LIVESTOCK WASTE MANAGEMENT IN EAST ASIA

Annex 3B

Environmental Impact Assessment (Thailand)

Final Draft

Prepared by:

CMS Environmental Consultants

Bangkok, Thailand

September 2005


Table of Content

Executive Summary ix

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Project Background 1

1.2 Purpose of the Report 1

1.3 Brief Introduction to the EA Report 2

1.3.1 Importance of the Project 2

1.3.2 Structure of the Report 3

1.4 Base of Assessment 3

1.4.1 Law and Regulations 3

1.4.2 Technical Documents 3

1.4.3 Main Design Documents 3

1.5 Principles of Environmental Assessment 4

1.6 Relationship to Feasibility Study 5

1.7 EA Team 5

1.8 Assessment Scope and Periods Covered 6

1.8.1 Assessment Scope 6

1.8.2 Periods Covered 6

1.9 Assessment Factors 6

1.10 Assessment Focus and Categorization 7

1.11 Assessment Criteria 7

1.12 Assessment Procedure 8

2 Policy, Legislation and Administration Framework 11

2.1 Organization and Administrative Framework 11

2.2 National Policy and Strategy for Environmental Protection 11

2.3 WB Requirements 13

3 Project Description 14

3.1 Project Objectives 14

3.2 Project Components 14

3.3 Indicators of Project Success 16

3.4 Project Area 19

3.4.1 Ratchaburi Province 19

3.4.2 Chonburi Province 21

3.5 Project Implementation Schedule 21

3.6 Project Investment 22

4 Description of Existing Environment 23

4.1 Chonburi Province 23

4.1.1 Geographical Environment 23

4.1.1.1 Topographical Information 23

4.1.1.2 Soil Resources 23

4.1.1.3 Meteorological Data 23

4.1.1.4 Water Resource and Quality 24

4.1.1.5 Groundwater Quality and Quantity 27

4.1.1.6 Air Quality 28

4.1.1.7 Water Pollution Loading 29

4.1.2 Ecological Environment 30

4.1.2.1 Flora 30

4.1.2.2 Fauna 31

4.1.2.3 Coastal Natural Resources 31

4.1.2.4 Soil Erosion and Soil Conservation 31

4.1.3 Beneficial Usage 31

4.1.3.1 Infrastructure 31

4.1.3.2 Land Tenure and Ownership 32

4.1.3.3 Land Use and Farming 32

4.1.4 Quality of Life 32

4.1.4.1 Population 32

4.1.4.2 Cultural Background 32

4.1.4.3 Public Health 32

4.1.4.4 Cultural Heritage 32

4.1.4.5 Scenic Spot and Tourism 32

4.1.4.6 Socio-economic Development Plan 32

4.2 Ratchaburi Province 32

4.2.1 Geographical Environment 32

4.2.1.1 Topographical Information 32

4.2.1.2 Geological Condition 32

4.2.1.3 Weather 32

4.2.1.4 Air Quality and Noise 32

4.2.1.5 Soil Resources 32

4.2.1.6 Surface Water Resource and Quality 32

4.2.1.7 Groundwater and groundwater quality 32

4.2.2 Ecological Environment 32

4.2.2.1 Forests 32

4.2.2.2 Wetlands 32

4.2.2.3 Natural Resource Conservation 32

4.2.3 Beneficial Usage 32

4.2.3.1 Infrastructure 32

4.2.3.2 Land Use 32

4.2.4 Quality of Life 32

4.2.4.1 Population and Cultural 32

4.2.4.2 Social and Economic Development 32

4.2.4.3 Public Health 32

4.2.4.4 Cultural Heritage and Tourism 32

5 Public Participation 32

5.1 Consultation Method and Subject 32

5.1.1 Consultation with Family/Individual 32

5.1.2 Consultation with Livestock Farmers 32

5.1.3 Consultation with Government Agency and NGOs 32

5.2 Public Opinion and Suggestion 32

5.2.1 Family/Individual Opinion and Suggestion 32

5.2.2 Farm Laborers and Farmers Opinion and Suggestion 32

5.2.3 Governmental Agency and NGOs Opinion and Suggestion 32

5.3 Information Disclosures and Feedback 32

5.4 Beneficiary Participation Plan (BPP) 32

5.5 Summary of Public Participation 32

6 Analysis of Alternatives 32

6.1 Analysis of “Without Project” Alternative 32

6.1.1 Current Status of Swine Farm in Thailand 32

6.1.2 Current environmental impacts from swine farms (without the proposed project) 32

6.1.3 Present Status of Applied Research, Extension and Training 32

6.2 Analysis of “With Project” Alternative 32

7 Analysis of Environmental Impacts & Proposed Mitigation Measures 32

7.1 Potential Sources of Effect. 32

7.2 Analysis of Environmental Impact & Proposed Mitigation Measures during implementation & Construction Phase (Chonburi & Ratchaburi) 32

7.2.1 Physical Resources 32

7.2.1.1 Noise & Vibration impacts 32

7.1.1.3 Soil Erosion and Disturbance 32

7.2.1.3 Air Quality 32

7.2.1.4 Surface Water Quality 32

7.2.2 Ecological Resources 32

7.2.2.1 Terrestrial Ecosystem 32

7.2.3 Human Use Values 32

7.2.3.1 Land Use 32

7.2.3.2 Transportation 32

7.2.4 Quality of life 32

7.2.4.1 Occupational health and safety 32

7.2.4.2 Cultural Heritage 32

7.3 Analysis of Environmental Impact & Proposed Mitigation Measures During Project Operation in Chonburi and Ratchaburi 32

7.3.1 Environmental Impact on Natural Resources 32

7.3.1.1 Physical resources of the Study Area 32

7.3.1.2 Ecological Resources 32

7.3.2.1 Physical Resources 32

Mitigation measures 32

7.3.2.2 Ecological Resources 32

7.3.2.3 Quality of life 32

7.3.3 Impact and Mitigation Measures of Biogas production System 32

7.3.3.1 Physical Resources 32

7.3.2.2 Ecological Resources 32

7.3.2.3 Human Use value 32

7.3.2.4 Quality of life 32

7.3.3 Impact and Mitigation Measure of Soil application of Manure 32

7.3.3.1 Physical Resources 32

7.3.3.2 Ecological resources 32

7.3.3.3 Human use values 32

7.3.3.4 Quality of life 32

7.3.4 Recycling by crop/fish uptake 32

7.3.4.1 Recycling by crop 32

7.3.4.2 Recycling by fish uptake 32

7.3.5 Removal by export to other region 32

8 Environmental Management Plan 32

8.1 Implementation Organizations and Responsibilities 32

8.1.1 Implementation Organizations 7

8.1.2 Role of PIU and Environmental Monitors 32

8.1.3 Supervision Organization 32

8.1.4 Environmental Monitoring and Management Plan 32

8.2 Environmental Monitoring Plan 32

8.2.1 Monitoring Items 32

8.2.2 Monitoring Implementers 32

8.2.3 Monitoring Report System 32

8.2.4 Pre-Implementation Monitoring (Baseline data) 32

8.2.5 Monitoring during implementation/construction 32

8.2.6 Monitoring during Operation 32

8.2.7 Monitoring Budget 32

8.4 Environmental Training/Institutional Strengthening Plan 32

8.4.1 Training Objectives 32

8.4.2 Training Courses for Environmental Officers 32

8.5 Budgets 32

9 Conclusions and Recommendations 32

9.1 General Conclusions 32

9.1.1 Selection of Project area 32

9.1.2 Environment Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures 32

9.2 Recommendations 32

9.2.1 Follow-up Program 32

9.2.2 Public Participation 32

9.2.3 Further suggestions and environmental requirements 32

10 List of References 32

Annex

A: Public and animal health risk assessment…………………………………………...109

B: TOR for Environmental Assessment, Local Consultant…………………………….114

C: TOR for Environmental Assessment, Local Consultant…………………………….117

D: Records of Public Consultancy……………………………………………………...119


List of Tables

Table 1-1 Preliminary Identification Matrix for Main Environmental Impact Factors of LWMEAP 10

Table 3-1 Number of swine farm in Ratchburi province 20

Table 4-1 Monthly rainfall, temperature and relative humidity (2002) 23

Table 4-2 Geographical information of the cannels and water bodies in BanBung district 24

Table 4-3 Average measured water quality in Bang Pakong river between January – June, 2003 26

Table 4-4 Number of ground water well in Chonburi province. 26

Table 4-5 Air quality in Chonburi province in 2003 28

Table 4-6 Loading Estimation from Major Point Sources of Pollution in the Study Areas 29

Table 4-7 Loads from pig farm in Amphoe Ban Bung, Chonburi Province 29

Table 4-8 Loads from pig farm in Amphoe Pak Tor, Ratchaburi Province 29

Table 4-9 Type of Farm Holding Land : 1991-1999 32

Table 4-10 Land Use in Chonburi Province 32

Table 4-11 Livestock Data, Chonburi Province (2002 Data) 32

Table 4-12 Population data by area and Amphoe (2002 data) 32

Table 4-13 Nmber of deaths by principal cause groups and sex (2002) 35

Table4-14 Monthly rainfall temperature and relative humidity1998-2002 38

Table 4-15 Type of Farm Land Holding :1999 44

Table 4-16 Number of Animal Farm in Ratchaburi Province 32

Table 4-17 Income from Animal Products 32

Table 4-18 Public health data, Ratchaburi Province (2002 data) 47

Table 7-1 The noise level of the machinery at different distances. 57

Table 8-1 Environment Monitoring Plan, LWMEAP 32

Table 8-2 Environment Management Plan for LWMEAP 32

Table 8-3 Environmental guideline for potential environmental issue in project operation phase 92

Table 8-4 Construction Air Quality Monitoring Program 32

Table 8-5 Noise Monitoring Program During Construction 32

Table 8-6: Cost Estimation of Environment Monitoring 99

Table 8-7 Salary Cost of Assigned Environmental Officers 32

Table 8-8 Cost for Environment Training for Environmental Officers 32

Table 8-9 Total cost estimates for Environmental Management Plan 32


List of Figures

Figure 1-1 Assessment Procedures for the EA of LWMEAP 9

Figure 2-1 Supervision of Swine Farm Activity 12

Figure 3.1 Map of Thailand highlighting Chanburi and Ratchaburi Provinces 15

Figure 4.1 Soil Groups in Ratchaburi Province 32

Figure 4-2 Farm holdings in Ratchaburi Province, 1999 data 32

Figure 6-1 Swine farms in each region of Thailand 32

Figure 8-1 Environmental Management Organization during Construction stage 83

Figure 8-2 Environmental Management Organization during Operation Stage 83

Figure 8-3 Monitoring Report Chart 32


List of Abbreviations

BOD / Biological Oxygen Demand
COD / Chemical Oxygen Demand
DO / Dissolved Oxygen
EA / Environmental Assessment
EMP / Environmental Management Plan
TSS / Total Suspended Solids
TSP / Total Suspended Particulates
WB / World Bank
TOR / Terms of References
RTG / The Royal Thai Government
GEF / The Global Environmental Facility
FAO / The Food and Agricultural Organization
PCD / The Pollution Control Deportment
DLD / The Department of Livestock Development
AWI / Area-Wide Integration
EIA / Environmental Impact Assessment
OEPP / The office of environmental policy and planning
MONRE / Ministry of Natural Resource and Environment
MOAC / Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperative
MOI / Ministry of Interior
PAO / Provincial Administrative Organization
TAO / Tambon Administrative Organization
NGOs / Non-Government Organizations
PIU / Project Implementation Unit
PLO / Provincial Livestock Offices
LDD / Land Development Department
DOA / Department of Agriculture
NIC / National Project Implementation
DEQP / Department of Environmental Quality Promotion
PNREO / Provincial Natural Resources and Environment Office
Exchange Rate
US$ 1.0 = Approx.40 Thai Bath in July 2004


Executive Summary

The livestock waste management project in Chonburi and Ratchaburi provinces of Thailand, the Global Environmental Facility grant project (LWMEAP), aims at improving surface water quality in sub-catchment areas in the central and the eastern regions of Thailand, to demonstrate effectiveness of positive impacts of improved livestock waste management systems on coastal environments in the Gulf of Thailand and the international waters of the South China Sea. The total investment of the project in Thailand is approximately US $ 3.69 million.

This environmental assessment report is prepared to satisfy relevant environment protection requirements of both Thailand and the World Bank. The project is classified as World Bank’s Category B project, requiring discussion of significant environmental issues and preparation of an environmental management and monitoring plan (EMMP).

The proposed LWMEAP project is anticipated to assist the introduction of sustainable and adaptable livestock waste management systems through the use of biogas production system, livestock waste treatment system, and nutrient recycling. Further, the project aims at integration with other livestock waste management activities in Southeast Asia to reduce the negative local and global environmental impacts of rapidly increasing livestock production on the coastal areas of Thailand and the South China Sea.

The principal expected outcome of the proposed LWMEAP is to reduce waste load form livestock production to the local and international waters. The achievements of the project would bring about the reduction of swine waste contamination in freshwater and marine environments of the Gulf of Thailand and the South China Sea. The benefits of the project itself and through replication should lead to an improvement of land-based pollution from livestock production.

Moreover, other global benefits would happen in the areas of aquatic biodiversity, land degradation, and environmental change. The excessive nutrients loading (mainly N and P) from the intensive livestock production units to the environment can be reduced by the reduction of the organic waste loads to the local and surrounding areas. These will induce the more effective conservation of freshwater and coastal marine aquatic biodiversity; reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions; and decrease public health hazards and land degradation form overabundance of nutrients.

In Thailand, the national environmental protection policy is considered as one of the major national policies. The formulated environmental protection strategy aims at managing the country’s natural resources and values of environment to facilitate sustainable economic and social development. The Pollution Control Department (PCD) under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MoNRE) has identified swine farm as a point source of water pollution according to the Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental quality Act 1992.

The effluent standards of wastewater treatment system from swine farm were set and this standard has been enforced since February 2002. The Department of Livestock Development (DLD) also established swine farm standard in 1999 to response to the environmental protection and food safety. These farm standards are voluntary and have no impacts on practices of swine farmers. Further, manure management in swine farm using biogas technology is strongly encouraged according to the Energy Act 1992 in order to reduce energy consumption and seeking for alternative sources of energy.

The proposed LWMEAP is a five-year project consisting of 4 components; (1) development of conductive policy framework, (2) demonstration of adaptive livestock waste management technologies, (3) development of decision support tools and regional cooperation, and (4) project management and monitoring. The identified demonstration sites in Thailand are located in Chonburi and Ratchaburi provinces, belonging to sub-catchment of rivers flowing to the Gulf of Thailand; the Bang Prakong River and the Maeklong River, respectively. The tentative large-scale demonstration site of the LWMEAP is the K.O.S. Farm located at Mu 5 DonSai Sub-district, Pak Tho District, and the tentative medium-scale demonstration site is the Weeraphan Farm, situated at Mu 3. Pak Tho Sub-district, Pak Tho District, Ratchaburi province. In addition, the potential small-scale demonstration site is the Sa-ard Farm, located at 102 Mo. 5, Marp Pai Sub-district, Ban Bung District, Chonburi province.

Chonburi province is situated on the Bang Prakong River basin in the eastern region of Thailand. Water quality, monitored in the Bang Prakong River in 2003 by PCD, generally meets the established standard except for dissolved oxygen concentration and coliform bacteria contamination. Climate of the province is under the influence of monsoon climate. The annual average temperature in Chonburi province varies between 18.9oC and 37.0 oC, while the average precipitation is 6.4 mm in February and 226.5 mm in May, with the average annual rainfall of 1,103.3 mm.

In Ratchaburi province, majority of the area is situated on the banks of the Maeklong River in the central part of Thailand. Climate of Ratchaburi province is under the influence of the southwestern monsoon climate. During 1998-2002, the average annual rainfall varied within the ranges of 1,037.9 - 1,397.4 mm. The annual average temperature varies between 18.3oC and 38.1oC. The most important river in the province is the Maeklong River. According to the data provided by PCD, water quality of Maeklong River is poor (below the established standard). It is believed that the low water quality is due to wastewater discharge from households, industry and agricultural activities, especially livestock farming.