Public Disclosure Authorized - World Bank · Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure...

66
Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized

Transcript of Public Disclosure Authorized - World Bank · Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure...

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

wb20439
Typewritten Text
E1395 v10

PLEJADES GmbH

Independent Experts

Feldstraße 5

D-64347 Griesheim

Telefon +49(0)6155/8234-0

Telefax +49(0)6155/8234-79

e-mail [email protected]

Amtsgericht Darmstadt

HRB 7863

Geschäftsführer:

Bärbel Krüger

Norbert Molitor

Stefan Kamsties

Sparkasse Darmstadt

BLZ 508 501 50

Konto-Nr. 270 141 35

Steuer-Nr. 07 241 00599

VAT-No: DE 209 238 518

First Public Consultation Meeting

Minutes

Energy Sector Clean-Up and Land Reclamation

Project:

Independent Environmental Impact Assessment and

Environmental Management Plan for the

Remediation of the former Lignite Gasification Plant

Kosovo Energy Corporation j.s.c.

Project No: P105870 19 November 2009

1st Public Consultation Meeting page 2 of 4 19 Nov 2009

Date: 19 November 2009 Time: 0945 hrs to 1100 hrs Place: KEK principal office Bill Clinton Boulevard Pristina Participants: See attendance list in annex 1 Copies: Attendants Minutes responsible/ date

1 Introduction

Ms Trandelina Cakaj-Baraku, CLRP PMU Project Director, welcomed the attendants, introduced the consultant and briefly summarised the background of the project. The project comprises preparation of an independent EIA Environmental Impact Assessment and EMP Environmental Management Plan for the collection and disposal of hazardous waste stored at the decommissioned gasification plant adjacent to Kosovo A thermal power plant. The meeting is the first public consultation meeting out of two mandatory meetings according to the respective Kosovo EIA legislation. 2 Presentation by the consultant

The presentation was given by the consultant’s team leader, Dr. Peter Bayer with support from Mirjeta Maxhuni-Deda and Dr. Norbert Molitor from the consultant’s team. The presentation was given in English, with consecutive translation into the Albanian language.

1st Public Consultation Meeting page 3 of 4 19 Nov 2009

The major topics of the presentation were:

• Information on the project o Site characteristics o Waste collection and treatment/disposal o Potential adverse effects and mitigation measures o Alternatives analyses o Project time schedule and cost estimate

• EIA o EIA Team o Applicable legislation o Approach o Contents o EIA Time schedule

The handouts of the presentation are attached as annex 2 (English version) and annex 3 (Albanian version). 3 Discussion

After the presentation there was a answer and question session, moderated by Ms Cakaj-Baraku. Mr Nazif Shala (Obiliq Municipality) expressed particular concern about the Sitnica river water quality and requested incorporation of a water quality monitoring into the project. Dr. Behxhet Shala (KEK) explained that the water quality of the Sitnica river is currently monitored by INKOS on behalf of KEK and that an additional monitoring of the Sitnica river water quality is not included in the scope of the project. In the framework of the project a monitoring of the water discharged from the on-site treatment is carried out as required by law. Mr Enver Tahiri (Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning) explained that an independent monitoring of the Sitnica river water quality has already been implemented by the Ministry. Mr Carel Brands (Dutch Embassy) thanked for the precise definition of the project and description of the required activities. He expressed his opinion that the funds provided by the Dutch government are well invested into this project. Mr Brands also stated, that, due to the particular status of Kosovo, the mandatory notification procedure for the hazardous waste transport to disposal facilities outside Kosovo may take longer than anticipated resulting in an extension of the project implementation period.

1st Public Consultation Meeting page 4 of 4 19 Nov 2009

Mr Istref Klinaku (KEK Executive Director Energy Generation) thanked the donators for provision of the funds and support for the project implementation. Mr Krenar Bujupi (World Bank) thanked the attendants and especially the representation of Obiliq Municipality for the co-operation. He also expressed his thanks to the Dutch Government as co-funder of the project. No objection was expressed against the outlined approach for the EIA and the EMP including the outlined activities concerning the radioactive sources management (see below). Minutes prepared Dr. Peter Bayer Minutes approved Trandelina Cakaj-Baraku Annexes 1 Attendance list 2 Handout presentation (English version) 3 Handout presentation (Albanian version)

1

1

Clean-up of the former Gasification Plant at

Kosovo A TPP

Energy Sector Clean-Up and Land Reclamation Project

Meeting on 19 November 2009

2

Scope of this meeting

• Start of the EIA procedure• EIA Approach• Information on the project

– Site– Activities– Expected Impacts and Mitigation Measures– Time Schedule

2

3

Project descriptionKosovo TPP A

Gasification Plantsituation 12 July 2008

4

Gasification plant characteristics

• Site owner: KEK Kosovo Energy Corporation j.s.c.

• Area: 40 ha• Decommissioned in 1998• Storage of hazardous materials from

discontinued production processes• Potential risks to the environment• Collection of hazardous materials and

elimination requiredscope of this project

3

5

Detailed hazardous wasteinventory available (example)

6

Hazardouswaste inventory• Classification based

on physical propertiesand chemicalanalyses

• Liquids with loworganic content(15,000 t):On-site treatment

• Other liquids, sludges, drums, tar (5,000 t): Disposal/re-useabroad

4

7

On-site Treatment Liquids with low organic content

• Batch process (500 t)

• Use of available infrastructure (basins) with upgrading as required

• 3 step process– Adjust pH to 3-5 (H2SO4)

Oxidation of phenols with Fenton‘s reagent (FeS04/H2O2)

– Adjust pH to 8.5 (NaOH)Precipitate metals (by adding Na2S)

– Treatment with activated carbon (optional)

• Discharge of effluent to storm water sewer/Sitnica river

water quality according to category IV as defined in administrative instruction No. 13/2008 for the limited values of the effluents that discharged on water bodies and on the system of public canalisation.

• Disposal of dewatered sludges (500 – 800 t) on TPP A ash disposal site

metal concentration similar to ash

8

Liquids with low organic content

4,000 – 5,500 mg/LChemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

1,500 – 2,000 mg/LTotal Organic Carbon (TOC)

average 250 mg/kg16 – 2,000 mg/kgHeavy metals (total)

average 500 mg/kg< 2 – 2,300 mg/kgPhenol Index

average < 1 %0,1 – 8 %,Dry substance

average 87 – 9pH-value

5

9

On-site Treatment• Potential adverse effects

– Emission into air (from oxidation)– Emission into surface water (effluent)– Spills (soil)

• Mitigation measures– Organisational

• Accepted standard procedures• Supervision

– Technical• Reaction control• Monitoring

– Ambient air– Effluent

10

Disposal/re-useOther liquids, sludges, drums, tar

• Collection from tanks/site

• Transport according to– Republic of Kosovo: Law No 2004/6 Transport of Dangerous

Goods.

– Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movementsof Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal

– Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community.

• Disposal/re-use in licensed cement plants (Hungary and Slovakia) and hazardous waste incinerators (Germany and Hungary)

6

11

Disposal/re-use• Potential adverse effects

– Emission into air (from transport and incineration)– Noise (transport)– Spills/accidents

• Mitigation measures– Organisational

• „Best practise“ for collection and loading• Licensed transport and disposal facilities• Supervision

– Technical• Monitoring of ambient air quality

12

Adverse effects - summary• Clean-up is limited in time and dimension

• No significant or inacceptable adverseeffects

• Mitigation measures integrated into design and realisation

• Removal and elimination of hazardousmaterials contributes significantly to improved environmental situation

7

13

Alternatives Analyses (summary)

Established process in waste water treatmentCan be realised using existing faciltiesAcceptable costs

XTreatment off-site (oxidation withFenton‘s Reagent)

Unsuitable conditions (variation in composition, presence of other chemicals, temperature variation)

XTreatment on-site (microbiological)

No disposal facilities in KosovoConsiderable masses (15,000 t) to betransported to disposal facilities abroadConsiderable impact of transportHigh costs

XDisposal off-site

Further deterioration of storage tanks likelyLeakage risk (contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water)

X„Zero Option“

ReasonFeasibleNot feasible

Liquids with Low Organic Content(low phenolic concentration)

14

Alternatives Analyses (summary)

TPP A not licensedTechnical facilities not available

XDisposal/Re-use on-site

No disposal/re-use facilities in KosovoLicensed disposal/re-use facilities availableabroad (incinerator, cement plant) Established BAT, no adverse effects

XDisposal/Re-use off-site

Further deterioration of storage tanks likelyLeakage risk (contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water)X

„ Zero Option“

ReasonFeasibleNot feasible

Other hazardous waste: Liquids with high organic content, sludge, paste, tar, drums

8

15

Accompanying measures

• Occupational Health and Safety measures

• Notification procedure (transport and disposal abroad)

• Emission prevention and control

• Monitoring (ambient air, effluent and sludges from on-site treatments)

• Supervision

• EMP Environmental Management Plan– Mitigation measures

– Monitoring

– Organisation

16

Project time schedule and costs

• Start: Spring 2010

• Duration: 9 to 11 Monthsincluding notificationprocedure (3-5 months)

• Cost estimate: (deleted)

9

17

EIA TeamPlejades GmbH – Independent Experts

Dr. Peter BayerEnvironmental Impact Assessment Specialist

Ms Mirjeta Maxhuni-Deda Environmental Specialist, Kosovo Legislation

Dr. Norbert Molitor Health and Safety/Hazardous Waste Expert

in close co-operation with KEK PMUMs Trandelina Cakaj

CLRP PMU Director

Dr. Behxhet ShalaEnvironmental Advisor

Mr Michael FeissTechnical Advisor

18

Legislation

• Republic of Kosovo (2009): Law No. 03/L-024 on environmental impact assessment

• Other Kosovo laws and regulations as applicable

10

19

EIA• According to Kosovo Legislation

and European Best Practice

• Scope: Prevent or mitigate adverse impacts

• Focused an potential impacts– Air– Soil– Ground Water– Surface Water

• Contents EIA Report (major issues - preliminary)– Project description– Main alternatives/reasons for choice– Environmental compartments likely to be affected– Significant aspects on the environment– Measures to prevent/mitigate adverse effects– Non-technical summary

20

Indicative Time Schedule EIA next steps

• Draft Final Report15 December 2009

• Albanian Version2 weeks later

• Public Information MeetingFirst week of January 2010

• Integration of comments from Public Information Meeting and Final Report

2 weeks later

11

21

Thank you for your attention!

1

Pastrimi i ish - Impiantit të Gasifikimitnë TC Kosova A

Projekti mbi Pastrimin e Sektorit tëEnergjisë dhe Rehabilitimi i tokës

Mbledhja e datës 19 nëntor 2009

2

Fushëveprimi i këtij takimi

• Fillimi i procedurës së VNM-së• Qasja në VNM• Informata rreth projektit

– Zonat– Aktivitetet– Masat lehëtsuese dhe ndikimet e pritura– Orari

3

Përshkrimi i projektitKosovo TPP A

Impianti i Gasifikimitgjendja më 12 korrik 2008

4

Karakteristikat e Impiantit tëGasifikimit• Pronari i lokacionit: KEK Korporata

Energjetike e Kosovës sh.a.• Zona: 40 ha• Dekomisionimi në vitin 1998• Deponimi i materieve të rrezikshme nga

ndalja e procesit të prodhimit• Rreziqet potenciale për mjedisin• Mbledhja e materieve të rrezikshme dhe

eliminimi i mundshëmfushëveprimi i këtij projekti

5

Inventari i detajizuar i materieve tërrezikshme në dispozicion(shembull)

6

Inventari i materieve tërrezikshme

• Klasifikimi i bazuar nëvetitë fizike dheanalizat kimike

• Lëngjet me përmbajtjetë ulët organike(15,000 t):Trajtimi në vend

• Lëngjet tjera,lymi, cistenrat, zift/bitumen/tar (5,000 t): Hedhja/largimi /ri-përdorimi jashtë vendit

7

Trajtimi në vendLengjet me përmbajtje të ulëtorganik• Procesi i grumbullimit (500 t)

• Përdorimi i infrasturkturës në dispozicion (bazeneve) me përmirësime tenevojshme

• Procesi 3 hapësh

– Përshtat ph prej 3-5 (H2SO4)Oxidimi i fenoleve përmes reagjentit Fenton (FeS04/H2O2)

– Përshtatja e ph në 8.5 (NaOH)

– Metalet e precipituara (Na2S)

– Trajtimi me karbon të aktivizuar (jodetyrimor)

• Shkarkimi i efluentëve në rrjedhën e kanalit ujor të shirave/ lumit Sitnica kualiteti i ujit sipas Kategorisë IV siç definohet në UA Nr.13/2008 për

vlerat limituese të efluentëve që shkarkohen në trupat ujor dhe sistemin e kanalizimit publik

• Hedhja e lymit të tharë (500 – 800 t) në deponitë e hirit të TC A

• koncentrimet e metalit të ngjajshme me hirin

8

Lëngjet me përmbajtje të ulëtorganikeVlera pH 7 – 9 mesatarja 8

Substancë e thatë 0,1 – 8 %, mesatarja < 1 %

Indexi i Fenolit < 2 – 2,300 mg/kg mesatarja 500 mg/kg

Metalet e rënda(total) 16 – 2,000 mg/kg mesatarja 250 mg/kg

Karboni Organikë Total (TOC)

1,500 – 2,000 mg/L

Shpenzimi imik I Oksigjenit (SHKO)

4,000 – 5,500 mg/L

9

Trajtimi në vend

• Efektet potenciale të kundërta

-Emisioni në ajër (nga oksidimi)

-Emisioni në sipërfaqe (efluent)

-derdhjet (dheu)

• Masat lehtësuese-Organizimi

• Procedurat e pranuara standarde

• Mbkëqyerja

-Teknike• Kontrolli reaksionit

• Monitorimi

• Ajri ambiental

• Efluentët

10

Hedhja/ripërdorimiLëngjet e tjera, lymi, barrelat, bitumeni

• Mbledhja nga rezervuarët/zonat– Ligji Nr.2004/6 Transporti i mallrave të rrezikshme i

Republikës së Kosovës– Konventa e Bazelit mbi kontrollin e Lëvizjes

ndërkufitare të Materieve të rrezikshme dhe deponimi -hedhja e tyre

– Regullorja e Këshillit (EEC) Nr 259/93 mbi mbikëqyrjen dhe kontrollin e transportimit tëmbeturinave brenda,në dhe jashtë Unionit Evropian

• Hedhja/ripërdorimi i tyre në impiantet e licencuara tëçimentos (Hungari dhe Slovaki) dhe incineratorët e mbeturinave të rrezikshme (Gjermani dhe Hungari)

11

Hedhja/ripërdorimi

• Efektet potenciale të kundërta

-Emisioni në ajër (nga transportimi dhe incinerimi)

-Zhurma (transporti)

-derdhjet /aksidentet

• Masat lehtësuese-Organizimi

• „Praktikat më të mira“ për mbledhje dhe ngrakim

• Objektet e licencuara për transport dhe deponim

• Mbikëqyerja

-Teknike• Monitorimi i kualitetit të ajrit ambiental

12

Efektet e kundërta-përmbledhje

• Pastrimi është i limituar me kohë dhe madhësi

• Nuk ka efekte te kundërta të rëndësishme apo tëpapranueshme

• -Masat lëhtësuese të përfshira në dizajnim dherealizim

• Largimi dhe eliminimi i materieve të rrezikshmedo të kontribuojë dukshëm në përmirësimin e situatës mjedisore

13

Analizat alternative (përmbledhje)

Lëngjet me përmbjatje tëulët organike (koncentrimi i ulët i fenolit

Jo e realizuseh

me

E realizuseh

me

Arsyea/Reason

Opcioni Zero XPërkeqësimi i mëtejmë i mundshëm i rezervuarëve deponues

Rreziku nga derdhjet (kontamini i dheut, ujërave tokësore dhe sipërfaqësore)

Deponimi jashtë lokacionit XNuk ka objekt të deponimit në KosovëMasa e konsiderueshme (15,000 t) që duhettë transportohet në objektet jashtë venditNdikimi i konsiderueshëm i transportitKostot e larta

Trajtimi në vend(mikrobilogjik)

XKushtet e papërshtatshme (ndryshimi i përbërjes, prezenca e materieve tjera kimike, ndryshimi i tempertaurës)

Trajtimi jashtë lokacionit(vendit) (oksidimi mereagjent të Fentonit)

XKrijimi i procesit në trajtimin e ujërave të zezaMund të realiyohet duke përdorur ibjektetekzistueseKostot e pranueshme

14

Analizat alternative (përmbledhje)Mbeturinat e tjera tërrezikshme: Lëngjet me përmbajtje të lartë organike, lym, bitumen, paste, drums

Jo e realizues

hme

E realizues

hme

Arsyeja

„ Opsioni zero“X

Përkeqësimi i mëtejmë i mundshëm i rezervuarëve deponues

Rreziku nga derdhjet (kontamini i dheut, ujërave tokësore dhe sipërfaqësore)

Hedhja/Përdorimi në lokacionX

TC A nuk është licencuarObjektet teknike nuk janë në dispozicion

Hedhja/Ripërdorimi jashtëlokacionit X

Nuk ka objekte deponimi/ripërdorimi nëKosovëObjektet e licencuara të deponimit/ripërdorimit janë në dispozicion jashtë vendit (incineratori, impianti i çimentos) TMD e përcaktuar, pa efekte të kundërta

15

Masat shoqëruese• Masat e shëndetit dhe sigurisë profesionale

• Procedurat e Informimit (transporti dhe deponimi jashtëvendit)

• Kontrolli dhe parandalimi i emisionit

• Monitorimi (ajri ambiental, efluentët dhe lymi nga trajtimet në lokacion (vend)

• Mbikëqyrja

• Plani Menaxhues Mjedisor –PMM – Masat lehtësuese

– Monitorimi

– Organizimi

16

Orari dhe kostoja e projektit

• Fillimi: Pranverë 2010

• Kohëzgjatja: 9 deri 11 muaj përfshirëprocedurat informative (3-5 muaj)

• Kostoja vlerësuese: (deleted)

17

Ekipi i VNM-sëPlejades GmbH – Ekspertët e pavarur

Dr. Peter BayerSpecialist për Vlerësimin e Ndikimit në Mjedis

Znj. Mirjeta Maxhuni-DedaSpecialiste Mjedisore, Legjislacioni i Kosovës

Dr. Norbert Molitor Ekspert për materie të rrezikshme/Siguri dhe Shëndet

Në bashkëpunim t ngushtë me KEK PMUZnj. Trandelina Cakaj

CLRP PMU Director

Dr. Behxhet ShalaKëshilltar Mjedisor

Z.Michael FeissKëshilltar Teknik

18

Legjislacioni

• Republika e Kosovës (2009): Ligji Nr. 03/L-024 mbi Vlerësimin e Ndikimit nëMjedis

• Ligjet dhe regulloret tjera në fuqi

19

VNM• Sipas Legjislacionit të Kosovës dhe Praktikave të BE-së

• Fushëveprimi: Parandalimi apo lehtësimi i ndikimeve të kundërta

• Përqendrimi i ndikimeve potenciale si:– Ajri– Dheu– Ujërat Tokësore– Ujërat Sipërfaqësore

• Përmbajtja e Raportit të VNM-së (çështjet e rëndësishme –paraprake)– Përshrkimi i projektit– Alternativat kryesore/arsyet për alternativa– Aspektet e mjedisit te cilat me gjase do te afektohen– Aspektet e dukshme mbi mjedisin– Masat parandaluese/lehtësuese të efekteve të kundërta– Përmbledhja joteknike

20

Orari i planifikuar i VNM-sëhapat e ardhshëm

• Drafti i Raportit Final Dhjetor 2009

• Verzioni në Shqip

2 javë më vonë

• Takimi Publik InformativJava e parë e Janarit 2010

• Përfshirja e komenteve nga Takimi Publik Informativ dhe Raporti Final

2 Javë më vonë

21

Ju falmenderit për vëmendjen tuaj!

PLEJADES GmbH

Independent Experts

Feldstraße 5

D-64347 Griesheim

Telefon +49(0)6155/8234-0

Telefax +49(0)6155/8234-79

e-mail [email protected]

Amtsgericht Darmstadt

HRB 7863

Geschäftsführer:

Bärbel Krüger

Norbert Molitor

Stefan Kamsties

Sparkasse Darmstadt

BLZ 508 501 50

Konto-Nr. 270 141 35

Steuer-Nr. 07 241 00599

VAT-No: DE 209 238 518

Public Hearing, 27 January 2010 at Obiliq

Minutes

Energy Sector Clean-Up and Land Reclamation

Project:

Independent Environmental Impact Assessment and

Environmental Management Plan for the

Remediation of the former Lignite Gasification Plant

Kosovo Energy Corporation j.s.c.

Project No: P105870 27 January 2010

Public Hearing Obiliq page 2 of 6 27 Jan 2010

Date: 27 January 2010 Time: 1100 hrs to 1300 hrs Place: Obiliq Municipality Hall Obiliq Participants: See attendance list in annex 1 Copies: KEK PMU CLRP (for further distribution) Minutes responsible/ date

1 Introduction

Dr. Behxhet Shala, KEK CLRP PMU, welcomed the attendants, introduced the consultant and briefly summarised the background of the project. The project comprises the preparation of an independent EIA Environmental Impact Assessment and EMP Environmental Management Plan for the collection and elimination of hazardous waste stored at the shut down lignite gasification plant adjacent to Kosovo A thermal power plant. The meeting is the second public consultation meeting out of two mandatory meetings according to WB EIA procedures and the respective Kosovo EIA legislation. 2 Presentation by the consultant

The presentation was given by the consultant’s team leader, Dr. Peter Bayer with support from Mirjeta Maxhuni-Deda and Dr. Norbert Molitor from the consultant’s team. The presentation was given in English, with consecutive translation into the Albanian language provided by Ms Mirjeta Maxhuni-Deda. Simultaneous translation into the Serbian language was provided by the Obiliq municipality.

Public Hearing Obiliq page 3 of 6 27 Jan 2010

The major topics of the presentation were:

• Scope of the meeting • EIA Team • EIA-Background • Information on the project

o Site characteristics o Hazardous waste inventory o Hazardous waste elimination

� On-site treatment � Collection and elimination in licensed disposal

facilities abroad o Alternatives analyses o Project time schedule and cost estimate o Project organisation o Legal Requirements and permits o Mitigation measures o EMP Environmental Management Plan

• EIA o Environmental compartments like to be affected o Potential adverse effects and mitigation measures o Discharge of sulphate to Sitnica River o Summary of Results

The presentation has been made available to the attendants as handouts both in the English version (annex 2) and the Albanian version (annex 3). 3 Discussion

After the presentation there was an answer and question session, moderated by Dr. Behxhet Shala. Mr Sejdi Halimi (Kosovo Ecology Party) stated that the hazardous chemicals stores at the site and the potential environmental hazards originate from the pre-1988 production phase and that collection and elimination of the hazardous waste has been waited for a long time now. It is very much appreciated that KEK now takes action. Mr Istref Klinaku (KEK Executive Director Energy Generation) asked about the selection of the incinerator and cement plants for the elimination of the waste. The consultant explained that suitable licensed disposal facilities had preliminary been identified as part of the technical design. Disposal facilities will be finally selected in the tendering procedure for the clean-up works. Mr Mehmet Krasniqi (Mayor of Obiliq) welcomed the activities and assured support from Obiliq municipality for the project implementation He asked about the environmental benefit of the clean-up for Obiliq municipality and

Public Hearing Obiliq page 4 of 6 27 Jan 2010

requested to inform Obiliq municipality about the implementation and progress of the project. Dr. Shala appreciated the support from the municipality. The consultant explained that the environmental benefit for Obiliq municipality is the sustainable elimination of some 20,000 t of hazardous waste at present stored at the gasification plant site resulting in the elimination of the potential hazards associated with this waste. Elimination of the waste is the first step toward demolition of the gasification plant and reclamation of the land as a contribution to a long term improvement of environmental quality in Obiliq municipality. Mr Jovic Predrag (Obiliq Municipality) expressed concern about the chemicals used in the on-site treatment process, potential release into the environment, effects of Sulphate concentration in effluent and asked for more information on the treatment process. The consultant explained that the on-site treatment is a batch process essentially in an enclosed basin at the site. The reaction will be controlled as to prevent emissions into the atmosphere. Treatment of a single batch can be repeated if required to achieve permissible discharge concentration. No discharge to Sitnica River will be allowed unless permissible discharge concentrations are achieved. As with respect to the effects of Sulphate concentrations in the effluent the consultant explained that this will have no adverse effect on fauna and flora. Sulphate will be precipitated as gypsum downstream from the discharge point. Sulphate and gypsum do not have toxic effects on the environment. Dr. Shala invited Mr Jovic Predrag to contact him in order to provide more detailed information on the on-site treatment process from the EIA report. Mr Vehbi Ejupi (MESP) stated that elimination of the hazardous waste from the gasification plant site would contribute to the improvement of the environmental quality in Obiliq municipality and Kosovo as a whole. He asked whether assessment of effluent sulphate concentration on the Sitnica River took into account annual variation of Sitnica River flow rate. He also expressed concerns on the notification process for transboundary transport of waste as Kosovo is not yet member of competent international organisations. The consultant explained that annual variation of Sitnica river water levels has been taken into account in the assessment. Most sensitive are especially very low flow rates likely to occur in summer. The consultant therefore recommended to modify effluent discharge rate for very low Sitnica River flow rates as to limit temporary increase of sulphate in Sitnica River to 50 % maximum. As with respect to he notification procedure for transboundary transport of waste, UNMIK is available to support the notification process in order to obtain the relevant permits. Ms Lumnije Grajcevci (NGO Women’s association ”Aureola”) asked about the identity of independent supervisor of the works and stated that disposal

Public Hearing Obiliq page 5 of 6 27 Jan 2010

facilities for hazardous waste should be made available in Kosovo in the future. Dr. Shala explained that the independent supervisor has not been identified yet. The independent supervisor will be a competent consultancy firm which will be identified and contracted in time. With respect to disposal facilities for hazardous waste in Kosovo, Dr Shala explained that these are not available in Kosovo at present. In order to not delay elimination of hazardous waste from the gasification plant site, disposal facilities in other countries have to be employed. Mr Sabit Restelica (Kosovo Environmental Protection Agency-KEPA ) asked whether a cross border EIA has been performed for assessment of effluent discharge effects on Sitnica River. He also stated, that sludge residues from on-site treatment should be disposed of otherwise. The consultant explained that a cross-border EIA has not been performed as this is not required considering the temporary nature of the projects and the limited adverse effects. With respect to the disposal of the sludge on the ash disposal facility the consultant explained that dewatered sludge will be disposed of in an engineered cassette made of low permeable clay. Disposal follows the “multi-barrier-concept” well established in Europe and effectively preventing adverse effects on the environment. It was also taken into account that metals as the environmental relevant content can not be eliminated by incineration or oxidation. Disposal of the sludge in other disposal facilities abroad would not be commensurate. Mr Shukri Shabani (MESP EIA Sector) stated, that the MESP is concerned about the discharge of sulphate concentration exceeding maximum concentration set in the respective administrative instruction The consultant explained that from an expert’s point of view and considering the environmental effects discharge of effluent to the Sitnica River is tolerable. From a legal point of view the particular threshold concentration for sulphate is exceeded. However, it should be taken into account that threshold values are generally orientation values assuming general conditions, non-site-specific assumptions and permanent operation/discharge. Authorities may make single case assessments which is common practise for authorities in EU member states. Single case assessment takes into account site-specific conditions, the temporary nature and overall positive effects of the project with the acceptance of adjusted discharge concentrations still complying with the overall objective of the protection of the environment. Single case assessment in this particular case may follow the arguments and assessment provided in the EIA report. The hearing was concluded and Dr. Shala thanked the participants for attending and contributing to the discussion.

Public Hearing Obiliq page 6 of 6 27 Jan 2010

4 Summary Conclusion

It is the consultant’s impression, that the project was well appreciated by the public. No objection was expressed against the project. Concerns have been listed to and explanations have been provided. Minutes prepared Dr. Peter Bayer/Mirjeta Maxhuni-Deda Minutes approved Dr. Behxhet Shala Annexes 1 Attendance list 2 Handout presentation (English version) 3 Handout presentation (Albanian version)

1

1

Clean-up of the Gasification Plant

at Kosovo AEnvironmental Impact Assessment

Energy Sector Clean-Up and Land Reclamation Project

Public Hearing on 27 January 2010at Obiliq

2

Scope of this meeting• Provide project information

– Technical– Organisational

• Provide information on the EnvironmentalImpact Assessment– Potential adverse effects– Measures to avoid and mitigate adverse

effects– Results

2

3

Environmental Impact Assessment Team

Mirjeta Maxhuni-DedaEnvironmental Specialist,Kosovo Legislation

Dr. Norbert Molitor Health and Safety,Hazardous Waste Expert

Dr. Peter BayerTeam Leader,EIA Specialist

4

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment• Mandatory according to Kosovo Legislation

• Compliant with European Union directives

• Scope: – identify potential adverse effects of the project– identify mitigation measures – assess adverse effects/environmental impact

• Focused an potential impacts– Air (contamination)– Water (groundwater/surface water)– Soil (contamination)– Air (noise)– Settlements (residential area/residents)– Biosphere (land use)

• EIA Report – Draft version delivered on 15/29 December 2009– Forwarded to Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning

3

5

Project descriptionKosovo TPP A

Gasification Plantsituation 12 July 2008

6

Gasification plant characteristics

• Site owner: KEK Kosovo Energy Corporation j.s.c.

• Area: 40 ha• Shut down in 1988• Hazardous waste stored in tanks

= Environmental hazard• Removal and elimination of hazardous

waste is requiredscope of this project

4

7

Storage tanks

Tar deposit

8

Detailed inventory of hazardouswaste available

– Tank / location– Quantity– Physical properties– Chemical composition

5

9

Hazardous waste elimination

• Two Fractions– Liquids with low organic content

15,000 tOn-site treatment

– Other liquids, sludges, tar, drums5,000 tElimination in licensed incinerators/cementplants outside Kosovo

10

On-site Treatment Liquids with low organic content

• Adaptation of an established waste water treatment process

• Batch process (30 x 500 m³), basic infrastructure available on-site

• Treatment (main steps) – Oxidation of organic compounds with Fenton‘s reagent (FeS04/H2O2)

– Treatment with activated carbon (optional)

– Precipitate metals (by adding Na2S)

• Discharge of effluent to Sitnica Rivereffluent quality corresponds to category IV (Kosovo administrativeinstruction No. 13/2008) for discharge to surface water

exception: Sulphate

• Disposal of dewatered sludges on TPP A ash disposal facility(500 – 800 t in total )

engineered casette with clay liner

6

11

Basins foron sitetreatment

Upgrading of basins:– Clean– Liner– Access road– Work and storage

area– Discharge line

12

Elimination in licensed plantsOther liquids, sludges, tar, drums

• Collection from tanks/site• Road / rail transport (tank lorries / tank wagon)• Elimination in licensed waste disposal facilities (BAT)

– Hazardous waste incinerators (Germany or Hungary)

– Cement plants (Hungary or Slovakia)

• Transport according to– Republic of Kosovo: Law No 2004/6 Transport of Dangerous

Goods

– Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movementsof Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal

– Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community

7

13

Alternatives Analyses (summary)

Hazardous waste/chemicals are not eliminatedConsiderable increase of volume to be disposedLicensed landfill not available in KosovoConsiderable costs for transport to licensed landfill outside Kosovo

XImmobilisation/disposal in landfill

Hazardous waste is not eliminatedNo suitable interim storage available to cover upgrading timeSite is not available for reclamation

XUpgrading of storage facilities, continue storage at site

Established process in waste water treatmentSustainable elimination of wasteCan be realised using existing facilitiesAcceptable costsNo inacceptable adverse effects

XTreatment on-site (oxidation withFenton‘s Reagent)

Unsuitable conditions (variation in composition, presence of other chemicals, temperature, variation)Microbiological treatment was intended for effluent from gasification plant during operation time but never worked properly

XTreatment on-site (microbiological)

No disposal facilities in KosovoConsiderable masses (15,000 t) to be transported to disposal facilitiesabroadConsiderable impact of transportHigh costs

XDisposal off-site

Further deterioration of storage tanks likelyLeakage risk (contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water)X„Zero Option“

JustificationRetainedRejected

Liquids with Low Organic Content

14

Alternatives Analyses (summary)

Hazardous waste/chemicals are not eliminatedConsiderable increase of volume to be disposedLicensed landfill not available in KosovoConsiderable costs for transport to licensed landfill outside Kosovo

XImmobilisation/disposal in landfill

Hazardous waste is not eliminatedNo suitable interim storage available to cover upgrading timeSite is not available for reclamation

XUpgrading of storage facilities, continue storage at site

No disposal/re-use facilities in KosovoSustainable elimination of hazardous waste and environmental risksLicensed disposal/re-use facilities available abroad (incinerator, cement plant) BAT Best Available Technology No significant adverse effectsSite is available for land reclamation

XElimination off-site and outside Kosovo

TPP A and B are not licensed for hazardous waste disposalAppropriate facilities (power plants/cement plants) not available in KosovoTechnical upgrading and permitting of existing plants not possible in short time and expensive

XElimination on-site or in Kosovo

Further deterioration of storage tanks likelyLeakage risk (contamination of soil, groundwater and surface water)X„Zero Option“

JustificationRetainedRejected

Other hazardous waste: Liquids, sludge, paste, tar, drums

8

15

Project time schedule and costs

• Start: Spring 2010• Duration: 8 Months• End: End of 2010• Cost estimate: 3.2 Million EUR

– 0.8 Million EUR for on-site treatment– 2.4 Million EUR for elimination in licensed

disposal facilities

16

ProjectOrganisation

PermitsNotification KEK j.s.c

CLRP PMU

Project Management

Works Supervisor

Independent

(contracted by KEK)

Contractor

Authorities:

- Kosovo

- Other countries(notification)

Control

On-site treatment of liquids with low organic content

Supervision

Internal Project Management

Occupational Health and Safety

Internal Supervision& Monitoring

Documentation

Collection of hazardous waste/chemicals

Licensed disposal facilities(Incinerator/cement plant)

Transport to disposal facilities

Peter Bayer
Rechteck

9

17

Legal Requirements / Permits

• Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning:– Environmental Consent (approval of the project)– Based on EIA Environmental Impact Assessment– Covering also

• Handling of hazardous waste on-site• On-site treatment • Discharge of effluent from on-site treatment to Sitnica river • Disposal of sludge from on-site treatment on Kosovo TPP ash dump

• Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning: – Permit for transport of waste inside Kosovo

• Other countries– Notification procedure for cross border transport of waste

18

Mitigation Measures

• Organisational– Detailed work concept– Occupational Health and Safety Plan– Emergency Plan

• Technical– Internationally accepted methods, standards and

practice– Reaction control (for on-site treatment)– Monitoring (contractor)

• ambient air quality (all working places)• Effluent (from on-site treatment)

10

19

Environmental Management Plan• Scope:

avoid and/or control adverse effects• Combination of measures (as described)

– Mitigation– Institutional/organisational– Monitoring

• Independent Supervisor– Permanent supervision of activities– Monitoring (ambient air at working places,

hazardous waste, effluent to Sitnica River)– Approval of batch discharge to Sitnica River

20

Sulphate to Sitnica River• Sulphate concentration:

– Sitnica River: 127 mg/l (average)– Effluent: 2.500 mg/l

(after introduction of additional step to reduce sulphate)

• Temporary increase of sulphate freight in Sitnica River: 20 - 50%

• Reduce discharge rate for low water regimes• Temporary impact: 5 – 10 hours (per batch)• Tolerable

11

21

EIA: Summary of results• Elimination of hazardous waste in licensed

incinerators/cement plantsNoise, emission to airTolerable

• On-site treatmentdischarge to Sitnica RiverTolerable

• Accident scenarios(spill, fire)Low probability, limited adverse effects

22

Summary• Clean-up is limited in time and dimension

• No significant or inacceptable adverseeffects

• Mitigation measures integrated into design and realisation

• Removal and elimination of hazardousmaterials contributes significantly to improved environmental situation

12

23

Ju falmenderit për vëmendjentuaj!

Thank you for your attention!

24

Summary Assessment

Environmental situation improved

NoneNoneYes(compressor unit)

NoneNoneNoneAfter project implementation

Low probability, limited effects

Technical and organis-ational

(low probability, adverse effects limited)

(low probability, adverse effects limited)

(low probability, adverse effects limited)

(low probability, adverse effects limited)

(low probability, adverse effects limited)

(low probability, adverse effects limited)

Accident scenarios

TolerableTechnical and organis-ational

(See water)NoneNoneNoneTolerable (sulphate in effluent/impact on Sitnica River)

NoneOn-site treatment of liquids with low organic content

TolerableTechnical and organis-ational

NoneTolerableTolerableNoneNoneNone (collection)Yes (transport, disposal)

Transfer of hazardous waste to licensed facilities

Project activities(with mitigation measures)

Deteriorating environmental situation, increasing impacts

noneNoneTolerableYes(compressor unit)

Risk(tank leakage)

Risk(tank leakage)

Yes(emission from contaminant sources on site)

Initial condition prior to project activities

Biosphere (Land Use)

Settlements (Residential Areas, Residents)

Air (Noise)

SoilWater (groundwater/surface water)

Air (Contaminants)

Summary assessment adverse effects

Mitigation measures

Potential impact on environmental compartments/potential receptorsActivities/scenarios

Situation

1

Pastrimi i impiantit të gasifikimit nëKosovën A

Vlerësimi i Ndikimit në Mjedis

Sektori i Energjisë Projekti për Pastrim dheRikultivim të Tokave

Dëgjimi publik më 27 Januar 2010në Obiliq

2

Qëllimi i këtij takimi• Të siguroj të dhëna për projektin

– Teknike– Organizative

• Të siguroj të dhëna mbi Vlerësimin e Ndikimit në Mjedis– Efektet negative potenciale– Masat për të menjanuar dhe lehtësuar efektet

negative – Rezultatet

3

Ekipi i Vlerësimit të Ndikimit në Mjedis

Mirjeta Maxhuni-DedaSpecialiste Mjedisore,Legjislacioni i Kosovës

Dr. Norbert Molitor Ekspert i Mbeturinave tërrezikshme, Siguri dhe Shëndetësi

Dr. Peter BayerUdhëheqës Ekipi,Specialist i VNM-së

4

Vlerësimi i Ndikimit në Mjedis VNM• Mandatet sipas Legjislacionit të Kosovës

• Në përputhshmëri me direktivat e Unionit Evropian

• Qëllimi: – Identifikoj efektet negative potenciale të projektit– Identifikoj masat lehtësuese– Vlerësoj efektet negative/ndikimin në mjedis

• Pqërqendrohet në ndikimet potenciale– Ajri (kontaminimi)– Uji (ujërat nëntokësor dhe sipërfaqësor)– Dheu(kontaminimi)– Ajri (zhurma)– Vendbanimet (zonat banuese/banorët)– Biosfera (shfrytëzimi i tokës)

• Raporti i VNM-së– Draft verzioni i dorëzuar më 15/29 Dhjetor 2009– Përcjellur në Ministrin e Mjedisit dhe Planifikimit Hapësinor

5

Project descriptionTCA Kosovës

Impianiti i Gasifikimitgjendja 12 Korrik 2008

6

Karakteristikat e impiantit tëGasifikimit• Pronari i lokacionit: KEK- Korporata

Energjetike e Kosovës sh.a.• Zona: 40 ha• Mbyllja në vitin 1988• Mbeturinat e rrezikshme të deponuara në

tanke = Rrezik mjedisor• Nevojitet/Kërkohet largimi dhe eliminimi i

mbeturinave të rrezikshmeqëllimi i këtij projekti

7

Tanket për deponim

Depoziti i katranit

8

Inventari i detajizuar i mbeturinavetë rrezikshme në dispozicion

– Tanket/lokacioni– Sasia– Vetitë fizike– Përbërja kimike

9

Eliminimi i mbeturinave të rrezikshme

• Dy fraksionet– Lëngjet me përmbajtje të ulët organike

15,000 tTrajtimi në vend

– Lëngjet tjera, lymi,katrani dhe fuqitë5,000 tEliminimi në inceneratorët e licencuar/impiantete cimentos jashtë Kosovës.

10

Trajtimi në vendLëngjet me përmbajtje të ulët organike

• Adaptimi i procesit të krijuar në trajtimin e ujërave të zeza

• Procesi i grumbullimit (30 x 500 m³), infrastruktura themelore në dispozicionnë teren

• Trajtimi (hapat kryesor) – Oxidimi i komponimeve organike përmes reagjentit Fenton (FeS04/H2O2 )

– Trajtimi me karbon të aktivizuar(opcional)

– Precipitimi i Metaleve(me shtimin e Na2S)

• Shkarkimi i efluentit në lumin Sitnicakualiteti i efluentit korespondon me Kategorinë IV (Udhëzimi Administrative Nr.13/2008) për shkarkim në ujë siperfaqesor

përjashtim:Sulfatet

• Hedhja e lymit të tharë në hirin e TCA (500 – 800 t në total)

Kaseta e ndërtuar me shtresë të argjilës

11

Bazenetpër trajtimnë vend

Përmirësimi i bazeneve:– Pastrimi– Shtresa– Rruga për qasje– Zona për deponim

dhe punë– Kanali për shkarkim

12

Eliminimi në impiantet e licencuaraLëngjet tjera, lymi, katrani dhe fuqitë

• Mbledhja nga tanket/zona• Rruga/transporti hekurudhor (maunet/vagonat-tanket)• Eliminimi në objektet e licencuara për deponim(TMM)

– Inceneratorët për mbeturina të rrezikshme(Gjermani apoHungari)

– Impiantet e cimentos (Hungari apo Slovaki)

• Transporti sipas– Ligji Nr.2004/6 mbi Transportin e mallrave të rrezikshme

:Republika e Kosovës

– Konventës së Bazelit mbi kontrollin e Lëvizjes ndërkufitare tëMaterieve të rrezikshme dhe deponimi -hedhja e tyre

– Rregullorja e këshillit (EEC) Nr 259/93 mbi mbikëqyerjen dhekontrollin e transportit të mbeturinave brenda, në dhe jashtëBashkësisë Evropiane

13

Alternatives Analyses (summary)

Lëngjet me përmbjatje tëulët organike E refuzuar E pranuar

Arsyeja

„Opcioni Zero“ XPërkeqësimi i mëtejmë i rezervuarëve deponues siq mund të jetë rrezikunga derdhjet (kontamini i dheut, ujërave tokësore dhe sipërfaqësore)

Përmirësimi i objektit për deponim, vazhdimi i deponimit në këtë zonë

XMbeturina e rrezikshme nuk është eliminuarNuk ka deponim të përkohshëm në dispozicion për të përfshirë kohën e përmirësimitZona nuk është në dispozicion për rikultivim

Imobilizimi/ deponimi –hedhja nëdeponi

XMbeturina/kimikatet e rrezikshme nuk janë eliminuarNjë rritje e konsiderueshme e vëllimit që do të deponohetDeponi të licencuar nuk ka në KosovëKostot e konsiderueshme për transport në deponitë e licencuara jashtëKosovës.

Hedhja jashtë zonës XNuk ka objekt të deponimit në KosovëMasa e konsiderueshme (15,000 t) që duhet të transportohet në objektetpër deponim jashtë venditNdikimi i konsiderueshëm i transportitKostot e larta

Trajtimi në vend(mikrobiologjik) XKushtet e papërshtatshme (ndryshimi i përbërjes, prezenca e materievetjera kimike, ndryshimi i tempertaurës)Trajtimi mikrobiologjik është planifikuar për efluent nga impianti i gasifikimit gjatë kohës së funksionimit por asnjëherë nuk ka punuar siduhet.

Trajtimi në vend (oksidimi mereagjent Fenton)

XKrijimi i procesit në trajtimin e ujërave të zezaEliminimi i qëndrueshëm i mbeturinësMund të realizohet duke shfrytëzuar objektet egzistueseKostot e pranueshmeNuk ka efekte negative të papranueshme

14

Alternatives Analyses (summary)

Mbeturinat tjera tërrezikshme: Lëngjet, lymi, pasta, katrani, fuqitë

E refuzuar E pranuarArsyeja

„Opcioni zero“ XPërkeqësimi i mëtejmë i rezervuarëve deponues siq mund të jetë rrezikunga derdhjet (kontamini i dheut, ujërave tokësore dhe sipërfaqësore)

Përmirësimi i objektit për deponim, vazhdimi i deponimit në këtë zonë

XMbeturina e rrezikshme nuk është eliminuarNuk ka deponim të përkohshëm në dispozicion për të përfshirë kohën e përmirësimitZona nuk është në dispozicion për rikultivim

IImobilizimi/ deponimi –hedhja nëdeponi

XMbeturina/kimikatet e rrezikshme nuk janë eliminuarNjë rritje e konsiderueshme e vëllimit që do të deponohetDeponi të licencuar nuk ka në KosovëKostot e konsiderueshme për transport në deponitë e licencuara jashtëKosovës.

Eliminimi në vend apo në Kosovë XTCA dhe B nuk janë të licencuar për deponimin e mbeturinave tërrezikshmeObjektet e përshtatshme (termocentralet) nukka në KosovëPërmirësimi teknik dhe lejet për impiantet egzistuese nuk janë tëmundshme në kohë të shkurtë dhe janë të kushtueshme

Eliminimi jashtë zonës dhe jashtëKosovës

XNuk ka objekte për deponim apo ripërdorim në KosovëEliminimi i qëndrueshëm i mbeturinave gtë rrezikshme dhe rreziqetmjedisoreObjektet e liencuara/ri-përdorim në dispozicion jashtë vendit(inceneratorët,impiantet e cimentos)TMM-Teknologjia më e Mirë e MundshmeNuk ka efekte negative të rëndësishmeZona është në dispozicion për rikultivim të tokës/

15

Orari dhe kostoja e projektit

• Fillimi: Pranverë 2010• Kohëzgjatja: 8 muaj• Mbarimi: Në fund të vitit 2010• Kostoja vlerësuese: 3.2 miliona euro

– 0.8 Million EUR për trajtim në vend– 2.4 Million EUR për eliminimin në objektet e

licencuara për deponim

16

Organizimi i Projektit

Lejet

NjoftimiKEK j.s.c

PPRT NJMP

Menaxhimi I Projektit

Mbikëqyerja e

punëve

Pavarur apo stafi I

KEK-ut

Kontraktori

Autoritetet:

- Kosovare

- Tjerët

(të njoftuar)

- (UNMIK, nësë

kërkohet)

Kontrolli

Trajtimi në vend I lëngjeve me

përmbajtje të ulët organike

Mbikëqyerja

Menaxhimi intern I projektit

Siguria dhe shëndeti

profesional

Monitorimi dhe Mbikëqyerja

Interne

Dokumentet

Mbledhja e

kimikateve/mbeturinave të

rrezikshme

Objektet e licencuara për

deponim

(Incinerator/impianti i cimentos)

Transporti tek objektet për

deponim

Peter Bayer
Rechteck

17

Kërkesat Ligjore/Lejet

• Ministria e Mjedisit dhe Planifikimit Hapësinor:– Leja Mjedisore (aprovimi i projektit)– Bazuar në Vlerësimin e Ndikimit në Mjedis VNM – Përfshinë gjithashtu

• Trajtimi në vend i mbeturinave të rrezikshme• Trajtimi në vend • Shkarkimi i efluentit nga trajtimi në vend në lumin Sitnica • Hedhja e lymit nga trajtimi në vend në deponin e hirit në TCA

• Ministria e Mjedisit dhe Planifikimit Hapësinor– Leja për transport të mbeturinave brenda Kosovës

• Vendet tjera– Procedurat e informimit për transportin ndërkufitar të

mbeturinave

18

Masat Lehtësuese

• Organisative– Koncepti detal i punës– Plani për siguri dhe shëndetit profesional– Plani emergjent

• Teknike– Metodat e pranuara ndërkombëtarisht, standardet

dhe praktikat– Kontrolli i reaksionit (për trajtimin në vend)– Monitorimi (kontraktori)

• Kualiteti i ajrit ambiental (të gjitha vendet punuese)• Efluenti (nga trajtimi në vend)

19

Plani i Menaxhimit Mjedisor• Qëllimi: menjanoj dhe/apo kontrolloj efektet

negative

• Kombinimi i masave(siq janë përshkruar)– Lehtësimet– Institucionale/organizative– Monitorimi

• Mbikëqyerja e pavarur– Mbikëqyerja e përhershme e aktiviteteve– Monitorimi (ajri ambientit në vendet

punuese,mbeturinat e rrezikshme,efluenti në LuminSitnica)

– Aprovimi i shkarkimit të grumbujve në lumin Sitnica

20

VNM:Përmbledhja e rezultateve

• Eliminimi i mbeturinave të rrezikshme nëincenratorët e licencuar/impiantet e cimentosZhurma, emisioni në ajërI tolerueshëm

• Trajtimi në vendshkarkimi në lumin Sitnica I tolerueshëm

• Skenarët aksidental(derdhja, zjarri)probabiliteti i ulët, efekte negative të limituara

21

Sulfatet në lumin Sitnica• Koncentrimi i sulfateve:

– Lumi Sitnica: 127 mg/l (mesatarja)– Efluenti: 2.500 mg/l (pas përdorimit të hapave

shtesë për redukimin e sulfatit/• Rritja e përkohsme e ngarkesës me sulfate në

lumin Sitnica: 20-50%• Redukimi i shkallës së shkarkimit për rregjimin e

ulët ujor• Ndikimi i përkohshëm: 5-10 orë (për grumbuj)• I toleruershëm

22

Përmbledhje• Pastrimi është i kufizuar në kohë dhe

madhësi• Nuk ka efekte negative të rëndësishme

apo papranueshme• Masat lehtësuese janë integruar në hartim

dhe realizim• Largimi dhe eliminimi i materieve të

rrezikshme kontribuonë në përmirësimin e gjendjes mjedisore

23

Ju falemnderit për vëmendjentuaj!

Gjendja Aktivitetet/skenarët

Ndikimet e mundshme në faktorët/kompartmentet mejdisor / receptorët e mundshëm Masatlehtësuese

Përmbledhja e vlerësimeve tëefektivenegative

Ajri(Kontaminantët)

Uji

(ujëratnëntokësordhesipërfaqësor)

Tokal Ajri(Zhurma)

Vendbanimet(Zonatbanuese,banorët)

Biosfera(shfrytëzimi I tokës)

Gjendjafillestare paraaktiviteteve tëprojektit

Po(emisioni ngaburimetkontaminuese nëvend)

Rreziku(rrjedhja e reservuarëve)

Rreziku(rrjedhja e reservuarëve)

Po(njësia e kompresorit)

E tolerueshme Asnjë Asnjë Përkeqësimi I situatësmjedisore, rritja e ndikimeve

Aktivitetet e projektit

(me masalehtësuese)

Transferi I kimikateve/mbeturinave tërrezikshme nëobjektet e licencuara

Asnjë (mbledhja)

Po (transporti, hedhja)

Asnjë Asnjë E tolerueshme

E tolerueshme Asnjë Teknikedheorganizative

E tolerueshme

Trajtimi në vend I LPUO

Asnjë E tolerueshme(sulfatet nëefluent /ndikiminë luminSitnica)

Asnjë Asnjë Asnjë (Shih ujin) Teknikedheorganizative

E tolerueshme

Skenarët e aksidenteve

(probabiliteti I ulët, efektet negative tëkufizuara)

(probabiliteti I ulët, efektetnegative tëkufizuara)

(probabiliteti I ulët, efektetnegative tëkufizuara)

(probabilitetiI ulët, efektetnegative tëkufizuara)

(probabiliteti I ulët, efektet negative tëkufizuara)

(probabiliteti I ulët, efektetnegative tëkufizuara)

Teknikedheorganizative

Probabiliteti I ulët, efektet e kufizuara

Pas implementimittë projektit

Asnjë Asnjë Asnjë Po(njësia e kompresorit)

Asnjë Asnjë Përmirësimi I gjendjesmejdisore

24

Vlerësimi I Përmbledhjes