Datum WGS 84/UTM

Field Manager GRC Henk Van der WieleSub-contractorEngineering Geologist

Date of Excavation 14/04/2006 Plant hand

Date Backfilled 14/04/2006 Ambient Temperature 35 deg. C

Pit Dimensions at surface 0.7 m x 0.5 mdepth 1.0 m

Details of Side Support Required Not required

Details of Water Inflows No water ingress

Summary of In-situ Tests Type (ii) Number EquipmentNA

Sampling Details Depth (m) Type (iii) Reference Submitted for Analysis0 - 3 Small MP2/1

AttachmentsAnnex A Lithological Log Annex B Results of Laboratory Analyses (where applicable)

Notes(i) method (1) GPS; (2) total station(ii) constant head (iii) specify small, bulk or otherwise

no

GRC 26-021-HAZ: Environmental Impact Assessment – SRC Hazardous Waste Storage Facility

Lab Ref. Test Pit No.

Project

Location PLAN VIEW

Weather

Surface Relief N

Test Pit Dimensions

Co-ordinates E N Elevation mamsl

TEST PIT LOG

REMARKS Logged by

Water table not encountered

Test pit walls are stable

Plant used : T hand

Test pit terminated at 1m depth

End of Test pit

Remarks

0.7 (W) x 0.5 (L) x 1.0(D)

448458 2708412 88

0.7 m

0.5

m

Face

D

GEO-Resources Consulting

S01

14/4/2006DateHot, Sunny, moderate wind

HVW

Slight fall to NW

Face C

Client Sohar Refinery Company LLC


Face Bn.a 1

Face A

0.25

Depth (m) Legend Description (Observations at Face A)

0.50

Rounded cobbles sand gravel of gabbro, to 10cm. Poorly consolidated to loose conglomerate with a sandy clay matrix

Occasional angular cobbles and gravel to 1.0 m. Poorly consolidated to loose conglomerate with a sandy clay matrix

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

2.25

2.50

2.00

1.75



Completion Report

Test Pit 2Summary










Sampling Details Depth (m) Type (iii) Reference Submitted for Analysis0 - 3 Small MP2/1



no

GRC 26-021-HAZ; Environmental Impact Assessment – SRC Hazardous Waste Storage Facility


Project

Location PLAN VIEW

Weather

Surface Relief N

Test Pit Dimensions


TEST PIT LOG

REMARKS Logged by



Plant used : T hand

Test pit terminated at 1.1m depth

2.25

2.50

2.00

1.75

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.25


0.50

Rounded cobbles sand gravel of weatehred gabbro to 0.1 m. Poorly consolidated to loose conglomerate with a sandy clay matrix

Occasional angular cobbles and gravel to 1.1 m. Poorly consolidated to loose conglomerate with a sandy clay matrix.

Increasing clay content at depth.

HVW

Slight fall to NW

Face C



Face Bn.a 2

Face A


S02


End of Test pit

Remarks

0.7 (W) x 0.5 (L) x 1.0(D)

448458 2708442 88

0.7 m

0.5

m

Face

D



Completion Report

Test Pit 3Summary










Sampling Details Depth (m) Type (iii) Reference Submitted for Analysis



GRC-26-021-HAZ; Environmental Impact Assessment – SRC Hazardous Waste Storage Facility


Project

Location PLAN VIEW

Weather

Surface Relief N

Test Pit Dimensions


TEST PIT LOG

REMARKS Logged by



Plant used : T hand

Test pit terminated at 1.0m depth

End of Test pit

Remarks / Photo

0.7 (W) x 0.5 (L) x 1.0(D)

448458 2708475 87

0.7 m

0.5

m

Face

D


S03


HVW

Slight fall to NW

Face C



Face Bn.a 3

Face A

0.25


0.50


Occasional angular cobbles and gravel to 1.0 m. Poorly consolidated to loose conglomerate with a sandy clay matrix.

Increasing clay content at depth.

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

2.25

2.50

2.00

1.75



Completion Report

Test Pit 4Summary

Location Liwa Temp Haz waste Storage SiteMeasurement Method (i)



Date of Excavation unknown Plant FEL / Dozer (previous gravel extraction)

Date Backfilled open Ambient Temperature 35 deg. C



Details of Water Inflows No water ingress. Evidence of previous standing water in pit


Sampling Details Depth (m) Type (iii) Reference Submitted for Analysis



SRC-26-021-HAZ: Environmental Impact Assessment – SRC Hazardous Waste Storage Facility


Project

Location PLAN VIEW

Weather

Surface Relief N

Test Pit Dimensions


TEST PIT LOG

REMARKS Logged by



Plant used : TFEL / Dozer (previous gravel extraction)

Test pit face cleaned up to 2.2m depth

2.25

2.50

2.00

1.75Sandy clays to clays with very occasional pebble.

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.25


0.50

HVW

Slight fall to NW

Face C



Face Bn.a 4

Face A


S01

openDateHot, Sunny, moderate wind

Remarks

14.0 (W) x 60.0 (L) x 2.2(D)

448348 2708517 89

0.7 m

0.5

m

Face

D


Occasional angular cobbles and gravel to 1.75 m. Larger cobbles becoming increasinly scarce at depth. Poorly consolidated to loose conglomerate with a sandy clay matrix grading to sandy clays near

base.

End of Test pit

Test

Pit

4, s

urfa

ce to

0.3

Test

Pit

4, W

eath

ered

incl

usio

ns a

t 1. 2

Test

Pit

4, G

radi

ng to

san

dy c

lays

at 1

.7

APPENDIX 6 GUIDELINES CONCERNING PROVISION OF

HDPE LINERS FOR IMPOUNDMENT & STORAGE AREAS

APPENDIX 7 CATALYST ACID LEACHATE TEST RESULTS

ARL Lab No: 18417Date: 04 September 2006

CLIENT:

ATTENTION:

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:

DATE RECEIVED:

LOCATION / JOB NO:

PURCHASE ORDER:

EXTRACTION FLUID: pH 5.0

METHOD REFERENCES:

Bottle Leaching Procedure - ASLP ARL No. 069Metals in Water ARL No. 029, 038, 039, 040, 065, 066

Kim RodgersLaboratory Manager

One solid sample as received for an ASLP Extraction and analysis of metals.

19881

Mr Henk Van der Wiele

09 August 2006

GRC-2006-021 Sohar Refinery

ATA Environmental

ASLP EXTRACTION CERTIFICATE

Dilhorn House

PERTH WA 60002 Bulwer Street

Page 1 of 1

Att: Mr Henk Van der WieleATA EnvironmentalARL Lab No: 1841704 September 2006

Metals Quality Control Data

Matrix Spike Certified Reference Material

Aluminium - 84%Iron - 101%

Nickel 104% 102%Antimony - 91%Titanium - -

Vanadium - 82%Zinc - 104%

% Recovery

Page 1 of 1


Date PreparedDate Analysed

ARL Lab NoSample Marks

Aluminium 0.1 2.0 1.8Iron 0.01 1.3 0.38

Nickel 0.01 0.51 0.49Antimony 0.001 0.94 1.1Titanium 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5

Vanadium 0.1 0.7 0.7Zinc 0.01 8.6 7.4

Metals - pH 5.0 Leachate

9/08/200618/08/2006

18417 DUPMethod Detection

Limit

SRC01

mg/l mg/l

18417SRC01

10-Jul-06

mg/l

10-Jul-06

Page 1 of 1

ARL Lab No: 18417Date: 04 September 2006

CLIENT:

ATTENTION:

SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:

DATE RECEIVED:

LOCATION / JOB NO:

PURCHASE ORDER:

EXTRACTION FLUID: Reagent Water

METHOD REFERENCES:

Bottle Leaching Procedure - ASLP ARL No. 069Metals in Water ARL No. 029, 038, 039, 040, 065, 066

Kim RodgersLaboratory Manager

One solid sample as received for an ASLP Extraction and analysis of metals.

19881

Mr Henk Van der Wiele

09 August 2006

GRC-2006-021 Sohar Refinery

ATA Environmental

ASLP EXTRACTION CERTIFICATE

Dilhorn House

PERTH WA 60002 Bulwer Street

Page 1 of 3


Metals Quality Control Data

Matrix Spike Certified Reference Material

Aluminium - 84%Iron - 101%

Nickel 104% 102%Antimony - 91%Titanium - -

Vanadium - 82%Zinc - 104%

% Recovery

Page 2 of 3


Date PreparedDate Analysed

ARL Lab NoSample Marks

Aluminium 0.1 0.3 0.2Iron 0.01 0.01 < 0.01

Nickel 0.01 0.10 0.07Antimony 0.001 0.52 0.53Titanium 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5

Vanadium 0.1 0.6 0.6Zinc 0.01 0.31 0.28

mg/l

18417SRC01

10-Jul-06

Metals - Reagent Water Leachate

9/08/200618/08/2006

18417 DUPMethod Detection

Limit

SRC01

mg/lmg/l

10-Jul-06

Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX 8 ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS CALCULATION

SHEET.

PROJECT Liwa Temp Haz Waste Construction SURVEY

PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTIONPM10 CO NOx SO2 VOC's RANGE 1 MONTHS

Tracked Dozer 3.03 9.4 34.16 1.7 3.31 TO 2 MONTHSTracked excav with drill 5.57 32.19 52.53 1.7 7.74 AVERAGE 1.5 MONTHSWheeled Dozer 17.7 14.73 34.29 1.7 1.58 45 DAYSScraper 3.27 10.16 30.99 1.7 2.28Grader 2.66 6.55 30.41 1.7 1.53 hrs/day 10

Off road truck 17.7 14.73 34.29 1.7 1.58 export trucking hrs/day 20

Wheeled loader 3.51 11.79 38.5 1.7 5.17Tracked loader 2.88 9.93 30.73 1.7 4.85Diesel light vehicles 2.53 13.8 15.525 1.7 11.5# Source: USEPA (1998) Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Fators, AP-42, 4th Edition

# vehicles % operational Operating hours/vehicle* Total Operating Hours Ave fuel used/vehicle Total fuel usage PM10 CO NOx SO2 VOC'sLitres/hr kilolitres tonnes tonnes tonnes tonnes tonnes

Tracked Dozer 0 0.1 45 0 45 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Tracked excav with drill 0 1.0 450 0 56 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Wheeled dozer 1 0.3 135 135 48 6 0.11 0.10 0.22 0.01 0.01Roller 1 0.5 225 225 15 3 0.02 0.11 0.18 0.01 0.03Water truck 1 0.8 360 360 36 13 0.23 0.19 0.44 0.02 0.02Grader 1 0.3 135 135 24 3 0.01 0.02 0.10 0.01 0.00Vibroseis Truck 0 0.8 360 0 36 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00maintenace trucks 1 1.0 450 450 36 16 0.29 0.24 0.56 0.03 0.03Recorder Truck 0 0.5 225 0 26 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Dump truck 2 0.8 360 720 48 35 0.61 0.51 1.19 0.06 0.05Camp Maintenace trucks 0 0.8 720 0 42 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Diesel light vehicles 3 0.5 225 675 8 5 0.01 0.07 0.08 0.01 0.06

82 1.3 1.2 2.8 0.1 0.2* Based on construction at 10hrs/day over 180 days # 613kW equiv engines 0.300 PER MONTH 54.810 0.856 0.826 1.845 0.093 0.136

Construction Camp Power Generation Emissions^ Particulates as PM10 CO NOx SO2 NHMC

Emission Rate (g/s) 0.016 0.833 1.5 0.032 0.018Operating Hours 324 324 324 324 324

Total Emissions (tonnes) 0.02 0.97 1.75 0.04 0.02

^Modelled using average emission values for 2 x Cummins KTA 38G3 613kW reciprocating engine (one on std bye)operating at 70% load

2.214.521.300.180.23

PARTICULATE MATTER (PM10)SULFUR DIOXIDE

NMHC + VOC's

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSION

COMBINED EMISSIONS TO AIR (tonnes)

CARBON MONOXIDEOXIDES OF NITROGEN

EMISSION FACTORS#

Equipment typeEmission Factor (kg/kL of fuel)

Survey Emissions

Green fields are constants - DO NOT ALTERPurple fields require manual entryBlue fields are calculated values used in other cells in the spreadsheetRed fields are calculated and are subtotals used in final emission summation

APPENDIX 9 SCREENING NOISE ASSESSMENT SHEET.

GRC-2006-021-HAZ-010_noise.doc

SCREENING PROCEDURE FOR NOISE – LIWA TEMPORARY HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE FACILIY CONSTRUCTION

This work sheet is based on free field abatement of environmental noise and the following schedule of sound power associated with the operation of generic construction equipment.

1 Construction Activity Composite noise level at 10m

Composite noise level at 50m

Composite noise level at 500m

concrete pumping 85 74 55 2 earthmoving 87 75 57

1 Herring Storer Acoustics, unpublished data. 2 includes a 5 db(A) loading for tonal elements 1. Community Concern Is the proposal particularly sensitive within the community? ..No... 2. Construction Noise. a) Estimated total sound power for construction sources on site

• daytime 87.dB(Aeq,T)at 10m (Maximum sound power relates to earthmoving activities and includes tonal penalty of 5 db(A).

• nightime N/A b) Distance to nearest noise sensitive area > 5km c) Plot the two points (a) against (b) on Graph 1- 1

40

Soun

d Po

wer

dB

(A)

Distance (m) 10 10000 1000 100

60

80

100

120

140

0

20

Day (0700 to 1800)

Night (2300 to 0700)

3985 1260

87

GRC-2006-021-HAZ-010_noise.doc

d) Is operational noise above the relevant line in Graph 1? ...No 3. Construction Activities On Site Is construction activity likely to take place outside the hours 7.00am to 6.00pm Saturday to Thursday? ..No...... a) If "Yes", estimated total sound power for all sources on site

• daytime .87.dB(A) • nightime .N/A

b) Distance to nearest residence > 5km c) Plot (a) against (b) on Graph 1 above d) Is construction noise above the either line in Graph 1? ...No... 4. Blasting c) Is the construction/operation likely to involve blasting? ....No.... 5. Discussion The worksheet adopts an algorithm that indicates noise reduction resulting from the free field reduction in noise without further control measures. Omani day time rural criteria will be met at 1260m from the source using free field attenuation alone. The nearest residential is over 5 km from the proposed construction site. The model does not consider landform, the attenuation characteristics of which will be significant in this case given considerable earthworks will occur near significant hills Background levels measured were influenced by well development (geotechnical investigations?) near the site.

APPENDICES