A2E-235 VOL.2

ELECTRICITY GENERATING AUTHORITY OF THAILAND

ADDENDUM

TO

FINAL REPORT

FOR

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

OF

RATCHABURI POWER PLANT PROJECT

JUNE 1998

EGAT -'IN E..... P.ROGAM. SU: PORT PROJECT

(WORLD ::ANK PRTIAL CREDI GUAEE)-:

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

R:itclhburi Environmental Imnpact Assessimentu'denldum rnand Updatc

June 22, 199S

The Ratchaburi Thermal Power Plant Project Environ:mental Impact Assessmentivas approved bv OEPP in April, 1997. This attachment includes updates, clarificationsand additional information concerning the project. The information below reflects the asbuilt project, in which there were several changes made since the original EnvironmentalImpact Assessment was written.

Fuel: Sources of natural gas for Ratchaburi Power Plant are developingproduction regions located in the Gulf of Martaban, Union of Myanmnar. Estimates ofnatural gas reserves and production are 5,700 billion cubic feet and 525 cubic feet per dayrespectively. Natural gas pipelines will be extended from production wells acrosspeninsular Myanmar and enter Thailand at the border (Kanchanaburi Province), thencontinue to the Ratchaburi Power Plant.

Delivery of the residual (No. 6) fuel oil will be via a seaberth, fuel oil terminaland a dedicated pipeline. The EIA for this pipeline to the power station has been finished.If alternative fuel delivery schemes are contemplated for the project, an additional EIAwould be required, and would have to pass review by OEPP and the World Bank.

Wastewater: The wastewater sources to be recycled through an irrigation pondinclude: sewage treatment plant (activate sludge and extended aeration); and plantdrainage through the oil/water separator. Water from the irrigation pond will be reusedfor gardening and green area maintenance inside the plant boundary. Storm drainage fromthe power plant area will be collected in a 100,000 cubic meter retention pond andpumped back to the reservoir for reuse.

Chemical wastewater and cooling tower blowdown would be discharged to theKhlong Bang Pa irrigation drainage canal, via an onsite holding pond. Air heaterwashwater will be routed to a lined pond for detention and treatment (pH adjustment,metals and suspended solids reduction). Demineralization plant effluent would beneutralized. The effluent would have higher total dissolved solids (TDS) than -theirrigation system drain; however, the effluent would meet the Royal IrrigationDepartment standard. The quality of the water discharged into Khlong Bang Pa would bebetter with respect to all other parameters than the water currently in Khlong Bang Pa,furthermore, the discharge would increase flow in the Khlong Bang Pa, which is stagnantduring the dry season. Additional details and monitoring are given in Addendum Annex1.

Hazardous Chemical Containment and Storage: All chemical storage tanks,solution tanks, and chemical feed pumps will be located on curbed concrete containmentareas drained through separate chemical waste collection piping to a neutralization basin

or a chemical \waste collection sump. A curbed cotncrete area xiii be provided wsith achemical-resistant coating suitable for -the particular service. As a miinimum, thecombined volume of the curbed area and the associatecl neutralization basin or wastesump will be adequate to contain the entire volume of the largest single ta.lk served. Aspill prevention, control and response plan will be added to the site Emergency Plan, andadded to the emergencv response drill routine.

Chlorine: The chlorination station for the condenser cooling water will beequipped with a leak detection and alarm system, wind sock-, leak stemming gear andpersonnel protective equipment, including self contained breathing apparatus. A chlorine.leakage response scenario will be added to the plant Emergency Plan, and leak responsedrills undertaken as part of the emergency response drill routine.

Fuel Oil Storage: Fuel oil will be stored in four tank-s of 32 million literscapacity each; a supply that would last for seven days of generation. The combined cycleunits will have three 17 million liter diesel oil tanks, a supply that would also last forseven days of generation. The area surrounding the fuel oil storage tanks will be designedto contain oil spills resulting from equipment failure or leaks occurring during normaloperations. The oil containment will be berms constructed of compacted earth with anirnpermeable liner or retaining walls built of reinforced concrete. Design and perfornancemust conform with the concerned Ministry Announcement and Act concerning oilstorage B.E. 2474. (Modify no. 1-5 B.C. 2474-2530). Fuel oil piping will be routedabove grade on pipe racks in order to facilitate detection and repair of leaks. If for anyreason the pipe must be located underground, it will be placed in a concrete trench whichwill be drained to the oil/water separator. The facility Emergency Plan covers fire andexplosion. A spill prevention, control and response plan will be added to the siteEmergency Plan, and added to the emergency response drill routine.

Solid Waste Disposal: The wastewater from the treatment system for circulatingwater makeup consists of an alkaline slurry which will be dewatered using a thickenerand then a filter press. The sludge will be landfilled, and an impermeable liner of clay orsynthetic material will be used to contain leachate. A groundwater monitoring programsimilar to the one for the plant site will be used for the gypsum landfill. The landfill areawill be used to collect discharge from the FGD system, sludge from sewage treatmentplant and solids from the air heater wastewater treatment system. Gypsum by productfrom the FGD system is approximately 2,000 tons per day or 350,000 m3 per year will bedumped in the landfill area of 600 rai at approximate heap height of 10 meter. Theestimated volume about 9.6 million m3 will serve for the 25 year power plant life.Alternative use of gypsum are being evaluated. Details of the landfill are included asAddendum Annex 2.

Environmental Management and Monitoring: An environmentalmanagement unit will be instituted at the power station, responsible for carrying out themonitoring plan, reporting performance, and follow up with management Theenvironmental unit would report directly to the plant manager. The environmental

monitoring plan covers the constructioni period as well as ongoing operations, ancl includes:effluent and surface water quality; noise; nroumndwater hydrology and quality; aquaticecology; solid waste management; transportation; socio-economic indicators; public health;and occupational health and safety. The monitoring plan includes continuous air emissionsand ambient air quality monitoring during operations.

Public Consultation: Public-con'sultation has been an ongoing program, sincepublication of the environmental impact assessemnt. An update of the publicconsultation that has taken place since the finalization of the EIA is attached asAddendum Annex 3.

Effluent, Stack Emissions and Ambient Air Quality: Estimates and designspecifications for effluent, stack emissions and ambient air quality are compared toThailand standards and World Bank guidelines in the following three tables.

Table 1Air Pollutants Emission For Ratchaburi Power Plant Project.

]?ollutants Unit Power Plant Emissionsa Thai Eiiiission Standar(ds World Bank Gni(ieliCresc Remlar11klis

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _(19 9 7 )_ oil gas oil g-oil sgas

Thermal Unit 700MWSO2 ppm 84 - 412 26 700 700NO,, ppm 183 120 232 155 225 155TSP mg/Nm3 70 - 141 70 5so 50

CombustionTurbine 200 MW

S02 ppm 62 - 136 8 700 700NO 2 ppm 75 50 77. 51 80 61TSP mg/Nm 3 8 - 56 28 5 0d 5 0d

Note a,b,c the concentration of pollutants is calculated at 3% and 15% excess 02 for Trermal Units ancl ComibLustioll 'ILlbinea based on power plant specificationb Notification of Ministry of Industry No. I B.E. 2540 (1997)d at the time thie project was designed, the World Bank guideline (1 988) was 00 111g/Nm113

Table 2Maximum Ground Level Concentration Estimates For Ratchabuiri Power Plant Project.

Pollutants Max GLC Thai Ambient Air Woritl Banik Guiidelines R|memrksI (ug/mn3) Quality Standard (1994) (1997) I

SO2 -1 lir. 392 780 - 90 % FGD- 24 hrs. 50 300 150 Eificiency- Annual Ave. 9.5 100 80

NO2 -1 hr. 170 320-24hrs. 150- Annual Ave. 80

TSP - 24 hrs. PM1 o 120, TSP 330 PM10 150- Annual Ave. PMjo 5, TSP 100 PM1o 50, TSP 80

Table 3The Effluent Quality of Ratchaburi Power Plant Comnpared with World Bank Guiidelines

Parameters Unit Power Plant Tha i Sta ndard' World Batinl Guii(lelines csersEffltuenit (Maximum Value) (Maxinllill Value)

(Maximum Value)pH 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 6-9

TSS mg/I 30 30 50 Daily - Neutralization J3alBOD mg/l 20 20 Daily - Raw water treatim

Oil & Grease mg/l 5 5 10 Daily - Wastewater TreatiFree Chlorine mg/l 1 1 Daily - Oil Separator

Residue Chlorine mg/l - 0.2 Daily - Cooling Tower OiTemperature Increase 0 C - < 3b < 3

TDS mg/l 1,300 1,300 Closed cycle Cooling 'IoxmAluminum mg/i 0.5 EfflueLnt temiip. equall Ito Ai

Arsenic mg/I 0.25 0.25 water temp.Cadmium mg/l 0.03 0.03Chromium mg/i 0.3 0.3

Copper mg/l 1 1

Note: a: Effluent Water Quality Standard for Irrigation Canals, RZoyal Irrigationi Departmnent.b: Tenmperature Increase is based on Surface Water Quality Standard: Notilicationi of National ElIviroinnuent

Board No. 8 B.E. 2537 (A.D. 1994)

Addendum Annex 1

Wastewater Dischargeand Surface Water Monitoring

IV) Effects of Eftluent Discharging to lrrigation Draiiia,e Canal( nwoing Bang Pa).

The updated wastewater treatment flow chart for Ratchaburi Power Plantshows four sources of wastewater;

1) Sanitary wastewater effluent will be treated on site and collected inthe irrigation pond;

2) Oily wastewater from power plant will be treated in oil/waterseparator and the discharge will be to the irrigation pond;

3) Chemical wastewater will be treated in the neutralization basin,flow into the holding pond, and overflow to Khlong Bang Pa;

4) Cooling tower blowdown from the cooling system which uses rawwater from the Mae Klong river, ( after being recycled in thecooling system ), the blowdown will be collected in the holdingpond and overflow to Khlong Bang Pa.

The wastewater treatment flow chart shows, there are two wastewaterdischarges:

i) irrigation pond will receive the wastewater from the sewage treatmentplant ( activated sludge and extended aeration ) and plant drainage throughthe oil/water separator. The water from this pond will be reused formaintenance within the plant vicinity mainly for gardening and green area.Storm drainage from the power plant area will be collected in a 100,000 m3

retention pond and will be pumped back to the reservoir for reuse.

ii) holding pond will receive wastewater from chemical wastewatet andcooling tower blowdown and discharge to the Khlong Bang Pa irrigationdrainage canal. Air heater washwater will be routed to a lined pond fordetention and treatment ( pH adjustment, metals and suspended solidsreduction ). Demineralization plant effluent would be neutralized. Theeffluent will be higher in total dissolved solids ( TDS) than that in theirrigation system drain; however, the effluent will be within the RoyalIrrigation Department Standards.

The recent water quality monitoring by the Aquatic Ecology Section ofEnvironmental Division, EGAT during the construction phase show thefollowing. For the water quality of rawv water supply for the coolinc svstemfrom the Mae Klong river and the Khlong Bang Pa at the cooling 'waterblowdown discharge point:

i) The water quality in the Mae Klong river was classified as class 3 forsurface water, except for total and fecal coliform bacteria. The analyses in1996 - 1998 were also within the Surface Water Quality Standards class 33.notification of National Environment Board No. 8 BE 2537 ( AD 1994 )especially the concentration of BOD5 was 0.8 mg/l ( BOD5 standard < 20mg/l except BOD5 in June and October 1997 were higher than standards2.2 and 2.7 mg/l respectively ). DO was in the range of 6.8 - 8.2 mg/l ( DOstandard > 4 mg/l ). Moreover, the water quality was quite similar in eachyear from 1996 - 1998 except when effected by sea water intrusion, whichcaused in high conductivity values. It happened in October 1997, 2,206microsiemen/cm,

ii) The water in Khlong Bang Pa was quite poor in quality ( October,1997 and February, 1998 ). In dry season especially between February -April, the sluice was shut and the water stagnates, Khlong Bang Pa receivedeffluent from animal farms ( pig, hen, duck and prawn ), therefore the waterwas high in BOD5 concentration ( 23.6 mg/l ) and the TDS content was830 mg/l in February 1998. The other water quality parameters were withinthe standards.

The cooling tower blowdown TDS will be controlled such that the effluentfrom the holding pond will meet standards of the Royal IrrigationDepartment for irrigation drainage canals. The cooling tower blowdown isby for the greatest volume of water discharged. After some temperaturedissipation (retention time is one day) the holding pond overflow qualityshould be better in all parameters than the existing water quality in KhlongBang Pa. Specifically, the condenser cooling water blowdown would havelow BOD5, since the raw water source (Mae Khlong River) has low BOD5.Furthermore, the raw water is treated prior to use as make up for the coolingsystem.

Flow through Khlong Bang Pa which is stagnant in the d1rv season, wouldbe increased by the cooling tower blowdown, TDS would be withinstandards, and the quality of the water in Khlong Bang Pa would beexpected to improve, especially in the dry season.

Water Quality of Mae Khlong River at the Pumping Station

(October 1996 - February 1998)

Parameters Units Oct'96 Jan'97 Jun'97 Oct'97 Feb'98 Standards

pH 7.9 7.9 8 7.7 7.8 5-9

Temperature 00 29 24 29 29 31 natural

Conductivity pS/cm . 265 300 270 2.206# 300

Turbidity NTU 33 13 23 52 13 3

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) mg/l 7 8.2 7 6.8 7 not less than 4

BOD5 mg/l 0.8 2.7 2.2 0.8 0.8 not more than 2

Total Dissolved Solids mg/l 230 165 163 170 80

(TDS) mg/l 40 18 18 58 2

Suspended Solids (SS)

Note: Surface Water Quality Standards Class 3 notification of National Environment Board NO. 8,

1994

# Fffectedl by sea water intrusion.

Water Quality of Khlong Bang Pa at discharge point

(October 1997 - February 1998)

Parameters Units Oct'97 Feb'98 Standards

pH 6.9 7.7 5-9

Temperature 0C 30 30 natural

Conductivity plS/cm. 859 1,642

Turbidity NTU 6 31

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) mg/I 1 4 not less than 4

BODs mg/l 4.6 23.6* not more than 2

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/I 528 830

Suspended Solids (SS) mg/l 2 15

Note: Surface Water Quality Standards Class 3 notification of National Environment Board NO. 8, 1994

* Effected by receiving the wastewater from animal farms ( pig, hen, duck and prawn).

Ratchaburi power Plant

Evaporation

Domestic Used 397 397Wastewater 10. On Site Treatment

777 I rrigation

| Pond .

380 3130Oily Wastewater 4 Oil Separator

. Flow rate: based on 4x700 mwThermal units and3x600 CombinedCycle Blocks

unit : m3 /day

Chemical Wastewater 3,424 Nutralization Basin 1

27,259 Holding Pond 27,259 Khlong

23,835Goofling Tower Blowdown -_________________

Addendum Annex 2

Landfill Details

_1 Conceptual Study

of

Waste Disposal Landfill System

Ratchburi Thermal Power Plant

Tl' Page

,11. LANDFILL AREA STUDY ...................... I

.3 1. I SELECTION OF FIIL ELEVATION ................... , .,.;., I.. 2 SEEPAGE CONTROL. 6.3, - - 1.3 RAIN WATER IN LANDFILL AREA .....................,., 6

2.0 TRANSPORTATION STUDY O...

2.1 TRANSPORTATION BY TRUCK ................................ I 01 2.2 TRANSPORTATION BY BELT CONVEYOR SYSTEM ............................... 12

2.3 CONCLUSION .1..................... 3

I -3.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................... 1 , I 5

. 3.1 STAGE I . 153.2 STAGE 2 ., 1 6

Ilr

x - iI

I . LAfKZ lIL,L AREA STUD",'

I. / Selecvio n off/I ele va tion

The natural ground elevation of landfill areas vary from 1.5 m.ms! to,±2.5 m.msl The aver-age ground elevaton used in this study is +2.0 m.

msl. Before gypsum is disposed as landfill meLhod, the landfill area mustbe prepared to contain -all gypsum in the area, ie., bund wall boundarv,excavated pond, or the combination of them.

For this s.udy, 6 alternatives of fill elevation in the landfill area No. I wereselected for comparision as follows:

Bund Wall | Excavated Disoosal Discosal Soil

AMt. Heigh above Elevation Depth Bed Eiev. thickness Volurne balanceNo. ground level (

_ (m) (m.rnl) _(m) (m.rrsI) (m) (mi!.m3)n 1.000 m3)

I 6 +8 1.4 +0.6 5.9 1.44 0

2 8 + 10 2.4 -0.4 8.9 2.17 0

......--- --- ---------- . ...... .............. ................ ........ .... ............. .. .. ..

3 11~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r ~~~~~~±r~~30- .0 952.32 15------- -------. --------

4 6 +8 6 -40 .07244 _T i- 350

5 6 +8 0 +2.0 4.5 1.10 -3 10

6 2 +14 1 0 1 +2.0 10.0 2.44 -1,036

Note: Soil balance + means soil surplus that have to be disposed

- means to import soil from outside

Figure I shows the 4 locabons of Landfill area. Figure 2 to Figure 4 show6 alternative sections.

The factors that were considered for the study were:

Bund wall height - This factor effects the environment in terms -of scenaryand visibility. As the 500kV transmission lines pass through the disposalarea the height also limit by the safety clearance under the transmissionlines.

2. Depth of excavation - Ground water level varies from 1.5 to 3 m. belowground level in dry season and more or less the same as ground level inwet season.

3. Soil balance - Soil balance effects the construction cost.

c:\Ratbun\landAll.doc

, ^< izsv *S e, * * *, . . , ,@ +.. . . . ..

8 ;i. . I / I/ >.X P KV

LI + r1

Zrc~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~h! I' /t

- -- .. I I _ s -l -J -

--FENCE ALT 1DRAINAGE TRENCH

SOIL COVER OIOm.

1O~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 20~~~~~~~~~~~~~

| -20 -| 12 10 COMPACTED CLAY ----- 12 20

1.00 m. THICK

ALT 2FENCE

DRAINAGE TRENCH

_ -- SOIL COVER 0.30rn.

--------- 7 --- I <tSW __________ _______________________________2 2

LK20H_| 16110] COMPACTED CLArY--------- - | 101| 16 2C 001.00 m. Ti IICK

SECTION 1-1 SOLID WASTE LANDFILL SYSTEMSCALE 1: I000__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

SECTION OF FILL ELEVATIONALTERNATIVE 1, 2

A I 0OI~ Ut At (I I SC tI )

ir~~~~ I., V --- ] -- ;--

ALT 3

FENCIE- DRAINAGE TRENCH

- SOIL COVER 0.30 M.

t L1 g t V~~~~/+10.0m. msl 2

m1 1< ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 : .05X,> 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 COMPACTED CLAYI__

8415 8 10_4 8_4 14 10 m THICK I - B | 0 | 8 1

FENCE ALT 4_ DRAINAGE TRENCH

X-1---SOIL COVER 0.30m.

20 12 10 12 4 4 12 10 12 20

COMPACTED CLAY1.00 m. TlIIICK

SOLID WAST, LAND FNLL SYSTEMSECTION 1-1SCALE 1 1000 SECTION OF FILL ELEVATION

ALTERNATIVE 3, 4

fNSLA CO UNS CO L1D).

Al I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FENCE . ALT 5. , ~~~~~~FENCE

DRAINAGE TRENCH

-SOIL COVER 0.30m.

. /N f\L r8~~~~~~~~ELT CONVEYOR l!

2p 9 A : 2 : nGYPS~ujiJ .5jm.t - g 5

I20 12 L o10 2 12 1 L 0 l 12 _ 20

PE. SIIEET 2 mm. THICK

ORIGINAL SOILBACK COVER 0.30m.

ALT 6FENCE

DRAINAGE TRENCH ----- SOIL COVER 0.30m.BELT CONVEYOR

20 12 14 KO{12 4 | _2_|_ 12 12 10 12 21 12 ?0

PE. StIEET 2 mm. THICK

ORIGINAL SOILBACK COVER 0.30m.

SOLID WYASTE LANDFILL SYSTEM

SECTION 1-1 SECTION OF FILL ELEVATiOr.'SCALE 1:I000 ALTERNATIVE 5, ;

g Aw CO, U l , ; U ''' | '*

_,~OIISUL_

Taking ai1 fac-tors into consideration and' discuisson,'it'n E\A%dT. A Lt]emJ 3 wasfinally selected according to the followvving reasons:

I. Bund wall height should be as high as possible to accommodatelarger volume of the waste. Wa21 height of I 2m is to high underthe transmission line. The transmission line has to be raised to themaximum height and the bund waii height is aliowed up to 8mabove the ground level.

2. Depth of excavation - Ground water controls the depth ofexcavation. Ground water is 3m below ground level in dryseason. In order to keep the bottom of landfill area dry in dryseason the maximum depth of excavation is 3m.

1.2 Seepage Control

Rain water in the disposal area which mix with gypsum will seep throughthe ground and lead to groundwater contamination. In order to protectthe groundwater, the landfill area must be lined with impervious material.Impervious material which suitable for a large area are:

- PE. Sheet 1-3 mm. thick- Compacted clay with permeability coefficient (k) < I 0 7m/s

The selected landfill area will be excavated to 3m. below the originalground level. In wet season, goundwater level is more or less the sameas the original ground level. If PE. sheet is used to line the landfill area, itwill be lifted by bouyancy force to the surface of groundwater level andsome part of PE. sheet will be damaged. Compacted clay about 1.0 m.thick is not damaged by this situation so it is selected.

Clay material is available in many places in Ratchaburi and it is widely usedfor municipal garbage disposal area.

1.3 Rain Water in Landfil/Area

This study was carried out to determine the amount of rain waterretained in the landfill area and also the rain water-level in the area duringlandfill operation. Landfill area No. I was selected for this study.

Assumption for the study

I . Water contained in the landfill area comes from rain only.

c:\Ratbun\Iandfill.doc 6

2. ,/ater- losses from thre a ,-di 2rea be ?:-aooa, . in E ors rom,>seepage

3. rainfalH and evaporation (mm/month)

jan Feb Mar _ JuY j Iu Aug Sept c eNov Dc Toai |

Rain 1 2 3 12 43 94 84 80 1106 130 264 93 16 042

Evaporation 124 132 171 64 137 1237 9 107 120 |1651

4. Disposal Waste (gypsum)

Disposal rate

year I and year 2 44 ton/hour (2x7OO MVV)

year 3 66 ton/nour (3x700 MW)

After year 3 88 ton/hour (4x700 MVV)

Gypsum density 1.5 ton/m3

Disposal volume

year I and yearv 2 9.3 m3/.our

16,876 m3/hour (80% plant factor)

year 3 43.95 mh3/our

25,314 m 3/hour (80% plant factor)

After year 3 58.6 m3/hour

33,752 m3/hour (80% plant factor)

5. Landfillarea(No.l) 226,000 m2 (141 Rai)

6. Landfill depth 9.5 m.

Amount of water and water level in landfill area were calculated as shownin Table I and plot in Figure 5 It was found that the landfill area will befulled in 77 months with water level at 5.53 m. above the bed which is3.97m. below the gypsum surface level and 5.47 m. below bund waillevel.

It means that no drainage system or water treatment system is required inthe landfill area. All water will be contained inside the bund wall area.

cA\Ratbun\landfill.doc 7

Table 1 Water Balance in Landfill Area

B135ic detaPond surtnce aren(m2) 226000 141.25 raiDisposzal ate at 60 % of the followingfirs 2 yr(th) 4.4year 3(t) 66after 3 yr (.`n) 88

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DECRAINFALL (mm) 12 3 12 43 94 84 80 106 130 264 198 16RAIN WATER(1000M^3) 2.7 0.7 2.7 9.7 21.2 19.0 18.1 24.0 29.4 59.7 4^4.7 3.6EVAPORATION(mm) 124 132 181 171 164 136 142 137 128 109 . 107 120

YEAR 1SURFACEAREA(1000,M^2) 224.2 222.4 220.6 218.8 217 215.2 213.4 211.6 209.8 208 206.2 204.4MAXE-VAP(100IOM 3) 27.80 29.36 S9.93 37.41 35.59 29.27 30.30 28.99 26.85 22.57 22.06 24.53WAT.ER +RAIN(1OOOM^3) 2.71 0.68 2.71 9.72 21.24 18.98 18.08 23S96 29.38 62.19 84.27 65.82ACTUAL EVAP(1OooM-3) 2.71 0.68 2.71 9.72 21.24 18.98 18.08 23.96 26.85 22.67 22.06 24.53REMAINED WATER(1000rm 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0°00 0°00 2.53 39.52 62.20 41.29WATER LEVEL(m.abovs bed) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.19 0.29 0.20

YEAR 2SURFACEAREA(1000M"2) 202.6 200.8 199 197.2 195.4 193.6 191.8 190 188.2 186.4 184.6 182.8MAX.EVAP(1000M^3) 25.12 26.51 36.02 33.72 32.05 26.33 27.24 26.03 24.09 20.32 19.75 21.94WATER +RAIN(IOOOM^3) 44.00 19.58 Z71 9.72 21.24 18.98 18.08 23.96 29.38 64.95 89.38 73.25ACTUALEVAP(1000M"3) 25.12 19.56 2.71 9.72 21.24 18.98 18.08 23.96 24.09 20.32 19.75 21.94REMAINED WATER(1000m^3, 18.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.29 44.64 69.63 51.31WATER LEVEL(m.above bed) 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.23 0.35 0.26

YEAR 3SUR.ACEAREA(1000M"2) 180.1 177.4 174.7 172 169.3 166.6 163.9 161.2 158.5 155.8 153.1 150.4MAX.EVAP(1000M^3) . 22.33 23.42 31.62 29.41 27.77 22.66 23.27 22.08 20.29 16.98 16.38 18.05WATER +RAIN(1000M - 3) 54.02 32.37 11.67 9.72 21.24 18.98 18.08 23.96 31.25 70.63 98.39 85.63ACTUALEVAP(1000M^3) 22.33 23.42 11.67 9.72 21.24 18.98 18.08 22.08 20.29 16.98 16.38 18.05REMAINED WATER(1000m^S3 31.69 8.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.87 10.96 53.65 82.01 67.58WATER LEVEL(m.ebove bed) 0.16 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.30 0.47 0,39

YEAR 4SURFACEAREA(1000M^2) 146.8 143.2 139.6 136 132.4 128.8 125.2 121.6 118 114.4 110.8 107.2MAX.EVAP(1000M^3) 18.20 18.90 25.27 23.26 21.71 17.52 17.78 16.66 15.10 12.47 11.86 12.86WATER +RAIN(1OO0M"3) 70.29 52.77 36.58 21.03 21.24 18.98 19.55 25.72 38.45 83.01 115.28 107.04ACTUAL EVAP(1000M - 3) 18.20 18.90 25.27 21.03 21.24 17.52 17.78 16.66 15.10 12.47 11,86 12.86REMAINEDWATER(1000m^"3 52.09 33.86 11.31 0.00 0.00 1.47 1.77 9.07 23.34 70.54 103.43 94.18WATER LEVEL(m.above bed) 0.31 0.20 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.16 0.48 0.71 0.66

YEAR 5SURFACE AREA(1000M ̂2) 103.6 100 96.4 928 89.2 85.6 82 78.4 74.8 71.2 67.6 64MAX.EVAP(100M"3) 12.85 13.20 17.45 15.87 14.63 11.64 11.64 10.74 9.57 7.76 7.23 7.68WATER +RAIN(1000M^3) 96.89 84.72 74.24 66.51 71.88 76.24 82.67 94.99 113.63 163.72 200.70 197.09ACTUALEVAP(1000^M-3) 12.85 13.20 17.45 15.87 14.63 11.64 11.64 10.74 9.57 .7.76 7.23 7.68REMAINED WATER(1000m^3: 84.05 71.52 56.79 50.64 57.25 64.59 71.03 84.25 104.05 155.95 193.47 189.41WATER LEVEL(mab6ve bed) 0.60 0.52 0.42 0.38 0.44 0.51 0.57 0.69 0.87 1.33 1.68 1.68

YEAR 6SURFACE AREA(1000M^2) 60.4 56.8 53.2 49.6 46 42.4 38.8 S5.2 31.6 28 24.4 20.8MAX.EVAP(1000M^3) 7.49 7.50 9.63 8.48 7.54 5.77 5.51 4.82 4.04 3.05 2.61 2.50WATER +RAIN(1000M "3) 192.12 185.31 180.52 180.61 193.37 204.81 217.12 235.57 260.13 315.75 357.44 358.45ACTUALEVAP(1000M^3) 7.49 7.50 9.63 8.48 7.54 5.77 5.51 4.82 4.04 3.05 2.61 2.50RFEMAINED WATER(lOOOm"3' 184.63 177.81 170.89 172.13 185.83 199.04 211.62 230.75 256.08 312.70 354.83 355.95WATER LEVEL(m.above bed) 1.68 1.65 1.63 1.68 1.86 2.04 2.23 2.50 2.85 3.58 4.18 4.32

YEAR 7SURFACEAREA(1000M^2) 17.2 13.6 10 6.4 2.8MAX.EVAP(1000M^3) 2.13 1.80 1.81 1.09 0.46;WATER +RAiN(IOOOM - 3) 358.67 357.21 358.13 366.04 386.18ACTUALEVAP(1000M^S) Z13 1.80 1.81 1.09 0.46REMAINED WATER(l000m^3 356.53 355.42 356.32 364.94 385.73WATER LEVELIm.above bed) 4.47 4.60 4.76 5.05 5.53

8

WATER LEVEL IN PONDALTERNATI'VE 3

7-

z0 5

0CIO 4-

uJ

Q~ 2uJ

tr 10 20 30 40 _____ __ SOLID WASTE LANDFILL >-Y.i10 20 30 40 50 0 70 WATER LEVEL ItN1 LANDFILL E ,

TIME - MONTH AllCCUTAOLD

2.0 TRANSPORTATION STUDY

2.1 Transportation by Truck

Assumpton

1 Owheel uuck capaciy 15 ton

hauling distance (Area No. 1) 2.5 km.

cycle time 20 min.

working bme 12 hour/day

output 15x12x 0 = 540ton / da'20

Waste disposal requirement

year I and year2 4x 24 = 1056 ton/day

year 3 66 x 24 = 1584 ton/day

Afteryear3 88 x24 = 2112 ton/day

Number of truck requirement

year I and 2 2

year 3 3

After year 3 4

Other heavy machine requirement

wheel loader I

crawler tractor I

hiring rate (include fuel, operator, maintenance, etc.)

10 wheel truck (Baht/day) 5,200

wheel loader (Baht/day) 4,800

crawler tractor (Baht/day) 5,400

c:\Ratbun\Iandfill.doc I O

_w~~_

hiring cost

year I and 2 (Baht/year)

truck 2 x 5,200 x 365 3,796,000

wheeHloader 4,800 x 365 1,752,000

crawlertractor 5,400x365 1,971,000

Total 7,5 19,000

year 3 (Baht/year)

truck 3 x 5,200 x 365 = 5,694,000

wheel loader 4,800 x 365 = 1,752,000

crawlertractor 5,400x365 = 971,000

Total 9,417,000

After year 3 (Baht/year)

truck 4 x 5,200 x 365 = 7,592,000

wheel loader 4,800 x 365 = 1,752,000

crawler tractor 5,400 x 365 = 1,971,000

Total 1 1315,000

Road maintenance

re-surface asphaltic concrete at

year 3 8,200,000 Baht

year 6 8,200,000 Baht

year 10 8,200,000 Baht

year 14 8,200,000 Baht

year 18 8,200,000 Baht

c:\Ratbun\Mandfill.doc I I

7 - S. ',7 '7..

2.2 Translortat,On by Belt Conveyor System

Initial Cost (million baht)

I) Belt conveyor 2.5 km. 45.0

2) Stacker 6.0

3) Power supply 3.0

4) Crawler tractor 120HP 3.5

5) Backup

Wheel loader 3.0

Dump tuck2@ 1.5 3.0

63.5

Operation Cost (million baht,'ear)

Operator .16 @ 0.24 3.84

Electricity 1.57

Fuel 0.50

Total 5.9 1

Maintenance Cost

4% of initial cost 2.54

Total 8.45

c:\Ratbun\IandfiIl.doc 12

2.3 Conc/usion

Transportation method was compared in terms of cost andenvironmental impact as follows:-

Cost comparision was calculated in two case, 6 years and 25 yearsoperation based on 12% interes. rate.

Case 1: 6 years operation

unit: mil.baht

YEAR TRUCK CONVEYOR

0 0.00 63.50

I 7.52 8.45

2 7.52 8.45

3 17.62 8.45A I 0 O AC. T U. 7 ') i'

5 11.32 8.45

6 19.52 8.45

SUM 74.80 1 14.20

NPV (12 %) 43.52 87.72-

c:\Ratbun\landfill.doc 1 3

Case 2: 25 yeanrs operation

,nit: mi. Baht

YEAR TRUCK CONVEYOR0 0.00 63.501 7.52 1 8-4.52 7.52 8.453 17.62 8.454 11.32 8.455 11.32 | 8.456 19.52 j 8.457 11.32 8.458 11.32 8.459 11.32 8.4510 19.52 | 8.4511 11.32 8.4512 11.32 8.4513 11.32 8.4514 19.52 8.4515 11.32 8.4516 11.32 8.4517 11.32 8.4518 19.52 8.4519 11.32 8.4520 11.32 8.4521 11.32 | 8.4522 19.52 8.4523 11.32 8.4524 11.32 8.4525 11.32 8.45

SUM 322.59 274.75 . _NPV (12%) 86.64 115.87

For both cases Net Present Value (NPV) of truck transportaton is lowerthan conveyor transportation. Especially case I for 6 years operabonNPV of truck is much lower. So the selected transportaton mode is trucktransportation.

c:\Ratbun\Iandfil.doc I 4

-s__~1-m 7

3.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

The present land areas allocated to be disposal landfi areas are notenough for 25 years operation of the power plant so that theimplementation plan is divided in to two sta,ces.

3. 1 Stage I

Stage I uses ali land areas that available at present. It comprises of 4 areasas shown in Figure I. As there are some constraints to use these lands sothat the effective area is only 65% of the total area. These areas can beused for 12 years.

Disposal waste (Gypsum)

- Disposal Rate

year I and year 2 44 ton/hour (for 2*700MW)

year 3 66 ton/hour (for 3*700MW)

After year 3 88 ton/hour (for 4*700MVV)

- Density 1500 Kg/cu.m.

- Disposal volume

year I and year 2 29.3 cu.m/hour

16,876 cu.m/month (80% plant factor)

year 3 43.95 cu.m/hour

25,314 cu.m/month (80% plant factor)

after year 3 58.6 cu.m/hour

33,752 cu.m./month (80% plant factor)

2. Landfill Area Stage I.

Average ground level' +2.0 m.msl.

Embankment level + 10.0 m.msl.

Landfill bed level -1.0 m.msl.

Gypsum fill level from - 1.0 m to + 8.5 m.msl.

c.\Ratbun\Mandfi11.doc 1 5

Area (m ) Volume (mi3 ) Full in (month)

Landfill Area No. 1 226,000 2,000,500 74

2 126,000 1,206,600 36

3 74,500 707,700 2 1

4 48,000 470,400 1 4

Total 474,500 . 4,385,200 145 (12 years)

3.2 Stage 2

Two options is considered for this stage.

Option I

Additional area requirement for 25 years operation.

Volume to be disposed - (25 yr - 12 yr) * 33,750 m3/mo.)

= 5,265,000 m3

Fill height 9.5 m.

Area requirement 554,2 10 m2

Assume 65% effectve

2Gross area requirement = 852,600 m

530 Rai

Option 2

If the additon area can not be acquired, landfill on top of the previous- --areas No. I and No. 2 is required.

Embankment level from + 10.0 to + 18.0 m.mslI

Pond bed level + 8.5 m.msl.

Gypsum fill level from + 8.5 to + 16.5 m.msl.

cA\Ratbun\andfill.doc 16

7 7T. -

Area (m ) Volume (m3) Full in (month)

PIo, I Lage 2L 75,600 JJ5,JUU 16

2 stage 2 109,000 872,000 26

Total 184,600 1,422,500 42 (3 years 6 months)

This option serves only 3.5 years. The total service time of this optionplus stage I is only 15 years and 7 months. Considering 25 years ofpower plant operation another disposal system must be required for therest of nine years.

c:\RatburMandfill.doc 17

//ZN ; ' ': :0 / t M -i - / 2?II ~~~~~~' --I-. ~~~~~~~~~AREA 4

I I'/// r / II

ILI

K rI~~~~~~G

/ SO-I WASTE DISPOSA L LAN DFILL

± -n L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I' + ___~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __ _ ___

. . . . _ . I~~~~~~.

M - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.-_--.!_ :,:, ......... ... ;j.

-FtNCtDRDAINAGE llRENCH IFINAL GYPSUMJ

FILL LEVEL t8.5m. ml- LATERITE ROAD ASPHALTIC ROAD

+10.Orn (5-I 1:10 2

>4|41 8 1 e | 8 14> ~ ~~COMIPACTED CLAYj |4 t_| |1I I "I 4 E.Cl 1i4 "ll m.4

4t4C 1K

fENCE _rIfiNAJ, ¢lSsUm FENCE_-DRAINAGE TRENCH fILL LEM1 +8.5m. mnt DRAINAGE IRENC H-

LATERITE ROADASPHALTIC ROAD ORIGINAL GROUND AEPIIALlTIC ROAD

_~~~~~~~~~ _ 27()L nm M.'

|1-4- | af1. ;l 1-±4 1.0 .COA TE CL [ ' 4f, 1- ^ 84 COMP TE_|LA

SCON 1-1

SOLID WASTE LANDFILL SYSTENM

LANDFILL AREA SECTION

AUT CON1SULTANTS CO LTD._. _ _ .__. I . .- _-

591 i\RaA-Fro

19

OF ROAD

BONO0.UN I-0.05 ASPliALTIC CONCRETEBOUNDAF!Y INE R -SINGLE SURFACE TREATMENT|BgBARBED VORE EXCAVATiON

2.5%_135 f 6.+Om .0m. M.I / / X / X r~~~~~SOOOING

IF- -U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

g g \~~~~~~~~ +60m 20 V9 4-60m msiAS COM PA CIE D CLAY

Xf / rORIGINAL GROUND LEVE_PS50L EXC TED FROM POND

- 7 7 J' SOIL EXCAVATED FROM POND ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D EXiVAOrn

SECTION OF LUNDWALL RATH A'SPHALfFC ROADSCALE 1: 250

!3.0% 3.0% + O s

L _ _ _ _ _ OR~~IGINAL GROUJNDLV__ , ____

; / (p SOI~~~L EXCAVATED FROsM POND r% l\O 4

SEC'nON OF LATERITE ROAD-SCALE 1:250 SOIdD WASTE LANDFILL SYSI'-{

DETAIL SECTION BUNDWALL VATHASPHALTIC ROAD AND LATERITE ROAD

f AFT CONSUL-TANiTS CoL,tTO,21O 0lSt% m u. (I PF 8

9511\RB*.-f09

- ~~~~~~~20

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- l --- nt- -- --

j <1.I CI . AL

SECTION 3-3SCALE 1 650

SOLID WASTE LANDFILL SYSTEM

SECTION OF LANDFILL AREA

STAGE 2

Eg1F ŽrW2Ca:.Sl ^1 C 1s29~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a>.* Z........__s. .1e

I; itt AREA ~SFE N L TEM

I I ' ! /-!,, SOUD WASTE DISPOSAL LANDF-I-LSTAGE 2 _

2 1

= ~~~~~~~ _

Groundwvater Monitoring

The monitoring program should focus on both water level and waterquality. This can be done by measuring static water levels of at least six tube wellsaround the landfill and at dug wells in the vicinity of tube wells.

The tube wells and dug wells can be chosen from' the existing wells inthe villages nearby. The tube wells must be located upstream and downstream of thelandfill and as close as possible to the landfill dikes.

Monitoring Program for Construction and operation Period

According to the perforation of on site well is not exactly known bythis stage. The six wells as G1, Dl, G2, D2, G3, D3 are proposed for the monitoringprogram.

The water level measuring and water analysis frequency is twice a year(dry and rainy seasons) for both construction period and operation period. Theparameters that should be analyzed are:

turbidity, PH, temperature, conductivitychloride, sulfate, nitrate, iron, manganese, total hardnessand total dissolved solidlead, cadmium, zinc and mercury.total co'lil'ui- i bactria. daund fecal colUflfl obacteria

Annual budget of monitoring program per year can be estimated as follows:1. Water level measuring equipment 25,000 Baht2. During the construction period 54,000 Baht3. During the operation period 54,000 Baht

Total 133,000 Baht

Addendum Annex 3

Public Consultation

Summary of EGAT's Activities of Public ConsultationRatchaburi PoNver Project

Date Activities

I 8 December 1995 Public Meeting at tlle Provincial Administration Office. Presented at themeeting include Ratchaburi Governor, Heads of local autlhorities andadminitrators, EGAT's executives and Ratclhaburi Power Project lMlanager.

2 16 January 1996 EGAT's executives and project manager made a second visit to inform theRatchaburi Governor and local administratives of the progress onRatchaburi Power Project development.

3 20-22 March 1996 EGAT arranged the first technical visit for the heads of the Ratchaburilocal authorities and administrator to visit Bang Pakong Power Plant,Rayong Power Plant, Refinery Plant of Petroleum Auhtority of Thailand,and Map Ta Put Industrial Estate.

4 25.27 March 1996 EGAT arranged the second technical visit for the heads of the Ratchaburilocal authorities and administrator to visit Bang Pakong Power Plant,Rayong Power Plant, Refinery Plant of Petroleum Auhtority of Thailand,and Map Ta Put Industrial Estate.

5 29 April 1996 EGAT's executives and Ratchaburi Project Manger presented the projectdevelopment progress to the meeting of Provincial Administratives andlocal authorities.

6 14-17 May 1996 EGAT arranged the third technical visit for Member of ProvincialAcministration Council and Sub-district Administration Organization tovisit Bang Pakong Power Plant, Rayong Power Plant, Refinery Plant ofPetroleum Auhtority of Thailand, and Map Ta Put Industrial Estate.

7 1 1-23 June 1996 EGAT arranged the technical visit for the selected member of RatchaburiProvincial Administratives to visit European Power Plant and itsmanagement in four European Countries.

8 14 October 1996 EGAT arrange the technical study tour for the member of RatchaburiProvincial Council to visit EGAT's facilities in the Northern Region ofThailand.

EGAT provided assistance and reliefs to the Ratchaburi Province in theevent of 1996 flood.

9 19-22 January 1997 EGAT arranged the technical visit for the member of Pikulthong Sub-district Women Group to visit EGAT's facilities in the northern region.

10 8-11 April 1997 EGAT arranged the technical visit for the member of Sub-district WomenGroup and Administration Organization of Ban Choa Rai Nua to visitEGAT's facilities in the northern region

11 26 August 1997 EGAT's executives and RatchabuLri Project Manger presented the projectdevelopment progress to the meeting of Provincial Aclninistratives andlocal authorities.

12 4-7 September 1997 EGAT arranged the technical visit for the member of Sub-districtWomen Group and Administration Organization of Sam Ruen Sub-district to visit EGAT's facilities in the northern regioil.

13 30 September 1997 Present project informnation to the Ratchaburi teacher meeting atBenjama Rachutit School.

14 26-29 November 1997 EGAT arranged the technical visit for the member of Sub-districtAdministration Organization of Pikulthong Sub-district to visitEGAT's facilities in the northern region.