Cover Image
close this bookConducting Environmental Impact Assessment in Developing Countries (United Nations University, 1999, 375 p.)
View the document(introduction...)
View the documentPreface
View the documentAbbreviations
close this folder1. Introduction
View the document1.1 The environmental movement
View the document1.2 Tracing the history of environmental impact assessment
close this folder1.3 Changes in the perception of EIA
View the document(introduction...)
View the document1.3.1 EIA at the project level
View the document1.3.2 From project level to regional EIA
View the document1.3.3 Policy level strategic EIA
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder2. Introduction to EIA
View the document2.1 What is EIA?
View the document2.2 Who is involved in the EIA process?
View the document2.3 When should the EIA be undertaken?
close this folder2.4 Effectiveness of EIA
View the document(introduction...)
View the document2.4.1 Legal regulations
View the document2.4.2 Rational and open decision-making
View the document2.4.3 Project EIA sustained by strategic EIA
View the document2.4.4 Room for public participation
View the document2.4.5 Independent review and central information
View the document2.4.6 Scoping in EIA
View the document2.4.7 Quality of the EIA
View the document2.5 EIA and other environmental management tools
close this folder3. EIA process
View the document3.1 Introduction
close this folder3.2 Principles in managing EIA
View the document(introduction...)
View the document3.2.1 Principle 1: Focus on the main issues
View the document3.2.2 Principle 2: Involve the appropriate persons and groups
View the document3.2.3 Principle 3: Link information to decisions about the project
View the document3.2.4 Principle 4: Present clear options for the mitigation of impacts and for sound environmental management
View the document3.2.5 Principle 5: Provide information in a form useful to the decision makers
View the document3.3 Framework of environmental impacts
close this folder3.4 EIA process in tiers
View the document(introduction...)
close this folder3.4.1 Screening
View the document(introduction...)
View the document3.4.1.1 Illustrations of screening
View the document3.4.2 Scoping
View the document3.4.3 The initial environmental examination
close this folder3.4.4 The detailed EIA study
View the document(introduction...)
View the document3.4.4.1 Prediction
View the document3.4.4.2 Assessment
View the document3.4.4.3 Mitigation
View the document3.4.4.4 Evaluation
View the document3.5 Resources needed for an EIA
close this folder3.6 Some illustrations of EIA processes in various countries
View the document(introduction...)
close this folder3.6.1 EIA system in Indonesia
View the document(introduction...)
View the document3.6.1.1 Responsibility for AMDAL
View the document3.6.1.2 Screening: determining which projects require AMDAL
View the document3.6.1.3 AMDAL procedures
View the document3.6.1.4 Permits and licenses
View the document3.6.1.5 Public participation in AMDAL
close this folder3.6.2 EIA procedure and requirements in Malaysia
View the document(introduction...)
View the document3.6.2.1 Integrated project-planning concept
View the document3.6.2.2 How is EIA processed and approved?
close this folder3.6.3 EIA in Canada
View the document(introduction...)
View the document3.6.3.1 The process
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder4. EIA methods
View the document4.1 Introduction
View the document4.2 Checklists
close this folder4.2.1 Descriptive checklists
View the document(introduction...)
View the document4.2.2 Weighted-scale checklists
View the document4.2.3 Advantages of the checklist method
View the document4.2.4 Limitations of the checklist method
close this folder4.3 Matrix
View the document(introduction...)
View the document4.3.1 Descriptive matrix
View the document4.3.2 Symbolized matrix
close this folder4.3.3 Numeric and scaled matrices
View the document4.3.3.1 Simple numeric matrix
View the document4.3.3.2 Scaled matrices
View the document4.3.4 The component interaction matrix
View the document4.3.5 Advantages of the matrix approach
View the document4.3.6 Limitations of the matrix approach
close this folder4.4 Networks
View the document(introduction...)
View the document4.4.1 Advantages of the network method
View the document4.4.2 Limitations of the network method
View the document4.5 Overlays
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder5. EIA tools
close this folder5.1 Impact prediction
View the document(introduction...)
View the document5.1.1 Application of methods to different levels of prediction
close this folder5.1.2 Informal modelling
View the document(introduction...)
View the document5.1.2.1 Approaches to informal modelling
View the document5.1.3 Physical models
View the document5.1.4 Mathematical models
View the document5.1.5 Modelling procedure
View the document5.1.6 Sensitivity analysis
View the document5.1.7 Probabilistic modelling
View the document5.1.8 Points to be considered when selecting a prediction model
View the document5.1.9 Difficulties in prediction
close this folder5.1.10 Auditing of EIAs
View the document(introduction...)
View the document5.1.10.1 Auditing prediction in EIAs
View the document5.1.10.2 Problems in conducting predictive techniques audit
View the document5.1.11 Precision in prediction and decision resolution
close this folder5.2 Geographical information system
View the document(introduction...)
View the document5.2.1 Data overlay and analysis
View the document5.2.2 Site impact prediction
View the document5.2.3 Wider area impact prediction
View the document5.2.4 Corridor analysis
View the document5.2.5 Cumulative effects assessment and EA audits
View the document5.2.6 Trend analysis
View the document5.2.7 Predicting impacts in a real time environment
View the document5.2.8 Continuous updating
View the document5.2.9 Multi attribute tradeoff system (MATS)
View the document5.2.10 Habitat analysis
View the document5.2.11 Aesthetic analysis
View the document5.2.12 Public consultation
View the document5.2.13 Advantages of the GIS method
View the document5.2.14 Limitations of the GIS method
close this folder5.3 Expert systems for EIA
View the document(introduction...)
View the document5.3.1 Artificial intelligence and expert systems
View the document5.3.2 Basic concepts behind expert systems
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder6. Environmental management measures and monitoring
View the document6.1 Introduction
close this folder6.2 Environmental management plan (EMP)
View the document(introduction...)
close this folder6.2.1 Issues and mitigation measures
View the document(introduction...)
View the document6.2.1.1 Project siting
View the document6.2.1.2 Plant construction and operation
close this folder6.2.2 Illustrations of guidelines for mitigation measures for specific projects
View the document(introduction...)
View the document6.2.2.1 Fertilizer industry
View the document6.2.2.2 Oil and gas pipelines
View the document6.2.2.3 Water resource projects
View the document6.2.2.4 Infrastructure projects
View the document6.2.3 Development of a green belt as a mitigation measure
View the document6.3 Post-project monitoring, post-audit, and evaluation
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder7. EIA communication
View the document7.1 Introduction
View the document7.2 What is expected from the user of EIA findings?
close this folder7.3 Communication to the public
View the document(introduction...)
close this folder7.3.1 Factors that may result in effective public participation
View the document(introduction...)
View the document7.3.1.1 Preplanning
View the document7.3.1.2 Policy of the executing agency
View the document7.3.1.3 Resources
View the document7.3.1.4 Target groups
View the document7.3.1.5 Effective communication
View the document7.3.1.6 Techniques
View the document7.3.1.7 Responsiveness
View the document7.3.2 Overview of the roles of the public
close this folder7.3.3 Public participation techniques
View the document(introduction...)
View the document7.3.3.1 Media techniques
View the document7.3.3.2 Research techniques
View the document7.3.3.3 Political techniques
View the document7.3.3.4 Structured group techniques
View the document7.3.3.5 Large group meetings
View the document7.3.3.6 Bureaucratic decentralization
View the document7.3.3.7 Interveners
View the document7.3.4 Implementing public participation
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder8. Writing and reviewing an EIA report
close this folder8.1 Writing an EIA report
View the document(introduction...)
View the document8.1.1 Guidelines for preparing EIA reports
View the document8.1.2 Comparison of guidelines of suggested/required components of an EIA report
close this folder8.2 Review of an EIA report
View the document(introduction...)
View the document8.2.1 Purpose of the review
View the document8.2.2 Information and expertise needed for review
View the document8.2.3 Strategy of the review
close this folder8.2.4 Approach
View the document(introduction...)
View the document8.2.4.1 Independent analysis
View the document8.2.4.2 Predetermined evaluation criteria
View the document8.2.4.3 Ad hoc review
View the document8.2.5 Specific document review criteria
close this folder8.3 Preparing terms of reference for consultants or contractors
View the document(introduction...)
View the document8.3.1 Checking out the consulting organization
View the document8.3.2 Strategy for formulating TOR
View the documentFURTHER READING
close this folder9. Emerging developments in EIA
View the document9.1 Introduction
close this folder9.2 Cumulative effects assessment
View the document(introduction...)
close this folder9.2.1 Concepts and principles relevant to CEA
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.2.1.1 Model of causality
View the document9.2.1.2 Input-process-output model
View the document9.2.1.3 Temporal and spatial accumulation
View the document9.2.1.4 Control factors
close this folder9.2.2 Conceptual framework
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.2.2.1 Sources of cumulative environmental change
View the document9.2.2.2 Pathways of cumulative environmental change
View the document9.2.2.3 Cumulative effects
View the document9.2.3 Conclusion
close this folder9.3 Sectoral environmental assessment
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.3.1 Need for SEA
View the document9.3.2 Differences between project level EIA and SEA
View the document9.3.3 Methodologies for SEA
View the document9.3.4 Status of SEA
View the document9.3.5 Effectiveness of SEA
close this folder9.4 Environmental risk assessments
View the document9.4.1 What is environmental risk assessment?
close this folder9.4.2 Terminology associated with ERA
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.4.2.1 Hazards and uncertainties
View the document9.4.3 ERA and the project cycle
View the document9.4.4 ERA builds upon EIA
View the document9.4.5 Basic approach to ERA
View the document9.4.6 Characterization of risk
View the document9.4.7 Risk comparison
View the document9.4.8 Quantitative risk assessments
View the document9.4.9 Risk communication
View the document9.4.10 Risk management
close this folder9.4.11 Guidelines for disaster management planning
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.4.11.1 Specification
View the document9.4.11.2 Plot plan
View the document9.4.11.3 Hazardous area classification
View the document9.4.11.4 P & I diagrams
View the document9.4.11.5 Storage of inflammable liquids
View the document9.4.11.6 Risk assessment
close this folder9.5 Environmental health impact assessment
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.5.1 Need for EHIA
close this folder9.5.2 Potential methodologies and approaches for addressing health impacts
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.5.2.1 Adapt EIA study activities
View the document9.5.2.2 Integrate health impacts into EIA
View the document9.5.2.3 Use a targeted approach
View the document9.5.2.4 Probabilistic risk assessment
close this folder9.5.3 Proposed methodology
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.5.3.1 Determining the need for health impact assessment
View the document9.5.3.2 Identify health impacts
View the document9.5.3.3 Prediction of health impacts
View the document9.5.3.4 Interpreting health impacts
View the document9.5.3.5 Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
close this folder9.6 Social impact assessment
View the document9.6.1 What is SIA? Why SIA?
View the document9.6.2 Identifying social impact assessment variables
View the document9.6.3 Combining social impact assessment variables, project/policy stage, and setting
close this folder9.6.4 Steps in the social impact assessment process
View the document(introduction...)
View the document9.6.4.1 Public involvement
View the document9.6.4.2 Identification of alternatives
View the document9.6.4.3 Baseline conditions
View the document9.6.4.4 Scoping
View the document9.6.4.5 Projection of estimated effects
View the document9.6.4.6 Predicting response to impacts
View the document9.6.4.7 Indirect and cumulative impacts
View the document9.6.4.8 Change in alternatives
View the document9.6.4.9 Mitigation
View the document9.6.4.10 Monitoring
View the document9.6.5 Principles for SIA
View the document9.6.6 TOR for consultants
View the documentFURTHER READING
View the documentAnnex 9.1: Case study for risk assessments
close this folder10. Case studies to illustrate environmental impact assessment studies
View the documentCase study 10.1 Tongonan Geothermal Power Plant, Leyte, Philippines
View the documentCase study 10.2 Accelerated Mahaweli Development Programme
View the documentCase study 10.3 Tin Smelter Project in Thailand
View the documentCase study 10.4 Thai National Fertilizer Corporation Project
View the documentCase study 10.5 Map Ta Phut Port Project
View the documentCase study 10.6 EIA at Work: A Hydroelectric Project in Indonesia
View the documentCase study 10.7 The Greater Cairo Wastewater Project

Annex 9.1: Case study for risk assessments

Petroleum terminal and distribution project

Project description

The project involves upgrading an operational oil terminal facility through the addition of new storage tanks, improvement of tank foundations, and construction of a new pipeline. The terminal receives various petroleum products by ship. It stores the products and subsequently distributes them to the domestic market by barge, tank trucks, drums, and cylinders. At present, the main activities in the terminal include unloading of the products from ships, loading of liquid products into barges, loading of liquid products and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) into tank trucks, blending and loading of lubricating oils in drums, and filling of LPG cylinders.

The proposed 50 km pipeline will be used to transport LPG and light petroleum products to a pumping station in another city, and then to another terminal in a port. The pipeline will pass a populated area, highways, rivers, a railroad, mangrove areas, and energy transmission lines.

The terminal is in a commercial/industrial area on the edge of an island. Adjacent facilities include shipyards, other industrial plants, and office buildings. Strong typhoons average two per year. The population around the terminal consists mostly of about 2000 workers in the area. Similar terminals operated by the same company can be found in many other countries, although the distribution system varies in each case.

ERA screening

An EIA with ERA is proposed to be conducted for the project. The EIA will assess the impact of the project to the population and the natural ecosystem. EIAs for similar facilities have identified the following as the major sources of environmental concerns: fuel spills and leakages, fires, explosions, vapour clouds, and pollution from the storage or accidental spills and leaks of the petroleum products. The ERA is expected to investigate these concerns where significant consequences and uncertainties warrant. The major hazard is large quantities of motor gasoline and LPG, which have low flash points. Spills and leakages could cause fires, explosions, or vapour clouds and could lead to catastrophic consequences, but the actual risk depends on how and when the spills and leakages would occur and what their magnitudes or sizes are.

Potential spills during operations are most likely during the transfer of products from one location or from one transport mode to another, such as from barge to tank truck. Those transferred at temperatures below their flash points may burn but will not create a flammable vapour cloud. Those liquids with high flash points (e.g., in excess of 80° C) will be difficult to ignite but may add fuel to a fire. The liquid products, which have flash points lower than ambient temperature, could produce vapour clouds under normal conditions.

Calculation of risk and presentation

The usual method of calculation of individual risk is to calculate the risk of a specified level of harm occurring to an individual who is assumed to be at a particular point 100% of the time. The calculation is summed for all hazardous events which can give that level of harm at that particular point, and this gives the total individual risk at that point from the hazardous source. By repeating the calculations for a series of points in a radial direction from the source, a risk profile can be generated. If a grid of points is considered, a series of contours can be produced around the source by interpolating between the risk values in the grid.

The distance from the release point to the location of interest is determined and then the concentration and cloud width at this downwind distance from the release point is calculated from either the concentration or the duration of exposure (release duration for a continuous release and the time for the cloud to pass over for an instantaneous release) using a probit function.

Emergency planning - definition

A major emergency is one which has the potential to cause serious injury or loss of life. It may cause extensive damage to property and serious disruption both inside and outside the works. It would normally require the assistance of outside emergency services to handle it effectively. While an on-site plan will always be the responsibility of the works management, different legislations may place the responsibility for the off-site plan elsewhere. For example, the EC Seveso Directive requires the local authority to prepare the off-site plan.

Emergency planning - objectives

The overall objectives of an emergency plan are: (a) to localize the emergency and, if possible, eliminate it, and (b) to minimize the effects of the accident on people and property. Elimination will require prompt action by operators and works emergency staff using, for example, fire-fighting equipment, emergency shut-off valves, and water sprays. Minimizing the effects may include rescue, first aid, evacuation, rehabilitation, and giving information promptly to people living nearby.

Identification and assessment of hazards

Overfilling of tanks could lead to large spills. The tanks are equipped with liquid indicators and vents to prevent spillage. But the alarms may fail or may be ignored by operators. Leakage from the pipeline may occur from operational errors, faulty systems, or damage to the pipeline from external sources. As the pipeline gets older, the frequency of leaks may increase.

Another possible catastrophic event is called BLEVE (boiling liquid expanding vapour explosion). This is the sudden failure of a tank when the contained liquid is at a temperature well above its atmospheric pressure boiling point. The usual cause of a BLEVE is the exposure to fire of the dry portions of a tank.

Additional matters that need further investigation are presented in the risk screen report (see below).

Accidents while transporting petrochemical products have occurred in many countries. Recent accidents in developing countries have caused many fatalities. In 1983, a train transporting gasoline in Pojuca, near Salvador, Bahia, derailed and caused the death of about 100 people. In the same year, a big rock from the construction of a highway damaged an oil pipeline in the state of Sao Paulo. The spilled oil polluted about 20 kilometers of estuarine mangroves and several beaches. In 1984, leakage from a pipeline transporting gasoline and other light petroleum products in Cubatao, Sao Paulo, caused a fire that killed 100 people and destroyed houses.

Pipelines will be equipped with protection systems and instruments for controlling internal conditions. Line pressure, temperature, flow rate alarm system, and shutdown devices will be triggered if abnormal transmission conditions occur. It will also have safety valves for the upstream and downstream parts of the zone. In each of the populated areas it will pass through, an emergency management system will be installed. This will include warning signs with clear instructions to people on what to do in case of an emergency.

Tanks are fitted with fire extinguishers, external water spray systems for exposure protection, and liquid level indicators and alarms. The terminal is provided with a manually operated emergency shutdown system with actuators strategically located in various areas in the terminal.

There is a need to evaluate probable accident scenarios with the use of fault and event tree analysis, failure modes and effect analysis, and common model failures. The contractor must identify probable initiating events. The analysis must consider similar accidents already experienced in similar facilities. The maximum credible spill, leakage, fire, and explosion and their adverse consequences must be assessed.

Physical risk screen

The physical risk screen was conducted to identify hazards other than those related to hazardous chemicals that could lead to impacts or public and occupational safety, physical damage to ecosystems, or monetary and disruptive impacts on project or community facilities. The following were identified: transportation risks; ship traffic accidents near the terminal or while docking; natural disasters; typhoon, which could cause some damage to the terminal and the distribution system; other on-site and off-site hazards; workers in the project, in general, may be compared with workers in a petrochemical plant for which the British Standard of the Advisory Committee on Major Hazards defines the total accident frequency rates (TAFR) to be equivalent to a death risk probability of 3 × 105 per person-year; the project involves use of barges, tank trucks, drums, and cylinders, and in addition to the distribution pipeline, the terminal itself has a piping system; the project does not involve complex human operations; the system within the terminal and the distribution system is simple - some parts of the pipeline, however, may be more difficult to monitor because they pass through rivers; the island has been peaceful because the entire system is secured from trespassers; the project is not highly dependent on the reliability of an electricity supply.

ERA scoping

1 Categories of adverse events: accidents, spills, leakages, fires, explosions, vapour clouds; natural disasters (typhoons) affecting the project.

2 Population at risk: workers in and around the terminal; residents of communities where the pipeline will pass through; residents of communities along the route of tank trucks; public within 500 m of the terminal.

3 Flow cycle: unloading of ships and barges; additional processing (i.e., mixing of products, enhancing of products with additives); storage; transport from the terminal to various distribution sites.

4 Geographic boundary: terminal project site, plus surrounding commercial/industrial area.

5 Time period: the operating lifetime of the facility.

6 Human health endpoints: deaths.

7 Risk indicators: inventory; routine emissions and leaks.

Terms of reference for the contractor

The contractor is to conduct the ERA in accordance with the following terms of reference.

1 The feasibility study for the project includes an EIA, which covers all the environmental effects found by initial examination to be of significant importance. This EIA will be performed simultaneously with the ERA.

2 The objective of the ERA is to advise management on the risks to human health, the ecosystem, and welfare from the major hazards encountered in the proposed petroleum terminal and distribution project. The consultant will conduct studies sufficient to:

• identify major hazards, including those in the attached screening checklist;

• construct plausible risk scenarios within the boundaries suggested in the attached scoping summary;

• characterize the risks as quantitatively as possible;

• compare the risk with alternative means of accomplishing the project or with abandonment of the project or of any aspect of it (e.g., the pipeline);

• describe the feasible risk reduction actions and estimate their costs; and

• recommend the most appropriate risk-reduction measures and project alternatives.

3 Description of the project.

4 The concerns of management centre on the risks from fuel spills, leakages (mainly from the proposed pipeline), fires, explosions, and vapour clouds, and their impact on populations within and around the terminal site and distribution routes, on property, on other industrial facilities, and on community infrastructure.

The screening process shows the following: significant quantities of flammable products shall be stored, handled, and transported and increased levels of transportation accident hazards. Scenarios include transportation accidents from the terminal to the distribution sites using various transportation routes and modes. These include accidents on highways, railroad crossings, and in rivers, and spills and leaks of hazardous products stored. The maximum credible accident (BLEVE) should be evaluated, including its likelihood of occurrence.

5 The scope of the ERA is detailed in the attached report of the scoping meeting.

6 Constraints and opportunities for risk reduction are foreseen to include the following.

• The terminal was moved only a year ago from a previous site. The move required substantial investment. Hence it is unlikely that any alternative terminal site will be considered at this point.

• Alternative transportation routes have been considered for each of the destinations of the petroleum products and the ones proposed have been found by the proponent to be the best, based on both economic and safety considerations. The contractor must confirm this finding, as it may be possible to reroute the pipeline to the least populated areas.

• Relocation of populations near the terminal and along the chosen transportation routes will be expensive and politically unacceptable.

• Workers and engineers trained to prevent and handle spills and leakages can be supplied as required by the project.

• Other possibilities for reducing risk from spills and leakages are using equipment with low failure rates, redundancy in critical equipment, installing spill detection and emergency shutdown systems to reduce the size of spills, and using drainage and diking systems to reduce the spread of spills.

• Community emergency response plans have been designed and may be reviewed further for additional improvements.

• Emergency response and safety features in the facility may be strengthened further.

7 Risks should be characterized as:

• plot of frequency versus severity for different designs and operations that would achieve the project objective;

• the severity should be measured in terms of deaths of workers or residents;

• individual risk of premature death for workers and residents in and around the terminal and near the transportation routes from accidents involving spills, leakages, fires, explosions, and vapour clouds;

• damage to surrounding facilities from terminal or transportation accidents.

8 Study constraints.

• The estimated cost of the ERA is ______, of which ______% is allocated for technology transfer and training of local staff.

• The estimated time required to conduct the ERA is ______.

• The proposed payment schedule is as follows: ______.

• The specialist staff requirements are ______.

• The contractor is expected to coordinate closely with the project proponent and the ADB project manager during the conduct of the ERA.