Earth Link and Advanced Resources Development s a. r L. (Elard) Submitted to: Council for Development and Reconstruction



Download 1.49 Mb.
Page5/30
Date conversion14.06.2018
Size1.49 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   30

Public Consultation

Lack of consultation with the directly affected local communities in the earlier EIA report posed a necessity to target these in the updated study in aim to ensure that adequate and timely information is provided to them and other stakeholders, and that they are given the chance to voice their opinions and concerns.

Based on an agreed plan with MoE’s representatives, ELARD team has consulted potentially affected local people and concerned Municipalities during the socio-economic survey. Project leaflets, prepared in Arabic, were distributed during the survey. These aimed at introducing the project while serving as an invitation to participate in a public consultation meeting.

The public participation event was held in the Lebanese University in Hadath at the Institute of Fine Arts on the 12th of May 2010.

ELARD consultants presented the project details, potential impacts and mitigation measures in a 45-minute presentation and opened the floor for one hour of open discussions with the attendees.

Various environmental impacts were discussed during the open session and some concerns rose up by the attendees. The two main serious concerns raised by the public are summarized in Table 1 -4 with an explanation of how the concern is addressed by the project proponents.

Table 1 4 Main Public Concerns



Concern

Description

Action/Answer

Retrieval of 3m3/s of water

Concerns were raised regarding type and magnitude of impact that could potentially affect the natural flow of water in the Awali River section downstream the Joun HEP after retrieval of the required amount of water for the Conveyor Project


CDR representative pointed out that the impact would be negligible.

ELARD to investigate the issue and address it in its Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Report



Structural impact from TBM activity

Concerns on adverse impacts on the structural stability of the St. Joseph Carmel School were expressed by the chairperson since the tunnel is passing beneath the school.

CDR to provide adequate geotechnical reports proving that there will be no direct impacts resulting from the tunnel boring activity.

A second Public Consultation covering both components of the project was held for the purpose of disclosing the results of the ESIA study on 27 July 2010 and has targeted the same audience including all related stakeholders as for the first consultation.

Environemntal and Social Impact Assessment


A summary of the

impacts of the Project on its surrounding environment assuming no mitigation measures are undertaken is given in Table 1 -5 in an Environmental Impact Severity Matrix (EISM) whereas Table 1 -6 presents the EISM of the project when control and mitigation measures are adopted.



With no mitigation measures being implemented, significant impacts would be attributed to the following activities:

Table 1 5 Impacts of the Project on its surrounding with no mitigation measures





Activity / Source of the Impact

Unmitigated Impacts




Receptor




Air Quality

Landscape and Soil QUALITY

water RESOURCES

Biodiversity

Noise

Archeological

Socio-Economic & Public health


Construction Phase




















C




Combustion and Exhaust Emissions

3C
















3C




Dust Generation

4C
















4C




Open Burning of solid waste

2A
















2A




Project Footprint




2C










1A

2B




Construction works

4C










2C




2B




Excavation and tunneling works

4C

4C

4C

3C

2C

1A

2B




Blasting




4C




4C

4C









Solid and Liquid waste generation





4C













4C




Accidental Spill of Fuel, Oil and Chemicals




4B

4C
















Land Expropriation



















4C




Traffic













4C




4C




Operation Phase

















C




Combustion and Exhaust Emissions

























Open Burning of solid waste

























Solid and Liquid waste generation




4C

3C










4C




Accidental Spill of Fuel, Oil and Chemicals







3C














Sludge Generation







1C
















Water Pumps













3C




3C




Retrieval of 3m3/s of water upstream Joun HEP







1C










1C




Trafffic













2B


2B


legend




Consequences

Likelihood

Acceptability




1 - Negligible

4 – Significant

A – Low




Beneficial




2 - Minor

5 – Catastrophic

B – Medium




Negligible with minor mitigation




3 - Moderate

Beneficial

C – High




Minimize Impacts













Unacceptable


Table 1 6 Impacts of the Project on its surrounding with mitigation measures






Activity / Source of the Impact

Mitigated Impacts




Receptor




Air Quality

Landscape and Soil QUALITY

water RESOURCES

Biodiversity

Noise

Archeological

Socio-Economic & Public health




Construction Phase



















C




Combustion and Exhaust Emissions

2C
















2C




Dust Generation

2C
















2C




Open Burning of solid waste

2A
















2A




Project Footprint


1C











1A

1B




Construction works

2C










1B




1B




Excavation and tunneling works

2C

2C

2B

2B

1B

1A

1B




Blasting




2C

2C




2B










Solid and Liquid waste generation




2A













2A




Accidental Spill of Fuel, Oil and Chemicals




2A

2B
















Land Expropriation



















3B



Traffic














3B




3B




Operation Phase



















C




Combustion and Exhaust Emissions

























Open Burning of solid waste























Solid and Liquid waste generation




2A

1C










2A




Accidental Spill of Fuel, Oil and Chemicals







1C
















Sludge Generation







1C














Water Pumps













1B




1B




Retrieval of 3m3/s of water upstream Joun HEP







1C










1C




Trafffic







1C










1C

legend




Consequences

Likelihood


Acceptability




1 - Negligible

4 – Significant

A – Low




Beneficial




2 - Minor

5 – Catastrophic

B – Medium




Negligible with minor mitigation




3 - Moderate

Beneficial

C – High




Minimize Impacts













Unacceptable






1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   30


The database is protected by copyright ©hestories.info 2017
send message

    Main page