Taweelah Iwp Esia Vol 4 30092019 v2

Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater
Reverse Osmosis Plant

Abu Dhabi, UAE
Environmental & Social

Impact Assessment
Volume 4 – Appendices
Prepared for:
September 2019
DOCUMENT INFORMATION
Project Name Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant, Abu
Dhabi, UAE
5Cs Project Number 1305/001/071
Document Title Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Volume 4-

Appendices
Client ACWA Power
5Cs Project Manager Eva Muthoni Kimonye
5Cs Project Director Ken Wade
DOCUMENT CONTROL
Version Version Date Description Author Reviewer Approver
1 29/05/2019 ESIA Volume 4-Appendices EMK KRW KRW

2 30/09/2019 ESIA Volume 4-Appendices EMK KRW KRW
1 Financial Capital Regardless of location, mode of delivery or

function, all organisations are dependent on
The 5 Capitals of Sustainable Development to
2 Social Capital
enable long term delivery of its products or
services.
3 Natural Capital
Sustainability is at the heart of everything that
5 Capitals achieves. Wherever we work, we
4 Manufactured Capital
strive to provide our clients with the means to
maintain and enhance these stocks of capital
5 Human Capital
assets.
DISCLAIMER
5 Capitals cannot accept responsibility for the consequences of this
document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific
any other purpose. purposes connected with the above-identified project only. It should not
This document contains confidential information and proprietary be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose
intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without
consent from the party which commissioned it.
5 Capitals Environmental and Management Consulting

Principal office: PO Box 119899 Sheikh Zayed Road, Dubai, UAE
'+971 4 343 5955 6+971 4 343 9366
CONTENTS
APPENDIX A –ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT TERMS OF REFERENCE REPORT
CONDITIONAL APPROVAL __________________________________________ 4
APPENDIX B – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT TERMS OF REFERENCE REPORT

5
APPENDIX C – AMBIENT AIR QUALITY INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE ___ 6
APPENDIX D – AIR QUALITY LABORATORY RESULTS _______________________ 7
APPENDIX E – MARINE WATER ANALYSIS (2018 & 2019) _________________ 8
APPENDIX F – MARINE SEDIMENT ANALYSIS (2018 & 2019) ________________ 9
APPENDIX G – MARINE ECOLOGY RESULTS ____________________________ 10
APPENDIX H – HR WALLINGFORD MARINE MODELLING __________________ 11
APPENDIX I – SOIL ANALYSIS LABORATORY RESULTS (2018 & 2019) _________ 12
APPENDIX J– GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS LABORATORY RESULTS _____________ 13
APPENDIX K – SOUND LEVEL METER CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE _____________ 14
APPENDIX L – NOISE MONITORING RESULTS____________________________ 15
Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant iii

APPENDIX A –ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
TERMS OF REFERENCE REPORT CONDITIONAL
APPROVAL
Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant Appendices
APPENDIX B – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
TERMS OF REFERENCE REPORT
Environmental Impact
Assessment Terms of
Reference Report
Taweelah ADWEA IWP
Seawater Reverse Osmosis
Plant
Abu Dhabi, UAE

May 2018
Revision 1
ILF Consulting Engineers

Project Information
Document Type : EIA Terms of Reference Report
Project : ILF SWRO Plant Taweelah
Client : ILF Consulting Engineers
HDR Project No. : TBC
HDR Doc. No. : ILF SWRO Plant Taweelah_ToR Report_230518_Rev1
Issued To: Environment Agency Abu Dhabi

For the Attention of : Mr. Faisal Al Hammadi
Position: Director of Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement
Address : Environment Agency Abu Dhabi
Environment Quality Sector
P.O. Box 45553
Abu Dhabi
United Arab Emirates
Tel : +971 2 445 4777
Issued By: HDR Middle East LLC

Project Manager : Amie Jan Lenkowiec
Address : HDR
P.O. Box 231205
Dubai
Tel : +971 55 101 9874
Fax : +971 4 330 6321
Email : Amie.lenkowiec@hdrinc.com
Revision Control
Revision No. Description Prepared By Checked By Approved By Issue Date
Report for EAD YS
00 PA PA 02/04/18
Review DM
01 Report for ILF use AJL DM PA 23/05/18
Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... 5
Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................................... 7
Tables......................................................................................................................................... 9
Figures ....................................................................................................................................... 9
1 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... 15
1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................... 16
1.2 Study Approach .................................................................................................... 17
2 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 20
2.1 Project Title and Project Proponent ..................................................................... 20
2.2 TOR Consultants .................................................................................................. 20
2.2.1 Environmental Assessment Team .......................................................... 21
2.3 Project Description and Rationale ........................................................................ 22
2.3.1 Summary of Proposed Project ................................................................ 22
2.3.2 Project Site Location and Plot Size ......................................................... 22
2.3.3 Project Development Rationale ............................................................... 24
2.3.4 Justification and Chronology for the Development of the TOR ............... 25
3 Legal Framework and Standards ................................................................................... 26
3.1 Federal Regulatory Framework ............................................................................ 26
3.2 Federal Policies .................................................................................................... 31
3.3 Regulatory Framework in Abu Dhabi ................................................................... 32
3.3.1 Regulation Supervision Bureau Regulations .......................................... 34
3.4 International Conventions, Protocols and Standards ........................................... 34
4 Project Description ......................................................................................................... 40
4.1 Statement of Need ............................................................................................... 40
4.2 Project Location and Scale................................................................................... 40
4.3 Project Activity and Description ............................................................................ 46
4.3.1 Project Components ................................................................................ 46
4.4 Project Status and Schedule ................................................................................ 52
5 Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation ............................................................................ 53
5.1 Air Quality ............................................................................................................. 53
5.1.1 Description of the Environment ............................................................... 53
5.1.2 Environmental Impact Prediction and Evaluation ................................... 55
5.1.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................ 56
5.2 Marine Water and Sediment................................................................................. 59
5.3 Marine Ecology ..................................................................................................... 72
5.4 Geology, Seismicity, Soil, and Groundwater ........................................................ 76
5.5 Terrestrial Ecology ............................................................................................... 81
5.6 Noise .................................................................................................................... 84
5.7 Seasonal Surveys ................................................................................................ 88
5.8 Risk Assessment .................................................................................................. 88
6 Project Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 91
6.1 “No Development” Alternative .............................................................................. 91
6.2 Coupled Power Generation and Water Production Alternative ............................ 91
6.3 Alternative Site Selection ..................................................................................... 92
Annexes ................................................................................................................................... 93
Annex 1 – References .................................................................................................... 93
Annex 2 – Affection Plan and Site Footprint .................................................................. 95
Annex 3 – EAD Communication..................................................................................... 96
Annex 4 – Letters of Appointment .................................................................................. 97
List of Abbreviations
AAQ – Ambient Air Quality
AAQMS – Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Station
ADM - Abu Dhabi Municipality
ADWEA – Abu Dhabi Water and Electricity Authority
ADWEC -Abu Dhabi Water and Electricity Company
As – Arsenic
C - Carbon
C 6 H 6 – Benzene
Cd - Cadmium
CFC – Chloro Fluoro Carbon
Ch 2 O – Formaldehyde
CIP – Clean-in-place
CITES – Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora
Cl- - Chloride
CLO 2 – Chlorine dioxide
CO – Carbon Monoxide
CoPs - Codes of Practice
Cu – Copper
CWM – Centre of Waste Management
DAF – Dissolved Air Filtration
dBA – Decibels
DMA - the Department of Municipal Affairs
DoE – Department of Energy
EAD – Environment Agency Abu Dhabi
EGA - Emirates Global Aluminium
EHS – Environmental health and safety
EHSMS – Environment health and safety management system
EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment
F- - Fluoride and its Compounds Including HF & SiF 4
Fe – Iron
FeCl 3 – Iron trichloride
GHG – Greenhouse Gas
GIS – Global Information System
H 2 S – Hydrogen Sulphide
H 2 SO 4 – Sulfuric acid
HF - Hydrogen Fluoride
Hg – Mercury
IDB - Industrial Development Bureau
IWP - Independent Water Project
KIZAD - Khalifa Industrial Zone Area
kWh – kilowatt hour
LLC - Limited Liability Company
5 | March 2018
m3 – metres cubed
MARPOL – Marine Pollution
MED – Multi Effect Distillation
MEMAC - Marine Emergency Mutual Aid Centre
mg/L – miligrams per litre
MIGD - Million Imperial Gallons per Day
MOCCEW - Ministry of Climate Change and Environment and Water
MPA – Marine Protected Area
MSDS – Material Safety Data Sheet
MSF – Multi Stage Flash
NaOCl – Sodium hypochlorite
NaOH – Sodium hydroxide
NDC – National Drilling Complex
NH 3 - Ammonia and Ammonium Compounds
Ni – Nickel
NILU - Norwegian Institute for Air Research
NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NO x – Nitrogen Oxides
ODC - ozone depleting chemicals
OSHAD – Occupational Safety and Health - Abu Dhabi
Pb – Lead
PM 10 - Particulate matter
POP - Persistent Organic Pollutants
PSU – Power Supply Unit
RI - Regulatory Instruments
RO – Reverse Osmosis
ROPME - Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment
Sb – Antimony
SBS - Sodium Bisulfite
SiF 4 – Silicon Fluoride
SO 2 – Sulphur Dioxide
SOP – Standard Operating Procedures
SRA – Sector Regulatory Authorities
SSO 3 - Sulphur Trioxide Including Sulphuric Acid Mist
SWRO – Seawater Reverse Osmosis
TDS - Total Dissolved Solids
TEL – Thresholds Effect Level
TOR – Terms of Reference
TSP - Total Suspended Particles
UAE – United Arab Emirates
UNFCC - United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
VOCs – Total Volatile Organic Compounds
Zn – Zinc
6 | March 2018
Definitions of Terms
Area of Probable Impact - The extent of a physical area occupied by an environmental component
that is likely to be impacted by at least one of the phases of the proposed project (i.e., construction,
operation, and decommissioning activities and processes). The boundary of the area of probable
impact is determined by measurements, previous studies, models, or best professional judgment
and may vary by environmental component.
Assessment Area - The physical area that the consultant and proponent have identified for
assessment of potential environmental impacts.
Construction - The time period corresponding to any event, process, or activity that occurs during
the construction phase (e.g., building of site, buildings, processing units) of the proposed project.
This phase terminates when the project goes into full operation or use.
Decommissioning - The time period corresponding to any event, process, or activity that occurs
during the decommissioning phase (destruction or dismantling) of the proposed project. The
decommissioning phase follows the operation phase.
Desalination - Removal of salt (sodium chloride) and other minerals from the sea water to make
it suitable for human consumption and/or industrial use. The most common desalination methods
employ reverse-osmosis in which salt water is forced through a membrane that allows water
molecules to pass but blocks the molecules of salt and other minerals.
Environmental Component - Attribute or constituent of the environment (i.e., Air Quality; Marine
Water; Waste Management; Geology, Seismicity, Soil, and Groundwater; Marine Ecology;
Terrestrial Ecology; Noise; Traffic; Socio-economic) that may be impacted by the proposed project.
Environmental Hazard - Any substance, physical effect, or condition with potential to harm
people, property, or the environment.
Environmental Impact - Positive or negative impact that occurs to an environmental component

as a result of the proposed project. This impact can be directly or indirectly caused by the project’s
different phases (i.e., construction, operation, and decommissioning).
Hazard - Same as Environmental Hazard.
Hazardous Waste - Waste that poses potential harm to human health and the environment.
Hydrodynamic Modeling - Hydrodynamic modelling is central in most modelling tasks in the

marine area. Apart from being important in itself, it also forms the basis for a number of other tasks,
such as sediment transport simulations, different kinds of spreading and dispersion studies and
studies of water quality or ecological systems.
Operation - The time period corresponding to any event, process, or activity that occurs during
the operation phase (fully functioning) of the proposed project (operation phase follows the
construction phase, and then terminates when the project goes into the decommissioning phase).
Project Area - The physical area within which all phases (i.e., construction, operation, and
decommissioning), processes, and activities of the proposed project will take place (boundary of
project area is defined by titled property boundary). The project area is equivalent to the project
site.
7 | March 2018
Project Site - Same as Project Area.
Proponent - The developer, permit applicant, company, or agency associated with the proposed
project.
Residual Impact - A potential environmental impact that is associated with the proposed project
that is not addressed as part of the recommended mitigation measures (i.e., is not mitigated as
part of the proposed project).
Reverse Osmosis - Liquid filtering process in which a contaminated (more concentrated) liquid is
forced to pass through a semi-permeable membrane that block most dissolved or suspended
contaminants. It is called 'reverse' because in normal osmosis a less-concentrated liquid passes
into a more concentrated one.
Solid Waste - Rubbish, debris, garbage, and other discarded solid materials resulting from the
project that are not classified as hazardous waste.
8 | March 2018
Tables
Table 1 Project Proponent ....................................................................................................... 20
Table 2 Environmental Consultant Details ............................................................................... 20
Table 3 EIA Team Members .................................................................................................... 21
Table 4 Maximum Allowable Emission Limits of Air Pollutants Emitted From Stationary
Sources ....................................................................................................................... 28
Table 5 Maximum Allowable Emission Limits of Air Pollutants Emitted From Hydrocarbon Fuel
Combustion Sources ................................................................................................... 29
Table 6 UAE Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................................................ 29
Table 7 UAE Federal Allowable Noise Limits .......................................................................... 30
Table 8 Production Design Limits ............................................................................................ 46
Table 9 Key Chemical Dosing Requirements .......................................................................... 51
Table 10 GPS Coordinates of Air Quality Station .................................................................... 54
Table 11 GPS Coordinates of Marine Monitoring Stations ...................................................... 61
Table 12 Similar Dispersion Modelling Studies in the UAE ..................................................... 70
Table 13 GPS Coordinates of Environmental Boreholes......................................................... 77
Table 14 GPS Coordinates of Ambient Noise Stations ........................................................... 85
Table 15 Consequence of Hazard ........................................................................................... 89
Table 16 Likelihood of Event.................................................................................................... 90
Table 17 Risk Rating ................................................................................................................ 90
Figures
Figure 1 Regional Setting of Project Site ................................................................................. 23
Figure 2 Location of Project Site within Taweelah Complex ................................................... 24
Figure 3 Project Site ................................................................................................................. 41
Figure 4 Project Site Plan Showing Location of Dolphin Gas Pipeline Corridor ...................... 42
Figure 5 Historical Aerial Imagery of the Site .......................................................................... 43
Figure 6 Surrounding Land Uses ............................................................................................. 44
Figure 7 Areas of Environmental Sensitivity ............................................................................ 45
Figure 8 Conceptual Site Plan ................................................................................................. 47
Figure 9 Proposed Location of the Air Quality Monitoring Station ........................................... 54
Figure 10 Nautical Chart for Taweelah Area ........................................................................ 60
Figure 11 Proposed Locations of the Marine Monitoring Stations Including Proposed In-Situ
Transect Locations ...................................................................................................... 61
Figure 12 Proposed Bathymetric Survey Corridor ................................................................ 64
Figure 13 Modeling Grid Developed by HDR for SWRO Dispersion Study in Dubai ........... 67
Figure 14 EAD EnviroPortal Habitat Map ............................................................................. 73
Figure 15 Areas of Critical Marine Habitat ........................................................................... 73
Figure 16 Proposed Locations of the Environmental Boreholes .......................................... 77
Figure 17 Proposed Locations of the Ambient Noise Monitoring ......................................... 85
9 | March 2018
‫اﻟﻤﻠﺨﺺ اﻟﺘﻨﻔﯿﺬي‬
‫ﻣﻘﺪﻣﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺘﺒﺮ إدارة أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ )‪ ،(DoE‬واﻟﻲ ﺗﻌﺮف رﺳﻤﯿﺎ ﺑﺎﺳﻢ ھﯿﺌﺔ ﻣﯿﺎه وﻛﮭﺮﺑﺎء أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ )‪ (ADWEA‬ھﻲ اﻟﻤﺼﺪر‬
‫اﻟﺮﺋﯿﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺸﺮب ﻓﻲ أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ‪ ،‬واﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻤﺪ اﻹﻣﺎرة ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺒﺎ ً ﺑﺠﻤﯿﻊ اﺣﺘﯿﺎﺟﺎﺗﮭﺎ‪ .‬ﻟﺘﻠﺒﯿﺔ اﻟﻄﻠﺐ اﻟﻤﺘﺰاﯾﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺪاد‬
‫اﻟﺴﻜﺎﻧﻲ اﻟﻤﺘﺰاﯾﺪ واﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎد ﻓﻲ أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺘﺰم إدارة أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ إﺿﺎﻓﺔ ﻣﺤﻄﺔ ﻧﻀﺢ ﻋﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ )‪(SWRO‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ اﻟﻄﻮﯾﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ واﻟﻤﯿﺎه‪ .‬ھﺬا اﻟﺘﻮﺳﻊ اﻟﺬي ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻘﺮر ﺗﻨﻔﯿﺬه ﻛﻤﺸﺮوع ﻣﯿﺎه ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻞ )‪ (IWP‬ﻣﻦ ﺷﺄﻧﮫ أن ﯾﻮﻓﺮ ‪200‬‬
‫ﻣﻠﯿﻮن ﺟﺎﻟﻮن ﺑﺮﯾﻄﺎﻧﻲ ﻛﻞ ﯾﻮم )‪ (MIGD‬وھﻮ ﻣﺎ ﯾﻌﺎدل ‪ 902,216‬م‪ /3‬ﯾﻮﻣﯿﺎً‪ .‬ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﻗﺖ اﻟﺮاھﻦ‪ ،‬ﯾﻀﻢ اﻟﻤﺠﻤﻊ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ )‪(3‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻄﺎت ﻣﺪﻣﺠﺔ ﻟﺘﻮﻟﯿﺪ اﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻐﺎز اﻟﻄﺒﯿﻌﻲ واﻟﺘﺤﻠﯿﻞ اﻟﺤﺮاري ﻟﻠﻤﺎء )‪ ،(MSF/MES‬وﻗﺪرة ﺗﻮﻟﯿﺪ إﺟﻤﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻗﺪرھﺎ‬
‫‪ 4,113‬ﻣﯿﻐﺎواط وﻗﺪرة ﺻﺎﻓﯿﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ إﻧﺘﺎج اﻟﻤﯿﺎه ﺑﻮاﻗﻊ ‪ 294‬ﻣﻠﯿﻮن ﺟﺎﻟﻮن ﺑﺮﯾﻄﺎﻧﻲ )ھﯿﺌﺔ ﻣﯿﺎه وﻛﮭﺮﺑﺎء أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ‪.(20171 ،‬‬
‫ﻣﺸﺮوع اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﻞ ﺣﺎﻟﯿﺎ ً ﻓﻲ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺗﺼﻤﯿﻢ اﻟﻤﻔﮭﻮم ﻣﻊ أي ال أف ﻟﻼﺳﺘﺸﺎرات اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﯿﺔ )‪ (ILF‬اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻢ ﺗﻜﻠﯿﻔﮭﺎ ﻛﺎﺳﺘﺸﺎري‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﺼﻤﯿﻢ ﺑﻮاﺳﻄﺔ إدارة أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺐ اﻟﺘﺸﺮﯾﻌﺎت اﻟﺤﺎﻟﯿﺔ إﺟﺮاء دراﺳﺔ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ أﺛﺮ ﺑﯿﺌﻲ )‪ (EIA‬ﻟﺘﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻵﺛﺎر اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻹﻧﺸﺎء وﺗﺸﻐﯿﻞ ﻣﺤﻄﺔ ﻧﻀﺢ ﻋﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﻊ ﺗﺮﻛﯿﺰ ﺧﺎص ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪ .‬ﻗﺎﻣﺖ أي ال أف‬
‫ﻟﻼﺳﺘﺸﺎرات اﻟﮭﻨﺪﺳﯿﺔ ﺑﺘﻌﯿﯿﻦ ﺷﺮﻛﺔ اﺗﺶ دي ار ﻹﺟﺮاء دراﺳﺔ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ اﻷﺛﺮ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ ﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺞ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ وﻓﻘﺎ ً‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺘﻄﻠﺒﺎت اﻟﺘﻨﻈﯿﻤﯿﺔ واﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻀﻢ ﻋﺪدا ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﻮاﻧﯿﻦ اﻻﺗﺤﺎدﯾﺔ واﻷواﻣﺮ اﻟﺘﻨﻔﯿﺬﯾﺔ واﻟﺴﯿﺎﺳﺎت واﻟﺘﻮﺟﯿﮭﺎت واﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﯿﺎت‬
‫واﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮﻛﻮﻻت‪ .‬ﻛﺨﻄﻮة أوﻟﻰ ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺼﺮﯾﺢ ﺑﯿﺌﻲ ﻓﻲ أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻤﺸﺮوع ﻣﻦ ھﺬا اﻟﻨﻮع‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﺘﺎج اﺗﺶ دي‬
‫ار إﻟﻰ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﺮﺟﻌﯿﺔ )‪ (TOR‬اﻟﺨﺎص ﺑﮭﺬا اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع واﻟﺬي ﯾﻤﺜﻞ أداة ﺗﺨﻄﯿﻄﯿﺔ ﻟﺘﻮﺟﯿﮫ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﺘﻘﯿﯿﻢ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﻊ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ طﻮﯾﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺧﻂ ﺳﺎﺣﻞ اﻟﺨﻠﯿﺞ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ ﻟﻺﻣﺎرات اﻟﻌﺮﺑﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة )‪ ) (UAE‬اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ‪.(ES-1‬‬
‫ﯾﻀﻢ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع‪ ،‬ﺑﻤﺴﺎﺣﺔ ‪ 379,000‬م‪ ،2‬ﻣﻤﺮ ﺧﻂ أﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ و ﺧﻂ أﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ ﻏﺎز ﯾﻤﺘﺪ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺨﻠﯿﺞ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ ﻛﻤﺎ ھﻮ ﻣﻮﺿﺢ ﻓﻲ‬
‫اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ‪ ،ES-1‬واﻟﺬي ﯾﻈﮭﺮ أﯾﻀﺎ ﻣﺴﺎر اﻟﻜﺎﺑﻼت اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻤﺮ ﻋﺒﺮ اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄة‪ .‬اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻷراﺿﻲ اﻟﻤﺤﯿﻄﺔ ﺑﻤﺠﻤﻊ اﻟﻄﻮﯾﻠﺔ‬
‫ﺻﻨﺎﻋﻲ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺪرﺟﺔ اﻷوﻟﻰ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺸﻤﺎل واﻟﺸﺮق‪ .‬ﯾﺒﻌﺪ ﻣﯿﻨﺎء ﺧﻠﯿﻔﺔ ﻣﺴﺎﻓﺔ اﺛﻨﯿﻦ )‪ (2‬ﻛﻠﻢ إﻟﻰ ﻟﺸﻤﺎل ﻓﻲ ﺣﯿﻦ ﺗﺒﻌﺪ ﻣﺼﻔﺎة‬
‫اﻷﻟﻮﻣﯿﻨﺎ اﻟﺘﺎﺑﻌﺔ ﻟﺸﺮﻛﺔ اﻹﻣﺎرات اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﯿﺔ ﻟﻸﻟﻤﻨﯿﻮم )‪ (EGA‬ﻣﺴﺎﻓﺔ أرﺑﻊ )‪ (4‬ﻛﻠﻢ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺸﻤﺎل اﻟﺸﺮﻗﻲ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﻄﻮﯾﻠﺔ‪،‬‬
‫وإﻟﻰ اﻟﺸﺮق ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة ﻣﻦ ﻣﺼﻔﺎة ﺷﺮﻛﺔ اﻹﻣﺎرات اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﯿﺔ ﻟﻸﻟﻤﻨﯿﻮم ﺗﻘﻊ ﻣﺼﻔﺎة ﺷﺎھﯿﻦ ﻟﻠﺒﻮﻛﺴﯿﺖ واﻟﺘﻲ ھﻲ ﻗﯿﺪ اﻹﻧﺸﺎء ﺣﺎﻟﯿﺎً‪.‬‬
‫‪ .ES-1‬اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮح ﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ ﺑﻤﺴﺎﺣﺔ ‪ 379,000‬م‪ 2‬ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ اﻟﻄﻮﯾﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺎر ﺧﻂ أﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ ﻏﺎز‪،‬‬
‫وﻣﻤﺮات ﻷﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ اﻟﻐﺎز‪ ،‬وﻛﺎﺑﻼت ﺑﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﺻﻒ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع‬
‫ھﺬا اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع اﻟﺘﻄﻮﯾﺮي اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮح ﻣﻦ ﺷﺄﻧﮫ أن ﯾﺴﺘﻐﻞ ﺗﻘﻨﯿﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ )‪ (SWRO‬ﺑﮭﺪف إﻧﺘﺎج ﻣﺎ ﯾﺼﻞ إﻟﻰ‬
‫‪ 200‬ﻣﻠﯿﻮن ﺟﺎﻟﻮن ﺑﺮﯾﻄﺎﻧﻲ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﺔ ﻟﻠﺸﺮب‪ .‬ﺗﻘﺘﺮح إدارة أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﻄﺎﻗﺔ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام أﺣﺪث ﺗﺼﻤﯿﻢ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﺗﻘﻨﯿﺎت‬
‫ﻛﺎﻓﯿﺔ وﻣﻌﺘﻤﺪة وﻣﻮﺛﻮﻗﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ‪ .‬ھﻨﺎك وﺻﻒ ﻛﺎﻣﻞ ﻟﻠﻌﻤﯿﻠﺔ ﺗﺠﺪوﻧﮫ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺠﺰء اﻟﺮﺋﯿﺴﻲ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﺮﺟﻌﯿﺔ‬
‫ھﺬا‪ .‬ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﯾﻠﻲ أدﻧﺎه وﺻﻒ ﻋﺎم ﻟﻠﺘﺼﻤﯿﻢ‪ .‬ﺳﻮف ﺗﻘﻮم اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄة اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ ﺑﺘﺤﻠﯿﻞ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ اﻟﺨﺎم اﻟﺬي ﯾﺘﻢ اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠﯿﮫ ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﻔﺘﻮح ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ ﺗﺤﺖ اﻟﻤﺮاﻗﺒﺔ‪ .‬ﺳﺘﻀﻢ اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄة ﻧﻈﺎﻣﺎ ً ﻟﺴﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ وﻧﻈﺎم ﺿﺦ ﻣﺪﻣﺠﯿﻦ واﻟﺬي ﺳﻮف‬
‫‪10 | March 2018‬‬

‫ﯾﻜﻮن ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﺔ ﻟﺴﺤﺐ ﻣﺎ ﯾﺼﻞ إﻟﻰ ‪ 2,278,730‬م‪ 3‬ﻣﻦ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ ﻛﻞ ﯾﻮم وھﺬا ﺳﻮف ﯾﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﺳﺘﺔ )‪ (6‬ﺧﻄﻮط ﺳﺤﺐ ﺑﻘﻄﺮ‬
‫اﺛﻨﯿﻦ )‪ (2‬ﻣﺘﺮ ﻟﻜﻞ ﺧﻂ‪ ،‬أو اﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻗﻨﺎة ﺳﺤﺐ ﺑﺪﻻً ﻣﻦ ذﻟﻚ‪ .‬ﺳﯿﺘﻢ اﻻﻧﺘﮭﺎء ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ وﺗﻜﻮﯾﻦ ﻣﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﺴﺤﺐ ﻓﻲ ھﺬا اﻟﺠﺰء‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ اﻷﺛﺮ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻌﺪ أﻏﺸﯿﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻠﻮث اﻟﻤﯿﻜﺮوﺑﻲ وﺗﻌﻜﺮ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه واﻟﻤﻠﻮﺛﺎت اﻷﺧﺮى‪ ،‬وﺑﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﺈن اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ‬
‫اﻷوﻟﯿﺔ واﻟﻤﺴﺒﻘﺔ ﺿﺮورﯾﺔ وﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﻊ اﻧﺴﺪاد اﻷﻏﺸﯿﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت واﻟﻤﻠﻮﺛﺎت‪ .‬ﺳﻮف ﯾﻀﻢ ﻧﻈﺎم اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ اﻷوﻟﯿﺔ ﺷﺎﺷﺎت؛‬
‫ﻧﻈﺎم ﺗﻄﻮﯾﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﮭﻮاء اﻟﻤﻨﺤﻞ )‪ ،(DAF‬اﻹزاﻟﺔ اﻟﻔﯿﺰﯾﺎﺋﯿﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻮاد اﻟﺼﻠﺒﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه‪ ،‬وأﻏﺸﯿﺔ ﺗﺮﺷﯿﺢ ﻓﺎﺋﻖ )‪ (UF‬وﻣﺼﺎﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺧﺮطﻮﺷﺔ‪ .‬ﺳﻮف ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ اﻷوﻟﯿﺔ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻌﺪﯾﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻜﯿﻤﺎوﯾﺎت ﻟﺰﯾﺎدة ﻛﻔﺎءة إزاﻟﺔ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ اﻷوﻟﯿﺔ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﺪ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ اﻷوﻟﯿﺔ‪ ،‬ﺳﯿﺘﻢ ﺿﺦ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻤﺼﻔﺎة )اﻟﺘﺼﻔﯿﺔ( ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل أﻏﺸﯿﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‪ .‬ﺳﯿﺘﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻧﻈﺎم‬
‫ﻻﺳﺘﺮداد اﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﺮى اﻟﺘﺮﻛﯿﺰ اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻲ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﺘﺨﻠﺺ ﻣﻨﮫ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺎﻋﺪة ﻓﻲ ﺗﺮﺷﯿﺪ ﺗﻜﺎﻟﯿﻒ اﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ‪ .‬ﺑﻌﺪ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﯿﺘﻢ إﻋﺎدة ﺗﻌﺪﯾﻦ اﻟﻤﻮاد اﻟﻤﺘﺨﻠﻠﺔ )ﺑﻌﺪ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ( ﻟﻤﻨﻊ ﺗﺂﻛﻞ ﺧﻄﻮط أﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ اﻟﺘﻮزﯾﻊ وإﻣﺪادات ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺸﺮب اﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮدة اﻟﻤﺸﺎﺑﮭﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﯿﺘﻢ ﻧﻘﻞ ﻣﺠﺎري اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت )اﻟﺮواﺳﺐ اﻟﻄﯿﻨﯿﺔ واﻟﻤﻮاد اﻟﺼﻠﺒﺔ( ﻣﻦ ﻧﻈﺎم اﻟﺘﻄﻮﯾﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﮭﻮاء اﻟﻤﻨﺤﻞ وأﻏﺸﯿﺔ اﻟﺘﺼﻔﯿﺔ اﻟﻔﺎﺋﻘﺔ إﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻣﻨﺸﺄة ﻣﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻮاد اﻟﺼﻠﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ‪ .‬ﯾﻮﺿﺢ اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ ES – A‬ﻣﺘﻄﻠﺒﺎت ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ اﻟﻌﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﺘﻲ ﯾﻨﺒﻐﻲ اﺳﺘﯿﻔﺎءھﺎ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ ﺗﻐﺬﯾﺔ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه ﻓﻀﻼً ﻋﻦ اﻟﻘﺪرة اﻟﻤﺼﻤﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻄﺔ وإﻧﺘﺎج اﻟﺘﺮﻛﯿﺰ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻗﻊ )اﻟﺠﺪول ‪.(Table ES – B‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎ ھﻮ ﻣﺸﺎر إﻟﯿﮫ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ ES – B‬ﺳﻮف ﯾﻜﻮن ﻣﺠﺮى اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻷﺳﺎﺳﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻟﺪة ﺧﻼل اﻟﻤﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻠﯿﺔ ﻣﺤﻠﻮﻻً ﻣﻠﺤﯿﺎ ً‬
‫ﻣﺮﻛﺰاً‪ 1,376,514 ~ ،‬م‪ /3‬اﻟﯿﻮم‪ .‬ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ أن اﻟﻤﻌﺪل اﻟﺪﻗﯿﻖ ﻟﻠﺘﺼﺮﯾﻒ ﻟﻢ ﯾﺤﺪد ﺑﻌﺪ‪ ،‬إﻻ أن ﺗﺮﻛﯿﺒﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻠﻮل اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻲ‬
‫ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻗﻊ أن ﯾﻜﻮن ﻋﻠﻰ درﺟﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻠﻮﺣﺔ‪ ،‬ورﺑﻤﺎ ﺗﺼﻞ اﻟﻤﻠﻮﺣﺔ إﻟﻰ ‪ 80‬وﺣﺪة ﻣﻠﻮﺣﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ )‪ .(80 PSU‬ﯾﻼﺣﻆ‬
‫أﯾﻀﺎ ً ﺑﺄن ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﺘﺼﺮﯾﻒ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ ﺳﻮف ﺗﻀﻢ أﯾﻀﺎ ً ﺟﻤﯿﻊ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﺴﺎﺋﻠﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻟﺪة ﻣﻦ ﻧﻈﺎم اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ‪ ،‬ﯾﺸﻤﻞ‬
‫ذﻟﻚ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﻜﯿﻤﯿﺎﺋﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺎﯾﺪة اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻟﺪة ﻣﻦ ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻲ ﻣﯿﺜﯿﻞ اﻟﻔﻮرﻣﺎﻣﯿﺪ )‪ (DMF‬واﻟﻜﻠﻮرة‪ .‬ﺗﻢ اﻗﺘﺮاح اﻟﻨﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﮭﯿﺪرودﯾﻨﺎﻣﯿﻜﯿﺔ‬
‫ﻛﺠﺰء ﻣﻦ ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻷﺛﺮ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ ﻹﻋﺎدة وﺿﻊ اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻷﺳﺎﺳﯿﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ وﺗﺒﺪﯾﺪ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﺴﺎﺋﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺨﻠﯿﺞ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎ ھﻮ اﻟﺤﺎل ﻣﻊ ﻧﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‪ ،‬ﻟﻢ ﯾﺘﻢ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺗﺤﺪﯾﺪ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ ﺗﻔﺮﯾﻎ ﻣﺨﻠﻔﺎت اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻌﺎدﻣﺔ اﻟﻨﺎﺗﺠﺔ ﻋﻦ اﻟﻤﺨﻠﻔﺎت‪ ،‬وﺳﻮف‬
‫ﯾﺨﻀﻊ ﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ دراﺳﺎت اﻟﻨﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﮭﯿﺪرودﯾﻨﺎﻣﯿﻜﯿﺔ‪ .‬اﻟﺨﯿﺎر اﻟﻤﺮﺟﺢ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺼﻤﯿﻢ اﻟﻤﻔﮭﻮم ھﻮ ﺗﻔﺮﯾﻎ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﺴﺎﺋﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻨﺎة‬
‫اﻟﻤﺼﺐ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺎﺧﻤﺔ ﻟﺤﺪود اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﺠﺪول اﻟﺰﻣﻨﻲ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮح ﻟﻠﺒﺪء ﺑﻤﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻹﻧﺸﺎء ﻟﻠﻤﺸﺮوع ھﻮ ﺷﮭﺮ ﻣﺎﯾﻮ ‪ .2019‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻗﻊ أن ﺗﺴﺘﻤﺮ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ اﻹﻧﺸﺎءات‬
‫‪ 42‬ﺷﮭﺮا ً ﻋﻠﻰ أن ﯾﺘﻢ إﻛﻤﺎل اﻷﻋﻤﺎل وأن ﺗﻜﻮن اﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ ﻓﻲ وﺿﻊ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻞ اﻟﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻓﻲ أﻛﺘﻮﺑﺮ ‪.2022‬‬
‫اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ .ES-A‬ﻧﻄﺎق اﻟﻤﻌﺎﯾﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻠﯿﺔ ﻟﻨﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‬

‫ﺣﺪود اﻟﺘﺼﻤﯿﻢ‬ ‫اﻟﻮﺣﺪات‬ ‫اﻟﻤﻌﯿﺎر‬
‫‪45,000 - 42,000‬‬ ‫ﻣﻠﻐﻢ‪ /‬ﻟﺘﺮ‬ ‫اﻟﻤﻮاد اﻟﺼﻠﺒﺔ اﻟﻤﺬاﺑﺔ ﻛﻠﯿﺎ ً )‪( TDS‬‬
‫‪37 – 19‬‬ ‫درﺟﺔ ﻣﺌﻮﯾﺔ‬ ‫درﺟﺔ اﻟﺤﺮارة‬
‫اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ .ES-A‬ﻧﻄﺎق اﻟﻤﻌﺎﯾﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻠﯿﺔ ﻟﻨﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‬

‫اﻟﻘﯿﻤﺔ‬ ‫اﻹﻧﺘﺎج‬
‫‪ 2,278,730‬م‪/3‬اﻟﯿﻮم‬ ‫اﻟﺤﺪ اﻷدﻧﻰ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻄﻠﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‬
‫‪ 902,216‬م‪/3‬اﻟﯿﻮم‬ ‫إﻧﺘﺎج اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺼﺎﻟﺤﺔ ﻟﻠﺸﺮﺑﺔ‬
‫~‪ 1,376,514‬م‪/3‬اﻟﯿﻮم‬ ‫اﻟﺘﺮﻛﯿﺰ اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﺨﻠﺺ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺒﺤﺮ*‬
‫~‪ 80‬وﺣﺪة ﻣﻠﻮﺣﺔ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻠﻮﺣﺔ اﻟﺘﺮﻛﯿﺰ اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻲ‬
‫)‪(PSU‬‬
‫‪11 | March 2018‬‬

‫* ﺳﻮف ﯾﻜﻮن اﻟﺤﺠﻢ اﻟﻔﻌﻠﻲ أﻗﻞ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ اﺣﺘﯿﺎﺟﺎت اﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ اﻷﺧﺮى‪ ،‬ﺳﯿﺘﻢ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺪﯾﺪ ﻣﻌﺪﻻت اﻟﺘﺼﺮﯾﻒ ﺧﻼل دراﺳﺔ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ اﻷﺛﺮ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ‬
‫ﻧﮭﺞ اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺿﻮء ﻣﺎ ورد أﻋﻼه‪ ،‬ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﯾﻠﻲ ﻧﻄﺎق اﻟﻌﻤﻞ اﻟﻤﻘﺮر ﻟﻠﺪراﺳﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﺧﺎص ﻟﻠﻤﻮﻗﻊ ﻣﻦ ﺣﯿﺚ اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻷﺳﺎﺳﯿﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫•‬
‫ﻧﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﺘﻮزﯾﻊ اﻟﺮﻗﻤﯿﺔ ﻟﻨﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ وﺧﻄﻮط أﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ اﻟﺘﺨﻠﺺ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﺮﻛﯿﺰ اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻲ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫•‬
‫اﻟﺘﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ ﻟﻤﺮاﺣﻞ اﻹﻧﺸﺎء واﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻞ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﺸﺄة اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫•‬
‫ﺗﻮﺻﯿﺎت ﺣﻮل إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺨﻔﯿﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺣﺪة آي آﺛﺎر ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑﻤﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ‪.‬‬ ‫•‬
‫ﺗﻘﺪﯾﻢ ﺗﻘﺮﯾﺮ دراﺳﺔ اﻷﺛﺮ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ إﻟﻰ ھﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ‪ -‬أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﺮاﺟﻌﺔ واﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎد‪.‬‬ ‫•‬
‫دراﺳﺎت أﺳﺎﺳﯿﺔ‬
‫ﺳﻮف ﺗﻌﻤﻞ اﻟﺪراﺳﺎت اﻷﺳﺎﺳﯿﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻘﺎم اﻷول ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺤﺪﯾﺪ ﻓﺠﻮات اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت ﻟﻜﻞ اﻟﻨﻮاﺣﻲ واﻟﺠﻮاﻧﺐ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﯿﺔ‪ ،‬أي‪ ،‬اﻟﮭﻮاء‪،‬‬
‫واﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﺮواﺳﺐ‪ ،‬اﻷﺣﯿﺎء اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪ ،‬واﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ‪ ،‬واﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺠﻮﻓﯿﺔ‪ ،‬واﻟﻀﺠﯿﺞ‪ ،‬وﻧﻮﻋﯿﺔ اﻟﮭﻮاء‪ ،‬اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻷرﺿﯿﺔ‪ ،‬إﺿﺎﻓﺔ‬
‫إﻟﻰ اﻷوﺿﺎع اﻻﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋﯿﺔ اﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎدﯾﺔ ﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع وﻣﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ‪ .‬ﺳﻮف ﯾﺴﺎﻋﺪ ﺗﺤﻠﯿﻞ ﻓﺠﻮة اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺤﺪﯾﺪ ﻣﺪى وﺣﺠﻢ‬
‫ﺑﺮﻧﺎﻣﺞ اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت واﻟﺬي ﺳﻮف ﯾﺮﻛﺰ ﺑﺸﻜﻞ رﺋﯿﺴﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺳﯿﺘﻢ إﺟﺮاء ﻣﺴﻮﺣﺎت ﻏﯿﺮ ﺑﺤﺮﯾﺔ‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎ ھﻮ ﻣﺒﯿﻦ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺠﺰء اﻟﺮﺋﯿﺴﻲ ﻣﻦ ھﺬه اﻟﻮﺛﯿﻘﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻈﮭﺮ ﻣﺮاﺟﻌﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت أﺟﺮﯾﺖ ﺧﻼل ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻧﻄﺎق اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع ﻋﺪم وﺟﻮد ﺑﯿﺎﻧﺎت ﻣﻌﻠﻨﺔ ﺧﺎﺻﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﯾﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﯿﺎه‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﯿﻄﺔ وأﺿﺎع اﻟﺮواﺳﺐ‪ .‬ھﻨﺎك ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت ﻣﺘﻮﻓﺮة ﺣﻮل ﺑﯿﺎﻧﺎت ﻣﺮاﻗﺒﺔ ﻧﻮﻋﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﻤﺼﺒﺎت ﺗﺼﺮﯾﻒ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه وﺳﯿﺘﻢ‬
‫ﻣﺮاﺟﻌﺘﮭﺎ ﻛﺠﺰء ﻣﻦ دراﺳﺔ ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻷﺛﺮ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﻲ‪ .‬ﻋﻼوة ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ أن اﻟﻤﺨﻄﻄﺎت اﻟﻌﻠﻨﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺎﺣﺔ ﻣﻘﺎﯾﯿﺲ دﻻﻟﯿﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻌﻤﻖ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺠﺎورة ﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع‪ ،‬ﻻ ﯾﺘﻮﻓﺮ ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت ﻣﻔﺼﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻮﻗﻊ ﺑﺨﺼﻮص ﻗﯿﺎﺳﺎت ﻋﻤﻖ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه ﺣﺎﻟﯿﺎً‪ ،‬ﻛﻤﺎ أن‬
‫ھﻨﺎﻟﻚ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ ﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت ﺧﺎﺻﺔ ﻓﯿﻤﺎ ﯾﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺘﯿﺎرات اﻟﻤﯿﺎه واﻟﻤﺪ واﻟﺠﺰر‪ .‬ھﺬه اﻟﺠﻮاﻧﺐ ﺗﻢ ﺗﺤﺪﯾﺪھﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﮭﺎ ﻓﺠﻮة إﺿﺎﻓﯿﺔ ﻓﻲ‬
‫اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺎﺣﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻦ أﺟﻞ ﻣﻌﺎﻟﺠﺔ ﻓﺠﻮات اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ‪ ،‬ﺳﯿﺘﻢ إﺟﺮاء ﺣﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻤﺮاﻗﺒﺔ ﻧﻮﻋﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻤﺤﯿﻄﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺪى ﺷﮭﺮ‬
‫واﺣﺪ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺴﻌﺔ )‪ (9‬ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺠﺎورة ﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع‪ .‬ﯾﺸﻤﻞ ذﻟﻚ ﻗﯿﺎس ﻣﻌﻠﻤﺎت اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ وﺟﻤﯿﻊ ﻋﯿﻨﺎت اﻟﻤﯿﺎه ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻠﯿﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺨﺒﺮي‪ .‬ﻧﻘﺎط أﺧﺬ اﻟﻌﯿﻨﺎت اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ ﻣﺒﯿﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺸﻜﻞ ‪.ES -2‬‬
‫ﺳﯿﺘﻢ إﺟﺮاء ﻣﺴﻮﺣﺎت أﺧﺮى ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺎﺧﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع‪ ،‬ﯾﺸﻤﻞ ذﻟﻚ ﻣﺴﻮﺣﺎت ﻗﯿﺎس ﻋﻤﻖ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه ﺑﺪﻗﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻣﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻘﺮر أن ﺗﻐﻄﻲ ﻣﻤﺮا ً ﺑﻘﯿﺎس ‪ 500‬م ‪ 2,000 x‬ﯾﻤﺮ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ‪ ،‬وﺟﻤﯿﻊ ﻗﯿﺎﺳﺎت اﻟﺘﯿﺎرات واﻟﻤﺪ واﻟﺠﺰر ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل ﺗﺜﺒﯿﺖ‬
‫اﺛﻨﯿﻦ )‪ (2‬ﻣﻦ أﺟﮭﺰة ﻗﯿﺎس ﺳﺮﻋﺔ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه )‪ (Aquadopp‬ﻓﻲ اﻟﺨﻠﯿﺞ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑﻌﺪ ‪ 300‬م و ‪ 3.5‬ﻛﻠﻢ ﻋﻦ ﺧﻂ اﻟﺴﺎﺣﻞ‪،‬‬
‫وﺟﮭﺎز واﺣﺪ )‪ (1‬ﻟﻘﯿﺎس اﻟﻤﺪ واﻟﺠﺰر‪.‬‬
‫‪12 | March 2018‬‬

‫‪ .ES-2‬اﻟﻤﻮاﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ ﻷﺧﺬ ﻋﯿﻨﺎت ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ واﻟﺮواﺳﺐ‬
‫ﻋﻼوة ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺘﺮح اﺗﺶ دي ار ﺗﺮﻛﯿﺐ ﻣﺤﻄﺔ ﻟﻤﺮاﻗﺒﺔ ﻧﻮﻋﯿﺔ اﻟﮭﻮاء اﻟﻤﻀﻐﻮط )‪ (Aeroqual, AQM65‬ﻟﻤﺪة أرﺑﻌﺔ‬
‫)‪ (4‬أﺳﺎﺑﯿﻊ ﻣﺘﺘﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺮﻛﺰ ﻣﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﺘﻄﻮﯾﺮ اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮح‪ .‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﺳﯿﺘﻢ إﺟﺮاء ﻓﺤﺺ ﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮﯾﺎت اﻟﻀﻮﺿﺎء اﻟﻤﺤﯿﻄﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﺎطﻖ ﺣﺴﺎﺳﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﻼً ﻋﻦ ﺟﻤﻊ ﻋﯿﻨﺎت ﻟﻠﺘﺮﺑﺔ واﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺠﻮﻓﯿﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺳﻄﺢ اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ وﻣﻦ ﺣﻘﺮ اﻵﺑﺎر‪ .‬ھﻨﺎك دراﺳﺎت أﺳﺎﺳﯿﺔ أﺧﺮى‬
‫ﺳﻮف ﺗﺘﻀﻤﻦ‪:‬‬
‫ﻣﺴﺢ إﯾﻜﻮﻟﻮﺟﻲ ﺑﺤﺮي ﯾﺸﻤﻞ ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻟﻤﻮاﺋﻞ‪ ،‬اﻟﺤﯿﻮاﻧﺎت واﻟﻨﺒﺎﺗﺎت اﻟﻘﺎﻋﯿﺔ وﺣﻤﻠﺖ رﺻﺪ ﻟﻠﺰواﺣﻒ‪.‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫ﻣﺴﺢ ﻟﻠﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻷرﺿﯿﺔ ﯾﺸﻤﻞ ﺗﻮﺻﯿﻒ اﻟﻤﻮاﺋﻞ اﻟﻄﺒﯿﻌﯿﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺤﯿﻮاﻧﺎت واﻟﻨﺒﺎﺗﺎت واﻟﺰواﺣﻒ واﻟﺤﯿﻮاﻧﺎت اﻟﺜﺪﯾﺔ وﻣﺴﺢ‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫ﻟﻼﻓﻘﺎرﯾﺎت واﻟﻄﯿﻮر‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﺘﻮزﯾﻊ اﻟﻌﺪدي‬

‫ﺧﻼل اﻟﻤﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻠﯿﺔ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮف ﯾﻜﻮن اﻟﻤﺼﺪر اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﻟﻶﺛﺎر اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ وﻧﻮﻋﯿﺔ اﻟﺮواﺳﺐ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻄﺎ ً ﺑﺘﺼﺮﯾﻒ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﻤﻠﺤﯿﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﯿﺎه إﻟﻰ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﺤﺮﯾﺔ واﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﺸﻤﻞ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﺴﺎﺋﻠﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻟﺪة ﻣﻦ ﻧﻈﺎم اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻣﺜﻞ اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﻜﯿﻤﯿﺎﺋﯿﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﺎﯾﺪة اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻗﻌﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺎت ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻲ ﻣﯿﺜﯿﻞ اﻟﻔﻮرﻣﺎﻣﯿﺪ )‪ (DMF‬واﻟﻜﻠﻮرة ‪.‬ﻛﻤﺎ ﯾﺤﺘﻤﻞ أن ﺗﺤﺘﻮي اﻟﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎدن ﻧﺰرة‬
‫ﻧﺎﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺗﺂﻛﻞ اﻷﻧﺎﺑﯿﺐ‪ .‬ﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻮﻋﯿﺔ ﻧﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ اﻟﺬي ﯾﺘﻢ اﺧﺘﯿﺎره‪ ،‬ﯾﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻮﻗﻊ إﺟﺮاء ﺗﻐﯿﯿﺮات ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬
‫اﻟﮭﯿﺪرودﯾﻨﺎﻣﯿﻜﻲ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﻤﺠﺎورة ﻟﻤﺠﻤﻊ اﻟﻄﻮﯾﻠﺔ أﯾﻀﺎً‪.‬‬
‫ﻧﻈﺮا ً إﻟﻰ ﺣﺠﻢ اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع اﻟﺘﻄﻮﯾﺮي‪ ،‬ﺗﺤﺘﺎج ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ ﻧﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﺘﻮزﯾﻊ اﻟﮭﯿﺪرودﯾﻨﺎﻣﯿﻜﯿﺔ إﻟﻰ ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻟﺘﻐﯿﯿﺮات ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬
‫اﻟﮭﯿﺪرودﯾﻨﺎﻣﯿﻜﻲ واﻵﺛﺎر اﻟﻤﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑﻨﻮﻋﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه‪ .‬ﺳﺘﺘﻢ ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ ﻧﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﺘﻮزﯾﻊ ﺑﻐﺮض ﺗﻮﻓﯿﺮ أﺳﺎس ﻟﻠﺘﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻟﻜﻤﻲ ﻟﻶﺛﺎر اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻨﻔﺎﯾﺎت اﻟﻤﻠﺤﯿﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄة اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ وﻟﺘﺤﺴﯿﻦ ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺼﺒﺎت واﻟﺴﺤﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﺪ اﻟﺴﻮاء ﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﻘﺘﺮﺣﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﯿﻜﻮن اﻟﻨﻤﻮذج اﻟﮭﯿﺪرودﯾﻨﺎﻣﯿﻜﻲ اﻟﻤﻘﺮر اﺳﺘﺨﺪاﻣﮫ ﻟﮭﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﺛﻼﺛﻲ اﻷﺑﻌﺎد‪ ،‬ﯾﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻮﻗﺖ وﻣﺼﺒﺎت اﻷﻧﮭﺎر واﻟﺴﻮاﺣﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻄﻮر ﺑﻮاﺳﻄﺔ ﺑﻠﻮﻣﺒﺮج و ﻣﯿﻠﻮر )‪ .(1987‬ﯾﺘﻀﻤﻦ اﻟﻨﻤﻮذج ﻣﺨﻄﻂ ﻣﯿﻠﻮر وﯾﺎﻣﺎدا )‪ (1982‬اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮى ‪ ½-2‬ﻟﻺﻏﻼق‬
‫اﻟﻤﻀﻄﺮب ﻟﺘﻮﻓﯿﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﯾﯿﺮ وﺛﻮاﺑﺖ واﻗﻌﯿﺔ ﻟﻠﺨﻠﻂ اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ‪ .‬ﯾﺘﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻧﻈﺎم اﻹﺣﺪاﺛﯿﺎت اﻟﻤﻨﺤﻨﯿﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻻﺗﺠﺎه اﻷﻓﻘﻲ اﻟﺬي ﯾﺴﻤﺢ‬
‫ﺑﺘﺼﻮﯾﺮ ﺳﻠﺲ ودﻗﯿﻖ ﻟﻠﮭﻨﺪﺳﺔ اﻟﺴﺎﺣﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻐﯿﺮة‪ .‬ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻘﯿﺎس اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ‪ ،‬ﯾﺴﺘﺨﺪم اﻟﻨﻤﻮذج ﻧﻈﺎم إﺣﺪاﺛﯿﺎت ﻣﺤﻮل ﯾﻌﺮف ﺑﺎﺳﻢ‬
‫‪13 | March 2018‬‬

‫ﺗﺤﻮﯾﻞ إﺣﺪاﺛﯿﺎت ﺳﯿﺠﻤﺎ ﻟﻠﺴﻤﺎح ﺑﺘﺼﻮﯾﺮ أﻓﻀﻞ ﻟﻠﺘﻀﺎرﯾﺲ اﻟﺴﻔﻠﯿﺔ‪ .‬ﯾﺘﻢ اﻟﺘﻨﺒﺆ ﺑﺎرﺗﻔﺎع ﺳﻄﺢ اﻟﻤﺎء‪ ،‬وﺳﺮﻋﺔ اﻟﻤﺎء ﻓﻲ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ‬
‫أﺑﻌﺎد‪ ،‬ودرﺟﺔ اﻟﺤﺮارة واﻟﻤﻠﻮﺣﺔ‪ ،‬واﻻﺿﻄﺮاب اﻟﻤﺎﺋﻲ اﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ ﻟﻠﻈﺮوف اﻟﺠﻮﯾﺔ )اﻟﺮﯾﺎح واﻹﺷﻌﺎع اﻟﺸﻤﺴﻲ(‪ ،‬وﺗﺪﻓﻖ اﻟﺮواﻓﺪ‪،‬‬
‫واﻟﻤﺪ واﻟﺠﺰر‪ ،‬ودرﺟﺔ اﻟﺤﺮارة واﻟﻤﻠﻮﺣﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ اﻟﺤﺪود اﻟﻤﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺼﻠﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺴﺎﺣﻠﯿﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﻋﻠﯿﮫ ﻓﺈن ﻣﮭﻤﺎت اﻟﻨﻤﺬﺟﺔ ﺳﻮف ﺗﺸﻤﻞ ﻣﺎ ﯾﻠﻲ‪:‬‬
‫إﻧﺸﺎء ﻧﻤﻮذج ﺷﺒﻜﺔ‪ :‬ﺷﺒﻜﺔ دﻗﯿﻘﺔ ﻣﻦ ‪ 10‬طﺒﻘﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ اﻷﻗﻞ ﻓﻲ اﻻﺗﺠﺎه اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ ﺳﯿﺘﻢ ﺑﻨﺎؤھﺎ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت ﻗﯿﺎس‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫اﻟﻌﻤﻖ اﻟﺘﻲ ﺗﻢ ﺟﻤﻌﮭﺎ ﻓﻲ ھﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﻓﻀﻼً ﻋﻦ ﻣﺼﺎدر اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﻮﻓﺮة‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎﯾﺮة اﻟﻨﻤﻮذج‪ :‬ﺳﯿﺘﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﺒﯿﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﻤﺠﻤﻌﺔ ﻛﺠﺰء ﻣﻦ ھﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﻻﺧﺘﯿﺎر وﻣﻌﺎﯾﺮة اﻟﻨﻤﻮذج‪.‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻧﻈﺎم ﺗﺼﺮﯾﻒ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‪ :‬اﺧﺘﯿﺎر ﻧﻈﺎم ﺗﺼﺮﯾﻒ اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻤﺎﻟﺤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻗﻨﺎة اﻟﻤﺼﺐ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﯿﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬
‫واﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻗﻨﺎة اﻟﺴﺤﺐ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻛﻤﺼﺪر ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ اﻟﺨﺎم ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ؛ واﺧﺘﺒﺎر ﻣﺎ ﯾﺼﻞ إﻟﻰ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ ﺗﺮﻛﯿﺒﺎت ﻣﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺼﺮﯾﻔﺎت اﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﻤﺎﻟﺤﺔ ﻓﻲ أﺣﺪ ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺼﺒﺎت ﻗﺒﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺸﺎطﺊ وأﺣﺪ ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ اﻟﺴﺤﺐ ﻗﺒﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺸﺎطﺊ‪.‬‬
‫ﺳﯿﺘﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻧﻮاﺗﺞ اﻟﻨﻤﻮذج ﻟﺘﺤﺴﯿﻦ ﻣﻮاﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺼﺒﺎت ﺑﺤﯿﺚ ﺗﻮﻓﺮ ﻧﻘﺎط اﻟﺘﺼﺮﯾﻒ أﻗﺼﻰ درﺟﺔ ﻣﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﺨﻔﯿﻒ وﺗﺄﺧﺬ‬
‫ﺑﻌﯿﻦ اﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎر اﻟﺒﻨﯿﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﺘﯿﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﺋﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﺒﯿﻞ اﻟﻤﺜﺎل‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺼﺒﺎت‪ ،‬ﻗﻨﻮات اﻟﺴﺤﺐ واﻟﺘﺼﺮﯾﻒ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺼﺎدر أﺧﺮى ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﻨﻄﻘﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺠﺎورة؛ وﻋﺪم ﺟﻮد ﺗﺄﺛﯿﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ اﻟﺴﺤﺐ‪ ،‬وﺑﯿﺎن اﻻﻣﺘﺜﺎل ﻟﻠﻮاﺋﺢ اﻟﺘﻨﻈﯿﻤﯿﺔ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﯿﺔ ﻟﮭﯿﺌﺔ اﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ ﻓﻲ أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ اﻟﺘﻲ ﯾﻤﻜﻦ أن‬
‫ﺗﺴﺒﺐ رﻓﺾ ﻣﺸﺮوع اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻟﻤﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‪ ،‬وﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ إﻣﻜﺎﻧﯿﺔ إﻋﺎدة ﺗﺪوﯾﺮ ﻣﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﻨﻀﺢ اﻟﻌﻜﺴﻲ ﻓﻲ ھﯿﻜﻞ اﻟﺴﺤﺐ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﻟﻤﺤﻄﺔ اﻟﻄﺎﻗﺔ واﻟﺘﺤﻠﯿﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻵﺛﺎر‬
‫ﺳﯿﺘﻢ إﺟﺮاء ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻟﻠﻤﺨﺎطﺮة وﻓﻘﺎ ً ﻟﻠﻤﻨﮭﺠﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﻘﺪﻣﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﺒﺎدئ اﻟﺘﻮﺟﯿﮭﯿﺔ اﻟﺘﻘﻨﯿﺔ ﻟﻺطﺎر اﻟﺘﻨﻈﯿﻤﻲ اﻟﻌﺎم ﻟﻨﻈﺎم إدارة اﻟﺼﺤﺔ‬
‫واﻟﺴﻼﻣﺔ واﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ )‪ (EHSMS RF‬ﻓﻲ أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ – ﻋﻤﻠﯿﺔ إدارة اﻟﻤﺨﺎطﺮة )اﻟﻨﺴﺨﺔ ‪ ،2‬ﻓﺒﺮاﯾﺮ ‪ ،(2012‬ﺣﯿﺚ ﯾﺸﻤﻞ ذﻟﻚ‬
‫اﻹﺷﺎرة إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺨﺎطﺮ اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﯿﺌﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺣﯿﻦ ﺗﺮﻛﺰ إرﺷﺎدات ﺗﻮﺟﯿﮭﺎت ﻣﺮﻛﺰ أﺑﻮ ظﺒﻲ ﻟﻠﺴﻼﻣﺔ واﻟﺼﺤﺔ اﻟﻤﮭﻨﯿﺔ‬
‫)‪ (OSHAD‬ﺑﺎﻟﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺼﺤﺔ واﻟﺴﻼﻣﺔ اﻟﻤﮭﻨﯿﺔ‪ .‬ﺗﺸﻤﻞ اﻟﺘﻮﺟﯿﮭﺎت اﻟﻤﻌﺎﯾﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺎﻟﯿﺔ‪:‬‬
‫أھﻤﯿﺔ ﻣﺨﺎطﺮة )اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ 12‬ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﺛﯿﻘﺔ اﻟﺮﺋﯿﺴﯿﺔ(؛‬ ‫•‬
‫اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻟﯿﺔ ﺣﺪوث )اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ 13‬ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﺛﯿﻘﺔ اﻟﺮﺋﯿﺴﯿﺔ(؛؛ و‬ ‫•‬
‫ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻟﻤﺨﺎطﺮة )اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ 14‬ﻓﻲ اﻟﻮﺛﯿﻘﺔ اﻟﺮﺋﯿﺴﯿﺔ(؛‬ ‫•‬
‫ﺗﺪاﺑﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺨﻔﯿﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺣﺪ اﻵﺛﺎر واﻟﺘﻮﺻﯿﺎت‬

‫ھﻨﺎك ﺗﻮﺻﯿﺎت ﻣﺮﺗﺒﻄﺔ ﺑﻜﻞ ﺗﺄﺛﯿﺮ ﻣﺤﺪد ﻹﺟﺮاءات وﺗﺪاﺑﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺨﻔﯿﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺣﺪ ذﻟﻚ اﻷﺛﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺷﺎﻧﮭﺎ أن ﺗﺤﺪ أو ﺗﻘﻠﻞ ﺑﺪرﺟﺔ ﻛﺒﯿﺮة‬
‫ﻣﻦ ﺷﺪة ذﻟﻚ اﻟﺘﺄﺛﯿﺮ‪ .‬ﺳﻮف ﺗﻘﺪم ھﺬه اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ ﺗﺤﺪﯾﺪا ً ﻛﻤﯿﺎ ً ﻣﻤﻨﮭﺠﺎ ً ﻟﻸﺛﺮ‪ ،‬وﺗﺤﺪد ﻣﺘﻄﻠﺒﺎت اﻟﺘﺨﻔﯿﻒ واﻟﻤﺮاﻗﺒﺔ اﻷﻛﺜﺮ ﺟﺪوى‬
‫ﺧﻼل ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺘﻲ اﻹﻧﺸﺎء واﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻞ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﺪ اﻟﺴﻮاء‪.‬‬
‫‪14 | March 2018‬‬

1 Executive Summary
The Abu Dhabi Department of Energy (DoE), formally Abu Dhabi Water and Electricity Authority
(ADWEA) is the predominant source of potable water in Abu Dhabi, supplying approximately all of
the Emirate’s needs. To meet the water demand for a growing population and the economy of Abu
Dhabi, the DoE intends to add a new Sea Water Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) plant at the Taweelah
Power and Water Complex. The expansion, which will be implemented as an Independent Water
Project (IWP) will provide an additional 200 Million Imperial Gallons per Day (MIGD) of desalinated
water, equivalent to 902,216 m3/day. Currently, the existing complex contains three (3) combined
gas cycle power generation and thermal desalination (MSF/MES) plants and has a total net power
generation capacity of 4,113 MW and a net water production capacity of 294 MIGD (ADWEC,
20171).
This IWP is currently at the concept design stage with ILF Consulting Engineers (ILF) appointed
as design consultants by the DoE. Existing legislation requires that an environmental impact
assessment (EIA) study is undertaken to assess the potential impacts of construction and
operation of the SWRO plant on the environment, with particular emphasis on the marine
environment. ILF commissioned HDR to conduct the EIA of the proposed SWRO plant according
to regulatory requirements that include a number of federal laws, executive orders, policies,
guidelines, conventions and protocols. As the first step in the Abu Dhabi environmental permitting
process for a Project of this nature, HDR are required to submit a Project specific Terms of
Reference (TOR) report that serves as a planning tool to guide the assessment process.
The Project area is located within the existing Taweelah complex on the Arabian Gulf coastline of
the United Arab Emirates (UAE) (Figure ES-1). The project site - with a footprint of 379,000 m2,
contains a pipeline corridor and a natural gas pipeline that extends into the Arabian Gulf as shown
in Figure ES-1, which also shows the path of a submarine cable across from the facility. Land use
surrounding the Taweelah Complex is predominantly industrial to the north and east. The Khalifa
Port is two (2) km to the north whilst the Emirates Global Aluminium (EGA) alumina refinery is
located four (4) km northeast of Taweelah, while immediately to the west of the EGA refinery, the
Shaheen Bauxite Refinery is currently under construction.
ES-1. Proposed location of the SWRO Plant with a footprint of 379,000 m2 within the
Taweelah Complex, a gas pipeline corridor, and paths of a gas pipeline and submarine cable
1
http://www.adwec.ae/existing.html
15 | March 2018
1.1 Project Description
The proposed development will employ Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) technology to
produce up to 200 MIGD potable water. The DoE proposes the use a state-of-the art design using
efficient, proven and reliable RO technologies. A full description of the process is detailed in the
main body of this TOR report. Below is a generic description of the design. The proposed facility
would desalinate raw seawater obtained from a screened open-sea intake. The facility will have a
combined seawater intake and pumping system that will be required to draw up to 2,278,730 m3
of seawater each day that will require six (6) intake lines each with a two (2) meter diameter, or
alternatively use an intake channel. The location and intake configuration will be finalized as part
of this EIA.
SWRO membranes are sensitive to microbial contamination, turbidity, and other contaminants,
therefore pretreatment of the raw seawater is required to prevent the membranes from fouling.
The pretreatment scheme would consist of screens; Dissolved air flotation (DAF); Ultra-filtration
(UF) membranes and Cartridge filters. The pretreatment process would require the use of several
chemicals to increase pretreatment removal efficiency. After pretreatment, the filtered water
(filtrate) would be pumped through the SWRO membranes. An energy recovery system would be
used to recover the energy from the concentrate stream prior to its disposal to assist in reducing
energy costs. After the RO process, the permeate would be re-mineralized (post-treatment) to
prevent corrosion of the distribution pipelines and resemble existing potable water supplies. Waste
streams (sludge and solids) from the DAF and UF membranes would be conveyed to an on-site
solids handling facility. The operational seawater intake requirements that must be met in the feed
water are listed in Table ES – A as well as the designed capacity of the plant and expected
concentrate production (Table ES – B).
As indicated in Table ES – B the principal waste stream produced during the operational phase
will be concentrated brine, ~ 1,376,514 m3/day. Although the exact rate of discharge has yet to be
defined, the composition of the brine is expected to be highly saline and may reach a salinity of 80
PSU. Note that the discharge to the marine environment will also include all liquid wastes
generated from the RO system, including neutralized chemical wastes generated from the DMF
and chlorination. Hydrodynamic modelling is proposed as part of the EIA to reproduce the baseline
conditions at the site and simulate the dispersion of the effluent into the Arabian Gulf waters.
As is the case with the seawater intake, the discharge location for the waste brine effluent has not
yet been finalized and will be subject to the outcome of hydrodynamic dispersion modelling studies.
The current preference at the concept design phase is to discharge the effluent into the existing
outfall channel that runs adjacent to the site boundary.
The current proposed schedule for the start of the construction phase of the project is May 2019.
Construction is anticipated to run for 42 months with works to be completed and the plant fully
commissioned in October 2022.
Table ES-A. Operational seawater intake parameters ranges
Parameter Units Design Envelope
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 42,000 - 45,000
Temperature °C 19 – 37
Table ES-A. Operational seawater intake design parameters
16 | March 2018
Production Value
Minimum Seawater Demand 2,278,730 m3/day
Potable Water Production 902,216 m3/day
Concentrate for Sea Disposal* ~ 1,376,514 m3/day
Salinity of Concentrate ~80 PSU
*Actual volume will be lower due to other plant needs; discharge rates will be defined
during the EIA study
1.2 Study Approach

In light of the above, the planned scope of work of the study is as follows:
• Site-specific evaluation of the baseline conditions;
• Numerical dispersion modeling of the seawater intake and concentrate discharge pipelines
in the marine environment;
• Environmental assessment of the construction and operational phases of the proposed
facility;
• Recommendation on mitigation measures that minimize any impacts associated with the
proposed SWRO plant; and
• Submittal of an EIA report to the Abu Dhabi Environment Agency for review and approval.
Baseline Studies
The baseline studies will first identify data gaps for each environmental compartment, i.e., air,
marine water and sediments, marine habitat, soil and groundwater, noise, air quality, terrestrial
ecology, in addition to the socio-economic settings of the project site and beyond. The data gap
analysis will help determine the extent and magnitude of the data acquisition program which will
ultimately focus on the marine environment, although other non-marine surveys will also be
conducted as explained in the main body of this document.
A review of data carried out during the project scoping stage shows that there is no publicly
available site specific data relating to ambient water and sediment conditions. Water quality
monitoring data relating to effluent outfall is available and will be reviewed as part of the EIA. In
addition, though publicly available charts provide indicative bathymetry in the vicinity of the project
site, detailed site information on bathymetry is not currently available, and site specific data relating
to the currents and tides are also required. This was identified as an additional gap in the available
data.
In order to address data gaps related to the marine environment, a one-month long ambient water
quality monitoring campaign will be carried out at nine (9) locations in the vicinity of the Project
site. It includes measuring in situ parameters and collecting water samples for laboratory analysis.
Proposed sampling points are provided in Figure ES -2.
Other surveys will be conducted adjacent to the project site, including a high resolution bathymetric
survey covering a corridor of 500m x 2,000m across from the site, the collection of currents and
tides by installing two (2) Aquadopp current profilers in the Arabian Gulf at about 300m and 3.5km
from the shoreline, and one (1) tide gauge.
17 | March 2018
ES-2. Proposed locations of marine and sediment sampling
In addition, HDR propose the installation of a compact air quality monitoring station (Aeroqual,
AQM65) for the duration of four (4) continuous weeks in the center of the proposed development
site. Ambient noise levels will also be surveyed at critical locations on the site, as well as collecting
soil and groundwater samples from the soil surface and from boreholes. Other baseline studies
will include:
- Marine ecology survey including a habitat assessment, benthic infauna, phytoplankton and
zooplankton identification in addition to an underwater visual census and a marine mammal
and reptile observation campaign.
- Terrestrial ecology survey including habitat and flora characterization, reptile, mammals,
invertebrate and avifauna survey.
Numerical Dispersion Modeling
During the operational phase, the principal source of potential marine water and sediment quality
impacts will be associated with the discharge of waste brine to the marine environment which
includes all liquid wastes generated from the RO system such as neutralized chemical wastes
generated from the DMF and chlorination processes. The effluent is also likely to include trace
metals caused by corrosion of the pipes. Depending on the type of seawater intake that is selected,
changes to the hydrodynamic regime in the vicinity of the Taweelah Complex can also be expected.
Given the scale of the development, hydrodynamic dispersion modelling is required to assess the
changes to the hydrodynamic regime and associated water quality impacts. Dispersion modeling
will be carried out with a view to providing a basis for a quantitative assessment of the potential
impacts of the brine effluent from the proposed facility and for optimizing the locations of both the
outfall and intake of the proposed desalination plant.
18 | March 2018
The hydrodynamic model to be used for this study is a three-dimensional, time-dependent,
estuarine and coastal circulation model developed by Blumberg and Mellor (1987). The model
incorporates the Mellor and Yamada (1982) level 2-½ turbulence-closure scheme to provide a
realistic parameterization of vertical mixing. A system of curvilinear coordinates is used in the
horizontal direction which allows for a smooth and accurate representation of variable shoreline
geometry. In the vertical scale, the model uses a transformed coordinate system known as the σ-
coordinate transformation to allow for a better representation of bottom topography. Water surface
elevation, water velocity in three dimensions, temperature and salinity, and water turbulence are
predicted in response to weather conditions (winds and incident solar radiation), tributary inflows,
tides, temperature and salinity at open boundaries connected to the coastal waters.
The modeling tasks will therefore include the following:
- Establishing the Model Grid: A fine grid with at least 10 layers in the vertical will be built
using the bathymetric information collected in this study as well as other available data
sources.
- Calibration of the model: Use the data collected as part of this study for testing and
calibrating the model.
- SWRO discharge assessment: Testing brine discharges in existing outfall canal, using the
existing intake canal as a source of raw seawater into the plant; and testing up to three
combinations of brine discharges into an off-shore outfall and off-shore intake locations.
These model outputs will be used to optimize the locations of the outfall in a way that the discharge
point provides the highest possible dilution that takes into account existing infrastructure, i.e.,
outfalls, intakes and discharges from other sources in the vicinity; has no influence on the intake
point; determines compliance with EAD Environmental Regulations for SWRO rejects; and
assesses the potential for SWRO recirculation into the existing Power and Desalination Station
intake structure.
Assessment of Impacts
A risk assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the methodology presented in the Abu
Dhabi Abu Dhabi EHSMS RF Technical Guideline – Process of Risk Management (Version 2,
February 2012), as this includes reference to environmental related hazards, whereas the updated
OSHAD guidelines focus entirely on occupational health and safety. The guidelines include the
following criteria:
• The consequence of the hazard (Table 15 in main document);
• Likelihood of the event (Table 16 in main document); and
• Risk rating (Table 17 in main document).
Mitigation Measures and Recommendations
Associated with each identified impact are recommendations for mitigation measures that will
eliminate or significantly reduce the severity of such impact. This EIA will systematically quantify
the impact, determine the most feasible mitigation and the monitoring requirements during both
the construction and the operation phases.
19 | March 2018
2 Introduction
This section provides detail on the project proponent, appointed environmental consultant and
provides a brief summary of the proposed development.
2.1 Project Title and Project Proponent

Project Title:
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Taweelah ADWEA IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis
Plant.
Table 1 Project Proponent

Project Proponent: Abu Dhabi Department of Energy
Address: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, PO Box 32800
Telephone Number: +971 2 207 7777
Fax Number: +971 2 671 3750
Contact Person: Name: Aisha Ahmed Al Mansoori
Position: Power Generation Engineer
Email: Aisha.almansoori@adwea.ae
Telephone: +971 2 6943649
2.2 TOR Consultants

This section provides an introduction to the appointed environmental consultants who will be
carrying out the environmental assessment of the proposed development. The following
subsections will provide details of the assessment team and their respective areas of expertise.
Table 2 Environmental Consultant Details

Environmental HDR Middle East LLC.
Consultants:
Address: Tamouh Tower, Floor 23, Al Reem Island, Abu Dhabi, United
Arab Emirates
Telephone Number: +971 2 694 2900
Fax Number: +971 2 694 2901
Contact Person: Name: Amie Jan Lenkowiec
Position: Project Manager
20 | March 2018
Email: Amie.Lenkowiec@hdrinc.com
Telephone: +971 4 509 4213
2.2.1 Environmental Assessment Team

The key members of the environmental team are presented in Table 3. All team members are
based in the United Arab Emirates and have extensive experience of working on development
projects in the UAE’s coastal zone. HDR’s team have extensive experience of undertaking marine
and terrestrial data collection surveys with over 100 hundred years combined technical expertise
undertaking hydrodynamic modelling studies and water quality assessments.
Table 3 EIA Team Members

Name Key Role in EIA Expertise
Dr. Paul Anid Project Director • Hydrodynamic

Modelling
Oversees the project implementation,
provides technical expertise and • Marine Water and
ensures appropriate and adequate Sediment Quality
resources are deployed for the project.
• Project Management
Technical director for the project with
particular emphasis on marine
hydrodynamic dispersion and water
quality modelling studies.
Mrs. Amie Project Manager • Project Management

Lenkowiec Responsible for the day to day
management of the project and • Marine Environmental
ensures the quality of deliverables. Surveys
Specific area of technical expertise is • Environmental
marine ecology. Assessment
Mr. David McGrath EIA Field Team Leader • Environmental

Technical lead for environmental Assessment
assessment studies. Will oversee • Marine and Terrestrial
environmental baseline data collection
Environmental Surveys
surveys, impact assessment process
and reporting for the EIA.
Mr. Darren Senior Environmental Scientist • Oceanographic Studies
Birmingham
Technical lead for oceanographic
studies.
Ms. Yanni Smith EIA Team Member • EIA Studies

Baseline data collection, analysis and • Marine and Terrestrial
EIA reporting. Environmental Surveys
Mr. Henry Fernando Field Team Member • Marine and Terrestrial

Environmental Surveys
Baseline data collection.
21 | March 2018
Name Key Role in EIA Expertise
Mr. Nicholas Kim Hydrodynamic Modeling Lead • Modeling

Responsible for leading the
hydrodynamic and water quality
modelling scope under this Project
2.3 Project Description and Rationale

2.3.1 Summary of Proposed Project
The Abu Dhabi Department of Energy (DoE), formally Abu Dhabi Water and Electricity Authority
(ADWEA), propose the development of a new Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) Plant within
the Taweelah Power and Water Complex. The proposed development will have a production
capacity 200 million imperial gallons per day (MIGD), equivalent to 909,216 m3/day.
The IWP project is currently at the concept design stage with ILF Consulting Engineers (ILF)
appointed as design consultants by the DoE. ILF have provided minimum technical requirements
which have been presented in greater detail in Section 4 of this report. Though the project is still
at the concept design phase, the principal components of the proposed development will not
change during the design process. These main plant components are listed below:
• Plant with a total capacity of 200 MIGD;
• Combined seawater intake system;
• Each plant will include the following:
o Physical seawater filtration system;
o Dissolved Air Filtration (DAF) system;
o Reverse osmosis water recovery trains with dedicated energy recovery
booster pumps, energy recovery system and spiral wound membrane
racks:
1st pass made up of 26 trains;
2nd pass of six (6) trains.
o RO membrane Clean-In-Place (CIP) system;
o Chlorination and chemical dosing systems;
o Potable water treatment system; and
o Sludge treatment, dewatering and storage system.
• Combined brine effluent discharge to the Arabian Gulf.
2.3.2 Project Site Location and Plot Size

The proposed development site is situated within the Taweelah Power and Water Complex,
located in the Al Taweelah area of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi (Figure 1).
22 | March 2018
Figure 1 Regional Setting of Project Site
The plot proposed for development is located at Taweelah South (Plot Number 141-001-000-P1)
(Figure 2), and has a footprint area of approximately 379,000 m2. The Abu Dhabi Department of
Municipal Affairs and Transport affection plan and figure showing the project site footprint are
provided in Annex 2.
23 | March 2018
Figure 2 Location of Project Site within Taweelah Complex
2.3.3 Project Development Rationale

ADWEC, in the Statement of Future Capacity Requirements 2018 – 2024 Report has identified
the need for additional Reverse Osmosis (RO) production capacity in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi in
order to meet anticipate growth in demand. The analysis was based on a review of historical
demand profiles and an assessment of the capabilities of existing cogeneration plants to produce
high water outputs at low power outputs. On the basis of the analysis, ADWEC identify the
requirement for 251 MIGD of additional RO capacity to be available by 2022.
The introduction of nuclear units in the electricity mix will impose some constraints on water
production during the winter period. When all four nuclear reactors of the Barakah Nuclear Energy
Plant are fully commissioned, they will provide almost all the power demand in the winter period.
This is anticipated to leave only a limited amount of power to be produced by conventional
cogeneration units that currently make up the majority of installed generation capacity in the
Emirate. Given that a minimum amount of power production is generally required for these
conventional plants to produce their maximum water output, the effective water production
capability in winter will be limited. This will create a need for additional stand-alone desalination
capacities that would not be constrained by any associated power production. Although standalone
water production is theoretically achievable with Multi Stage Flash (MSF) and Multi-effect
Distillation (MED) technologies coupled to dedicated boilers, the most economical solution to
achieve this is to use RO technology.
The additional RO desalination capacity is required in 2020/21 to ensure security of supply to the
Emirate. On a systemic basis, RO is now significantly more efficient than thermal desalination
technologies. RO will also enhance operational flexibility, enabling Abu Dhabi's current gas-fired
IWPP fleet to be operated more efficiently, allowing additional savings of gas. The adoption of RO
24 | March 2018
also delivers significant benefits in improved despatch flexibility, which will be essential as inflexible
nuclear power and renewable energy form a larger portion of Abu Dhabi's installed generation
capacity.
2.3.4 Justification and Chronology for the Development of the

TOR
In accordance with objectives of Federal Law No. 24 of 1999, all projects which have the potential
to impact on the environment shall be required to perform an EIA. As stipulated by the Abu Dhabi
Executive Council, ADWEA issued a letter to the Environment Agency – Abu Dhabi (EAD) on 3rd
October 2017 introducing the proposed development at Taweelah.
The letter requesting EAD’s approval to proceed with further technical and environmental studies
and the associated response from EAD are included in Annex 3, for reference. Based on the
response from the EAD, dated 6th November 2017, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
for the proposed development is to be carried out and submitted to the EAD for review and
approval.
HDR were appointed by ILF Consulting Engineer’s, the design consultant appointed by
Department of Energy, to carry out the environmental assessment of the proposed development.
A copy of relevant letters of appointment have been included in Annex 4. As the first step in the
Abu Dhabi environmental permitting process for a project of this nature, HDR are required to submit
a project specific Terms of Reference (TOR) report. The TOR is intended to serve as a planning
tool to guide the assessment process. HDR have prepared this TOR in accordance with the EAD
Technical Guidance Document for Terms of Reference (April, 2014).
25 | March 2018
3 Legal Framework and Standards
The UAE has a legislative framework for environmental conservation, monitoring and pollution
control and management. There are a number of federal environmental laws that form part of an
over-arching legislative framework at the national level and at the local (Emirate) level. This section
describes the legislative framework under which the Project is required to abide.
Due to the nature and scale of the construction and operational activities associated with the
Project, this document has considered only the relevant federal and local environmental laws,
regulations and technical guidance documents. International guidelines have also been considered
particularly on matters where there is no applicable local standard or guideline.
The following sections provide an overview of the regulatory requirements relevant to the Project’s
construction and operational activities. These are based on HDR’s understanding of the current
environmental and regulatory standards applicable to the Project, and should therefore not be
construed as legal opinion.
3.1 Federal Regulatory Framework

The UAE Ministry of Climate Change and Environment and Water (MOCCEW) is the federal
government agency responsible for the regulation and enforcement of environmental standards
and development of environmental policies in the UAE. The MOCCEW, formally the Ministry of
Environment and Water, delegates its regulatory roles in close coordination with the respective
local environmental agencies of the Emirates. In the case of Abu Dhabi, the designated
environmental regulator is The Environment Agency – Abu Dhabi (EAD).
Federal Law No. 11 of 2002 – Concerning Regulating and Controlling the

International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
This Law regulates the import, export, as well as the introduction by sea, unloading and re-shipping
of endangered species in the UAE. It has been enacted in support to the international Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
The provisions of this law may not directly apply to the Project; however, it is recommended that
the Project should support and adhere to this law’s primary aim to conserve any endangered
species.
Federal Law No. 23 of 1999 – Concerning Exploitation, Protection and

Development of the Living Aquatic Resources in the Waters of the UAE
This law governs the fishing trade, import and export of aquatic organisms in the UAE. It intends
to ensure the protection and conservation of aquatic resources, particularly fish stock, in the UAE.
Given the nature and location of the Project, efforts are to be made to ensure negative adverse
impacts on marine ecology are minimized or, where feasible, eliminated. This law provides a
number of prohibitions with regards to destruction of aquatic resources.
Federal Law No. 24 of 1999 and Law No. 37 of 2006 – Concerning the
Protection, Development and Amendments of the Environment
This law relates to the protection of the environment by preserving diversity and natural equilibrium
through prevention of all forms of pollution. The intent of the law is to provide a coordinated
26 | March 2018
approach to addressing environmental issues throughout the UAE. This law aims to achieve the
following goals:
• Protection and conservation of the quality and natural balance of the environment;
• Control of all forms of pollution and avoidance of any immediate or long-term harmful
effects resulting from economic, agricultural, industrial, development or other programs
aiming at improving life standards and co-ordination among the Agency, Competent
Authorities and Parties concerned with the protection of the environment and conservation
of the quality, natural balance and consolidation of environmental awareness and
principles of pollution control;
• Development of natural resources and conservation of biological diversity in the region of
the state and the exploitation of such resources with consideration of present and future
generations;
• Protection of society, human health and the health of other living creatures from activities
and acts, which are environmentally harmful or impede authorized use of the
environmental setting;
• Protection of the State environment from the harmful effects of activities undertaken
outside the region of the State; and
• Compliance with international and regional agreements ratified or approved by the State
regarding environmental protection, control of pollution and conservation of natural
resources.
In line with the above objectives, this law provides 101 articles dealing with the following
environmental aspects:
• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of projects and establishments applying for
license;
• Sustainable development;
• Combat to environmental disasters;
• Protection of water environment;
• Protection of soil;
• Protection of air from pollution;
• Handling of hazardous substances, hazardous wastes and medical wastes;
• Establishment of natural reserves; and
• Liability and compensation for environmental damages.
Executive Order issued by Council of Ministers Decree No. 37 of 2001 on

Regulation Concerning Environmental Impacts of a Project
In line with objectives of Federal Law No. 24 of 1999, all projects which have the potential to impact
on the environment shall be required to perform an EIA. The EIA forms the basis for the issuance
of environmental permits from the relevant regulatory agency, which in the case of this Project, is
The Environment Agency – Abu Dhabi (EAD).
27 | March 2018
Executive Order issued by Council of Minsters Decree No. 12 of 2006 on
Regulation Concerning the Protection of Air from Pollution
This Minsters Decree was enacted in line with the air pollution control objective of the Federal Law
No. 24 of 1999. It provides maximum allowable limits of air pollutants emitted from different source
installations, in work areas and in the ambient air. It also specifies allowable levels of ambient noise
in accordance with different land use classifications.
The ambient air quality standards, allowable emission limits from stationary sources and allowable
noise limits stipulated in the said Regulation are shown in Table 4 to Table 7.
Table 4 Maximum Allowable Emission Limits of Air Pollutants Emitted

From Stationary Sources
Substance Symbol Sources Max Allowable
Emission Limits
(mg/Nm3)
Visible Emissions -- Combustion Sources 250

Other Sources None
Carbon Monoxide CO All Sources 500
Nitrogen Oxides (expressed and NO x Combustion Sources See Table 12
nitrogen dioxide) Material Producing Industries 1500
Other Sources 200
Sulphur Dioxide SO 2 Combustion Sources 500
Material Producing Industries 2000
Other Sources 1000
Sulphur Trioxide Including Sulphuric SSO 3 Material Producing Industries 150
Acid Mist (expressed as Sulphur Other Sources
Trioxide) 50
Total Suspended Particles TSP Combustion Sources 250
Cement Industry 50
Other Sources 150
Ammonia and Ammonium Compounds NH 3 Material Producing Industries 50
(expressed as ammonia) Other Sources 10
Benzene C6H6 All Sources 5
Iron Fe Iron and Steel Foundries 100
Zinc and its compounds (expressed as Zn Electroplating / Galvanizing 10
Zinc) Industries
Lead and its compounds (expressed as Pb All Sources 5
Lead)
Antimony and its compounds Sb Material Producing Industries 5
(expressed as Antimony) Other Sources 1
Arsenic and its compounds (expressed As All Sources 1
as Arsenic)
Cadmium and its compounds Cd All Sources 1
(expressed as Cadmium)
Mercury and its compounds (expressed Hg All Sources 0.5
as Mercury)
Nickel and its compounds (expressed Ni All Sources 1
as Nickel)
Copper and its compounds (expressed Cu All Sources 5
as Copper)
28 | March 2018
Substance Symbol Sources Max Allowable
Emission Limits
(mg/Nm3)
Hydrogen Sulphide H2S All Sources 5
-
Chloride Cl Chlorine Works 200
Other Sources 100
Hydrogen Fluoride HF All Sources 2
Silicon Fluoride SiF 4 All Sources 10
-
Fluoride and its Compounds Including F Aluminium Smelters 20
HF & SiF 4 (expressed as fluoride) Other Sources 50
Formaldehyde CH 2 O Material Producing Industries 20
Other Sources 2
Carbon C Odes Production 250
Waste Incineration 50
Total Volatile Organic Compounds VOCs All Sources 20
(expressed as total organic carbon
(TOC))
Dioxins & Furans -- All Sources 1 (ng TEQ/m3)
Table 5 Maximum Allowable Emission Limits of Air Pollutants Emitted

From Hydrocarbon Fuel Combustion Sources
Substance Symbol Sources Max Allowable Emission
Limits (mg/Nm3)
Visible Emissions -- All sources 250
Nitrogen Oxides (expressed as Fuel Combustion Units:

nitrogen dioxide (NO2)) -gas fuel 350
-liquid fuel 500
NO x
Turbine Units:
-gas fuel 70
-liquid fuel 150
Sulphur Dioxide SO 2 All Sources 500
Total Suspended Particles TSP All Sources 200
Carbon Monoxide CO All Sources 500
Table 6 UAE Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards

Substance Symbol Maximum Allowable Limit (µg/Nm3) Average Time
Sulphur dioxide 350 1 hour
SO 2 150 24 hours
60 1 year
Carbon monoxide 30 (mg/Nm3) 1 hour

CO
10 (mg/Nm3) 8 hours
29 | March 2018
Substance Symbol Maximum Allowable Limit (µg/Nm3) Average Time
Nitrogen dioxide 400 1 hour

NO 2
150 24 hours
Ozone 200 1 hour

O3
120 8 hours
Total Suspended 230 24 hours

Particulates (TSP) TSP
90 1 year
Particulate matter (10

PM 10 150 24 hours
microns or less in diameter)
Lead Pb 1 1 year
Source Regulation concerning Protection of Air from Pollution
Table 7 UAE Federal Allowable Noise Limits

Area Allowable Limits (dBA)* for Allowable Limits (dBA)* for
Daytime Night Time
(7 AM to 8 PM) (8 PM to 7 AM)
Residential areas with light traffic 40 – 50 30 – 40
Residential areas in downtown 45 – 55 35 – 45
Residential areas which include some

workshops and commercial business or
50 – 60 40 – 50
residential areas near the highways
Commercial areas & downtown 55 – 65 45 – 55
Industrial areas (heavy industry) 60 – 70 50 – 60
Note: * dBA means decibels adjusted. dBA is used for determining the sound exposure to humans.
Source Regulation concerning Protection of Air from Pollution
Executive Order issued by Council of Ministers Decree No. 37 of 2001 on

Regulation for Handling Hazardous Materials, Hazardous Wastes and Medical
Wastes
This Ministers Decree provides the classification categories / criteria for hazardous materials
(Schedule 1.1 of Annex 1) and waste (Schedule 1.2 of Annex 1). It also provides regulatory
requirements for the storage, management, transport and disposal of hazardous materials and
wastes. The following are provisions of this Decree which are relevant to the generation of
hazardous waste:
30 | March 2018
• No import of hazardous materials specified in Schedule 1.1 of Annex 1 is allowed unless a
Permit is acquired from the Competent Authority;
• Only licensed contractors should be engaged to collect hazardous waste;
• Entities responsible for the production and handling of waste must take all necessary
measures to ensure that no damage to the environment occurs;
• Entities responsible for the production and handling of waste and must keep a register of
all wastes generated by the entity, volumes transported and disposed of off the site owned
/ operated by the entity;
• Hazardous wastes are prohibited from being be transported via land or sea without a permit
from the relevant regulatory agency;
• Hazardous materials and waste are classified in accordance with Schedules 1.1 and 1.2
of Annex 1;
• Segregation requirements are to be maintained when storing hazardous material

(Schedule 1.3 of Annex 1); and
• The specifications for the burial of hazardous wastes in specially equipped burial holes
isolated from other environment elements.
3.2 Federal Policies

UAE Green Agenda 2015-2030
The UAE is seeking to manage greenhouse gas emissions from major sectors including the heavy
industries, oil and gas, building and transportation sectors, under a national green growth
framework titled Green Agenda 2015-2030. The Agenda consists of five (5) strategic objectives,
12 main programmes and 31 sub-programs.
UAE National Climate Change Plan
National Climate Change Plan will coordinate efforts to manage greenhouse emissions, minimise
risk and increase ability to adapt to the climate, while sustaining economic growth. Given the nature
of the project, the UAE National Climate Change Plan is to be consulted during the EIA phase.
31 | March 2018
3.3 Regulatory Framework in Abu Dhabi
Law No. 5 of 2016 – Concerning the Regulation of Groundwater in the Emirate
of Abu Dhabi
Law No. 16 of 2005 – Pertaining to the Reorganization of the Abu Dhabi

Environmental Agency
The EAD was established in 2005 under Law No. 16 of 2005 Pertaining to the Reorganisation of
the Abu Dhabi Environment Agency to replace the Environmental Research and Wildlife
Development Agency (ERWDA). EAD was established as an independent juridical entity
concerned with the environmental affairs in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. This law holds EAD
responsible for protecting the environment and the wildlife along with its biological diversity in its
natural environment in the emirate through offering suggestions, making recommendations,
conducting environmental studies and monitoring, and creating social awareness. All government
departments and other agencies are to adhere to this law by cooperating and coordinating with
EAD in matters relating to research, studies, and programs associated with the environment and
wildlife in Abu Dhabi.
Abu Dhabi Environmental Permitting Guidelines
EAD is the Competent Authority to review and approve environmental permits for development,
infrastructure and industrial projects. According to Federal Law No. 24 of 1999 for the Protection
and Development of the Environment, various industrial / commercial facilities and development
projects require an environmental permit or No Objection Certificate prior to the commencement
of site activities. In addition, certain environmental studies2 may be required in order to process
the permit. The following Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) and technical guidance
documents, published by the EAD, are considered relevant to the Project:
• SOP for Permitting of Development and Infrastructure Projects in Abu Dhabi, April 2014;
• Technical Guidance Document for Construction Environmental Management Plan, April
2014;
• Technical Guidance Document for Environmental Action Plan (EAP), April 2014;
• Technical Guidance Document for Environmental Audit Reports, January 2011;
• Technical Guidance Document for Submission of Environmental Permit Applications and
Environmental Studies, April 2014;
• Technical Guidance Document for Discharges from Construction Activities, April 2014;
• Technical Guidance Document for Storage of Hazardous Materials, April 2014;
• Technical Guidance Document for Fugitive Dust Control Plan, April 2014; and
• Technical Guidance Document for Leak Detection and Repair Plan, April 2014.
2
Depending on the nature and the impacts of the project, the environmental studies may include
Preliminary Environmental Review, Strategic Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact
Assessment, Construction Environmental Management Plan, Operation Environmental Management
Plan, and Decommissioning Environmental Management Plan.
32 | March 2018
Law No. 21 of 2005 – Regarding Waste Management in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi
This law provides guidelines to ensure effective management of waste at all stages, from the
source points to the transportation of waste and final disposal. As a minimum requirement, waste
generators are required to comply with the following:
• Reduce the amount of waste generated by implementing the regulations, methods,
techniques and alternatives approved in the Emirate for classifying, sorting, reusing or
recycling of waste;
• Classify the waste generated in terms of hazardous and non-hazardous waste;
• Adhere to the relevant occupational health and safety regulations, guidelines and codes of
practice; and
• Ensure that waste is transported in accordance with relevant codes of practice and appropriate
licenses.
Decree No. 17 of 2008 for Establishing the Centre of Waste Management of Abu
Dhabi
The Tadweer, Center of Waste Management-Abu Dhabi (CWM) was established in 2008 in order
to serve as the lead agency in controlling and coordinating the waste management activities
throughout the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. This includes implementing the Waste Management Strategy
and all aspects of service delivery required to establish a full cycle for an integrated waste
management system.
The CWM issued the technical guidelines relating to waste management in the Emirate of Abu
Dhabi. The guideline most applicable to this project is as follows:
Technical Guideline on Requirements and Procedures for Disposal of
Hazardous Waste
Hazardous waste will be generated during the construction of the Project, as such and the
Technical Guideline will apply. Waste generators are required to:
• Engage CWM Registered Service Providers3 for the collection / transport, treatment and /
or disposal of hazardous waste;
• Obtain CWM approval (i.e. one-time or annual) for the disposal of hazardous waste. The
waste generator will be required to provide information on the characteristics of the
hazardous waste (e.g. Waste Material Data Sheet, MSDSs and analysis report);
• Ensure that hazardous waste containers are not stored near a sewerage or water network,
stormwater network, marine environment, marine outfalls or channels; and
• Submit monthly records (RSP Register) along with waste test reports and copies of all
waste manifests for the month, within five working days of the following month.
The Technical Guideline also sets out the documentation procedure (i.e. use of Waste Manifest)
for tracking hazardous waste from the point of collection to the disposal or treatment facility.
This Technical Guideline defines hazardous wastes as those specified in the Basel Convention
(refer to Section 3.4).
3 https://www.nadafa.ae/en/ESPAcc.aspx
33 | March 2018
3.3.1 Regulation Supervision Bureau Regulations
The Regulation and Supervision Bureau (RSB) is the independent regulator of the water,
wastewater and electricity sector in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. It enforces the relevant laws primarily
through licensing of regulated activities including the:
• Generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity; and
• Production, transmission, distribution, sale and treatment of water including wastewater
products.
RSB regulations that could be applicable to the Project are outlined below.
Trade Effluent Control Regulations (2010)
These regulations are required under Article (63) of Law No (2) of 1998, as amended, and establish
a framework for the efficient and safe collection and treatment of trade effluent. Trade effluent is
non-domestic wastewater discharged by industrial and commercial premises.
The regulations require sewerage service licensees to consent to all trade effluent discharges. The
consent will define the permitted composition and quantity of the discharge and the regulations
empower sewerage service licensees enforce compliance with consents through inspection and
monitoring activities.
The Fuel Storage Tank Regulations 2009 (for Water and Electricity Sector -
Emirate of Abu Dhabi)
RSB requires registration of all fuel storage tanks with a capacity of 50,000 imperial gallons or
more within 30 days of coming into service. The Regulations further specify requirements on:
• Design parameters for storage tanks including secondary containment and corrosion
protection;
• Management procedures for release prevention and detection, maintenance and
inspection;
• Reporting of spills (> 200 imperial gallons);
• Fuel release emergency response plan; and
• Decommissioning of tanks.
3.4 International Conventions, Protocols and

Standards
The UAE is signatory to a number of international conventions and protocols considered to be
relevant to the Project construction and operational activities. The conventions relevant to the
Project are discussed below.
34 | March 2018
Marine Pollution (MARPOL) Control
MARPOL 73/78 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from

Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto
MARPOL 73/787 is the main international convention covering prevention of pollution of the marine
environment by ships from operational or accidental causes. Specific regulations of this
Convention are provided in the following annexes:
• Annex I Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Oil;
• Annex II Regulations for the Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances in Bulk;
• Annex III Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances Carried by Sea in Packaged

Form;
• Annex IV Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships; and
• Annex V Prevention of Pollution by Garbage from Ships.
The operation of any marine vessels for the construction of the Project will be required to adhere
to the requirements of this Connection.
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping Wastes and

Other Matter (LDC) (1972) including its Amendments
This Convention originally prohibits dumping of certain hazardous wastes that can potentially
cause marine pollution. However, in 1996 Parties adopted a Protocol to the Convention on the
Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 (known as the
London Protocol) which entered into force in 2006. This Protocol prohibits all dumping, except for
possibly acceptable wastes, contained in an annex to the Protocol, which would still require permits
from the relevant authority designated by the Contracting Parties.
Other key requirements of this Protocol include:
• Precautionary approach requiring that “appropriate preventative measures are taken

when there is reason to believe that wastes or other matter introduced into the marine
environment are likely to cause harm even when there is no conclusive evidence to
prove a causal relation between inputs and their effects”.
• Direct responsibility of polluter such that “the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost
of pollution”.
• Requirement for Contracting Parties to “ensure that the Protocol should not simply
result in pollution being transferred from one part of the environment to another”.
35 | March 2018
Climate Change and Air Pollution Control
Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (1985)
The Vienna Convention established mechanisms for international co-operation in research into the
ozone layer and the effects of ozone depleting chemicals (ODCs). This convention seeks to protect
human health and the environment against adverse effects that impact on and modify the ozone
layer.
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete Ozone Layer (1987)
On the basis of the Vienna Convention, the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the
Ozone Layer was established to call for the Parties to phase out the use of CFCs, halons and other
man-made ODCs. The most recent schedule for the phase out of each controlled substance has
been agreed during the 9th Meeting of the Parties in September 1997.
The UAE is a signatory to the Montreal Protocol and operates under Article 5(1). In line with its
commitments, the UAE has enacted a national decree called the Federal Decree No. 13 of 1999
Concerning Regulation of Ozone depleting Substances in the UAE.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992)
The Convention on Climate Change sets an overall framework for intergovernmental efforts to
tackle the challenge posed by global warming and climate change believed to have been caused
by industrial and other emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHG).
Under the Convention, governments:
• Gather and share information on greenhouse gas emissions, national policies and best
practices;
• Launch national strategies for addressing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to
expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to
developing countries; and
• Cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change.
• The UAE acceded to the convention in December 1995.
Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change (1997)
The Kyoto Protocol was developed in line with the objectives and institutions of the Convention on
Climate Change. The main difference to the Convention is that the Protocol commits rather than
encourage the signatory parties to stabilise their GHG emission.
Under the Protocol, the Annex I countries have committed to reduce their emissions by an average
of 5% against the 1990 levels over the period of 2008 to 2012. As a non-Annex I country, the UAE
is not required to reduce its emissions below 1990 levels. However, the UAE ratified the Protocol
on January 2005 and has submitted its First and Second Communications to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change in January 2007 and January 2010, respectively. This
36 | March 2018
initial communication presents options and initiatives that the UAE may undertake in order to
reduce its GHG emissions.
Paris Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change (2016)
The Paris Agreement is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC) dealing with greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, adaptation and
finance starting in the year 2020. The legally-binding framework for an internationally coordinated
effort to tackle climate change stipulates a global warming goal of well below 2°C on pre-industrial
averages. It requires countries to formulate ambitious climate targets which are consistent with this
goal.
The Paris Agreement establishes the main framework for cooperative action on climate change
beyond 2020 and will replace the Kyoto Protocol. It provides the framework under which the Paris
Agreement is adopted, it contains guidance on pre-2020 climate action, it regulates and organizes
action that needs to be taken before the Paris Agreement enters into force but is relevant for the
implementation of the Agreement (e.g. the formulation of guidance and modalities for the
Agreement) and it contains detail and guidance on how to develop and formulate NDCs.
Waste Management
Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous

Wastes and their Disposal (1989)
The Basel Convention was established primarily to set up a framework for controlling the
“transboundary” movements of hazardous wastes. Hazardous wastes covered by the Convention
include toxic, poisonous, explosive, corrosive, flammable, ecotoxic and infectious.
The Convention has developed the criteria for “environmentally sound management”, which
involves strong controls from the generation of waste to its storage, transport, treatment, reuse,
recycling, recovery and final disposal. It also promotes hazardous waste minimisation whenever
possible, as well as control of hazardous waste as close to where these are produced as possible.
Under this Convention, transboundary movement of hazardous wastes or other wastes is allowed
only under conditions below:
• If the state of export does not have the capability of managing or disposing of the
hazardous waste in an environmentally sound manner; and
• Upon prior written notification by the state of export to the designated authorities of the
state of import and transit, where appropriate.
Each country that is a party to the Convention is required to report on its hazardous waste
generation and movement. The UAE signed the Basel Convention on September 1989.
37 | March 2018
Chemicals and Dangerous Goods
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (2001)
The Stockholm Convention is a global treaty, which aims to protect human and the environment
from the so-called Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). POPs are “chemicals that remain intact
in the environment for long periods, become widely distributed geographically and accumulate in
fatty tissue of human and wildlife” (Stockholm Convention website). Recognizing the serious
effects of POPs to human health, the Convention requires Parties to take measures to eliminate
or reduce the release of POPs into the environment. Lists of chemicals categorized as POPs are
presented under Appendices of the Convention.
The UAE signed this Convention on May 2001 and subsequently ratified on July 2002.
Biodiversity
The Convention of Wetlands on International Importance – The Ramsar

Convention (1971)
Ramsar is the oldest of the modern global intergovernmental environmental agreements. The
treaty was negotiated throughout the 1960s with engagement from both national governments and
non-governmental organizations concerned about the increasing loss and degradation of wetland
habitat for migratory waterbirds. The convention was formalised in the Iranian city of Ramsar in
1971 and came into force in 1975.
The UAE ratified the convention and it entered into force across the UAE on 29th December 2007.
The United Arab Emirates currently has five (5) sites designated as Wetlands of International
Importance (Ramsar Sites), with a combined surface area of 20,278 hectares. None of the Ramsar
sites are located within the Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah. It is not known whether the recent move
to protect areas of mangrove and intertidal habitat will include submitting applications for
designation as Ramsar sites of international importance to migratory bird species.
Convention on Biological Diversity (1992)
The UAE signed this Convention in 1992 and subsequently ratified this in 2000.
The Convention on Biological Diversity promotes the conservation of biological diversity, the
sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the
use of genetic resources.
In April 2002, the Parties to the Convention committed themselves to achieve by 2010 a significant
reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level.
Regional Conventions
Kuwait Regional Convention for Cooperation on the Protection of the Marine

Environment from Pollution, 1978
During the Kuwait Regional Conference in 1978, the eight coastal states of the Gulf Region
including the UAE (along with Bahrain, Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi
38 | March 2018
Arabia) adopted the following documents to coordinate a common action towards protection of
their common marine environment:
• Kuwait Action Plan for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment and
Coastal Areas;
• Kuwait Regional Convention for the Co-operation on the Protection of the Marine
Environment; and
• Protocol concerning Regional Co-operation in Combating Pollution by Oil and Other

Harmful Substances in Cases of Emergency (1978).
The Kuwait Action Plan mainly covers activities relating to oil pollution, industrial wastes, sewage
and marine resources. Programs include coastal area management, fisheries, public health, land-
based activities, sea-based pollution, biodiversity, oceanography, marine emergencies, GIS and
remote sensing, environmental awareness and capacity building.
Milestones include the creation in 1979 of the Regional Organization for the Protection of the
Marine Environment (ROPME), the establishment in 1982 of the Marine Emergency Mutual Aid
Centre (MEMAC), and the adoption of the following four protocols addressing marine emergencies,
hazardous wastes, land-based activities and sea-based pollution:
• Protocol concerning Marine Pollution resulting from Exploration and Exploitation of the
Continental Shelf (1989);
• Protocol for the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-
Based Sources (1990);
• Protocol on the Control of Marine Transboundary Movements and Disposal of

Hazardous Wastes and Other Wastes (1998); and
• Protocol concerning the conservation of biological diversity and the establishment of

protected areas.
The concept of environmentally sound and sustainable development has been promoted by
ROPME since its establishment.
39 | March 2018
4 Project Description
4.1 Statement of Need
As detailed in Section 2.3.3, the ADWEC Statement of Future Capacity Requirements 2018 – 2024
Report has identified the need for additional Reverse Osmosis (RO) production capacity in the
Emirate of Abu Dhabi in order to meet anticipate growth in potable water demand. On the basis of
the analysis, ADWEC identify the requirement for 251 MIGD of additional RO capacity to be
available by 2022.
The projected change in composition of Abu Dhabi’s power generation sector will create a need
for additional stand-alone desalination capacities that are not constrained by any associated power
production. Although standalone water production is theoretically achievable with Multi Stage Flash
(MSF) and Multi-effect Distillation (MED) technologies coupled to dedicated boilers, the most
economical solution to achieve this is to use RO technology.
technologies. RO will enhance operational flexibility, enabling Abu Dhabi's current gas-fired IWPP
fleet to be operated more efficiently, allowing additional savings of gas. The adoption of RO also
delivers significant benefits in improved dispatch flexibility, which will be essential as inflexible
capacity.
Meeting the anticipated growth in potable water demand using RO technology rather than
traditional coupled thermal desalination technology also provides economic and strategic benefits.
Thermal plants in the UAE currently rely on gas combustion driven turbines and heat recovery
systems. The ADWEC analysis indicates that for all possible gas prices, water production cost of
RO are lower than the specific cost of the existing fleet. Use of RO technology also reduces
reliance on fluctuating fuel prices.
4.2 Project Location and Scale

The proposed development site is situated within the Taweelah Power and Water Complex,
located in the Al Taweelah area of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. The existing Taweelah Complex
commenced development in the 1970s and has grown rapidly since the 1990s. The complex now
contains three (3) combined gas cycle power generation and thermal desalination (MSF/MES)
plants. The existing complex has a total net power generation capacity of 4,113 MW and a net
water production capacity of 294 MIGD (ADWEC, 2017 4).
The plot, located in the southern portion of the Taweelah Power and Water Complex, has a
footprint area of approximately 379,000 m2 (Figure 3). The site is bordered to the south and west
by the Taweelah outfall channel that transports wastewater from the power generation and
desalination process to the Arabian Gulf. The Arabian Gulf is located approximately 50 metres to
the northwest of the site boundary.
4
http://www.adwec.ae/existing.html
40 | March 2018
Figure 3 Project Site
The site is devoid of any buildings or structures. The south west of the project site contains a gas
pipeline corridor measuring approximately 20 metres in width (Figure 4). This portion of the site
contains the Dolphin Gas Pipeline transporting natural gas from the gas processing and
compression plant at Ras Laffan. The pipeline was commissioned in 2007 and has the capacity to
transport up to two (2) billion cubic feet of natural gas per day from Qatar to the UAE.
The site consists of coastal sand sheet with imported fill material. The site shows scars from
historical cut and fill operations and sparse coverage of scattered vegetation. The vegetation has
naturally colonized the site since 2008 when historical aerial imagery shows the site to be largely
devoid of vegetation (Figure 5).
41 | March 2018
Figure 4 Project Site Plan Showing Location of Dolphin Gas Pipeline Corridor
42 | March 2018
A review of publicly available historical aerial imagery of the proposed development site, obtained
from Google Earth, indicates that the site was used as a storage area for fill material. Two (2) large
stockpiles are evident in the first detailed image of the site, taken in 2007. The 2008 image shows
a temporary office complex at the northern boundary of the site which is assumed to have been
the offices for the contractor carrying out the Taweelah B Plant expansion, completed in October
2008 (Figure 5). The area around the office site was also used as a stockpile / laydown area. The
image from 2012 shows the stockpiles to have been reduced in size with scars from excavators
evident across the majority of the site. The site shows minimal change between 2012 and the most
recent image, taken in November 2017.
2007 2008
2012 2017
Figure 5 Historical Aerial Imagery of the Site

(Source: Google Earth Pro, 2018)
Land use surrounding the Taweelah Complex is predominantly industrial to the north and east.
The Khalifa Port is two (2) km to the north whislt the Emirates Global Aluminium (EGA) alumina
refinery is located four (4) km northeast of Taweeah (Figure 6). Immediately to the west of the EGA
refinery, the Shaheen Bauxite Refinery is currently under construction.
43 | March 2018
Figure 6 Surrounding Land Uses
44 | March 2018
Both the EGA smelter and the bauxite refinery sit within the footprint of Khalifa Industrial Zone Area
A (KIZAD A). KIZAD is under development and is expected to be the industrial and logistical hub
of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi by 2030. The entire KIZAD A area has been prepared for development.
As such, the majority of the area has undergone site enabling works with extensive cut and fill
operations and construction of infrastructure. As such, the terrestrial ecology of the area has been
significantly degraded.
Immediately to the north of the Taweelah Complex boundary is the Emirates Heritage Club marina
that occupies a small parcel of land between the Taweelah complex and the Khalifa Port. To the
south of the Taweelah Complex boundary is the area of Al Hanjurah which is predominantly
privately owned land that includes forestry plantations and private residences believed to belong
to members of the Abu Dhabi Royal Family.
Figure 7 presents the areas of critical habitat in the vicinity of the project site as per the EAD
EnviroPortal GIS resource.
Figure 7 Areas of Environmental Sensitivity

Source: EAD, 2018
The key areas of note and distance from the project site are as follows:
• Fringing coral reef (purple):
o Coverage starts approximately one (1) km southwest of the site boundary beyond
the existing Al Taweelah outfall
• Areas of seagrass coverage (light green):
o Shallow marine waters adjacent to the Taweelah Complex seawater intake
channel. Coverage starts approximately 300 metres from the proposed site
boundary.
45 | March 2018
• Ras Ghanada Marine Protected Area (red outline):
o Located to the north of Khalifa Port, the MPA contains extensive areas of coral and
seagrass beds that are regionally significant. The MPA is located approximately
6.8 km northeast of the proposed site.
4.3 Project Activity and Description

The proposed development will employ Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) technology to
produce up to 200 MIGD potable water, equivalent to 909,216 m3/day.
The process of seawater reverse osmosis involves the intake of seawater from the marine
environment. Following physical filtration and pre-treatment to remove biological impurities, this
feedwater is then passed through pressured trains containing multiple thin-film composite
membranes that are partially permeable. The high pressure in the filter train and partial
permeability of the membranes means that water is forced against the osmotic gradient whilst salts
are excluded. Modern commercially available membranes can offer up to 99.8% salt rejection,
though the precise values are dependent upon the nature of the feedwater. The by-product of the
desalination process is concentrated brine with high concentrations of salts. This brine effluent is
typically discharged back into the marine environment. The product of the desalination process is
water with a very low salt content. This is then treated to make the water suitable for consumption
and transported to the distribution network.
Though the project is at the concept design phase, the technical envelope requirements for
feedwater have been provided by the design consultants (LF). The threshold limits for Total
Dissolved Solids (TDS) and temperature of seawater required to guarantee quality and quantity of
are provided in Table 8.
Table 8 Production Design Limits
Parameter Units Design Envelope
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 42,000 - 45,000
Temperature °C 19 – 37
4.3.1 Project Components

Though the project is still at the concept design phase, the principal components of the proposed
development will not change during the design process. A conceptual site plan for the proposed
development is provided in Figure 8. It is currently proposed that there will be two (2) SWRO plants
operating in parallel. The facility will, however, have a number of shared components required for
seawater intake, pre-treatment, waste management, operational infrastructure and transfer of
potable water and brine effluent off the site. The following sub-sections provide preliminary details
on the shared and individual project components as they are known at this stage of the design
process. It is noted that some components of the design may be subject to change during the
environmental assessment process as baseline data is collected and the design incorporates site
specific findings.
46 | March 2018
Figure 8 Conceptual Site Plan
47 | March 2018
Seawater Intake
The facility will have a combined seawater intake and pumping system that will be required to draw
up to 2,278,730 m3 seawater each day. This figure provides sufficient seawater to meet the
seawater demand at all possible operating points, at the most adverse seawater conditions in the
design envelope. Seawater intake design consideration shall include protection from storm,
minimizing obstruction and fouling caused by floating debris, sediment inflow, and maintaining
ease of maintenance.
Location of the intake has yet to be finalized. Given the intake volumes required, initial design
calculations estimate that using a submerged pipe intake to draw water in to the facility would
require six (6) intake lines each with a two (2) metre diameter. In light of this, an intake channel is
initially preferred, as depicted in Figure 8.
Use of the existing intake channel has been considered as an option. The intake volumes required
by the new facility render this option non-viable on the basis that intake velocities in the channel
will exceed the threshold at which physicals can operate effectively.
The design process will draw on the findings of the environmental assessment process to help
guide the best possible solution taking into account operational requirements, environmental
impacts and economic considerations. Hydrodynamic modelling is proposed as part of the EIA
(refer to Section 5.2.2) which will model the baseline conditions at the site and model the dispersion
of effluent from the facility.
Intake Pumps and Pre-Treatment

Ten equally sized pumps will be required. Of these, two (2) will remain in standby mode. The intake
pumping system will be vertical centrifugal. Intake water will be passed through a physical
screening system consisting of a revolving chain screen with 30m bar spacing to remove all large
debris. A second phase will comprise a MultiDisc screen with 4 mm perforated screen panels.
Finally, the feedwater will be shock dosed with Sodium Hypochlorite generated on-site with a view
to preventing bacterial growth in the intake system.
Individual Plant Components

Feedwater will then be passed through the two identical plants each containing the following key
components:
• Dissolved Air Filtration (DAF) system with multiple air/water recycle manifolds;
• Dual Media Filters (DMF)
• Reverse osmosis water recovery trains with dedicated energy recovery booster pumps,
energy recovery system and spiral wound membrane racks:
o 1st pass made up of 26 trains;
o 2nd pass of six (6) trains.
• RO membrane Clean-In-Place (CIP) system.
Common Facilities
The proposed development will have the following shared components:
• Chlorination and chemical dosing systems;
48 | March 2018
• Neutralization pit;
• Potable water treatment system; and
• Sludge treatment, dewatering and storage system.
Brine Effluent Outfall

As is the case with the seawater intake, the discharge location for the waste brine effluent has not
yet been finalized and is subject to the outcome of hydrodynamic dispersion modelling studies.
The current preference at the concept design phase is to discharge the effluent into the existing
outfall channel that runs adjacent to the site boundary.
Construction Phase
Given the final design is not yet completed, the precise construction requirements are not yet clear.
Indicative terrestrial construction works are likely to include the following components:
• Site enabling works:
o Removal of all vegetation;
o Taking site levels; and
o Setting up of temporary construction facilities such as site offices, access roads,
temporary diesel storage and septic tanks.
• Excavation of building foundations;
• Pumping concrete for foundations;
• Excavation of utility corridors;
• Installation of infrastructure for potable water, irrigation and sewage transfer systems,
electricity distribution and telecommunication infrastructure;
• Backfilling with previously excavated material, grading and profiling;
• Construction of the SWRO Plant buildings and structures;
• Installation of hard landscaping; and
• Soft landscaping.
As detailed above, the precise requirements for the seawater intake and outfall have not yet been
fully defined. This will be addressed in greater detail in the EIA. Nonetheless, the following works
may be required in the marine environment:
• Dredging of the seabed, whether for an intake channel near the shoreline or intake / outfall
trenches for submerged intake / outfall pipelines;
• Laying pipelines and construction of intake wells; and
• Construction of protective rock revetment in the event an open intake channel is required.
To facilitate the undertaking of construction activities, temporary facilities will be required on-site.
These facilities may include but are not be limited to the following:
• Construction offices;
• Welfare facilities/clinic;
• Security facilities;
49 | March 2018
• Parking facilities;
• Mosques and prayer rooms;
• Fencing and barriers;
• Project signage;
• Traffic signage;
• Portable toilets;
• Water tanks;
• Septic tanks;
• Power generators;
• Fuel storage tanks;
• Storage areas and warehouse;
• Plant yards;
• Laydown areas;
• Solid waste management areas; and
• Wash-down facilities.
The main construction equipment likely to be utilised during the marine works are as follows:
• Multi-purpose pontoon or jack-up barge;
• Tug or service vessel;
• Hydraulic excavator;
• Wheel loaders; and
• Dumper trucks to remove excavated material.
The equipment used for the landside construction works is likely to include, but may not be limited
to, augers, backhoe loader, compressor, concrete mixer an concrete pumps, crane, diesel
generator, dump truck, excavator, grader, concrete / industrial saw, rollers, rough terrain forklifts,
scrapers, tampers / rammers, trenches and welders.
Operational Phase
During operation the plant will have an anticipated energy demand of 4.2 – 4. kWh / m3 depending
on seawater conditions. Power for the process will be sourced from an existing sub-station located
in the south of the Taweelah Complex. All power will be supplied by the Taweelah Complex. No
power generation will be incorporated into the plant design, though the design will incorporate
energy recovery devices to reduce energy consumption where possible.
The plant will require certain chemical compounds to be stored on the site for use in water pre-
and post-process treatment. The chemical dosing and storage systems are to be designed to
ensure full compliance with applicable regulations, with particular reference to HSE requirements.
The precise process chemicals and compounds will be determined by the successful EPC
contractor who is awarded the Project by DoE. ILF have provided detail on the minimum facility
requirements:
50 | March 2018
• H 2 SO 4 and FeCl 3 required for DAF operation
• FeCl 3 required for DMF operation;
• Antiscalant and Sodium Bisulfite (SBS) for conditioning of feedwater to the RO section (1st
pass);
• NaOH and antiscalant dosing for RO 2nd pass;
• Coagulant and polymers for sludge dewatering and stabilization;
• Acid and basic dosing and monitoring system for effluent neutralization;
• Acid and basic dosing for RO membranes chemical cleaning (CIP);
• Biocide dosing for membrane sterilization and preservation.
Chemicals readily available on the local market shall be preferred.
Table 9 Key Chemical Dosing Requirements

Compound Use
Pre-treatment
NaOCl Seawater Disinfection. Utilised for protection of the intake screens and intake
pipework and downstream process piping and equipment from bacterial growth.
H 2 SO 4 pH adjustment. The pH will be adjusted to reach an optimum value for the dosing of
the coagulant in the DAF
FeCl 3 Coagulation. FeCl 3 enhances the coagulation and therefore increases the retention of
the solid in the pre-treatment (DAF)
1st Pass RO
Antiscalant Reduce/inhibit scale formation on the RO membrane
SBS SBS reduces the residual chlorine which can cause irreversible damage to the RO
membrane.
2nd Pass RO
Antiscalant Reduce/inhibit scale formation on the RO membrane
NaOH pH adjustment – NaOH brings the pH to a value which allows higher Boron rejection
Wastewater Treatment
Polyelectrolyte Coagulation - polyelectrolytes enhance the coagulation and therefore increase the
retention of the solid in the wastewater treatment system
Potabilization
Carbon Dioxide The potabilisation of the permeate water requires a recarbonation system provided to
(tanker) and treat the permeate water from the reverse osmosis process and make it suitable for
Calcium potable water
Carbonate
The re-carbonation system uses CO2 and limestone filters to harden the water
CLO 2 Disinfection/Sterilization of potable water
51 | March 2018
The principal waste stream produced during the operational phase will be concentrated brine. The
planned rates of discharge has yet to be defined, however the composition of the brine is expected
to be highly saline. Effluent waters may have a maximum salinity of 80 PSU. The discharge to the
marine environment will include all liquid wastes generated from the RO system. As well as process
effluent, discharges will include neutralized chemical wastes generated from the DMF and
chlorination. The effluent is also likely to include trace metals caused by corrosion of the pipes.
With regards waste removed from the site for disposal to the municipal waste management
network, the plant is expected to generate comparatively small volumes of domestic and
operational waste streams. The most significant volume of solid waste will be generated by the
dissolved air filtration system which will produce sludge. The operational sludge will require
treatment and temporary on-site storage prior to off-site disposal. Sludge will be dewatered on-site
using a dedicated sludge treatment system where the moisture content is removed by thickening
(settlers) and dewatering using centrifuges and through the addition of polymer aids. The target
dewatering will be 20% sludge final dryness as a minimum. Dewatered sludge will be transferred
off-site to a landfill site under license from the Abu Dhabi Center for Waste Management
(Tadweer).
4.4 Project Status and Schedule

The IWP project is currently at the concept design stage with ILF appointed as design consultants
by the DoE. Following completion of environmental assessment studies and mathematical
modelling, the detailed design will be completed.
The current proposed schedule for the start of the construction phase is May 2019. Construction
is anticipated to run for a duration of 42 months with works to be completed and the plant to fully
commissioned in October 2022.
The anticipated lifespan of the project is still under review, but is expected to be in the region of
25-30 years.
52 | March 2018
5 Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation
This section provides a brief overview of the existing environmental baseline conditions, identifies
data gaps and proposes environmental baseline data collection methodologies to address the gaps
in publicly available data. This section also briefly summarises potential environmental impacts to
respective environmental components that will be addressed in greater detail in the EIA. Typical
mitigation measures that might be proposed are presented. Finally, details on the proposed impact
assessment methodology that will be employed in the EIA is presented.
5.1 Air Quality

5.1.1 Description of the Environment
Baseline Conditions
Air quality in the UAE is commonly characterized by elevated levels of particulate matter (PM).
PM 10 levels frequently exceed the UAE Federal Guideline hourly limit of 150 µg/m3. This is largely
attributable to the fact that the UAE is located in an arid desert environment. The country has
naturally low vegetation covering and fine grained sandy soils that mean that during periods of
high winds, levels of airborne particulates are naturally high. During the summer, strong Shamal
winds also increase the concentration of airborne particulates. However, these natural
phenomenon are exacerbated by the impacts of rapid economic growth in the UAE. Large-scale,
rapid urbanization has been accompanied by removal of large areas of natural vegetation.
Increased construction activity, vehicle movements on unpaved roads and off-road driving
combined with significant increases in combustion emissions, both from transport and industrial
sources, contribute to elevated levels of airborne particulates in the region.
PM 2.5 is associated with greater human health impacts given the ability for the smaller particles to
enter into the lungs. To date it is estimated that 54%-67% of PM 2.5 generated in the Abu Dhabi
Emirate is as a direct consequence of anthropogenic activity (EAD, 2015).
Ground level ozone at urban air quality monitoring stations also frequently exceeds the Federal
Guideline limit for eight (8) hour periods (120 µg/m3) (EAD, 2015). Ground level ozone forms in the
atmosphere as a result of reactions between nitrogen oxides (NO x ) and Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOCs), in the presence of sunlight. The main sources of these precursor compounds
are combustion emissions from transportation, predominantly road traffic and international
shipping, and industrial activity. The presence of heavy industrial complexes at Taweelah and EGA
combined with increasing road traffic and the shipping terminal at Khalifa Port means that the area
is likely a strong source of NO x .
Other contaminants commonly recorded in monitoring of ambient air quality in the UAE are sulphur
oxides (SO x ) and carbon monoxide (CO). Both are largely present as a result of hydrocarbon
combustion. Concentrations typically vary with proximity to areas of significant industrial activity,
shipping ports or road transport infrastructure.
The Abu Dhabi Statistics Center (2016) identify power generation industrial processes and
transport as the primary source of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs) in the Emirate of Abu
Dhabi. With the population expansion and the growth of the three sectors, emissions of GHGs
increased in Abu Dhabi between 2010 and 2012 and have likely continued to grow from 2012 to
present.
53 | March 2018
Data Gaps
A review of publicly available data published by the EAD as part of the Abu Dhabi Air Quality
Monitoring programme indicates that there are no air quality monitoring stations situated within
Taweelah or KIZAD. It is understood that baseline ambient air quality (AAQ) monitoring has been
conducted in the past near the Project site by the Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU) using
an ambient air quality monitoring station (AAQMS) on behalf of Abu Dhabi Ports Company (ADPC).
This data is privately owned and is not currently available publicly. A data request for air quality
monitoring data specific to the Taweelah Complex similarly indicates that there is no publicly
available data specific to the Taweelah Complex area.
Proposed Baseline Data Collection

In order to address the gap in the data, HDR propose conducting an ambient air quality monitoring
campaign as part of the EIA. HDR propose the installation of a compact air quality monitoring
station (Aeroqual, AQM65) for the duration of four (4) continuous weeks at the location shown in
Figure 9 and Table 10.
Figure 9 Proposed Location of the Air Quality Monitoring Station
Table 10 GPS Coordinates of Air Quality Station
Station Name Latitude Longitude
AQU_01 24.758816° 54.676768°
54 | March 2018
The monitoring station will record the following air quality parameters:
• Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 );
• Carbon Monoxide (CO);
• Nitrogen Dioxide (NO x );
• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC);
• Ozone (O 3 );
• Sulphur Dioxide (SO 2 );
• Hydrogen Sulphide (H 2 S); and
• Particulate Matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5 ).
In addition to the parameters listed above, the following site specific information shall be recorded
by the HDR field scientist should spot noise monitoring be required:
• Date and time of measurements;

• Type and reference number of instrumentation used;
• Description of measurement location;
• GPS coordinated (UTM / WGS 84);
• Digital photographs of the monitoring site and potential Air Sensitive Receptors (NSRs);
• Meteorological conditions including wind speed, direction and ambient temperature; and
• Description of the most significant noise sources during the monitoring period.
The following meteorological data will be collected during the four (4) week monitoring period:
• Wind speed (m/s) by anemometer;

• Wind direction by anemometer;
• Relative humidity (%) by ancillary measurement;
• Barometric pressure by ancillary measurement; and
• Temperature (°C) by ancillary measurement.
5.1.2 Environmental Impact Prediction and Evaluation

Construction Phase Impacts
Mechanical dust sources result due to the movement of equipment or plant, as opposed to wind
erosion emissions which result from the action of wind disturbing and displacing particles into the
atmosphere. Mechanical emissions of particulates will likely generate some of the primary air
quality impacts on a local level during the construction phase. Activities that will likely generate
mechanical particulate emissions include:
• Earthworks (top soil removal, excavations, grading, bulldozing and compaction);
• Vehicle movements on unpaved tracks;
• Mechanical demolition works and wind erosion on unpaved surfaces and stockpiles; and
55 | March 2018
• Fill material transfer and hauling.
The generation of the following emissions during construction phase is also expected to have
impacts:
• Emission of combustion gasses from construction vehicles and equipment, generators,
and vehicles accessing and working on the project site;
• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) emitted from open chemicals and hydrocarbons
stored on site; and
• Odour from sanitary and waste disposal facilities.
Operational Phase Impacts

Potential air quality impacts during the operational phase are likely to be associated with the
following:
• Combustion emissions as a consequence of the additional vehicle trips to the area;
• Fugitive emissions from chemical and hydrocarbon storage areas / tanks; and
• Odour generation from the waste treatment system, sludge storage and possible defects
in the sewage waste transfer and storage system.
Cumulative Impacts
Impacts during both the construction and operational phase will be cumulative as transboundary
emissions of dust, combustion pollutants and GHGs combine with emissions from the Taweelah
Complex, KIZAD Area A, Khalifa Port and other areas.
Impact Assessment
Given the absence of significant point sources during both construction and operation, HDR
propose to undertake a qualitative assessment of air quality impacts associated with the proposed
development in the EIA. Impacts to changes in air quality will consider the following potential Air
Sensitive Receptors (ASRs):
• Employees and visitors to the Taweelah Complex;
• Residents and visitors to residences of the Royal Family located approximately two (2)
kilometres to the southwest;
• Employees and vistors to the Emirates Heritage Club and Co-op Fishing Harbour located
approximately 3.5 km to the northeast of the site;
• Forestry plantations and areas of mangroves and mudflats located to the south and
southwest of the site; and
• Any other potential ASRs identified during the course of environmental baseline surveys.
5.1.3 Mitigation Measures

Impacts on ambient air quality resulting from the construction activities can be controlled through
the implementation of the following mitigation measures:
56 | March 2018
Construction Phase
Dust Control
• Erection of hoarding along the site boundary and/or areas where dusty activities
performed.
• Site layout: Locate the dust generating activities, haulage routes, stockpiles and dusty
materials away from the sensitive receptors as far as possible (taking the predominant
wind direction into consideration).
• Surfacing and/or compaction of site access roads to minimise dust generated by vehicle
movements on-site.
• Surfacing and/or compaction of unsurfaced areas when work is completed to minimise
areas susceptible to wind erosion.
• Removal of stockpiles or materials that have a potential to emit dust from site as soon as
possible.
• Dusty materials on site or on truck (within and outside the site) to be covered by impervious
sheet to prevent wind erosion.
• Using mains electricity or battery powered equipment: avoid using diesel or petrol powered
generators, where practicable.
• Watering the unsurfaced areas and areas where dusty work is performed (cutting, grinding
and sawing): Watering the areas susceptible to wind erosion, where applicable.
• Wheel washing at site exits: Wash the vehicles before they leave the site to minimise dust
and soil on wheels being transferred off-site.
• Minimising dropping from height: Minimise drop heights from conveyors, loading shovels,
hoppers, loading or handling equipment. Use water sprays on such equipment / work
areas wherever appropriate.
• Enclosing chutes, conveyors and covering skips.
• Suspension of dusty works during periods of high wind speed.
Control of Exhaust Gases and Particulate Emissions
• Equipment and vehicles to be turned off when they are not in use to minimise gaseous
emissions and fuel consumption.
• Use of equipment fitted with pollution control devices (e.g. diesel particulate matter filter.
• Maintain the equipment and vehicles as per the manufacturer’s recommended intervals
and withdraw poorly maintained /sub-standard equipment and vehicles from service.
• Manage the sustainable delivery of machinery, materials, workers and staff members to
avoid double handling of trips.
• Banning of open burning on site.
Control of VOC Emissions
• Storage of fuel, paints and other volatile materials:
57 | March 2018
o Designated and well ventilated storage facilities provided for the storage of volatile
organic materials.
o The storage area should be located away from on-site and off-site sensitive
receptors (with consideration of the predominant wind direction).
o The quantity of volatile materials to be stored on-site should be kept to minimum.
Containers holding the volatile materials should be kept closed when not in use.
• Indoor storage of volatile organic materials should ensure adequate ventilation to prevent
employees from exposure to a build-up of VOCs.
Odour Control
• Locating portable toilets, sewage storage tanks and waste storage facilities away sensitive
receptors.
• Ensure toilets and septic tanks are well maintained and frequently cleaned. Leaks should
be fixed as soon as possible.
• Waste bins holding putrescible waste should be covered to minimise odour emission and
attraction of vectors.
• Regular off-site disposal of waste should be arranged by an EAD/ADM licensed waste
disposal contractor.
Operational Phase
Impacts on ambient air quality resulting from the operational activities can be controlled through
Control of VOC Emissions
• Storage of fuel, paints and other volatile materials:

o Designated and well ventilated storage facilities provided for the storage of volatile
organic materials.
o The storage area should be located away from on-site and off-site sensitive
receptors (with consideration of the predominant wind direction).
o The quantity of volatile materials to be stored on-site should be kept to minimum.
Containers holding the volatile materials should be kept closed when not in use.
• Indoor storage of volatile organic materials should ensure adequate ventilation to prevent
employees from exposure to a build-up of VOCs.
Control of Odour
• Any leaking of sewage should be fixed as soon as possible to minimise groundwater

contamination and the exposure of site occupants to harmful substances. Where practical,
pressure monitors should be installed in the sewerage to monitor for indications of leaks
within the system.
• Housekeeping and sanitary conditions should be well maintained at the waste
management facilities. Bins for putrescible waste should be kept covered. Waste on site
58 | March 2018
and at the waste management facilities to be removed from site regularly to avoid over
accumulation of waste.
5.2 Marine Water and Sediment

Seasonal changes in hydrodynamic and physicochemical water processes cause pronounced
periodic shifts in water quality throughout the Gulf. A key driver of these processes is the Gulf
salinity front. This front changes according to ambient temperature driven by seasonal
(summer/winter) changes, and creates a distinctive and dynamic thermo-saline isopleth. In winter,
circulation of relatively warmer less saline waters entering the Gulf from the Strait of Hormuz is
restricted to the southern Gulf. However, during summer months relatively less saline water enters
the Gulf from the Strait of Hormuz in surface levels, passing inwards along the Iranian coast before
reaching the Arabian coasts in a broadly anticlockwise flow, resulting in enhanced circulation
(Kampf and Sadrinasab, 2005).
The Gulf waters have high salinity of 38 - 45‰, although areas of net evaporation such as the Gulf
of Salwa exhibit substantially more saline water of over 55‰. Water temperature ranges can be
extreme fluxing from over 32°C in surface coastal waters in the summer to less than 17°C in the
central and western Gulf in the winter. The elevated seawater temperatures and salinity have
important effects on water quality by reducing the capacity for oxygen to remain dissolved in water.
Increasing salinity also results in increased precipitation of calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ) in
seawater, which reduces its buffering capacity against increases in acidity. As a consequence
saline waters have a tendency to be more alkaline than freshwater bodies. Importantly, prevailing
winds and tidal currents work in combination to increase wave action, which in-turn oxygenates
surface waters and is considered an important process for maintaining marine life in the Gulf.
Water temperatures and salinity values vary in the UAE’s coastal waters throughout the year, with
temperatures ranging between 19°C and 35°C, and salinity ranging between 32 and 42 ppt
(Abdessalaam, 2007). In the summer months, seawater temperatures and salinity values are
higher, due to increased evaporation rates. In addition, due to the shallow nature of the Arabian
Gulf and the limited input of freshwater, the salinity tends to display higher values compared to
similar geographical locations around the world.
Sediments in the Gulf show marked regional differences with carbonate sands predominating
throughout the Saudi Arabian – UAE coast (Al-Ghadban, 2002). Carbonaceous sediments of
biological origin (derived mainly from microfauna, especially foraminifera) make up the majority of
the substrate in Abu Dhabi’s coastal waters. On a local scale, sediment compositions are
influenced by a number of factors such as water depth, water agitation, light penetration, origin of
sediment (whether autochthonous, allochthonous, calcareous or terrigenous) and hydrodynamic
processes and proximity to sources of anthropogenic pollutants (Al-Ghadban et al, 1998).
Data Gaps
A review of data carried out during the project scoping stage shows that there is no publicly
available site specific data relating to ambient water and sediment conditions. Water quality
monitoring data relating to effluent outfall is available and will be reviewed as part of the EIA. In
addition, though publicly available charts provide indicative bathymetry in the vicinity of the project
site (Figure 10), detailed site information on bathymetry is not currently available.
59 | March 2018
Figure 10 Nautical Chart for Taweelah Area
Source: Navionics, 2018
In order to asses extent of sediment plume dispersion during possible dredging works, changes to
the hydrodynamic regime and water quality impacts during operation, site specific data relating to
the currents and tides are also required. This was identified as an additional gap in the available
data.
Marine Water Quality
In order to address the data gaps, a marine environmental baseline data collection programme is
proposed. A month long ambient water quality monitoring campaign will be carried out. Ambient
water quality samples will be collected over twenty days from nine (9) locations shown in Figure
11 and Table 11.
60 | March 2018
Figure 11 Proposed Locations of the Marine Monitoring Stations Including
Proposed In-Situ Transect Locations
Table 11 GPS Coordinates of Marine Monitoring Stations
MAR_01 24.770849° 54.676639°
MAR_02 24.756275° 54.664172°
MAR_03 24.784612° 54.675147°
MAR_04 24.773727° 54.667108°
MAR_05 24.766477° 54.661185°
MAR_06 24.757024° 54.655281°
MAR_07 24.783285° 54.661136°
MAR_08 24.774888° 54.653328°
MAR_09 24.772150° 54.638721°
Assuming water depth exceeds three (3) metres, water samples will be collected from one (1)
metre below the surface and one (1) metre above the seabed using a Wildco Beta water sampler,
or similar. At sites where water depth does not exceed three (3) metres, samples will be collected
from mid-depth in the water column.
61 | March 2018
Samples will be submitted to an ENAS accredited analytical laboratory, for the analysis of the
following parameters:
• Metals (Al, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Pb, Mn, Hg, Ni, Se, V and Zn);
• Total Suspended Solids (TSS);
• Total Dissolved Solids (TDS);
• Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD);
• Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD);
• Ammonium;
• Ammonia-nitrogen;
• Nitrate;
• Nitrite;
• Total Nitrogen;
• Phosphate;
• Silicate;
• Sulphate;
• Sulphide;
• Residual Chlorine;
• Oil and Grease;
• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH); andFigure 11
• E.coli.
Water quality will be measured in situ at each of the marine water quality sampling station for the
following parameters:
• pH;
• Dissolved oxygen (DO);
• Temperature;
• Conductivity;
• Salinity;
• Chlorophyll ‘a’; and
• Turbidity.
In addition to the in-situ measurements recorded at each of the nine (9) sampling stations,
additional in-situ measurement shall be conducted along a number of pre-defined transects as
shown in Figure 11. Profiled measurements will be collected approximately every 500m along
these transects.
Care will be taken not to disturb the seabed during sampling in order to avoid recording artificially
elevated turbidity measurements.
62 | March 2018
Proposed sampling points are provided in Figure 10.
Marine Sediment Quality
One (1) set of marine sediment samples will be collected from each of the nine (9) marine sampling
sites using a Van Veen Petite Ponar grab sampler deployed from the survey vessel. As soon as
sediment samples are collected, and before their transfer into sample containers, visual
observations will be made and a record of the following will be made:
• Sediment colour;
• Character;
• Volume;
• Any visual or olfactory indications of contamination;
• Any visual presence of biological organisms; and
• Photograph.
Samples will be sent to an ENAS-accredited and ISO/IEC 17025 certified laboratory for analysis
of the following parameters:
• Particle size distribution;

• Metals (Al, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Pb, Mn, Hg, Ni and Zn);
• Nitrate;
• Nitrite;
• Ammonium;
• Ammonia-nitrogen;
• Total Nitrogen;
• Phosphate;
• Total Organic Carbon (TOC);
• Sulphate;
• Sulphide;
• Phenols;
• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH);
• Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)
In the absence of locally specific sediment contamination guidelines, results will be assessed
against the US NOAA Threshold Effects Level (TEL) standards. The NOAA TEL provide an
indicative screen for certain parameters.
Bathymetry
A bathymetric survey will be conducted adjacent to the project site. The high resolution survey will
cover a corridor of 500m x 2,000m. The proposed survey area is shown in Figure 12.
63 | March 2018
Figure 12 Proposed Bathymetric Survey Corridor
Currents and Tides
In order to collect site specific data on current and tidal water movements in the study area, HDR
propose the installation of two (2) Nortek Aquadopp Current Profilers (or similar model) for a
duration of four (4) consecutive weeks. The Aquadopps will be mounted in either steel or aluminium
frames and will be deployed, and recovered from a suitable vessel using a PADI qualified dive
team. The frame will be moored in place on the seabed at the required location with up to 4x
anchors & chains, and if required additional sandbag ballast. This should minimise the possibility
of theft by third parties, snagging by fish nets, or displacement by wave action. The deployment
position of the Aquadopps will be logged using dGPS with an accuracy of +/- 1.5m, or better.
The following parameters will be recorded for a duration of four (4) weeks:
• Temperature;
• Current speed at profiled depths; and
• Current direction at profiled depths.
The two Aquadopps shall be located at distances of 300 m and 3,500 m from the shore of the
Project site to capture conditions in close proximity to the project site and further offshore from the
site.
In addition to this, one tidal gauge shall be deployed proximal to one of the Aquadopp Profilers.

The nature and extent of construction works required in the marine environment will be more clearly
defined during the environmental assessment. Potential sources of negative environmental impact
during construction and operational phases are listed in the following sub-sections.
64 | March 2018
The Project will have the following components that are likely to impact the marine environment:
• Benthic dredging for possible intake / outfall alignments causing direct habitat loss,
negative water quality impacts and smothering of benthic communities.
• Habitat loss, marine water and sediment impacts associated with construction of new
marine structures.
• Land-side construction works causing sediment run-off in to the marine environment.

During the operational phase, the principal source of potential marine water and sediment quality
impacts will be associated with the discharge of waste brine to the marine environment. The
discharge to the marine environment will include all liquid wastes generated from the RO system.
As well as process effluent, discharges will include neutralized chemical wastes generated from
the DMF and chlorination. The effluent is also likely to include trace metals caused by corrosion of
the pipes.
Depending on the type of seawater intake that is selected, changes to the hydrodynamic regime
in the vicinity of the Taweelah Complex can also be expected.
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts are anticipated as the effluent from the proposed development will contribute
to incremental changes in water quality, water temperature and salinity beyond the footprint of the
Project site. Outfalls from the Taweelah Complex will be considered in the impact assessment to
ensure that cumulative impacts are considered. Data will also be collected in close proximity to the
existing EGA outfall to ensure that the impact assessment covers all industrial discharges into the
study area.
Impact Assessment
The principal impact on the marine environment is the direct and cumulative impact of the new
seawater intakes and brine effluent outfall. Given the scale of the development hydrodynamic
dispersion modelling is required to assess the changes to the hydrodynamic regime and
associated water quality impacts. Dispersion modeling will be carried out with a view to providing
a basis for a quantitative assessment of the potential impacts of the brine effluent from the
proposed facility and for optimizing the locations of both the outfall and intake of the proposed
desalination plant. The following sub-sections detail the modeling proposed to be undertaken as
part of the EIA.
Site Understanding
A number of relevant considerations must first be addressed ahead of any model selection, grid
size determination or scenario runs. Understanding the localized marine environment proximal to
the facilities is crucial for developing and applying the right model coefficients and achieving a
calibrated and, ultimately, a validated model. An important aspect of this particular modeling
exercise is focusing on the data that will help achieve a calibrated model – besides the data needs
for the desalination plant needs per se. The following considerations are paramount to achieving
a calibrated, valid and reliable model:
65 | March 2018
• The thermal load originating from the existing canal discharging directly into the coastal
waters is significant. This thermal load directly affects the hydrodynamic circulation pattern
of the nearshore waters creating a thermal gradient that stratifies the water column. The
loading can be estimated based on the discharge volumes and water temperatures of the
discharged waters from the power plants and desalination operations. This information will
be requested from ADWEA. It is ADWEA preference to use the same canal for discharging
the brine. This option as well as others including an off-shore outfall and an offshore intake
will be tested as part of the modeling exercise.
• In order to calibrate the hydrodynamic model two (2) Aquadopp current profilers will be
deployed at a locations that capture the prevailing currents velocities and direction (refer
to Section 5.2.1). In addition, a series of measurements of in situ parameters (i.e., DO,
temperature, salinity, pH, chlorophyll a and Blue Green Algae) will also be carried out along
transects in order to better define the baseline conditions (refer to Section 5.2.1).
• The bathymetric information will be collected by conducting a survey of 2,000 m by 500 m
across from the proposed facility location (refer to Section 5.2.1).
Hydrodynamic ECOMSED Model
The hydrodynamic model to be used for this study is a three-dimensional, time-dependent,
estuarine and coastal circulation model developed by Blumberg and Mellor (1987). The model
incorporates the Mellor and Yamada (1982) level 2-½ turbulence-closure scheme to provide a
realistic parameterization of vertical mixing. A system of curvilinear coordinates is used in the
horizontal direction which allows for a smooth and accurate representation of variable shoreline
geometry. In the vertical scale, the model uses a transformed coordinate system known as the σ-
coordinate transformation to allow for a better representation of bottom topography. Water surface
elevation, water velocity in three dimensions, temperature and salinity, and water turbulence are
predicted in response to weather conditions (winds and incident solar radiation), tributary inflows,
tides, temperature and salinity at open boundaries connected to the coastal waters. Illustrations
of a zoomed out grid utilized for a similar study adjacent to the DEWA facilities in the Emirate of
Dubai is shown in Figure 13.
66 | March 2018
Figure 13 Modeling Grid Developed by HDR for SWRO Dispersion Study in
Dubai
The model has gained wide acceptance within the modeling community and regulatory agencies
as indicated by the number of applications to important water bodies around the world. Among
these applications are: Abu Dhabi Island (2009 – 2016), Dubai Creek (HydroQual, 2003, 2005)
Dubai coast (HDR, 2007, 2013, 2014, 2015), New York Harbor and Bight (Blumberg et al, 1999),
the Hudson Raritan estuary (Oey et al., 1985a,b), Delaware River, Delaware Bay, and adjacent
continental shelf (Galperin and Mellor 1990a,b), the South Atlantic Bight (Blumberg and Mellor,
1983), the Gulf of Mexico (Blumberg and Mellor, 1985), Chesapeake Bay (Blumberg and Goodrich
1990), Massachusetts Bay (Blumberg et al., 1993), St. Andrew Bay (Blumberg and Kim, 1998),
and Onondaga Lake (Ahsan and Blumberg 1999). The model has also been applied in several
other lake environments such as Lake Michigan, Lake Pontchartrain (Signell and List, 1997),
Green Bay (HydroQual, 2001), and Lake Ontario (HydroQual, 2005 and 2008), Passaic River
(2005-2016), Housatonic River (2015-2011). In all of these studies, model performance was
assessed by means of extensive comparisons between model calculations and measurements.
The predominant physics were realistically reproduced by the model for this wide range of
applications.
The model solves a coupled system of differential, prognostic equations describing the
conservation of mass, momentum, temperature, salinity, turbulence energy and a turbulence
macroscale. The governing equations for velocity Ui = (u,v,w), temperature (T), salinity (S), and xi
= (x,y,z) are as follows:
67 | March 2018
∂U i
=0
∂x i (2-1)
∂ ∂
(U , V ) + [U i ( u , v ) + f ( −v , u )] =
∂t ∂ xi
1 ∂P ∂P ∂ ∂
− , + KM ( u , v ) + ( FU , FV )
ρo ∂ x ∂ y ∂z ∂z
(2-2)
∂T ∂ ∂ ∂T
+ (U i T ) = KH + FT
∂t ∂ xi ∂z ∂z
(2-3)
∂S ∂ ∂ ∂S
+ (U i S ) = KH + FS
∂t ∂ xi ∂z ∂z
(2-4)
The horizontal diffusion terms, (FU, FV), FT and FS, in Equations (2-2) through (2-4) are calculated
using a Smagorinsky (1963) horizontal diffusion formulation (Mellor and Blumberg, 1985). Under
the shallow water assumption, the vertical momentum equation is reduced to a hydrostatic
pressure equation. Vertical accelerations due to buoyancy effects and sudden variations in bottom
topography are not taken into account. The hydrostatic approximation yields:
P η ρ − ρ0
= g (η − z ) + ∫ g dz ′
ρ0 z ρ0 (2-5)
where P is pressure, z is water depth, η(x,y,t) is the free surface elevation,

ρ0 is a reference
density, and
ρ = ρ (T , S ) is the density.
The vertical mixing coefficients, KM and KH, in Equations (2-2) through (2-4) are obtained by
applying the Mellor and Yamada Level 2-½ turbulence-closure scheme and are given by:
K M = ql S M + υ M (2-6)
K H = ql SH + υH (2-7)
where q2/2 is the turbulent kinetic energy, l is a turbulence length scale, SM and SH are stability
functions defined by solutions to algebraic equations given by Mellor and Yamada (1982) as
modified by Galperin et al. (1988), and υM and υH are constants. The variables q2 and l are
determined from the following differential transport equations:
68 | March 2018
∂ q2 ∂ ( uq 2 ) ∂ ( vq 2 ) ∂ ( wq 2 )
+ + + =
∂t ∂x ∂ y ∂z
2 2
∂ ∂ q2 ∂u ∂v 2g ∂ρ
Kq + 2K M + + KH − 2
∂z ∂z ∂z ∂z ρo ∂z
∂ ( q 2l ) ∂ ( uq 2 l ) ∂ ( vq 2 l ) ∂ ( wq 2 l )
+ + + =
∂t ∂x ∂ y ∂z
2 2
∂ ∂ ( q 2l ) ∂u ∂v g ∂ρ
Kq + E1l K M + + KH −
∂z ∂z ∂z ∂z ρo ∂z
K = 0.2ql F
where q , the eddy diffusion coefficient for turbulent kinetic energy; Fq and l represent
horizontal diffusion of the turbulent kinetic energy and turbulence length scale and are
~
ω
parameterized in a manner analogous to either Equation (2-6) or (2-7); is a wall proximity
ω%= 1 + E ( l κ L ) ( L ) = (η − z ) + ( H + z ) ,
2 −1 −1 −1
function defined as 2
; where κ is the von
Karman constant (= 0.41), H is the water depth, η is the free surface elevation, and E1, E2, and
B1 are empirical constants specified in the closure scheme.
The basic Equations, (2-1) through (2-9), are transformed into a terrain-following σ-coordinate
system in the vertical scale and an orthogonal curvilinear coordinate system in the horizontal scale.
The resulting equations are vertically integrated to extract barotropic variables, and a mode
splitting technique is introduced such that the fast-moving, external barotropic modes and relatively
much-slower internal baroclinic modes are calculated by prognostic equations with different time
steps. Detailed solution techniques are described in Blumberg and Mellor (1987).
The model has many features that address coastal engineering projects. They include model
capability to address wetting and drying processes in shallow tidal flats; coupled intake/outfall flow
diversion to address power plant cooling water system and discharge of elevated salinity from
desalination plant; thin dams to account for flow around wave breakers/hurricane barriers in harbor
system; allowing uni-directional flows in the model domain to simulate tidal gate operations.
Use of Model in the UAE

This model has been applied on more than two thousand studies since 1980 in its initial and refined
versions over the last 30 years. The list below is a list of studies of a similar nature where the
model has been applied in the UAE.
69 | March 2018
Table 12 Similar Dispersion Modelling Studies in the UAE
HDR Summary of Similar Studies in the UAE

Client Water Body Description
Outfall Diffuser Design

Outfall and Diffusers siting and
Dubai Municipality Jebel Ali Waters (UAE)
design
Jacobs Engineering Abu Dhabi Coast (UAE) Submerged multi-port diffuser
Nakheel Jebel Ali Waters (UAE) Outfall Discharge
ILF Ghantoot Coastline (UAE) Mixing Zone Study
Outfall and Diffusers siting and
DEWA Arabian Gulf (UAE)
design
Modelling Tasks
Establishing the Model Grid
A fine grid with at least 10 layers in the vertical will be built using the bathymetric information
collected in this study as well as other available data sources. The grid size will be very fine near
the coast line (i.e., ~ 10 m) and increases in size further off-shore in order to optimize computing
time. Should more refinement be needed, the grid will be modified to an even finer spatial
resolution around the proposed SWRO discharge location, other outfalls in the area and the Power
Station intake structure. The model grid refinements – should it be required - will also take into
account existing and future development and other structures, including water intake structures.
ECOMSED Model Calibration
HDR will use the data collected as part of this study – physico-chemical, hydrographic and
bathymetric data, as well as data from other existing current, meteorological and tide information
for testing and calibrating the model.
SWRO Discharge Assessment
Once the model testing and calibration are completed, the SWRO discharge scenarios can be
analyzed. Up to four (4) SWRO discharge scenarios will be analyzed with the model. The
scenarios conditions will include:
• Testing brine discharges in existing outfall canal, using the existing intake canal as a
source of raw seawater into the plant; and
• Up to three combinations of brine discharges into an off-shore outfall and off-shore intake
locations.
These four (4) model scenarios will be analyzed with the model for a 30-day period that represent
a range of environmental conditions. Model output will be provided as spatial distributions of
SWRO salinity variations for different time periods (e.g., tidal average, 30-day average) at different
depths in the water column and as time-series of salinity variations at specific locations around the
SWRO discharge location (including the intake location). These model outputs will be used to
optimize the locations of the outfall in a way that the discharge point provides the highest possible
dilution that:
• Takes into account existing infrastructure, i.e., outfalls, intakes and discharges from other
sources in the vicinity;
70 | March 2018
• Has no influence on the intake point;
• Determines compliance with EAD Environmental Regulations for SWRO rejects; and
• Assesses the potential for SWRO recirculation into the Power Station intake structure.

Construction Phase
Impacts to the marine environment during the construction works are inevitable. However, the
extent of the impacts can be managed with the implementation of the following appropriate
mitigation measures:
• Prior to starting any construction works in the marine environment, the contractor will install
heavy duty, low permeability silt screens to minimize the dispersion of marine sediments
during trenching;
• Continuous visual observations of the silt screens to monitor for damage and dispersion of
the sediment plume in the receiving environment. If damage is observed, construction
works will be put on hold until the damage is repaired or new silt curtains have been
installed;
• Turbidity must be continuously monitored using a real-time measurement system prior to
and during dredging and/or trenching operations. The collected data must then be
compared to EAD water quality standards. In this regard it is important that baseline
conditions established prior to trenching or dredging operation serve as the basis for
interpreting the real–time data. Should the DM objectives be exceeded or the baseline
conditions altered, the contractor will suspend work until mitigation measures are put in
place and/or sea conditions improve if the increase in turbidity is weather related. The
adoption of an adaptive management process that could include the implementation of
“environmental dredging” methodologies may be needed in case of repeated
exceedances. Yet, the expected minimum disturbance of the seabed during the trenching
operation may preclude the need to adopt environmental dredging methods.
• No dumping of dredged spoil in to the marine environment will permitted. All excavated
material will be collected for off-site disposal by an EAD/ADM licensed waste disposal
contractor.
• All vessels to reduce speed below 5 knots within nearshore environments to minimize
turbidity generation caused by propeller wash;
• On-site refueling of marine vessels is prohibited;
• All wastes to be collected and disposed off-site;
• Use of environmentally degradable greases wherever feasible;
• All vessels will be equipped with a spill response kit, including booms that can be deployed
from the vessel. All vessel employees will receive training in the appropriate spill response
measures; and
• The contractor will appoint a marine fauna observer (MFO) on each vessel. The MFO will
check for marine megafauna within a 300 meter radius of the vessel. Dredging activities
are to be ceased until 20 minutes after the last observation of marine fauna in the
monitoring zone.
71 | March 2018
Operational Phase
During the operational phase, the discharge of brine and other waste water from the Project plant
are inevitable. In order to reduce the impacts associated with the brine discharge, HDR will carry
out a modelling study to aid with the design of the outfall pipeline.
• All discharge that will be mixed with the brine (liquid chemical wastes generated from the
DAF and DMF stages of sea water filtration) shall be neutralized in the on-site facilities;
• All liquid chemical wastes from the Plant is to be treated to a level whereby discharge is
compliant with the EAD discharge standards; and
• No wastes will be discharged to the marine environment without prior consent by EAD.
5.3 Marine Ecology

The EAD EnviroPortal identifies benthic habitat in the vicinity of the Project site (Figure 14). Areas
of light green indicate that seabed habitat immediately adjacent to the Project site is comprised
predominantly of unconsolidated sandy bottom. To the southwest and west, these sandy areas
appear to be interspersed with areas of hard substrate (grey zones).
72 | March 2018
Figure 14 EAD EnviroPortal Habitat Map
The EAD EnviroPortal also identifies areas of critical environmental sensitivity (Figure 15). The key
areas of note and distance from the project site are as follows:
• Fringing coral reef (purple):
o Coverage starts approximately one (1) km southwest of the site boundary
beyond the existing Al Taweelah outfall.
• Areas of seagrass coverage (light green):
o Shallow marine waters adjacent to the Taweelah Complex seawater intake
channel. Coverage starts approximately 300 metres from the proposed site
boundary.
Figure 15 Areas of Critical Marine Habitat
Data Gaps
It is noted that the EnviroPortal data is derived from remote sensing data. There have been no
known ground trothing surveys to confirm habitat nature and coverage. In light of this, and
through the data gap analysis, the following key information on local marine ecology is not
available for inclusion in the environmental assessment:
1. Visual assessment of benthic habitats and associated sessile epibenthic communities;
73 | March 2018
2. Phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthic infaunal communities; and
3. Demersal fish communities in the area around the Project site.
Habitat Assessment
In order to address the data gaps identified above, HDR propose carrying out a single season
marine ecological survey in the vicinity of the Project site. The survey will aim to characterize
benthic habitat distribution through deployment of towed video and drop-down camera arrays
recording HD video. Where high value habitat is identified, and assuming there are no risks to
health and safety of the survey team, marine scientists on SCUBA will carry out line intersect
transects to provide more detailed information on community structure and coverage.
In addition to the above samples of phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthic infauna will be
collected a six (6) of the marine sampling locations identified in Section 5.2.1. Sites will be randomly
selected to limit bias in site selection. The proposed sampling methodologies are outlined below.
Benthic Infauna
Benthic infauna samples will be from the top 10 cm of the substrate using a Van Veen Petite Ponar
Grab Sampler. Upon retrieval of the grab, the entire sample will be sieved with a 100 μm mesh
whilst on-site. The remaining sediment and organisms in the sieve will be transferred to a sample
container. The samples will be preserved using a mixture of 10% buffered formalin, and kept at
room temperature pending delivery to the analytical laboratory for sorting and taxonomic
identification. Individuals will be identified to species level where possible and abundance will be
reported.
Phytoplankton
A single phytoplankton sample will collected at each of the six (6) sampling locations using a
‘Wildco’ water sampler, or similar. Samples will be immediately decanted into a 500 ml sample
container and preserved using 10 ml Lugol’s solution. Sample containers will be immediately
wrapped in tinfoil and placed in a dark cooler box to minimize cell division prior to analysis
taxonomic identification and abundance assessment.
Zooplankton
A single zooplankton sample will collected at each of the six (6) sampling locations by a single
horizontal tow using a 64 µm mesh plankton net. The sample inside the mesh net will be washed
down to ensure that all plankton is concentrated in the cod end. Samples will be immediately
decanted into a 500 ml sample container and preserved using 10% buffered formaldehyde
solution. Samples will be transfered to the analytical laboratory for taxonomic identification and
abundance assessment on the day of sample collection.
Underwater Visual Census
An Underwater Visual Census (UVC) will be conducted at key locations in areas that are likely to
support fish assemblages. HDR propose the use of Baited Remote Underwater Video System
(BRUVS). Aluminum frames with a fixed high resolution video camera and a bait station mounted
on the support frame will be deployed for minimum soak times of 35 minutes per location. BRUVS
74 | March 2018
provides a non-destructive and non-intrusive method of assessing fish populations and the
technique provides a useful way to gauge the approximate composition and extent of demersal
fish populations in the study area. The data provided is by no means exhaustive, but instead
provide an indication of some of the species that frequent the areas adjacent to the Project site. It
is noted that nocturnal BRUVS surveys are not proposed at this stage.
Following recovery, the video footage will be reviewed in HDR’s offices with all recorded species
identified to species level where visibility permits. The records will then be analysed to determine
species richness and maximum abundance. Maximum abundance will be calculated by counting
the maximum number of any one species present in any one frame (MaxN).
Marine Mammal and Reptile Observations
Though the EAD EnviroPortal does not show records of marine mammals or reptiles within a three
(3) km radius of the project site, this does not preclude them from utilizing the study area. Whilst
dedicated MMRO surveys are not proposed as part of this assessment, incidental observations of
marine mammals and reptiles will be recorded. In the event that HDR’s team of marine scientist
do observe anything of note a GPS record will be maintained and the following information will be
recorded, if feasible:
• Species;
• Timing;
• Direction of travel;
• Behaviour (i.e. feeding); and
• Abundance.

The status and health of marine ecological receptors is inherently linked to changes in ambient
water and sediment conditions. Construction phase impacts will consider degradation of water and
sediment quality as well as direct and indirect impacts on habitats within the footprint of the
construction works and the surrounding areas.
With regards the operational phase, the quantitative impact assessment of water quality changes
caused by the brine effluent plume dispersion (Section 5.2.2) will inform a qualitative impact
assessment of potential impacts on marine ecological receptors. Again, this will assess potential
changes in the vicinity of the project site and surrounding areas.
Cummulative Impacts
Consideration of both sessile and mobile ecological receptors will be included in the impact
assessment, as will the cumulative impact of the proposed development when considered in the
wider context of existing and potential future developments that might negatively impact or
enhance ecological resources in the study area.
75 | March 2018
Impact Assessment
As detailed above, the impact assessment will undertake a qualitative assessment of predicted
changes in water and sediment quality, noise and light generation, direct and indirect habitat loss
/ degradation and potential habitat creation. Where feasible, the impact assessment will draw on
quantitative modelling (refer to Section 5.2.2).

The proposed mitigation measures to protect the marine ecological environment for both
construction and operation phases of the Project shall be the same as those listed in section 5.2.3
of this ToR document.
5.4 Geology, Seismicity, Soil, and Groundwater

A review of the EAD EnviroPortal shows that the project site is classified as urban, but sits within
an area made up of torripsamments. Torripsamments are dominated by wind-borne sands on
dunes and sand sheets. A few of the soils are alluvial sands with little or no
gravel. Torripsamments are the most extensive soils in the UAE, covering an estimated 75% of the
UAE’s surface area (Emirates Soil Museum, 2018). The natural soil profile at the site is likely to
have been disturbed during stockpiling and removal of soil at the site in the last 10 years (refer to
Section 4.2).
Given the proximity of the site to the Arabian Gulf, it is considered likely that groundwater levels at
the site are shallow and influenced by marine waters. Salinity is likely to be elevated and levels
may shows variation with the tides. The EAD EnviroPortal indicates that the project site sits within
the band of maximum salinity, with salinity potentially as high as 125,000 – 165,000 ppm. As such,
groundwater at the site is not a potable water resource or considered suitable for irrigation. The
site also does not contain any groundwater extraction wells.
Data Gaps
There have been no geotechnical studies conducted at the site. As such, site specific information
on soil profiles, depth to groundwater and the nature of groundwater are not fully understood at
this stage. In addition, presence of existing soil and groundwater contamination is not clear.
HDR propose a Phase 1 site assessment be conducted to determine the potential presence of soil
and groundwater contamination. This will be followed by a targeted soil and groundwater
investigation. The scope for the proposed works is detailed below.
Groundwater Sampling
Four (4) environmental boreholes will be advanced within the footprint at the locations shown in
Figure 16 and Table 13. Boreholes will be drilled to a depth of five (5) metres below existing ground
level. The location of these environmental boreholes shall be determined based on the presence
of potential sources of soil and groundwater contamination within the Project site.
76 | March 2018
Figure 16 Proposed Locations of the Environmental Boreholes
Table 13 GPS Coordinates of Environmental Boreholes
SGW_01 24.758743° 54.678130°
SGW_02 24.760948° 54.675003°
SGW_03 24.758298° 54.674686°
SGW_04 24.757038° 54.670697°
All boreholes will have a standpipe installed to allow the collection of groundwater samples. The
standpipe will be installed to a depth of approximately two (2) metres below the water table.
Following completion of drilling and installation of piezometers, wells will be developed by pumping
at variable depths for one (1) or until water runs clear. A few days after each well is developed, the
wells will be sampled. Prior to collection of the water sample, the well will be purged with at least
three (3) well volumes extracted and the well will be allowed to recharge. At this stage a water
sample will be collected.
Water samples will be submitted to an ENAS accredited laboratory for analysis of the following
suite of parameters:
• pH;
77 | March 2018
• Salinity;
• TDS;
• Metals (As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Mn, Hg and Zn)
• BTEX;
• PAH;
• TPH;
• Phenols; and
• PCBs.
In addition, measurements of conductivity, dissolved oxygen, pH and chlorohyll a will be recorded

in situ at the project site. Any evidence of visual or olfactory indications of potential contamination
will be recorded during the sample collection.
Soil Sampling
Trial pits will be hand excavated prior to the start of drilling works to confirm clearance of any
utilities or infrastructure. The trial pits will be excavated to a depth of 1.5 m below the existing
ground level. A composite soil sample will be collected from within the top 1.5 m of the soil profile
and submitted to the analytical laboratory for analysis of the following suite of parameters:
• Metals (As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Mn, Hg and Zn)
• BTEX;
• PAH;
• TPH;
• Phenols; and
• PCBs.

Construction is anticipated to generate negative impacts associated with the site enabling and
construction works:
• Earthmoving, clearing, excavation, fill placement, grading and other ground preparation
work will alter the landform and condition, structure and composition of the site soils.
• Clearing and excavation works will generate spoil which are likely require off-site disposal
if not of suitable quality for re-use.
78 | March 2018
• New soil that is brought on site for fill purposes carries the risk of contamination.
• Leak or spills of potentially hazardous chemicals or hydrocarbons stored and used at the
site.
• Leaks or spills from the sewage transfer and storage network.
• Erosion and dispersion of soils and stockpiles by wind, dust suppression and damaged /
burst pipes.
Impacts to groundwater are generally indirect or secondary to soil quality issues. Typically,
groundwater contamination occurs when there is sufficient percolation of contaminated water
through the vadose zone and in to the aquifer. As such, potential contamination risks to soil, as
detailed above, also pose a similar risk to groundwater quality at the site.
If a contamination event, such as an oil spill, occurs at the Project site, there is a relatively thin soil
horizon between the soil surface and the groundwater table. The sandy soils at the Project site are
characterized by a high drainage capacity and rapid permeability. Potential groundwater
dewatering that may be required during construction has the potential to draw in contamination
from the surrounding area and makes contamination more mobile.
Potential sources of soil contamination impacts are outlined below:
• Leak or overflow of untreated sewage from sewerage storage and transfer infrastructure.
• Leachate from poorly maintained waste management infrastructure (e.g. sludge storage
and waste collection centres).
• Accidental spill or leakage from on-site bulk storage (diesel storage tank).

Construction Phase
The risk of soil contamination resulting from the fuel and chemicals storage, handling and use will
be greatly reduced through the following measures:
• Provide a dedicated bounded area for storage and handling of fuel, oil, paint, adhesives
and other potentially hazardous chemicals. The storage capacity of containment is to be
110% of the total volume of stored materials or 25% of the total capacity of all tanks within
the bund, whichever is greater;
• Locating chemical, fuel and other hazardous materials storage facilities away from
sensitive receptors or employees on site;
• Use of double walled tanks for the storage of fuel or alternatively, single wall tanks mounted
on concrete base and bunded with storage capacity of 110% of the total volume of fuel to
be stored;
79 | March 2018
• Ensure that storage/containment is covered with a material that is strong enough and
compatible with the stored hazardous substances to prevent the receptacle from corroding
causing collapse or cracking;
• All bulk storage sites must be covered for protection from direct sunlight and rain;
• Do not store incompatible materials together and ensure that each material is stored in
accordance with their specific requirements;
• Locks to be installed on fuel tanks and storage areas with signage to prohibit unauthorised
access;
• All hazardous materials must be properly labelled with the label written in a language(s)
that will be understood by the majority of site personnel (e.g. English, Hindi and Arabic);
• Chemicals and hazardous materials will be stored along with a Material Safety and Data
Sheet (MSDS);
• Storage areas and vehicles carrying chemical and hazardous materials will have an
emergency containment / spill kit and fire extinguishers (with valid inspection tags duly
filled out);
• All PPE and control measures such as first aid kits, fire extinguishers and spill kits shall be
prepared prior to handling hazardous materials;
• Develop spill or leakage prevention and contingency measures;
• Designated areas shall be established specifically for activities associated with use and
handling of chemicals and hazardous substances, which must be fitted with appropriate
ventilation and cooling units;
• Handling of chemicals only to be undertaken by trained and designated staff. A Hazardous

Material register will be maintained by designated staff;
• Empty hazardous material containers are not to be re-used for storage of different
materials; and
• ‘No smoking’ policy to be enforced in vicinity to hazardous materials storage area.
The risk of contamination associated with the operation and maintenance of various equipment,
plant and vehicles on-site will be reduced through implementation of the following measures:
• Placement of drip trays beneath stationary diesel and petrol operated equipment;
• Regular inspection and maintenance of plant, equipment and vehicles in order to prevent
leakage or spill during the course of operation or movement across the construction site;
and
• Undertake re-fuelling activities at designated areas in accordance with appropriate

procedures; and
80 | March 2018
• Ensure that water used for dust suppression is of a suitable quality.
Operational Phase
The following are measures to be implemented in order to control risk of soil and groundwater
contamination during the operational phase:
• Septic tanks and diesel storage tanks should be regularly inspected for damage or leaks;
• Sewage networks should be monitored for leaks;
• During the operation phase, incidents (e.g. odour) indicating poor quality of waste
management should immediately be coordinated with the relevant authority.
5.5 Terrestrial Ecology

Whilst the site has not been heavily utilized since 2012, the site is a brownfield site within an
existing industrial complex. It is not known to support areas of critical or high value vegetation.
Prior to 2008 it appears that the site was graded with all indigenous vegetation stripped from the
site. The site was then used to stockpile soil. This is likely to have had a significant negative impact
on populations of rodents or reptiles that might have been resident within the site footprint. Since
2012 the vegetation cover at the site has increased and, whilst the site is unlikely to support
significant populations of locally or regionally significant terrestrial ecology, it is likely that site does
supports small populations of invertebrates, reptile, resident and migratory birds and, possibly,
small rodents. It is also feasible that the site supports feral cats which are often commensurate
with areas of anthropogenic activity.
No protected areas of critical importance to local or regional terrestrial ecological communities are
known to exist within a radius of five (5) km of the site. It is noted that there is an area of irrigated
forestry plantations located 370 metres to the south of the site footprint on the far side of the
existing outfall channel. Further to the south and southwest there are areas of mangroves and
intertidal mudflats that provide valuable habitat to indigenous and migratory avifauna.
Data Gaps
There have been no ecological studies conducted at the site to date.

HDR propose to undertake a single season terrestrial ecology survey at the Project site and within
a buffer of 100 metres from the proposed development site. At this stage it is not proposed to carry
out seasonal surveys or surveys within the forestry zones to the south of the site. A proposed
methodology is detailed below
Habitats and Flora
A rapid Phase 1 habitat assessment of the site will be conducted. The vegetation of the survey
area will be recorded by identifying the main habitat types and their plant communities in
accordance with an “Interpretation Manual of the Major Terrestrial Natural and Semi Natural
Habitat Types of Abu Dhabi Emirate” by Brown and Boer (2004). Where the habitat is identified
81 | March 2018
that is not detailed in the Abu Dhabi manual, the habitat classification will be adapted as necessary.
The study area will be covered on foot with walked transects providing representative coverage of
the site. At all areas visited, HDR will aim to record presence of plant species. Nomenclature of all
flora will follow Jongbloed (2003).
Reptiles
During the walked transects, visual targeted searches for reptiles will be conducted in areas of
suitable habitat. Areas that contains natural shelter, such as vegetation and rocks, will be targeted
for cryptic species as will areas of anthropogenic debris.
Mammals
Mammals within the survey area will be recorded by visual sightings. In addition, signs such as
tracks, burrows and droppings, if identifiable, will be recorded and locations marked using GPS.
Survey effort will focus around the existing features at the Project site that are likely to support
mammal species. No nocturnal surveys or live trapping of rodents is proposed as part of this
survey.
Invertebrates
Incidental observations of invertebrates will be recorded throughout the course of the survey. No
pitfall or light trapping are proposed as part of this survey.
Avifauna
A presence / absence record of all bird species will be recorded during walked transects of the
site. Sites identified as providing suitable habitat for birds will be monitored in greater detail with
10 minute point count surveys at selected survey locations. Point count surveys will target each of
the habitats represented within the study area. Minimum distance between point count stations will
be 250 metres. During point counts, observers will identify any activity, namely calling, singing,
nesting and flight. The site walkover will include the intertidal zone, with the beach visited at low
tide. In addition, all incidental observations during site visits and marine surveys will be recorded
and reported.

During the construction phase the principal impacts to ecological resources at the site and in the
immediate vicinity are likely to be generated by:
• Direct habitat loss and modification.
• Disturbance to terrestrial fauna as a result of increased light, dust and noise emissions.
• Increased risk of injury or mortality due to vehicle strikes and / or ingestion of waste or toxic
substances.
82 | March 2018
Impacts to the terrestrial ecology on site during the operational phase are expected to be minimal.
The Project is likely to generate increased levels of light and sound. This has the potential to disturb
or result in negative health and behavioural effects to terrestrial fauna including disruption to
biological clock, changes in foraging, prey detection, anti-predator behaviour and navigational
disorientation. The extent of these impacts are likely to be limited by the fact that the site is situated
within an existing industrial complex.
Cummulative Impacts
The project development will contribute to a loss of habitat in the Taweelah and KIZAD area. The
development of the site will remove areas of intertidal beach and coastal sand sheet that is
supports terrestrial ecology. The site development will also contribute to additional lighting and
noise generation, which is likely to contribute to wider disturbance in the area around the Taweelah
Complex.

Construction Phase
Impacts to the terrestrial ecology at the Project site during the construction works are inherent and
cannot be eliminated. However, the extent of the impacts can be managed with the implementation
of the following mitigation measures:
• Minimise the construction footprint wherever possible;
• Store excavated surface soil for re-use where possible to protect seed bank;
• All outdoor lighting, other than signs, shall be limited to those required for safety and
security; and
• Design a lighting system to minimise light spill.
In addition to the above, it is recommended to implement the following mitigation measures:
• Dust emissions: Implement proposed construction air quality mitigation measures (Section
5.1.3);
• Noise emissions: Implement proposed construction noise mitigation measures

(Section 5.6.3); and
• Waste: Develop and implement a waste management plan.
Operational Phase
Impacts on terrestrial ecology resulting from the operational activities of the Project can be
controlled through the implementation of the following mitigation measures:
• Noise emissions: Implement proposed construction noise mitigation measures

(Section 5.6.3);
83 | March 2018
• Artificial lighting: Design a lighting system to minimize light spill. Where possible limit
outdoor lighting; and
• Waste: Develop and implement a waste management plan.
5.6 Noise
The ambient noise environment is predominantly influenced by its proximity to the operational
Taweelah Complex.
Data Gaps
No noise monitoring data is available for the site of surrounding areas.
HDR propose to conduct an ambient noise monitoring survey at the Project site and in the
surrounding area. Monitoring is proposed at five (5) locations shown in Figure 17 and Table 14.
Noise measurements will be recorded using a Type-1 sound level meter. Monitoring will be
undertaken for a duration of 30-minutes per location. s
Measurements will be taken during the following time periods at each monitoring location:
• Daytime (7 AM to 8 PM); and

• Night-time (8 PM to 7 AM).
During each of the monitoring periods listed above, measurements will be recorded on a weekday
(Sunday to Thursday) and a weekend (Friday). In total, there will be four (4) noise measurements
per location.
The following noise parameters shall be recorded:
• LA eq – Equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level;

• LA max – Maximum A-weighted sound pressure level;
• LA min – Minimum A-weighted sound pressure level;
• LA 10 – 10th Percentile A-weighted sound pressure level; and
• LA 90 – 90th Percentile A-weighted sound pressure level.
84 | March 2018
Figure 17 Proposed Locations of the Ambient Noise Monitoring
Table 14 GPS Coordinates of Ambient Noise Stations
NOI_01 24.760573° 54.676299°
NOI_02 24.754669° 54.679275°
NOI_03 24.785286° 54.694682°
NOI_04 24.754734° 54.676751°
NOI_05 24.756248° 54.671465°
In addition to the parameters listed above, the following site specific information shall be recorded
by the HDR field scientist should spot noise monitoring be required:
• Date and time of measurements;

• Type and reference number of instrumentation used;
• Description of measurement location;
• GPS coordinated (UTM / WGS 84);
• Digital photographs of the monitoring site and potential Noise Sensitive Receptors (NSRs);
85 | March 2018
• Meteorological conditions including wind speed, direction and ambient temperature; and
• Description of the most significant noise sources during the monitoring period.
The following meteorological data will be collected:
• Wind speed (m/s) by anemometer;

• Wind direction by anemometer;
• Relative humidity (%) by ancillary measurement;
• Barometric pressure by ancillary measurement; and
• Temperature (°C) by ancillary measurement.

Noise impacts associated with construction will also be dependent upon a number of factors:
• The intensity of construction activities;

• The location of construction activities on-site;
• The type of equipment used;
• Existing background noise levels;
• Intervening terrain and structures; and
• The prevailing weather conditions.
The construction activities on site will involve the operation of vehicles such as loaders, bulldozers,
compactors and trucks to move, deposit and spread material on site. Laying foundations, plant
assembly, building construction works are also likely to generate noise and vibration. The nature
of the construction works is such that the type of noise generated is inherently impulsive and
sporadic, rather than steady state and, as such, causes greater disturbance to NSRs.

Potential noise impacts during the operational phase are likely to be associated with the following:
• Pumping systems.
• Water treatment infrastructure.
• Vehicle traffic travelling to and from the site.
Impact Assessment
Given the fact that the project is located within an existing industrial complex, HDR propose to
undertake a qualitative assessment of noise impacts associated with the proposed development
in the EIA. Impacts to changes in noise conditions will consider the following potential Noise
Sensitive Receptors (ASRs):
• Employees and visitors to the Taweelah Complex;
86 | March 2018
• Residents and visitors to residences of the Royal Family located approximately two (2)
kilometres to the southwest;
• Employees and vistors to the Emirates Heritage Club and Co-op Fishing Harbour located
approximately 3.5 km to the northeast of the site;
• Ecological receptors in the forestry plantations and areas of mangroves and mudflats
located to the south and southwest of the site; and
• Any other potential NSRs identified during the course of environmental baseline surveys.

Construction Phase
Impacts on ambient noise conditions during the construction activities can be controlled through
• Plan and schedule construction activities to avoid high noise producing equipment
operating simultaneously;
• Erect hoarding / noise barrier along the site boundary and/or areas where activities emitting
high noise levels are performed;
• Ensure gaps between barriers / hoarding panels and between the barrier and the ground
are carefully sealed;
• Avoid dropping materials from heights;
• Stationary noise sources, including generators and compressors are to be positioned as
far as possible from noise sensitive receptors;
• Install appropriate noise attenuation fittings such as engine covers, silencers, mufflers or
other forms of acoustic linings on vehicles, plant and equipment;
• Keep acoustic cover closed at all times;
• Low noise level reversing beepers should be used;
• Operate, and maintain/service all vehicle, plant and equipment in accordance with
manufacturers’ specifications;
• Turn off vehicles/equipment/machinery when not in use;
• Contractor to provide sensitive receptors in neighbouring areas with advance notification
of noisy works;
• The Contractor will provide a community liaison notification (signage) that includes a phone
number and e-mail address for a permanent site contact so that noise complaints can be
received and addressed in a timely manner; and.
• Noise complaints will be handled as soon as possible.
Operational Phase
Impacts on ambient noise conditions during the operational phase can be controlled through the
implementation of the following mitigation measures:
87 | March 2018
• All pumps and wastewater treatment machinery to be located within dedicated, sealed
buildings;
• Pumping and equipment enclosure/structure interiors to be provided with absorptive
treatment;
• Mounting of equipment on vibration mats, or increasing the mass weight of the equipment
to reduce vibration and vibration related noise;
• Selection of quiet equipment/system (at the design phase); and
• Maintain equipment via regular inspection and services.
5.7 Seasonal Surveys

EAD have expressed concern regarding the need for seasonal surveys for both seawater
conditions and ecological characteristics (benthic, zooplankton and phytoplankton) of the water.
These concerns were raised in comments No. 5 and 7 of the comments responses sheet included
in Section 2 of this addendum. Based on discussions held with EAD, ILF and HDR on the 17th
May regarding the requirement for seasonal surveys, HDR propose the following.
Because of the time constraint imposed by the Ministry of Energy and the preliminary nature of
this EIA report it is understood that the IWP contractor will be required to submit an updated EIA
once final design has been completed and construction and operation inputs can be included.
At this stage of the EIA process HDR propose to conduct the summer season survey i.e., worst
case scenario, on the basis of which EAD could provide a conditional approval pending the
completion of another survey (as part of the IWP contractor obligation) in November or December
of 2018 as shown in the table.
Proposed Survey May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Seawater Sampling
Ecological Survey
Please also note that during the Baseline Survey for the Taweelah B Extension in 2005, an
intensive survey program was conducted in November and December 2004 for the following:
1) Marine ecological characteristics (benthic, infaunal, fish and fauna, habitat);

2) Seawater characteristics (CTD); and
3) Sediment characteristics.
This information can be also be used as a reference to better understand the
current marine conditions.
5.8 Risk Assessment

A risk assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the methodology presented in the Abu
Dhabi Abu Dhabi EHSMS RF Technical Guideline – Process of Risk Management (Version 2,
February 2012), as this includes reference to environmental related hazards, whereas the updated
88 | March 2018
OSHAD guidelines focus entirely on occupational health and safety. The guidelines include the
following criteria:
• The consequence of the hazard (Table 15);
• Likelihood of the event (Table 16); and
• Risk rating (Table 17).
The risk assessment will:
• Focuses on the environmental-related hazards only; and
• Is not a detailed assessment as it considers environmental-related hazards at a high level
reflecting that the Project is in the Feasibility stage
Table 15 Consequence of Hazard
89 | March 2018
Table 16 Likelihood of Event
Table 17 Risk Rating
90 | March 2018
6 Project Alternatives
ADWEA conducted a feasibility assessment prior to confirming the decision to proceed with the
project development. This section presents a summary of the options considered, the “No
Development” alternative and selection of alternative sites in the UAE other than Taweelah.
6.1 “No Development” Alternative

The “No Development” alternative has the advantage of avoiding the generation of additional
negative environmental impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed
facility.
The “No Development” option was rejected by the Project Proponent on the basis that the ADWEC
has identified the need for additional potable water generation in order to meet anticipated growth
in demand and reduced output from existing water generation facilities. On the basis of the
analysis, ADWEC identify the requirement for 251 MIGD of additional. Failure to supply the
additional water required would have potentially severe humanitarian, economic and social
impacts. In addition, it is envisaged that the development of the Project will contribute to the overall
growth in the UAE’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) through the creation of job opportunities both
during construction and operational phases.
6.2 Coupled Power Generation and Water Production

Alternative
The majority of the UAE’s desalination capacity to date has preferred coupled power generation
and thermal desalination technologies. The projected change in composition of Abu Dhabi’s power
generation sector will create a need for additional stand-alone desalination capacities that are not
constrained by any associated power production. Although standalone water production is
theoretically achievable with Multi Stage Flash (MSF) and Multi-effect Distillation (MED)
technologies coupled to dedicated boilers, the most economical solution to achieve this is to use
RO technology.
technologies. RO will enhance operational flexibility, enabling Abu Dhabi's current gas-fired IWPP
fleet to be operated more efficiently, allowing additional savings of gas. The adoption of RO also
delivers significant benefits in improved dispatch flexibility, which will be essential as inflexible
capacity.
Meeting the anticipated growth in potable water demand using RO technology rather than
traditional coupled thermal desalination technology also provides economic and strategic benefits.
Thermal plants in the UAE currently rely on gas combustion driven turbines and heat recovery
systems. The ADWEC analysis indicates that for all possible gas prices, water production cost of
RO are lower than the specific cost of the existing fleet. Use of RO technology also reduces
reliance on fluctuating fuel prices.
In light of the above, SWRO was selected as the most suitable technology for the new desalination
plant.
6.3 Alternative Site Selection
A site selection feasibility study was conducted by ADWEA in the advance planning stages of the
project development. It is understood that the feasibility study has been shared with EAD by
ADWEA (please refer to attached letter included in Annex 2). A brief summary of the feasibility
study has been included below.
The feasibility study considered existing desalination complexes in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi and
Fujaiarah as potential development sites. This sites of Umm Al Nar, Taweelah, Fujairah, EMAL
and Mirfa sites were considered.
The assessment of each shortlisted site at Umm Al Nar, Taweelah, Fujairah, EMAL and Mirfa
showed that all sites are in general suitable for development of RO plants in a standalone
environment. The assessment found that the technical recommendations provided for each of the
sites in order to cope with the particular local conditions related to environmental constraints and/or
seawater quality. For all sites ambient seawater salinity and temperature are already elevated,
requiring comprehensive mitigation. Large scale RO capacity can be developed on each site
ranging from 80 to as much as 260 MIGD in Taweelah, The capacity at the EMAL site, however,
is limited to some 40 MIGD. A larger capacity is expected to exceed salinity limits in combination
with existing EMAL facilities.
The financial analysis found that sites of Fujairah and Mirfa were less financially viable as a
consequence of the higher CAPEX required expand the existing water transmission systems.
Finally, the Taweelah sites also offered the advantage of being able to meet the additional water
demand within the timeframe required. In light of this, Taweelah was considered the most suitable
site of those shortlisted for consideration.
Annexes
Annex 1 – References
Abu Dhabi Statistics Center (2016) Climate Change 2016. Abu Dhabi. UAE
Al Abdessalaam, T.Z., (2007). Coastal and marine habitats. Marine Resources and Environments
of Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi, UAE: Environment Agency–Abu Dhabi
Al-Ghadban, A. N., Abdali, F. & Massoud, M. S. (1998). Sedimentation Rate and Bioturbation in
the Arabian Gulf. Environment International 24 (1 of 2): 23-31
Al-Ghadban, A. N. (2002). Geological Oceanography of the Arabian Gulf. In: Khan, N. Y., Munwar,
M. & Price (eds). The Gulf Ecosystem: Health and Sustainability, pp. 23-29. Backhuys Publishers,
Leiden, The Netherlands
Brown, G. and Böer, B. (2004) Interpretation Manual of Major Terrestrial and Semi-Natural Habitat
Types of Abu Dhabi Emirate. Research Report, Environmental Research and Wildlife Development
Agency, Abu Dhabi
EAD (2015) Enhancing Air Quality in Abu Dhabi 2014. Environment Agency. Abu Dhabi. United
Arab Emirates.
Emirates Soil Museum (2018) UAE Soil Map. (http://www.emiratessoilmuseum.org/uae-soil-map)
– Accessed at: http://www.emiratessoilmuseum.org/uae-soil-map
Jongbloed, M., Feulner, G., Böer, B. and Western, A.R., 2003. The comprehensive guide to the
wild flowers of the United Arab Emirates. Environmental Research and Wildlife Development
Agency.
Kampf, J., Sadrinasab, M. The circulation of the Persian Gulf: a numerical study. Ocean Science
Discussions, European Geosciences Union (EGU), 2005, 2 (3), pp.129-164
Navionics (2018) Marine Chart Viewer Web App
(https://webapp.navionics.com/?lang=en#boating@6&key=wfdyCkuppI) Accessed: 19th March
2018
Annex 2 – Affection Plan and Site Footprint
LOCATION
3
KEY PLAN
NOTES:
1. Coordinates are according to UTM coordinate system.
LEGEND:
COORDINATES
SL.No. EAST (m) NORTH (m)
1 264367.00 2740008.00
2 264724.00 2740493.00
4 3 264849.00 2740616.00
5 4 265159.00 2740329.00
5 265145.00 2740312.00
6 265246.00 2740213.00
7 265025.00 2739975.00
8 264933.00 2739794.00
GAS LINE
A 264384.23 2740031.41
6 B 264948.95 2739825.38
SWRO PLANT
200 MIGD TAWEELAH
A
GAS
1 GAS
GAS FEN
CE L
INE
GAS
0 ISSUE FOR REVIEW 04-02-18 AR LG RM
GAS 7
20M REV DESCRIPTIONREV DATE DRAWING CHECKED APPROVED
GAS
Client:
GAS
GAS GAS
LINE ABU DHABI
GAS
GAS
WATER & ELECTRICITY
GAS AUTHORITY (ADWEA)
GAS
GAS Technical Advisor:

GAS
ILF Consulting Engineers-Abu Dhabi
GAS
Al Reem Island, Sky Tower,Unit 36-01, 36th Floor
CONSUL PO Box 73250, Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates
B ENGINE
TING Tel: +971 2 6500701 Fax: +971 2 6586298
ERS Email: info@adb.ilf.com Webpage: www.ilf.com
8 Project:
ABU DHABI WATER & ELECTRICITY AUTHORITY
IWP RO PROJECT TAWEELAH
Title:
Coordinates of the Plot
Appendix-1
Drawing No.
O556-ILF-UEW-OD-0005
Scale. Contract No. Sheet No. Rev.
1:2000 G-14699 1 of 1 00
T
TTYTTT
YY T
YYT
PT YYTT
PT
TT PPYY PT YYTT
YP
LOCATION
P T
P
TTY TT PPYYTPTYYTT
Y PT YYTT
YYTPTYYTT PPYYPT
PT
E
GE HLORIT
TANK
HYPOC
STORA
PT T
R
BLOWE
PPYYPTY KEY PLAN
CYLINDERS
19 P YYPTYY T
NITROGEN
FILTER
SKID
ACID
WASH
RS
PPY
OLYZE
AUTO
ELECTR
PUMPS
ER
DOSING
BOOST
PUMPS
TER
SEAWA
PP YPT T
PPYY T P Y NOTES:
PPYYTT TT PPY P
P Y 1. THE EMPLOYED PLANNING MODULE, GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF THE
PPYYT
PT
P
YY T P BUILDING AND STRUCTURE IS INDICATIVE ONLY AND NOT SUPPORTED BY
ANY STRUCTURAL CALCULATION. THE CONTRACTOR TO DEVELOP A
T
NE
CRA
18 Y
PP YPT Y SOLUTION DURING THE DETAIL DESIGN STAGE TO DELIVER TO THE CLIENT
PY
sdgsdgaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
13 THE MOST APPROPRIATE, COST EFFECTIVE AND FIT FOR THE PURPOSE
PPYYPP SOLUTION, WHICH OPTIMIZES THE AVAILABLE SITE TO ACCOMMODATE THE
SELECTED PROCESS TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT, UTILITIES AND SUPPORT
PP OPERATION.
O E
O P
S 12
o AI N N
rtn P
4 aarS
e L
20
SOE LEGEND:
S 0T E
IW
aIHC
giD 00 1 R.O. Building
O E E 2 DAF
OPS
3 DMF
oAI N N P
rtn
2
4 Pre-Treatment Chemical Building
R.O. Electrical Building
aarS
e SO E T 5
SL
0 T
0 E 6 Post-Treatment
ga ICW
iDIH0 7 Warehouse
0 6 8 Workshop
E 15 NK
S 9 Control Building
3
TA 10 Admin Building
16 TO
11 Fire Station
14 2
OL
CONTR
DOSING
SYSTEM
Ø2.36M
20KL
TANK
Sludge Treatment
CO² GE
STORA
12
20KL
TANK2
E
Ø2.36M
STORAG
CO²
1
M
SYSTE
OL
DOSING
CONTR
DOSING
OL
2
SYSTEM
CONTR
3 Pre-Treatment Electrical Building
STORACO²
13
GE
TANK
20KL
Ø2.36M
DOSING
OL
2
CONTR
E
CO²
SYSTEM
TANK2
20KL
STORAG
GE
CO²
STORA
Ø2.36M
TANK
20KL
Ø2.36M
DOSING
OL
CONTR
1
M
SYSTE
GE
CO²
STORA
20KL
TANK2
Ø2.36M
G
AR S
DIN
DOSING
RW MP
OL
1
CONTR
PU
SYSTEM
FO
14 R.O Chemical Building
TE
M K
R N
EA
TAPE
15 Compressure Building
16 Substation 110/34.5 kV
3
SH S
MP
ING
FLU PU
17 Brine Tower
S
MP
PU
CIP
K
11
TAN
CIP
18 Intake
GE
RT TER
RID
CA FIL
19 Hypochlorination Building
DOSING
M OL
CONTR
2
SYSTE
5
CO²
GE
STORA
20KL
TANK
Ø2.36M
OL
2
DOSING
M
6
SYSTE
GE
CONTR
CO²
STORA
1
TANK2
20KL
20KL GE
CO²
Ø2.36M
STORA
TANK
Ø2.36M
3
DOSING
OL
1
CONTR
SYSTEM
CO²
E
TANK2
20KL
STORAG
Ø2.36M
G
AR S
DIN
RW MP
DOSING
M OL
CONTR
1
PU
SYSTE
FO
7
TE
M K
R N
EA
PE TA
Seawater Pipe
Treated Water Pipe
SH S
ING
FLUPUMP
S
MP
Potable Pipe
PU
CIP
K
TAN
CIP
8 9
GE
RT TER
RID
CA FIL
1 REFERENCE:
O556-ILF-UEW-OD-0005 Coordinates of the Plot, Appendix-1
10
9
GA
S 17
GA
S
GAS 0 ISSUE FOR REVIEW 04-02-18 AR LG RM
FEN
CE REV DESCRIPTIONREV DATE DRAWING CHECKED APPROVED
GA
S LINE
GA
S Client:
GA
S
20M ABU DHABI
S GAS
17
I GA
S WATER & ELECTRICITY
U GA GAS
14
AUTHORITY (ADWEA)
N S
LINE
L GA
S
E GAS
Technical Advisor:
T GA
S
GA
S
ILF Consulting Engineers-Abu Dhabi
Al Reem Island, Sky Tower,Unit 36-01, 36th Floor
GA
S PO Box 73250, Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates
GAS Tel: +971 2 6500701 Fax: +971 2 6586298
GA Email: info@adb.ilf.com Webpage: www.ilf.com
S
GA
S
Project:
ABU DHABI WATER & ELECTRICITY AUTHORITY
IWP RO PROJECT TAWEELAH
Title:
General Layout
Appendix-4
Drawing No.
O556-ILF-UEW-OD-0005
Scale. Contract No. Sheet No. Rev.
1:2000 G-14699 1 of 1 00
Annex 3 – EAD Communication
Annex 4 – Letters of Appointment
‫‪ILF CONSULTING ENGINEERS‬‬
‫أي ال اف مـــــهـــنــــد ســـــون اســـتــشـــاريـــــون‬
‫‪Al Reem Island, Sky Tower,‬‬
‫‪th‬‬
‫‪Unit 36-01, 36 Floor‬‬ ‫‪Phone:‬‬ ‫‪+971 / 2 / 6500701‬‬
‫‪PO Box 73250‬‬ ‫‪Fax:‬‬ ‫‪+971 / 2 / 6586298‬‬
‫‪Abu Dhabi‬‬ ‫‪E -mail:‬‬ ‫‪info.adb@ilf.com‬‬
‫‪U.A.E.‬‬ ‫‪Webpage:‬‬ ‫‪http://www.ilf.com‬‬
‫‪HDR Middle East LLC‬‬
‫‪Al Tamouh B12 F23, Infinity Tower‬‬

‫‪Al Reem Island, PO Box 112327‬‬
‫‪Abu Dhabi, UAE‬‬
‫‪Att. Mrs. Amie Lenkowiec‬‬

‫‪th‬‬
‫‪Abu Dhabi,28 March 2018‬‬ ‫‪Our Reference : O556-ILF-UEW-OC-0032‬‬
‫‪E-mail: Corrado.Sommariva@ilf.com‬‬
‫‪Project : ADWEA IWP RO Taweelah‬‬
‫‪Subject: Contract G-14911 Sub consultancy Agreement for EIA studies – Appointment‬‬
‫‪letter‬‬
‫هذا هو التصديق على أن شركة ‪ ILF‬لالستشارات الهندسية قد عينت ‪( HDR‬مستشار فرعي)‬

‫اتفاقية االستشارات الفرعية لدراسات تقييم األثر البيئي لصالح هيئة مياه وكهرباء‬
‫أبوظبي )‪.)ADWEA IWP RO Taweelah‬‬
‫تم تعيين المهندسين االستشاريين لشركة ‪ ILF‬من قبل وزارة الطاقة كوثيقة مرجعية‬
‫‪ DOE-PD/RO As-am-vj/001/2018‬بتاريخ ‪ 8‬مارس ‪( 2018‬الملحق ‪.)1‬‬
‫نطاق الخدمات المفصلة التفاقية المستشارين الفرعيين ولكن ال يقتصر على‪:‬‬
‫• الحصول على تصاريح و ‪NOC‬‬
‫•دراسة وتقارير تقييم التأثير البيئي‬
‫• أخذ عينات مياه البحر وإعداد التقارير عنها ‪،‬‬
‫• مسح األعماق وإعداد التقارير‪.‬‬
‫• مسح المحيطات وإعداد التقارير‬
‫ً لمتطلبات هيئة البيئة‬

‫يقوم االستشاري الفرعي بجميع خدمات االستشارات الفرعية وفقا‬
‫‪ -‬أبوظبي (‪ ، )EAD‬هيئة مياه وكهرباء أبوظبي والقوانين واللوائح المعمول بها في‬
‫‪U.A.E.‬‬
‫ًا في‬
‫نحن نثق بأن هذا أمر مقبول ونتطلع إلى تعاونك وجهود استباقية وإلى العمل مع‬
‫هذا المشروع الهام والنهائي‪.‬‬
‫‪ILF Consulting Engineers Abu Dhabi‬‬ ‫‪CM Registration No.: 605282‬‬ ‫‪Licence No.: 2033874‬‬
ILF CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Al Reem Island, Sky Tower,

th
Unit 36-01, 36 Floor Phone: +971 / 2 / 6500701
PO Box 73250 Fax: +971 / 2 / 6586298
Abu Dhabi E -mail: info.adb@ilf.com
U.A.E. Webpage: www.ilf.com
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Corrado Sommariva

Managing Director Generation Middle East
Annexure 1:
- DOE-PD/RO As-am-vj/001/2018
ILF Consulting Engineers Abu Dhabi CM Registration No.: 605282 Licence No.: 2033874

th
Unit 36-01, 36 Floor Phone: +971 / 2 / 6500701
PO Box 73250 Fax: +971 / 2 / 6586298
Annexure 1:

th
Unit 36-01, 36 Floor Phone: +971 / 2 / 6500701
PO Box 73250 Fax: +971 / 2 / 6586298
th
Unit 36-01, 36 Floor Phone: +971 / 2 / 6500701
PO Box 73250 Fax: +971 / 2 / 6586298
U.A.E. Webpage: http://www.ilf.com
HDR Middle East LLC
Al Tamouh B12 F23, Infinity Tower

Al Reem Island, PO Box 112327
Abu Dhabi, UAE
Att. Mrs. Amie Lenkowiec

th
Abu Dhabi,18 March 2018 Our Reference : O556-ILF-UEW-OC-0029
Project : ADWEA IWP RO Taweelah
Subject: Contract G-14911 Sub consultancy Agreement for EIA studies – Appointment
letter
Dear Madam,
This is to certify that ILF Consulting Engineers has appointed HDR (Sub consultant) Sub
consultancy Agreement for EIA studies for ADWEA IWP RO Taweelah.
ILF Consulting Engineers has been appointed by Department of Energy as reference

document DOE-PD/RO As-am-vj/001/2018 dated 8th March 2018 (Appendix 1)
The detailed Scope of Services of Sub-Consultant Agreement is but not be limited to:
Obtaining Permits and NOC’s

EIA Study and Reports
Seawater Sampling and Reporting,
Bathymetric Survey and Reporting.
MetOcean Survey and Reporting
The Sub-Consultant shall undertake all sub-consultancy scope of services according to the
requirements of Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi (EAD), ADWEA and applicable laws and
regulations in the U.A.E.
We trust this is acceptable and look forward to your cooperation, proactive efforts and to and
to working together on this high profile and critical Project.

th
Unit 36-01, 36 Floor Phone: +971 / 2 / 6500701
PO Box 73250 Fax: +971 / 2 / 6586298
Yours Sincerely
Dr. Corrado Sommariva

Managing Director Generation Middle East
Annexure 1:
- DOE-PD/RO As-am-vj/001/2018

th
Unit 36-01, 36 Floor Phone: +971 / 2 / 6500701
PO Box 73250 Fax: +971 / 2 / 6586298
Annexure 1:
EAD Terms of Reference Report Addendum No. 1
Environmental Impact
Assessment ToR Report
Addendum No. 1
Taweelah ADWEA IWP
Seawater Reverse Osmosis
Plant
Abu Dhabi, UAE

May 2018

Project Information
Document Type : EIA Terms of Reference Report Addendum
Project : ILF SWRO Plant Taweelah
Client : ILF Consulting Engineers
HDR Project No. : TBC

ILF SWRO Plant Taweelah_ToR Addendum
HDR Doc. No. :
No.1_200518_Rev1
Issued To: Environment Agency Abu Dhabi

For the Attention of : Mr. Faisal Al Hammadi
Position: Director of Permitting, Compliance and Enforcement
Address : Environment Agency Abu Dhabi
Environment Quality Sector
P.O. Box 45553
Abu Dhabi
Tel : +971 2 445 4777
Issued By: HDR Middle East LLC

Project Manager : Amie Jan Lenkowiec
Address : HDR
P.O. Box 231205
Dubai
Tel : +971 55 101 9874
Fax : +971 4 330 6321
Email : Amie.lenkowiec@hdrinc.com
Revision Control
Revision No. Description Prepared By Checked By Approved By Issue Date
Report for EAD YS
01 PA PA 20/05/18
Review DM
Table of Contents
1 EAD Comments ............................................................................................................. 4
2 HDR Comments Responses .......................................................................................... 7
3 Addendum ................................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Proposed Schedule for Seasonal Surveys ......................................................... 14
3.2 Location of the Air Quality Station ...................................................................... 15
3.3 Locations of Marine Monitoring Stations ............................................................ 16
3.4 Locations of Soil and Groundwater Sampling .................................................... 17
3.5 Locations of Ambient Noise Monitoring .............................................................. 18
1 EAD Comments
2 HDR Comments Responses
EAD Section Page No. HDR Comment

# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
General General The detailed design will be finalized by the appointed IWP
Contractor selected to carry out the work. However, the
selection of the locations of the outfall and intake will be
specified at the design stage. The quality and the volumes of the
At this phase of project (TOR and EIA preparation), the brine are conceptually known and will not significantly change in
final design should be ready and available, a major the final design; and that selection will be fully based on the
project component such as the location of the brine environmental, operational as well as the cumulative impacts of
1 1.1
discharge outfall. Meanwhile, a discussion to justify the the brine.
choice of the location from an environmental
perspective is required. At the final detailed design phase, the type and kind of diffusers
will be determined. As per discussions with EAD in the meeting
held on the 17th of May, an updated EIA will be submitted to EAD
by the IWP contractor or their appointed environmental
consultant with a view to obtaining final approval from EAD.
General The project location also should be justified in the EIA, The site selection will be justified in the EIA. Note however, that
please refer to EAD letter under reference no. OUT- the overarching reason for the site selection is the expandable
IJ2017/EQS/0227 in which EAD clearly asked that the current existing facility and a full site selection analysis has
2 1.2
EIA should include in its scope the site selection with already been undertaken by the Department of Energy. This will
all the criteria used for the selection of the location, in be justified as well.
addition to what mentioned in the feasibility study.
General A key point of the environmental impact assessment of Cumulative impacts are and will be fully addressed as an
3 1.3 this facility is the incremental impact (Cumulative intrinsic part of the EIA.
impacts) on marine environment in the project area.
# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
The EIA should clearly assess the actual marine
environment baseline status knowing that three
desalination plants are already operating on site, and
prove that an additional 200 MGPD RO plant, with
brine discharge characteristic different than brine
discharged from thermal desalination plants in mailer of
temperature, salinity, density and chemicals properties
(chemicals listed in table 9 Page 51 ).
General Waste management, traffic, and socio-economic were All additional scope points will be added in the EIA and shall be
scoped out and not discussed in this report. According assessed fully.
4 1.4
to TGD for TOR, all the environmental components
should be discussed.
General As per discussions with EAD in the meeting held on the 17th
May, this EIA is preliminary and will include data collected during
the summer season (data to be collected May/June). Existing
secondary data will also be reviewed and considered in the
preliminary EIA. The final updated EIA to be submitted by the
Seasonal ambient marine water quality monitoring
appointed contractor/environmental consultant will include a
would be required as there are marked seasonal
verification study that includes data collected during the winter
differences in marine water quality parameters, the
5 1.5 season (sampling to be conducted December).
scope (methodology and dates) of this seasonal survey
must be submitted to EAD for review and approval prior While seasonal variations are expected, the first survey period
to start the survey. will coincide with the summer season which represents the most
extreme conditions in terms of temperature and salinity and
potential impacts on the marine environment. This information
will be used to predict worst-case conditions impacts. Seasonal
variability, i.e., cold season, will be captured (and used) to
coincide with the final design stage when EAD approval will be
# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
sought again as part of the RO Contractor obligation.
Please see attached addendum to the TOR which includes a

proposed schedule.
1.2 Study 17 The summer season sampling represents the most extreme
The proposed 1 month long ambient marine water
Approach – conditions (refer to 1.5 above). Also, the additional goal of the
quality monitoring campaign at 9 locations would not daily water quality sampling is for process operational purposes.
Baseline
Studies be adequate to provide data that is representative of Refer to 1.5 for the seasonal surveys.
6 2.1
the waters surrounding the site. Seasonal monitoring
would be required as there are marked seasonal
differences in marine water quality parameters.
18 The environmental impact prediction and evaluation The summer season sampling represents the most extreme
needs to provide estimates of impingement and conditions. Please refer to point 1.5 above for our proposed
entrainment of fish eggs and larvae on screens and plan with regards to seasonal monitoring.
7 2.2 litters. The single phytoplankton and zooplankton
samples proposed are inadequate for this. A seasonal
sampling program for these faunal components needs
10 be conducted as part of the EIA.
3. Legal 26 As per in the TGD for TOR, All relevant and applicable Noted – all relevant and applicable local laws shall be included
Framework Emirate and local laws, standards, and guidelines for in the EIA.
8 3.1 and
Standards all environmental media (i.e. Marine water, soil ) must
he included in this chapter.
4.3 Project 46 This is and will be fully taken into account in the EIA.
Table 8 Production Design Limits: Because there is
9 4.1 Activity and three existing desalination plant (with production
Description
capacities around 300 MGPD) discharging brine
# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
resulted from thermal seawater desalination
operations, is there any discussion if will this affect the
salinity and temperature in the intake surroundings?
The distance between the end point of 1hc existing
culvert and the existing intake is not more than 2.5 Km.
46 Chemicals will be quantified further and individually assessed in

The doses listed in table 9 should be quantified in the
the EIA.
10 4.2 EIA. In addition, their potential impacts in the quality of
the brine quality must be discussed
4.3.1. Project 46 Please refer to 1.1.

It's stated al the "the project is still at the concept
Components design phase": At the EIA stage, the facility design
should be finalised, and any changes later should be
11 5.1 subject to a technical modification application, and in
order to avoid such procedures, the consultant I
proponent is advised to submit the EIA once the full
design is made and ready.
Proposed 54 GPS of the Air Quality station will be provided (see addendum
The GPS coordinates for the air quality monitoring
Baseline Data for details)
location should be provided and it should be identified
Collection –
Air Quality in a map and justification for the selection. It is only
12 6.1
mentioned that the station will be placed in the centre
of the project site thus more details is required 10
clarify this statement.
54 QA/QC procedure will be fully presented and discussed in the

Survey methodology selected and Quality
EIA.
assurance/quality control methods to be adopted
13 6.2
during sample collection must be discussed in this
section
# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
Figure 10 61 GPS coordinates for marine stations to be provided (see
The GPS coordinates for the Marine water sampling
14 7.1 Marine Water addendum for details)
locations should be provided.
Quality
Sampling 61 The sites selected are based on the approximate zones that the
The selection of the sampling locations should be
Sites intake and/or outfall will be located. The precise locations will be
justified in relation with the selected design for brine defined by the hydrodynamic dispersion modelling study and as
effluent outfall and seawater intake. such the sampling sites are aimed at determining the ambient
seawater conditions within these zones. Based on preliminary
modelling runs, some sampling locations may be moved,
however the justifications for this will be fully explained in the
EIA.
Please note that the existing open channel outfall will not be
15 7.2
used for the new SWRO brine discharge. Moreover, adding
additional sampling locations (for water chemistry) will not
necessarily add to our understanding of water quality as, unlike
temperature and salinity, it is unlikely to encounter a sudden
gradient that justifies additional stations. Yet, we will be
conducting measurements of in situ parameters along transects
that cover the zone of influence of the existing and proposed
outfalls (see addendum for proposed transect locations) where
in-situ seawater parameters will be measured at a number of
stations along each transect.
5.2. Proposed 62 The proposed bathymetry survey focuses on the potential path
There is no justification for the corridor selected for the
Baseline Data of the intake channel. Also as indicated above the existing
bathymetry survey, why it is not covering the existing channel has been taken out as a potential discharge location of
16 8.1 Collection
outfalls. the brine.
5.2.2. 64 Acknowledged – however, the existing channel has been taken

It is stated that offshore discharging options will be
Environmental out as a potential discharge location of the brine. The modeling
discussed in the EIA, and ADWEA preference is to use will be conducted on other locations in the domain. The final
17 9.1 Impact
Prediction and the existing outfall: EAD require a detailed assessment siting of the outfall will be based on those locations that ensure
Evaluation of each option, especially the predicted behaviour of compliance with the regulatory threshold as well as meeting
process water quality requirements.
# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
important volumes of brine, with different physical and
chemical parameters. Mixing thermal and RO brine
discharges should be addressed not only as added
flows to an existing discharge.
64 Acknowledged - all options will be discussed in EIA

The EIA should explore the option of brine outfall pipe,
with single and multiple ports diffusers, and based on
18 9.2
this assessment EAD has the right to approve other
outfall option than preferred by the proponent.

The intake options should include an assessment of
19 9.3 entrainment and impingement of fish and marine fauna,
and mitigation measures adopted.

During the operational phase, the impingement of
marine reptiles (juvenile and sub-adult turtles in
20 9.4 particular) on intake screens is likely. This needs to be
included as an impact and appropriate mitigation
proposed.
Modeling 68 Noted – all will be discussed fully in EIA - configurations will

The four model scenarios must be discussed in this
Tasks change dependent on the findings, and we will fully detail all
report and more descriptive details should be provided. scenarios that were run in the EIA. It is an optimization exercise
to identify the locations where regulatory threshold are met and
21 10.1
process water quality requirements are adequate.
68 Noted - will be fully addressed in the EIA – the extent of the

Tasks under the numerical dispersion modelling should
potential impact will be determined based on many findings
22 10.2 also include determining how the effluent discharge at
different locations will modify and affect marine water
# EAD Comment
Ref. Title
quality parameters at nearby sensitive receptors (coral
reefs, mangroves and seagrass beds). The aim being
to determine the discharge location with the least
impact.
68 Noted - will be fully addressed in the EIA – the extent of the

Tasks under the numerical dispersion modelling should
potential impact will be determined based on many findings
23 10.3 also include the cumulative impact of the effluent
discharge on nearby sensitive receptors
Proposed 75 Borehole locations to be provided (see addendum for details)

It is stated that "The location of these environ menial
Baseline Data
boreholes shall be determined based on the presence
Collection –
Geology, of potential sources of soil and groundwater
24 11.1
Seismicity, contamination within the project site”. At the TOR
Soil and stage, the boreholes must be determined and the GPS
Groundwater must be given in the study.
5.6.1 82 The GPS coordinates for the noise monitoring location Noise monitoring stations to be provided (see addendum for
Description of
should be provided and it should be identified in a map details)
25 12.1 the
Environment -
Noise
3 Addendum
3.1 Proposed Schedule for Seasonal Surveys
EAD have expressed concern regarding the need for seasonal surveys for both seawater
conditions and ecological characteristics of the water. These concerns were raised in comments
No. 5 and 7 of the comments responses sheet included in Section 2 of this addendum. Based on
discussions held with EAD, ILF and HDR on the 17th May regarding the requirement for seasonal
surveys, HDR propose the following.
Because of the time constraint imposed by the Ministry of Energy and the preliminary nature of
this EIA report it is understood that the IWP contractor will be required to submit an updated EIA
once final design has been completed and construction and operation inputs can be included.
At this stage of the EIA process HDR propose to conduct the summer season survey i.e., worst
case scenario, on the basis of which EAD could provide a conditional approval pending the
completion of another survey (as part of the IWP contractor obligation) in November or December
of 2018 as shown in the table.
Proposed Survey May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Seawater Sampling
Ecological Survey
Please also note that during the Baseline Survey for the Taweelah B Extension in 2005, an
intensive survey program was conducted in November and December 2004 for the following:
1) Marine ecological characteristics (benthic, infaunal, fish and fauna, habitat);

2) Seawater characteristics (CTD); and
3) Sediment characteristics.
This information can be also be used as a reference to better understand the current marine
conditions.
3.2 Location of the Air Quality Station
Table 2. GPS Coordinates of Air Quality Station
AQU_01 24.758816° 54.676768°
Figure 1. Proposed Location of the Air Quality Monitoring Station

3.3 Locations of Marine Monitoring Stations
Table 3. GPS Coordinates of Marine Monitoring Stations
MAR_01 24.770849° 54.676639°
MAR_02 24.756275° 54.664172°
MAR_03 24.784612° 54.675147°
MAR_04 24.773727° 54.667108°
MAR_05 24.766477° 54.661185°
MAR_06 24.757024° 54.655281°
MAR_07 24.783285° 54.661136°
MAR_08 24.774888° 54.653328°
MAR_09 24.772150° 54.638721°
Figure 2. Proposed Locations of the Marine Monitoring Stations Including Proposed In-
Situ Transect Locations
3.4 Locations of Soil and Groundwater Sampling
Table 4. GPS Coordinates of Environmental Boreholes
SGW_01 24.758743° 54.678130°
SGW_02 24.760948° 54.675003°
SGW_03 24.758298° 54.674686°
SGW_04 24.757038° 54.670697°
Figure 3. Proposed Locations of the Environmental Boreholes

3.5 Locations of Ambient Noise Monitoring
Table 5. GPS Coordinates of Ambient Noise Stations
NOI_01 24.760573° 54.676299°
NOI_02 24.754669° 54.679275°
NOI_03 24.785286° 54.694682°
NOI_04 24.754734° 54.676751°
NOI_05 24.756248° 54.671465°
Figure 4. Proposed Locations of the Ambient Noise Monitoring

EAD Terms of Reference Report Approval Document
Annex 5
Revision 1 EIA EAD
Comments and HDR
Response Sheet
(September 2018)
EAD Section Title Page No. HDR Comment
# EAD Comment
Reference
This approval is conditional based on the agreements
1 - between EAD and DoE and the commitments made in the Noted.
EIA.
The approval is conditional on the final design meeting the

2 - Noted.
standards and operational parameters set in this EIA.
With respect to all the follow up surveys mentioned

throughout the impact assessment, and as per the outcomes
Noted. The revised and final Project EIA shall be submitted to EAD once the final design has been confirmed by the Project EPC. The
3 - of the meeting between EAD and DoE dated 17th May 2018,
updated EIA shall include all additional surveys discussed in the mentioned meeting and also as detailed in the EIA Report.
an updated EIA study should be submitted once all the
additional surveys are completed.
The value was not provided by the Project Proponent and was not imposed upon HDR. HDR proposed the approach with a view to taking
a conservative, precautionary approach utilising existing Abu Dhabi water quality objectives UAE Ministry of Environment and Water
mixing zone distances.
While there are no specific regulations and standards with respect to the size of the mixing zone in Abu Dhabi, there are however UAE
Federal guidelines – which by definition are recommended values and not enforceable regulations. These define the size of the mixing
zone as being between 300m and 500m radius around the point of discharge.
Cabinet decree No. 37 of 2001 provides ambient water quality objectives (AWQOs). This decree stems from the original Federal
Throughout the report there are references to the "maximum Environmental Law No 24, 1999. EAD effluent standards are also based on that decree and stipulate that TDS /salinity cannot exceed
allowable increase of salinity above ambient conditions, as of 1,500 mg/L while temperature cannot exceed 5 °C above ambient conditions inside the mixing zone. Such zone is not however defined.
General
1 2 PSU at the edge of the mixing zone". However, the study The AWQOs stipulate salinity should not exceed 5% above ambient conditions.
contains no mention of any legal reference to this allowable
The Emirate of Dubai has its own limits which differ from Abu Dhabi limits. For example, Local Order 61 stipulates that delta temperature
limit although it is a key parameter of the environmental
(∆T) and delta salinity (∆S) should not exceed 1°C and 2PSU, respectively, at the edge of a 300m mixing zone. However, the
performance and compliance of the proposed project.
wastewater discharge limits are ≤ 5°C and ≤ 2PSU inside the mixing zone. Temperature and salinity recorded at 1,500m offshore are
If this value was given by the proponent (as a part of new considered as “ambient” while temperature and salinity at 500m from the point of discharge are considered as temperature and salinity of
regulations to be issued, or a limit set by the proponent), the mixing zone. In other words the difference between temperature measured at 1,500m and temperature measured at 500m or less
4 - this detail should be mentioned and discussed in the from the shoreline cannot be more than 5 °C while salinity cannot be more than 2PSU. It is important to note that there are no specific
study. depth requirements for applying those standards.
The available standards applicable for discharges to the Note that there are no desalination specific regulations or guidelines that refer to brine discharge into the marine environment specific to
marine environment are Cabinet decree no 37 - 2001 Abu Dhabi, as typically these are assessed by EAD on a case-by-case basis. There are proposed UAE standards for the brine limits at
(Annex no 8), and Recommended Ambient Marine Water desalination plants outfalls published by the UAE Ministry of Environment and Water that sets the following rather stringent conditions:
Quality Standards for Abu Dhabi Emirate (AWQOs).
- Mixing Zone radius: 500m from outfall
EAD welcomes any approach to satisfy more stringent
- Temperature difference relative to ambient: ≤5°C inside in the mixing zone and ≤2°C at the edge of the mixing zone
parameters but this should be discussed within the report.
- TDS: ≤2% above ambient conditions
Based on the above, HDR selected a conservative approach of using a 500m mixing zone radius and ≤ 5% salinity at the edge of the
mixing zone. This approach is conservative for one main fundamental reason:
- The limits for salinity were applied against calculated values at the bottom of the water column where the brine is discharged at
about 2m above the seabed, and not against a depth-averaged salinity. Using the calculated depth averaged salinity as the
basis for determining compliance with the 5% limit at the edge of the mixing zone would circumvent the spirit and substance of
the rule and not accurately reflect the magnitude of impacts associated with the brine discharge.
# EAD Comment
Reference
Assuming a background salinity of 40 PSU, a 5% change salinity is equivalent to 2 PSU. As such a ∆S of 2 PSU at the edge of the 500m
mixing zone was applied when assessing compliance in all simulated runs.
Ensure that all abbreviations in the report are listed

abbreviations list: references to "DM guideline /DM
5 - All abbreviations have been corrected in all relevant sections to EAD or national guidelines.
environmental regulation/ DM's" are made in many places.
The study should follow EAD guidelines and regulations.
Noted. The EPC and DoE will confirm the final proposed alignment during the detailed design phase. During the detailed EIA, further
In the event the final EIA confirms the loss of seagrass, a
6 - surveys will confirm the potential impact on seagrass beds. If the additional surveys show that there will be any physical loss of seagrass,
compensation plan should be proposed.
a management and compensation plan will form part of the updated EIA that is to be submitted to EAD for review and approval.
Exact coordinates of the marine Dolphin Energy pipeline alignment were not provided by DoE and are not publically available. The
Please provide the coordinates for the locations of the gas location of the alignment was obtained from published nautical charts, publicly available via the website “Navionics Chart Viewer”.
7
pipeline and submarine cable depicted in Figure ES- 1.
Onshore coordinates of each end of the gas pipeline are shown in Figure 5 of the EIA.
Executive Under the "Marine Baseline Study Findings" subsection (page

Summary – 5), the text compares the excess salinity, temperature and
2 2
1.1 - Project quantity of generated brine from the existing Taweelah
Description Complex discharges and for the proposed RO plant. Please
8 Please refer to additions to text in Section 5.2.2.1 and in Table 27 (p.140)
provide the details of the calculation used to reach the
conclusion that "the salinity load in the receiving waters from
the proposed facility will be almost equal to that discharged
by today's operations."
The text states that "the optimal solution would be the

shortest outfall whose discharge meets the maximum
9 Executive allowable increase of salinity above ambient conditions, i.e., Please refer to response to No 1, above
Summary – as of 2PSU at the edge of the mixing zone." Please clarify the
3 1.2 – 7-9 source of the standard referenced in the text.
Summary of
Findings The text references "EAD Environmental Regulations for
Please refer to response #1 and #11. Section 3.3 of the report has been updated to include the Cabinet decree no 37 - 2001 (Annex no
10 SWRO rejects", this must be included in the Legal Framework
8), and Recommended Ambient Marine Water Quality Standards for Abu Dhabi Emirate (AWQOs).
chapter.
All relevant and applicable standards and source document(s)

Legal of standard pollutant limits must be listed in this section, such
Framework Section 3.3 has been updated to include both the Federal Limits for Discharge to the Marine Environment and the Recommended Abu
11 4 22-35 as the Federal Limits for Discharge to the Marine
and Standards Dhabi Ambient Marine Water Quality Standards for Abu Dhabi Emirate.
-3 Environment and the Abu Dhabi Ambient Marine Water
Quality Limits.
With regards to the following statement: "As detailed above,

Project the precise requirements for the seawater intake and outfall
Description - have not yet been fully defined. This will be addressed in
12 5 4.3.6 - 48 Section 4.3.6 has been amended to clarify this.
Construction greater detail in the EIA", it should be clarified that this refers
Phase to the updated EIA to be submitted at a later date and that the
dredging methodology must be discussed.
Climate, This section specified that "PM 1O levels frequently exceed

13 6 Meteorology 54-57 the UAE Federal Guideline hourly limit of 150 µg/m3 (EAD, Section 5.1.1.1 has been corrected in accordance with the comment.
and Ambient 2015)". However as there is no EAD standard limit for hourly
# EAD Comment
Reference
Air Quality – average of PM10, the text should refer to the 24 hours
5.1.1.1 –
average.
Regional
Context
Provide the location map or coordinates for the monitoring
14 location mentioned in Table 11 in order to understand the A new table (Table 13) has been provided to include the coordinates from the A10 EIA (2006).
ground level concentration of monitored location.
Under "Baseline Site Conditions", the text states that NO2,

O3, and PM10 exceedances are all detailed in Table 35
15 Section 5.1.1.2 has been corrected to reflect that measured NO2 concentrations did not exceed the UAE Federal Standard.
(Page 61). However, the percentage exceedance (%) of NO2
is stated as 0. Please clarify.
Please include the calibration certificate for the air quality

16 monitoring station "Aeroqual, AQM65" and other monitoring The calibration certificate for the AQM65 is now added into the Annex.
Climate,
equipment in the Annex of the EIA.
Meteorology
and Ambient
7 Air Quality – 58-61 This section stated that the "Measurements of N02, O3 and
5.1.1.2 – PM10 all exceeded the federal guideline values at
Baseline Data frequencies detailed in Table 35. There are currently no DM
Collection guideline limits or standards for PM2.5''. Table 13 depicted
PM10 only exceeded to the UAE Federal Standard. All other
17 Section 5.1.1.2 has been corrected in accordance with comment response #15.
parameters are shown with in the limit of UAE Federal
Standard. The standard speculates hourly, 8 hour and 24
hour average and not about the maximum concentration in
the monitoring period. Also, it is wrongly referred as DM
guideline instead of EAD guideline.
Climate, The text discusses the potential of dust deposition in the

Meteorology
marine environment and states that "prevailing wind direction
and Ambient
Air Quality – is from the northwest, blowing in towards the site off the sea, Section 5.1.2.1 has been updated to include a wind rose for the air quality monitoring period (duration one month) which indicates that
15 8 62 the volume of dust deposited into the marine environment is
5.1.2.1 – prevailing wind direction is from NWW.
Construction not expected to be significant." This information must be
Phase supported by a wind rose.
Impacts
Climate, Provide details about the air emission emissions from

16 Meteorology hypochlorination plant operation and its emission reduction Section 5.1.2.2 has been corrected in accordance with the comment.
and Ambient
measures
Air Quality –
9 63-64
5.1.2.2 –
Table 14 Potential Air Mitigation Measures must include the
Operational
17 Phase mitigation measures for the excavated material stockpile from Section 5.1.3.1 and 5.1.3.2 have been updated in accordance with the comment.
Impacts wind erosion.
Climate, 64 This section must discuss potential mitigation measures for

Meteorology odour.
and Ambient
Air Quality –
21 10 Section 5.1.3.1 (Table 17) has been updated to include odour mitigation measures provided in Section 5.1.3.2.
5.1.3.1 –
Potential
Mitigation
Measures
Climate, 68 The EIA refers to "DM licensed waste disposal contractor" in
24 11 Meteorology The EIA has been corrected with typographical errors removed.
Abu Dhabi the entity responsible for licensing the waste
# EAD Comment
Reference
and Ambient disposal contractors is Tadweer - Centre of Waste
Air Quality –
Management.
5.1.3.2 –
Selected
Mitigation
Measures
Marine Water, 73 Confirm the GPS coordinates of the Aquadopps provided in
Sediment and Table 16 under the "Hydrodynamic Regime'' subsection as
25 12 Ecology - the locations do not match those provided in Figure 17. Error has been corrected and the coordinates have been changed to match the points in Figure 17.
5.2.1.1 –
Regional
Context
Table 18 must separately list the limits of ADS WQO and

EAD Recommended Ambient Marine Water Quality
26 Standards for Abu Dhabi Emirate (AWQOs). AWQOs limits Section 5.2.1.2 (currently Table 21) has been updated as per the suggested comment.
must be provided for all parameters (eg.:Sulphide, Oil and
grease).
The source ADS WQO limits for Temperature, Turbidity, pH,

27 This section has been updated according to the AWQOs.
E. Coli amongst others must be provided.
The project must adopt the stringent standard for the ambient
marine water quality (for example, Table 17 shows the
28 turbidity limit for ADS WQOs is 75 NTU (provide the source of This section has been updated according to the AWQOs.
information). But, AWQOs specified only 10 NTU for the
Turbidity).
Provide a copy of the analytic lab accreditation with Emirates The laboratory used for this Project (PSN Lifescience) are accredited from Emirates International Accreditation Centre (EIAC), Dubai
29 Marine Water, National Accreditation System (ENAS) in the Annex. which is also recognized by Abu Dhabi Government. Beside this, they are also a registered member of Abu Dhabi Quality Control Council
(ADQCC) and DAC certified. All laboratory certifications have been provided in the Annex.
Sediment and
13 Ecology - 87-138
5.2.1.2 – Baseline marine ecology must address supralittoral and The CICPA passes obtained for this Project restricted access to the Project site and marine areas accessible by boat only. It is not
30 Baseline intertidal ecosystem. possible to access the beach of the Taweelah facility and the vessel was not permitted to moor or anchor in the area. During the updated
Results EIA it will be attempted to obtain CICPA clearance to access this portion of the survey area.
Baseline marine ecological sampling locations were not

selected with reference to the configuration of the waste brine
effluent discharge outfall. Section 4.3.5 mentioned that "it
Visual marine ecological surveys were completed (DDV and BRUVs) at each of the outfall diffuser locations and included in the present
consists of seven kilometre long outfall with six diffusers".
31 EIA. Benthic, phytoplankton and zooplankton sampling will be completed along the alignment once the design is finalised by the Project
Baseline marine ecology of waste brine effluent discharge
EPC and results will be included in the updated EIA.
locations must be assessed (especially the diffusers at the
sixth and seventh kilometre from the shore where the 60% of
brine discharged).
The EIA states that no fish eggs or larvae was present within
the samples collected during the zooplankton survey. Please
Additional zooplankton samples will be collected at the updated EIA stage once the final intake/outfall alignment has been proposed by
refer to Comment 2 in EAD's response to the TOR: a
32 the Project EPC. This survey will focus on the potential impingement and entrainment on any intake screens and filters once the
seasonal sampling is required in order to assess any potential
locations of these screens has been finalised.
impingement and entrainment of fish eggs and larvae on
sweater intake screens and filters.
# EAD Comment
Reference
Marine Water, 147 Under the “Direct Habitat Loss and Modification” Subsection,
Sediment and the text states that “retaining areas of seagrass on the
Ecology - It is considered preferable to minimise seagrass loss as far as is possible. If possible, the outfall alignment should allow for retention of
western side of the existing intake channel will aid in recovery
5.2.2.2 – seagrass patches on the western side of the alignment to aid recovery on that side of the future pipeline alignment. Implementation of
Construction in this area as Halodule species have negatively buoyant
protection measures detailed in Section 5.2.3.1 are targeted at containing the dispersion of the sediment plume and protecting benthic
Phase seeds that will not disperse long distances”. Confirm whether
33 14 communities. In the event that it is not possible to retain seagrass cover on the western side of the alignment then the detailed EIA would
Impacts seagrass on the western side can be retained as the text
be expected to consider whether implementation of management / compensation measures should be implanted. These would be
previously stated that this seagrass is expected to be
detailed in a management and compensation plan that would form a part of the detailed EIA to be submitted to EAD for review and
negatively affected by sediment plumes and therefore it is
approval.
logical to assume that seagrass on the eastern side will aid in
recovery via seed dispersion.
Marine Water, 166-167 The Impingement and Entrainment impact assessment must
Sediment and comply with the Technical Guidance Document for Fish
Ecology - Entrapment and Impingement Studies (environmental impact
34 5.2.3.4 – Section 5.2.3.4 has been updated as per the suggested comment.
Operational description, Evaluation of intake technologies for reducing
Phase E&I etc.), the TGD is available on EAD website, and the
Impacts – updated EIA should address this comment.
Impingement
and It is important that the updated EIA include not only a
Entrainment discussion of the final design of the intake technology and its
35 15 Impingement and Entrainment impacts, but also the design Section 5.2.3.4 has been updated as per the suggested comment.
options and mitigation measures that were considered but
were not implemented.
The text stated the following "it is likely that additional studies
would be needed to better identify the exact species at risk
Additional zooplankton samples will be collected at the updated EIA stage once the final intake/outfall alignment has been proposed by
and their seasonal abundance near the proposed intake
36 the Project EPC. This survey will focus on the potential impingement and entrainment on any intake screens and filters once the
location", the updated EIA must address this issue and
locations of these screens has been finalised.
conduct the necessary assessment of the intake entrainment
and impingement impacts.
Marine Water, 167 This paragraph is too general, the section must describe and
Sediment and evaluate the cumulative impact in a detailed manner. Please
37 16 Ecology - refer to the TGD for EIA published on EAD website. Section 5.2.2.5 has been updated accordingly
5.2.4.5 –
Cumulative
Impacts
Please adhere to the TGD format for the potential and

38 selected mitigation measures for the construction and Section 5.2.3.has been updated as per the suggested comment.
operation phase.
Marine Water, Table 29 under section 5.2.3.1 "Potential Mitigation
39 Sediment and Table 32 has been updated to include potential construction phase mitigation measures
Measures" must include the construction phase.
17 Ecology - 167-169
5.2.3 – Mitigation measures to address Impingement and Table 32 has been updated to include potential operational phase mitigation measures to reduce entrainment and impingement. In
Mitigation
40 Measures Entrainment must be included in this section. addition, the requirement for undertaking a targeted assessment of the detailed design and proposing site-specific fish entrainment and
impingement study in accordance with EAD Technical Guidance Document (April, 2014) has been included in Section 5.2.4.
Provide details about the impacts of dredging activities to the Additional sub-heading added to Section 5.2.2.2 that links production efficiency to seawater quality impacts that have already been
41
existing seawater intake water quality. discussed.
# EAD Comment
Reference
Specify details about the discharge velocity and other This calculation will be made available in the detailed EIA that will include CFD or CORMIX modelling and will be based on the final
42
discharge design configurations of outfall at each opening. detailed design provided by the EPC and / or DoE.
500m mixing zones indicated (red) in Figure 75 shows

inconsistencies with the discharge location. The mixing zone This comment is not entirely clear. The figure provided shows the 500m mixing zone around each of the proposed discharge points along
43
must be highlighted around the discharge points in order to the alignment.
read the concentration within and beyond the mixing zone.
44 Please ensure that the scale is provided on all maps. All figures provided, including outputs from model simulations, have been updated to include a scale bar
Evaluate and detail the potential cumulative environmental

impacts of marine discharges from existing (outfall of
45 Taweelah complex & Kizad Port) and proposed (SWRO) Please refer to changes to section 5.2.2.5
project. Also, discuss recirculation risks due to the cumulative
impacts on existing and proposed seawater intakes.
5.2.3.2 -Selection Mitigation Measures -Construction Phase:

No description was given for the named "the environmental
46 dredging" method. This paragraph is very general, and more Please refer to the additions to Section 5.2.5.1
details should be given in order to assess this dredging
method as "environmental dredging".
Marine Water, 171 Table 30 "Proposed Brine Monitoring Parameters" should

Sediment and include all the parameters stated in EAD's Standards and
Ecology –
5.2.5.1 Limits TGD under "Characteristics of Treated Industrial
Monitoring Wastewater at Point of Discharge into the Sea." The previous Table 30 has been removed from the document. Instead, please refer to Table 33 and Table 34 for the full list of
47 18
Program for parameters requested.
Compliance
with Selected
Mitigation
Measures
Waste 179-190 This section docs not predict and evaluate operational
Management hazardous waste generation and their impacts on
– 5.3 Volumes of hazardous waste that will be generated will need to be defined in consultation with the EPC contractor as the type and
environment even though the process operation involves the
48 19 volume of wastes generated can vary substantially. It is recommended that this be included in the detailed EIA once the project design
use of some hazardous chemicals. Estimate the hazardous
has progressed through to the detailed design phase and there is more project specific information available.
waste generation and their management practices through
storage, handling and disposal.
Geology, 201 Under the "Laboratory Analysis Results" subsection, the text
Seismicity,
stales that "all concentrations of the measured parameters,
Soil and
Groundwater were below both the target and intervention levels, as
Abu Dhabi Specification for Soil Contamination (ADQCC, 2017) screening level thresholds employed as the screening criteria for soil
49 20 – 5.4.1 – specified in the Dutch Regulations 2009."" However, please
sample analysis.
Description of note that the "Soil Contamination User Guide for the Emirate
the of Abu Dhabi must be referred to and used as a guideline
Environment
instead of the Dutch standards.
Terrestrial Please note that the Potential mitigation Measures must

Ecology – include all possible measures that may or may not be
50 21 5.6.3 – 223-225 Comment is noted
Mitigation selected. The Selected Mitigation Measures (5.6.3.2) must be
Measures selected from all the potential options in 5.6.3.1.
# EAD Comment
Reference
The catch and release plan for non-mobile fauna species
(reptiles) included in Table 44 must be implemented and
51 Noted. Selected Mitigation Measures section has been updated.
therefore should be included in section 5.6.3.2 (Selected
Mitigation measures)
Section 5.6.3.2 "Selected Mitigation Measures" (Page 225)

states the following as a mitigation measure: "Photos and a
The bullet point in questions refers to training materials and references species of potential conservation importance that could be shown
short brief describing species of conservation significance
to workers as part of the introductory environmental training course. The initial survey of the site has confirmed the site does not support
that could be present on site, including the spiny tailed lizard,
52 populations of Spiny-tailed Lizard. This was confirmed by absence of active or inactive burrows across the site that is made of
ghaf tree and desert eagle owl as a minimum." Please note
predominantly made ground, with much of the site having been used to stockpile dredged material. The bullet in question has been re-
that the Spiny Tailed Lizard is a protected species and their
worded to avoid any ambiguity.
presence or absence on site must be confirmed via a more
detailed survey.
Note that any relocation of fauna must be within the

Any catch-release plan to employed at the site is to be submitted to EAD for review and approval. It is assumed that this will form a part
53 surrounding environment, else the issue should be reported
of the detailed EIA.
to EAD for further discussion and approval.
Noise – 5.7.1 230 Under the "Noise Sensitive Receptors" subsection, the text
– Description
states that "There are no known site& of ecological sensitivity,
of the Noise
such as tunic nesting sites or bird nesting sites, within a
Though the occupancy of the nests could not be confirmed during the site visits conducted by HDR. Section 5.7.1 has been updated to
54 22 radius of five (5) kilometres of the Project site." However,
reflect that there may be Osprey nesting on the site, though this will need to be confirmed during the detailed EIA update stage.
Section 5.6.2 (Page 221) states that there is potential
presence of possible osprey nesting in the North of the site.
Please confirm.
Noise – 5.7.2 237 Justify why terrestrial and marine fauna were not included as
–
sensitive receptors. This is particularly relevant for marine
Environmental
Impact fauna during the construction phase given the dredging works This section has been updated to reflect that terrestrial and marine fauna are considered noise sensitive receptors and provides some
55 23
Prediction and that will be conducted. This section must be revised to include commentary on the potential impacts construction noise has the potential to generate on terrestrial and marine fauna.
Evaluation the justification else address the impacts on specific fauna in
detail.
Please adhere to the TGD format in this section and note that
56 all selected mitigation measures must be presented as Comment is noted
options in the potential mitigation measures section.
The updated EIA must revise the potential mitigation

measures in Table 51 under section 5.7.3.1. The current
Detailed information on construction equipment that will be used is not clear at this stage. It is suggested that this information be included
measures are very general in nature. The mitigation
57 in the detailed EIA update, once the pipeline length and alignment has been confirmed and the construction equipment / methodologies
measures for the construction phase in particular must
Noise – 5.7.3 that will be required is known.
24 – Mitigation 240 – 242 provide greater details about the machinery involved and
Measures specific marine fauna that may be impacted.
The text states lists "good planning of vibration intensive

activities (timing. Operating procedures, locations) as a This is a typographical error. Table 54 updated to include “Mounting of equipment on vibration mats, or increasing the mass weight of the
58
potential mitigation measure in Table 51. Please provide equipment to reduce vibration and vibration related noise”.
details in the EIA to be addressed fully in the CEMP.
Section 5.7.3.2 "Selected Mitigation Measures" must be With regards operational noise impacts on marine fauna, these will be addressed in the detailed EIA, once greater detail is available on
59
revised to adhere to the TGD format and provide greater type and situation of intake and outfall pumping stations.
# EAD Comment
Reference
details regarding the machinery and marine fauna as detailed
above.
Impacts, This section must address the potential risk of RO membrane

Mitigation and
malfunction. The following text has been inserted into Section 5.12.1: RO membrane malfunction can take the form of leakage from the pressure vessels or
Monitoring
relief from the pressure safety valve or membrane rupture disc; in all the cases mentioned above, the drain which is going to be either
Summary
60 25 301 seawater or brine will be conveyed to the outfall through the drainage system.
5.12.1 –
Hazards and
Effects
Register
Project The text states "RO is now significantly more efficient than
Alternatives –
thermal desalination technologies ", the section should
6.2 – Coupled
Power discuss this statement and prove how the Reverse Osmosis
61 26 310 desalination technology is more efficient than thermal. Section 6.2 has been updated. Please refer to Table 69.
Generation
and Water
Production
Alternative
Data submission to EAD in correct format and conversion to All relevant survey locations and the project footprint will be submitted to EAD in the format specified in the EAD TG (Arc GIS format files)
52
GIS as required (Mahwah or Stuart)
APPENDIX C – AMBIENT AIR QUALITY INSTRUMENT
CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE
APPENDIX D – AIR QUALITY LABORATORY RESULTS
O3 NOx NO2 SO2 H2S TEMP ITEMP CO PID PM2.5 CO2 PM10 NH3
Date/Time (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (°C) (°C) RH (%) (ppm) (ppm) (µg/m³) (ppm) (µg/m³) (ppm)
6/18/2018 3:00 0.02 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 27.87 30.03 0.38 71.06 ‐0.14 13.92 248.35 18.46 ‐0.25
6/18/2018 4:00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 26.76 30.02 0.43 64.10 ‐0.14 11.59 217.32 15.44 ‐0.24
6/18/2018 5:00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 26.23 30.03 0.36 58.05 ‐0.14 11.42 186.90 15.44 ‐0.21
6/18/2018 6:00 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 27.54 30.03 0.21 47.91 ‐0.14 10.13 148.98 14.58 ‐0.19
6/18/2018 7:00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 30.92 30.05 0.17 38.50 ‐0.07 9.82 124.05 14.61 ‐0.13
6/18/2018 8:00 0.03 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.00 35.60 30.09 0.20 32.92 0.20 28.80 345.77 43.29 0.10
6/18/2018 9:00 0.04 0.01 0.29 0.00 ‐0.01 39.45 30.11 0.18 33.05 0.13 30.47 394.33 45.64 0.11
6/18/2018 10:00 0.05 0.00 0.57 0.00 ‐0.01 42.43 30.13 0.12 26.97 0.14 40.32 383.93 59.13 0.00
6/18/2018 11:00 0.05 0.00 0.78 0.00 ‐0.01 43.10 30.12 0.13 23.71 0.14 45.84 377.73 66.80 0.05
6/18/2018 12:00 0.06 0.00 0.93 0.00 ‐0.01 42.62 30.11 0.14 24.73 0.14 36.65 380.35 53.41 0.05
6/18/2018 13:00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.93 30.11 0.15 28.64 0.14 39.01 389.00 56.90 0.17
6/18/2018 14:00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.60 30.11 0.27 35.61 0.31 40.76 404.20 59.40 ‐0.03
6/18/2018 15:00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.96 30.11 0.25 41.85 0.32 52.61 410.55 77.23 0.02
6/18/2018 16:00 0.06 0.00 ‐0.59 0.00 0.00 37.71 30.11 0.25 46.58 0.31 51.43 400.87 73.96 ‐0.08
6/18/2018 17:00 0.06 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00 36.90 30.12 0.25 47.93 0.30 50.55 393.12 72.41 ‐0.07
6/18/2018 18:00 0.07 0.00 0.64 0.00 0.00 34.58 30.08 0.29 56.24 0.29 46.26 388.12 66.04 ‐0.07
6/18/2018 19:00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.30 30.07 0.29 62.40 0.28 50.86 396.32 72.30 ‐0.09
6/18/2018 20:00 0.05 0.01 0.54 0.00 0.00 33.04 30.06 0.37 64.75 0.27 63.87 405.40 90.77 ‐0.10
6/18/2018 21:00 0.04 0.01 0.27 0.00 0.00 32.48 30.07 0.42 67.93 0.26 83.76 431.70 118.85 ‐0.12
6/18/2018 22:00 0.03 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 31.92 30.05 0.38 65.85 0.26 69.34 406.88 98.43 ‐0.15
6/18/2018 23:00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.01 30.83 30.05 0.40 66.53 0.27 66.99 408.40 95.14 ‐0.19
6/19/2018 0:00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 31.17 30.04 0.51 53.53 0.28 46.60 392.45 66.70 ‐0.17
6/19/2018 1:00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 31.33 30.05 0.61 48.16 0.28 46.65 384.67 67.90 ‐0.09
6/19/2018 2:00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 30.73 30.04 0.55 55.53 0.28 49.55 392.37 70.79 ‐0.01
6/19/2018 3:00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 30.15 30.03 0.47 65.49 0.27 54.71 398.62 77.78 ‐0.04
6/19/2018 4:00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 29.27 30.03 0.52 58.51 0.28 49.30 393.08 70.27 ‐0.15
6/19/2018 5:00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 28.30 30.02 0.55 57.53 0.28 47.94 388.25 68.56 ‐0.11
6/19/2018 6:00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 29.21 30.03 0.50 53.07 0.29 47.95 387.70 69.78 ‐0.08
6/19/2018 7:00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 32.70 30.05 0.53 43.53 0.30 50.56 383.72 76.63 ‐0.09
6/19/2018 8:00 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.00 37.62 30.09 0.42 32.56 0.31 54.46 367.03 81.00 ‐0.06
6/19/2018 9:00 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 39.45 30.11 0.44 35.17 0.32 47.14 380.32 69.25 0.04
6/19/2018 10:00 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 40.03 30.12 0.41 35.38 0.32 45.32 379.00 66.34 ‐0.07
6/19/2018 11:00 0.06 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 40.43 30.12 0.40 38.56 0.31 49.18 389.17 71.69 0.05
6/19/2018 12:00 0.06 0.01 0.30 0.00 0.00 39.57 30.12 0.36 50.54 0.30 84.06 409.82 119.62 0.02
6/19/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.31 0.01 0.00 39.01 30.12 0.29 52.61 0.27 73.52 415.28 104.36 ‐0.11
6/19/2018 14:00 0.05 0.01 0.34 0.00 0.00 38.74 30.13 0.30 53.25 0.26 96.53 417.72 136.79 ‐0.14
6/19/2018 15:00 0.05 0.01 0.36 0.00 0.00 38.14 30.11 0.30 53.59 0.25 94.35 417.88 133.80 ‐0.15
6/19/2018 16:00 0.05 0.01 0.39 0.00 0.00 37.28 30.10 0.29 54.90 0.25 83.75 404.17 118.76 ‐0.18
6/19/2018 17:00 0.05 0.01 0.41 0.00 0.00 35.98 30.10 0.28 59.50 0.25 92.36 405.62 131.06 ‐0.10
6/19/2018 18:00 0.05 0.01 0.39 0.00 0.00 34.48 30.08 0.28 65.11 0.24 108.27 412.73 153.55 ‐0.16
6/19/2018 19:00 0.04 0.01 0.37 0.00 0.00 33.29 30.06 0.30 65.78 0.24 103.77 408.35 147.11 ‐0.18
6/19/2018 20:00 0.05 0.01 0.41 0.00 0.00 32.77 30.06 0.28 66.83 0.23 99.42 406.43 140.93 ‐0.14
6/19/2018 21:00 0.05 0.01 0.39 0.00 0.00 32.12 30.06 0.28 71.32 0.22 130.78 412.15 185.24 ‐0.14
6/19/2018 22:00 0.04 0.01 0.31 0.00 0.00 31.30 30.05 0.28 73.36 0.22 135.13 410.87 191.46 ‐0.17
6/19/2018 23:00 0.03 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 29.97 30.04 0.31 76.19 0.22 129.10 403.75 182.89 ‐0.14
6/20/2018 0:00 0.03 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.01 29.72 30.03 0.31 79.56 0.21 203.97 413.93 288.75 ‐0.14
6/20/2018 1:00 0.03 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 29.55 30.04 0.31 81.76 0.21 249.38 418.28 353.03 ‐0.15
6/20/2018 2:00 0.03 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.01 29.89 30.04 0.41 79.84 0.21 201.89 424.25 285.93 ‐0.17
6/20/2018 3:00 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 28.99 30.04 0.41 80.25 0.22 167.57 419.05 237.36 ‐0.16
6/20/2018 4:00 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 28.80 30.03 0.41 80.76 0.22 163.61 415.47 231.70 ‐0.15
6/20/2018 5:00 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 28.55 30.04 0.40 82.44 0.22 208.55 417.98 295.30 ‐0.14
6/20/2018 6:00 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 29.42 30.04 0.41 80.37 0.22 173.95 421.70 246.31 ‐0.13
6/20/2018 7:00 0.03 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 33.09 30.05 0.39 72.20 0.23 157.20 428.98 222.84 ‐0.13
6/20/2018 8:00 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 36.05 30.08 0.34 61.22 0.23 122.17 422.43 173.23 ‐0.17
6/20/2018 9:00 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 38.67 30.10 0.42 51.86 0.26 96.08 436.75 136.46 ‐0.18
6/20/2018 10:00 0.05 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 41.19 30.10 0.44 45.56 0.26 89.15 428.52 126.74 ‐0.15
6/20/2018 11:00 0.06 0.01 0.14 0.01 0.00 41.19 30.10 0.36 50.70 0.24 130.79 438.42 185.56 ‐0.13
6/20/2018 12:00 0.05 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 40.58 30.10 0.28 52.85 0.20 106.14 436.02 150.59 ‐0.18
6/20/2018 13:00 0.04 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.01 40.49 30.09 0.26 53.30 0.19 88.60 433.78 125.80 ‐0.17
6/20/2018 14:00 0.04 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 39.81 30.10 0.22 55.19 0.18 84.17 437.82 119.51 ‐0.18
6/20/2018 15:00 0.04 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 38.78 30.10 0.24 57.71 0.19 85.14 437.58 120.84 ‐0.19
6/20/2018 16:00 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 37.88 30.10 0.24 59.02 0.20 76.95 385.57 109.38 ‐0.19
6/20/2018 17:00 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 36.37 30.08 0.34 65.17 0.22 80.61 370.00 114.50 ‐0.18
6/20/2018 18:00 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.01 34.76 30.08 0.90 71.13 0.42 92.59 370.45 131.39 ‐0.17
6/20/2018 19:00 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.01 33.48 30.07 0.93 78.42 0.40 225.27 372.33 318.77 ‐0.15
6/20/2018 20:00 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 32.76 30.06 1.08 82.29 0.38 267.36 366.32 378.16 ‐0.13
6/20/2018 21:00 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 32.56 30.06 1.09 82.31 0.39 330.38 363.07 467.59 ‐0.12
6/20/2018 22:00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 31.26 30.05 1.00 84.03 0.41 626.82 357.20 887.12 ‐0.10
6/20/2018 23:00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 30.71 30.05 1.01 87.31 0.43 915.22 353.02 1295.17 ‐0.09
6/21/2018 0:00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 30.44 30.04 1.25 87.04 0.47 897.95 332.02 1270.62 ‐0.02
6/21/2018 1:00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 30.09 30.05 1.41 87.21 0.50 919.24 308.88 1301.59 0.11
6/21/2018 2:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 29.73 30.04 1.17 87.53 0.47 995.76 335.98 1410.36 0.00
6/21/2018 3:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 29.12 30.04 1.08 87.49 0.44 867.59 344.22 1227.90 ‐0.05
6/21/2018 4:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 29.58 30.05 0.99 89.97 0.42 1026.26 354.55 1453.45 ‐0.08
6/21/2018 5:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 28.41 30.03 1.04 91.27 0.42 1099.36 352.85 1558.38 ‐0.09
6/21/2018 6:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 29.14 30.04 1.07 91.43 0.42 1043.57 362.52 1478.37 ‐0.09
6/21/2018 7:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.20 30.06 1.02 85.87 0.42 429.28 364.88 607.54 ‐0.07
6/21/2018 8:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 35.83 30.05 1.02 73.49 0.43 148.17 364.20 209.65 ‐0.07
6/21/2018 9:00 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 39.23 30.09 1.01 55.39 0.46 75.46 365.77 107.11 ‐0.09
6/21/2018 10:00 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 43.15 30.06 1.10 41.33 0.51 71.76 372.80 102.04 ‐0.23
6/21/2018 11:00 0.05 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.00 45.27 30.02 1.07 34.13 0.49 68.35 352.32 97.36 ‐0.22
6/21/2018 12:00 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.00 46.00 30.02 0.93 36.35 0.43 79.06 356.72 112.26 ‐0.08
6/21/2018 13:00 0.04 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.00 42.28 30.06 0.86 51.21 0.34 111.81 380.53 158.41 ‐0.15
6/21/2018 14:00 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.00 40.74 30.08 0.86 54.70 0.34 188.99 381.23 267.64 ‐0.16
6/21/2018 15:00 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.00 39.06 30.08 0.95 58.44 0.35 235.65 386.75 333.52 ‐0.15
6/21/2018 16:00 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 37.30 30.09 0.84 64.49 0.34 141.24 379.73 199.97 ‐0.15
6/21/2018 17:00 0.05 0.03 0.12 0.00 0.00 36.29 30.08 0.84 61.17 0.33 135.68 379.58 192.22 ‐0.16
6/21/2018 18:00 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.00 0.00 34.80 30.08 0.81 64.81 0.38 131.27 381.83 185.90 ‐0.21
6/21/2018 19:00 0.05 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.00 33.85 30.05 0.88 65.29 0.38 122.70 364.67 173.91 ‐0.22
6/21/2018 20:00 0.05 0.02 0.16 ‐0.01 0.00 33.42 30.05 0.90 69.66 0.38 167.00 370.63 236.47 ‐0.17
6/21/2018 21:00 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.00 0.00 32.59 30.06 0.84 76.53 0.33 81.53 379.75 115.63 ‐0.18
6/21/2018 22:00 0.04 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.00 32.17 30.06 0.82 75.00 0.34 57.77 372.33 82.12 ‐0.19
6/21/2018 23:00 0.04 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.00 32.11 30.05 0.80 73.58 0.35 58.19 368.30 82.72 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 0:00 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.00 32.11 30.06 0.82 77.20 0.33 73.92 378.58 104.89 ‐0.17
6/22/2018 1:00 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.00 0.00 31.77 30.06 0.82 77.79 0.32 80.74 378.33 114.72 ‐0.19
6/22/2018 2:00 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.00 31.60 30.05 0.83 78.18 0.32 85.24 380.47 121.11 ‐0.18
6/22/2018 3:00 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.00 31.29 30.05 0.83 79.09 0.32 73.89 380.77 104.94 ‐0.19
6/22/2018 4:00 0.03 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.00 30.33 30.04 0.87 81.64 0.31 86.45 382.52 122.70 ‐0.19
6/22/2018 5:00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 29.33 30.03 1.00 84.33 0.34 101.40 385.88 143.68 ‐0.18
6/22/2018 6:00 0.04 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.00 32.49 30.06 0.82 74.02 0.36 31.09 369.43 44.09 ‐0.21
6/22/2018 7:00 0.04 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.00 35.39 30.07 0.78 62.02 0.36 26.72 364.20 37.94 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 8:00 0.04 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.00 37.18 30.08 0.74 54.64 0.35 27.38 358.60 38.94 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 9:00 0.04 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.00 38.96 30.10 0.72 50.39 0.34 30.68 360.25 43.59 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 10:00 0.04 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.00 40.87 30.10 0.73 45.96 0.35 29.77 360.45 42.30 ‐0.19
6/22/2018 11:00 0.04 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.00 42.02 30.09 0.73 42.42 0.35 28.20 358.47 40.15 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 12:00 0.04 0.01 0.18 0.00 0.00 42.19 30.08 0.74 42.38 0.34 30.41 359.72 43.19 ‐0.19
6/22/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 42.22 30.09 0.75 40.90 0.36 32.01 355.92 45.58 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 14:00 0.05 0.01 0.20 0.00 0.00 41.78 30.07 0.85 39.63 0.40 32.31 347.57 46.04 ‐0.21
6/22/2018 15:00 0.05 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 40.62 30.07 0.88 42.46 0.40 35.21 347.92 50.11 ‐0.18
6/22/2018 16:00 0.05 0.01 0.24 0.00 0.00 38.44 30.08 0.88 48.90 0.40 38.46 360.12 54.65 ‐0.18
6/22/2018 17:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.20 30.08 0.88 56.88 0.40 58.11 380.67 82.50 ‐0.18
6/22/2018 18:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.24 30.07 0.87 63.83 0.39 76.75 384.63 108.84 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 19:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.14 30.06 0.88 65.54 0.39 60.59 382.38 85.96 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 20:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.77 30.07 0.87 66.75 0.39 50.16 383.75 71.14 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 21:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.50 30.06 0.88 67.40 0.39 48.84 382.28 69.29 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 22:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.18 30.06 0.86 68.70 0.39 51.43 384.63 73.04 ‐0.20
6/22/2018 23:00 0.05 0.01 0.22 0.00 0.00 31.97 30.06 0.86 69.19 0.38 52.93 384.02 75.11 ‐0.19
6/23/2018 0:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.79 30.05 0.85 69.93 0.38 53.53 384.85 75.95 ‐0.19
6/23/2018 1:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.37 30.05 0.87 70.79 0.38 56.12 381.82 79.65 ‐0.20
6/23/2018 2:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.03 30.06 0.86 71.21 0.39 58.41 381.92 82.88 ‐0.20
6/23/2018 3:00 0.05 0.01 0.19 0.00 0.00 30.54 30.04 0.85 71.57 0.39 56.05 380.08 79.53 ‐0.19
6/23/2018 4:00 0.03 0.01 0.16 0.00 0.00 29.36 30.04 0.87 74.95 0.39 57.25 382.02 81.22 ‐0.18
6/23/2018 5:00 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 28.31 30.03 0.98 78.69 0.39 57.56 387.85 81.67 ‐0.19
6/23/2018 6:00 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 29.00 30.04 0.96 76.20 0.40 54.84 380.25 77.80 ‐0.17
6/23/2018 7:00 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 32.17 30.06 0.93 66.79 0.42 52.53 379.50 74.56 ‐0.17
6/23/2018 8:00 0.03 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 35.78 30.08 0.94 56.30 0.41 49.18 382.27 69.87 ‐0.17
6/23/2018 9:00 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.00 38.53 30.09 0.63 48.27 0.42 49.53 381.68 70.38 ‐0.21
6/23/2018 10:00 0.05 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 41.36 30.11 0.37 36.30 0.44 43.78 358.95 62.30 ‐0.20
6/23/2018 11:00 0.06 0.01 0.21 0.00 0.00 42.28 30.09 0.39 36.05 0.44 42.40 363.47 60.33 ‐0.16
6/23/2018 12:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.37 30.08 0.44 38.59 0.43 49.27 377.50 69.96 ‐0.16
6/23/2018 13:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 ‐0.01 42.43 30.08 0.44 38.11 0.43 59.89 382.67 85.06 ‐0.18
6/23/2018 14:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 ‐0.01 42.11 30.07 0.45 39.16 0.42 65.06 381.60 92.39 ‐0.18
6/23/2018 15:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 ‐0.01 40.21 30.09 0.46 45.90 0.42 86.36 392.60 122.62 ‐0.16
6/23/2018 16:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 ‐0.01 38.22 30.08 0.43 52.82 0.41 80.01 393.47 113.55 ‐0.18
6/23/2018 17:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.05 30.09 0.40 60.66 0.39 63.36 378.47 89.88 ‐0.18
6/23/2018 18:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.87 30.07 0.43 67.72 0.39 56.14 381.00 79.66 ‐0.20
6/23/2018 19:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.75 30.07 0.42 69.28 0.39 58.28 377.48 82.62 ‐0.21
6/23/2018 20:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.37 30.05 0.40 70.12 0.38 68.02 377.93 96.54 ‐0.20
6/23/2018 21:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.19 30.06 0.38 68.85 0.37 81.72 371.70 116.12 ‐0.20
6/23/2018 22:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.93 30.05 0.37 70.93 0.37 97.23 376.12 138.06 ‐0.19
6/23/2018 23:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.58 30.06 0.37 74.02 0.37 126.34 379.85 179.53 ‐0.19
6/24/2018 0:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.32 30.06 0.37 75.41 0.37 115.70 380.28 164.39 ‐0.20
6/24/2018 1:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.22 30.06 0.35 74.54 0.39 106.49 379.10 151.32 ‐0.21
6/24/2018 2:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.31 30.05 0.36 70.69 0.40 96.30 370.50 136.88 ‐0.21
6/24/2018 3:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.39 30.06 0.34 67.60 0.40 86.93 363.12 123.63 ‐0.21
6/24/2018 4:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.08 30.06 0.33 65.02 0.39 77.88 357.62 110.94 ‐0.20
6/24/2018 5:00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.04 30.04 0.33 63.49 0.39 69.57 354.13 99.09 ‐0.19
6/24/2018 6:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.59 30.06 0.32 59.87 0.39 64.51 353.40 91.67 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 7:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.28 30.08 0.31 57.80 0.39 71.35 359.37 101.54 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 8:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.06 30.08 0.32 51.87 0.40 76.37 357.65 108.68 ‐0.18
6/24/2018 9:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.32 30.09 0.33 47.44 0.40 77.41 354.52 110.20 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 10:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.38 30.11 0.33 45.92 0.40 78.99 356.40 112.35 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 11:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.36 30.11 0.33 44.34 0.41 84.59 358.03 120.46 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 12:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.81 30.11 0.32 42.32 0.41 91.74 361.48 130.54 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.02 30.10 0.34 43.07 0.40 93.73 364.23 133.36 ‐0.17
6/24/2018 14:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.64 30.09 0.35 44.67 0.41 103.23 369.57 146.71 ‐0.18
6/24/2018 15:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.62 30.08 0.37 47.41 0.41 123.17 370.92 175.23 ‐0.18
6/24/2018 16:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.93 30.08 0.36 51.29 0.40 153.03 369.97 217.51 ‐0.19
6/24/2018 17:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.10 30.08 0.35 55.95 0.41 180.44 377.53 256.48 ‐0.19
6/24/2018 18:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.17 30.06 0.35 60.59 0.40 184.02 375.77 261.49 ‐0.19
6/24/2018 19:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.09 30.05 0.34 63.73 0.40 181.70 376.48 258.14 ‐0.18
6/24/2018 20:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.64 30.07 0.34 65.70 0.40 174.89 376.25 248.50 ‐0.19
6/24/2018 21:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.37 30.07 0.34 67.94 0.39 176.17 380.53 250.23 ‐0.18
6/24/2018 22:00 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 32.10 30.05 0.33 70.03 0.39 165.23 383.47 234.53 ‐0.20
6/24/2018 23:00 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.91 30.06 0.33 71.03 0.38 137.59 385.00 195.20 ‐0.19
6/25/2018 0:00 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.00 ‐0.01 31.84 30.06 0.33 70.37 0.38 131.23 383.73 186.14 ‐0.20
6/25/2018 1:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.94 30.06 0.33 66.45 0.36 108.38 376.47 153.72 ‐0.21
6/25/2018 2:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 32.12 30.05 0.31 61.61 0.37 87.32 366.45 123.99 ‐0.21
6/25/2018 3:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 32.12 30.07 0.30 58.66 0.38 77.45 360.42 110.08 ‐0.19
6/25/2018 4:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.90 30.05 0.30 59.68 0.37 75.22 359.73 106.90 ‐0.17
6/25/2018 5:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.44 30.06 0.31 62.21 0.37 74.53 361.58 105.96 ‐0.17
6/25/2018 6:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 32.68 30.05 0.30 57.87 0.37 61.22 359.47 86.97 ‐0.18
6/25/2018 7:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 34.83 30.09 0.28 51.38 0.38 54.92 358.12 78.30 ‐0.16
6/25/2018 8:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 36.31 30.09 0.27 48.95 0.39 53.55 359.62 76.37 ‐0.15
6/25/2018 9:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 37.63 30.11 0.27 44.53 0.39 59.63 358.57 85.03 ‐0.17
6/25/2018 10:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 38.73 30.10 0.27 40.88 0.40 63.15 356.35 90.01 ‐0.16
6/25/2018 11:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.11 30.10 0.27 38.81 0.40 63.24 352.48 90.19 ‐0.17
6/25/2018 12:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.57 30.10 0.28 38.52 0.41 67.28 352.23 96.01 ‐0.14
6/25/2018 13:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.49 30.10 0.29 39.08 0.41 60.21 353.78 85.80 ‐0.15
6/25/2018 14:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.49 30.10 0.28 40.09 0.41 59.08 356.10 84.20 ‐0.13
6/25/2018 15:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.33 30.10 0.29 42.35 0.41 60.60 360.32 86.40 ‐0.14
6/25/2018 16:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 38.64 30.09 0.29 43.79 0.44 61.15 362.43 87.15 ‐0.15
6/25/2018 17:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 36.88 30.09 0.30 46.56 0.43 63.13 375.05 89.86 ‐0.16
6/25/2018 18:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.79 30.07 0.30 50.59 0.42 65.57 378.52 93.40 ‐0.16
6/25/2018 19:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.22 30.06 0.30 55.46 0.42 65.42 380.35 93.15 ‐0.15
6/25/2018 20:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 32.73 30.06 0.30 56.99 0.41 62.86 381.82 89.48 ‐0.16
6/25/2018 21:00 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.05 30.05 0.31 60.60 0.40 63.74 384.55 90.65 ‐0.14
6/25/2018 22:00 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.90 30.04 0.31 62.83 0.40 62.02 391.95 88.17 ‐0.15
6/25/2018 23:00 0.06 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.24 30.05 0.32 66.62 0.40 64.47 394.98 91.64 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 0:00 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.97 30.05 0.32 68.02 0.40 68.65 404.15 97.62 ‐0.16
6/26/2018 1:00 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 31.94 30.05 0.32 68.58 0.38 70.74 407.48 100.51 ‐0.17
6/26/2018 2:00 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 31.37 30.05 0.37 70.70 0.37 79.79 412.93 113.18 ‐0.19
6/26/2018 3:00 0.03 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 29.45 30.04 0.54 70.30 0.39 73.72 414.08 104.61 ‐0.20
6/26/2018 4:00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 27.63 30.03 0.59 66.93 0.40 68.89 398.90 97.84 ‐0.19
6/26/2018 5:00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 26.95 30.02 0.56 66.14 0.41 74.62 392.08 105.93 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 6:00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 27.68 30.02 0.53 62.61 0.44 74.08 382.45 105.20 ‐0.14
6/26/2018 7:00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 30.87 30.04 0.52 54.13 0.45 69.81 383.18 99.26 ‐0.11
6/26/2018 8:00 0.03 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01 36.55 30.09 0.45 49.22 0.48 66.27 395.72 94.42 ‐0.09
6/26/2018 9:00 0.05 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.01 40.33 30.11 0.35 40.75 0.49 58.55 391.52 83.82 ‐0.11
6/26/2018 10:00 0.05 0.01 0.18 0.00 0.01 41.84 30.09 0.37 37.82 0.49 57.96 393.73 82.51 ‐0.16
6/26/2018 11:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.58 30.11 0.35 35.75 0.47 56.29 390.65 80.11 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 12:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.49 30.11 0.33 36.53 0.47 55.33 390.17 78.67 ‐0.14
6/26/2018 13:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.21 30.10 0.33 37.14 0.47 57.75 391.57 82.11 ‐0.16
6/26/2018 14:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.16 30.11 0.33 40.69 0.47 58.98 395.97 83.77 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 15:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.90 30.11 0.31 43.90 0.47 57.81 396.95 82.11 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 16:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.73 30.10 0.30 46.20 0.46 55.16 396.33 78.38 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 17:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.31 30.11 0.32 50.49 0.46 57.77 396.78 81.99 ‐0.16
6/26/2018 18:00 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.29 30.09 0.33 56.63 0.45 60.65 397.42 86.10 ‐0.17
6/26/2018 19:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.62 30.08 0.35 60.20 0.44 59.92 398.00 85.41 ‐0.18
6/26/2018 20:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.88 30.06 0.35 63.60 0.43 62.26 400.53 88.51 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 21:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.07 30.04 0.37 66.87 0.42 65.93 403.57 93.53 ‐0.17
6/26/2018 22:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.23 30.05 0.38 71.97 0.41 86.12 409.38 122.06 ‐0.15
6/26/2018 23:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 30.12 30.04 0.43 71.65 0.43 76.79 403.92 108.93 ‐0.21
6/27/2018 0:00 0.03 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.01 30.44 30.04 0.58 66.32 0.43 73.57 410.58 104.48 ‐0.18
6/27/2018 1:00 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 29.82 30.04 0.50 61.89 0.43 67.16 398.90 95.42 ‐0.18
6/27/2018 2:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 28.66 30.03 0.40 59.29 0.42 63.16 374.67 89.80 ‐0.15
6/27/2018 3:00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 28.43 30.03 0.38 56.21 0.42 65.60 367.13 93.34 ‐0.14
6/27/2018 4:00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 27.83 30.02 0.35 53.23 0.41 67.67 356.45 97.33 ‐0.13
6/27/2018 5:00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.01 27.19 30.02 0.36 52.81 0.41 67.61 349.32 96.62 ‐0.11
6/27/2018 6:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01 28.85 30.03 0.36 46.71 0.43 64.87 346.55 93.20 ‐0.10
6/27/2018 7:00 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 32.86 30.06 0.38 35.61 0.45 62.27 340.00 89.54 ‐0.10
6/27/2018 8:00 0.03 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.01 37.79 30.09 0.37 29.74 0.47 61.03 347.00 87.53 ‐0.05
6/27/2018 9:00 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.01 41.47 30.11 0.43 25.50 0.49 64.64 357.63 92.52 ‐0.09
6/27/2018 10:00 0.05 0.00 0.14 0.01 0.01 44.54 30.08 0.43 21.43 0.51 59.94 358.55 86.40 0.01
6/27/2018 11:00 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.00 42.60 30.11 0.67 36.84 0.53 77.59 416.57 110.73 0.00
6/27/2018 12:00 0.06 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.00 42.30 30.10 0.57 37.17 0.51 70.20 408.97 100.11 ‐0.11
6/27/2018 13:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.31 30.12 0.33 36.46 0.50 61.60 385.98 87.70 ‐0.07
6/27/2018 14:00 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 41.01 30.10 0.41 43.05 0.50 71.52 408.10 101.61 ‐0.11
6/27/2018 15:00 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.73 30.10 0.43 40.23 0.52 66.16 401.80 94.08 ‐0.18
6/27/2018 16:00 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.70 30.12 0.37 41.31 0.50 61.82 391.28 87.78 ‐0.14
6/27/2018 17:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.47 30.10 0.35 38.82 0.49 56.96 398.30 81.18 ‐0.18
6/27/2018 18:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.03 30.09 0.35 35.35 0.50 53.90 411.82 77.94 ‐0.20
6/27/2018 19:00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.66 30.07 0.40 37.21 0.50 54.85 406.93 79.48 ‐0.02
6/27/2018 20:00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.18 30.07 0.43 45.17 0.48 59.99 424.57 85.93 ‐0.07
6/27/2018 21:00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.50 30.05 0.40 48.78 0.47 62.99 421.08 89.68 ‐0.11
6/27/2018 22:00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 31.47 30.05 0.50 47.43 0.47 64.39 421.47 91.80 ‐0.10
6/27/2018 23:00 0.03 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.01 32.02 30.04 0.55 49.25 0.47 66.43 431.52 94.60 ‐0.02
6/28/2018 0:00 0.03 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.01 31.71 30.05 0.57 54.36 0.48 69.42 440.87 98.74 ‐0.09
6/28/2018 1:00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.01 30.97 30.04 0.62 45.88 0.49 68.98 432.75 101.05 ‐0.14
6/28/2018 2:00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.01 30.37 30.03 0.46 40.40 0.49 66.39 421.65 97.38 ‐0.09
6/28/2018 3:00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 29.76 30.03 0.42 37.49 0.49 66.77 411.35 96.31 ‐0.08
6/28/2018 4:00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 29.45 30.02 0.41 36.02 0.49 67.50 393.02 96.84 ‐0.04
6/28/2018 5:00 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 29.33 30.02 0.38 40.38 0.51 63.70 390.15 93.13 0.08
6/28/2018 6:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 31.87 30.06 0.36 51.81 0.51 67.79 419.38 96.76 0.08
6/28/2018 7:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.71 30.08 0.35 45.09 0.52 64.56 420.73 93.09 ‐0.04
6/28/2018 8:00 0.03 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01 38.53 30.11 0.33 33.34 0.54 53.92 409.25 78.72 ‐0.07
6/28/2018 9:00 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.01 41.41 30.10 0.44 25.94 0.56 51.27 403.93 75.85 ‐0.11
6/28/2018 10:00 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.00 0.01 43.02 30.10 0.66 30.97 0.58 65.87 457.48 95.37 0.08
6/28/2018 11:00 0.04 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 41.67 30.11 0.53 37.80 0.56 61.18 450.38 88.04 0.05
6/28/2018 12:00 0.06 0.01 0.23 0.00 0.00 40.92 30.11 0.43 43.33 0.54 77.06 462.08 110.29 ‐0.07
6/28/2018 13:00 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.36 30.12 0.43 41.79 0.52 70.52 454.58 100.43 ‐0.11
6/28/2018 14:00 0.08 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.15 30.12 0.43 42.67 0.53 74.28 456.10 105.58 ‐0.11
6/28/2018 15:00 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.15 30.13 0.39 46.64 0.54 98.93 462.70 140.68 ‐0.15
6/28/2018 16:00 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.41 30.11 0.42 44.15 0.54 83.68 451.48 119.20 ‐0.16
6/28/2018 17:00 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.18 30.12 0.44 47.91 0.54 86.11 447.98 122.39 ‐0.13
6/28/2018 18:00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.02 30.11 0.56 49.51 0.51 84.58 420.73 119.97 ‐0.17
6/28/2018 19:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.56 30.09 0.64 48.00 0.51 79.08 456.50 112.34 ‐0.12
6/28/2018 20:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.79 30.08 0.40 56.27 0.49 99.81 423.00 141.53 ‐0.08
6/28/2018 21:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.26 30.09 0.41 61.33 0.47 124.61 433.52 176.54 ‐0.12
6/28/2018 22:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.74 30.09 0.39 65.84 0.46 168.38 440.80 238.38 ‐0.09
6/28/2018 23:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.29 30.07 0.38 66.67 0.46 148.00 440.50 209.52 ‐0.18
6/29/2018 0:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.38 30.08 0.34 69.14 0.46 224.17 447.95 317.33 ‐0.09
6/29/2018 1:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.50 30.08 0.37 77.10 0.44 459.74 462.07 650.40 ‐0.13
6/29/2018 2:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.86 30.08 0.36 72.03 0.46 192.73 455.15 272.81 ‐0.18
6/29/2018 3:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.50 30.10 0.67 67.60 0.46 121.69 448.72 172.29 ‐0.16
6/29/2018 4:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.69 30.09 0.69 65.92 0.45 117.67 447.30 166.60 ‐0.16
6/29/2018 5:00 0.04 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.01 33.92 30.08 0.75 63.16 0.45 111.49 453.10 158.05 ‐0.22
6/29/2018 6:00 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 34.75 30.09 0.35 52.30 0.46 152.95 426.77 217.55 ‐0.16
6/29/2018 7:00 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.01 36.26 30.10 0.34 46.57 0.46 121.34 418.13 172.92 ‐0.14
6/29/2018 8:00 0.03 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.01 38.96 30.11 0.30 39.83 0.47 95.39 405.62 136.39 ‐0.14
6/29/2018 9:00 0.04 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.01 42.07 30.12 0.26 27.58 0.48 92.02 377.98 131.80 ‐0.15
6/29/2018 10:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 44.45 30.10 0.30 29.42 0.48 87.82 392.73 125.27 ‐0.01
6/29/2018 11:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.55 30.12 0.31 39.38 0.47 94.40 423.87 134.20 ‐0.10
6/29/2018 12:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.67 30.11 0.32 36.59 0.46 93.98 413.37 133.88 ‐0.13
6/29/2018 13:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.57 30.07 0.28 39.82 0.36 118.56 426.37 168.76 ‐0.09
6/29/2018 14:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.17 30.05 0.19 35.46 0.39 112.13 406.43 159.40 ‐0.20
6/29/2018 15:00 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 41.93 30.07 0.23 37.65 0.40 125.55 400.85 178.75 ‐0.09
6/29/2018 16:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.90 30.07 0.29 50.97 0.38 164.92 423.53 234.65 ‐0.07
6/29/2018 17:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 37.44 30.10 0.22 55.74 0.36 184.50 430.67 261.96 ‐0.15
6/29/2018 18:00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 36.36 30.08 0.34 55.92 0.36 161.02 354.63 228.74 ‐0.15
6/29/2018 19:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.64 30.08 0.39 58.27 0.36 127.21 358.37 180.58 ‐0.15
6/29/2018 20:00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.77 30.07 0.53 55.71 0.36 101.50 353.55 144.05 ‐0.16
6/29/2018 21:00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.37 30.08 0.48 58.78 0.36 101.04 359.07 143.37 ‐0.09
6/29/2018 22:00 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 36.94 30.08 1.36 46.31 0.38 116.07 411.33 165.72 ‐0.31
6/29/2018 23:00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.01 38.00 30.09 0.47 34.92 0.43 107.69 331.58 153.74 ‐0.10
6/30/2018 0:00 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 34.60 30.06 0.30 51.56 0.41 108.22 335.00 153.80 ‐0.04
6/30/2018 1:00 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.01 34.67 30.08 0.37 61.72 0.39 133.17 366.92 189.36 0.01
6/30/2018 2:00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 35.27 30.08 0.55 55.00 0.41 114.37 366.22 162.36 ‐0.18
6/30/2018 3:00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 35.48 30.07 0.38 46.73 0.41 123.82 339.25 176.33 ‐0.17
6/30/2018 4:00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.87 30.05 0.34 49.05 0.40 124.76 330.92 177.32 ‐0.12
6/30/2018 5:00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 33.39 30.06 0.33 48.85 0.39 128.72 325.10 182.87 ‐0.12
6/30/2018 6:00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 33.91 30.05 0.21 39.35 0.39 142.56 296.63 203.72 ‐0.16
6/30/2018 7:00 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 36.64 30.08 0.15 28.56 0.40 129.63 280.93 185.08 ‐0.12
6/30/2018 8:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 40.10 30.10 0.12 22.08 0.42 134.61 280.00 191.92 ‐0.08
6/30/2018 9:00 0.03 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.01 43.41 30.09 0.13 15.06 0.44 156.56 280.00 223.13 ‐0.10
6/30/2018 10:00 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.02 46.94 30.03 0.13 10.57 0.45 156.82 280.00 224.26 ‐0.07
6/30/2018 11:00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 48.78 29.96 0.14 14.85 0.47 159.09 280.85 227.63 0.19
6/30/2018 12:00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 44.17 30.06 0.14 31.64 0.45 158.74 310.40 226.82 0.19
6/30/2018 13:00 0.02 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 41.58 30.08 0.31 40.45 0.44 156.71 344.23 222.81 0.03
6/30/2018 14:00 0.03 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.01 40.02 30.10 0.27 46.36 0.43 153.35 360.43 217.86 ‐0.06
6/30/2018 18:00 0.03 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.01 37.37 30.09 0.68 53.78 0.40 142.81 389.32 203.29 ‐0.12
6/30/2018 19:00 0.04 0.03 0.18 0.00 0.01 35.16 30.08 0.48 67.23 0.40 152.36 385.27 216.05 ‐0.09
6/30/2018 20:00 0.05 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.01 35.46 30.07 0.57 61.68 0.39 149.82 382.43 212.52 ‐0.16
6/30/2018 21:00 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.01 36.35 30.07 0.91 50.65 0.39 146.86 418.38 208.89 ‐0.26
6/30/2018 22:00 0.03 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.01 35.44 30.08 0.73 52.60 0.39 139.93 352.58 199.16 ‐0.09
6/30/2018 23:00 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 35.24 30.08 0.38 51.45 0.39 139.03 346.25 197.59 ‐0.11
7/1/2018 0:00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 34.76 30.07 0.56 53.57 0.40 140.56 354.97 199.77 ‐0.12
7/1/2018 1:00 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 34.68 30.07 0.72 60.42 0.40 152.12 370.73 216.01 0.01
7/1/2018 2:00 0.01 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 34.07 30.07 0.70 71.34 0.43 159.21 378.57 225.70 ‐0.05
7/1/2018 3:00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.43 30.08 0.49 58.19 0.42 138.48 380.55 196.62 ‐0.24
7/1/2018 4:00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.88 30.05 0.43 47.64 0.42 140.55 326.62 200.21 ‐0.20
7/1/2018 5:00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.94 30.04 0.35 42.74 0.44 154.29 301.48 220.77 ‐0.16
7/1/2018 6:00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 33.23 30.06 0.28 39.63 0.45 161.42 288.22 230.73 ‐0.10
7/1/2018 7:00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 35.66 30.07 0.28 35.68 0.44 152.55 288.02 217.59 ‐0.07
7/1/2018 8:00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 38.97 30.11 0.18 31.21 0.43 83.36 281.02 118.59 ‐0.06
7/1/2018 9:00 0.04 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.01 41.96 30.11 0.17 25.73 0.45 52.51 280.03 75.13 ‐0.08
7/1/2018 10:00 0.04 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.01 45.30 30.06 0.17 21.55 0.47 57.99 280.00 82.88 ‐0.04
7/1/2018 11:00 0.04 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.01 46.98 30.04 0.18 21.38 0.47 63.63 284.68 91.10 0.09
7/1/2018 12:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 44.60 30.09 0.19 32.87 0.47 63.52 318.50 90.25 0.01
7/1/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.66 30.09 0.18 35.52 0.47 65.93 328.18 93.74 ‐0.09
7/1/2018 14:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.70 30.07 0.17 35.43 0.46 68.73 327.35 97.66 ‐0.05
7/1/2018 15:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.27 30.09 0.17 41.34 0.44 74.50 345.63 105.82 ‐0.05
7/1/2018 16:00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.90 30.08 0.16 42.94 0.43 81.86 347.70 116.29 ‐0.16
7/1/2018 17:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 39.12 30.09 0.21 48.04 0.41 85.58 356.05 121.56 ‐0.06
7/1/2018 18:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 36.75 30.08 0.22 53.85 0.39 94.15 356.90 133.59 ‐0.12
7/1/2018 19:00 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.00 0.01 35.33 30.07 0.19 61.17 0.41 102.33 367.13 145.28 ‐0.08
7/1/2018 20:00 0.03 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.01 34.37 30.07 0.20 67.95 0.45 108.71 384.28 154.30 ‐0.10
7/1/2018 21:00 0.04 0.03 0.19 0.00 0.01 34.08 30.07 0.21 69.91 0.44 139.26 398.27 197.55 ‐0.09
7/1/2018 22:00 0.04 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.01 33.57 30.07 0.20 69.83 0.43 141.79 395.72 201.15 ‐0.14
7/1/2018 23:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.67 30.08 0.21 65.24 0.42 131.36 386.12 186.37 ‐0.17
7/2/2018 0:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.43 30.06 0.62 65.64 0.41 130.48 388.88 185.02 ‐0.12
7/2/2018 1:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.77 30.06 0.81 63.11 0.44 126.34 387.08 179.19 ‐0.17
7/2/2018 2:00 0.03 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.01 31.63 30.06 0.28 72.85 0.43 136.47 393.37 193.56 ‐0.08
7/2/2018 3:00 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 30.51 30.04 0.29 78.08 0.45 138.21 399.33 196.14 ‐0.11
7/2/2018 4:00 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 30.22 30.05 0.28 79.94 0.42 146.45 402.30 207.72 ‐0.10
7/2/2018 5:00 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 29.32 30.04 0.26 82.99 0.41 155.25 401.25 222.77 ‐0.10
7/2/2018 6:00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 29.66 30.05 0.28 81.42 0.40 136.88 400.82 194.57 ‐0.13
7/2/2018 7:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.53 30.05 0.33 67.86 0.41 111.56 396.50 158.37 ‐0.16
7/2/2018 8:00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 37.36 30.09 0.32 45.32 0.44 93.32 368.45 132.77 ‐0.20
7/2/2018 9:00 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 42.60 30.11 0.24 25.90 0.46 98.57 325.15 140.72 ‐0.20
7/2/2018 10:00 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.00 0.01 42.89 30.09 0.37 39.89 0.46 98.40 381.82 139.89 0.08
7/2/2018 11:00 0.04 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.01 42.40 30.09 0.37 42.66 0.46 104.18 399.77 147.94 ‐0.09
7/2/2018 12:00 0.05 0.03 0.18 0.00 0.01 40.97 30.10 0.36 48.86 0.49 124.53 421.27 176.66 ‐0.08
7/2/2018 13:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.22 30.08 0.27 51.95 0.50 127.66 414.77 181.06 ‐0.11
7/2/2018 14:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 39.71 30.10 0.22 53.10 0.49 127.75 410.45 181.10 ‐0.09
7/2/2018 15:00 0.04 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.01 38.96 30.08 0.21 53.22 0.44 124.76 402.50 176.93 ‐0.12
7/2/2018 16:00 0.04 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.01 38.25 30.08 0.15 48.07 0.41 111.35 386.32 157.91 ‐0.17
7/2/2018 17:00 0.05 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.01 36.49 30.09 0.16 58.63 0.41 143.67 403.05 203.58 ‐0.06
7/2/2018 18:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.75 30.08 0.19 64.73 0.40 155.07 380.38 219.70 ‐0.13
7/2/2018 19:00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.71 30.07 0.15 62.19 0.39 140.94 335.37 199.82 ‐0.16
7/2/2018 20:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.25 30.07 0.19 65.27 0.37 211.94 340.30 300.19 ‐0.12
7/2/2018 21:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.52 30.06 0.16 69.37 0.39 252.52 345.90 357.76 ‐0.09
7/2/2018 22:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.65 30.05 0.23 72.35 0.41 323.01 350.82 457.52 ‐0.10
7/2/2018 23:00 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.01 30.40 30.04 0.21 74.85 0.43 225.75 340.28 319.78 ‐0.14
7/3/2018 0:00 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 30.28 30.05 0.31 76.21 0.40 231.43 349.92 327.76 ‐0.10
7/3/2018 1:00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 30.18 30.04 0.35 76.58 0.40 229.78 353.17 325.47 ‐0.12
7/3/2018 2:00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 29.83 30.05 0.37 75.16 0.38 180.75 359.35 256.12 ‐0.13
7/3/2018 3:00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 29.40 30.05 0.35 75.73 0.37 171.40 350.02 242.85 ‐0.12
7/3/2018 4:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 28.98 30.04 0.29 77.55 0.37 182.51 342.75 258.59 ‐0.11
7/3/2018 5:00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 28.34 30.03 0.28 78.99 0.37 179.67 330.45 254.52 ‐0.11
7/3/2018 6:00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 29.07 30.04 0.27 79.98 0.35 225.60 338.65 319.53 ‐0.09
7/3/2018 7:00 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 32.47 30.07 0.29 75.51 0.39 290.84 337.05 411.92 ‐0.03
7/3/2018 8:00 0.03 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.01 35.95 30.08 0.33 67.65 0.45 294.87 330.63 417.63 ‐0.03
7/3/2018 9:00 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.01 38.00 30.10 0.41 61.94 0.48 278.59 340.63 394.36 ‐0.03
7/3/2018 10:00 0.04 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.01 39.53 30.10 0.39 57.17 0.49 249.95 324.88 353.91 ‐0.02
7/3/2018 11:00 0.05 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.01 39.88 30.09 0.40 55.74 0.49 164.59 325.67 233.12 ‐0.03
7/3/2018 12:00 0.05 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.01 39.80 30.08 0.42 55.93 0.49 145.57 318.63 206.13 ‐0.01
7/3/2018 13:00 0.05 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 40.23 30.08 0.46 54.67 0.51 106.48 308.65 150.77 0.01
7/3/2018 14:00 0.04 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 41.07 30.09 0.33 42.41 0.44 66.23 331.47 94.07 ‐0.20
7/3/2018 15:00 0.04 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 40.50 30.09 0.26 47.65 0.42 83.53 349.17 118.50 ‐0.01
7/3/2018 16:00 0.04 0.03 0.17 0.00 0.01 38.54 30.08 0.31 57.71 0.42 113.02 349.85 160.13 ‐0.06
7/3/2018 17:00 0.03 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 37.13 30.08 0.46 64.81 0.46 207.38 301.63 293.80 0.04
7/3/2018 18:00 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 35.31 30.09 0.52 71.29 0.42 298.16 293.85 421.95 0.09
7/3/2018 19:00 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 34.25 30.07 0.53 72.69 0.39 252.58 318.22 357.42 0.08
7/3/2018 20:00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 33.53 30.06 0.52 73.03 0.37 226.95 322.07 321.17 0.07
7/3/2018 21:00 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 33.21 30.06 0.62 75.09 0.37 266.62 322.58 377.41 0.07
7/3/2018 22:00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.51 30.06 0.70 78.49 0.37 505.35 320.87 714.93 0.09
7/3/2018 23:00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.93 30.06 0.59 82.17 0.36 530.34 307.07 750.14 0.12
7/4/2018 0:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.82 30.06 0.65 82.71 0.34 448.47 303.15 635.13 0.14
7/4/2018 1:00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.65 30.06 0.91 83.27 0.35 425.04 283.83 602.38 0.29
7/4/2018 2:00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.51 30.06 1.02 81.87 0.34 431.96 288.82 611.00 0.34
7/4/2018 3:00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 32.35 30.05 0.87 81.74 0.27 442.36 336.68 625.73 0.08
7/4/2018 4:00 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 31.30 30.05 0.52 83.73 0.24 622.53 356.58 880.73 0.01
7/4/2018 5:00 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 30.39 30.05 0.44 87.13 0.24 804.64 369.50 1138.48 ‐0.03
7/4/2018 6:00 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 30.97 30.05 0.39 85.10 0.24 619.72 387.88 876.85 ‐0.04
7/4/2018 7:00 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.02 32.90 30.04 0.47 73.10 0.25 211.65 409.80 299.69 ‐0.07
7/4/2018 8:00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 38.14 30.09 0.31 34.63 0.25 105.17 365.23 149.94 ‐0.32
7/4/2018 9:00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.14 30.06 0.22 19.91 0.26 105.27 322.38 150.32 ‐0.23
7/4/2018 10:00 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 46.04 30.06 0.21 22.57 0.30 92.53 338.42 131.89 0.00
7/4/2018 11:00 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 43.53 30.07 0.29 36.19 0.31 104.42 377.52 148.61 ‐0.07
7/4/2018 12:00 0.05 0.03 0.11 0.00 0.01 42.32 30.09 0.33 43.71 0.30 106.07 413.22 150.47 ‐0.11
7/4/2018 13:00 0.05 0.04 0.15 0.00 0.00 41.91 30.06 0.34 46.19 0.31 108.87 437.92 154.33 ‐0.15
7/4/2018 14:00 0.05 0.03 0.17 0.00 0.01 41.09 30.03 0.23 53.70 0.29 115.34 457.58 163.37 ‐0.12
7/4/2018 15:00 0.05 0.03 0.17 0.00 0.01 40.10 30.04 0.30 57.86 0.31 130.39 448.18 184.64 ‐0.09
7/4/2018 16:00 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.01 39.10 30.05 0.35 57.05 0.30 115.80 414.97 164.08 ‐0.06
7/4/2018 17:00 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.01 38.73 30.07 0.33 48.39 0.26 85.50 433.63 121.30 ‐0.20
7/4/2018 18:00 0.06 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.01 37.14 30.06 0.29 52.47 0.24 90.47 419.05 128.33 ‐0.19
7/4/2018 19:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.75 30.07 0.28 58.87 0.24 100.54 365.92 142.52 ‐0.18
7/4/2018 20:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.01 30.07 0.31 66.07 0.24 144.47 390.05 204.57 ‐0.15
7/4/2018 21:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.30 30.06 0.31 73.45 0.26 271.71 388.03 384.52 ‐0.11
7/4/2018 22:00 0.04 0.03 0.19 0.00 0.01 34.22 30.08 0.35 70.16 0.26 137.37 373.10 194.52 ‐0.08
7/4/2018 23:00 0.04 0.03 0.18 0.00 0.01 34.04 30.06 0.31 71.25 0.26 144.76 375.92 204.99 ‐0.08
7/5/2018 0:00 0.04 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.01 33.76 30.06 0.32 74.43 0.26 233.13 369.40 329.94 ‐0.06
7/5/2018 1:00 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 33.49 30.06 0.33 72.89 0.26 169.70 363.13 240.27 ‐0.06
7/5/2018 2:00 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 33.71 30.07 0.34 68.66 0.22 104.27 401.22 147.76 ‐0.18
7/5/2018 3:00 0.03 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.01 32.98 30.05 0.32 69.92 0.22 113.46 403.77 160.69 ‐0.19
7/5/2018 4:00 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 32.40 30.06 0.41 70.96 0.22 122.49 404.10 173.49 ‐0.18
7/5/2018 5:00 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.01 31.47 30.05 0.29 74.42 0.21 126.95 409.75 179.78 ‐0.19
7/5/2018 6:00 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 32.31 30.05 0.25 72.86 0.21 121.78 411.17 172.49 ‐0.18
7/5/2018 7:00 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.72 30.08 0.25 65.14 0.22 103.40 410.60 146.52 ‐0.19
7/5/2018 8:00 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.01 38.14 30.08 0.29 50.58 0.25 100.94 397.78 143.24 ‐0.23
7/5/2018 9:00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 42.60 30.06 0.17 32.46 0.26 173.87 341.13 247.52 ‐0.21
7/5/2018 10:00 0.03 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.01 45.06 30.01 0.13 27.53 0.27 195.94 321.68 279.03 ‐0.19
7/5/2018 11:00 0.03 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.01 47.65 29.99 0.10 21.13 0.28 206.50 302.83 294.25 ‐0.18
7/5/2018 12:00 0.04 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.01 46.96 29.95 0.11 30.11 0.30 206.67 336.73 294.19 ‐0.03
7/5/2018 13:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.93 30.02 0.14 42.18 0.29 203.12 399.52 288.45 ‐0.11
7/5/2018 14:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.80 30.02 0.16 44.28 0.29 192.98 413.10 273.96 ‐0.18
7/5/2018 15:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 41.80 30.03 0.16 46.68 0.28 189.71 412.47 269.22 ‐0.14
7/5/2018 16:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.22 30.05 0.17 50.30 0.29 188.28 422.42 267.16 ‐0.19
7/5/2018 17:00 0.05 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.01 38.28 30.05 0.33 63.62 0.32 179.05 386.50 253.57 ‐0.05
7/5/2018 18:00 0.05 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.01 36.67 30.07 0.60 63.79 0.33 131.46 351.78 186.25 0.00
7/5/2018 19:00 0.05 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.01 36.77 30.07 0.53 57.05 0.27 92.32 349.15 130.94 ‐0.15
7/5/2018 20:00 0.03 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 37.53 30.07 0.70 46.45 0.26 83.34 415.55 118.51 ‐0.25
7/5/2018 21:00 0.04 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.00 37.55 30.07 0.79 46.61 0.26 81.31 367.32 115.46 ‐0.19
7/5/2018 22:00 0.02 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 39.29 30.07 0.74 38.59 0.27 125.76 336.83 178.80 ‐0.22
7/5/2018 23:00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 39.37 30.08 0.18 34.82 0.28 126.96 288.75 180.46 ‐0.17
7/6/2018 0:00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 37.42 30.08 0.24 39.53 0.28 117.67 280.00 167.12 ‐0.14
7/6/2018 1:00 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 38.00 30.08 0.12 36.01 0.32 98.41 280.00 139.85 ‐0.15
7/6/2018 2:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01 38.06 30.09 0.10 34.49 0.32 88.90 280.00 126.23 ‐0.13
7/6/2018 3:00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.01 37.38 30.09 0.11 34.88 0.32 86.43 280.00 122.77 ‐0.11
7/6/2018 4:00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 36.19 30.08 0.11 36.29 0.31 118.54 280.00 168.58 ‐0.11
7/6/2018 5:00 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 37.62 30.10 0.05 31.06 0.31 313.55 280.00 446.37 ‐0.10
7/6/2018 6:00 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 38.33 30.08 0.03 35.74 0.32 442.24 280.00 629.41 ‐0.05
7/6/2018 7:00 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 39.12 30.09 0.01 36.69 0.33 449.00 280.00 639.63 ‐0.07
7/6/2018 8:00 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.02 40.49 30.09 0.01 34.42 0.34 440.33 280.00 627.43 ‐0.09
7/6/2018 9:00 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.02 42.59 30.08 0.01 30.90 0.35 474.70 280.00 677.27 ‐0.09
7/6/2018 10:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.02 44.88 30.01 0.02 27.08 0.36 430.91 280.00 614.96 ‐0.09
7/6/2018 11:00 0.02 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.02 46.67 29.91 0.02 25.98 0.38 382.16 280.00 545.52 ‐0.05
7/6/2018 12:00 0.02 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.01 45.96 29.93 0.02 30.49 0.38 398.68 280.07 568.42 ‐0.06
7/6/2018 13:00 0.02 0.03 0.15 0.00 0.01 43.23 29.95 0.13 45.12 0.40 282.40 304.32 401.53 0.05
7/6/2018 14:00 0.02 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.01 40.81 30.01 0.45 56.41 0.47 169.28 280.00 239.73 0.07
7/6/2018 15:00 0.02 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.01 41.00 30.01 0.48 53.89 0.47 180.92 280.00 256.51 0.07
7/6/2018 16:00 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.01 41.15 30.02 0.42 49.32 0.40 178.67 331.95 253.42 ‐0.05
7/6/2018 17:00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 41.19 30.04 0.53 46.00 0.30 182.38 426.22 258.83 ‐0.17
7/6/2018 18:00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 41.92 30.00 0.65 37.99 0.30 474.29 366.97 676.82 ‐0.23
7/6/2018 19:00 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 41.79 30.04 0.08 31.27 0.30 468.61 323.00 667.89 ‐0.15
7/6/2018 20:00 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 41.33 30.08 0.03 27.32 0.33 258.15 323.77 367.57 ‐0.17
7/6/2018 21:00 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 40.81 30.13 0.02 26.94 0.34 216.27 316.52 308.00 ‐0.11
7/6/2018 22:00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 40.14 30.09 0.05 28.80 0.33 183.17 316.02 260.94 ‐0.08
7/6/2018 23:00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 39.60 30.10 0.04 29.30 0.33 175.84 312.13 250.36 ‐0.07
7/7/2018 0:00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.02 38.81 30.09 0.07 29.88 0.33 198.79 310.75 283.09 ‐0.07
7/7/2018 1:00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 37.93 30.08 0.08 31.94 0.33 185.70 311.23 264.88 ‐0.05
7/7/2018 2:00 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.02 37.38 30.08 0.06 31.98 0.34 143.82 308.65 204.79 ‐0.07
7/7/2018 3:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.02 36.85 30.08 0.04 31.12 0.35 112.11 304.33 159.48 ‐0.06
7/7/2018 4:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01 35.93 30.08 0.04 33.47 0.36 109.56 305.85 156.12 ‐0.04
7/7/2018 5:00 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.01 35.20 30.08 0.02 35.70 0.39 124.03 307.22 176.98 ‐0.04
7/7/2018 6:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.02 36.22 30.08 0.01 34.42 0.40 145.91 308.82 208.77 ‐0.04
7/7/2018 7:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.02 38.21 30.10 0.00 31.55 0.40 157.16 310.48 224.62 ‐0.04
7/7/2018 8:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.02 40.35 30.10 ‐0.01 29.55 0.40 145.73 311.97 207.87 ‐0.02
7/7/2018 9:00 0.02 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.02 43.46 30.07 ‐0.02 26.38 0.43 149.21 315.35 212.76 ‐0.03
7/7/2018 10:00 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 45.43 30.02 0.00 29.05 0.44 147.39 332.87 210.89 0.05
7/7/2018 11:00 0.02 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.01 45.49 30.00 0.01 31.40 0.43 147.05 350.05 209.57 0.00
7/7/2018 12:00 0.02 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.01 44.26 30.00 0.02 35.38 0.43 143.52 371.52 204.16 ‐0.05
7/7/2018 13:00 0.02 0.03 0.11 0.00 0.01 43.92 29.96 0.02 37.83 0.45 141.46 388.67 201.20 ‐0.05
7/7/2018 14:00 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 43.16 30.00 0.02 40.06 0.45 142.19 401.53 202.13 ‐0.09
7/7/2018 15:00 0.03 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.01 42.14 30.04 0.01 42.00 0.43 143.62 406.25 204.18 ‐0.10
7/7/2018 16:00 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.01 41.11 30.08 0.03 44.92 0.44 141.58 416.85 201.28 ‐0.11
7/7/2018 17:00 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 39.91 30.10 0.03 47.45 0.43 140.98 420.68 200.36 ‐0.11
7/7/2018 18:00 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 38.75 30.11 0.04 50.74 0.42 142.58 426.38 202.65 ‐0.11
7/7/2018 19:00 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 37.73 30.10 0.04 51.88 0.41 141.70 383.32 201.20 ‐0.14
7/7/2018 20:00 0.01 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.01 37.48 30.10 0.04 51.08 0.38 138.57 339.63 196.99 ‐0.13
7/7/2018 21:00 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.01 37.21 30.09 0.04 51.73 0.38 138.83 336.87 197.27 ‐0.13
7/7/2018 22:00 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.02 36.88 30.08 0.04 48.57 0.37 132.05 320.50 187.72 ‐0.16
7/7/2018 23:00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 35.59 30.10 0.06 50.01 0.37 134.96 311.05 191.85 ‐0.12
7/8/2018 0:00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 35.10 30.07 0.14 48.28 0.37 132.16 301.55 188.02 ‐0.11
7/8/2018 1:00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 34.35 30.07 0.13 48.75 0.37 134.27 295.88 191.47 ‐0.11
7/8/2018 2:00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 34.52 30.06 0.12 44.31 0.37 128.47 283.58 184.87 ‐0.13
7/8/2018 3:00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 34.83 30.06 0.09 42.53 0.37 125.52 280.15 179.41 ‐0.07
7/8/2018 4:00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 33.59 30.06 0.11 45.34 0.37 124.81 280.18 178.52 ‐0.08
7/8/2018 5:00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02 33.84 30.07 0.12 46.79 0.37 126.35 281.67 180.03 ‐0.05
7/8/2018 6:00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02 33.96 30.07 0.15 45.58 0.38 133.40 282.95 190.56 ‐0.08
7/8/2018 7:00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 36.66 30.08 0.17 37.34 0.39 123.61 280.58 177.86 ‐0.09
7/8/2018 8:00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 40.78 30.11 0.03 28.56 0.40 91.36 280.00 130.50 ‐0.07
7/8/2018 9:00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 44.18 30.06 0.04 24.73 0.41 82.87 280.00 118.17 ‐0.04
7/8/2018 10:00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 46.58 30.00 0.03 21.95 0.43 76.16 280.00 108.67 ‐0.03
7/8/2018 11:00 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 48.12 29.93 0.05 20.79 0.45 73.25 280.00 104.19 ‐0.01
7/8/2018 12:00 0.03 0.01 0.09 0.00 0.01 48.63 30.09 ‐0.04 24.48 0.46 72.69 281.18 104.76 0.06
7/8/2018 13:00 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.01 46.43 29.95 0.04 32.84 0.45 72.78 301.85 104.57 0.03
7/9/2018 6:00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 31.38 30.05 0.17 55.74 0.26 128.97 280.00 183.25 ‐0.10
7/9/2018 7:00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 34.12 30.06 0.15 47.82 0.27 123.95 280.00 176.93 ‐0.10
7/9/2018 8:00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 38.78 30.08 0.13 35.00 0.31 117.62 280.00 168.63 ‐0.12
7/9/2018 9:00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 42.14 30.07 0.18 29.61 0.34 109.92 280.00 156.90 ‐0.06
7/9/2018 10:00 0.03 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.01 44.21 30.05 0.13 28.47 0.37 99.90 280.00 142.72 ‐0.04
7/9/2018 11:00 0.05 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.01 44.63 30.07 0.09 36.69 0.36 106.32 286.03 152.07 ‐0.01
7/9/2018 12:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 44.39 30.02 0.12 39.74 0.36 110.82 308.38 157.70 ‐0.05
7/9/2018 13:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.36 30.03 0.16 44.99 0.38 116.99 333.28 165.88 ‐0.08
7/9/2018 14:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.42 30.02 0.19 46.67 0.38 108.31 334.07 153.52 ‐0.11
7/9/2018 15:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 41.26 30.04 0.19 49.33 0.38 104.36 337.25 147.90 ‐0.11
7/9/2018 16:00 0.05 0.01 0.14 0.00 0.01 40.07 30.05 0.32 54.04 0.40 116.39 289.72 164.91 ‐0.03
7/9/2018 17:00 0.04 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.01 38.27 30.07 0.35 60.17 0.40 138.61 280.00 196.36 0.03
7/9/2018 18:00 0.04 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 36.21 30.07 0.41 67.96 0.36 175.83 280.00 249.03 0.07
7/9/2018 19:00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 35.29 30.06 0.48 69.69 0.32 178.69 283.67 253.10 0.06
7/9/2018 20:00 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.95 30.07 0.69 71.53 0.31 205.02 300.62 290.38 0.07
7/9/2018 21:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.96 30.06 0.80 70.34 0.28 195.26 308.58 276.61 0.07
7/9/2018 22:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.75 30.07 0.60 70.85 0.26 210.91 307.85 298.67 0.06
7/9/2018 23:00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.81 30.05 0.48 75.53 0.24 321.10 303.12 454.54 0.08
7/10/2018 0:00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.56 30.06 0.46 78.68 0.24 372.61 289.82 527.50 0.10
7/10/2018 1:00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.26 30.06 0.45 78.95 0.21 389.99 294.65 551.80 0.10
7/10/2018 2:00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.27 30.06 0.49 78.30 0.20 352.26 297.10 498.61 0.09
7/10/2018 3:00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.59 30.06 0.87 73.93 0.24 227.84 280.00 322.57 0.37
7/10/2018 4:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.98 30.06 0.49 79.84 0.17 337.47 316.40 477.72 0.18
7/10/2018 5:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.60 30.04 0.39 82.83 0.14 495.56 338.57 701.34 0.02
7/10/2018 6:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.92 30.04 0.40 81.16 0.14 307.30 347.12 435.08 0.00
7/10/2018 7:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.65 30.06 0.40 68.81 0.14 172.60 363.82 244.53 ‐0.03
7/10/2018 8:00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 38.48 30.08 0.29 49.38 0.11 126.25 388.88 179.04 ‐0.22
7/10/2018 9:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 42.72 30.05 0.27 34.47 0.14 110.77 361.70 157.22 ‐0.22
7/10/2018 10:00 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.01 44.25 30.04 0.28 39.09 0.15 127.95 390.47 181.44 ‐0.03
7/10/2018 11:00 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 43.59 30.04 0.34 45.18 0.14 150.60 434.45 213.36 ‐0.13
7/10/2018 12:00 0.05 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.00 42.04 30.02 0.43 51.62 0.17 191.06 396.70 270.51 ‐0.07
7/10/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 41.46 30.01 0.56 53.54 0.20 192.54 328.12 272.53 0.04
7/10/2018 14:00 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 41.20 31.39 ‐0.18 54.24 0.19 161.79 366.48 229.07 ‐0.01
7/10/2018 15:00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 39.76 30.01 0.91 60.65 0.10 230.21 317.02 325.76 0.08
7/10/2018 16:00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 38.16 30.03 0.56 65.42 0.12 262.50 302.43 371.33 0.08
7/10/2018 17:00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 36.84 30.05 0.68 69.35 0.14 284.97 286.33 403.08 0.19
7/10/2018 18:00 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 36.32 30.06 0.66 65.89 0.13 214.95 327.47 304.21 0.06
7/10/2018 19:00 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 35.65 30.06 0.47 66.79 0.12 203.79 343.75 288.45 ‐0.02
7/10/2018 20:00 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 35.93 30.04 0.53 62.54 0.08 153.85 319.58 217.80 ‐0.07
7/10/2018 21:00 0.06 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.00 36.04 30.07 0.53 61.50 0.06 142.19 352.27 201.35 ‐0.14
7/10/2018 22:00 0.06 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.00 35.87 30.06 0.25 61.92 0.06 144.15 362.43 204.12 ‐0.17
7/10/2018 23:00 0.06 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 35.76 30.05 0.26 61.76 0.04 139.49 364.43 197.53 ‐0.19
7/11/2018 0:00 0.06 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.00 35.72 30.05 0.24 61.27 0.04 132.50 364.00 187.70 ‐0.19
7/11/2018 1:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.54 30.06 0.40 61.16 0.05 130.70 367.63 185.20 ‐0.19
7/11/2018 2:00 0.04 0.01 0.18 0.00 0.01 35.76 30.05 0.87 56.38 0.05 105.02 353.95 148.98 ‐0.20
7/11/2018 3:00 0.03 0.01 0.15 0.00 0.01 35.95 30.05 0.67 57.02 0.05 103.65 355.32 146.88 ‐0.15
7/11/2018 4:00 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.01 35.35 30.07 0.90 56.81 0.05 107.38 384.83 152.12 ‐0.18
7/11/2018 5:00 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 35.34 30.07 0.70 60.58 0.08 112.65 383.92 159.59 ‐0.15
7/11/2018 6:00 0.03 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 35.66 30.06 0.82 61.01 0.08 121.38 401.97 172.01 ‐0.15
7/11/2018 7:00 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.01 38.13 30.06 0.68 52.69 0.07 109.35 412.93 154.89 ‐0.20
7/11/2018 8:00 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 39.96 30.07 0.52 44.45 0.11 100.68 391.97 142.79 ‐0.24
7/11/2018 9:00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 44.67 29.99 0.25 20.54 0.13 68.36 291.95 97.31 ‐0.27
7/11/2018 10:00 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.01 49.61 30.01 0.07 12.82 0.15 69.56 280.98 98.97 ‐0.12
7/11/2018 11:00 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.01 46.78 29.97 0.31 28.41 0.17 76.74 325.47 109.04 ‐0.02
7/11/2018 12:00 0.03 0.04 0.11 0.00 0.01 46.14 29.93 0.40 33.81 0.17 94.98 366.63 134.67 ‐0.01
7/11/2018 13:00 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 44.60 29.91 0.54 42.33 0.20 136.73 406.92 193.64 ‐0.09
7/11/2018 14:00 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.00 42.49 29.98 0.53 49.06 0.22 156.96 336.90 222.15 0.00
7/11/2018 15:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 40.22 29.98 0.56 59.16 0.22 218.65 287.45 309.25 0.06
7/11/2018 16:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 40.11 30.02 0.46 52.73 0.18 112.92 286.78 160.01 0.07
7/11/2018 17:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.13 30.05 0.43 53.89 0.16 102.89 310.65 145.82 0.01
7/11/2018 18:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 37.59 30.05 0.41 60.51 0.15 127.95 312.82 181.31 0.01
7/11/2018 19:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 36.89 30.05 0.58 61.67 0.12 131.63 320.32 186.35 0.00
7/11/2018 20:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 36.56 30.05 0.43 62.39 0.12 135.10 298.02 191.36 ‐0.02
7/11/2018 21:00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 36.44 30.05 0.57 62.76 0.10 137.03 303.78 194.13 ‐0.04
7/11/2018 22:00 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 35.58 30.05 0.35 63.94 0.07 136.78 316.27 193.81 ‐0.05
7/11/2018 23:00 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 34.56 30.06 0.36 69.98 0.08 205.86 287.93 291.35 0.01
7/12/2018 0:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.04 30.05 0.36 70.28 0.08 171.95 284.82 243.45 0.02
7/12/2018 1:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.76 30.05 0.40 72.95 0.09 239.12 280.07 338.42 0.04
7/12/2018 2:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.67 30.05 0.38 72.76 0.08 185.84 282.42 263.08 0.03
7/12/2018 3:00 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.31 30.05 0.39 70.50 0.07 172.90 287.22 244.66 0.01
7/12/2018 4:00 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 33.92 30.05 0.29 68.94 0.04 149.30 321.72 211.34 ‐0.07
7/12/2018 5:00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 31.52 30.04 0.22 73.91 0.01 166.86 340.98 236.28 ‐0.12
7/12/2018 6:00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 31.88 30.04 0.32 76.11 0.02 186.69 345.07 264.28 ‐0.09
7/12/2018 7:00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.12 30.05 0.32 67.46 0.02 127.18 358.12 180.07 ‐0.13
7/12/2018 8:00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 38.69 30.07 0.25 52.81 0.03 103.73 355.07 147.01 ‐0.17
7/12/2018 9:00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 42.69 30.04 0.32 39.11 0.04 83.02 339.35 117.77 ‐0.20
7/12/2018 10:00 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 46.63 29.96 0.29 26.00 0.06 68.50 300.93 97.19 ‐0.22
7/12/2018 11:00 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.01 47.50 29.93 0.30 26.79 0.09 71.22 308.27 101.09 ‐0.12
7/12/2018 12:00 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.01 44.03 29.97 0.51 47.25 0.14 167.04 303.30 236.53 0.09
7/12/2018 13:00 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 43.15 30.00 0.56 48.47 0.18 146.67 280.00 207.60 0.10
7/12/2018 14:00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 41.87 29.97 0.48 56.50 0.17 202.06 280.00 285.79 0.11
7/12/2018 15:00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.91 29.99 0.51 56.55 0.18 124.28 280.00 175.78 0.19
7/12/2018 16:00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.36 30.04 0.52 50.37 0.17 118.89 280.00 168.43 0.39
7/12/2018 17:00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 38.75 30.05 0.35 55.57 0.11 136.43 287.12 193.07 0.06
7/12/2018 18:00 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 37.01 30.05 0.23 60.13 0.06 164.54 349.00 232.90 ‐0.08
7/12/2018 19:00 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 35.64 30.06 0.20 63.99 0.03 213.10 382.10 301.48 ‐0.15
7/12/2018 20:00 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.98 30.07 0.31 69.20 0.04 418.14 318.92 591.49 ‐0.09
7/12/2018 21:00 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.73 30.05 0.33 69.76 0.04 388.06 280.47 548.90 ‐0.07
7/12/2018 22:00 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.62 30.05 0.32 70.32 0.04 384.98 281.68 544.62 ‐0.08
7/12/2018 23:00 0.05 0.02 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.51 30.06 0.42 71.42 0.05 362.99 280.00 513.48 ‐0.05
7/13/2018 0:00 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 33.65 30.06 0.46 73.22 0.04 440.71 280.00 623.38 ‐0.03
7/13/2018 1:00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 31.82 30.05 0.35 78.06 0.03 501.35 280.23 709.23 ‐0.05
7/13/2018 2:00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 30.92 30.03 0.38 78.96 0.02 365.92 304.00 517.71 ‐0.14
7/13/2018 3:00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 30.72 30.05 0.37 79.67 0.00 374.84 314.73 530.26 ‐0.15
7/13/2018 4:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 30.02 30.03 0.35 81.21 0.01 347.32 316.58 491.33 ‐0.16
7/13/2018 5:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02 29.73 30.03 0.33 82.80 0.00 431.75 319.35 610.75 ‐0.16
7/13/2018 6:00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 30.29 30.03 0.25 79.63 0.01 272.49 306.47 385.52 ‐0.17
7/13/2018 7:00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.21 30.05 0.26 65.52 0.02 130.45 295.35 184.66 ‐0.19
7/13/2018 8:00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 37.87 30.07 0.26 44.64 0.04 71.36 280.52 101.07 ‐0.21
7/13/2018 9:00 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.01 42.79 30.04 0.40 33.12 0.06 56.86 280.00 80.69 ‐0.13
7/13/2018 10:00 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.01 42.70 30.07 0.34 41.34 0.06 80.83 292.50 114.56 ‐0.12
7/13/2018 11:00 0.06 0.02 0.14 0.00 0.00 42.12 30.02 0.45 51.37 0.09 261.51 313.12 369.98 ‐0.06
7/13/2018 12:00 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 41.50 30.00 0.61 58.07 0.12 321.01 280.00 454.00 0.07
7/13/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 41.51 30.00 0.54 56.30 0.10 192.58 280.00 272.36 0.07
7/13/2018 14:00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 41.50 30.00 0.62 50.54 0.13 156.70 280.00 221.74 0.31
7/13/2018 15:00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.56 30.02 0.51 56.14 0.09 201.28 280.00 284.72 0.14
7/13/2018 16:00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 39.79 30.03 0.62 56.47 0.12 141.95 280.00 200.81 0.29
7/13/2018 17:00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 38.51 30.04 0.53 60.09 0.12 150.72 280.00 213.27 0.32
7/13/2018 18:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 36.77 30.05 0.38 63.56 0.05 160.69 280.00 227.33 0.02
7/13/2018 19:00 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 35.66 30.06 0.49 69.87 0.03 368.15 280.00 520.76 0.00
7/13/2018 20:00 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 35.10 30.08 0.55 74.42 0.03 447.75 280.00 633.35 0.02
7/13/2018 21:00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.26 30.05 0.43 77.47 0.03 344.54 280.00 487.56 0.09
7/13/2018 22:00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.29 30.06 0.45 71.41 0.01 312.14 281.42 441.94 ‐0.02
7/13/2018 23:00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.26 30.07 0.58 75.78 0.06 450.15 281.08 636.69 0.32
7/14/2018 0:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.14 30.05 0.42 78.94 0.02 478.45 280.00 676.93 0.13
7/14/2018 1:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.39 30.04 0.34 81.01 0.00 621.58 280.00 879.19 0.01
7/14/2018 2:00 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.24 30.05 0.31 80.47 0.00 537.32 280.00 760.04 0.01
7/14/2018 3:00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 32.67 30.05 0.60 81.43 0.07 497.77 280.00 706.02 0.40
7/14/2018 4:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 32.55 30.04 0.38 82.68 0.01 604.86 280.07 857.35 0.11
7/14/2018 5:00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.17 30.04 0.32 81.22 ‐0.01 483.32 280.87 684.63 ‐0.02
7/14/2018 6:00 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.28 30.04 0.41 82.60 ‐0.02 546.97 317.92 773.69 ‐0.07
7/14/2018 7:00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.25 30.06 0.28 75.12 ‐0.03 257.47 339.88 364.20 ‐0.10
7/14/2018 8:00 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 37.31 30.07 0.24 55.82 ‐0.02 75.56 344.67 106.95 ‐0.20
7/14/2018 9:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 40.76 30.07 0.31 46.18 0.01 65.06 322.23 92.13 ‐0.20
7/14/2018 10:00 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.01 41.55 30.05 0.30 47.72 0.00 76.64 347.55 108.59 ‐0.18
7/14/2018 11:00 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.01 41.54 30.05 0.26 49.68 0.01 96.25 377.32 136.17 ‐0.21
7/14/2018 12:00 0.07 0.03 0.18 0.00 0.00 41.68 30.03 0.29 50.13 0.01 113.23 400.67 160.20 ‐0.21
7/14/2018 13:00 0.05 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 41.25 30.00 0.21 56.14 0.00 187.53 421.90 265.28 ‐0.18
7/14/2018 14:00 0.04 0.02 0.13 0.00 0.01 41.18 29.99 0.17 54.44 0.00 133.56 429.27 188.99 ‐0.18
7/14/2018 15:00 0.05 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.01 40.81 29.98 0.16 54.79 0.00 105.02 441.37 148.57 ‐0.18
7/14/2018 16:00 0.05 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.01 39.61 30.03 0.16 57.81 0.00 112.78 450.13 159.55 ‐0.18
7/14/2018 17:00 0.04 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.01 38.34 30.05 0.13 59.12 0.00 82.22 451.17 116.33 ‐0.19
7/14/2018 18:00 0.04 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.01 37.03 30.06 0.09 60.88 0.00 67.16 455.30 95.04 ‐0.21
7/14/2018 19:00 0.04 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.01 35.71 30.06 0.14 67.55 ‐0.02 121.41 462.80 171.77 ‐0.20
7/14/2018 20:00 0.05 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.01 35.20 30.05 0.32 71.45 ‐0.02 235.77 432.57 333.48 ‐0.20
7/14/2018 21:00 0.05 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.01 34.72 30.06 0.12 73.31 ‐0.02 292.68 280.02 413.97 ‐0.19
7/14/2018 22:00 0.04 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.01 34.19 30.06 0.10 74.38 ‐0.02 256.47 280.05 362.77 ‐0.18
7/14/2018 23:00 0.04 0.02 0.18 0.00 0.01 33.74 30.05 0.10 73.77 ‐0.03 206.32 280.17 291.85 ‐0.18
7/15/2018 0:00 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.01 32.67 30.05 0.12 79.42 ‐0.02 465.71 281.97 658.69 ‐0.17
7/15/2018 1:00 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 31.83 30.05 0.13 82.46 ‐0.02 681.01 283.77 963.23 ‐0.17
7/15/2018 2:00 0.04 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.01 32.12 30.04 0.09 82.42 ‐0.03 502.49 281.75 710.73 ‐0.17
7/15/2018 3:00 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 31.60 30.04 0.14 83.35 ‐0.02 655.22 281.37 926.74 ‐0.16
7/15/2018 4:00 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.00 0.01 30.91 30.04 0.22 85.64 ‐0.02 817.92 281.17 1157.32 ‐0.14
7/15/2018 5:00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 30.80 30.05 0.62 87.11 0.03 880.71 280.00 1247.35 0.37
7/15/2018 6:00 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 31.62 30.05 0.38 86.96 0.01 715.14 280.00 1014.63 0.10
7/15/2018 7:00 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 33.11 30.03 0.43 79.21 0.01 366.90 280.00 520.20 ‐0.04
7/15/2018 8:00 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 36.69 30.06 0.26 68.90 0.00 155.77 280.00 220.34 ‐0.08
7/15/2018 9:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 39.83 30.06 0.41 56.20 0.05 74.69 280.00 105.69 0.18
7/15/2018 10:00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.17 30.03 0.33 47.97 0.06 70.63 280.00 99.95 0.18
7/15/2018 11:00 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 42.55 30.03 0.12 50.22 0.01 86.46 280.00 122.36 ‐0.17
7/15/2018 12:00 0.05 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.01 42.51 30.02 0.16 52.11 ‐0.01 108.34 280.50 153.29 ‐0.20
7/15/2018 13:00 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.00 0.01 41.97 30.00 0.16 54.14 ‐0.01 110.45 283.58 156.25 ‐0.20
7/15/2018 14:00 0.05 0.03 0.17 0.00 0.01 41.12 30.01 0.16 55.96 ‐0.01 84.28 286.68 119.26 ‐0.20
7/15/2018 15:00 0.05 0.03 0.23 0.00 0.01 40.29 30.03 0.20 58.42 0.00 81.81 292.93 115.75 ‐0.21
7/15/2018 16:00 0.05 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.01 38.88 30.04 0.20 63.41 ‐0.01 90.48 286.02 128.02 ‐0.16
7/15/2018 17:00 0.04 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.01 37.33 30.07 0.27 69.13 0.01 118.39 280.02 167.59 ‐0.04
7/15/2018 18:00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 35.67 30.06 0.56 74.64 0.09 98.07 280.00 138.74 0.44
7/15/2018 19:00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.57 30.06 0.44 77.89 0.05 136.56 280.00 193.17 0.21
7/15/2018 20:00 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.51 30.07 0.24 73.51 ‐0.01 127.50 280.00 180.33 ‐0.09
7/15/2018 21:00 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.01 33.93 30.05 0.22 76.31 ‐0.02 178.76 280.00 252.85 ‐0.13
7/15/2018 22:00 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.93 30.05 0.52 77.35 0.01 149.68 280.00 211.73 0.28
7/15/2018 23:00 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 34.10 30.06 0.28 77.23 0.00 101.76 280.00 144.24 0.04
7/16/2018 0:00 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 34.40 30.06 0.12 71.06 ‐0.03 33.04 280.00 46.78 ‐0.13
7/16/2018 1:00 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.01 34.53 30.06 0.07 67.79 ‐0.04 25.01 280.00 35.41 ‐0.21
7/16/2018 2:00 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 34.62 30.06 0.03 65.57 ‐0.02 23.33 280.00 33.04 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 3:00 0.03 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.01 34.41 30.05 0.01 65.64 ‐0.02 23.54 280.00 33.36 ‐0.25
7/16/2018 4:00 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.01 34.44 30.05 0.00 65.19 ‐0.02 24.16 280.00 34.23 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 5:00 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.01 34.45 30.06 0.01 66.52 ‐0.02 26.78 280.00 37.95 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 6:00 0.04 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.01 35.38 30.07 0.02 64.72 ‐0.03 27.79 280.00 39.34 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 7:00 0.04 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.01 37.51 30.07 0.01 57.11 ‐0.03 27.14 280.00 38.49 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 8:00 0.04 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.01 39.90 30.05 0.02 50.54 ‐0.02 25.78 280.00 36.59 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 9:00 0.04 0.02 0.19 0.00 0.01 41.82 30.05 0.03 45.09 ‐0.01 24.99 280.00 35.54 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 10:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.81 30.03 0.03 42.45 ‐0.01 24.27 280.00 34.44 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 11:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.34 29.99 0.04 42.55 ‐0.01 24.96 280.00 35.41 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 12:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.24 29.99 0.05 42.86 ‐0.01 26.26 280.00 37.21 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 13:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.06 30.01 0.04 44.86 ‐0.01 25.91 280.00 36.70 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 14:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.41 29.99 0.05 47.57 ‐0.01 27.45 280.12 38.93 ‐0.23
7/16/2018 15:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.97 29.99 0.03 53.83 0.00 34.43 290.27 48.75 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 16:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 39.78 30.04 0.01 56.10 0.01 33.84 299.37 47.89 ‐0.25
7/16/2018 17:00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 38.36 30.05 0.01 60.53 0.01 43.80 305.68 62.00 ‐0.25
7/16/2018 18:00 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.61 30.06 0.03 65.81 0.03 45.18 312.77 63.98 ‐0.26
7/16/2018 19:00 0.07 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.46 30.06 0.03 66.68 0.03 42.63 318.30 60.33 ‐0.27
7/16/2018 20:00 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 35.26 30.06 0.05 64.51 0.03 37.11 306.35 52.57 ‐0.28
7/16/2018 21:00 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.02 30.06 0.05 63.34 0.02 32.36 280.15 45.84 ‐0.27
7/16/2018 22:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.49 30.05 0.06 66.92 0.02 36.07 280.12 51.07 ‐0.24
7/16/2018 23:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.85 30.05 0.05 69.25 0.02 35.83 280.10 50.72 ‐0.25
7/17/2018 0:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.28 30.05 0.09 70.64 0.04 36.95 280.12 52.34 ‐0.25
7/17/2018 1:00 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.00 0.01 31.92 30.06 0.18 70.56 0.03 32.62 280.00 46.37 ‐0.26
7/17/2018 2:00 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.01 31.22 30.04 0.22 71.06 0.04 32.53 280.00 46.10 ‐0.23
7/17/2018 3:00 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.01 31.26 30.05 0.27 73.12 0.05 41.97 280.00 59.43 ‐0.21
7/17/2018 4:00 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.02 30.49 30.05 0.34 74.72 0.08 47.23 280.00 66.84 ‐0.22
7/17/2018 5:00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02 29.94 30.03 0.32 76.51 0.08 57.23 280.00 81.15 ‐0.22
7/17/2018 6:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02 30.65 30.04 0.32 74.07 0.08 47.41 280.00 67.13 ‐0.22
7/17/2018 7:00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 33.75 30.06 0.35 63.06 0.17 39.78 280.00 56.34 ‐0.22
7/17/2018 8:00 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.01 38.32 30.07 0.32 56.64 0.42 36.11 280.00 51.26 ‐0.19
7/17/2018 9:00 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 41.95 30.03 0.17 47.61 0.40 24.53 280.00 34.76 ‐0.24
7/17/2018 10:00 0.04 0.02 0.17 0.00 0.01 43.64 30.01 0.16 42.10 0.39 21.34 280.00 30.30 ‐0.23
7/17/2018 11:00 0.05 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.01 43.98 30.04 0.13 40.90 0.39 22.35 280.00 31.69 ‐0.24
7/17/2018 12:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.40 29.99 0.11 39.94 0.39 20.92 280.00 29.80 ‐0.24
7/17/2018 13:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.94 30.03 0.09 39.52 0.40 19.48 280.00 27.63 ‐0.23
7/17/2018 14:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 42.47 30.01 0.09 43.33 0.42 21.89 280.00 31.08 ‐0.22
7/17/2018 15:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 41.72 30.02 0.12 47.30 0.44 25.20 280.00 35.71 ‐0.23
7/17/2018 16:00 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 40.49 30.02 0.15 52.30 0.45 30.04 280.75 42.57 ‐0.24
7/17/2018 17:00 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.47 30.04 0.34 59.07 0.43 37.65 288.45 53.31 ‐0.25
7/17/2018 18:00 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 36.59 30.06 0.44 64.77 0.42 46.77 293.20 66.23 ‐0.25
7/17/2018 19:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.52 30.06 0.41 63.13 0.42 36.96 281.90 52.40 ‐0.26
7/17/2018 20:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.48 30.07 0.39 59.97 0.41 29.78 280.00 42.17 ‐0.26
7/17/2018 21:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.46 30.06 0.40 57.97 0.41 26.14 280.00 37.03 ‐0.25
7/17/2018 22:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.18 30.06 0.39 58.54 0.41 25.39 280.00 35.94 ‐0.24
7/17/2018 23:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.72 30.05 0.38 59.79 0.41 24.09 280.00 34.10 ‐0.24
7/18/2018 0:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.52 30.05 0.38 60.35 0.41 23.08 280.00 32.79 ‐0.23
7/18/2018 1:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.56 30.05 0.37 62.93 0.41 22.48 280.00 31.81 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 2:00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.71 30.05 0.38 69.23 0.41 28.38 280.00 40.21 ‐0.21
7/18/2018 3:00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 32.96 30.05 0.40 70.66 0.42 33.57 280.10 47.56 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 4:00 0.03 0.03 0.18 0.00 0.01 32.56 30.05 0.42 74.19 0.42 50.46 282.88 71.43 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 5:00 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.01 31.37 30.04 0.49 78.15 0.43 68.43 287.90 96.84 ‐0.23
7/18/2018 6:00 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.01 31.39 30.05 0.59 75.21 0.44 54.13 281.37 76.63 ‐0.24
7/18/2018 7:00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 33.84 30.05 0.62 68.43 0.46 49.04 283.92 69.45 ‐0.21
7/18/2018 8:00 0.03 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.01 37.69 30.08 0.42 61.85 0.45 34.46 294.98 48.80 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 9:00 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.01 40.87 30.05 0.43 52.93 0.45 31.10 299.75 44.03 ‐0.24
7/18/2018 10:00 0.04 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.01 42.64 30.04 0.40 47.70 0.44 28.51 299.02 40.36 ‐0.24
7/18/2018 11:00 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 43.94 30.05 0.35 39.57 0.45 21.41 280.97 30.35 ‐0.27
7/18/2018 12:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 44.15 30.01 0.39 39.97 0.44 29.79 280.13 42.27 ‐0.25
7/18/2018 13:00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.89 30.00 0.44 36.08 0.45 69.74 280.00 98.85 ‐0.26
7/18/2018 14:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 43.66 30.01 0.42 36.54 0.47 92.77 280.00 131.56 ‐0.23
7/18/2018 15:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 42.49 30.03 0.40 41.56 0.45 105.59 280.00 149.65 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 16:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.95 30.05 0.39 45.36 0.44 112.65 280.00 159.61 ‐0.23
7/18/2018 17:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.00 30.05 0.39 49.86 0.46 100.89 280.00 143.07 ‐0.23
7/18/2018 18:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 36.84 30.06 0.39 55.75 0.45 89.72 280.00 127.16 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 19:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 35.38 30.07 0.38 62.02 0.43 94.68 280.00 134.12 ‐0.22
7/18/2018 20:00 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.79 30.06 0.38 65.41 0.43 119.36 280.25 169.08 ‐0.23
7/18/2018 21:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.54 30.07 0.38 65.47 0.43 105.92 280.02 150.10 ‐0.24
7/18/2018 22:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.39 30.06 0.38 64.10 0.43 91.39 280.00 129.55 ‐0.24
7/18/2018 23:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.30 30.07 0.37 62.24 0.44 71.78 280.00 101.79 ‐0.25
7/19/2018 0:00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.27 30.06 0.36 59.10 0.44 51.50 280.00 73.00 ‐0.24
7/19/2018 1:00 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.19 30.05 0.35 58.91 0.44 41.78 280.00 59.21 ‐0.23
7/19/2018 2:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.65 30.05 0.39 62.50 0.44 42.88 280.00 60.77 ‐0.21
7/19/2018 3:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 33.74 30.06 0.37 60.43 0.44 35.20 280.00 49.89 ‐0.24
7/19/2018 4:00 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.42 30.07 0.35 56.86 0.44 28.67 280.00 40.67 ‐0.22
7/19/2018 5:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.42 30.06 0.36 57.60 0.45 30.91 280.00 43.84 ‐0.20
7/19/2018 6:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 34.75 30.07 0.40 61.80 0.45 35.05 280.00 49.71 ‐0.20
7/19/2018 7:00 0.02 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.01 34.94 30.08 0.47 61.66 0.46 50.34 280.00 71.34 ‐0.21
7/19/2018 8:00 0.05 0.01 0.16 0.01 0.01 38.45 30.08 0.38 50.02 0.47 35.00 280.00 49.61 ‐0.22
7/19/2018 9:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.24 30.07 0.35 45.89 0.47 31.83 280.00 45.16 ‐0.22
7/19/2018 10:00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 40.80 30.30 0.35 44.10 0.47 34.49 280.00 48.88 ‐0.22
APPENDIX E – MARINE WATER ANALYSIS (2018 &
2019)
A alyti al a oratory Accre itation
A alyti al a oratory Results or ari e ater a li g a aig 2018
a li g o atio s
Dete tio AD
ara eter Date its AA AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR AR
i it A Q s
ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto ur a e otto
Metals
11.05.201 0.02 0.05 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.02 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0.0 5 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 0.0 1 0.05
12.05.201 0.0 0.02 0.0 1 0.050 0.052 0.0 0.055 0.050 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.052 0.0 0.01 0.02 0.0
1 .05.201 0.0 2 0.05 0.0 1 0.052 0.051 0.0 5 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.051 0.05 0.0 0.0 0 0.01 0.0 0 0.2 0 0.0 1 0.0
1 .05.201 0.012 0.0 0.02 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.025 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.020 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0 0.0 0 0.02
1 .05.201 0.0 0.0 5 0.0 0.0 2 0.051 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 2 0.0 1 0.0 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 2
1 .05.201 0.021 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.02 0.025 0.015 0.021 0.01 0.02 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.020 0.02 0.0 2 0.02
rsenic 1 .05.201 mg/ 0.01 0.0 0.01 0.010 0.011 0.012 0.01 0.020 0.015 0.02 0.012 0.0 0.01 0.02 0.011 0.01 0.012 0.0 1 0.012
20.05.201 0.01 0.0 5 0.0 0 0.02 0.01 0.012 0.010 0.011 0.0 0.021 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.005 0.01
22.05.201 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.015 0.01 0.0 0.02 0.02 0.020 0.02 0.011 0.01
2 .05.201 0.011 0.02 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.02 0.0 1 0.0 0.052 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0
25.05.201 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.0 1 0.015 0.0 1 0.01 0.0 1 0.02 0.0 1 0.0 0.012 0.01 0.02 0.0 2 0.0 0 0.01
2 .05.201 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.02 0.0 1 0.0 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2
2 .05.201 0.0 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.025 0.0 0.0 0.02 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05
11.05.201 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0
12.05.201 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
elenium 1 .05.201 mg/ 0.05 0.2 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0
20.05.201 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.0
22.05.201 0.05 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Inorganics
20.05.201 0. 0. 0. 5 0. 5 0. 0. 2 0. 2 0. 0. 0. 5 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 5 0. 0. 5
22.05.201 1. 5 1. 1. 5 1. 0 1. 1.50 1. 1. 2.01 1. 1.50 1. 0 1. 0 1. 1. 1.5 1.5 1.2
2 .05.201 1. 1. 1. 1. 5 1. 1 1. 1. 1.52 1. 2 1. 1 1.5 1. 1. 5 1.51 1. 2 1.50 0. 1.2
2 .05.201 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 2 1. 1. 1. 5 1. 2 1. 2 1. 5 1. 5 1. 1 1. 1 1. 1 1. 5 1. 1. 0
ilicate mg/ 0.1
25.05.201 1. 1 1. 1. 2 1. 5 1.1 1. 1. 5 1. 1. 1. 1. 0. 5 0. 1. 1. 1. 0 1. 2.2
2 .05.201 1. 1. 1. 1. 2 1. 1.5 1. 0 1. 1. 5 1. 1.5 1. 1.51 2. 1. 0 1. 1. 1. 2
2 .05.201 1. 1. 5 1. 1. 2 1. 5 1. 1. 5 1. 1. 1.55 1. 1 1. 1.55 1. 2 1.55 1. 5 2.5 2.52
2 .05.201 1. 1. 0 1. 1. 1.5 1. 2 1.51 1. 2 1.5 1. 1. 2 2.15 2.0 1. 1. 1. 2.12 1.
1 .05.201 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.21 0.1 0.12 0.1 0. 0 0.1 0.20 0.1
1 .05.201 0.12 0.10 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.1
22.05.201 0.1 2 0.12 0.2 0.1 0.21 0.2 0.2 0. 0 0. 2 0.2 0.1 0.22 0. 0.25 0.25 0. 0.5
2 .05.201 0. 1 0.2 0. 0.1 0.20 0.2 0.2 0. 0.2 0.2 0.2 0. 0. 0 0. 2 0. 1 0.2 0.2 0.
hosphate mg/ 0.1
2 .05.201 0.215 0.21 0. 0 0. 0. 2 0.2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 0. 2 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0.
25.05.201 0. 0. 0. 0. 5 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 2 0.5 0.5 0.51 0.5 0.50 0. 0.50 0. 0.
2 .05.201 0.1 0.10 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.12 0.00
2 .05.201 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.11 0.10
11.05.201 210 .2 2 . 0 2 1 .00 2 5.00 22 2. 0 225 . 0 20 . 0 2110. 0 211 .00 5 .00 .00 21 1. 0 2 .20 2 . 0 2222. 0 2 2 . 0 1 . 0 20 .00
12.05.201 20 5 .20 2.00 . 0 .20 2 0.00 2 21. 0 0 .00 2 5. 0 2.00 2 . 0 0 . 0 5 0. 0 1 . 0 5 . 0 22 . 0 0 .00 . 0
1 .05.201 21 2 0.00 1 .20 25 . 0 2 1.00 2251.00 22 .00 2 50. 0 2 2.00 2 . 0 1 . 0 20 . 0 21 .00 215 .20 22 . 0 251 . 0 20 1. 0 1 . 0
1 .05.201 1 1 . 12 0. 0 1 . 0 1 2.20 1 2 .00 1 1 .00 1 21. 0 1 .20 1 . 0 2 5.00 1 . 0 12 5. 0 112 . 0 10 . 0 121 . 0 12 . 0 112 .00 1 5 .20
1 .05.201 0 0 2 01. 0 0 0.20 0 . 0 2 . 0 10 .20 2 0. 0 2 . 0 2 2 . 0 1 . 0 1 .20 2 .20 15 .00 25 2.00 25 .20 2 52.00 2 1 . 0 2 1 . 0
1 .05.201 0 .2 20 .00 . 0 1 . 0 12 . 0 2 . 0 2 51.20 10 . 0 10 . 0 1 1. 0 2 1. 0 5 5.20 1 2. 0 25 .00 2 2.20 0 . 0 11 . 0 2 1 . 0
1 .05.201 2 52. 11.00 0 0. 0 2 5. 0 2 . 0 2 1.00 2 02. 0 2 5 .20 2 1. 0 001. 0 2 0 . 0 2 0 . 0 2 0. 0 2 00.20 21 .20 2 . 0 2 .20 2 5.20
ulphate 20.05.201 mg/ 0.5 2 0 .2 2 11.00 015. 0 . 0 0 . 0 1 5. 0 2 2 . 0 2 0 .00 2 1. 0 1 5.00 00 . 0 2 1. 0 0 . 0 . 0 . 0 2 .00 1 . 0 0 . 0
22.05.201 2 05. 2 10. 0 01 .00 .00 0 . 0 1 5. 0 2 1. 0 2 0 .20 2 2. 0 1 5. 0 001. 0 2 0.20 0 5. 0 01.20 . 0 2 . 0 151. 0 0 . 0
2 .05.201 1 . 0 1. 0 1 .00 0 0. 0 205. 0 12 . 0 2 .00 2 5.20 001. 0 2 .00 2 . 0 2 .00 02 .00 2 5.00 005. 0 2 0. 0 2 .00 2 2 . 0
2 .05.201 2 1 1 2.00 225. 0 00. 0 0 1. 0 0 .00 2 . 0 . 0 2 10. 0 0 . 0 1 . 0 2 . 0 2 2.20 0 5. 0 1 2. 0 0 .20 2 2 .20 0 5. 0
25.05.201 0 . 102.00 5 .00 552.00 2 . 0 2 . 0 015. 0 021. 0 11 . 0 111. 0 20 . 0 0 .20 222.00 .00 1 . 0 0 5.20 12 .00 055. 0
2 .05.201 0 .2 10 . 0 5 . 0 .00 2 . 0 51 .00 01 .00 2 0. 0 11 .00 05 .00 20 .00 05. 0 1 . 0 . 0 1 . 0 0 .20 12 . 0 0 .20
2 .05.201 0 5.2 10 .00 5 .20 1. 0 25. 0 . 0 01 . 0 2 . 0 11 . 0 055. 0 205.00 0 .00 1 .20 .00 11 . 0 0 2. 0 125.00 0 0. 0
2 .05.201 0 . 10 . 0 5 . 0 . 0 2 . 0 50 . 0 01 . 0 020. 0 11 . 0 00 . 0 10. 0 201. 0 0 .00 21 .20 0.00 0 2.20 0 5. 0 125. 0
11.05.201 0.5 0.5 0. 0 0. 0 0.51 0.5 0.52 0.5 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.5 0. 0 0.5 0. 0.51 0.5 0.55
12.05.201 0. 5 0.5 0. 0. 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0. 2 0. 5 0.5 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.55 0.5 0.5
1 .05.201 0. 0.5 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 2 0.5 0. 5 0.5 0. 2 0.5 0. 0.5 0. 1 0.5 0. 2 0.5
1 .05.201 0.5 0.55 0. 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.51 0.52 0.5 0.5 0.51 0.5 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.
1 .05.201 0. 2 0. 2 0. 5 0. 0. 0. 0 0. 1 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 5 0. 0. 1 0.5 0.5 0. 0 0.55 0.
1 .05.201 0. 2 0. 1 0. 5 0. 0. 0 0.5 0. 1 0. 0 0. 2 0. 0. 0. 0. 5 0. 5 0. 0 0. 5 0. 0 0. 2
itrate itrogen 20.05.201 mg/ 0.1 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 5 0. 0. 1 0. 0 0. 5 0.51 0.55 0.5 0.5 0. 0.55 0. 0.5 0.5 0.5
22.05.201 0.5 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.50 0.55 0. 0.51 0. 0.50 0.5 0.5 0. 5 0.52 0. 0. 0. 5 0.
2 .05.201 0.5 0. 0. 5 0. 5 0. 0. 2 0. 2 1.0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1 0. 2 0. 5
2 .05.201 0. 2 0. 0. 0. 5 0. 5 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
2 .05.201 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.52 0.55 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
2 .05.201 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.52 0.5 0.52 0.50 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.51 0.5 0.52 0.5 0.5 0.5
2 .05.201 0.5 5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0. 0.5 0.5 0.52 0.52 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.52 0. 0. 0.50 0.5
11.05.201 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.21 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.22 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2
12.05.201 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.15 0.15 0.0 0.15 0.1 0.15 0.11 0.2 0.1 0.12 0.12 0.10
1 .05.201 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
1 .05.201 0.12 0.10 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.10 0.0 0.11 0.11 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.15 0.11 0.1 0.2 0.11 0.10
1 .05.201 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
1 .05.201 0.0 0.10 0.1 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.10 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.1
itrogen mmonia 1 .05.201 mg/ 0.05 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.1
20.05.201 0. 0. 0 0. 0. 5 0. 0. 1 0. 0 0. 5 0.51 0.55 0.5 0.5 0. 0.55 0. 0.5 0.5 0.5
22.05.201 0.11 0.1 0.11 0.10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11 0.12 0.1
2 .05.201 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0
2 .05.201 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.0
25.05.201 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.0
2 .05.201 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.0
11.05.201 0.21 0.22 0.1 0.25 0.22 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.15 0.1 0.21 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.21 0.22 0.11 0.25
12.05.201 0.1 0. 0.1 0.1 0.10 0.10 0.1 0.1 0.10 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0. 2 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.12
1 .05.201 0.2 0.20 0.2 0.22 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.1 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2
1 .05.201 0.15 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.20 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.12
1 .05.201 0.1 0.1 0.20 0.21 0.15 0.1 0.22 0.22 0.1 0.21 0.1 0.22 0.21 0.1 0.20 0.1 0.1 0.1
1 .05.201 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.15 0.1
mmonia 1 .05.201 mg/ 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.21 0.22 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.21 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.20
20.05.201 0. 0.2 0.25 0.20 0.1 0.12 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.10 0.12 0.1 0.12 0.15 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
22.05.201 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.0 0.10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11 0.1 0.15 0.1
2 .05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 .05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
25.05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 .05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
11.05.201 0.21 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.15 0.1 0.22 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.22 0.2 0.12 0.
12.05.201 0.1 0. 0.1 0.1 0.10 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0. 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.1
1 .05.201 0.20 0.21 0.2 0.2 0.22 0.22 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.21 0.1 0.22 0.21 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2
1 .05.201 0.1 1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.20 0.21 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1
1 .05.201 0.1 0.1 0.21 0.22 0.1 0.20 0.2 0.2 0.20 0.22 0.2 0.2 0.22 0.20 0.21 0.1 0.1 0.1
1 .05.201 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
mmonium 1 .05.201 mg/ 0.0 0.1 0.20 0.22 0.2 0.20 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.21
20.05.201 0. 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.1 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.10 0.1 0.1 0.1
22.05.201 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.0 0.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.1
2 .05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 .05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
25.05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 .05.201 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1 .05.201 0.11 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.12 0.12 0.1 0.1 0.15 0.1 0.1
mmonium itrogen mg/ 0.1
1 .05.201 0.152 0.1 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.1 0.15 0.15 0.11
TSS and Oxygen Demand
11.05.201 5.0 5.0 .0 51 0 5 2 2 5
12.05.201 0.0 .0 .0 2 5 1 2 5 2 1 50 5
1 .05.201 0.0 2 .0 .0 21 2 2 0 5 2 20 2 2 0 2
1 .05.201 25.0 .0 .0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 0 21 2 0
1 .05.201 2 .0 .0 1.0 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0
1 .05.201 2 .0 1.0 2 .0 2 1 2 25 1 5 0 1 25
1 .05.201 .0 2 .0 .0 2 25 2 0 2 2 1 2 2 2 25
scherichia coli 20.05.201 /100ml 1.0 21.0 2 .0 .0 1 2 2 2 2 2 5 0 1
22.05.201 1.0 2.0 21.0 2 0 2 2 5 2 1 2 2 25 2 5
2 .05.201 .0 2 .0 .0 25 2 2 0 0 5 2 20 2 1 2
2 .05.201 0.0 .0 2 .0 0 0 2 0 5 2 2 2 2 0 25
25.05.201 0.0 25.0 1.0 1 2 5 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 2
2 .05.201 .0 2 .0 2 .0 0 0 2 5 2 0 2 2 2
2 .05.201 2 .0 .0 2.0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 5
2 .05.201 .0 2 .0 2.0 0 5 1 2 2 2 2
11.05.201 1 11 12. . 11.00 11. 12. 15. 12. .00 10. 12.00 12. 12. 10. 12.00 1 . 15.
12.05.201 . 10. 12. 5.00 .00 1 . 10. 11. 1 . 15. .00 15. 1 . 11.00 1 .00 15.00 1 . 1 .
1 .05.201 15. 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 .00 .00 15. 1 . 15. 1 .00 1 . . 1 . 1 .00 1 .00 1 .
1 .05.201 1 12 11. 1 . 11.00 15. 1 . 1 . 15.00 10. 1 .00 11. 1 . 1 . 1 .00 1 . 1 .00 1 .
1 .05.201 11. 1 1 11.00 12. 10.00 12.00 1 .00 1 .00 . 1 . 15. .00 12. 1 . 15.00 1 . 10.00
1 .05.201 10 . 10. 12. 10. 1 .00 12. 10. 11. 1 . 15. 1 .00 15. 1 . 12. 1 . 15.00 10.00
1 .05.201 10. 1 10. 15.00 11.00 1 .00 12. 1 . 1 .00 10. 1 . 1 . 1 .00 1 .00 15.00 1 . 1 .00 1 .00
otal uspended olids 20.05.201 mg/ 1 1 . 12 1 . 1 .00 11. 12. 1 . 12. 1 . 10.00 11.00 1 . 1 .00 12. 1 . 15.00 15.
22.05.201 1 . 1 1 1 .00 11. 12. 1 .00 15. 11. 12. 10. 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 .00
2 .05.201 1 1 . 1 1 . 10.00 11. 12. 1 . 1 . 15.00 15. 12. 1 . 1 .00 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 1 .00
2 .05.201 1 12. 15. 1 . 1 . 10.00 . 0 10. 1 .00 1 . 1 . 15. 12. 20. 15. 1 .00 1 . 1 .00
25.05.201 11. 11. 1 10. 1 . 12.00 12. 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 .00 20.00 1 .00 1 . 15.00 1 . 10.00 1 .00
2 .05.201 . 10 1 . 1 .00 1 .00 1 . 1 .00 1 .00 20. 1 . 1 .00 20.00 11. 12.00 11.00 1 . 15. 10.
2 .05.201 1 . 11. 15. 1 . 1 .00 1 . 1 . 1 . 11. 10. 1 .00 11.00 1 .00 1 . 1 .00 11. 20.00 1 .00
2 .05.201 1 . 12 15 1 . 1 . 15. 1 . 1 . 20. 1 .00 15. 11. 1 . 1 . 1 .00 12. 1 .00 1 .
11.05.201 50 12 51 1 0 .00 220.00 5020.00 2 0.00 120.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 00.00 2 0.00 0.00 500.00 00.00 2 22.00 .00
12.05.201 0 5. 55. 0 500.00 5 5. 210. 210. 210. 10. 5515. 5 05. 5 5. 20. 500.00 0.00 5 0.00 0 5. 05.
1 .05.201 0 0 5. 15 5 0.00 5 0.00 5. 5. 0.00 1 0.00 500.00 20. 500.00 50 0.00 55. 5 50. 5210. 0.00 5 55.
1 .05.201 500 55. 0 0.00 5 5. 5 5. 500.00 5. 51 5. 5 50. 5515. 00.00 55. 5225. 0.00 05. 210. 5500.00
1 .05.201 0 5. 5 20 5 5. 0.00 5500.00 0.00 5. 5. 51 5. 51 5. 5. 5. 5 0.00 5515. 5225. 225. 500.00 521 .
1 .05.201 0 5 55 0 0.00 55.00 500.00 225. 5 5. 52 0.00 110.00 5 5.00 255. 0.00 0.00 0.00 50 5.00 5.00 521 .
1 .05.201 5. 55. 500. 0.00 210. 500. 2 5. 21 5. 2 0.00 50 5. 0.00 255. 2 20. 5. 2 5. 0.00 2 0.00 210.
otal issolved olids 20.05.201 mg/ 10 210. 5. 00 0.00 5 55.00 0 5. 2 0.00 0 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 55. 52 0. 2 5. 05. 2 5. 5 5. 2 5. 55.
22.05.201 2 . 2515. 52 0. 5 0 . 0 25 . 0 2 2. 0 2 0.00 25 . 0 2 02.00 0 2. 0 21 . 0 511 .00 2 . 0 2 . 0 2 0 .00 0 1. 0 20 . 0 5 . 0
2 .05.201 1 0 2050 515 0.00 21 .00 2 5.00 20 .00 2 0.00 22 .00 25 .00 515.00 5 5.00 1 05.00 1 1 .00 1 .00 25 .00 1 .00 2 5.00
2 .05.201 1 02 2 0 512 22.00 2 .00 2 0.00 2 20.00 210.00 2 .00 2 .00 0 2.00 .00 500.00 0.00 5 .00 2 2.00 21 .00 0 0.00
25.05.201 1 15 1 05 0 515.00 2050.00 2 0.00 10 5.00 2 20.00 2 0.00 2 0.00 21 5.00 55.00 1 0.00 1 05.00 1 02.00 210.00 1 0.00 2 5.00
2 .05.201 2 21 22 0.00 2050.00 2 .00 2 0.00 2 .00 2 2.00 5 .00 0 .00 50 .00 0 1.00 50.00 1 02.00 50.00 1 5 .00 20 .00
2 .05.201 1 0 1 05 0 0 2 2 .00 2050.00 2 0.00 2 0.00 1 05.00 21 5.00 2 .00 210.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 21 .00 1 15.00 20 .00 2 20.00
2 .05.201 2 0 2 0 512 22.00 210.00 2 20.00 500.00 21 .00 0.00 0 0.00 2 2.00 0.00 2 2.00 2 .00 0 .00 2 .00 2 .00 0 0.00
11.05.201 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.20 22. 0 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 22. 0 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 15.20
12.05.201 22. 15.2 22. 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 22. 0 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 0. 1 15. 0 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 22. 0
1 .05.201 22. 15.2 15.2 15.20 22. 0 15.20 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20
1 .05.201 22. 15.2 22. 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 22. 0 15.20 15.20 15.20 15.20 15.20 22. 0 15.20 22. 0 15.20
1 .05.201 15.2 22. 0. 15.21 22. 1 0. 1 15.21 22. 0 0. 1 15.21 22. 1 0. 1 15.20 22. 1 0. 1 15.21 22. 1 0. 1
1 .05.201 15.2 22. 0. 15.21 22. 1 0. 1 15.21 22. 1 0. 1 15.21 22. 1 0. 1 15.21 22. 1 0. 1 15.21 22. 1 0. 1
1 .05.201 22. 15.2 22. 22. 1 15.21 0. 1 22. 1 15.21 0. 1 22. 1 15.21 0. 1 22. 1 15.21 0. 1 22. 1 15.21 0. 1
hemical gen emands 20.05.201 mg/ 5.0 21. 25. 1 .2 25. 25. 2 .0 25. 2 .0 1 .1 21. 1 2 .0 2. 1 25. 2 .0 21. 1 25. 25. 2 .0
22.05.201 22. 2 . 1 .1 22. 22. 2 . 1 2 . 1 0.5 22. 2 . 1 2 . 1 0.52 22. 2 . 1 22. 2 . 1 2 . 1 0.52
2 .05.201 2 .1 2 . 1 .2 2 .0 2 .0 2 . 1 2 . 1 0. 5 2 .0 2 . 1 2 .0 2 . 1 2 .0 2 . 1 1 .22 2 .0 2 .0 2 . 1
2 .05.201 2 .0 0. 2 .2 2 .02 1 . 0 2 .1 2 .1 2 .02 1 . 0 2 .1 2 .02 0. 1 . 0 2 .1 2 .02 0. 2 .02 0.
25.05.201 22. 2 . 1 .1 22. 0 22. 0 2 .1 2 . 1 0. 1 22. 0 2 .1 2 . 1 0. 1 2 . 1 .01 22. 0 2 . 1 2 . 1 0. 1
2 .05.201 1 .5 2 . . 2 . 2 . 1 .52 2 . 2 . 1.2 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1.2 2 . 2 . 1 .52 2 .
2 .05.201 1 . 2 . 2 . 2 .55 2 .55 1. 2 . 1 2 .55 1. 2 .55 2 . 1 2 .55 2 . 1 2 .55 1. 2 .55 2 . 1 2 .55
2 .05.201 1 .5 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1.2 2 . 2 . 1.2 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1.2 2 . 2 . 2 .
Figures for Analytical Water Quality Analysis Results 2018
nalytical ater ality la oratory certi ication doc ments are a aila le on re est
D e to t e extremely large ol me o t ese re orts t ey a e een excl ded rom t is
nnex t can e ro ided i re ired
201
Analytical Laboratory Results for Marine Water 2019
Sampling Locations
Parameter Units Detection limit ADS WQO AWQOs SR3 SR3 SR4 SR4 TP1-End TP1-End TP-Start TP-Start SR2 SR2 TPSW1 TPSW1 SR1 SR1
Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom Surface Bottom
Aluminium as Al mg/L 0.15 0.2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Arsenic as As mg/L 0.04 0.005 0.005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Cadmium as Cd mg/L 0.02 0.0007 0.001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chromium as Cr mg/L 0.06 0.0002 0.01 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Copper as Cu mg/L 0.05 0.003 0.01 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Iron as Fe mg/L 0.09 0.3 0.3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Lead as Pb mg/L 0.05 0.0022 0.01 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Manganese as Mn mg/L 0.04 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mercury as Hg# µg/L 0.030 0.0001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Nickel as Ni mg/L 0.05 0.007 0.02 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Selenium as Se mg/L 0.05 - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
Vanadium as V * mg/L 0.05 0.0094 0.0094 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Zinc as Zn mg/L 0.05 0.01 0.01 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 10.00 - - 39090.67 39601.33 39800.00 38620.67 39498.00 38839.33 40202.00 40001.33 38340.00 38581.33 39236.00 39421.33 39340.00 38220.00
Total Suspended Solids mg/L 3.00 <33 <33 10.67 12.00 14.00 13.67 15.33 13.00 17.00 15.67 14.00 15.67 17.33 19.00 18.00 13.67
Biochemical Oxygen
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Demands (BOD) mg/L 2.00
Chemical Oxygen
- -
Demand ( COD) mg/L 5.00 20.0 20.0 24.00 16.00 20.00 16.00 24.00 20.00 19.68 23.62 27.55 19.68 31.49 23.62
Ammonium ## mg/L 0.064 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ammonia Nitrogen* mg/L 0.10 0.004 0.004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Nitrate Nitrogen mg/L 0.10 0.095 0.095 0.47 0.50 0.51 0.49 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.44 0.45 0.44 0.57 0.44 0.45
Nitrite Nitrogen mg/L 0.10 0.034 0.034 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total Nitrogen mg/L 2.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Phosphate mg/L 0.20 0.034 0.034 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Silicate mg/L 0.10 0.89 0.89 0.14 0.30 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.12 - 0.10 0.10 0.10 - -
Sulfate mg/L 0.50 - - 3800.00 3665.00 3696.90 3507.30 3624.00 3450.90 3579.5 3704 3739.90 3810.90 3097.30 3692.40 3413.40 3526.40
Sulphide mg/L 2.0 - 0.004 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total Residual Chlorine mg/L 0.01 0.01 0.01 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Not
Oil & Grease 5.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
mg/L Visible
VPH C5-C10 µg/L 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
EPH C10-C40 µg/L 50 - - - - - - - - - - 58.0 - 117 - - -
MPN/100
Escherichia coli 1 130 - 10 19 13 14 20 12 21 17 12 21 17 13 16 13
ml
eawater a li g a aig itu Raw Results 2018
ite ate epth emperature onductivit alinit ppt p urbidit hloroph ll g/l cells/ml issolved gen issolved gen
ms/cm mg/l
_01 11.05.201 1 1.2 5 2.50 .0 0. 1. 112. . 0
2 1. 2 2. 1 .0 0. 1. 21 11 . .5
1.25 51 2. .0 0. 2.5 5 111 .5
1. 1 2. 2 .12 1.1 2. 11 .5 . 1
5 1. 1 1 2. 1 .12 0. 2. 0 11 . . 2
1. 0 2 2. 0 .12 1. 2. 11 .0 .
1. 11 2. .1 1.1 2.2 2 11 . . 5
_02 11.05.201 1 .2 0 . 1 . 1 1. 0.1 1 5 11 . 5.
2 . 11 . 5 .5 1. 0. 11 .1 5.
. 111 . .55 0. 1. 2 0 11 .0 5.
. 1 . .52 2.0 0. 5 11 .0 5. 5
_0 11.05.201 1 0. 2 50 2.1 .2 1.0 1. 5 10 . .52
2 0. 5 2 52 2. 1 .15 0. 2. 1 10 . . 2
0. 1 5 2. 2 .12 1.1 .1 15 10 . .
0. 1 2. 2 .0 1.1 2.0 55 10 .5 .
5 1.00 55 2. .0 .1 2. 10 5 105.1 .
_0 11.05.201 1 1. 2 11 2.21 . 0. 1. 10 . .
2 1. 0 2.5 .00 0. 2. 10 10 . .5
1. 5 2. .05 0. 2.1 15 10 .0 .
2.1 1 1 .15 .10 1. 1. 11 .2 . 1
5 2.1 1 0 .1 .11 2.1 1. 11 . .
_05 11.05.201 1 1. 0 5 2. 0 . 1 0. 1.2 5 110.0 .
2 2. 5 .15 . 1 0. 0. 1 2 10 .2 .2
2. 50 1 . . 0.1 0. 5 10 .0 .0
5. 0 01 5.0 . 0. 0. 5 10 .1 5.
5 5. 52 5.5 . 1. 0.2 0 10 .5 5. 2
_0 11.05.201 1 . 5011 .5 . 2. 1. 0 110. .2
2 . 0 . 0 . 2. 0. 1105 111.1 .12
. 2 1 .05 .52 1.2 0.2 1 110. 5. 5
.0 5.5 . 0. 0.5 1 10 . 5. 0
5 . 1 5 . 5 1. 0. 105. 5. 1
_0 11.05.201 1 0. 0 2 2.05 .1 0. 1. 1 10 . .
2 0. 2 2.22 .12 0. 2.1 10 . . 1
0. 2 2.2 .11 1.1 2. 52 10 . .
1.02 1 2. 1 .11 2. . 0 10 . .
5 1.0 1 2. .0 2. 2.5 0 10 . . 2
1.05 1 2. .0 12. .0 2 1 10 . .
_0 11.05.201 1 0.5 2 1 1. .0 0. 1. 1 10 .1 . 2
2 0. 2 2 2.2 .0 0. 0. 22 105. .2
1.22 51 2.5 .10 0. 2. 105.1 .1
1. 0 .0 .1 1. 1.5 55 101.2 5.
5 2. 0 51 . 1 . 2 . 2.5 11 102. 5.
2. 5011 . .2 . .1 2 55 10 . 5. 2
_0 11.05.201 1 2 . 2 0 1.15 .02 1.2 0. 1151 10 . .
2 2 . 1511 1.20 .01 1. 1. 5 10 . . 5
0.25 1 1.52 .0 1. 1.1 5 1 10 .2 . 2
0. 0 2515 1. .0 0. 1.2 0 10 . . 5
5 1.15 0 2. .12 5. 2. 1 102.2 .01
1.20 221 2. .1 11. . 2 102. .0
ite ate epth emperature onductivit ms/cm alinit ppt p urbidit hloroph ll g/l cells/ml issolved gen issolved gen
mg/l
_01 12.05.201 1 0. 2 051 2. .11 0.2 2. 5 11 . . 5
2 0. 0 0 2. .0 0. 2. 51 11 .5 .
0. 0 2 2. 5 .02 0. 2. 10 1 11 . .
0. 05 2. .02 0. 2.2 0 11 . .
5 0. 0 2. .02 0. 2. 00 11 . .
0. 1 02 2. 2 .01 0. 2. 2 11 . .
0. 5 01 2. 2 .01 0. 0. 50 112. .
_02 12.05.201 1 . 0 55 .25 . 1 2.0 0. 11 . 5.
2 . 2 . 0 . 1 1. 0. 1 11 . 5.
. 5 15 . 0 . 0 0. 0. 1 0 11 . 5. 1
. 5 0 .2 .5 0. 0. 20 11 . 5. 1
.5 . 10 .2 .5 0.5 0.5 2 11 .5 5. 2
_0 12.05.201 1 0.1 15 2.5 .2 0. 2.1 1511 10 .1 .
2 0. 2 2.52 .20 0. .2 10 2 10 . .
0. 2 2.52 .1 0. .5 10 . .
0. 2 2 2.5 .1 1.1 .2 11 10 . .
5 0. 50 2.5 .15 0. . 0 10 .5 .
_0 12.05.201 1 0.2 2 2.0 .2 0. 2. 110.1 .5
2 0. 2 55 2.0 .22 0. 1. 00 110. .5
0.50 2 2.1 .20 1.5 2. 1 111.5 .
0.5 2 02 2.2 .20 0. .1 112.1 .
5 0.5 2 2 2. 1 .20 0.5 2. 11 . .
_05 12.05.201 1 0. 5 2 1 2.21 .2 0.2 1. 1 110. .5
2 0. 1 2 2.22 .2 1.1 2. 1 110. .5
0. 1 2 0 2.2 .2 0. 2. 2 111. . 2
0. 5 1 0 2. .2 0. . 111. .5
5 2. 0 0 . . 0. 1. 11 . .52
_0 12.05.201 1 1. 00 .05 . 5 0. 0. 01 111. .
2 2.05 51 . 2 . 0.1 1. 1 5 10 . .25
.12 5 . . 0.1 0. 5 110. .1
5. 0 2 5 5. .52 0. 0.2 1 111. .01
5 .0 50 5. .52 0. 0.1 1 112. .0
_0 12.05.201 1 0. 2 21 1. 1 . 1 1. 2.2 115 10 . .5
2 0. 2 22 1. 0 .2 1. 2.2 11 110.2 .5
0. 0 2 2 1. .2 1.1 2. 55 110.1 .5
0. 25 2.02 .2 0. . 11 10 . .5
5 0.5 2 0 2.2 .2 1.0 . 1 1 110.1 .5
_0 12.05.201 1 0. 2 0 2 2. .1 . 2. 51 111.5 .5
2 0. 0 005 2. 1 .1 1.1 2.2 1 10 . .51
0. 1 2 5 2.2 .1 0.2 2.1 1 5 10 .5 .50
0.5 2 2 2. 1 .1 0.2 2.0 10 . .51
5 0. 0 210 2. .1 0.0 2. 10 . .
_0 12.05.201 1 0. 0 2 1. .25 0.1 0. 50 10 . .
2 0. 0 2 5 1. .2 0.0 0. 20 10 . .
0. 2 5 1. .22 0.0 2. 10 .2 .
0. 2 1. .22 0.1 2.1 10 .0 .
5 0. 5 2 2 1. .22 0.0 1. 1 0 10 . .
.15 120 .1 . 0 0. 0.2 120 . 5.
ms/cm mg/l
_01 1 .05.201 1 0. 2 0 2. .12 0. 1.5 1 1 111. . 2
2 0. 010 2. 1 .0 0. 1. 2 5 111. . 0
0. 1 0 1 2. .10 0.5 2. 55 112. . 1
1.0 2 1 2. .1 0. 1. 1 111. .5
5 1.0 2 5 2. .1 0. 2. 111. .55
1.05 25 2. .1 0.2 2. 15 10 .2 .
1.05 2 5 2.51 .1 0. 2. 0 10 .2 .
_02 1 .05.201 1 . 5 .5 . 2 1. 0.0 2 11 . .0
2 .5 1 5 . 5 . 0.0 0.0 11 . .02
. 2 15 . . 0.1 0.2 01 11 . .01
.51 055 .5 . 2 0.1 0. 11 . .01
5 . .5 . 1 0.0 0.2 2 11 . .0
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.2 2 55 2.15 . 1 1.5 1. 2 10 . .
2 0. 2 2 2.20 .2 1.5 1. 10 . .
0.5 2. .2 1. 1. 12 10 .1 .2
0. 1 1 2. 5 .2 2.1 2. 5 10 .1 .2
5 0. 5 25 2.50 .2 2.0 2. 10 . . 1
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 0 2 2.11 . 5 2. 2. 111.1 .5
2 0. 2 2.1 . 2.2 2.1 . 111.2 . 0
0. 1 2 2.1 . 1 2.1 2. 10 111. . 1
0. 5 2 1 2.20 . 0 2.0 2. 111. . 2
5 0. 2 2.2 . 0 2.1 2.0 1020 112.1 .
_05 1 .05.201 1 0. 5 2520 1. . 0. 0.5 25 10 . .
2 0. 5 25 2.05 . 5 0. 2.1 1 5 10 . . 2
1.0 0 2. 2 . 5 0. 2. 2 10 .5 . 0
1. 0 2. . 0. 1. 10 . .
5 .10 51 . . 1.1 1.1 1 110. .2
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 2 2 52 2.0 .2 0.0 1.1 21 111.2 .5
2 1.1 022 2. 1 .2 0. 1.0 525 111. .5
5.02 5 . 2 .52 0. 1.0 2 11 . .2
5.12 1 . .52 0. 0. 1 11 . .20
5 . 5 1 .5 . 1. 1. 1 111. .12
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 5 250 1. 5 .2 1. 1.5 10 10 .1 .50
2 0. 252 1 5 .25 2. 1. 5 0 10 .1 .50
0.50 25 2.00 .2 2.1 . 20 10 .2 .51
0.52 2 2 2.0 .2 2. . 10 . .50
5 0. 5 2 1 2.11 .2 2.1 .0 5 10 .1 .
1. 1 2. 1 . 0 . 2. 2 105. .1
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.2 2111 1. .1 0.0 1. 2 2 10 .5 .55
2 0.21 211 1. .1 0.0 0. 2 10 .1 .55
0.25 22 1. .1 0.0 1. 15 10 . .5
0.1 221 1. .1 0.0 1. 10 10 . .5
5 2. 5 .2 . 1 1.1 0.2 5 10 .0 .2
2. .55 . 2.1 1. 101 10 . .1
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.0 1 1. . 0.2 0. 15 105.2 .
2 2 . 1 1. 0 . 0.1 0. 1 105. . 0
2 . 1 51 1. . 0.1 .1 2 105.5 . 5
2 . 1 1. . 0.2 1. 1 5 105. .
5 2 . 1 1.5 . 2 0. 1.5 105.0 .
0. 2 2 1 2.22 . 5 .5 .2 1 10 .2 .1
ms/cm mg/l
_01 1 .05.201 1 0.5 05 2. .0 0. 1. 2 10 .5 .
2 0.5 0 2. .05 0.5 1. 22 10 . . 5
0.52 00 2. 2 .0 0.5 2. 5 1 10 . .
0.51 01 2. .0 0. 1. 10 . .
5 0.5 0 2. 5 .0 0. 2.0 5 10 . .
0.5 0 2. .0 0. 2.5 5 10 . . 2
0.5 0 2 2. .0 0. 2. 10 . . 1
_02 1 .05.201 1 . 5. .55 1.0 0.2 1 0 10 . .0
2 .02 00 5. .5 0. 0.1 21 10 .5 .0
.01 1 5. 5 .52 0. 0.5 0 10 . 5. 0
.50 0 2 5. 5 .50 0. 0.0 0 10 . 5.
5 .2 1 5. . 0. 0.0 15 10 . 5. 5
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 12 2. 1 .02 0.2 .5 2 105.0 .22
2 0. 0 1 2. 1 .02 0. 2. 12 10 .1 .1
0. 0 05 2. 2 .02 0. 2. 10 .1 .1
0. 2 2.2 .02 0. .1 10 .5 .1
5 0.5 1 1 2. 5 .0 0. 2. 5 10 . .1
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.5 2 5 2.2 . 1.2 2.5 105. .2
2 0. 0 2 0 2.2 . 1 1.1 2. 552 105. .2
0. 12 2.52 . 1.1 2. 5 105. .2
0. 0 2. . 2.1 2.5 5 1 10 .1 .2
5 1. 5 2. . 5 1. .0 10 2 10 .0 .20
_05 1 .05.201 1 0. 0 2. 0 . 2 0. 1. 5 10 .2 .2
2 0. 121 2. 0 . 0 0. 2. 1 10 . .2
1.0 55 2. . 1 0. 2. 1 105. .2
1. 2 . . 0. 1. 1 105. .0
5 . 0 12 .55 . 1.5 1. 10 . 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 1. 0 0 .12 .0 0.2 1.0 2 10 . .0
2 1.5 0 2 .0 .0 0.2 1. 5 10 .5 .0
. 121 5.2 . 1.1 1.2 10 . 5. 0
5.11 1 1 5.2 . 0 1. 0. 5 10 . 5.
5 5.0 0 5.2 . 1 1.1 0. 5 2 10 . 5. 5
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 2 2 1 1. . 2 2.0 2. 1 10 . . 5
2 0. 1 2 2 1. .52 2.1 1. 21 105. . 1
0. 0 2 0 2.01 .5 2.5 . 1 10 . .2
0.5 52 2. 0 . 2. .0 12 10 . .1
5 1.22 2. . 2 2.5 2. 1 10 . .01
2.01 50 . 1 . . 2. 2 21 101. 5. 5
_0 1 .05.201 1 1.25 2 2. . 0. 1. 101. 0.05
2 1.2 1 2. 1 . 2 0. 0. 51 101. 5. 5
1. 052 .01 . 0. 0. 51 101. 5.
1. 5 .5 . 5 0. 2. 1 101. 5. 2
5 2.1 1 . 2 . 1. 1. 1 102. 5.5
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 1 2 05 2.15 .0 0. 1. 1 102. .1
2 0. 2 55 2.1 .0 1.1 1.2 12 5 10 .0 .1
0. 2 0 1.1 .0 1.2 2.1 5 2 102. .12
0. 5 2 5 2.21 .0 2.2 1. 5 102. .10
5 0.5 2 5 2.2 .11 . 2. 105 102.0 .0
0. 0 2 2. 1 .1 1. . 2 2 101. .05
ms/cm mg/l
_01 1 .05.201 1 0.0 52 2. 1 .12 0. 2. .5 5.
2 0.1 2. 2 .0 1.0 2. 2 . 5.
0.1 1 2. .0 0. 2.5 .5 5.
0.1 2. .0 0. .2 12 .2 5.
5 0.1 2. 1 .0 1.0 2.0 5 .1 5.
0. 0 2. 1 .0 1.0 1. . 5.
0.25 2. .0 1.1 2. 00 . 5. 0
_02 1 .05.201 1 . 1 11 . . 2.0 1.0 1 10 .5 5.
2 . 5 .5 . 2 1.5 0. 21 10 . 5.
. . 2 . 1 1. 0. 20 10 . 5. 5
.02 0 2 . . 0 1.2 0.0 2 10 .2 5. 5
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 0 550 2. .0 1.2 2.2 5 0 .1 5. 0
2 0. 25 2. .0 1.2 2.1 0 .2 5. 1
0. 2. .10 1. 2.5 . 5. 1
0. 1 2. .10 1.2 2. 2 . 5. 1
_0 1 .05.201 1 . . .2 2. 1. 120 100.5 5. 2
2 .5 . .21 . 1. 11 . 5.5
.52 0 . .21 .5 0. 1 . 5.5
. 0 5 . .22 .5 2.0 15 .0 5.5
_05 1 .05.201 1 0. 5 2 1 .2 .2 0.5 1. 101. 5.
2 1.02 . .22 0.2 1. 220 101.1 5. 2
1.15 5 .5 .22 0. 1.5 2 100. 5.
2. 2 . . 1. 1.2 01 102.2 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 .2 5.22 . 5 .5 0.1 2 101. 5. 1
2 .2 01 5.2 . 2. 0. 5 101. 5. 0
. 0 01 5.2 . 2 2.0 1.0 10 101. 5.5
.2 00 5.22 . 0 . 0.2 100.5 5.5
5 . 5 5.1 . 5 12.2 2.0 51 100.0 5.5
_0 1 .05.201 1 1.21 2 2 .25 .25 2.2 2.1 . 5.
2 1.2 25 .25 .22 2. 2.5 0 . 5. 2
1.25 0 .2 .20 . 2. 2 . 5. 0
1.2 0 .2 .1 . 1.5 120 . 5.
5 1. 2 . 1 .1 . . 2 . 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 1.0 0 5 .1 . 2 1. 1. 5 . 5.
2 1.0 0 .1 . 0 2. 2.1 1 . 5. 0
1.10 0 .1 .2 2.2 1. . 5. 0
1.0 0 .11 .2 2.1 1. .5 5.
5 1.11 0 .11 .2 2. 1. 10 . 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.1 2 15 2.1 .2 .0 1. 5 .0 5. 2
2 0.1 2 5 2.22 .25 .1 2. 1 1 . 5. 1
0.1 2 2.2 .2 2. 2. 12 1 . 5. 0
0.1 2 0 2.2 .21 2. 2.0 11 . 5. 0
5 0.1 2 2.2 .20 5.5 2.2 1 5 .5 5.
ms/cm mg/l
_01 1 .05.201 1 0.25 0 2. 1 .25 0. 0. 51 102. .10
2 0.25 2. .2 0. 1. 2 102.0 .0
0.25 2. .2 0. 2. 5 1 101. .0
0.25 00 2. .22 0. 2.1 20 101. .05
5 0.25 00 2. .21 0. 2.2 2 5 101. .0
0.25 1 2. .20 0. 2. 5 101.1 .02
0.2 5 2. .20 0. 2.1 2 100. .01
_02 1 .05.201 1 .11 5 .2 . 1. 0.0 0 111. 5.
2 .52 5 . . 1.2 0. 2 110.0 5.
. 1 .5 . 1. 0.0 2 110.5 5. 0
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.1 050 2. .0 .1 2.0 11 100. 5. 0
2 0.15 0 2. .0 1.1 2. 02 .5 5.
0.20 1 2. .02 1.0 2. 01 . 5. 0
0.2 1 2. .0 1.0 2. 2 .5 5. 0
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 1 2 .20 . 0.1 0. 22 10 . .11
2 1.05 . . 0.1 1. 2 5 10 . 5. 1
2.1 550 . . 1. 1.0 101. 5. 5
.0 512 . .5 2. 1. 10 1 101. 5.
_05 1 .05.201 1 1. 5 0 .0 . 0. 1.2 2 10 .2 .00
2 1. 5 .11 . 0. 0.5 1 10 . .01
2. 5 . 2 . 5 0. 1. 20 10 .2 5.
.15 00 5.5 .5 2.1 0. 10 . 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 . 1 .15 .51 1. 1.2 5 105. 5.
2 . 5 0 5.25 .5 2. 0. 5 2 105.5 5.
.1 12 5. 2 .55 .1 2.0 1 105. 5.
.2 0 5.2 .5 2. 0. 1150 105.2 5. 1
_0 1 .05.201 1 1.21 . 1 .21 1.2 2.1 100.2 5.
2 1.2 . 2 .1 1. 2.2 5 100.1 5. 5
1.2 2 . .1 1.5 1. . 5.
1. 0 1 . .1 2.2 1.5 0 .1 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 1 .1 .1 0. 0. 15 102. .0
2 1.01 1 .22 .1 0. 1.5 1 0 102. .01
1.10 5005 . 2 .22 1. 1.0 5 5 101.2 5. 5
1. 525 . .2 1.5 1.5 102. 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 2. 0 .22 0. 0. 0 100. 5.
2 0.5 5 2. .1 1. 1.2 2 100. 5.
0.55 50 2. 5 .1 1. 2.2 100.1 5.
1.1 0 2. 1 .2 2. 1. 50 100.5 5.
5 1. 2 . 0 .2 .0 2.1 151 100. 5.
ms/cm mg/l
_01 1 .05.201 1 0. 2 5 2. 1 . 1 1. 1.1 22 10 . .1

2 0. 2. . 0 1. 2.0 0 10 .2 .15
0. 2 2. 1 . 0 1. 1. 10 . .15
0. 2 5 2. 1 .2 1. 0. 10 10 .1 .1
5 0. 1 2. .2 1. 1. 1 1 10 . .1
0. 0 2. .2 1. 1. 2 5 10 . .1
0. 2 2. .2 1. 1. 2 10 .2 .10
_02 1 .05.201 1 . 0 . . 2 0.0 1. 0 110. 5.
2 .0 0 . . 0 0. 0.5 2 110.1 5.
. 0 1 . 2 . 0. 0.0 1 110.2 5. 5
. 552 .0 . 0. 0.5 11 110.5 5. 5
_0 1 .05.201 1 0. 2. 2 .2 0.0 0. 112 102.2 .0
2 0. 2. 2 .2 0.0 0. 102.2 .0
0. 2. .2 0.0 1.0 105 102.2 .02
0. 0 .01 .25 0.5 1.0 2 10 . .0
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.2 2 2.2 . 0.0 0. 12 101.5 .05
2 0. 05 2. .2 0.0 0.5 101.2 .0
0. 20 2.5 .2 0.0 0. 15 101. .05
1.5 .5 . 5 0.0 0. 10 101. 5.
_05 1 .05.201 1 2. 2 2.21 . 0. 0. 1 2 101.5 .0
2 0.5 1 2. . 0.5 0. 10 101. .05
.20 1 . 0 .5 0. 0.5 0 10 .0 .01
.5 0 . 0 .5 0. 0.2 10 .5 .01
_0 1 .05.201 1 1.51 5 . .55 1. 1.2 1 5 102. 5.
2 2.1 5201 .02 .5 0.5 1.1 10 10 . 5.
5. 51 .0 . 0. 0. 2 10 . 5.
.1 0 . 0 . 1 0. 0.1 0 10 .2 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.0 2 2.1 .2 0.0 1.2 205 101.2 .0
2 0.1 2 2. 0 .2 0.0 0. 1 1 101.0 .02
0. 2 2 2. .25 0.0 1.1 50 100. . 5
1. 5 . 1 . 0 1. 1. 1 .5 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 2 . 2555 1. . 0 0.0 0. 2 100.1 .02
2 0.0 2 0 2.1 .2 0.0 1.2 50 100. .02
1. 55 . 5 . 0.1 0. 21 . 5. 0
.5 05 . 1 . 0. 0. 1 0 . 5.5
_0 1 .05.201 1 2 . 2 22 1. .22 0. 1. 0 101. .1
2 2 . 2 2 1. .1 0. 1.2 101 .1 5. 2
2 . 2 0 1.. .1 0. 0. 1 . 5. 0
2 . 2 1. .1 0. 1.1 . 5.
5 0. 5 2. .2 1. 1. 512 .0 5. 5
ms/cm mg/l
_01 20.05.201 1 0. 2 2 2. 5 .22 1. 1. 55 101. 5.
2 0. 5 2. 0 .21 1. 0.5 101.5 .00
0. 550 2. 1 .20 1. 1.1 15 101. .01
0. 2 2. 5 .21 1.5 0.5 20 102.0 .02
5 0. 2 1 2. .20 1.5 0.1 202 102. .05
1.0 2. .20 1.2 0. 101. .00
1. 1 5 0 2. .1 1.0 1.2 00 10 .1 .0
_02 20.05.201 1 . 2 . . 0. 0. 0 110. 5. 5
2 . 021 . . 5 0. 0. 25 111.1 5. 0
. 0 . . 0. 0.2 1 111.0 5. 0
_0 20.05.201 1 1. 5 2. . 1. 1. 5 .2 5.
2 1. 2 2. . 1 0. 1.2 1 0 100. 5. 2
0. 2.5 .2 0.2 1.5 25 . 5. 1
1.0 0 2. 2 .2 0.1 1.2 15 10 . .0
_0 20.05.201 1 0. 2 0 2.20 . 0.0 0. 20 100.2 5.
2 0.51 2 1 2.2 . 2 .5 0. 100. 5.
2.11 . . 2 1. 0.1 2 0 . 5.
2. 51 1 . . 0. 0. 20 . 5. 2
_05 20.05.201 1 0. 2 1 1. . 0. 1.2 1 . .
2 0. 2 1 2. . 5 0.5 0. 105 101. .02
. 0 11 . 1 .5 0. 0. 0 10 . .0
. 2 1 . 2 . 0. 0. 10 . .0
_0 20.05.201 1 1. 0 2 .10 . 1 0. 0. 2 2 10 .0 5.
2 5. . .52 0.5 0.0 11 105. 5.
. 0 1 5.0 .5 0.2 0.0 0 10 .1 5.
. 5 5.1 .5 0. 0.0 0 10 . 5.
_0 20.05.201 1 0. 0 012 2.0 .10 0.5 0.1 5 101.1 .01
2 0. 5 0 5 2. 5 .1 0. 1.1 101. .00
0. 2 0 2. 0 .1 0.5 0. 101.2 .00
1. 5 1 . 2 . 0 0. 0.2 2 . 5.
5 .11 110 .5 . . 0. 05 .5 5.
_0 20.05.201 1 2 . 2 1 1. 2 .2 0.5 0. 1 5 . 5.
2 2 . 2 2 1. .21 0.2 0.5 25 . 5. 5
2. . . 0.1 0. 1 0 101.2 5.
. 5 . . 0.1 0. 12 101. 5.
_0 20.05.201 1 2 . 2052 1. 2 .20 1. 1. 5 10 . 5.
2 2 . 211 1. .1 0. 0.2 1 . 5.
2 . 221 1. .1 0. 0.1 101 . 5. 0
2 . 5 2 1 1. .1 0.2 0. 100 5. 5.
5 1.21 12 .1 .25 0.1 1.0 5 1.5 5. 2
ms/cm mg/l
_01 22.05.201 1 1.1 0 0 2. 5 . 0.5 0.2 25 105.2 .1

2 1.1 0 5 2. . 0. 1.0 2 10 .5 .15
1.1 0 2. . 0. 1.1 105.1 .1
1.1 0 0 2. 2 . 0.5 0.0 01 10 . .1
5 1.15 05 2. . 0. 0. 1 10 .2 .1
1.15 0 5 2. 5 . 0. 0. 11 10 . .10
1.1 0 2. . 0. 1.0 5 10 . .10
_02 22.05.201 1 .05 2 0 .12 . 0 0.1 0.2 5 11 . .0
2 .01 1 5. .5 0.2 0. 1 0 115. .05
. 5 5 .2 .5 0.1 0. 50 112. 5. 1
_0 22.05.201 1 1.01 2 2.2 .2 0. 0.5 5 102. .0
2 1.0 0 2. .2 0.1 0. 102. .0
1.15 20 2. 5 .2 0. 0. 5 102. .05
1.15 205 2. 5 .22 0. 0.5 11 10 .0 .0
5 1.1 202 2. .22 0. 0. 10 . .0
_0 22.05.201 1 0. 2 1 2.05 . 0 0. 0. 2 1 10 . .20
2 0. 0 2 2.0 .2 0. 0. 11 105. .25
0. 5 2 2.21 .2 0. 0.5 22 10 . . 1
1.05 02 2. 2 .2 0. 0. 10 .0 . 1
5 1.0 02 2. 1 .2 0. 1.1 10 . . 2
_05 22.05.201 1 1.12 02 2. 1 .2 0. 0. 102.0 .00
2 1.55 5 2.5 .2 0. 0. 5 102. .00
2. 02 .01 . 0. 0.2 1 1 10 . .0
. 5 0 .1 . 0. 0.5 5 10 . .1
_0 22.05.201 1 2.52 1 .15 . 5 0. 0.2 10 .1 5.
2 5. 1 1 5.21 . 0. 0.0 10 .5 .0
5. 2 5. 0 .51 0. 0.0 1 5 112.0 .0
5. 5.20 .51 0.5 0.1 52 112.5 .0
_0 22.05.201 1 0. 21 1. 0 .0 0. 1.1 1 00 105. . 0
2 0. 1 21 1. 0 .0 0. 0. 1 105. . 2
0. 1 22 1. .0 0. 0. 52 10 . .25
0. 2 0 2.10 .11 0. 1. 105.0 .22
5 0. 1 2 2.1 .1 0. 1. 2 1 10 .0 .22
_0 22.05.201 1 0. 2 0 2.1 .0 0. 0.1 101. .05
2 0. 2 0 2.1 .0 0. 1.0 0 102.1 .05
0. 2 1 2.1 .0 0. 0. 12 101. .0
1.0 1 2.50 .11 0. 0. 2 100. 5.
5 1.1 2 2. .12 0. 0. 15 100. 5.
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.1 1 1. . 5 1.1 0.1 2 .5 5.
2 0.15 1 0 1. 2 . 1.1 1.2 2 . .00
0.5 25 0 1. . 1.0 0. 120 101. .05
1.5 0 .1 .0 0. 0. 500 10 .0 5.
5 2.5 01 .5 .1 0. 1.0 1 105.1 .01
ms/cm mg/l
_01 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 25 1 1. .10 0. 0.5 2 10 . .22

2 0. 0 25 1. .0 0. 1. 2 10 . .21
0. 1 25 0 1. .0 0.5 1.1 501 10 . .21
0. 25 2 1. .0 0. 0. 5 0 10 .5 .1
5 0. 25 0 1. .0 0.5 1.0 5 10 . .1
0. 25 5 1. .0 0. 0. 02 10 . .1
0. 25 1. .0 0.5 0. 5 10 .1 .1
_02 2 .05.201 1 .0 5 5.01 .51 2. 0.1 11 .2 .1
2 .2 11 5.21 . 1.1 0.0 0 11 .1 .1
.5 2 5.2 . 0.2 0. 1 11 . .0
.5 5. . 0.2 0. 0 11 .2 .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 2 2.1 .2 0. 0.5 15 101. .02
2 0. 2 0 2.1 .25 0. 0. 0 101. 5.
0. 2 2.20 .2 0. 1.1 0 101. 5.
0. 0 2. .25 0.1 1. 102. .0
5 0. 5 0 2. 5 .2 0.1 0. 102. .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0.5 2225 1. 2 . 1.5 0.5 20 102. .1
2 0.5 225 1. . 0.2 1.1 5 101. .0
0.55 2255 1. 5 . 1 0. 1.1 10 101.2 .0
1.5 05 2. . 0. 0. 10 100.2 5.
5 1. 2. . .0 1.5 100 101. 5.
_05 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 2.10 . 2 0.1 0. 155 10 . .20
2 0. 2 2.15 .2 0. 0. 10 .5 .1
1.11 001 2. 0 .2 0. 0. 105.0 .1
1. 0 50 2.21 . 1.0 0. 500 105. .1
_0 2 .05.201 1 5. 5.05 .5 0. 0. 1 10 . 5.
2 5.0 2 . 1 . 0. 0. 110.1 .0
. 1 55 . 5 . 0. 0. 111.0 .0
. 2 0 . 1 . 0 0. 0. 155 111.2 .10
_0 2 .05.201 1 0.2 1 1 1. 5 .1 1. 0. 5 0 10 .1 .22
2 0. 2121 1. .1 0. 0. 5 0 10 .1 .1
0. 22 1. .1 0.5 0. 1 102. .15
0. 5 225 1. 5 .1 0. 0. 10 . .1
5 0. 5 2255 1. 5 .1 0. 0. 5 10 .1 .15
_0 2 .05.201 1 0.1 1 2 1. .1 1.1 0. 10 . .2
2 0.22 1 2 1. .0 1.0 0. 5 10 . .22
0.2 1 0 1. .0 0. 0. 150 10 . .21
0. 2 2.20 .11 0. 0. 5 10 . .1
5 1.2 20 2. 5 .15 0. 0.5 5 0 10 .0 .05
1.52 502 2. 5 .1 0.5 0. . 5. 2
_0 1 .05.201 1 0.11 11 0. 2 .1 1. 0. 10 10 .5 .2
2 0.1 1 1.0 .1 1.2 0.5 21 10 .2 .21
0.1 1 1 1.0 .1 1.2 0. 00 10 .2 .21
0.5 1 1. .1 1.2 0.2 2 5 101. .0
5 1. 1 1 2.55 .25 1.1 1.2 111 102. 5.
2.0 5 2. .2 0. 0. 0 101. 5. 0
ms/cm mg/l
_01 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 0 1. .1 0.5 0. 0 . 5.
2 0. 0 2 1. .15 0. 0. . 5. 2
0. 2 2 1. 2 .1 0. 1. 1 . 5. 2
0. 2 1. 2 .1 0. 0. 10 . 5.
5 0. 5 2 1. .12 0. 0. 102 100.5 5.
0. 2 2 2 1. .12 0. 0. 20 101.0 .00
0. 2 10 1. .12 0. 1. 0 101. .0
_02 2 .05.201 1 .05 0 5.20 . 0 0.2 0.1 5 11 . .12
2 .15 15 5.25 .5 0. 0. 1 11 .2 .1
.1 1 2 5.1 .55 0. 0.1 1 11 . .1
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 22 0 1. .2 0. 0.5 2 . 5.
2 0. 2 0 2.0 .2 0. 1. 2 0 . 5. 5
0. 2 2.2 .21 0. 1. 10 . 5.
5 0. 2 2.2 .20 0. 0. 25 .5 5.
0. 052 2.2 .1 0. 1.2 15 100.0 5. 5
_0 2 .05.201 1 1. 1 2 1. 0 . 0. 1. 52 101. .05
2 0. 0 2 1 1. . 1 0. 1.2 11 102. .05
0. 5 2 2 1. .2 0. 0.2 101 101. .05
0.5 2 5 1. 1 .2 0. 1.0 10 . .1
5 0.5 2 1. 1 .2 1.0 0. 10 . .22
_05 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 2.0 . 5 1.2 0. 5 1 102. .0
2 0. 2 0 2.0 . 2 1.2 0.2 115 102. .0
0. 2 1 2.05 . 0 1.2 0. 15 10 . .11
1.02 2 2.0 .2 1.2 0. 10 .5 .11
_0 2 .05.201 1 2.50 11 .10 . 1.1 1.0 0 10 . 5. 2
2 2. 2 1 .25 . 1.0 0. 1 5 10 . 5. 2
2. 5 . . 1.2 0. 10 . 5. 1
2. 10 . 1 . 2 1.1 0. 0 10 . 5. 1
5 .25 5522 .10 . 0. 0. 10 .0 .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 15 1. .2 1.1 1.0 200 100. 5.
2 0.5 22 1. .2 0. 0. 1 101.1 .02
0.5 22 1. .21 1.1 0. 0 101. .0
0.5 225 1. 5 .1 1.5 1.5 11 102. .11
5 0.5 22 1. .1 1.2 1.2 101. .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 5 2 0 1. .22 1.1 0. 210 . 5. 5
2 0. 2 2 1. .10 1.2 1.0 2 .1 5.
0. 2 1 1. .15 1.0 0.5 0 .0 5.
0. 2 0 1. .1 1.0 1.2 5 . 5.
5 0. 2 1. 5 .1 1.1 0. 5 0 . 5.
0. 2 1. .1 1.1 0.1 1 0 . 5. 0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 1 20 5 1.5 . 1. 0.0 1 5 100. .02
2 0. 2 205 1. 0 .52 1. 0. 0 100. .0
0. 2 20 1 1. . 1. 0. 0 100. .02
0. 21 1. . 1.2 1. 0 100. .01
5 0.5 22 1. . 1. 1.0 25 100.2 5.
0. 2 1. 0 . 1.2 1.0 .2 5. 0
ms/cm mg/l
_01 25.05.201 1 0. 2 21 1. .1 0. 1. 101.2 .00
2 0. 21 1. .12 0. 0. 101.1 5.
0. 21 5 1. .11 0. 1.1 1 100.5 5.
0. 21 1. .11 0. 0. 1 0 100.5 5.
5 0. 22 1. 2 .10 0. 1. 10 101. .02
0. 1 22 1. .11 0.5 2.5 15 102.1 .0
0. 225 1. .11 0.5 1. 220 102. .11
_02 25.05.201 1 .0 1 . . 2 0. 0. 11 .2 .10
2 .0 . 0 .5 0.0 0. 105 11 .1 .0
.2 . .52 0. 0.1 0 11 .5 .0
. 5.05 . 0. 0.0 52 112.1 .00
_0 25.05.201 1 0. 2525 1. . 0.5 0. 0 .2 5.
2 0. 25 1. 5 . 0.2 0. 10 . 5.
1.02 2 2.10 .2 0.1 1.1 2 .0 5.
1.12 2 51 2.1 .2 0.2 1. 10 . 5.
5 1.1 055 2. .22 0. 1. 251 . 5.
_0 25.05.201 1 0. 0 22 2 1. 5 . 0.5 0. 0 101.5 .02
2 0. 22 1. . 5 0.1 0. 0 101. .0
0. 1 22 1. . . 0. 1 101. .0
0. 2 0 1. . 1 0. 1.0 1 2 102. .10
5 0. 2 20 1. .2 0. 0. 12 102. .10
_05 25.05.201 1 1.20 2 1. . 5 0.2 0. 15 102.0 .0
2 0. 5 2 0 1. . 5 0. 1.1 1 101. .02
0. 2 2 1. . 1.2 1.0 50 101. .01
0. 2 0 1. .2 1.2 1.0 12 101. .0
5 1.0 2 0 2.1 .2 1.2 1.1 22 10 . .10
_0 25.05.201 1 1.52 2 2.0 . 0. 0. 1 10 . .1
2 1.5 1 2. . 2 1.1 0. 1 1 10 . .05
1.21 0 0 .11 . 5 1.1 1. 1 10 . 5. 5
. 2 1. .52 0. 0.0 00 10 . 5.
5 . 5 0 .1 .5 0. 0. 10 . 5.
_0 25.05.201 1 0. 2015 1.5 . 1. 0.5 1 10 . .15
2 0. 5 20 1.5 . 1.2 0.5 11 102.1 .0
0. 21 1. 5 . 0 0. 2.1 15 .0 5.
0. 5 221 1. 1 .2 0.5 0. 201 . 5.
5 0. 22 1. 2 .2 0. 1. 20 100.5 5.
_0 2 .05.201 1 0.5 1 2 1. .0 1.2 0. 11 102.2 .1
2 0.5 1 2 1. .02 1.2 1.0 05 102. .1
0.5 1 1. .0 1.2 1. 0 102. .11
0. 2211 1. 0 .0 1.2 0.1 0 101.2 .00
5 1.1 1 2 2. .15 1.0 1. 0 .2 5. 0
. 5 5100 . 0 . 0. 0. 2 101.0 5.
_0 25.05.201 1 0. 1 1. 2 . 1. 1. 0 101. .0
2 0. 1 2 1. 2 .0 1. 1.2 10 101. .0
0. 1 1. 1 .0 1. 0. 101. .0
0. 1 0 1. .0 1. 0.5 20 101. .0
5 1. 20 2.5 .2 1.2 1.2 0 . 5.
. 2 55 0 .1 . 1.0 0. .2 5.
ms/cm mg/l
_01 2 .05.201 1 0. 1 2215 1. 0 . 0. 1. 5 . 5.
2 0. 1 221 1. 1 . 0. 1. 1 . 5.
0. 220 1. 0 . 0. 2.1 1 .0 5.
0. 221 1. 1 . 0. 1. 1 . 5. 1
5 0. 221 1. 1 . 0. 1.2 .2 5.
0. 221 1. 1 . 0.2 1.5 51 . 5. 0
0. 2210 1. 0 . 0. 2.0 00 .0 5.
_02 2 .05.201 1 .0 2 . 2 .5 0.5 0.5 2 1 111. .01
2 .01 5 . .55 0.5 0.2 1 111. .02
.22 0 . .5 0. 0.1 102 111. .00
. 2 . .52 0.5 0.2 0 111. .
5 . 5.0 . 0.5 0.2 0 111.5 5.
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 5 205 1.5 .22 0. 1.5 0 101.2 .0
2 0. 5 20 1.5 .1 0. 2.1 1 100. .01
0. 20 1.5 .1 0. 2.0 1 2 100. 5.
0. 20 1.5 .1 0. 2.2 100. 5.
5 0. 5 22 1 1. .1 0.5 1. 5 101. 5.
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 2 1 1. .2 1.1 0.1 221 10 . .15
2 0. 2 1 1. .2 1.1 0.5 0 10 . .15
0. 2 1 1. .21 1.1 2.1 10 .5 .1
0. 2 12 1. .20 1.0 1. 220 10 . .1
5 0. 2 1 1. .1 0. 1. 11 10 . .1
_05 2 .05.201 1 1.0 2 21 1. .2 1. 0. 0 10 . .1
2 1.0 2 1. 1 .21 1. 1.5 0 10 . .1
1.1 2 1. 1 .20 1. 1.1 0 10 . .12
1.20 2 1. .20 1. 1.5 0 10 . .12
5 2. 5 . . 0. 1.1 2 0 10 . 5.
_0 2 .05.201 1 1.22 25 2 1. 5 .2 1.2 0. 0 10 . .11
2 1.2 2 1 2.0 .2 1. 1.0 0 10 . .10
1.52 0 2. 0 .2 1. 1. 0 10 . .05
2.2 125 .11 . 1.1 1.5 1 0 10 .1 .05
5 .02 202 .12 . 1.1 0. 1 5 10 . .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 210 1. 2 .21 1.1 0. 0 101. .02
2 0. 5 20 1. 1 .1 1.2 0.2 2 101. .01
0. 20 1. 1 .15 1.0 1. 101. .00
0. 20 1. 0 .1 1.2 1. 5 101.2 .00
5 0. 20 2 1. 0 .1 1.2 0. 211 101. .00
0. 20 5 1.5 .1 2.5 0. 2 101. .01
_0 2 .05.201 1 0.5 1 5 1.2 .21 1. 0. 2 1 102.5 .12
2 0.5 1 5 1. 0 .1 1. 0. 11 102. .11
0. 1 2 1. 1 .15 1. 1.5 200 101. .0
0.01 2215 1. .1 1.2 0. 0 .5 5.
5 1. 2 2 2.0 .1 1.2 2. 0 1.5 5. 5
2.11 2.5 .1 0.1 1. 202 0.5 . 5
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 1 1.05 .05 1. 1. 0 102.1 .12
2 0. 1 1.05 .0 1. 1.2 0 101. .11
0. 1 2 1.0 .0 1. 1. 0 101. .12
0. 1 2 1.0 .0 1. 1. 0 101. .11
5 0. 2 1 0 1.2 .0 1. 1.1 0 100. .01
2. 52 2. .20 1.1 1.2 2 5.0 . 5
ite ate epth emperature onductivit alinit ppt p urbidit hloroph ll issolved issolved gen
ms/cm g/l cells/ml gen mg/l
_01 2 .05.201 1 0. 20 1. 1 .00 0.1 0. 5 100. 5.
2 0. 20 0 1. 0 . 0. 2. 15 100. 5.
0. 20 1.5 . 0. 2.1 2 100.5 5.
0. 20 1.5 . 0. .2 100. 5.
5 0. 20 1.5 . 0. 1.2 5 100.5 5.
0. 20 1 1.5 .00 0. 2. 505 100. 5.
0. 2051 1.5 .00 0.5 .0 55 . 5.
_02 2 .05.201 1 .50 00 . .52 0.2 0.5 0 11 .1 .1
2 .5 . .50 0. 0.1 0 11 .5 .0
.5 2 . . 0.5 0. 0 11 .0 .05
. 2 50 . 2 . 0.5 1.0 10 11 .2 .0
5 . 1 2 . 1 . 2 0. 0.2 0 11 .2 .05
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 1 5 1.50 .15 0.5 1. 15 102. .0
2 0. 1 1.52 .12 0. 1. 102.2 .0
0. 5 1 1.5 .11 0. 1. 1 102.0 .0
0. 5 1 1.52 .10 0. 1. 1 102.1 .0
5 0. 1 1.52 .10 0. 1. 1 2 102.0 .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 2050 1.5 .21 0. 1. 0 10 . .15
2 0. 20 1.5 .1 0. 2.2 0 10 . .15
0. 2051 1.5 .15 0. 1. 11 10 . .15
0. 210 1. 2 .15 0. 1. 1 105.1 .2
5 0. 2 1 1. 0 .15 0. 1.5 0 105. .25
_05 2 .05.201 1 1.2 2 00 1. 2 .2 1.1 0.1 1 10 . .2
2 1.25 2 2 1. 2 .2 1. 0.5 0 10 .5 .2
1.2 2 1. 2 .2 1. 1.2 0 10 . .2
1. 2 2 15 1. 2 .21 1. 0.2 20 10 . .0
5 2. 2 5 .20 . 1.1 0.2 50 101. 5.
_0 2 .05.201 1 1.0 205 1.5 .22 1. 1.1 0 10 .0 .2
2 1.0 212 1. 2 .21 1. 0.5 1 0 105. .2
1. 2 2.1 .25 1. 1. 0 10 . .2
1.2 2.00 . 1.1 0. 1 10 .0 .15
5 . .5 . 0 1.1 0. 0 10 . .15
_0 2 .05.201 1 1.01 1 1.51 .1 1. 1.2 1 . 5. 1
2 1.01 1 0 1.51 .0 1. 1.2 0 10 . . 2
1.01 1 1.52 .0 1. 1.5 0 10 . . 0
0. 1 1.50 .0 1.0 0. 0 10 .5 .20
5 0. 2020 1.55 .0 0. 2.0 1 10 . .22
0. 210 1. 1 .0 0.0 1.5 1 10 .5 .1
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 5 1 1 1. 2 .1 1. 0. 0 105.5 .2
2 0. 5 1 1. 1 .02 1. 1.5 0 105. .2
0. 5 1 01 1. 1 .02 1. 1. 0 105. .2
1.10 1 2. .1 1. 1. 0 10 .2 5.
5 . 5 .50 .25 0. 0. 55 . 5.50
. 00 .55 .2 0.2 0.1 250 .2 5. 2
_0 2 .05.201 1 0. 1 5 1.1 .0 0. 1.5 5 .0 .2
2 0. 15 1.1 .00 1. 1.5 112 105. .2
0. 1 15 1.21 . 1. 0. 0 105.2 .2
0. 15 1.22 .00 1. 1. 0 105.1 .2
5 2.5 51 2. .1 1.1 1. 101 .5 5. 0
.1 1 .0 .22 0.0 1. 2 2 5. 5. 2
_01 2 .05.201 1 1.2 20 1.55 .1 0.5 0. 50 10 .5 .11
2 1.2 202 1.5 .0 0. 1.5 1 0 10 . .10
1.2 2020 1.5 .05 0. 1.5 1 0 10 .2 .0
1.21 202 1.5 .0 0. 2.0 0 102. .0
5 1.2 20 1 1.55 .0 0. 1. 5 101. .01
1.1 20 5 1.55 .0 0. 1. 50 101. .01
1.1 20 0 1.55 .0 0.5 1. 0 101. .01
_02 2 .05.201 1 .1 2 . . 0 0.0 0.1 1 11 .0 .1
2 . 2 . .5 0.0 0.0 0 115. .12
. 0 .5 .5 0.1 0.1 0 11 . .1
. 0 1 . .50 . 1. 5 11 .0 .1
_0 2 .05.201 1 1.11 1 0 1.50 .1 0. 1. 0 102. .0
2 1.12 1 5 1.50 .0 0. 0. 20 102. .0
1.11 1 51 1. .0 0. 1. 1 102. .0
1.11 1 1. .05 0. 1. 5 102.5 .0
5 1.10 1 1. .05 0.1 1. 1 102.5 .0
_0 2 .05.201 1 1.20 1 1 1. .25 0.5 1.0 2 10 . .1
2 1.0 1 1. 1 .1 0.5 1. 11 10 . .22
0. 1 5 1. 2 .1 0. 1. 50 105. .2
0. 1 1 1. .1 0.5 1. 1 105.5 .25
5 1.00 1 5 1. .1 0.5 0. 0 105. .2
_05 2 .05.201 1 1. 205 1.55 .20 1.0 0. 2 105. .21
2 1.22 20 1.55 .1 1.0 1. 52 10 .1 .
1.1 20 2 1.5 .1 0. 1. 10 10 . .
1.1 205 1.5 .1 0. 0. 11 10 . .
5 1.21 2112 1. .1 0. 1.1 5 10 .0 .
_0 2 .05.201 1 2.0 2 21 2.0 . 1. 0. 0 10 . .1
2 2.1 2 5 2.1 . 5 1. 0.5 0 10 . .25
2. 0 2.5 . 1.2 0. 0 10 .2 .22
.15 22 .21 . 1 1.1 0.5 2 10 .1 .11
5 . 2 . . 5 0. 0.5 0 110. .10
_0 2 .05.201 1 1.01 1 22 1. .1 1. 0. 10 . .15
2 1.01 1 2 1. 0 .12 0. 0. 5 10 .1 .1
1.0 1 5 1. .12 1.0 2.0 10 .2 .1
1.05 1 2 1. .11 0. 2.0 1 10 . .1
5 1.0 1 12 1. .11 0. 1.2 0 105.0 .22
1.0 1 10 1. .11 2. 1. 0 105. .25
_0 2 .05.201 1 1. 2 1. .15 1. 1.2 0 105. .20
2 1. 5 2 5 1. .0 1. 1. 0 105. .20
1. 5 2 1. .0 1.2 1. 20 10 .0 .25
1. 2 1. 0 .10 1.2 1.0 2 10 . .2
5 1. 2 1. .11 1. 0.1 1 10 . .2
1. 2 55 1. .12 1.0 1.1 2 10 .1 .2
_0 2 .05.201 1 1. 5 2 21 1. 2 .2 1. 1.0 0 105. .1
2 1. 2 1. .2 1. 1.1 0 105.5 .1
1. 2 2 1. 2 .1 1.2 1.0 0 105. .1
1. 2 0 1. .15 1. 1. 0 105. .1
5 2.1 1 2. 0 .22 1. 1.1 0 100.0 5. 1
_01 02.0 .201 1 2. 0 5 0.50 . 1 1. 0. 5 111. .
2 2. 0 0.50 .2 0. 1.2 111. .
2. 5 0 5 0.51 .2 0. 0. 112. .50
2. 0 51 0.50 .2 0. 1.5 111. .
5 2. 0 5 0.50 .2 1.0 1.5 112.2 .
2. 5 0 0.50 .2 1.0 0. 5 110.5 . 0
2. 1 0 0. .2 1.0 0. 110. . 2
_02 02.0 .201 1 . 51 .5 . 1.2 0.0 15 115. .0
2 . 1 51 1 .5 . 5 1.1 0.0 115. .0
. 2 51 0 .5 . 1.1 0.0 1 115. .02
_0 02.0 .201 1 2. 0 1 0. . 2 0. 1.0 50 111. .
2 2. 0 11 0. . 0 0.5 1.0 1 111. .
2. 0 0 0. . 0. 0. 1 111. .
2. 0 0 0. . 0. 1.5 0 111.5 .
5 2. 0 00 0. . 1.0 1. 111. .
_0 02.0 .201 1 .1 0 . 1 0. 1 . 0.2 1. 5 110.1 .
2 2. 1 0 .51 .5 . 1 0. 0.5 05 112. .5
2. 0 20 0. . 0.5 1.0 2 11 . .5
2. 5 0 0. . 0 0.5 0. 5 11 .1 .5
5 .02 101 0. . 0. 0. 5 11 . . 0
_05 02.0 .201 1 . 2 1. . 2 0.0 0. 111.5 .2
2 . 2 0 1. .5 0.0 0. 55 111. .2
. 2 2 0 1. 0 .55 0.0 0. 5 111.2 .2
. 1 2 1. .5 0.0 0. 5 112.1 .2
_0 02.0 .201 1 .2 0 0. . 5 0.0 0. 2 10 . . 2
2 .1 10 0. . 0.0 0.2 111. .
.15 2 5 1.5 .5 0.0 0. 112. .
. 1 1. 5 .51 0.0 0. 5 111. . 0
5 . 21 1. 0 .5 0.1 0.0 2 111. .
_0 02.0 .201 1 .21 11 1 0. 0 . 1.0 0. 5 10 .0 .2
2 .1 11 1 0. . 0. 0.1 5 112.0 .
.11 1125 0. . 2 0.5 0. 5 111. .
.11 1121 0. . 1 0.5 0.2 25 112.0 .
5 .11 111 0. . 0 0. 0.2 5 111. .
_0 02.0 .201 1 . 0 215 1.50 .5 0.1 0.2 2 0 110. .20
2 . 2 215 1.51 .52 0.1 0. 2 110. .2
. 2 21 1.52 .51 0.0 0.2 1 111.1 .2
. 2 21 1.52 .50 0.1 0.1 5 111. .2
5 . 21 5 1.52 . 0.0 0.5 111. .2
_0 02.0 .201 1 2. 0 5 0.51 .25 0. 0. 5 10 . . 0
2 2. 0 00 0. 1 .2 0. 0.2 1 1 10 . .2
2. 101 0. .2 0. 0.5 2 10 .1 .2
.0 1111 0. .2 0. 0.2 10 . . 2
5 .12 1115 0. . 0 0. 0.2 521 10 . . 2
_01 0 .0 .201 1 .20 0 2 0. 2 .22 0. 1.5 2 11 . .
2 .21 0 2 0. .22 1. 0. 11 . .
.1 0 0 50. 1 .2 0. 1.2 1 11 . .
.1 0 5 0.5 .2 0. 1. 11 .5 .
5 .1 0 0.5 .2 1.0 1. 11 . .
.1 0 00 0.5 .2 1. 1.2 11 . . 1
.15 0 5 0. .2 0. 1.5 21 115.5 . 5
_02 0 .0 .201 1 . 0 5 . . 0. 0.0 115.5 5.
2 . 5 0 . 1 . 0. 0.0 115. 5.
. 5 . 1 . 0. 0.0 05 11 .1 5.
. 5 . 1 . 5 0. 0.2 11 .1 5.
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 10 0. 5 .0 0. 0. 10 .5 .22
2 2. 5 122 0. 5 .0 0. 1.5 01 10 . .22
2. 1 1.0 .0 0. 0. 5 10 .0 .1
2. 15 0 1.10 .0 0. 0. 10 . .1
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2.5 0 5 0. 5 .0 0. 0. 0 10 . .2
2 2.55 0 0. .02 0.2 0. 5 10 .1 .2
2.5 0 5 0. .0 0.2 0. 0 10 . .2
2.55 0 0. .0 0.2 0.5 5 10 . . 2
_05 0 .0 .201 1 .0 110 0. .2 . . 111. . 2
2 .12 10 1 0. .2 0.0 0. 111.2 . 1
.0 10 0. 2 .2 0.2 1. 50 110. .
.0 105 0. 2 .25 0.1 1.2 52 111. . 2
_0 0 .0 .201 1 .2 11 0. . 0.2 0. 0 11 . .5
2 .2 1155 0. . 5 0. 0.5 55 11 . . 1
.2 11 0. . 5 0.1 1. 0 115.1 . 1
.22 115 0. . 5 0.1 0.2 11 . .
5 .1 11 1 0. . 0.1 0. 11 . .
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 1102 0. . 0.2 0.5 2 10 . .2
2 2. 5 10 0. 5 . 5 0. 0. 10 . .2
2. 5 10 0. . 0. 0. 10 . .2
2. 5 10 0. 5 . 0.2 0.2 50 10 .1 . 0
5 2. 5 10 0 0. 5 . 2 1. 2.1 50 10 . .
_0 0 .0 .201 1 5.1 2 00 2.02 . 0. 0.0 0 10 . 5.
2 5.1 2 2 2.01 . 2 0.2 0. 0 10 . 5. 1
5.1 2 5 2.00 . 1 0.2 0. 2 10 . 5. 1
5.1 2 2 2.01 . 0. 0. 20 10 . 5. 2
5 5.1 2 50 2.00 .5 0.1 0. 5 10 . 5. 2
_0 0 .0 .201 1 .1 1225 0. 5 . 0 0. 0. 2 10 . .2
2 .1 1220 0. 5 .5 0.2 0.0 05 10 .2 .22
.15 12 0. .5 0. 0. 2 10 .1 .15
.22 1 0. .5 0. 1.0 22 105.2 .0
5 .2 1 0. 5 .51 0.2 0. 5 10 . 5.
_01 0 .0 .201 1 2. 5 0 12 0.5 .22 0.5 0. 5 111. .
2 2. 0 0. 2 .22 1.1 1. 0 111. .
2. 5 0 5 0. 1 .22 1.0 1. 0 111. . 5
2. 0 0. 1 .2 0. 1.5 5 110. . 2
5 2. 0 0. 1 .2 1.0 1.2 110. . 0
2.55 0 05 0. 2 .2 1.2 1. 10 .0 .
2.51 0 0. .2 1.1 2.1 1 10 . . 2
_02 0 .0 .201 1 . 0 5 0 . . 2 1.1 0.0 11 .0 5.
2 . 55 . 5 . 1.2 0.0 5 112. 5. 2
.50 5 . 0 . 1. 0.0 1 112.5 5. 0
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 10 0. . 0 0. 0. 0 110. .
2 2. 10 0. 5 .2 1.1 1. 5 110.2 .
2. 10 5 0. .2 1.0 1. 110. .
2. 10 0. 5 .2 0. 2. 2 110.2 .
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 2 0 5 0.22 .2 0.2 0. 2 1 10 . .
2 2. 1 0 0 0. 1 .22 0. 0. 0 10 . .
2. 2 0 0 0. 1 .21 0.2 0.0 25 10 . .
2. 2 0 0 0. 1 .22 0. 0. 515 10 .5 .
_05 0 .0 .201 1 2. 0 51 0.5 . 0.0 0. 5 110.5 . 1
2 2. 0 0 1 0.5 . 0.1 0.0 22 110. . 0
2. 0 1 0.5 . 0.1 1.1 110. .
2. 0 11 0.5 . 0.0 0.5 5 110. .
_0 0 .0 .201 1 .20 12 0. 0 . 0.0 0. 2 10 . .2
2 .1 1 1 0. 2 . 5 0.0 0. 1 10 .0 .25
.22 1 1.0 . 0.0 0. 10 .0 .2
. 5 2010 1. .50 0.0 0.1 5 110. .2
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 2 05 5 0. . 0. 0. 5 105.5 .15
2 2. 05 0. . 0.2 0. 5 105.5 .15
2. 05 1 0. . 5 0. 1. 5 105. .1
2. 05 2 0. . 0.5 1.5 55 105. .1
5 2. 0555 0. . 0.5 1.0 52 105. .1
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 5 10 5 0. 5 . 5 0.1 0.1 10 .2 . 1
2 2. 10 0. . 1 0.0 0. 10 .1 . 1
2. 1055 0. . 0.1 0.1 5 10 . . 0
2. 5 105 0. . 0.1 0.5 10 . . 2
5 2. 10 0. . 0.2 0.1 5 10 .1 . 1
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 0 0. .5 0.2 1.5 10 . .1
2 2. 0 55 0. .51 0.2 0.5 10 . .1
2. 0 0. 5 . 0. 0.5 10 . .1
2. 0 0. 5 . 0. 0. 11 10 . .1
5 2. 0 2 0. . 0. 1.5 0 10 . .20
_01 0 .0 .201 1 2. 0 21 0. 1 .1 0. 0.1 50 10 .5 .2
2 2. 0 0. 1 .1 0. 1.0 22 10 . .2
2. 0 0. 2 .1 0.2 1. 20 10 .0 .2
2. 0 2 0. 1 .1 0. 1.2 1 10 . .2
5 2. 0 0. 1 .1 0.5 0. 21 10 . .2
2. 0 5 0. .20 0. 0. 10 . .2
_02 0 .0 .201 1 .05 5 0 .1 .5 1. 0.2 0 115.0 .0
2 .10 51 .0 .55 1.2 0.1 11 . .0
.1 551 .15 .55 1.2 0.0 11 . .0
.20 551 .1 .5 1.2 0.0 52 11 . .0
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 0 0.5 . 0.5 1. 10 .1 .1
2 2. 0 0.5 . 1 0. 1. 1 10 . .20
2. 0 5 0.5 . 0 0.5 1.1 2 10 . .22
2. 1 0 5 0.5 . 1.1 1. 10 .0 .25
5 2. 1 0 5 0.5 . 1. 1. 5 10 . .2
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 05 0. . 1. 2.2 2 10 . . 2
2 2. 05 2 0. 5 . 0.5 0. 5 10 . . 1
2. 05 2 0. 5 . 0. 0.0 10 . .
2. 05 2 0. 5 . 0. 0.2 2 10 . . 0
_05 0 .0 .201 1 .01 0 0 0.50 . 5 0. 0.2 112. .
2 .02 0 5 0.51 . 0.1 0. 0 111. .
.02 0 2 0.50 . 2 0. 0.5 111. . 5
.01 0 5 0.50 . 0 0.2 1.2 502 111. .
_0 0 .0 .201 1 .11 1 1.1 .55 0.0 0.2 112.1 . 5
2 .11 1 1.1 .5 0.0 0. 112.1 . 5
.0 1 1.1 .50 0.1 0.2 1 111. .
.10 1 1.12 . 0.1 0. 2 112.1 .
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2.5 0 20 0.2 . 0. 0. 5 10 . .25
2 2.5 0 15 0.2 . 1 0. 0. 5 10 . .25
2.5 0 0 0.25 .2 0. 0. 5 0 10 .1 .2
2.5 0 10 0.2 .2 0.5 1.1 5 10 .0 .2
5 2.5 0 0 0.25 .2 0. 1.1 10 .5 .2
_0 0 .0 .201 1 2. 0 2 0. 0 . 0.2 0. 10 .5 .2
2 2. 5 0 1 0. 0 .2 0.2 0.1 10 .1 .2
2. 0 0. 0 .2 0. 0.1 1 0 10 .2 .2
2. 0 0.2 .2 0. 0.1 15 10 .0 .2
5 2. 0 0. 1 .2 0.2 1.0 5 10 .5 .2
_0 0 .0 .201 1 1. 2 5 1 . . 1 0.2 0.2 0 105. .2
2 1. 5 0 . . 0.2 0. 105. .2
1. 5 0 . 0 . 0.2 0. 1 5 105. .22
1. 5 5 0 . 0 . 0.2 0. 12 105. .2
5 1. 5 5 . .0 0.0 0.5 51 105. .20
ms/cm mg/l
_01 20.0 .201 1 . 2 20 1. .22 1. 0.2 1 5 10 .1 .12
2 . 2 0 1. .21 1. 0. 11 10 .1 .12
.51 2 25 1. 5 .20 1. 0. 1105 10 . .1
.5 2 1. .1 1. 0. 1 10 . .1
5 . 5 2 1. 1 .1 2.0 1.0 2 10 . .20
. 2 2 2 1. 2 .1 1.5 0. 0 10 . .20
. 1 2 5 1. 1 .1 1. 0.5 20 10 . .1
_02 20.0 .201 1 . 5. . 1 2.1 0.1 11 1 11 .5 5. 2
2 . 5. . 2.2 0.0 151 11 5. 1
. 0 5. . 10. 2. 1 15 11 .0 5.
_0 20.0 .201 1 .01 25 1 1. . 5 1. 0. 10 2 102. 5.
2 2. 2521 1. . 1 1. 1. 102. 5.
2. 2512 1. .2 1. 0.2 102. 5.
2. 5 2 1. .2 1. 0. 5 10 .1 5. 2
_0 20.0 .201 1 . 5 2 0 1. 1 . 0.2 0.0 55 102. 5.
2 . 0 2. 0 . 1.0 0. 1 1 10 .2 5.
.5 5 2. . 1 1.1 0. 1212 10 . 5.
5.02 15 .00 . 1.1 0.1 101 10 .5 .
_05 20.0 .201 1 .01 2 2.0 . 1.1 0.2 5 10 .2 5. 0
2 . 5 1 .21 .5 1. 0.5 10 .2 5.
. 5 0 .01 . 0 1.5 0.0 1250 110. 5. 2
. 5 2 .2 . 0 1. 0.0 111. 5. 2
_0 20.0 .201 1 5. . 5 .50 1.2 0.0 2 10 . 5. 5
2 . 1 51 0 . .5 1.2 0. 05 10 .1 5.
.12 5505 . 0 .52 1. 0.5 0 110.0 5. 2
.0 1 . . 1. 0. 110.2 .02
_0 20.0 .201 1 . 25 2 1. 5 . 1 1.1 0.2 101.2 5.
2 . 0 25 2 1. 5 . 0 1.1 0.0 5 101.1 5.
. 25 1. .2 1.1 0.5 05 101.1 5.
. 2 0 2.0 . 2 1.2 0.1 111 102. 5.
5 5. 25 . . 2. 0. 1 25 105. 5.
_0 20.0 .201 1 2. 1 5 1. 5 .21 1.2 0. 1120 . 5.
2 2. 1 1. .21 1.1 0.2 5 100. 5.
. 2 25 1. 1 .2 1.2 0. 05 101. 5.
.25 5 5 . 5 . 1. 0.1 0 10 .2 5.
5 . 5 2 . 0 .50 1.5 0.0 10 . 5. 0
_0 20.0 .201 1 2. 1 1 1.0 . 1 1.2 0.0 . 5.
2 2. 0 1 1.0 .25 1.2 0.2 1 . 5.
2. 0 1501 1.0 .2 1.1 0.5 . 5.
. 255 2. . 1. 0. 0 . 5.
5 .50 11 2. . 0 1. 0. 1 . 5. 2
201
In-situ Seawater Quality
Temperature Conductivity Salinity Turbidity Chlorophyll Dissolved Dissolved Oxygen

Site ID Date Depth pH
(oC) (ms/cm) (ppt) (NTU) (µg/l) Oxygen (%) (mg/l)
Sensitive Receptor
0.0 27.01 62572 42.11 8.14 2.5 1.4 104.9 6.60
0.5 27.00 62548 42.10 8.14 2.5 1.4 104.3 6.56
1.0 27.01 62624 42.15 8.14 2.5 0.7 104.1 6.55
SR1 29.04.2019
1.5 26.95 62935 42.39 8.14 2.9 1.1 104.8 6.59
2.0 26.99 62781 42.27 8.14 2.7 1.3 105.0 6.60
2.5 26.95 62925 42.39 8.14 3.0 0.7 105.2 6.62
0.0 26.66 62462 42.04 7.89 3.2 0.9 105.9 6.70
0.5 26.66 62455 42.03 7.89 2.8 1.1 106.5 6.74
1.0 26.66 62448 42.03 7.89 2.8 1.6 106.5 6.74
1.5 26.67 62457 42.04 7.89 2.6 1.6 106.7 6.75
SR2 29.04.2019
2.0 26.67 62461 42.04 7.89 2.6 1.3 107.1 6.78
2.5 26.69 62481 42.05 7.90 2.8 1.1 107.7 6.82
3.0 26.73 62529 42.09 7.93 2.7 1.1 109.7 6.93
3.5 26.89 62792 42.29 7.99 2.8 0.5 118.5 7.46
0.0 27.07 62624 42.15 8.24 2.1 3.0 102.1 6.41
0.5 27.11 62632 42.16 8.29 2.2 7.3 102.4 6.43
1.0 27.11 62640 42.16 8.28 2.1 2.2 102.5 6.44
1.5 27.11 62636 42.16 8.27 2.1 1.6 102.5 6.43
2.0 27.11 62640 42.16 8.27 2.2 0.9 102.3 6.42
2.5 27.12 62664 42.18 8.26 2.2 1.9 102.2 6.42
SR3 02.05.2019
3.0 27.13 62686 42.20 8.26 2.3 2.3 102.2 6.42
3.5 27.14 62680 42.19 8.26 2.3 1.7 102.1 6.40
4.0 27.15 62692 42.20 8.25 2.3 1.7 102.2 6.42
4.5 27.17 62726 42.23 8.25 2.3 0.9 102.2 6.41
5.0 27.19 62750 42.24 8.25 2.5 0.0 101.9 6.39
5.5 27.39 62879 42.34 8.26 3.5 1.2 101.8 6.36
6.0 27.42 62970 42.40 8.27 4.3 1.4 101.3 6.32

0.0 26.68 62270 41.89 8.13 14.3 4.2 100.5 6.37
0.5 26.68 62291 41.91 8.15 7.7 2.3 101.4 6.42
1.0 26.69 62295 41.91 8.15 6.0 2.3 101.6 6.43
1.5 26.68 62291 41.91 8.16 5.2 1.5 101.7 6.44
2.0 26.68 62299 41.91 8.16 5.0 1.1 101.9 6.45
2.5 26.68 62312 41.92 8.16 4.6 0.9 101.8 6.45
SR4 02.05.2019 3.0 26.68 62319 41.93 8.16 4.6 1.1 101.7 6.44
3.5 26.68 62334 41.94 8.17 4.5 0.7 101.6 6.43
4.0 26.70 62377 41.97 8.17 4.6 0.8 101.6 6.43
4.5 26.82 62471 42.04 8.17 4.6 1.2 101.5 6.41
5.0 26.89 62596 42.13 8.18 4.5 1.4 101.5 6.40
5.5 28.54 61481 41.23 8.26 8.2 2.1 103.7 6.40
6.0 29.67 65967 44.63 8.43 21.6 3.0 103.8 6.17
Outfall Path
0.0 27.12 62563 42.10 8.26 2.3 7.8 102.8 6.46
0.5 27.11 62559 42.10 8.25 2.2 2.9 102.8 6.46
1.0 27.11 62559 42.10 8.24 2.2 1.2 102.8 6.46
1.5 27.12 62559 42.10 8.23 2.2 1.0 102.6 6.45
2.0 27.12 62560 42.10 8.23 2.3 0.7 102.7 6.45
TP1- 2.5 27.11 62568 42.11 8.22 2.3 1.0 102.4 6.44
02.05.2019
End 3.0 27.11 62577 42.11 8.22 2.3 1.2 102.5 6.44
3.5 27.11 62590 42.12 8.22 2.4 1.1 102.4 6.43
4.0 27.11 62604 42.13 8.22 2.4 1.5 102.5 6.44
4.5 27.15 62652 42.17 8.21 2.7 1.7 102.3 6.42
5.0 27.34 62845 42.31 8.22 2.9 1.7 102.5 6.41
5.5 27.78 62880 42.32 8.26 3.9 1.2 102.7 6.37
0.0 27.18 62584 42.12 8.19 3.0 17.1 102.6 6.44
TP2 02.05.2019
0.5 27.18 62588 42.12 8.21 3.8 4.7 102.5 6.43
1.0 27.16 62604 42.13 8.21 2.8 1.6 102.5 6.43

1.5 27.16 62600 42.13 8.22 2.6 0.7 102.6 6.44
2.0 27.17 62618 42.14 8.22 2.5 1.3 102.6 6.44
2.5 27.16 62596 42.13 8.22 2.5 1.0 102.6 6.44
3.0 27.17 62597 42.13 8.23 2.5 1.0 102.4 6.42
3.5 27.17 62620 42.14 8.23 2.6 0.8 102.4 6.42
4.0 27.19 62646 42.16 8.23 2.7 1.1 102.4 6.42
4.5 27.27 62752 42.24 8.24 2.8 0.9 102.6 6.43
5.0 27.33 62825 42.30 8.25 3.1 1.4 102.8 6.43
5.5 28.20 65132 44.04 8.30 4.6 1.8 106.1 6.48
0.0 26.03 61952 41.67 7.84 17.7 4.2 101.0 6.48
0.5 26.05 61971 41.68 7.86 15.7 6.3 101.2 6.48
1.0 26.03 61984 41.69 7.86 13.9 6.9 101.4 6.50
1.5 26.00 62020 41.72 7.86 11.3 6.2 101.6 6.51
2.0 26.07 62151 41.82 7.86 8.0 5.3 101.7 6.51
2.5 26.19 62298 41.93 7.88 5.2 4.2 102.3 6.53
TP3 29.04.2019
3.0 26.33 62498 42.08 7.90 4.7 2.6 102.5 6.52
3.5 26.30 62656 42.20 7.91 4.2 0.5 102.2 6.50
4.0 26.13 62610 42.17 7.90 3.9 0.0 102.0 6.51
4.5 27.32 62046 41.70 8.05 4.1 0.8 102.2 6.41
5.0 27.91 65352 44.22 8.16 4.1 0.5 101.5 6.22
5.5 27.90 65351 44.22 8.20 4.4 0.9 101.0 6.19
0.0 25.98 61205 41.10 7.93 129.0 9.2 98.8 6.36
0.5 26.08 61861 41.60 7.96 21.6 16.7 99.2 6.36
1.0 26.09 62047 41.74 7.97 8.9 6.1 100.5 6.44
TP4 29.04.2019
1.5 26.12 62116 41.79 7.98 3.7 1.6 101.2 6.47
2.0 26.24 62324 41.95 8.00 2.6 0.0 102.0 6.51
2.5 26.34 62492 42.07 8.02 2.6 0.0 102.0 6.49
3.0 26.29 62548 42.12 8.02 2.7 0.0 102.1 6.50

3.5 26.16 62589 42.15 8.02 2.9 0.0 102.1 6.51
4.0 26.05 62638 42.19 8.01 3.0 0.0 102.1 6.52
4.5 26.71 62637 42.17 8.14 3.8 0.0 101.9 6.44
5.0 27.90 65356 44.22 8.23 4.3 0.0 102.5 6.28
0.0 26.28 62244 41.88 8.77 2.6 0.0 101.5 6.47
0.5 26.28 62233 41.88 8.33 2.2 1.5 101.8 6.49
1.0 26.22 62238 41.88 8.27 2.1 1.4 101.8 6.49
1.5 26.16 62229 41.88 8.23 2.1 0.2 101.8 6.51
2.0 26.25 62419 42.02 8.22 2.2 0.1 101.9 6.50
TP5 29.04.2019 2.5 26.23 62443 42.04 8.21 2.2 1.3 102.0 6.51
3.0 26.21 62548 42.12 8.19 2.3 1.2 102.2 6.51
3.5 26.05 62584 42.15 8.17 2.5 2.0 102.0 6.52
4.0 25.83 62541 42.12 8.13 2.7 1.8 102.2 6.55
4.5 26.38 63228 42.63 8.20 3.5 0.6 103.5 6.56
5.0 27.89 65307 44.19 8.35 4.1 1.7 104.7 6.42
0.0 26.31 62169 41.83 8.12 3.8 1.8 101.3 6.46
0.5 26.33 62200 41.85 8.12 3.0 2.0 101.7 6.48
1.0 26.40 62351 41.96 8.13 3.0 1.7 102.1 6.49
1.5 26.34 62254 41.89 8.12 3.0 0.8 101.9 6.49
2.0 26.39 62450 42.04 8.12 3.1 0.9 102.0 6.48
TP6 29.04.2019 2.5 26.29 62467 42.05 8.11 3.1 1.5 101.9 6.49
3.0 26.24 62541 42.11 8.11 3.2 1.4 102.1 6.50
3.5 26.08 62568 42.14 8.09 3.3 1.2 102.2 6.53
4.0 25.86 62495 42.09 8.07 3.8 1.3 102.0 6.54
4.5 27.39 65567 44.41 8.17 4.2 1.0 104.6 6.46
5.0 28.08 65459 44.30 8.31 4.8 1.5 104.2 6.37
TP7 29.04.2019 0.0 26.45 62315 41.93 8.27 3.1 0.2 102.2 6.50
0.5 26.46 62314 41.93 8.24 3.3 0.8 102.3 6.50

1.0 26.44 62347 41.96 8.23 3.4 1.0 102.3 6.50
1.5 26.38 62441 42.03 8.21 3.5 1.3 102.0 6.49
2.0 26.27 62462 42.05 8.19 3.6 0.9 102.0 6.50
2.5 26.16 62510 42.09 8.17 3.5 1.9 102.1 6.51
3.0 26.13 62546 42.12 8.16 3.5 2.0 102.3 6.53
3.5 25.95 62550 42.13 8.14 3.6 2.5 102.0 6.53
4.0 26.01 62641 42.19 8.13 3.8 1.0 102.6 6.56
4.5 27.04 63359 42.72 8.20 4.2 1.0 104.2 6.53
5.0 28.11 65414 44.26 8.37 5.5 1.7 104.7 6.40
0.0 27.00 62435 42.01 8.14 1.1 4.3 103.3 6.51
0.5 26.99 62449 42.02 8.07 1.1 1.7 103.3 6.51
1.0 26.90 62462 42.03 8.04 1.1 1.1 103.3 6.51
1.5 26.79 62498 42.06 8.02 1.2 0.7 103.3 6.52
2.0 26.58 62515 42.08 7.99 1.2 1.0 103.1 6.54
TP8 29.04.2019 2.5 26.29 62492 42.07 7.96 1.3 0.5 102.9 6.55
3.0 26.08 62464 42.06 7.92 1.4 1.4 103.3 6.60
3.5 26.16 62547 42.12 7.90 1.6 0.7 104.4 6.66
4.0 28.20 63494 42.78 8.08 2.0 0.8 108.3 6.66
4.5 28.38 65409 44.25 8.19 2.2 0.9 110.2 6.70
5.0 28.49 65410 44.25 8.24 2.7 1.3 110.6 6.72
0.0 27.00 62447 42.02 8.07 1.1 4.4 102.9 6.48
0.5 27.00 62447 42.02 8.07 1.1 4.3 102.9 6.48
1.0 26.97 62475 42.04 8.09 1.3 1.0 103.0 6.48
TP9 29.04.2019 1.5 26.96 62499 42.06 8.10 1.2 0.8 102.8 6.48
2.0 26.83 62677 42.20 8.10 1.3 1.3 102.8 6.49
2.5 26.67 62724 42.24 8.09 1.4 1.3 103.2 6.52
3.0 26.57 62723 42.24 8.08 1.4 0.6 103.4 6.55
3.5 26.44 62738 42.26 8.07 1.6 1.1 104.6 6.64

4.0 28.40 64938 43.89 8.21 2.0 0.4 109.3 6.66
4.5 28.75 65410 44.24 8.33 2.3 1.4 111.6 6.75
0.0 26.89 62653 42.18 8.10 2.4 31.9 102.8 6.48
0.5 27.03 62467 42.03 8.14 1.2 7.1 102.8 6.47
1.0 27.02 62496 42.06 8.14 1.2 3.0 103.0 6.48
1.5 27.02 62534 42.08 8.15 1.3 0.6 103.1 6.49
2.0 27.03 62623 42.15 8.16 1.4 0.8 103.2 6.49
TP10 29.04.2019
2.5 26.94 62812 42.30 8.16 1.4 1.0 103.5 6.52
3.0 26.82 62837 42.32 8.15 1.4 0.9 103.4 6.52
3.5 26.48 62774 42.28 8.12 1.6 0.7 105.0 6.66
4.0 27.39 62399 41.97 8.28 2.0 1.0 112.2 7.02
4.5 28.57 65291 44.15 8.35 2.1 0.8 112.8 6.85
0.0 27.60 62959 42.39 8.24 26.5 5.9 99.4 6.18
0.5 27.59 62993 42.42 8.25 26.9 4.5 99.3 6.18
1.0 27.60 63011 42.43 8.26 22.4 4.5 100.8 6.27
1.5 27.58 63013 42.43 8.27 12.0 4.1 101.6 6.32
2.0 27.58 63022 42.44 8.28 6.1 4.3 102.6 6.38
2.5 27.58 63025 42.44 8.28 3.6 3.0 103.0 6.41
TP11 02.05.2019
3.0 27.58 63027 42.44 8.28 3.3 2.1 103.1 6.42
3.5 27.66 63126 42.52 8.29 3.2 2.1 103.3 6.42
4.0 27.76 63181 42.56 8.30 3.1 1.7 103.2 6.40
4.5 27.82 63253 42.61 8.30 3.1 1.7 103.3 6.40
5.0 28.35 64068 43.22 8.34 3.5 2.1 107.0 6.55
5.5 30.49 66140 44.73 8.50 12.0 1.8 117.0 6.87
0.0 26.93 63062 42.49 8.10 0.0 16.4 99.9 6.28
TP12 29.04.2019 0.5 27.23 62689 42.20 8.17 1.7 1.9 103.2 6.47
1.0 27.16 62732 42.23 8.17 1.7 1.2 103.1 6.47
1.5 27.19 62724 42.22 8.17 1.3 1.2 103.1 6.46

2.0 27.09 62796 42.28 8.16 1.4 1.5 103.2 6.48
2.5 27.01 62837 42.32 8.16 1.3 1.5 103.4 6.50
3.0 26.92 62881 42.35 8.15 1.3 1.3 103.7 6.52
3.5 26.48 62778 42.29 8.12 1.5 1.9 105.1 6.67
4.0 27.39 64624 43.68 8.19 1.7 1.8 110.6 6.86
0.0 27.26 62689 42.20 8.16 0.1 5.3 103.4 6.48
0.5 27.26 62686 42.19 8.17 1.0 3.7 103.3 6.47
1.0 27.26 62685 42.19 8.18 1.2 1.6 103.2 6.47
1.5 27.22 62707 42.21 8.18 1.2 0.8 103.2 6.47
TP13 29.04.2019 2.0 27.17 62772 42.26 8.18 1.2 2.0 103.3 6.48
2.5 27.12 62825 42.30 8.18 1.3 1.6 103.6 6.50
3.0 26.94 62873 42.35 8.17 1.3 0.8 103.7 6.52
3.5 26.65 62768 42.27 8.16 1.3 1.3 104.2 6.59
4.0 28.10 64812 43.80 8.24 1.5 1.1 109.2 6.69
0.0 27.09 62873 42.34 8.13 7.5 13.1 100.8 6.33
0.5 27.22 62691 42.20 8.16 2.9 8.2 103.6 6.49
1.0 27.21 62682 42.19 8.17 1.8 3.2 103.6 6.50
1.5 27.16 62705 42.21 8.18 1.3 1.7 103.5 6.49
2.0 27.13 62716 42.22 8.18 1.3 1.0 103.5 6.49
TP14 29.04.2019
2.5 27.05 62748 42.25 8.18 1.2 1.1 103.6 6.51
3.0 26.78 62706 42.22 8.17 1.2 1.1 103.5 6.53
3.5 26.53 62664 42.20 8.14 1.2 0.7 106.2 6.73
4.0 28.18 65123 44.04 8.24 1.5 0.6 111.5 6.81
4.5 28.40 65048 43.97 8.33 1.6 1.2 114.1 6.95
0.0 27.12 62636 42.16 8.16 14.0 4.2 99.8 6.27
TP15 29.04.2019 0.5 27.20 62713 42.22 8.18 6.4 2.7 102.4 6.42
1.0 27.18 62722 42.22 8.19 2.6 1.6 103.2 6.47
1.5 27.15 62741 42.24 8.19 1.9 1.3 103.4 6.49

2.0 27.07 62731 42.23 8.19 1.7 1.0 103.3 6.49
2.5 27.00 62752 42.25 8.18 1.5 1.2 103.7 6.52
3.0 26.83 62737 42.25 8.17 1.4 1.1 104.1 6.57
3.5 26.72 62694 42.22 8.16 1.3 1.3 105.4 6.66
4.0 28.14 64640 43.66 8.27 1.6 1.8 112.0 6.86
0.0 26.95 62873 42.35 8.13 1.1 9.9 100.3 6.31
0.5 27.11 62718 42.22 8.18 1.2 3.2 103.5 6.50
1.0 27.09 62713 42.22 8.20 1.4 0.6 103.6 6.51
1.5 27.07 62714 42.22 8.20 1.5 1.5 103.9 6.52
TP16 29.04.2019 2.0 27.05 62717 42.22 8.20 1.6 1.8 103.8 6.52
2.5 27.01 62730 42.23 8.20 1.6 0.5 103.8 6.53
3.0 26.94 62752 42.25 8.20 1.6 0.9 104.0 6.55
3.5 26.90 62875 42.35 8.22 1.7 0.6 107.8 6.79
4.0 28.08 64713 43.72 8.32 1.9 0.9 117.7 7.22
0.0 26.96 62859 42.34 8.06 0.0 14.1 100.3 6.31
0.5 27.12 62713 42.22 8.21 1.0 9.8 103.4 6.49
1.0 27.09 62715 42.22 8.21 1.4 4.0 103.7 6.51
1.5 27.09 62719 42.22 8.21 1.5 1.7 103.9 6.52
TP17 29.04.2019
2.0 27.06 62735 42.24 8.21 1.7 0.7 104.0 6.53
2.5 27.01 62758 42.26 8.21 1.7 0.7 104.0 6.54
3.0 26.90 62757 42.26 8.20 1.8 1.7 104.3 6.57
3.5 26.71 62632 42.17 8.19 1.7 1.9 106.5 6.73
0.0 26.85 63036 42.47 8.19 1.0 5.7 100.2 6.31
0.5 27.13 62774 42.27 8.21 2.1 4.4 104.1 6.53
TP18 29.04.2019 1.0 27.12 62768 42.26 8.23 2.1 1.7 104.3 6.55
1.5 27.10 62772 42.26 8.23 2.1 0.6 104.3 6.55
2.0 27.03 62744 42.24 8.23 2.0 1.1 104.4 6.56
2.5 26.98 62727 42.23 8.23 1.9 1.5 104.4 6.57

3.0 26.89 62695 42.21 8.23 1.9 1.3 104.5 6.58
3.5 26.98 62711 42.22 8.24 1.9 1.7 107.4 6.76
0.0 27.03 62671 42.19 8.23 11.0 3.6 102.6 6.45
0.5 27.04 62687 42.20 8.23 3.0 4.0 104.2 6.55
1.0 27.02 62695 42.21 8.23 2.4 3.3 104.4 6.57
TP19 29.04.2019 1.5 26.95 62686 42.20 8.23 2.1 2.2 104.5 6.58
2.0 26.93 62624 42.16 8.22 2.0 1.7 104.6 6.59
2.5 26.85 62629 42.16 8.21 1.9 2.0 104.8 6.61
3.0 26.84 62627 42.16 8.21 1.8 1.3 104.8 6.61
0.0 26.93 62604 42.14 8.16 0.1 2.3 103.2 6.50
0.5 26.93 62607 42.14 8.17 1.1 1.3 104.4 6.58
1.0 26.93 62614 42.15 8.17 1.3 1.6 104.6 6.59
TP20 29.04.2019
1.5 26.93 62618 42.15 8.17 1.4 0.9 104.7 6.60
2.0 26.94 62620 42.15 8.17 1.4 1.3 104.6 6.58
2.5 26.94 62622 42.15 8.17 1.4 0.8 104.6 6.59
0.0 27.51 62731 42.22 8.16 0.6 5.8 103.7 6.47
0.5 27.24 62706 42.21 8.18 1.7 1.8 104.8 6.56
TP21 29.04.2019 1.0 27.32 62715 42.21 8.19 1.7 1.6 105.2 6.58
1.5 27.30 62707 42.21 8.19 1.9 1.4 105.3 6.59
2.0 27.32 62723 42.22 8.19 1.9 2.0 105.4 6.59
Intake Footprint
0.0 26.68 62676 42.20 8.20 1.0 5.5 103.8 6.57
0.5 26.68 62672 42.20 8.18 1.0 2.6 103.8 6.57
1.0 26.60 62673 42.20 8.17 1.0 2.3 103.7 6.56
FP1 29.04.2019
1.5 26.60 62681 42.21 8.16 1.1 1.0 103.5 6.55
2.0 26.55 62654 42.19 8.15 1.2 0.9 104.1 6.60
2.5 26.47 62644 42.18 8.14 1.2 0.7 104.7 6.65
3.0 26.49 62678 42.21 8.14 1.2 0.7 106.2 6.73

0.0 26.64 62622 42.16 8.29 1.2 0.9 103.1 6.53
0.5 26.66 62628 42.17 8.27 1.2 1.1 103.1 6.52
1.0 26.65 62630 42.17 8.26 1.2 1.3 103.1 6.52
FP2 29.04.2019
1.5 26.66 62633 42.17 8.25 1.1 1.7 103.1 6.52
2.0 26.66 62640 42.18 8.24 1.1 1.2 103.0 6.52
2.5 26.69 62640 42.17 8.23 1.9 2.4 103.2 6.52
0.0 26.59 62627 42.17 8.31 0.8 2.0 103.0 6.52
0.5 26.59 62627 42.17 8.27 0.8 1.4 103.0 6.52
1.0 26.59 62631 42.17 8.25 0.9 0.4 102.9 6.52
FP3 29.04.2019 1.5 26.58 62653 42.19 8.23 0.9 1.3 102.7 6.51
2.0 26.59 62680 42.21 8.22 1.0 1.7 104.8 6.63
2.5 26.57 62692 42.22 8.23 1.1 1.1 107.9 6.83
3.0 26.57 62696 42.22 8.23 1.1 0.8 109.2 6.92
0.0 26.48 62638 42.18 8.18 1.1 1.8 103.1 6.54
0.5 26.49 62635 42.18 8.15 1.1 1.1 103.2 6.55
1.0 26.47 62625 42.17 8.12 1.0 1.4 103.0 6.53
FP4 29.04.2019 1.5 26.44 62628 42.17 8.10 1.2 0.9 102.7 6.52
2.0 26.42 62639 42.18 8.09 1.1 0.8 102.3 6.50
2.5 26.42 62672 42.21 8.08 1.2 0.6 102.8 6.53
3.0 26.42 62677 42.21 8.09 1.2 1.4 105.0 6.67
0.0 26.57 62690 42.22 8.26 1.6 0.8 102.3 6.48
0.5 26.51 62687 42.22 8.23 1.6 1.3 102.1 6.48
1.0 26.50 62687 42.22 8.21 1.4 0.9 102.0 6.47
FP5 29.04.2019 1.5 26.43 62680 42.21 8.19 1.4 1.1 103.0 6.54
2.0 26.36 62663 42.20 8.19 1.3 1.3 105.8 6.73
2.5 26.37 62667 42.21 8.18 1.4 0.9 107.5 6.83
3.0 26.39 62668 42.20 8.18 1.4 1.2 108.3 6.88
0.0 26.51 62686 42.22 8.13 1.1 1.2 101.9 6.46

0.5 26.51 62688 42.22 8.05 1.1 1.3 101.9 6.46
1.0 26.51 62687 42.22 8.01 1.2 1.2 101.7 6.45
FP6 29.04.2019 1.5 26.49 62698 42.23 7.99 1.3 1.1 101.9 6.46
2.0 26.47 62690 42.22 7.98 1.3 0.9 102.1 6.48
2.5 26.38 62674 42.21 7.98 1.3 1.0 103.3 6.57
3.0 26.36 62701 42.23 7.99 1.3 0.7 105.9 6.73
oor i ates og or all ari e urvey tatio s
GPS Coordinates Log for all Marine Survey Stations
BRUVS stations
2018 Stations
BR_01 24.777574° 54.685372°
BR_02 24.772784° 54.677073°
BR_03 24.771545° 54.678733°
BR_04 24.770843° 54.676679°
BR_05 24.764558° 54.671277°
BR_06 24.756383° 54.664131°
BR_07 24.773755° 54.667113°
BR_08 24.757200° 54.655296°
BR_09 24.756281° 54.648375°
BR_10 24.774611° 54.659714°
BR_11 24.783360° 54.661148°
BR_12 24.780959° 54.652989°
BR_13 24.772120° 54.638641°
BR_14 24.787804° 54.646237°
BR_15 24.794598° 54.639654°
BR_16 24.801852° 54.634027°
BR_17 24.808850° 54.627949°

2019 Stations
TBRUV1 24.757843° 54.666180°
TBRUV2 24.774198° 54.672850°
TBRUV3 24.769898° 54.676247°

Drop Down Camera Stations
Marine Sampling Stations 2018
MAR_01 24.770849° 54.676639°
MAR_02 24.756275° 54.664172°
MAR_03 24.784612° 54.675147°
MAR_04 24.773727° 54.667108°
MAR_05 24.766477° 54.661185°
MAR_06 24.757024° 54.655281°
MAR_07 24.783285° 54.661136°
MAR_08 24.774888° 54.653328°
MAR_09 24.772150° 54.638721°
Nearshore Transect Stations 2018
NS1_A 24.780843° 54.688554°
NS1_B 24.780209° 54.687788°
NS1_C 24.779510° 54.687061°
NS1_D 24.778653° 54.686323°
NS1_E 24.777855° 54.685596°
NS1_F 24.777116° 54.684858°
NS1_G 24.776308° 54.684066°
NS1_H 24.775530° 54.683328°
NS1_I 24.774742° 54.682449°
NS1_J 24.773907° 54.681741°
NS2_A 24.767899° 54.673481°
NS2_B 24.767077° 54.673053°

NS2_C 24.766328° 54.672532°
NS2_D 24.765372° 54.671816°
NS2_E 24.764525° 54.671208°
NS2_F 24.763658° 54.670633°
NS2_G 24.762821° 54.670112°
NS2_H 24.761894° 54.669570°
NS2_I 24.761136° 54.668995°
NS2_J 24.760196° 54.668334°
NS3_A 24.756917° 54.653903°
NS3_B 24.756741° 54.652936°
NS3_C 24.756603° 54.651808°
NS3_D 24.756436° 54.650593°
NS3_E 24.756318° 54.649616°
NS3_F 24.756239° 54.648423°
NS3_G 24.756121° 54.647381°
NS3_H 24.756121° 54.646318°
NS3_I 24.756042° 54.645298°
NS3_J 24.755887° 54.644034°
Breakwater Transect Stations 2018
BW1_A 24.787066° 54.683382°
BW1_B 24.787174° 54.682146°
BW1_C 24.787282° 54.681082°
BW1_D 24.787548° 54.679639°
BW1_E 24.787716° 54.678163°
BW1_F 24.787903° 54.676894°

BW1_G 24.788090° 54.675592°
BW2_A 24.790454° 54.666282°
BW2_B 24.790789° 54.663439°
BW2_C 24.791144° 54.660770°
BW2_D 24.791558° 54.657906°
BW2_E 24.791932° 54.655106°
BW2_F 24.792227° 54.652698°
BW2_G 24.792582° 54.649768°
BW2_H 24.792838° 54.647533°
Intake Transect Stations 2018
IN_A 24.771205° 54.679086°
IN_B 24.771520° 54.678673°
IN_C 24.771865° 54.678283°
IN_D 24.772131° 54.677881°
IN_E 24.772417° 54.677458°
IN_F 24.772742° 54.676992°
Pipeline Stations 2018
PL1_A 24.774594° 54.659767°
PL1_B 24.775106° 54.659767°
PL1_C 24.774569° 54.660342°
PL1_D 24.774131° 54.659729°
PL1_E 24.774599° 54.659208°
PL1_F 24.775619° 54.659815°
PL1_G 24.774555° 54.660852°
PL1_H 24.773599° 54.659642°

PL1_I 24.774623° 54.658671°
PL2_A 24.780974° 54.652995°
PL2_B 24.781534° 54.653018°
PL2_C 24.780928° 54.653435°
PL2_D 24.780539° 54.652931°
PL2_E 24.781002° 54.652350°
PL2_F 24.782061° 54.653050°
PL2_G 24.780894° 54.653989°
PL2_H 24.779998° 54.652877°
PL2_I 24.781061° 54.651764°
PL3_A 24.787744° 54.646225°
PL3_B 24.788218° 54.646274°
PL3_C 24.787681° 54.646757°
PL3_D 24.787346° 54.646198°
PL3_E 24.787785° 54.645710°
PL3_F 24.788750° 54.646339°
PL3_G 24.787607° 54.647272°
PL3_H 24.786795° 54.646149°
PL3_I 24.787834° 54.645081°
PL4_A 54.645081° 54.639747°
PL4_B 24.795094° 54.639807°
PL4_C 24.794591° 54.640252°
PL4_D 24.794178° 54.639617°
PL4_E 24.794715° 54.639183°
PL4_F 24.795507° 54.639872°

PL4_G 24.794532° 54.640822°
PL4_H 24.793705° 54.639509°
PL4_I 24.794744° 54.638695°
PL5_A 24.801722° 54.634008°
PL5_B 24.802146° 54.634105°
PL5_C 24.801693° 54.634545°
PL5_D 24.801250° 54.633850°
PL5_E 24.801752° 54.633492°
PL5_F 24.802604° 54.634252°
PL5_G 24.801659° 54.635104°
PL5_H 24.800762° 54.633699°
PL5_I 24.801728° 54.632923°
PL6_A 24.808939° 54.627844°
PL6_B 24.809366° 54.627818°
PL6_C 24.808932° 54.628409°
PL6_D 24.808430° 54.627818°
PL6_E 24.808903° 54.627362°
PL6_F 24.809829° 54.627823°
PL6_G 24.808947° 54.628876°
PL6_H 24.807888° 54.627807°
PL6_I 24.808854° 54.626868°
DDV Stations 2019
SR1 24.751060° 54.647280°
SR2 24.779163° 54.683097°
SR3 24.784610° 54.651538°

SR4 24.768632° 54.635985°
TP1-End 24.781698° 54.654000°
TP2 24.780652° 54.654939°
TP3 24.779619° 54.655869°
TP5 24.777543° 54.657739°
TP7 24.775466° 54.659611°
TP9 24.773292° 54.661395°
TP11 24.771081° 54.663127°
TP13 24.768869° 54.664859°
TP15 24.766658° 54.666581°
TP17 24.764446° 54.668333°
TP19 24.762226° 54.670055°
TP21 24.760023° 54.671776°
TP-Start 24.774728° 54.660281°
TPSW1 24.767389° 54.666014°
TSD1 24.778222° 54.657133°
TSD2 24.763688° 54.668930°
FP1 24.763790° 54.671910°
FP2 24.762420° 54.672520°
FP3 24.763260° 54.672990°
FP4 24.763500° 54.672030°
FP5 24.763020° 54.672560°
FP6N 24.763370° 54.673340°

Ecology Stations:
Ecology Stations 2018
Eco_01 24.770849° 54.676639°
Eco_02 24.756275° 54.664172°
Eco_03 24.773727° 54.667108°
Eco_04 24.757024° 54.655281°
Eco_05 24.783285° 54.661136°
Eco_06 24.772150° 54.638721°
Eco_3a 24.772365° 54.666751°
Eco_5a 24.783598° 54.661835°
Benthic Stations 2019
SR1 24.751060° 54.647280°
SR2 24.779163° 54.683097°
SR3 24.784610° 54.651538°
SR4 24.768632° 54.635985°
TP1-End 24.781698° 54.654000°
TP11 24.771081° 54.663127°
TP-Start 24.774728° 54.660281°
TPSW1 24.767389° 54.666014°
TSD1 24.778222° 54.657133°
TSD2 24.763688° 54.668930°
FP1 24.763790° 54.671910°
FP2 24.762420° 54.672520°

FP3 24.763260° 54.672990°
FP4 24.763500° 54.672030°
FP5 24.763020° 54.672560°
FP6N 24.763370° 54.673340°
Fish Eggs and Larvae Stations 2019
FP6N 24.763370° 54.673340°
TZ1 24.763882° 54.672409°
TZ2 24.762672° 54.672939°
TZ3 24.762121° 54.671698°
Intertidal Infauna Stations 2019
HIT 1 & 2 24.761990° 54.673750°
MIT 1 & 2 24.762040° 54.673650°
HIT 1 & 2 24.762110° 54.673550°

GPS Coordinates for all Survey Station 2019
Drop Down
Station Name Latitude Longitude Sonde Seawater Sediment Infauna Zooplankton BRUV
Camera
Sensitive Receptor
SR1 24.751060° 54.647280°
SR2 24.779163° 54.683097°
SR3 24.784610° 54.651538°
SR4 24.768632° 54.635985°
Outfall Path
TP1-End 24.781698° 54.654000°
TP2 24.780652° 54.654939°
TP3 24.779619° 54.655869°
TP4 24.778584° 54.656801°
TP5 24.777543° 54.657739°
TP6 24.776507° 54.658674°
TP7 24.775466° 54.659611°
TP8 24.774398° 54.660534°
TP9 24.773292° 54.661395°
TP10 24.772187° 54.662266°
TP11 24.771081° 54.663127°
TP12 24.769975° 54.663998°
TP13 24.768869° 54.664859°
TP14 24.767763° 54.665720°
TP15 24.766658° 54.666581°
TP16 24.765561° 54.667452°
TP17 24.764446° 54.668333°
TP18 24.763331° 54.669184°
TP19 24.762226° 54.670055°
TP20 24.761119° 54.670906°
TP21 24.760023° 54.671776°
TP-Start 24.774728° 54.660281°
TPSW1 24.767389° 54.666014°
TSD1 24.778222° 54.657133°
TSD2 24.763688° 54.668930°
Intake Footprint
FP1 24.763790° 54.671910°
FP2 24.762420° 54.672520°
FP3 24.763260° 54.672990°
FP4 24.763500° 54.672030°
FP5 24.763020° 54.672560°
FP6N 24.763370° 54.673340°
Baited Remote Underwater Video
TBRUV1 24.757843° 54.666180°
TBRUV2 24.774198° 54.672850°
TBRUV3 24.769898° 54.676247°
Zooplankton
TZ1 24.763882° 54.672409°
TZ2 24.762672° 54.672939°
TZ3 24.762121° 54.671698°
Intertidal
HIT 24.761990° 54.673750°
MIT 24.762040° 54.673650°
LIT 24.762110° 54.673550°
APPENDIX F – MARINE SEDIMENT ANALYSIS (2018
& 2019)
Particle Size Analysis Results for Marine Sediment 2018
MAR‐01
Test Sieve Size (mm) Passing (%)
4.75 100
2.00 99
0.850 99
0.600 99
0.425 98
0.300 98
0.150 90
0.075 23
0.045 10
0.029 9
0.017 7
0.012 6
0.008 5
0.004 3
0.002 2
MAR‐02
4.75 100
2.00 99
0.850 99
0.600 95
0.425 81
0.300 61
0.150 26
0.075 2
0.047 2
0.029 2
0.017 2
0.012 2
0.008 2
0.004 2
0.002 2
MAR_03
19.00 100
9.50 99
4.75 99
2.00 97
0.850 92
0.600 85
0.425 70
0.300 44
0.150 15
0.075 5
0.046 4
0.029 4
0.017 4
0.012 3
0.008 2
0.004 2
0.002 2
MAR_04
2.00 100
0.850 97
0.600 92
0.425 80
0.300 56
0.150 20
0.075 3
0.046 3
0.029 3
0.017 3
0.012 3
0.008 2
0.004 1
0.002 1
MAR_05
19.00 100
9.50 98
4.75 95
2.00 91
0.850 88
0.600 81
0.425 63
0.300 29
0.150 3
0.075 1
0.046 1
0.029 1
0.017 1
0.012 1
0.008 1
0.004 1
0.002 1
MAR_06
4.75 100
2.00 99
0.850 98
0.600 92
0.425 66
0.300 31
0.150 12
0.075 1
0.047 1
0.030 1
0.017 1
0.012 1
0.009 1
0.004 1
0.002 1
MAR_07
4.75 100
2.00 99
0.850 96
0.600 91
0.425 80
0.300 63
0.150 27
0.075 3
0.047 3
0.030 3
0.017 3
0.012 2
0.009 2
0.004 2
0.002 2
MAR_08
4.75 100
2.00 99
0.850 97
0.600 92
0.425 75
0.300 34
0.150 5
0.075 3
0.047 3
0.029 3
0.017 3
0.012 3
0.008 3
0.004 3
0.002 3
MAR_09
4.75 100
2.00 99
0.850 99
0.600 97
0.425 91
0.300 70
0.150 3
0.075 2
0.047 2
0.029 2
0.017 2
0.012 2
0.008 2
0.004 2
0.002 2
Particle Size Analysis Results for Marine Sediment 2019
Particle Size Analysis for Marine Sediment 2019
TP1-End
Test Sieve Size Passing

(mm) (%)
9.50 100
4.75 99
2.00 99
0.850 97
0.600 95
0.425 90
0.300 72
0.150 14
0.075 4
0.046 3
0.029 3
0.017 3
0.012 3
0.008 3
0.004 3
0.002 3
TSD1

(mm) (%)
0.850 100
0.600 99
0.425 95
0.300 87
0.150 28
0.075 5
0.046 4
0.029 3
0.017 3
0.012 3
0.008 3
0.004 3
0.002 3
TSD2

(mm) (%)
9.50 100
4.75 98
2.00 95
0.850 87
0.600 76
0.425 55
0.300 26
0.150 8
0.075 2
0.047 2
0.029 2
0.017 2
0.012 2
0.008 2
0.004 2
0.002 1
SR1

(mm) (%)
2.00 100
0.850 99
0.600 98
0.425 92
0.300 78
0.150 14
0.075 4
0.047 2
0.029 2
0.017 2
0.012 2
0.008 2
0.004 2
0.002 1
SR2

(mm) (%)
9.500 100
4.750 99
2.000 98
0.850 95
0.600 90
0.425 78
0.300 51
0.150 11
0.075 2
0.047 2
0.029 2
0.017 2
0.012 2
0.008 2
0.004 2
0.002 1
SR3

(mm) (%)
4.75 100
2.00 98
0.850 93
0.600 87
0.425 70
0.300 36
0.150 7
0.075 5
0.046 4
0.029 3
0.017 3
0.012 3
0.008 3
0.004 3
0.002 3
SR4

(mm) (%)
4.75 100
2.00 98
0.085 95
0.600 89
0.425 62
0.300 24
0.150 7
0.075 4
0.046 4
0.029 3
0.017 3
0.012 3
0.008 3
0.004 3
0.002 3
Analytical Sediment Sample Results Certificates 2018
Analytical Sediment Raw Results 2019
Analytical Laboratory Results for Marine Sediment 2019
Sampling Locations
Detection
Parameters Units TP1-
Limit SR2 TSD2 SR1N SR3 SR4 TSD1
End
Metals
Aluminium as Al mg/kg 0.10 398.43 550.74 320.2 327.4 406.7 341.17 544.41
Arsenic as As mg/kg 0.10 - - - - - - -
Cadmium as Cd mg/kg 0.10 1.97 2.23 1.85 0.62 0.60 1.03 1.76
Chromium as Cr mg/kg 0.10 2.91 4.17 2.67 2.41 3.84 3.11 4.23
Copper as Cu mg/kg 0.10 - - - - - - -
Iron as Fe mg/kg 0.10 468.13 1134.06 444.78 358.88 582.74 368.13 754.12
Lead as Pb mg/kg 0.10 - - - - - - -
Manganese as Mn mg/kg 0.10 16.12 32.77 18.12 10.7 17.19 12.85 28.09
Mercury mg/kg 0.010 - - - - - - -
Nickel as Ni mg/kg 0.10 2.18 4.07 1.44 1.78 3.05 1.76 4.23
Zinc as Zn mg/kg 0.10 2.6 3.56 1.23 - 2.63 1.97 10.12
Inorganics
Nitrate Nitrogen mg/kg 0.50 2.63 2.42 0.63 3.77 9.04 4.31 4.71
Nitrite Nitrogen mg/kg 0.50 - - - - - - -
Ammonia Nitrogen mg/kg 0.25 9 7.75 2.3 12.00 22.50 12.00 14.00
Ammonium mg/kg 0.32 11.6 9.97 2.96 15.40 28.90 15.40 18.00
Ammonia mg/kg 0.30 10.9 9.41 2.79 14.60 27.30 14.60 17.00
Total Nitrogen mg/kg 5.00 - - - 13.03 12.18 12.63 13.31
Phosphate mg/kg 0.50 0.99 1.27 1.07 7.97 9.39 0.82 0.73
Total Organic Carbon % 0.10 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.3
Sulfate mg/kg 0.50 2789.8 2089 1848 1886.31 2004.23 1666.98 1595.68
Sulphide mg/kg 10.00 - - - - - - -
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH)
VPH C5-C10 mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
EPH C10-C40 mg/kg 50 - - - - - - -
Sampling Locations
Detection
End
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH)
Acenaphthene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Acenaphthylene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Antheracene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Benzo (a) anthracene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Benzo (a)Pyrene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Benzo (b)fluoranthene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Benzo (g,h,i) perylene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Benzo (K) fluoranthene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Chrysene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Dibenzo (a,h) anthracene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Fluroanthene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Fluorene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Indeno ( 1,2,3-c,d) Pyrene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Naphathalene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Phenanthalene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Pyrene mg/kg 0.01 - - - - - - -
Phenols
2,4,5-Trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2,4-Dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2,4-Dimethylphenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2-Chlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2-Methylphenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2-Nitrophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
4-Methylphenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - 0.72 - -
Sampling Locations
Detection
End
4-Nitrophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
Pentachlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
2,6-Dichlorophenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - - - -
3-Methylphenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - 0.65 - -
Phenol mg/kg 0.05 - - - - 0.36 - -
APPENDIX G – MARINE ECOLOGY RESULTS
Raw Data for Zooplankton Abundance Counts 2018
All in counts per ml
Phylum Class Species Zoo_1 Zoo_2 Zoo_3 Zoo_4 Zoo_5 Zoo_6
Mollusca Gastropod Limacina bulimoides 8 2 4 14
Mollusca Gastropod Atlanta sp. juv. 2 8 4 14
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_01 4 2 2 2 1 11
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_03 3 3 2 3 11
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_04 4 3 7
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_06 2 2
Mollusca Plecypod Bivalvia sp 2 2 2 6
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Favella adriatica 2 4 4 4 2 16
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Favella campanula 2 2 2 6
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Favella ehrenbergi 4 4
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinnopsis gracilis 2 4 4 6 6 22
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinnopsis failakkaensis 2 2 2 6
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinnopsis baltica 2 2
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinnopsis parva 2 2 4 8
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinnopsis radix 2 2 2 3 9
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinopsis_01 2 5 2 3 2 4 18
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinopsis_02 2 2 1 2 2 9
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinopsis_03 3 1 1 6 11
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinopsis_04 1 2 1 4
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinopsis_05 7 4 11
Ciliophora Tintinopsis Tintinopsis_06 2 2
Arthropoda Copepod Acrocalanus longicornis 8 24 4 4 20 60
Arthropoda Copepod Acrocalanus gibber 2 2 10 14
Arthropoda Copepod Centropages furcatus 4 20 6 30
Arthropoda Copepod Oithona plumifera 6 14 2 22
Arthropoda Copepod Oithona similis 10 4 22 36
Arthropoda Copepod Oithona brevicornis 2 22 2 26
Arthropoda Copepod Paracalanus parvus 6 50 2 12 70
Arthropoda Copepod Copepod_01 2 10 3 2 2 7 26
Arthropoda Copepod Copepod_02 2 12 2 3 8 27
Arthropoda Copepod Copepod_05 3 8 2 12 25
Arthropoda Copepod Copepod_06 18 4 22
Arthropoda Copepod Copepod_07 6 4 10
Arthropoda Copepod Copepod_08 4 4
Arthropoda Ostracod Ostracod sp. 24 4 2 30
Arthropoda Decapod Larvae Decapod Larvae 6 2 2 10
Foraminiferan Retaria Foraminiferan sp. 2 2 4
Crustacea Nauplia Nauplia sp. 10 12 10 2 4 6 44
Annelida Polychaete Larvae Polychaete Larvae 2 2 4 2 10
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularia sicula 20 120 2 2 30 50 224
Chordata Appendicularian Oikopleura dioica 20 80 2 20 30 152
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_01 20 60 5 2 15 40 142
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_04 2 70 2 12 20 106
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_05 4 30 7 30 71
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_06 2 50 10 62
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_07 4 30 10 44
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_08 20 20
Chordata Appendicularian Appendicularian_09 60 60
Nematoda Nematode Nematode 12 12
Cnidaria Medusa Medusa 6 6
195 884 90 48 156 486 1859
Raw Data for Fish Eggs and Larvae Abundance Counts 2019
Phylum Class Species Ben_1 Ben_2 Ben_3 Ben_4 Ben_5 Ben_6
Annelida Polychaeta Prionospio pinnata 3 4 2 2 5 16
Annelida Polychaeta Glycera longipinis 2 1 3
Annelida Polychaeta Lumbriconereis notocirrata 1 2 4 3 7 17
Annelida Polychaeta Nephtys polybranchia 4 3 1 8 2 18
Annelida Polychaeta Hesione pantherina 2 4 7 1 14
Annelida Polychaeta Phyllodoce malmgreni 3 4 7
Annelida Polychaeta Ancistrosyllis parva 1 4 4 9
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_01 4 2 2 2 2 1 13
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_06 2 1 2 1 3 9
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_07 4 1 1 2 8
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_08 2 2 4
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_09 1 1
Arthropoda Amphipod Ampelisca typica 1 2 1 4
Arthropoda Amphipod Ampelisca brevicornis 3 3
Arthropoda Amphipod Gammarus locusta 9 9
Arthropoda Amphipod Ampithoe rubricata 4 1 5
Arthropoda Amphipod Paracaprella pusilla. L 2 5 2 9
Arthropoda Amphipod Amphipod_01 2 1 1 5 2 11
Arthropoda Amphipod Amphipod_02 2 1 3
Arthropoda Amphipod Amphipod_03 6 6
Arthropoda Ostracod Conchoecia or Euconchoecia 2 2
Arthropoda Ostracod Loxoconcha lilljeborgii 1 1
Arthropoda Ostracod Tanella gracilis 1 1 2 4
Arthropoda Cumacean Bodotria pulchella 1 1 1 3
Arthropoda Cumacean Iphinoe crassipes 1 1
Arthropoda Cumacean Iphinoe maculata 1 1
Arthropoda Cumacean Iphinoe tenella 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Portunus Sanguinolentus 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Podophthalmus vigil 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Charybdis natator 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Portunus pelagicus 1 1
Mollusca Bivalve Chlamys singaporina 3 2 1 6
Mollusca Bivalve Placenta placenta 1 1 2
Mollusca Bivalve Dosinia exasperata 2 4 1 7
Mollusca Bivalve Gafrarium sp. 2 1 1 1 2 1 8
Mollusca Bivalve Lioconcha castrensis 3 1 4
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_01 2 1 1 3 2 3 12
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_02 1 1 2 1 2 7
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_03 1 1 2 1 5
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_04 2 1 2 5
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_05 2 2
Mollusca Gastropod Lottia septiformis 1 2 1 4
Mollusca Gastropod Acmaea subrugosa 1 1 5 3 10
Mollusca Gastropod Nerita undata 2 2 4
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_01 2 1 1 1 2 1 8
Echinodermata Ophiuroid Ophionotus victoriae 8 2 1 1 8 2 22
Crustacea Anomuran Pachycheles natalensis 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Petrolisthes ornatus 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Pisidia dehaanii 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Coenobita scaevola 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Clibanarius virescens 1 1
Crustacea Penaeid Metapenaeopsis stridulans 1 1 2
Crustacea Penaeid Parapenaeopsis stylifera 1 1
Crustacea Penaeid Melicertus canaliculatus 1 1
73 41 34 48 133 38 367
45 Taxa
Raw Data for Phytoplankton Abundance Counts 2018
All in counts per ml
Phylum Class Species Phyto_1 Phyto_2 Phyto_3 Phyto_4 Phyto_5 Phyto_6
Diatom Navicula Navicula cuspidata 8 6 4 6 12 10 46
Diatom Navicula Navicula peregrine 6 6 4 6 8 8 38
Diatom Navicula Navicula distans 6 4 2 4 8 8 32
Diatom Navicula Navicula monilifera 4 2 2 2 4 2 16
Diatom Navicula Navicula_01 2 3 4 2 3 2 16
Diatom Navicula Navicula_02 4 3 2 1 2 2 14
Diatom Navicula Navicula_03 2 2 2 1 2 9
Diatom Navicula Navicula_04 1 2 2 5
Diatom Navicula Navicula_05 2 2
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus centralis 100 60 40 2 10 4 216
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus subtilis 100 40 30 8 6 184
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_01 60 10 5 1 5 2 83
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_02 20 20 15 1 1 2 59
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_03 20 5 5 1 1 32
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_04 30 25 5 1 1 62
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_05 10 20 1 31
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_06 14 20 34
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_07 24 24
Diatom Coscinodiscus Coscinodiscus_08 22 22
Diatom Gyrosigma Gyrosigma balticum 2 6 8 2 6 6 30
Diatom Plagiotrosis Plagiotrosis lepidoptera 4 6 8 18
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosgma directum 8 50 40 2 2 4 106
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma elogatum 6 40 30 2 2 80
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma_01 2 1 4 2 1 4 14
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma_02 2 11 3 3 2 4 25
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma_03 1 7 1 3 3 15
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma_04 6 9 8 2 25
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma_05 5 5 6 16
Diatom Pleurosigma Pleurosigma_06 1 1
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia lorenziana 4 12 16 32
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia sigma 2 4 6 12
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia closterium 4 2 6
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia_01 1 1 4 6 1 13
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia_02 1 1 2 3 2 9
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia_03 2 4 2 8
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia_04 2 10 1 13
Diatom Nitzchia Nitzchia_05 5 2 7
Dinoflagellata Ceriatum Ceratium furca 18 20 16 32 18 22 126
Dinoflagellata Ceriatum Ceratium triops 20 10 30
Dinoflagellata Ceriatum Ceratium macroceros 12 16 28
Dinoflagellata Ceriatum Ceratium inflatum 70 60 4 16 150
Dinoflagellata Protoperidinium Protoperidinium diabolum 8 2 10
Dinoflagellata Protoperidinium Protoperidinium_01 6 4 2 12
Dinoflagellata Protoperidinium Protoperidinium_04 3 1 4
Dinoflagellata Protoperidinium Protoperidinium_05 5 5
Eukaryota Phacus Phacus_01 1 3 1 2 2 10 19
Eukaryota Phacus Phacus_04 1 3 4 2 10
Eukaryota Phacus Phacus_05 2 2 5 9
Eukaryota Phacus Phacus_06 2 2
Eukaryota Rhodomonas Rhodomonas_01 2 1 1 4
Eukaryota Rhodomonas Rhodomonas_02 4 10 1 15
Eukaryota Rhodomonas Rhodomonas_03 6 3 9
Eukaryota Rhodomonas Rhodomonas_04 4 4 8
Eukaryota Rhodomonas Rhodomonas_05 4 4
Eukaryota Melosira Melosira moniliformis 8 8
Eukaryota Melosira Melosira_01 2 5 7
Eukaryota Melosira Melosira_02 2 10 12
Eukaryota Melosira Melosira_03 6 6
Cyanobacteira Chrorococcus Crorococcus minimus 2 2
Green Algae Actinastrum Actinastrum_01 1 3 2 6
Green Algae Actinastrum Actinastrum_02 2 3 2 7
Green Algae Actinastrum Actinastrum_03 5 4 9
Green Algae Actinastrum Actinastrum_04 5 5
Green Algae Actinastrum Actinastrum_05 1 1
550 522 362 124 247 160 1965
Raw Data for Benthic Abundance Counts 2018
Phylum Class Species Ben_1 Ben_2 Ben_3 Ben_4 Ben_5 Ben_6
Annelida Polychaeta Prionospio pinnata 3 4 2 2 5 16
Annelida Polychaeta Lumbriconereis notocirrata 1 2 4 3 7 17
Annelida Polychaeta Hesione pantherina 2 4 7 1 14
Annelida Polychaeta Phyllodoce malmgreni 3 4 7
Annelida Polychaeta Ancistrosyllis parva 1 4 4 9
Arthropoda Amphipod Ampelisca typica 1 2 1 4
Arthropoda Amphipod Ampelisca brevicornis 3 3
Arthropoda Amphipod Gammarus locusta 9 9
Arthropoda Amphipod Ampithoe rubricata 4 1 5
Arthropoda Amphipod Paracaprella pusilla. L 2 5 2 9
Arthropoda Amphipod Amphipod_01 2 1 1 5 2 11
Arthropoda Amphipod Amphipod_02 2 1 3
Arthropoda Ostracod Conchoecia or Euconchoecia 2 2
Arthropoda Ostracod Loxoconcha lilljeborgii 1 1
Arthropoda Ostracod Tanella gracilis 1 1 2 4
Arthropoda Cumacean Bodotria pulchella 1 1 1 3
Arthropoda Cumacean Iphinoe crassipes 1 1
Arthropoda Cumacean Iphinoe maculata 1 1
Arthropoda Cumacean Iphinoe tenella 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Podophthalmus vigil 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Charybdis natator 1 1
Arthropoda Brachyuran Portunus pelagicus 1 1
Mollusca Bivalve Chlamys singaporina 3 2 1 6
Mollusca Bivalve Placenta placenta 1 1 2
Mollusca Bivalve Dosinia exasperata 2 4 1 7
Mollusca Bivalve Gafrarium sp. 2 1 1 1 2 1 8
Mollusca Bivalve Lioconcha castrensis 3 1 4
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_01 2 1 1 3 2 3 12
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_02 1 1 2 1 2 7
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_03 1 1 2 1 5
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_04 2 1 2 5
Mollusca Bivalve Bivalve_05 2 2
Mollusca Gastropod Lottia septiformis 1 2 1 4
Mollusca Gastropod Nerita undata 2 2 4
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_01 2 1 1 1 2 1 8
Echinodermata Ophiuroid Ophionotus victoriae 8 2 1 1 8 2 22
Crustacea Anomuran Pachycheles natalensis 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Petrolisthes ornatus 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Coenobita scaevola 1 1
Crustacea Anomuran Clibanarius virescens 1 1
Crustacea Penaeid Metapenaeopsis stridulans 1 1 2
Crustacea Penaeid Parapenaeopsis stylifera 1 1
Crustacea Penaeid Melicertus canaliculatus 1 1
73 41 34 48 133 38 367
45 Taxa
Raw Data for Benthic Abundance Counts 2019
Phylum Class Species SR1 SR2 SR3 SR4TP1 EndTSD1 TP‐START TP11 TPSW1 TSD2 FP1 FP2 FP3 FP4 FP5 FP6 total
Annelida Polychaeta Capitella capitata 2 5 3 4 3 2 1 1 1 3 4 2 1 2 3 19
Annelida Polychaeta Prionospio pinnata 1 2 3 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 11
Annelida Polychaeta Flabelligera affinis 1 3 4 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 1 12
Annelida Polychaeta Glycera longipinis 3 1 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 7
Annelida Polychaeta Sabella penicillus 2 2 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 2 9
Annelida Polychaeta Maldanella capensis 1 1 2 2 1 3
Annelida Polychaeta Phyllodoce malmgreni 1 2 1 1 4
Annelida Polychaeta Hesione pantherina 1 0
Annelida Polychaeta Eunice tentaculata 2 2 3 1 1 7
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_01 2 2 1 4 1 3 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 2 2 3 12
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_02 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 10
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_03 1 4 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 13
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_04 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 6
Arthropoda Amphiod Ampelisca tenuicornis 2 1 3
Arthropoda Amphiod Ampelisca typica 1 2 2 1 1 1
Arthropoda Amphiod Gammarus salinus 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 5
Arthropoda Amphiod Ampithoe rubricata 0
Arthropoda Amphiod Leptocheirus pilosus 1 1 2
Arthropoda Amphiod Nannonyx goesi 2 2
Arthropoda Amphiod Paracaprella pusilla 1 1 2
Arthropoda Amphiod Amphipod_01 1 2 1 3 7
Arthropoda Amphiod Amphipod_02 1 1
Arthropoda Cumacea Iphinoe crassipes 1 1 2 1 2
ArthropodaMalacostraca Apseudes latreillii 3 2 1 6
ArthropodaMalacostraca Iphinoe crassipes 2 2
Mollusca Pelecypod Gari elangata 4 2 4 4 3 2 3 2 1 3 4 5 4 6 3 2 19
Mollusca Pelecypod Donax cuneatus 2 1 2 3 4 7 1 2 3 3 1 2 5 3 2 3 22
Mollusca Pelecypod Mactra laevis 2 1 3 2 4 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 15
Mollusca Pelecypod Lucina victorialis 2 3 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 6
Mollusca Pelecypod Fragum fragum 2 2 4 3 3 5 1 1 2 1 19
Mollusca Pelecypod Pinguitellina pinguis 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 1 9
Mollusca Pelecypod Lioconcha castrensis 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 4
Mollusca Pelecypod Brachiodontes variabilis 1 2 1 4
Mollusca Pelecypod Codakia punctata 5 3 2 3 13
Mollusca Pelecypod Donax incurnatus 2 1 2 5
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_01 1 2 3 4 3 5 1 1 2 1 4 1 1 4 1 2 19
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_02 2 4 2 2 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 4 16
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_03 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 3 3 8
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_04 1 2 3 1 3 2 2 1 2
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_05 1 1 1 2 0
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_06 2 1 0
Mollusca Gastropod Turritella attenuata 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 3 1 2 1 12
Mollusca Gastropod Thais savignyi 1 1 1 0
Mollusca Gastropod Terebralia palustris 2 1 3
Mollusca Gastropod Nassarius glans 1 1
Mollusca Gastropod Terebra subulata 2 2 1 3 8
Mollusca Gastropod Epitonium pulchellum 1 1
Mollusca Gastropod Eunaticina papilla 2 2
Mollusca Gastropod Gastropod_05 1 2 1 4
Mollusca Bivalvia Saccostrea cuccullata 1 3 2 1 2 3 5
Mollusca Bivalvia Tellina spp. 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 4
chinodermatHolothuriida Holothuria scabra 1 1
Crustacea Penaeid Metapenaeopsis stridulans 1 1
Chordata Fish Eggs Fish Eggs 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 2
Raw Data for Benthic ntertida Counts 2019
Phylum Class Species HIT1 HIT2 MIT1 MIT2 LIT1 LIT2 total
Annelida Polychaeta Capitella capitata 1 2 1 1 2 7
Annelida Polychaeta Prionospio pinnata 1 4 5
Annelida Polychaeta Flabelligera affinis 2 3 3 1 1 2 12
Annelida Polychaeta Sabella penicillus 2 1 2 4 1 10
Annelida Polychaeta Amphitrites sp. 1 1
Annelida Polychaeta Polychaete_03 1 1 1 3
Arthropoda Amphiod Ampelisca typica 0
Arthropoda Amphiod Gammarus salinus 1 2 1 4
Arthropoda Amphiod Ampithoe rubricata 2 2
Arthropoda Cumacea Iphinoe crassipes 1 1
Mollusca Pelecypod Gari elangata 5 4 3 2 3 2 19
Mollusca Pelecypod Donax cuneatus 1 2 4 3 2 1 13
Mollusca Pelecypod Mactra laevis 3 1 1 2 1 8
Mollusca Pelecypod Lucina victorialis 3 4 1 1 9
Mollusca Pelecypod Fragum fragum 2 1 1 2 6
Mollusca Pelecypod Pinguitellina pinguis 1 2 3
Mollusca Pelecypod Lioconcha ornata 2 2 1 1 1 2 9
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_01 2 1 1 1 1 1 7
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_02 3 1 1 1 2 8
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_03 1 3 1 2 7
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_06 1 1
Mollusca Pelecypod Plecypod_07 1 1
Mollusca Bivalvia Saccostrea cuccullata 1 1 2
Mollusca Bivalvia Tellina spp. 1 1
Mollusca Gastropod Turritella attenuata 2 1 1 2 6
Mollusca Gastropod Thais savignyi 2 1 3
Mollusca Gastropod Terebralia palustris 1 2 3
Mollusca Gastropod Rissoella atrimacula 3 2 1 6
Chordata Fish Eggs Fish Eggs 2 2 2 1 3 2 12
Photo Log for Drop Down Video Camera Survey 2018
Figure 1 BW1_A Figure 3 BW1_C Figure 5 BW1_E
Figure 2 BW1_B Figure 4 BW1_D Figure 6 BW1_F

Figure 7 BW1_G Figure 9 BW2_B Figure 11 BW2_D
Figure 8 BW2_A Figure 10 BW2_C Figure 12 BW2_E

Figure 13 BW2_F Figure 15 BW2_H Figure 17 NS1_B
Figure 14 BW2_G Figure 16 NS1_A Figure 18 NS1_C

Figure 19 NS1_D Figure 21 NS1_F Figure 23 NS1_H
Figure 20 NS1_E Figure 22 NS1_G Figure 24 NS1_I

Figure 25 NS1_J Figure 27 NS2_B Figure 29 NS2_D
Figure 26 NS2_A Figure 28 NS2_C Figure 30 NS2_E

Figure 31 NS2_F Figure 33 NS2_H Figure 35 NS2_J
Figure 32 NS2_G Figure 34 NS2_I Figure 36 NS3_A

Figure 37 NS3_B Figure 39 NS3_D Figure 41 NS3_F
Figure 38 NS3_C Figure 40 NS3_E Figure 42 NS3_G

Figure 43 NS3_H Figure 45 NS3_J Figure 47 PL1_B
Figure 48 PL1_C
Figure 44 NS3_I Figure 46 PL1_A
Figure 49 PL1_D Figure 51 PL1_F Figure 53 PL1_H
Figure 50 PL1_E Figure 52 PL1_G Figure 54 PL1_I

Figure 55 PL2_A Figure 57 PL2_C Figure 59 PL2_E
Figure 58 PL2_D Figure 60 PL2_F

Figure 56 PL2_B
Figure 61 PL2_G Figure 63 PL2_I Figure 65 PL3_B
Figure 62 PL2_H Figure 64 PL3_A Figure 66 PL3_C


Figure 74 PL4_B Figure 76 PL4_D Figure 78 PL4_F

Figure 79 PL4_G Figure 81 PL4_I Figure 83 PL5_B
Figure 80 PL4_H Figure 82 PL5_A Figure 84 PL5_C


Figure 92 PL6_B Figure 94 PL6_D Figure 96 PL6_F

Figure 97 PL6_G Figure 99 PL6_I Figure 101 IN_B
Figure 98 PL6_H Figure 100 IN_A Figure 102 IN_C

Figure 103 IN_D Figure 105 IN_F Figure 107 MAR_01
Figure 108 MAR_02

Figure 104 IN_E Figure 106 IN_G
Figure 109 MAR_03 Figure 111 MAR_05 Figure 113 MAR_07
Figure 110 MAR_04 Figure 112 MAR_06 Figure 114 MAR_08

Figure 115 MAR_09
APPENDIX H – HR WALLINGFORD MARINE
MODELLING
1. Hydrodynamic Modelling Survey Report (2019)
2. Sediment Transport Modelling Report (2019)
3. Addendum Report-further data collection and model analysis

(September 2019)
Taweelah IWP
Brine dispersion modelling and recirculation study
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 May 2019

Taweelah IWP
Document information
Document permissions Confidential - client
Project number DER6082
Project name Taweelah IWP
Report title Brine dispersion modelling and recirculation study
Report number RT001
Release number R03-00
Report date May 2019
Client ACWA Power Global Services LLC
Client representative Udyan Seth
Project manager Matthew Wood
Project director Elfed Jones
Document history
Date Release Prepared Approved Authorised Notes
17 May 2019 03-00 MJW TEJ TEJ Updated to address HDR comments
26 Apr 2019 02-00 MJW TEJ ICC Updated to address 5 Capitals' comments
17 Apr 2019 01-00 PMJ MJW *** Preliminary draft for information only
This unsigned document has not been formally checked and authorised for release. Until it has
been reviewed and signed off by qualified technical staff within HR Wallingford, this document
must not be considered complete or final.
© HR Wallingford Ltd
This report has been prepared for HR Wallingford’s client and not for any other person. Only our client should rely upon the contents of this report and any
methods or results which are contained within it and then only for the purposes for which the report was originally prepared. We accept no liability for any
loss or damage suffered by any person who has relied on the contents of this report, other than our client.
This report may contain material or information obtained from other people. We accept no liability for any loss or damage suffered by any person, including
our client, as a result of any error or inaccuracy in third party material or information which is included within this report.
To the extent that this report contains information or material which is the output of general research it should not be relied upon by any person, including
our client, for a specific purpose. If you are not HR Wallingford’s client and you wish to use the information or material in this report for a specific purpose,
you should contact us for advice.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Summary
The Abu Dhabi Department of Energy (DoE) is developing a seawater reverse osmosis
(SWRO) Independent Water Project (IWP) at the existing Taweelah Power and
Desalination Complex in Abu Dhabi. The plant will draw in seawater through an open
intake to produce 200 MIGD of potable water. Reject brine will be returned to sea through
a submerged multiport diffuser outfall.
DoE previously prepared an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which included marine modelling. This
was submitted to and approved by Abu Dhabi’s environmental regulator, EAD.
ACWA Power (ACWA) was awarded the project after an international tender. HR Wallingford previously
carried out marine studies to support ACWA’s bid in 2018, including near-field dilution modelling, concept
outfall design, and far-field dispersion modelling to predict the saline dispersion of the reject brine and
transport to sensitive ecological receptors identified by ACWA’s environmental consultant.
Marine modelling has now been carried out to support the design of the intake/outfall configuration, and the
process to obtain environmental approval from EAD by providing dispersion modelling for the EIA. This
report describes the findings of the studies.
The studies have been carried out in a very short timescale to comply with DoE’s deadlines. As a result,
several modelling approximations have been necessary, which we recommend are investigated further
before detailed design is carried out. These are outlined in the main report and summary.
Baseline conditions and environmental thresholds

A number of facilities currently operate near the proposed site. The existing Taweelah Complex abstracts
seawater through a common shoreline intake, and discharges combined cooling water and reject brine to a
common shoreline outfall. It is not known whether the existing Taweelah Complex will reduce capacity
through decommissioning units when the proposed IWP is brought online.
Emirates Global Aluminium (EGA) discharges cooling water and reject brine to an outfall operated by Abu
Dhabi Ports (ADP). This outfall is also understood to serve a number of industries in the area. During the
study, ADP confirmed that the other operators discharge only small quantities of effluent to the outfall.
Therefore, flow rates and discharge constituents for this outfall were taken from information provided by
EGA.
A series of spot measurements of seawater temperature and salinity were made at nine stations in May
2018. The measurement timings and the corresponding operating conditions of the nearby outfalls were not
available. The measurements suggest that operating conditions (flow rates, temperatures and salinities) of
the Taweelah Complex outfall can vary, and are at times different to those provided to ACWA during
previous studies. For subsequent stages of study, we would recommend that operational details of the
discharges (flow rates, temperatures and salinities) are collected at the same time as CTD measurements of
temperatures and salinities across the area, so that formal model calibration can be undertaken.
The data indicate that existing conditions include elevated temperatures and salinities across the project site,
due to the operation of the existing outfalls. Near the proposed IWP outfall site, the available data suggest
that background salinities can already be elevated by around 4.5 ppt. Our model sensitivity testing shows
that the existing salinity field is highly sensitive to the assumed existing discharge parameters. We therefore
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
recommend that the assumptions made for these studies are confirmed with the local industries and plant
operators during subsequent studies. This is particularly important given that it is not known whether the
existing Taweelah Complex will reduce capacity through decommissioning units when the proposed IWP is
brought online.
Site-specific environmental regulations are not applicable for the study. Federal mixing zone standards have
been assumed to apply: the salinity should fall within 5% background at the edge of the mixing zone. This
corresponds to an excess salinity of about 2 ppt. The Federal standards do not set a target mixing zone size,
and therefore we have presented the results as:
Maximum and average extents of the plume, showing the size of the areas above +2 ppt;
Predicted brine plume extents and concentrations at sensitive sites for interpretation by ACWA’s
environmental consultant, 5 Capitals; and,
Excess salinities at the edge of a nominal 500 m mixing zone around the proposed IWP outfall.
Hydrodynamic modelling
HR Wallingford’s established Arabian Gulf regional model was used to provide time- and space-varying
boundary conditions for a detailed local model at Taweelah. The models are built using TELEMAC, an
established state-of-the-art finite element model, which is currently being used by more than 200
professional and research organisations worldwide. TELEMAC uses a completely flexible triangular mesh.
As meshes are unstructured, they can be easily refined to represent coastlines and other important
structures efficiently and accurately. The local TELEMAC-3D model solves the 3D equations of motion and
transport, and includes the important effects of buoyant spreading, inhibition of vertical mixing associated
with sharp density gradients, and shear of wind-driven currents. Each of these processes is vital for the
accurate simulation of brine discharge dispersion and recirculation.
TELEMAC-3D has been used by HR Wallingford in more than 100 dispersion studies worldwide, and has
been extensively validated against field observations. Most recently, HR Wallingford has validated
TELEMAC-3D against field measurements taken near thermal-saline outfalls in the Arabian Gulf, and in the
coastal waters of the UK.
To ensure that the hydrodynamic model predictions (water levels, current speed and direction) are suitable
for use in the dispersion assessment, the local 3D model was validated using local current meter and tide
gauge data provided for the study. On the basis of the comparisons, the local model was deemed suitable
for the purposes of the present assessment.
In general, current speeds at the site are low (less than 0.2 m/s), although there is some acceleration of
currents through the channel that passes through the gap in the Khalifa Port reclamations, and some local
acceleration due to the existing discharges. The hydrodynamic environment at the site is likely to be
relatively poor in terms of potential dispersion and dilution of discharges, and it will be particularly important
to configure the outfall diffuser to generate as much dilution of the proposed discharge as possible.
Baseline discharge assessment

The baseline (existing) discharges were simulated for periods of typical winds and periods of stronger winds.
The typical wind condition includes periods of diurnally varying land-sea breeze (with winds changing during
the day due to temperature differences between the land and sea), as well as periods of commonly-occurring
northerly winds. The stronger wind condition includes stronger Shamal winds, which may be adverse in
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
terms of pushing the discharge plumes towards the shore and intakes. The periods of data chosen for
simulation should give an overall representation of the general plume behaviour. However, to inform detailed
design, a wider range of wind conditions could be tested during subsequent project phases, when more time
is available.
On average, the offshore extent of the plume is generally reduced for the stronger wind condition, but the
maximum footprints (i.e. the areas reached by the plume at any time during the simulations at each model
node and that these values do not occur simultaneously) are similar for both cases. Maximum concentrations
of the Taweelah Complex discharge are higher during the strong wind conditions, due to increases in
recirculation, and the confinement of the plume to the shallower nearshore region.
The combined plume generates an area above +2 ppt predicted to extend more than 10 km east or west of
the site during the typical wind scenario test. It should be noted that these maximum eastward and westward
extents do not occur at the same time; this is simply an indication of the maximum footprint of the areas
reached by the plume at any time during the simulation. The area above +2 ppt extends more than 15 km
east of the site for the stronger wind scenario. Average predicted excess salinities generally fall below +2 ppt
within 5 km of the site.
As observed in the water quality survey, the existing thermal-saline discharges spread over the area
proposed for the Taweelah IWP outfall. The model predicts excess salinities at the proposed outfall site of up
to about 4.5 ppt for the typical wind test, which is in good agreement with the observations. While this gives
some confidence in the predicted dispersion patterns, formal calibration and validation of the saline
predictions would require more information on the timing of the measurements and the operating conditions
of the nearby outfalls, which were not available for the present study.
Summaries of the predicted baseline levels of recirculation at the existing Taweelah Complex and at the
proposed site for the IWP intake are shown in the tables below. The values were calculated over the last 3
weeks of each simulation. In the tables below, the 95th-percentile is the excess salinity that is exceeded for
less than 5% of the simulation.
Summary of predicted baseline excess salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake
excess salinity (ppt)
wind condition average 95th-percentile maximum
typical 1.2 2.5 3.7
stronger 1.2 3.1 3.9
Summary of predicted baseline excess salinities near the proposed IWP intake site
typical 1.4 3.1 3.6
Taweelah IWP discharge

Two outfall pipes will be used for the proposed discharge, each carrying half the total flow rate. As the
seabed slopes relatively gradually along the pipeline route, water depths are relatively limited. The mean
water depth 2 km from the shoreline is about 6.3 m.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Federal environmental standards have been assumed to apply at the site. These require the excess salinity
to be below 5% of the background salinity, which means an excess of approximately 2 ppt, at the edge of a
mixing zone. As noted above, the observed and predicted salinities at the proposed IWP outfall site are
already well above the mixing zone threshold at times, due to the presence of the existing discharges, which
generate a combined plume that is well above 2 ppt. Therefore, any diffuser for the Taweelah IWP built in
the area influenced by the existing plumes will (automatically) result in the entrainment of water that is above
the threshold. It is therefore not possible to configure a diffuser in this vicinity for the IWP outfall that dilutes
the discharge to below the environmental threshold at all times close to the outfall, as the local ambient
seawater entrained into the plume for dilution is already at a higher salinity above the environmental
threshold.
To avoid the existing plumes, the outfall would need to be located several kilometres further offshore, which
would necessitate further dredging (and therefore impact) of the seabed over a longer corridor during
installation. Such a diffuser location could then potentially be affected by future offshore reclamations for
Khalifa Port (described further below).
We have therefore attempted to derive a diffuser design that would meet the required level of dilution within
the near-field area around the diffuser, if the existing discharges were not to be operating (that is, if the IWP
discharge were to entrain ambient seawater at the naturally occurring level of salinity). The resulting extents
of the areas above the mixing zone threshold salinity are then calculated including the effects of the existing
discharges as part of the far-field modelling described below.
The concept outfall design for the two outfall pipes is as follows:
First pipe: 2.5 km long, with a diffuser section over the final 500 m section.
30 x Ø 0.35 m single-port risers, equally spaced along the section.
Second pipe: 3 km long, with a diffuser section over the final 500 m section.
31 x Ø 0.35 m single-port risers, equally spaced along the section.
Ports angled at 30° upwards from seabed, and normal to the diffuser pipe axis.
Neighbouring risers discharging in opposite directions.
For subsequent stages of design, when full details of the range of operating conditions for the Taweelah
Complex discharge are available (including the range of flow rates, excess temperatures and excess
salinities), and a full data set is available for calibration and validation of the predicted temperature and
salinity fields, it may be possible to refine the configuration of the outfall to generate further mixing and
dilution.
If the existing discharges were not operating, this concept configuration is predicted to reduce excess
salinities to within 2 ppt of the ambient values at the point of impact with the seabed, a few metres from the
outfall.
Dispersion model simulations were then carried out for the same conditions tested for the baseline. The
maximum footprints of the combined plume show several differences when compared with the equivalent
plots for the baseline (existing outfalls) simulations. Under typical wind conditions, as would be expected,
concentrations in the immediate vicinity of the proposed discharge are higher, and the proposed RO
discharge increases concentrations to the north-east (in the vicinity of Khalifa Port).
The addition of the IWP discharge appears to cause an increase in the overall density of the combined
plume (that is the combination of the existing and IWP brine plume). The combined plume tends to flow
further offshore down the seabed gradient, which partially reduces the westernmost extents of the plume,
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
compared with baseline. As a result, the maximum offshore extent of the area above +2 ppt is several
kilometres further offshore compared with baseline.
For the stronger wind condition test, the maximum alongshore extents of the area above +2 ppt is increased
by several kilometres with the addition of the IWP. On average, the area extends a few hundred metres east
of the IWP outfall, and merges with the existing Taweelah Complex discharge plume to form a combined
area above +2 ppt that extends several kilometres west of the site.
In terms of recirculation, the combined discharges are predicted to reach the existing intake with excess
salinities of up to 4 ppt, and the proposed IWP intake at up to 5 ppt. Average and 95th-percentile excess
salinities were lower. Summaries of the predicted levels of recirculation including the IWP are shown in the
tables below. The values were calculated over the last 3 weeks of each simulation.
Summary of predicted excess salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, including IWP
Typical 1.8 2.8 4.0
Stronger 1.6 3.2 4.1
Summary of predicted excess salinities at the proposed IWP intake, including IWP
Typical 2.1 4.0 4.9
Stronger 2.0 4.1 5.0
The IWP simulations included the effects of initial dilution by assuming that the diffuser jets entrain seawater
with a constant excess salinity of +4.5 ppt. This is based on the maximum observed and predicted baseline
values at the diffuser site. Due to the short timescale of the studies, a relatively basic coupling representation
for the near- and far-field models was used. At times the level of dilution in the immediate vicinity of the
outfall may be slightly over-predicted, but at other times the rates of dilution will be under-predicted. For the
next phase of studies we will apply a more complex time-varying coupling between the two modelled
regions.
To demonstrate the importance of the initial dilution representation, equivalent “worst-case” simulations were
also carried out, where the effects of near-field dilution are removed completely. These show significantly
higher peak concentrations, with larger areas of the seabed experiencing salinities well above the mixing
zone threshold. Slightly higher levels of recirculation are also predicted. Accurate representation of the near-
field is therefore important in order to correctly represent the entrainment of the nearby discharges into the
IWP plume.
Khalifa Port expansion

As part of the present study, the potential effects of future expansions to the port have been simulated in the
hydrodynamic model. This is important as the port reclamation already reduces the potential for dispersion of
the existing discharges, by providing a partial barrier to the ambient currents. Further reclamation may
increase the shielding effects, and increase the overall discharge plume footprints and recirculation.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Predicted peak current speeds are reduced in a region west of the reclamation, but are increased through
the gap in the causeway. Predicted average current speeds are similar near the proposed IWP site before
and after development. Dispersion simulations including the proposed port layout show that the overall
plume extents are similar for the two layouts, although the main core of the plume (and the areas exceeding
+2 ppt) can be increased by several kilometres.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Contents
Summary
1. Introduction _________________________________________________________ 1
1.1. Coordinate systems and report conventions ...................................................................................1
2. Data review and assumptions ___________________________________________ 2
2.1. Intake and outfall layouts ................................................................................................................2
Existing facilities ................................................................................................................2
Proposed Taweelah IWP facilities .....................................................................................3
2.2. Intake and outfall parameters .........................................................................................................4
2.3. Background water quality and implications for future studies ..........................................................4
2.4. Environmental regulations ..............................................................................................................5
3. Hydrodynamic modelling _______________________________________________ 6
3.1. Regional model ...............................................................................................................................6
3.2. Local flow modelling .......................................................................................................................7
3.3. Model mesh and bathymetry...........................................................................................................7
3.4. Wind ...............................................................................................................................................9
3.5. Model calibration...........................................................................................................................10
3.6. Predicted current patterns.............................................................................................................13
4. Dispersion and recirculation assessment _________________________________ 15
4.1. Test conditions .............................................................................................................................15
Wind conditions ...............................................................................................................15
Seawater conditions ........................................................................................................16
Tidal conditions................................................................................................................16
Existing outfall and intake representation ........................................................................16
Simulation durations ........................................................................................................17
4.2. Baseline discharge assessment (existing outfalls only) ................................................................17
Baseline discharge dispersion .........................................................................................17
Baseline discharge recirculation ......................................................................................21
4.3. Taweelah IWP discharge dispersion (existing plus proposed outfalls) ..........................................23
Outfall configuration and near-field assessment ..............................................................23
Effects of the existing discharges on the proposed IWP outfall ........................................25
Mid- to far-field dispersion including IWP discharge ........................................................25
Nominal mixing zones......................................................................................................30
Recirculation including IWP discharge .............................................................................31
5. Khalifa Port expansion ________________________________________________ 33
6. Conclusions ________________________________________________________ 40
7. References ________________________________________________________ 40
Appendices ____________________________________________________________ 41
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
A. Predictions at sensitive sites – typical winds

B. Predictions at sensitive sites – stronger winds
C. Predicted excess salinities – demonstrating effects of initial dilution representation
D. Nominal mixing zone analysis
E. Recirculation analysis
Figures
Figure 1.1: Location of Taweelah Power and Water Complex ..................................................................1
Figure 2.1: Existing facilities .....................................................................................................................2
Figure 2.2: Proposed IWP intake layout ...................................................................................................3
Figure 2.3: Proposed IWP intake and outfall pipeline layout .....................................................................3
Figure 2.4: Sensitive site locations ...........................................................................................................6
Figure 3.1: HR Wallingford’s regional gulf model mesh ............................................................................7
Figure 3.2: Local model mesh ..................................................................................................................8
Figure 3.3: Model bathymetry ...................................................................................................................9
Figure 3.4: Comparison of measured and predicted wind speeds and directions at
Taweelah (June 2018) ............................................................................................................................10
Figure 3.5: Aquadopp current profiler and tide gauge locations .............................................................11
Figure 3.6: Comparison of predicted and observed water levels at the tide gauge .................................12
Figure 3.7: Comparison of predicted and observed current speeds and direction at Aquadopp-1 ..........12
Figure 3.8: Comparison of predicted and observed current speeds and direction at Aquadopp-2 ..........12
Figure 3.9: Predicted spring tide current patterns, baseline, typical wind conditions ..............................14
Figure 4.1: ERA5 wind speeds and directions during the typical wind period .........................................15
Figure 4.2: ERA5 wind speeds and directions during the stronger wind period ......................................16
Figure 4.3: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, baseline, typical winds .........................19
Figure 4.4: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, baseline, strong winds ......................... 20
Figure 4.5: Predicted excess salinities at the bed at times of particularly strong transport towards
the east and west (snapshots), baseline, typical winds ..........................................................................21
Figure 4.6: Predicted excess salinity at the existing intake, baseline, typical winds................................21
Figure 4.7: Predicted excess salinity at the existing intake, baseline, strong winds ................................22
Figure 4.8: Predicted excess salinity near the site proposed for the IWP intake,
baseline, typical winds ............................................................................................................................22
Figure 4.9: Predicted excess salinity near the site proposed for the IWP intake,
baseline, strong winds ............................................................................................................................23
Figure 4.10: Proposed IWP outfall and intake location ...........................................................................27
Figure 4.11: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, developed, typical winds ....................28
Figure 4.12: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, developed, strong winds ....................29
the east and west (snapshots), including IWP, typical winds ..................................................................30
Figure 4.14: Predicted excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, typical winds,
including IWP .........................................................................................................................................31
Figure 4.15: Predicted excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, strong winds,
including IWP .........................................................................................................................................31
Figure 4.16: Predicted excess salinity at the proposed IWP intake, typical winds, including IWP ...........32
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.17: Predicted excess salinity at the proposed IWP intake, strong winds, including IWP ...........32
Figure 5.1: Khalifa Port future layout ......................................................................................................33
Figure 5.2: Model bathymetry, baseline and future layout ......................................................................34
Figure 5.3: Predicted current speeds and directions at Aquadopp-1, baseline and future
Khalifa Port layout ..................................................................................................................................35
Figure 5.4: Predicted current speeds and directions at Aquadopp-2, baseline and future
Khalifa Port layout ..................................................................................................................................35
Figure 5.5: Predicted maximum and mean depth-averaged current speeds, baseline
and future layout ....................................................................................................................................36
Figure 5.6: Predicted current speed differences due to the future layout during peak ebb and peak
flood, typical winds .................................................................................................................................37
Figure 5.7: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, future layout, including
IWP, typical winds ..................................................................................................................................38
Figure 5.8: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, future layout, including
IWP, strong winds ..................................................................................................................................39
the east and west (snapshots), including IWP, future layout, typical winds ............................................40
Tables
Table 2.1: Operational parameters ...........................................................................................................4
Table 2.2: Sensitive site coordinates (Lat/Long, WGS84) ........................................................................5
Table 4.1: Summary of predicted baseline excess salinities at the existing
Taweelah Complex intake ......................................................................................................................22
Table 4.2: Summary of predicted baseline excess salinities near the proposed IWP intake site ............23
Table 4.3: Approximately outfall diffuser section coordinates .................................................................27
Table 4.4: Summary of predicted excess salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake,
including IWP .........................................................................................................................................31
Table 4.5: Summary of predicted excess salinities at the proposed IWP intake, including IWP .............32
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
1. Introduction
Desalination Complex in Abu Dhabi (Figure 1.1). The plant will draw in seawater through
an open intake to produce 200 MIGD of potable water. Reject brine will be returned to sea
through a submerged multiport diffuser outfall.
was submitted to and approved by Abu Dhabi’s environmental regulator, EAD.
ACWA Power (ACWA) was awarded the project after an international tender. HR Wallingford carried out
marine studies to support ACWA’s bid in 2018, including near-field dilution modelling, concept outfall design,
and far-field dispersion modelling to predict the saline dispersion of the reject brine (Reference 1).
Marine modelling has now been carried out to support the design of the intake/outfall configuration, and the
process to obtain environmental approval from EAD. This report describes the findings of the studies.
The studies have been carried out in a very short timescale to comply with DoE’s deadlines. As a result,
several modelling approximations have been necessary, which we recommend are investigated further
before detailed design is carried out. These are outlined in the main report and summary.
Figure 1.1: Location of Taweelah Power and Water Complex
1.1. Coordinate systems and report conventions

The horizontal coordinate system used in this report is WGS84 UTM Zone 40, unless otherwise stated. The
vertical datum is Mean Sea Level (MSL). In accordance with normal meteorological and oceanographic
conventions, winds come from the specified direction while currents and water displacements are towards
the specified direction.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 1
Taweelah IWP
2. Data review and assumptions

2.1. Intake and outfall layouts
Existing facilities
common shoreline outfall. The existing intake and outfall locations are shown in Figure 2.1.
Dhabi Ports(ADP). According to EGA (correspondence by email, April 2019) this outfall also serves a
number of industries in the area. ADP confirmed that the other operators discharge only small quantities of
effluent to the outfall. Therefore, flow rates and discharge constituents for this outfall were taken from
information provided by EGA (see Section 2.2).
It is not known whether the existing Taweelah Complex will reduce capacity through decommissioning units
when the proposed IWP is brought online.
Figure 2.1: Existing facilities
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 2
Taweelah IWP
Proposed Taweelah IWP facilities

The proposed intake and outfall layouts provided by ACWA during the bid-stage studies are shown in
Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3. These are situated around half-way between the Taweelah Complex intake and
outfall channels. The concept outfall configuration is described in Section 4.3.1.
Figure 2.2: Proposed IWP intake layout

Source: Adapted from drawings provided by ACWA
Figure 2.3: Proposed IWP intake and outfall pipeline layout

Source: ACWA
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 3
Taweelah IWP
2.2. Intake and outfall parameters

The IWP will produce 200 MIGD. The operational parameters provided by ACWA for Taweelah IWP and
neighbouring plants are given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Operational parameters
Intake flows Discharge to culvert
Flow temp. TDS Flow temp. TDS
UNIT (m3/s) (°C) (g/kg) (m3/s) (°C) (g/kg)
Taweelah A+A1 34.1 32.0 45.0 32.5 42.9 47.1
Taweelah A2 27.4 32.0 45.0 24.7 40.4 49.8
35.0 32.0 45.0 31.3 41.0 50.4
Taweelah Initial B
40.0 32.0 45.0 40.0 44.0 45.0
Taweelah B Ext. 17.6 32.0 45.0 16.4 39.3 48.2
24.8 32.0 45.0 21.1 44.3 52.8
Taweelah B New
2.7 32.0 45.0 2.7 42.3 45.0
Ext.
1.0 32.0 45.0 1.0 44.0 45.0
Auxiliaries 1.7 32.0 45.0 1.7 44.0 45.0
Taweelah IWP 27.8 32.0 45.0 17.3 34.0 72.4
Source: ACWA (Reference 1)
The discharge from the nearby EGA plant was also included in the model. The EGA plant is understood to
include both desalination (5 MIGD) and cooling water processes. Information on discharge flow rates and
constituents were taken from email correspondence with EGA (April 2019):
Flow rate: 9.3 m3/s
Excess temperature (ΔT): +3.6°C
Excess salinity (ΔS): +3.9 ppt.
2.3. Background water quality and implications for future studies

Information on local water quality was provided by HDR (Reference 2). Spot measurements of temperature
and salinity were made at nine locations over 15 days in May 2018. The timings of the measurements, and
the operating conditions of the nearby outfalls were not available. Over the measurement period, the data
indicate background salinities of approximately 40-40.5 ppt, and peak salinities across the area due to the
existing discharges of around 47 ppt. Temperatures varied from about 30°C to around 40°C across the area.
As would be expected, the highest temperatures and salinities were recorded in the mouth of the Taweelah
Complex outfall channel. At this location, the water column is relatively well-mixed (with similar
temperatures/salinities near the bed and surface). The data at the mid- to far-field locations (a few kilometres
from the existing outfalls) show that the water column is at times well-mixed, and is at times stratified (with a
concentrated warmer/more saline plume layer near the seabed).
Near the proposed IWP outfall site, measured salinities generally ranged between 40.5 ppt (presumably
when the existing plumes were being carried to the west, away from the site) and 45 ppt. This suggests that
background salinities can already be elevated by around 4.5 ppt near the new outfall site. As described in
more detail in Section 4.2, the existing salinity field is highly affected by the assumed existing discharge
parameters. For the present study existing discharge parameters were based on the values provided by the
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 4
Taweelah IWP
respective stakeholders (described in Section 2.2). For future studies, we recommend that it is confirmed
whether the existing Taweelah Complex will reduce capacity through the decommissioning of units when the
proposed IWP is brought online.
2.4. Environmental regulations

Site-specific environmental regulations are not applicable for the study. Therefore, we have assumed that
Federal standards will apply: the salinity should fall within 5% background at the edge of a mixing zone. It is
assumed that “background” in this case corresponds to the undisturbed ambient salinity, away from the
existing plumes. Based on the data analysis, this threshold corresponds to an excess salinity of about 2 ppt
(relative to the undisturbed ambient salinity of 40.5 ppt). The Federal standards do not set a target mixing
zone size, and therefore we have presented the results as:
Maximum and average extents of the plume, showing the size of the areas above +2 ppt;
Predicted brine plume extents and concentrations at sensitive sites for interpretation by ACWA’s
environmental consultant, 5 Capitals; and,
Excess salinities at the edge of a nominal 500 m mixing zone around the proposed IWP outfall.
As noted above, local existing salinities at the proposed IWP outfall site are already above the mixing zone
threshold at times. Therefore, it is not possible to configure a diffuser for the IWP that meets the
environmental standards close to the outfall at all times, as the local ambient seawater entrained into the
plume for dilution is already at a higher salinity. This is further discussed in Section 4.
The locations of the sensitive sites are shown in Table 2.2 and Figure 2.4.
Table 2.2: Sensitive site coordinates (Lat/Long, WGS84)
Coordinates (Degrees Minutes Seconds) Coordinates (Decimal Degrees)
ID Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude
Fringing Reef
R1 24°51'46.80" 54°42'43.20" 24.863000° 54.712000°
R2 24°51'3.60" 54°42'3.60" 24.851000° 54.701000°
R3 24°50'6.00" 54°41'34.80" 24.835000° 54.693000°
Patch Reef
R4 24°41'35.62" 54°35'17.76" 24.693229° 54.588266°
R6 24°38'33.99" 54°31'38.29" 24.642776° 54.527302°
Fringing Reef with Macro Algae
R5 24°44'42.00" 54°38'20.40" 24.745000° 54.639000°
Sea grass
SG1 24°49'51.60" 54°42'50.40" 24.831000° 54.714000°
SG2 24°48'10.80" 54°41'56.40" 24.803000° 54.699000°
SG3 24°46'44.40" 54°41'6.00" 24.779000° 54.685000°
SG4 24°42'46.80" 54°36'43.20" 24.713000° 54.612000°
SG5 24°41'42.00" 54°37'44.40" 24.695000° 54.629000°
Mangrove
M1 24°48'39.60" 54°43'58.80" 24.811000° 54.733000°
M2 24°44'20.40" 54°40'4.80" 24.739000° 54.668000°
Mudflat
MF1 24°49'4.80" 54°43'19.20" 24.818000° 54.722000°
MF2 24°43'1.20" 54°39'18.00" 24.717000° 54.655000°
Source: 5 Capitals
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 5
Taweelah IWP
Figure 2.4: Sensitive site locations

Source: Adapted from information provided by 5 Capitals
3. Hydrodynamic modelling
HR Wallingford’s established Arabian Gulf regional model was used to provide time- and space-varying
boundary conditions for a detailed local model at Taweelah. This procedure, commonly known as nesting, is
a well-established technique for modelling hydrodynamics over wide areas with varying resolution.
3.1. Regional model

The regional Gulf model is built using TELEMAC, an established state-of-the-art finite element model, which
is currently being used by more than 200 professional and research organisations worldwide. The
TELEMAC-2D module solves the depth-averaged shallow water equations and is used to model various
hydraulic phenomena such as tidal and coastal flows, storm surges, etc. The TELEMAC system is developed
under a quality assurance system, which includes the application of stringent validation tests. TELEMAC
uses a completely flexible triangular mesh. As meshes are unstructured, they can be easily refined to
represent coastlines and other important structures efficiently and accurately.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 6
Taweelah IWP
The computational mesh of the Gulf model is shown in Figure 3.1. The model covers the Arabian Gulf, the
Straits of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman, and extends out into the Arabian Sea. Currents and water levels
are driven by astronomical tides and spatially-varying wind and pressure fields. Predicted water levels have
been calibrated against tidal elevation data at 36 locations spread across the Arabian Gulf and the
Gulf of Oman.
Time- and spatially-varying currents and water
levels were extracted from the regional model and
used to drive the local Taweelah model.
3.2. Local flow modelling

The Taweelah local model was built using
TELEMAC-3D, which solves the 3D equations of
motion and transport, and includes the important
effects of buoyant spreading, inhibition of vertical
mixing associated with sharp density gradients, and
shear of wind-driven currents. Each of these
processes is vital for the accurate simulation of Figure 3.1: HR Wallingford’s regional gulf model mesh
brine discharge dispersion and recirculation.
TELEMAC-3D has been used by HR Wallingford in more than 100 dispersion studies worldwide, and has
been extensively validated against field observations. Most recently, HR Wallingford has validated
TELEMAC-3D against field measurements taken near brine outfalls in the Arabian Gulf, and in the coastal
waters of the UK.
In the present study the model simulated the increases of temperature and salinity above the naturally
occurring ambient values, due to the IWP and nearby discharge plumes. This is known as excess
temperature and excess salinity modelling. Natural variations in the ambient sea temperature and salinity are
not predicted directly by the model, but representative values are specified in the model and used to
determine the relative buoyancy of the plume, and the rate of atmospheric cooling. This is a standard
approach for this type of study, and has been validated by HR Wallingford using field measurements at other
existing outfalls. The approach has been accepted by EAD as fit for purpose in other studies in Abu Dhabi’s
coastal waters.
3.3. Model mesh and bathymetry

A close-up image of the baseline local model mesh is shown in Figure 3.2. The model mesh resolution varies
between about 50 m near the outfalls and intakes, rising gradually to around 2 km at the offshore
boundaries.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 7
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.2: Local model mesh
The model bathymetry was defined using information from international hydrographic offices, supplemented
with data from a local survey provided by ACWA. The survey area extended 2 km offshore and 500 m
alongshore. The detailed local data were merged with sparser hydrographic office data, which means that
bed levels beyond the edges of the survey are estimated using interpolation and extrapolation. We
recommend that the exact bed levels outside the survey area are confirmed through a wider survey during
subsequent studies.
The resulting bathymetry used in the model is shown in Figure 3.3. This plot also shows the locations of a
submarine cable and gas pipeline near the site.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 8
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.3: Model bathymetry
3.4. Wind
Wind conditions at the site were simulated using data from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather
Forecasting (ECMWF) ERA5 hindcast dataset.
ERA5 is a climate reanalysis dataset , generated using Copernicus Climate Change Service information. The
name ERA refers to ‘ECMWF ReAnalysis’, with ERA5 being the fifth major global reanalysis produced by
ECMWF. ERA5 gives an estimate of historical atmospheric activity based on numerical models combined
with observations.
Wind measurements were collected at Taweelah from 12 June 2018 to 19 July 2018. Comparisons with
ERA5 are shown in Figure 3.4. The ERA5 model reproduces the general trends of the winds, including the
periods of stronger Shamal (northerly) winds that occurred during the first and third quarters of the
measurement period, as well as the periods of lighter sea breezes that occurred during the second quarter.
ERA5 gives hourly predictions, which means that some higher frequency variations are not resolved.
However, this is to be expected and is unlikely to significantly affect local or regional hydrodynamics. On this
basis, the ERA5 model dataset was deemed suitable for the purposes of the present assessment.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 9
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.4: Comparison of measured and predicted wind speeds and directions at Taweelah (June 2018)
3.5. Model calibration

To ensure that the hydrodynamic model predictions (water levels, current speed and direction) are suitable
gauge data provided by HDR for the study.
Two current profiler (Aquadopp) instruments were deployed approximately 2 km and 5 km offshore from the
project site, over the period May to June 2018. In addition, one tide gauge was deployed in the marina,
south-east of the ADP Khalifa Port causeway, to record variations in water levels. The locations of the
instruments are shown in Figure 3.5.
The model was run for the survey period, with ERA5 data applied as described above. The ambient
seawater temperature was set to 30°C, which was the baseline (background) temperature, measured away
from the existing discharges over the survey period.
Parameters such as bed friction, turbulence formulations, boundary conditions and wind drag
parametrisation were varied (within physically realistic ranges) to give as close a match as possible with the
observed currents and water levels.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 10
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.5: Aquadopp current profiler and tide gauge locations
Time-series of observed and predicted water levels at the tide gauge are shown in Figure 3.6. The model
predicts the tidal ranges to within a few percent of those observed. Predicted water level variations are
therefore well within the accuracy required for this type of assessment.
Time-series of observed and predicted depth-averaged current speeds and directions are shown in
Figure 3.7 (Aquadopp-1, inshore) and Figure 3.8 (Aquadopp-2, further offshore). Current directions
(including the rotations through the tide) are well reproduced by the model, particularly closer to the offshore
part of the proposed IWP outfall (near Aquadopp-2), where the reject brine plume is likely to develop.
Daily peak current speeds are generally reproduced to within a few centimetres per second of those
observed, although during the first half of the measurement period, the second daily peak current is under-
predicted by the model. This is likely due to small changes in the position of the eddy that forms next to the
Khalifa Port reclamation, and is considered unlikely to affect the overall study conclusions. Predicted current
speeds match those observed much more closely during the second half of the survey period.
On this basis, the local model was deemed suitable for the purposes of the present assessment.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 11
Taweelah IWP
observations model
1.5
tide elevation (mMSL)
1.0
0.5
0.0
‐0.5
‐1.0
‐1.5
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
Figure 3.6: Comparison of predicted and observed water levels at the tide gauge
observations model ADCP_all_res2d_16
0.4
current speed (m/s)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
observations model
360
curent direction (°N)
270
180
90
0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
Figure 3.7: Comparison of predicted and observed current speeds and direction at Aquadopp-1
0.4
current speed (m/s)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
observations model
360
270
180
90
0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 12
Taweelah IWP
3.6. Predicted current patterns

Predicted depth-averaged current patterns from the 3D hydrodynamic model are shown for selected times
during a spring tide in Figure 3.9. In general, current speeds at the site are low (less than 0.2 m/s), although
there is some acceleration of currents through the channel that passes through the gap in the Khalifa Port
causeway, and some local acceleration due to the existing discharges.
The hydrodynamic environment at the site is likely to be relatively poor in terms of potential dispersion and
dilution of discharges, and it will be particularly important to configure the outfall diffuser to generate as much
dilution of the proposed discharge as possible.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 13
Taweelah IWP
High Water Peak ebb
Low Water Peak flood
Figure 3.9: Predicted spring tide current patterns, baseline, typical wind conditions
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 14
Taweelah IWP
4. Dispersion and recirculation assessment

4.1. Test conditions
Wind conditions
For the mid- to far-field dispersion assessment, wind conditions were simulated using data from the
European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF) ERA5 hindcast dataset, as introduced in
Section 3.4. ERA5 wind data were applied to coincide with periods of typical wind conditions and stronger
wind conditions.
The typical wind condition was chosen to include representative winds from the overall annual climate, with
periods of diurnally varying land-sea breeze (when winds change during the day due to temperature
differences between the land and sea), as well as periods of commonly-occurring northerly winds. Wind
speeds and directions during this period are shown in Figure 4.1.
The stronger wind condition includes stronger Shamal winds, which may be adverse in terms of pushing the
discharge plumes towards the shore and intakes. Wind speeds and directions during this period are shown
in Figure 4.2.
The periods of data chosen for simulation should give an overall representation of the general plume
behaviour. However, to inform detailed design, a wider range of wind conditions could be tested during
subsequent project phases, when more time is available.
Figure 4.1: ERA5 wind speeds and directions during the typical wind period
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 15
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.2: ERA5 wind speeds and directions during the stronger wind period
Seawater conditions
Typical winter conditions were assumed for the simulations, with a seawater temperature of 19°C (based on
HR Wallingford’s experience of temperatures in the region), and an ambient salinity of 40.5 ppt (based on
the ambient salinity measurements described in Section 2.3). Sensitivity tests were also carried out using
representative summer seawater temperatures. The warmer temperatures generally give higher rates of
evaporative cooling, which results in a denser plume that spreads slightly further at the seabed. The overall
changes to the plume were found to be small compared with the overall size of the area affected. However,
we recommend that a wider range of conditions are tested during subsequent project phases, when more
time is available.
Tidal conditions
Tests were carried out for full spring-neap cycles to include the effects of both spring tides (which give faster
ambient current speeds and a wider range of water depths) and neap tides (which give slower current
speeds and a narrower range of water depths).
Existing outfall and intake representation

The outfalls and intakes described in Section 2 were included in the hydrodynamic model. Recirculation of
heat and salt was included between the outfalls and intakes.
Due to project timescale constraints, the ADP intake flow, and recirculation from the ADP intake to the ADP
outfall, were not included in the calculations. The ADP intake is relatively far away from the existing and
proposed outfalls, and we consider that the effects on the predicted salinity footprints are likely to be small.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 16
Taweelah IWP
Nevertheless, we recommend that the ADP intake flow (and associated recirculation) is included in any
subsequent testing.
Simulation durations
Each dispersion simulation was carried out for 30 days, with all analysis carried out on the last 20 days, to
allow sufficient time for model “spin-up” (that is, for the predicted dispersion patterns to develop and reach an
approximate dynamic equilibrium). Quality assurance checks were carried out on the predicted dispersion
patterns to confirm whether the plume is still building up near the outfall site, and over the wider area, by the
end of the simulations. Plume concentrations near the outfalls and intakes reach a dynamic equilibrium over
the simulation (that is, concentrations are not still increasing by the end of the simulation). At the plume
edges (many kilometres from the outfall), the plume is still growing, although at typically low concentrations.
The dispersion patterns predicted in this study will therefore give an overall representation of the general
plume behaviour. However, we recommend that longer simulations are carried out during subsequent project
phases, when more time is available.
4.2. Baseline discharge assessment (existing outfalls only)

Baseline discharge dispersion
Predicted excess salinity patterns are shown as contour plots in Figure 4.3 to Figure 4.5. Predictions are
shown at the sea surface, mid-depth, and at the seabed. These plots also show the locations of a submarine
cable and gas pipeline near the site.
Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4 show the maximum and average excess salinities over the simulated spring-neap
cycle. It should be noted that these are the maximum and average values predicted by the model at any time
during the spring-neap cycle. They therefore do not represent the plume patterns at any particular time. It
can be helpful to think of these as plume “footprints”. For comparison, snapshots of the instantaneous plume
behaviour at times of particularly strong transport towards the east and west during the typical wind
simulation are shown in Figure 4.5. The patterns of dispersion are intricate and are generated by the
interaction of the tidal- and wind-driven currents with eddies that form along the complex coastline shape.
The maximum excursion of the plume towards the west is not just driven by the flooding tide (which causes
advection towards the west); it can also be caused by:
Longer periods of weak winds with an easterly or north-easterly component;
Shorter periods of stronger winds with an easterly or north-easterly component.
Similarly, the maximum excursion of the plume towards the east is not just driven by the eastward ebbing
tide; it can also be caused by periods of wind with a westerly or north-westerly component. These winds
generate coastal drifts which act over several days to cause a net movement of the plume alongshore.
For the discharge parameters and conditions tested, the existing discharge plumes are near neutrally-
buoyant. This means that they are generally fully mixed across the water depth, with similar concentrations
at the water surface, mid-depth and seabed.
On average, the offshore extent of the plume is generally reduced for the stronger wind condition, but the
maximum eastward and maximum westward extents of the plume are similar for both cases. Maximum
concentrations of the Taweelah Complex discharge are higher during the strong wind conditions, due to
increases in recirculation, and the confinement of the plume to the shallower nearshore region.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 17
Taweelah IWP
The (existing) combined discharges result in an area exceeding +2 ppt that extends more than 10 km east
and west of the site during the typical wind simulation. It should be noted that these maximum eastward and
westward extents do not occur at the same time; this is simply an indication of the maximum footprint of the
plume at any time during the simulation. The area above +2 ppt extends more than 15 km east of the site
during the stronger wind simulation (due to the additional coastal drift current). On average, excess salinities
generally fall below +2 ppt within 5 km of the site.
As observed in the water quality survey, the existing thermal-saline discharges spread over the area
proposed for the Taweelah IWP outfall. The model predicts excess salinities at the proposed outfall site of up
to about 4.5 ppt above the undisturbed ambient salinity for the typical wind test, which is in good agreement
with the observations. While this gives some confidence in the predicted dispersion patterns, formal
calibration and validation of the saline predictions would require more information on the timing of the
measurements and the operating conditions of the nearby outfalls, which were not available for the present
study.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 18
Taweelah IWP
Maximum Average
Surface
Mid-depth
Bed
Figure 4.3: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, baseline, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 19
Taweelah IWP
Maximum Average
Surface
Mid-depth
Bed
Figure 4.4: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, baseline, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 20
Taweelah IWP
Westward Eastward
Bed
Figure 4.5: Predicted excess salinities at the bed at times of particularly strong transport towards the east
and west (snapshots), baseline, typical winds
Baseline discharge recirculation

Time-series of predicted excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake are shown in Figure 4.6
(typical winds) and Figure 4.7 (stronger winds). The existing discharges are predicted to reach the intake
with peak excess salinities of 3-4 ppt. Average and 95th-percentile1 excess salinities were lower. Summaries
over the last 3 weeks of each simulation are given in Table 4.1. Further statistical analysis is given in
Appendix E.
5
4.5
4
Excess salinity (ppt)
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base01
Figure 4.6: Predicted excess salinity at the existing intake, baseline, typical winds
1 The 95th-percentile is the salinity that is exceeded for less than 5% of the simulation.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 21
Taweelah IWP
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base04
Figure 4.7: Predicted excess salinity at the existing intake, baseline, strong winds
Table 4.1: Summary of predicted baseline excess salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake
typical 1.2 2.5 3.7
Time-series of predicted baseline excess salinity near the site of the proposed IWP intake are shown in
Figure 4.8 (typical winds) and Figure 4.9 (stronger winds). The existing discharges (i.e. before commission of
the new IWP outfall) are already predicted to be resulting in excess salinities of up to 3.5 ppt during typical
winds, and up to about 4.5 ppt during strong winds near the intake site. Average and 95th-percentile excess
salinities were predicted to be lower. Summaries over the last 3 weeks of each simulation are given in
Table 4.2. Further statistical analysis is given in Appendix E.
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base01
Figure 4.8: Predicted excess salinity near the site proposed for the IWP intake, baseline, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 22
Taweelah IWP
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base04
Figure 4.9: Predicted excess salinity near the site proposed for the IWP intake, baseline, strong winds
Table 4.2: Summary of predicted baseline excess salinities near the proposed IWP intake site
typical 1.4 3.1 3.6
4.3. Taweelah IWP discharge dispersion (existing plus proposed

outfalls)
Outfall configuration and near-field assessment
The proposed outfall pipeline route is shown in Figure 2.3. Two outfall pipes will be used, each assumed to
carry half the total flow rate. As the seabed slopes relatively gradually along the pipeline route, water depths
are relatively limited. The mean water depth 2 km from the shoreline is about 6.3 m.
As described in Section 2.4, we have assumed that Federal environmental standards will apply. These
require the excess salinity to be below 5% of the background salinity, which means an excess of
approximately 2 ppt above the undisturbed ambient salinity, at the edge of a mixing zone. As demonstrated
in Sections 2.3 and 4.2, at times the existing discharges raise the background salinity above this
environmental threshold at the site.
We have therefore attempted to derive a diffuser design that would meet the required level of dilution within
the near-field area around the diffuser, if the existing discharges were not to be operating. The resulting
areas above +2 ppt are then shown including the effects of the existing discharges as part of the far-field
modelling shown in Section 4.3.3.
The reject brine from the proposed plant will be denser than the receiving seawater, which means it will tend
to sink following release, forming a dense layer or gravity current at the seabed. Rates of dilution in gravity
currents can be relatively slow, and so outfalls for reject brines must be designed to ensure high levels of
dilution and mixing with the ambient seawater before the plume reaches the seabed.
Brine is therefore usually discharged as a series of individual jets from diffuser ports spread along a pipe.
The ports are normally angled upwards so that the jets initially rise before sinking back to the seabed under
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 23
Taweelah IWP
their negative buoyancy. This increases the trajectories of the individual jets before they reach the seabed,
maximises the potential for entrainment of ambient seawater, and reduces near-bed concentrations. The
actual rates of dilution for the proposed outfall will be limited at times, as the reject brine will mix with the
thermal-saline plumes from the existing facilities as it rises from the diffuser ports and then sinks back to the
seabed.
The rise of the jets from the outfall ports, their subsequent sinking to the seabed and their formation of an
initially turbulent gravity current at the seabed are controlled by the initial momentum and negative buoyancy
of the discharge, as well as the outfall configuration. The region over which these factors dominate mixing
and dilution of the reject brine is known as the “near-field”. As rapid near-field mixing processes dissipate the
brine’s initial momentum and buoyancy, the gravity current forms a relatively stable structure near the
seabed, and ambient turbulence begins to dominate mixing and dispersion processes. This region is known
as the “far-field”. The area of transition between the two regions is known as the mid-field. Typically, rates of
dilution in the far-field are much slower than those in the near-field.
The methodology for configuration of the diffuser was as follows:
Choose a starting point for the first (shoreward) port that:
Sits largely outside of the main core of the existing plumes;
Avoids the existing submarine cable and gas pipeline; and,
Has sufficient water depth for diffuser operation/performance.
Choose a combination of port orientations and diameters that maximises trajectories (and therefore
dilution) before impact with the seabed, while minimising interaction between jets from neighbouring
ports.
Use established formulae and the latest research on brine jets to determine minimum required port
separation, distances to impact with the seabed, impact dilution rates and near-field extents.
The resulting outfall is then introduced into the far-field model as described in Section 4.3.2.
The above process was used to derive a concept outfall design for the two outfall pipes. The first pipe will be
2.5 km long, with a diffuser section over the final 500 m section. The second pipe will be 3 km long, with a
diffuser section over the final 500 m section. As the two pipes are close together, this essentially makes a
single diffuser section, approximately 1 km long. The first pipe will have with 30 single-port risers, equally
spaced along the diffuser section, and the second will have 31 ports (that is, 61 ports for the combined
outfall). Port diameters are about 0.35 m, which gives exit velocities of around 2.9 m/s. For this stage of
modelling, we have assumed that the centre point of each diffuser port is located around 1 m above the
seabed. This is to increase the trajectory lengths of the jets, and to minimise their interaction with both the
sea surface and seabed.
The ports should make an angle of about 30° with the seabed. For the modelling, we have assumed that the
port on each riser is orientated normal to the diffuser pipe axis, and neighbouring risers discharge in opposite
directions.
If the existing discharges were not operating, this concept configuration is predicted to reduce excess
salinities to within 2 ppt of the ambient values at the point of impact with the seabed, approximately 15 m
from the outfall. A saline layer would then develop at the bed to a thickness of a few metres, spreading to the
end of the near-field area, approximately 20 m from the outfall, further entraining ambient seawater. This
means that the spreading layer would occupy a significant proportion of the water depth. Dispersion of the
brine over the wider area, its interaction with the neighbouring discharges and its potential for build-up
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 24
Taweelah IWP
around the diffuser over successive tides cannot be included in the near-field assessment. This requires 3D
hydrodynamic dispersion modelling, which is described in the next section.
Effects of the existing discharges on the proposed IWP outfall

The water quality data described in Section 2.3 and the modelling presented in Section 4.2 show that the
existing discharges already give excess salinities up to around 4.5 ppt above the undisturbed ambient
salinity at the site of the proposed outfall.
The present IWP simulations included the effects of initial dilution by assuming that the diffuser jets entrain
seawater with a constant excess salinity of +4.5 ppt during their initial rise and fall. This is based on the
maximum observed and predicted baseline values at the diffuser site. Due to the short timescale of the
studies, a relatively basic coupling representation for the near- and far-field models was used. This does not
explicitly allow for the change in far-field concentrations over successive tidal cycles, due to the presence of
the additional IWP plume. This means that at times the level of dilution in the immediate vicinity of the outfall
may be slightly over-predicted, but at other times the rates of dilution will be under-predicted. For the next
phase of studies we will apply a more complex time-varying coupling between the two modelled regions, with
a more direct exchange between the two regions.
Therefore, in some respects, the method applied is conservative, as the data suggest that there will be times
during the tidal cycle when the IWP discharge is entraining the existing plumes at lower salinities, particularly
from the mid and upper water column (from where most of the initial jet dilution occurs).
To demonstrate the importance of the initial dilution representation, equivalent “worst-case” simulations were
also carried out, where explicit treatment of near-field dilution was removed. In reality, the salinity fields that
develop will not be as concentrated as these worst-case simulations; they simply provide a highly
conservative upper bound for comparison with the other tests.
It is important to note that our sensitivity testing shows that the mid-field behaviour of the plume is particularly
sensitive to this representation in the model, and so we recommend that this is explored further during
subsequent project stages, when further time is available to carry out the modelling study.
Mid- to far-field dispersion including IWP discharge

Model simulations were carried out for the same conditions tested for the baseline. The outfall location is
shown in Figure 4.10 and approximate coordinates are given in Table 4.3.
Predicted excess salinity patterns are shown in Figure 4.11 to Figure 4.13, including the representation of
initial dilution described in Section 4.3.2. These plots also shows the locations of a submarine cable and gas
pipeline near the site. Predictions are shown in the same format as for the baseline, to enable direct
comparison with the figures shown in Section 4.2.
The maximum footprints of the combined plume show several differences when compared with the
equivalent plots for the baseline (existing outfalls) simulations. Under typical wind conditions, as would be
expected, concentrations in the immediate vicinity of the proposed discharge are higher, and the proposed
RO discharge increases concentrations to the north-east (in the vicinity of Khalifa Port).
The addition of the IWP discharge appears to cause an increase in the overall density of the combined
plume (that is the combination of the existing and IWP brine plume). The combined plume tends to flow
further offshore down the seabed gradient, which partially reduces the westernmost extents of the plume,
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 25
Taweelah IWP
compared with baseline, for the typical wind conditions. As a result, the maximum offshore extent of the area
above +2 ppt is several kilometres further offshore compared with baseline.
For the stronger wind condition test, the maximum alongshore extents of the areas above +2 ppt are
increased by several kilometres with the addition of the IWP. On average, the area extends a few hundred
metres east of the IWP outfall, and merges with the existing Taweelah Complex discharge to form a
combined area above +2 ppt that extends several kilometres west of the site.
Time-series of excess salinity at the sensitive sites are provided in Appendices A and B.
The IWP simulations included the effects of initial dilution as described in Section 4.3.2. Equivalent
dispersion plots for the simulations excluding the effects of initial dilution are provided in Appendix C. These
show significantly higher peak concentrations, with larger areas of the seabed experiencing salinities well
above the mixing zone threshold. Accurate representation of the near-field is therefore important in order to
correctly represent the entrainment of the nearby discharges into the IWP plume. This emphasises the
importance of applying a more complex time-varying coupling between the two modelled regions in the next
phase of studies.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 26
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.10: Proposed IWP outfall and intake location
Table 4.3: Approximately outfall diffuser section coordinates

Easting (m) Northing (m)
Start point 263429 2742029
End point 262806 2742812
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 27
Taweelah IWP
Maximum Average
Surface
Mid-depth
Bed
Figure 4.11: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 28
Taweelah IWP
Maximum Average
Surface
Mid-depth
Bed
Figure 4.12: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 29
Taweelah IWP
Westward Eastward
Bed
and west (snapshots), including IWP, typical winds
Nominal mixing zones

As the baseline excess salinities at the outfall site can already be above the Federal standards, it is not
known how the usual mixing zone concept will be interpreted by EAD. Predicted excess salinities were
analysed at four locations, nominally 500 m from the outfall, and are shown in Appendix D. Predictions are
shown at the seabed for baseline and including the proposed IWP discharge.
It is important to note that due to the method of source representation used in the far-field modelling (as
noted in Section 4.3.2), these plots should be treated with caution. We recommend that this is explored
further during subsequent project stages, when further time is available to carry out the modelling study, and
a mixing zone definition has been formally agreed with EAD.
The predictions as shown demonstrate that the existing plumes already result in excess salinities of more
than 2 ppt near the proposed outfall site. With the IWP outfall in operation, excess salinities are several ppt
higher. Therefore, depending on EAD’s views, it may be more appropriate to compare the overall sizes of the
areas above +2 ppt, rather than using a standard mixing zone definition.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 30
Taweelah IWP
Recirculation including IWP discharge

Time-series of predicted excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake are shown for the
simulations including the proposed IWP in Figure 4.14 (typical winds) and Figure 4.15 (stronger winds). The
combined discharges are predicted to reach the existing intake with excess salinities of up to 4 ppt. Average
and 95th-percentile excess salinities were lower. Summaries over the last 3 weeks of each simulation are
given in Table 4.4. Average values are predicted to increase by 0.4-0.6 ppt compared with baseline. Further
statistical analysis is given in Appendix E.
It should be noted that predicted levels are recirculation are slightly higher for the simulations excluding the
representation of initial dilution, described in Section 4.3.2. Accurate representation of the near-field is
therefore important in order to correctly represent the entrainment of the nearby discharges into the IWP
plume, and therefore the potential levels of recirculation. This emphasises the importance of applying a more
complex time-varying coupling between the two modelled regions in the next phase of studies. However,
based on the sensitivity tests, we would not expect predicted recirculation levels to be significantly higher
than presented here.
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base03C
Figure 4.14: Predicted excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, typical winds, including IWP
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base06C
Figure 4.15: Predicted excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, strong winds, including IWP
Table 4.4: Summary of predicted excess salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, including IWP
typical 1.8 2.8 4.0
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 31
Taweelah IWP
Time-series of predicted excess salinity at the proposed IWP intake are shown for the simulations including
the proposed IWP in Figure 4.16 (typical winds) and Figure 4.17 (stronger winds). The combined discharges
are predicted to reach the proposed intake with excess salinities of up to 5 ppt. Average and 95th-percentile
excess salinities were lower. Summaries over the last 3 weeks of each simulation are given in Table 4.5.
Average excess salinities at the intake are around 2 ppt, and 98th-percentiles are around 4 ppt. Further
statistical analysis is given in Appendix E.
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base03C
Figure 4.16: Predicted excess salinity at the proposed IWP intake, typical winds, including IWP
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5 Bed
2 Mid‐depth
1.5 surface
1
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (days)
base06C
Figure 4.17: Predicted excess salinity at the proposed IWP intake, strong winds, including IWP
Table 4.5: Summary of predicted excess salinities at the proposed IWP intake, including IWP
typical 2.1 4.0 4.9
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 32
Taweelah IWP
5. Khalifa Port expansion

As part of the present study, the potential effects of future expansions to the port have been simulated in the
hydrodynamic model. This is important as the port reclamation already reduces the potential for dispersion of
the existing discharges, by providing a partial barrier to the ambient currents. Further reclamation may
increase the shielding effects, and increase the overall discharge plume footprints and recirculation.
A future layout for the port was provided by ADPC and ACWA, including land reclamations and additional
dredging areas, as shown in Figure 5.1. The model bathymetry for the baseline and future layout are shown
in Figure 5.2.
Figure 5.1: Khalifa Port future layout

Source: ADP and ACWA
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 33
Taweelah IWP
Baseline Future layout
Figure 5.2: Model bathymetry, baseline and future layout
Based on initial model simulations, current speeds and directions closer to the shore (Aquadopp-1) are
relatively similar before and after development. However, further offshore (Aquadopp-2) peak current speeds
are reduced by 25-50%. Comparisons of the current speeds and directions are shown in Figure 5.3 and
Figure 5.4. Predicted maximum and mean depth-averaged current speeds for both layouts are shown in
Figure 5.5. Differences in peak ebb and peak flood current speeds are shown in Figure 5.6, for times during
the typical wind condition simulation. The speed difference plots indicate that the extended reclamation
generates a sheltered region to the west, over which peak current speeds are reduced. This affects the
region over which the IWP plume will spread offshore from the outfall. However, peak current speeds
through the gap in the causeway are predicted to increase after the development, and peak speeds are
actually predicted to slightly increase at the outfall site itself.
Dispersion simulations including the proposed port layout were carried out for the same conditions tested
and described in Section 4. Predicted dispersion patterns are presented in Figure 5.7 to Figure 5.9.
The model shows that the overall plume extents are similar for the two layouts, although the main core of the
plume (and the area above +2 ppt) can be increased by several kilometres.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 34
Taweelah IWP
Figure 5.3: Predicted current speeds and directions at Aquadopp-1, baseline and future Khalifa Port layout
Figure 5.4: Predicted current speeds and directions at Aquadopp-2, baseline and future Khalifa Port layout
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 35
Taweelah IWP
Baseline Future layout

Maximum depth-averaged currents
Mean depth-averaged currents
Figure 5.5: Predicted maximum and mean depth-averaged current speeds, baseline and future layout
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 36
Taweelah IWP
Peak ebb Peak flood
Figure 5.6: Predicted current speed differences due to the future layout during peak ebb and peak flood,
typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 37
Taweelah IWP
Maximum Average
Surface
Mid-depth
Bed
Figure 5.7: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, future layout, including IWP, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 38
Taweelah IWP
Maximum Average
Surface
Mid-depth
Bed
Figure 5.8: Predicted maximum and average excess salinities, future layout, including IWP, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 39
Taweelah IWP
Westward Eastward
Bed
and west (snapshots), including IWP, future layout, typical winds
6. Conclusions
Hydrodynamic and dispersion modelling has been carried out to determine the near- and far-field mixing,
dispersion and potential for recirculation of reject brine associated with a proposed IWP at Taweelah.
Conclusions are given in the Executive Summary.
7. References
1. Taweelah SWRO – Brine dispersion modelling, HR Wallingford Report DER6007-RT001-R02-00,
October 2018.
2. Taweelah DoE IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant – Environmental Impact Assessment, HDR, July
2018.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00 40
Taweelah IWP
Appendices
A. Predictions at sensitive sites – typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.1: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef site R1, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.2: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef site R1, developed, typical winds
Figure A.3: Predicted bed excess salinity at fringing reef site R1, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.10: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R4, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.11: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R4, developed, typical winds
Figure A.12: Predicted bed excess salinity at patch reef site R4, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.13: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R6, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.14: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R6, developed, typical winds
Figure A.15: Predicted bed excess salinity at patch reef site R6, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.16: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef with macro algae site R5, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.17: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef with macro algae site R5, developed, typical winds
Figure A.18: Predicted bed excess salinity at fringing reef with macro algae site R5, baseline and developed,
typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.19: Predicted excess salinity at seagrass site SG1, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.20: Predicted excess salinity at seagrass site SG1, developed, typical winds
Figure A.21: Predicted bed excess salinity at seagrass site SG1, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.34: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M1, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.35: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M1, developed, typical winds
Figure A.36: Predicted bed excess salinity at mangrove site M1, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.37: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M2, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.38: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M2, developed, typical winds
Figure A.39: Predicted bed excess salinity at mangrove site M2, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.40: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF1, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.41: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF1, developed, typical winds
Figure A.42: Predicted bed excess salinity at mudflat site MF1, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure A.43: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF2, baseline, typical winds
Figure A.44: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF2, developed, typical winds
Figure A.45: Predicted bed excess salinity at mudflat site MF2, baseline and developed, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
B. Predictions at sensitive sites – stronger winds
Figure B.1: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef site R1, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.2: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef site R1, developed, strong winds
Figure B.3: Predicted bed excess salinity at fringing reef site R1, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.10: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R4, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.11: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R4, developed, strong winds
Figure B.12: Predicted bed excess salinity at patch reef site R4, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.13: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R6, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.14: Predicted excess salinity at patch reef site R6, developed, strong winds
Figure B.15: Predicted bed excess salinity at patch reef site R6, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.16: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef with macro algae site R5, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.17: Predicted excess salinity at fringing reef with macro algae site R5, developed, strong winds
Figure B.18: Predicted bed excess salinity at fringing reef with macro algae site R5, baseline and developed,
strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.19: Predicted excess salinity at seagrass site SG1, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.20: Predicted excess salinity at seagrass site SG1, developed, strong winds
Figure B.21: Predicted bed excess salinity at seagrass site SG1, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.34: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M1, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.35: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M1, developed, strong winds
Figure B.36: Predicted bed excess salinity at mangrove site M1, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.37: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M2, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.38: Predicted excess salinity at mangrove site M2, developed, strong winds
Figure B.39: Predicted bed excess salinity at mangrove site M2, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.40: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF1, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.41: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF1, developed, strong winds
Figure B.42: Predicted bed excess salinity at mudflat site MF1, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure B.43: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF2, baseline, strong winds
Figure B.44: Predicted excess salinity at mudflat site MF2, developed, strong winds
Figure B.45: Predicted bed excess salinity at mudflat site MF2, baseline and developed, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
C. Predicted excess salinities – demonstrating effects

of initial dilution representation
Without dilution With dilution
Surface
Bed
Figure C.1: Predicted maximum excess salinities, developed, with and without dilution, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP

Surface
Bed
Figure C.2: Predicted average excess salinities, developed, with and without dilution, typical winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP

Surface
Bed
Figure C.3: Predicted maximum excess salinities, developed, with and without dilution, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP

Surface
Bed
Figure C.4: Predicted average excess salinities, developed, with and without dilution, strong winds
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
D. Nominal mixing zone analysis
Figure D.1: Mixing zone analysis points, chosen nominally 500 m from the outfall
Note: The dashed grey line represent a 500 m radius area from the outfall diffusers
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
P1 – offshore
P2 – inshore
P3 – east
P4 – west
Figure D.2: Nominal mixing zones, predicted near-bed excess salinity at the output locations, typical winds
Note: Due to the method of source representation used in the far-field modelling, these plots should be treated with
caution. We recommend that this is explored further during subsequent project stages, when further time is
available to carry out the modelling study, and a mixing zone definition has been formally agreed with EAD.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
P1 – offshore
P2 – inshore
P3 – east
P4 – west
Figure D.3: Nominal mixing zones, predicted near-bed excess salinity at the output locations, stronger wind
conditions
Note: Due to the method of source representation used in the far-field modelling, these plots should be treated with
caution. We recommend that this is explored further during subsequent project stages, when further time is
available to carry out the modelling study, and a mixing zone definition has been formally agreed with EAD.
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
E. Recirculation analysis
Baseline typical wind With IWP, typical wind

Taweelah Complex intake ‐ bed Taweelah Complex intake ‐ bed
60% 60%
50% 50%
Percentage occurance
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Salinity (bin upper value) ppt Salinity (bin upper value) ppt
Figure E.1: Predicted near-bed salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, baseline (existing) and
developed (including IWP), typical wind
Baseline stronger wind With IWP, stronger wind

Taweelah Complex intake ‐ bed Taweelah Complex intake ‐ bed
60% 60%
50% 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Salinity ( bin upper value) ppt Salinity (bin upper value) ppt
Figure E.2: Predicted near-bed salinities at the existing Taweelah Complex intake, baseline (existing) and
developed (including IWP), stronger wind
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Baseline typical wind With IWP, typical wind

IWP intake ‐ bed IWP intake ‐ bed
60% 60%
50% 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Salinity ( bin upper value) ppt Salinity (bin upper value) ppt
Figure E.3: Predicted near-bed salinities at the proposed IWP intake, baseline (existing) and developed
(including IWP), typical wind
Baseline, stronger wind With IWP, stronger wind

IWP intake ‐ bed IWP intake ‐ bed
60% 60%
50% 50%
40% 40%
30% 30%
20% 20%
10% 10%
0% 0%
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Salinity ( bin upper value) ppt Salinity ( bin upper value) ppt
Figure E.4: Predicted near-bed salinities at the proposed IWP intake, baseline (existing) and developed
(including IWP), stronger wind
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
HR Wallingford is an independent engineering and environmental hydraulics

organisation. We deliver practical solutions to the complex water-related challenges
faced by our international clients. A dynamic research programme underpins all that we
do and keeps us at the leading edge. Our unique mix of know-how, assets and facilities
includes state of the art physical modelling laboratories, a full range of numerical
modelling tools and, above all, enthusiastic people with world-renowned skills and
expertise.
HR Wallingford, Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BA, United Kingdom

tel +44 (0)1491 835381 fax +44 (0)1491 832233 email info@hrwallingford.com
www.hrwallingford.com
© HR Wallingford
DER6082-RT001-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Sediment plume dispersion studies
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 May 2019

Taweelah IWP
Report title Sediment plume dispersion studies
Report number RT002
Report date May 2019
Client ACWA Power Global Services
Document history
03 May 2019 01-00 JS MJW TEJ
This unsigned document has not been formally checked and authorised for release. Until it has
been reviewed and signed off by qualified technical staff within HR Wallingford, this document
must not be considered complete or final.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
Executive Summary
(SWRO) Independent Water Project at the existing Taweelah Power and Desalination
Complex in Abu Dhabi. The plant will draw in seawater through an open intake to produce
200 MIGD of potable water. Reject brine will be returned to sea through a submerged
multiport diffuser outfall.
was submitted to and approved by Abu Dhabi’s environmental regulator, EAD. ACWA Power (ACWA) was
awarded the project after an international tender. To support the design of the intake/outfall configuration,
and the process to obtain environmental approval from EAD, ACWA previously commissioned
HR Wallingford to undertake numerical modelling of brine dispersion and recirculation.
The present report describes the findings of an assessment of the dispersion of the sediment plumes likely to
arise from construction activities. Construction activities considered in the study are dredging activities
related to the installation of the discharge pipelines and diffuser sections.
At the present stage of the project, details of the pipeline/diffuser installation methodologies are not yet
known. Therefore, we have assumed the dredging and placement of sediment will follow the methodologies
of similar projects in the region.
The key findings of the assessment are as follows:
Predicted increases of more than 10 mg/l are restricted to within 2 km of the dredging/placement.
Fine sediment deposition is principally contained within 2 km of the dredging/placement but small
amounts of deposition (of a fraction of a millimetre) are predicted over the coral reef north of the port and
over the sea grass close to shore immediately north of the works.
Regarding sensitive receivers, the following conclusions are drawn:
Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration at the nearby intake operated by Abu
Dhabi Port were predicted to be less than 0.1 mg/l.
Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration at the existing Taweelah Complex intake
were predicted to be less than 4 mg/l, and above 0.5 mg/l for less than 1% of the time.
Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration over the fringing coral were predicted to
be less than 2 mg/l, and above 0.5 mg/l for less than 3% of the time during dredging of the diffuser
trench and for less than 0.1% of the time during dredging of the outfall trench.
On the basis of these results, it is not anticipated that the proposed dredging and placement operations (and
hence the backfilling operations) will cause increases in suspended concentrations or fine sediment
deposition which will cause adverse impacts for local intakes or the coral reef north of the works.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
Contents
Executive Summary
1. Introduction _________________________________________________________ 1
1.1. Background ....................................................................................................................................1
1.2. Coordinate systems and report conventions ...................................................................................1
2. Data review and assumptions ___________________________________________ 2
2.1. Existing Intake and outfall facilities .................................................................................................2
2.2. Proposed Taweelah IWP facilities...................................................................................................2
2.3. Proposed dredging and placement .................................................................................................4
2.4. Sensitive receivers..........................................................................................................................4
2.5. Hydrodynamic environment ............................................................................................................5
2.6. Sedimentary environment ...............................................................................................................7
3. Hydrodynamic model __________________________________________________ 7
3.1. Regional model ...............................................................................................................................7
3.2. Local flow modelling .......................................................................................................................7
3.3. Local model mesh and bathymetry .................................................................................................8
3.4. Wind ...............................................................................................................................................8
3.5. Model calibration.............................................................................................................................9
4. Plume dispersion model _______________________________________________ 9
4.1. Introduction .....................................................................................................................................9
4.2. Source terms ..................................................................................................................................9
4.3. Summary of plume modelling simulations .....................................................................................10
4.4. Simulation parameters ..................................................................................................................11
5. Plume dispersion results ______________________________________________ 12
5.1. Results of Simulation 1 - dredging and placement at the diffuser trench.......................................12
5.2. Results of Simulation 2 - dredging and placement at the inshore end of the outfall trench ...........16
6. Discussion _________________________________________________________ 19
6.1. The effect of backfilling operations ...............................................................................................19
6.2. Effects of deposition of fine sediment from whole of proposed works ...........................................20
6.3. Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration at sensitive receivers ........................21
7. Conclusions ________________________________________________________ 22
8. References ________________________________________________________ 23
Appendices ____________________________________________________________ 24
A. SEDPLUME-RW model
Figures
Figure 1.1: Location of Taweelah Power and Water Complex ..................................................................1
Figure 2.1: Existing intake and outfall facilities .........................................................................................2
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure 2.2: Proposed IWP intake layout ...................................................................................................3

Figure 2.3: Proposed IWP intake and outfall pipeline layout .....................................................................3
Figure 2.4: Dredging and stockpiling operations represented in this study ...............................................4
Figure 2.5: Seabed habitat in the vicinity of the proposed works ..............................................................5
Figure 2.6: Predicted spring tide current patterns, baseline, typical wind conditions ................................6
Figure 3.1: HR Wallingford’s regional gulf model mesh ............................................................................7
Figure 3.2: Local model mesh ..................................................................................................................8
Figure 4.1: The locations of the different dredging and placement activities for the two simulations ......11
Figure 5.1: Predicted maximum increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration
above background, Simulation 1, dredging of diffuser trench .................................................................13
Figure 5.2: Predicted mean increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration above
background, Simulation 1, dredging of diffuser trench ............................................................................14
Figure 5.3: Predicted fine sediment deposition after 14 days of dredging and placement,
Simulation 1, dredging of diffuser trench ................................................................................................15
Figure 5.4: Predicted maximum increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration
above background, Simulation 2, dredging of inshore outfall trench.......................................................17
background, Simulation 2, dredging of inshore outfall trench .................................................................18
Figure 5.6: Predicted fine sediment deposition after 29 days of dredging and placement,
Simulation 2, ..........................................................................................................................................19
Figure 6.1: Predicted fine sediment deposition resulting from works as a whole ....................................20
Figure 6.2: Time series of predicted increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment
concentration at the Taweelah Power Station intake ..............................................................................22
Figure 6.3: Time series of predicted increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment
concentration at the fringing coral reef ...................................................................................................22
Tables
Table 4.1: Sediment parameter settings .................................................................................................11
Table 6.1: Summary of impacts on sensitive receivers resulting from proposed operations ...................21
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
Desalination Complex in Abu Dhabi (Figure 1.1). The plant will draw in seawater through
an open intake to produce 200 MIGD of potable water. Reject brine will be returned to sea
was submitted to and approved by Abu Dhabi’s environmental regulator, EAD. ACWA Power (ACWA) was
awarded the project after an international tender. To support the design of the intake/outfall configuration,
and the process to obtain environmental approval from EAD, ACWA commissioned HR Wallingford to
undertake numerical modelling. The assessment of the dispersion and recirculation of the discharged brine
is presented in HR Wallingford (2019). The present report describes the findings of an assessment of the
dispersion of the sediment plumes likely to arise from construction activities.
Figure 1.1: Location of Taweelah Power and Water Complex
1.2. Coordinate systems and report conventions

The horizontal coordinate system used in this report is WGS84 UTM Zone 40, unless otherwise stated. The
vertical datum is Mean Sea Level (MSL). In accordance with normal meteorological and oceanographic
conventions, winds come from the specified direction while currents and water displacements are towards
the specified direction.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 1
Taweelah IWP
2. Data review and assumptions

2.1. Existing Intake and outfall facilities
common shoreline outfall. The existing intake and outfall locations are shown in Figure 2.1.
Dhabi Ports(ADP). According to EGA (correspondence by email, April 2019) this outfall also serves a
number of industries in the area. ADP confirmed that the other operators discharge only small quantities of
effluent to the outfall. Therefore, flow rates and discharge constituents for this outfall were taken from
information provided by EGA.
Figure 2.1: Existing intake and outfall facilities
2.2. Proposed Taweelah IWP facilities

The proposed intake and outfall layouts provided by ACWA during the bid-stage studies are shown in
Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3. These are situated around half-way between the Taweelah Complex intake and
outfall channels.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 2
Taweelah IWP
Figure 2.2: Proposed IWP intake layout

Source: Adapted from drawings provided by ACWA
Figure 2.3: Proposed IWP intake and outfall pipeline layout

Source: ACWA
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 3
Taweelah IWP
2.3. Proposed dredging and placement

At the present stage of the project, details of the pipeline/diffuser installation methodologies are not yet
known. Therefore, we have assumed the dredging and placement of sediment will follow the methodologies
of similar projects in the region.
Based on the layout given in Figure 2.3 and the need to place the won sediment locally at a temporary
stockpile for later placement, it is assumed for the purpose of this study that the dredging and placement will
be as represented in Figure 2.4. The proposed dredging is separated into the inshore dredging of the outfall
pipeline and the dredging of the diffuser area further offshore. For both of these phases of the dredging
operations, sediment is temporarily placed alongside the dredge in temporary stockpiles which will be re-
used following laying of the pipeline and diffusers for backfilling.
Figure 2.4: Dredging and stockpiling operations represented in this study
2.4. Sensitive receivers

A map of the local seabed habitat in the vicinity of the proposed works is shown in Figure 2.5. Along the
shoreline north of the proposed works there is seagrass and some macro-algae close to the port itself. The
seagrass communities extend northwards beyond Khalifa Port. Offshore of the seagrass and north of the
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 4
Taweelah IWP
port there is an international important community of fringing reef. Also shown in Figure 2.5 are the locations
of the Taweelah and EGA intakes.
Figure 2.5: Seabed habitat in the vicinity of the proposed works

Source of environmental data : HDR (2018)
2.5. Hydrodynamic environment

The current patterns in the vicinity of the proposed works are shown in Figure 2.6. In general, current speeds
at the site are low (less than 0.2 m/s), although there is some acceleration of currents through the channel
that passes through the gap in the Khalifa Port causeway, and some local influences due to the discharges
from existing outfalls. In general the flows northwards along the coast are stronger than those southwards
along the coast.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 5
Taweelah IWP
High Water Peak ebb
Low Water Peak flood
Figure 2.6: Predicted spring tide current patterns, baseline, typical wind conditions
Source: HR Wallingford (2019)
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 6
Taweelah IWP
2.6. Sedimentary environment

Analysis of grab samples taken from the vicinity of the proposed works and presented in HDR (2018) shows
that the soil which is to be removed is predominantly sandy with a fine sediment content in the range 1-10%.
For the purpose of this study we chose a fine sediment content of 10% as a conservative estimate.
Analysis of water samples taken daily between 11 and 15 May 2018 gave measurements of suspended
solids concentrations of between 13 mg/l and 21 mg/l (HDR, 2018).
3. Hydrodynamic model
The hydrodynamic model used to drive the plume dispersion modelling uses the TELEMAC modelling
software, an established state-of-the-art finite element model, which is currently being used by more than
200 professional and research organisations worldwide. The TELEMAC-2D module solves the depth-
averaged shallow water equations and is used to model various hydraulic phenomena such as tidal and
coastal flows, storm surges, etc. The TELEMAC system is developed under a quality assurance system,
which includes the application of stringent validation tests. TELEMAC uses a completely flexible triangular
mesh. As meshes are unstructured, they can be easily refined to represent coastlines and other important
structures efficiently and accurately.
The hydrodynamic model is a local model using boundary conditions from a much larger Arabian Gulf
regional model. Both these models are briefly described below.
3.1. Regional model

The computational mesh of the regional Gulf model
is shown in Figure 3.1. The model covers the
Arabian Gulf, the Straits of Hormuz and the Gulf of
Oman, and extends out into the Arabian Sea.
Currents and water levels are driven by
astronomical tides and spatially-varying wind and
pressure fields. Predicted water levels have been
calibrated against tidal elevation data at 36
locations spread across the Arabian Gulf and the
Gulf of Oman.
Time- and spatially-varying currents and water
levels were extracted from the regional model and
used to drive the local Taweelah model. Figure 3.1: HR Wallingford’s regional gulf model mesh
3.2. Local flow modelling

The Taweelah local model was built using TELEMAC-3D, which solves the 3D equations of motion and
transport, and includes the important effects of buoyant spreading, inhibition of vertical mixing associated
with sharp density gradients, and shear of wind-driven currents.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 7
Taweelah IWP
3.3. Local model mesh and bathymetry

A close-up image of the baseline local model mesh is shown in Figure 3.2. The model mesh resolution varies
between about 50 m near the outfalls and intakes, rising gradually to around 2 km at the offshore
boundaries.
Figure 3.2: Local model mesh
The model bathymetry was defined using information from international hydrographic offices, supplemented
with data from a local survey provided by ACWA. The survey area extended 2 km offshore and 500 m
alongshore. The detailed local data were merged with sparser hydrographic office data, which means that
bed levels beyond the edges of the survey are estimated using interpolation and extrapolation. We
recommend that the exact bed levels outside the survey area are confirmed through a wider survey during
subsequent studies.
3.4. Wind
Wind conditions at the site were simulated using data from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather
Forecasting (ECMWF) ERA5 hindcast dataset. ERA5 is a climate reanalysis dataset, generated using
Copernicus Climate Change Service information. The name ERA refers to ‘ECMWF ReAnalysis’, with ERA5
being the fifth major global reanalysis produced by ECMWF. ERA5 gives an estimate of historical
atmospheric activity based on numerical models combined with observations.
Wind measurements were collected at Taweelah from 12 June 2018 to 19 July 2018 and compared with the
ERA5 hindcast predictions in the brine dispersion study (HR Wallingford, 2019). The ERA5 model was found
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 8
Taweelah IWP
to reproduce the wind characteristics (speeds and directions) well within the vicinity of the study area,
including periods of typical land-sea breeze and stronger winds from the north and north-west. On this basis
it was deemed suitable for the purposes of the assessment.
3.5. Model calibration

To ensure that the hydrodynamic model predictions (water levels, current speed and direction) were suitable
gauge data provided by HDR (see HR Wallingford, 2019). This data was derived from two current profiler
(Aquadopp) instruments which were deployed approximately 2 km and 5 km offshore from the project site,
over the period May to June 2018. The model was run for the survey period, with ERA5 data applied as
described above. The calibration exercise demonstrated that the model predictions of water level and current
speed are suitable for the purposes of dispersion assessments at the site.
More details on the calibration of the hydrodynamic model is provided in HR Wallingford (2019).
Typical current patterns are shown in Figure 2.6.
4. Plume dispersion model

4.1. Introduction
The sediment plume dispersion model SEDPLUME-RW was used to predict the fate of fine material released
by the dredging and stockpiling activities. This model uses the hydrodynamic output from the TELEMAC-2D
flow model, and the assumption of a logarithmic velocity profile through the water column, to track the
3-dimensional movement of sediment particles.
Dispersal in the direction of flow is provided by the shear action of differential current speeds while turbulent
dispersion is modelled using a random walk technique. The deposition and erosion of particles are modelled
by establishing critical bed shear stresses for erosion and deposition. Erosion of deposited material occurs
when this erosion threshold is exceeded while deposition occurs when bed shear stress falls below the
critical level.
Note that the dispersion modelling does not represent background concentrations but simulates the increase
of suspended sediment concentrations caused by the plumes generated by the dredging and/or reclamation
activities over and above these background concentrations.
Details of the SEDPLUME-RW model are included in Appendix A.
4.2. Source terms

Source term magnitude
The behaviour of the sediment plume depends on the characteristics of the bed sediments to be dredged
and the type of dredger used, which together determine the source term for the fine sediment release, and
the local flow regime, which determines the resulting advection and dispersion.
The bed sediments have been described in Section 2.6 and can be summarised as sand with a small
proportion of fines. For the purposes of this study a conservative value of 10% fines has been selected.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 9
Taweelah IWP
The dredger to be used for the trenching is assumed to be a small/medium cutter suction dredger which
will be pumping the dredged sandy sediment to a local stockpile.
Using the information about bed sediment and assumed dredging methodology as input to
HR Wallingford’s in house dredger production models, we predict that the rate of release of fine sediment
at the trench will be 8 kg/s while the release of fine sediment at the placement site will be 20 kg/s.
General points about the release of sediment in the model
The release of fine sediment from the dredging operations is represented in the model as being a release
into the bottom half of the water column while the release of fine sediment from placement activities is
assumed to occur throughout the water column.
As the coarser fractions (particle sizes above 63 μm in diameter) will settle rapidly to the bed, only the
finest fractions (<63 μm) have been modelled.
Backfill operations
During the dredging operations, the sediment will be stockpiled along-side the trenches and re-used to
backfill the trenches following pipeline lay. During the backfill operations the material will be similar to that
prior to dredging but most of the fines content within the in-situ sediment will have dispersed from the sand
during the first phase of dredging and placement. The plumes resulting from backfilling (re-dredging and re-
placement of the stockpile) will therefore be much reduced compared to those of the original dredging and
stockpiling.
4.3. Summary of plume modelling simulations

Two simulations were undertaken:
Simulation 1 - dredging and placement of the diffuser trench at the offshore end of the outfall trench;
Simulation 2 - dredging of the outfall trench inshore of the diffuser trench.
The locations of the different dredging and placement activities for the two simulations are summarised in
Figure 4.1.
We assume that as the intake is relatively small and attached to the land, it is likely to be constructed using
dumper trucks and backhoe with minimal impact. It is therefore not considered further within this study.
The diffuser trench simulation was undertaken for a period of 14 days (a spring-neap cycle) while the inshore
trench simulation was undertaken for a period of 29 days (two spring-neap cycles). The representation of
dredging in the plume dispersion simulations assumed continuous dredging and was represented as an
average dredging rate over this period. In reality it can be expected that there will be dredging down time due
to mechanical failure, weather and/or movement of the dredger.
The overall effect of dredging (taking into account the combination of both periods of dredging and
placement) is discussed in Section 6.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 10
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.1: The locations of the different dredging and placement activities for the two simulations
4.4. Simulation parameters

The sediment parameter settings used in the simulations are listed in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Sediment parameter settings
Parameter Value
Critical shear stress for deposition 0.1 N/m2
Critical shear stress for erosion 0.2 N/m2
Erosion constant [me = dm/dt = me(τ-τe)] 0.002 kg N-1m-2s-1
Settling velocity of fine sediment 1 mm/s
Dry sediment density of deposited fine sediment 500 kg/m3
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 11
Taweelah IWP
5. Plume dispersion results

In the following sections the results of plume dispersion modelling are presented in four different formats:
Plots of the maximum predicted increase in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration. Such
plots are composites of the maximum value reached throughout the simulation, at different times, at
every location, and therefore do not represent the extent of the plume at any given time. The strength of
these plots is that they present the envelope of the effects of the plume. The drawback of these plots is
that they over-emphasise the size of the plume (at any particular moment the plume will be smaller) and
they don’t take into account the duration of the plume (a plume concentration might only be attained
momentarily).
Plots of the mean predicted increase in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration. These plots
take into account the magnitude and duration of the increases in suspended sediment concentration and
represent the average conditions that occur at any location with the model. However, because plumes
move with the tidal currents, these plots tend to under-estimate the size of the plume at any given time.
Time series plots of the depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration at sensitive receivers. These
plots illustrate the increases in suspended sediment over time that will be experienced at beach and
other locations in the vicinity of the dredging. The plots are presented in Section 6.
Plots of the mean predicted fine sediment deposition over the course of the simulations. These plots
show the predicted fine sediment deposition that results from the 14-29 day periods of dredging
simulated.
5.1. Results of Simulation 1 - dredging and placement at the

diffuser trench
The predicted peak increase in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration resulting from
Simulation 1 (dredging of the diffuser trench and placement to the north-west of the trench) is shown in
Figure 5.1. Suspended sediment concentration increases of more than 10 mg/l are carried through the port
to the edge of the coral field, with predicted peak increases in depth-averaged sediment concentration of up
to 5 mg/l over the coral itself. In the vicinity of the dredging/placement, concentrations are predicted to
increase by up to 500 mg/l (though in the immediate near-field of the dredger and/or placement higher
concentration increases would be expected).
The predicted mean increase in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration resulting from
Simulation 1 is shown in Figure 5.2. The figure shows that mean suspended sediment concentration
increases of more than 10 mg/l above background extend up to 2 km to the NW, as far as the entrance to
the port. In the vicinity of the dredging/placement, mean concentration increases are predicted of up to 50
mg/l (though in the immediate near-field of the dredger and/or placement higher mean concentration
increases would be expected).
The predicted fine sediment deposition resulting from the 14 days of dredging and placement represented by
Simulation 1 is shown in Figure 5.3. The figure shows that the footprint of deposition extends to within and
north of the port but within the port the predicted thickness of deposition is less than 1 mm further north the
predicted thickness of deposition is very low (a fraction of a millimetre). Deposition of more than 1 mm is
predicted up to 2 km NW of the placement and up to a few hundred metres SE of the dredging. In the vicinity
of the dredging and placement fine sediment deposition of more than 100 mm is predicted.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 12
Taweelah IWP
Figure 5.1: Predicted maximum increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration above
background, Simulation 1, dredging of diffuser trench
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 13
Taweelah IWP
background, Simulation 1, dredging of diffuser trench
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 14
Taweelah IWP
Figure 5.3: Predicted fine sediment deposition after 14 days of dredging and placement, Simulation 1,
dredging of diffuser trench
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 15
Taweelah IWP
5.2. Results of Simulation 2 - dredging and placement at the

inshore end of the outfall trench
The predicted peak increase in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration resulting from
Simulation 2 (dredging of the outfall trench and placement to the south-east of the trench) is shown in
Figure 5.4. Suspended sediment concentration increases of more than 10 mg/l are limited to within 750 m of
the dredging/placement with plumes and predicted peak increases in depth-averaged sediment
concentration over the coral itself are less than 2 mg/l. In the vicinity of the dredging/placement
concentrations are predicted to increase by up to 500 mg/l (though in the immediate near-field of the dredger
and/or placement higher concentration increases would be expected).
The predicted mean increase in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration resulting from
Simulation 2 is shown in Figure 5.5. The figure shows that mean suspended sediment concentration
increases of more than 1 mg/l above background extend less than 500 m from the dredging/placement. In
the vicinity of the dredging/placement, mean concentration increases are predicted of up to 50 mg/l (though
in the immediate near-field of the dredger and/or placement higher mean concentration increases would be
expected).
The predicted fine sediment deposition resulting from the 14 days of dredging and placement represented by
Simulation 1 is shown in Figure 5.6. The figure shows that deposition of more than 1 mm is predicted up to
750 from dredging/placement. In the vicinity of the dredging and placement fine sediment deposition of more
than 100 mm is predicted.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 16
Taweelah IWP
Figure 5.4: Predicted maximum increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration above
background, Simulation 2, dredging of inshore outfall trench
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 17
Taweelah IWP
background, Simulation 2, dredging of inshore outfall trench
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 18
Taweelah IWP
Figure 5.6: Predicted fine sediment deposition after 29 days of dredging and placement, Simulation 2,
6. Discussion
6.1. The effect of backfilling operations
In terms of the assumed dredging and placement methodologies, the backfill operation is very like that of the
original dredging and stockpile placement. However, once the trench has been dredged and the won
sediment has been stockpiled locally, most of the fine sediment that was originally in the in situ sediment will
have been lost into the water column. When the stockpiled sediment is re-dredged and placed back into the
trench, there will be much less fine sediment available to be released into the water column. The nature of
any increases in suspended sediment concentration and fine sediment deposition linearly scales with the
amount of fine sediment released into the water column so it can be expected that the effects of backfilling
activities are very like those outlined in the modelling presented in Section 5, except that the suspended
sediment increases and fine sediment deposition will much smaller - around 10-20% of those shown.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 19
Taweelah IWP
6.2. Effects of deposition of fine sediment from whole of proposed

works
Based on a combination of the results shown in Section 5, Figure 6.1 shows an estimate of the fine sediment
deposition expected from the works as a whole. The figure is overlaid upon the seabed habitat distribution so
that any potential impacts upon habitat can be more readily identified. The predictions indicate some small
amounts of deposition on the fringing coral reef beyond the port to the north and some local deposition on
the seagrass bed immediately north of the inshore works.
The fine sediment predicted to deposit can be expected to be slowly re-worked by waves and currents so
that it spreads to and along the shoreline.
Figure 6.1: Predicted fine sediment deposition resulting from works as a whole
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 20
Taweelah IWP
6.3. Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration at

sensitive receivers
Time series of predicted increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration at the Taweelah
Power Station intake and at the edge of the coral reef are presented in Figure 6.2 and Figure 6.3. The
corresponding predictions for the EGA intake are not presented as the predicted increases are always below
0.1 mg/l. Table 6.1 summarises the results of these time series. It can be seen that the predicted increases
in concentration at these locations are small and rarely above 0.5 mg/l.
Table 6.1: Summary of impacts on sensitive receivers resulting from proposed operations
Predicted increase in suspended % of the time>predicted increase

sediment concentration (mg/l) is > 0.5 mg/l
Name of sensitive receiver
Dredging of Dredging of Dredging of Dredging of
diffuser trench outfall trench diffuser trench outfall trench
Taweelah Complex intake <4 <1 2.7 0.1

ADP intake < 0.1 < 0.1 0 0
Fringing Coral Reef <2 <2 0.1 0.8
On the basis of these results It is not anticipated that the proposed dredging and placement operations (and
hence of the backfilling operations) will cause increases in suspended concentrations or fine sediment
deposition which will cause adverse impacts for the intakes or coral reef.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 21
Taweelah IWP
Figure 6.2: Time series of predicted increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration at the
Taweelah Power Station intake
Figure 6.3: Time series of predicted increases in depth-averaged suspended sediment concentration at the
fringing coral reef
7. Conclusions
Numerical dispersion modelling has been applied to investigate the potential changes in suspended
sediment concentration, and potential deposition of fine sediment, arising from dredging and placement
associated with the proposed construction of an IWP diffuser pipeline at Taweelah.
Assessments of the sediment dispersion indicate concentration increases of several hundred mg/l close
to the location of the dredging and that predicted increases of more than 10 mg/l are restricted to within 2
km of the dredging/placement.
Fine sediment deposition is principally contained within 2 km of the dredging/placement but small
amounts of deposition (of a fraction of a millimetre) are predicted over the coral reef north of the port and
over the sea grass close to shore immediately north of the works.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 22
Taweelah IWP
Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration at the existing ADP intake were predicted to
be less than 0.1 mg/l.
Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration at the existing Taweelah Complex intake were
predicted to be less than 4 mg/l and above 0.5 mg/l for less than 1% of the time.
Predicted increases in suspended sediment concentration over the fringing coral were predicted to be
less than 2 mg/l and above 0.5 mg/l for less than 3% of the time during dredging of the diffuser trench
and for less than 0.1% of the time during dredging of the outfall trench.
On the basis of these results It is not anticipated that the proposed dredging and placement operations
(and hence of the backfilling operations) will cause increases in suspended concentrations or fine
sediment deposition which will cause adverse impacts for the intakes or coral reef.
8. References
HDR (2018) Environmental Impact Assessment, Taweelah DoE IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant, July
2018.
HR Wallingford (2019) Taweelah IWP, Brine dispersion modelling and recirculation study, DER6082-RT001-
R02-00, April 2019.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00 23
Taweelah IWP
Appendices
A. SEDPLUME-RW model
Flow in a coastal region consists of large-scale tidal motion, wind-driven currents and small-scale turbulent
eddies. In order to model the dispersal of suspended fine sediment in such a region, the effects of these
flows on these plumes must be simulated. The random walk dispersal model, SEDPLUME, represents
turbulent diffusion as random displacements from the purely advective motion described by the turbulent
mean velocities computed by the free surface flow model, in this TELEMAC.
A.1. Representation of mud disturbance

In SEDPLUME, the release of suspended mud in coastal waters is represented as a regular or intermittent
discharge of discrete particles. Particles are released throughout a model run to simulate continuous mud
disturbance or for part of the run to simulate mud disturbance over an interval during the tidal cycle, for
instance to represent the resuspension of fine sediment during dredging operations. At specified sites a
number of particles are released in each model time-step and, in order to simulate the release of suspended
mud, the total mud released at each site during a given time interval is divided equally between the released
particles. Particles can be released either at the precise coordinates of the specified sites, or distributed
randomly, centred on the specified release sites. The particles can be released at the surface or evenly
distributed through the water column. This allows the representation of the initial spreading of plumes of
material released by a dredger, for example, but SEDPLUME results are generally fairly insensitive to the
specified initial spreading radius.
A.2. Large scale advection

TELEMAC can be used to model either 2D or 3D currents. For TELEMAC-3D the 3D currents are used
directly by SEDPLUME. In the case of TELEMAC-2D SEDPLUME converts the depth-averaged current
TELEMAC-2D output into a 3D representation of tidal currents using the well-known logarithmic velocity
profile:
U* 30.1z
U ( z) ln
ks
(1)
where:
U = current speed (ms-1)
U = friction velocity for a tidal current (ms-1)
*
= von Karman’s constant

z = distance above sea bed (m)
ks = roughness length (m)
Each particle is then advected by the local flow conditions. Because the three dimensional structure of the
flow is calculated by SEDPLUME, effects such as shear dispersion of plumes are automatically represented.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
In the case of wind-driven currents, SEDPLUME assumes that the surface wind-driven current is parallel to
the wind vector with a speed given by:
S w (2)
where:
S = surface wind-driven current speed (ms-1)
= an empirical constant
w = wind speed at 10m above the sea surface (ms-1)
SEDPLUME uses this information to establish a parabolic velocity profile through depth due to wind which is
superimposed upon the tidal current profile.
A.3. Turbulent diffusion

In order to simulate the effects of turbulent eddies on suspended mud plumes in coastal waters, particles in
SEDPLUME are subjected to random displacements in addition to the ordered movements which represent
advection by mean currents. The motion of simulated plumes is, therefore, a random walk, being the
resultant of ordered and random movements. Provided the lengths of the turbulent displacements are
correctly chosen, the random step procedure is analogous to the use of turbulent diffusivity in depth-
averaged mud transport models. This is discussed in more detail below.
(a) Lateral diffusion
The horizontal random movement of each particle during a time-step of SEDPLUME consists of a
displacement derived from the parameters of the simulation. The displacement of the particle in each of the
orthogonal horizontal directions is calculated from a Gaussian distribution, with zero mean and a variance
determined from the specified lateral diffusivity. The relationship between the standard deviation of the
displacement, the time-step and the diffusivity is defined in Reference 1 as:
2
= 2D
t (3)
where:
= standard deviation of the turbulent lateral displacement (m)
t = time-step (s)
D = lateral diffusivity (m2s-1).
In a SEDPLUME simulation, a lateral diffusivity is specified, which the model reduces to a turbulent
displacement using Equation (3). No directional bias is required for the turbulent movements, as the effects
of shear diffusion are effectively included through the calculated depth structure in the mean current profile.
(b) Vertical diffusion
Whilst lateral movements associated with turbulent eddies are satisfactorily represented by the specification
of a constant diffusivity, vertical turbulent motions can vary significantly horizontally and over the water
depth, so that vertical diffusivities must be computed from the characteristics of the mean flow field, rather
than specified as constants. In neutral conditions, the vertical diffusivity, Kz, is given by:
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
2 h u
K z = 0.16 h 1 -
d z (4)
where:
h = height of particle above the bed
d = water depth
0.16 = (von Karman constant)
u = current speed
z = vertical coordinate
The value of the vertical diffusivity is calculated at each particle position, then a vertical turbulent
displacement is derived for each particle from its Kz value using an equation analogous to (3) for the lateral
turbulent displacement.
(c) Drift velocities
A particle undergoes a random walk as follows:
n n -1 n -1 n - 1 n - 1 n -1 n
x = x + A( x ,t ) t + B( x ,t ) t (5)
where xn is the position of the particle at time tn, A is the advection velocity at timestep n-1 and B is a matrix
giving the diffusivity. is a vector of three random numbers, each drawn from a normal distribution with unit
variance and zero mean. In the case of SEDPLUME, B is diagonal, with the first two entries equal to (2D)
(as introduced in the previous section) and the third diagonal entry being equal to the local value of (2Kz).
The movement of a particle undergoing a random walk as described in equation (5) can be described by the
Fokker-Planck equation in the limit of a very large number of particles and a very short timestep, where we
introduce subscripts i,j and k running over the three coordinate directions:
2
f 1
+ ( Ai f) = ( Bik B jk f)
t xi xi x j 2 (6)
The probability density function f(x,t|x0,t0) is the probability of a particle which starts at position x0 at time t0
being at position x at time t.
Equation (6) can be compared with the advection-diffusion equation for the concentration of a pollutant, c:
c
+ ( u i c) = ( K ik c)
t xi xi xk (7)
where Kik is the eddy diffusion matrix, diagonal in our case but not necessarily so. Thus identifying f with c,
we can see that the two equations are equivalent provided that we take the advection velocity as:
Ai = u i + K ik
xk (8)
In the case of SEDPLUME, the diffusivity varies only in the vertical and is constant in the horizontal, so the
horizontal advection velocity is simply the flow velocity (assuming that the relatively small effects of changing
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
water depth can be neglected). However, when considering the movement of particles in the vertical it is
important to include the gradient of the diffusivity (often referred to as a drift velocity) in the advection step. If
this term is omitted then particles tend to accumulate in regions of low diffusivity, which in our case means at
the surface and at the bed.
This subject is discussed in considerably more detail in References 2, 3, 4, and 5.
A.4. Sedimentation processes

(a) Settling
In SEDPLUME, the settling velocity (ws) of suspended mud is assumed to be related to the mud
concentration (c) through an equation of the form:
Q
ws = max( wmin , Pc ) (9)
where wmin, P and Q are empirical constants. Having computed a suspended mud concentration field, as
described subsequently in this section, a settling velocity can be computed in each output grid cell from
Equation (7) and used to derive a downward displacement for each particle during each time-step of a model
simulation. This displacement is added vectorially to the other computed ordered and random particle
displacements. Note that there is a specified minimum value of ws. This results in settling velocities being
constant at low suspended mud concentrations, as indicated by recent research at HR. (Reference 6).
(b) Deposition
SEDPLUME computes bed shear stresses from the input tidal flow fields using the rough turbulent equation,
based on a bed roughness length input by the user. If the effects of storm waves on mud deposition and
erosion at the sea bed are to be included in a model simulation, a bed shear stress associated with wave
orbital motions, computed from the results of mathematical wave model simulations, is added to that
resulting from the simulated tidal currents (Reference 7). Where the computed bed stress, b, falls below a
specified critical value, d, and the water is sufficiently deep, then deposition is assumed to occur. Mud
deposition is represented in SEDPLUME by particles approaching the sea bed becoming inactive when b is
below d. Whilst active particles in the water column contribute to the computed suspended mud
concentration field, as described subsequently in this appendix, inactive particles contribute to the mud
deposit field.
In shallow areas, where tidal currents are sufficiently weak to allow mud accretion, normal wave action can
prevent mud deposition. This effect is included empirically in SEDPLUME, by specifying a minimum water
depth below which deposition does not occur.
(c) Erosion
The erosion of mud deposits from the sea bed is represented in SEDPLUME by inactive particles returning
to the water column (becoming active) when b exceeds a specified erosional shear strength, e. The
number of particles which become re-suspended in each cell of the output grid in each time-step of a
simulation is determined by the equation:
me
M b e
t (10)
where:
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
me = the mass eroded (kg)

t = time (s)
M = an empirical erosion constant.
A.5. Computation of suspended mud concentrations

In SEDPLUME, suspended mud concentrations are computed on the TELEMAC-2D grid which can be
designed to resolve the essential features of relatively small-scale plumes. In each SEDPLUME grid cell a
concentration is derived by dividing the total suspended mud represented by all the active particles in that
cell by the volume of the cell.
A.6. Computation of mud deposit distributions

SEDPLUME computes mud deposit distributions by summing the mass of mud represented by the inactive
particles in each cell of the output grid, and assuming that the resulting mass is evenly distributed over the
cell area.
A.7. References
1. H B Fischer, E J List, R C Y Koh, J Imberger and N H Brooks, 1979. Mixing in Inland and Coastal
Waters. New York : Academic. 483 pp.
2. A S Monin and A m Yaglom. "Statistical Fluid Mechanics". MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1971.
3. A F B Tompson and L W Gelhar. "Numerical simulation of solute transport in three-dimensional randomly
heterogeneous porous media". Water Resources Research, Vol 26 pp2541-2562, October 1990.
4. K N Dimou and E E Adams. "A random-walk particle tracking model for well-mixed estuaries and coastal
waters". Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, Vol 37, pp99-110, 1993.
5. B J Legg and m R Raupach. "Markov-chain simulation of particle dispersion in inhomogeneous flows: the
mean drift velocity induced in a gradient in Eulerian velocity variance". Boundary Layer Meteorology Vol
24, pp3-13, 1982.
6. HR Wallingford. Port and Airport Development Strategy - Enhancement of the WAHMO Mathematical
Models. Calibration of the North West New Territories Coastal Waters Mud Transport Model for Normal
Wet and Dry Season Conditions. Report EX 2266, January 1991.
7. HR Wallingford. Port and Airport Development Strategy - Enhancement of the WAHMO Mathematical
Models. Testing of the North West New Territories Coastal Waters Mud Transport Model for Storm Wave
Conditions in the Wet Season. Report EX 2267, January 1991.
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP

organisation. We deliver practical solutions to the complex water-related challenges
faced by our international clients. A dynamic research programme underpins all that we
do and keeps us at the leading edge. Our unique mix of know-how, assets and facilities
includes state of the art physical modelling laboratories, a full range of numerical
modelling tools and, above all, enthusiastic people with world-renowned skills and
expertise.
HR Wallingford, Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BA, United Kingdom

© HR Wallingford
DER6082-RT002-R01-00
Taweelah IWP
Addendum report - further data collection and
model analysis
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 September 2019

Taweelah IWP
Addendum report - further data collection and model analysis
Report title Addendum report - further data collection and model analysis
Report number RT003
Report date September 2019
Client ACWA Power Global Services LLC
Document history
27 Sep 2019 03-00 MJW RBE RBE Authorised release
26 Sep 2019 02-00 MJW *** *** Unauthorised release, addressing comments
from 5 Capitals
25 Sep 2019 01-00 MJW *** *** Preliminary (unauthorised) release for
discussion
Document authorisation
Prepared Approved Authorised
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Summary
A seawater reverse osmosis Independent Water Project (IWP) is being developed at the
existing Taweelah Power and Desalination Complex. Seawater will be drawn through an
open intake to produce 200 MIGD of potable water. Reject brine will be returned to sea
HR Wallingford has previously carried out hydrodynamic/dispersion modelling and diffuser studies to support
the design of the intake/outfall configuration, and to support the process to obtain related environmental
approvals from EAD.
EAD provided comments on these studies and requested additional data collection to give further confidence
in the model predictions. This report summarises subsequent assessments and data collection that have
been carried out in response to EAD comments and following discussions with EAD on 22 May and 18 June
2019.
Conclusions from the initial model calibration and additional data

collection
HR Wallingford’s local 3D model was originally verified using current meter and tide gauge data provided for
the study by HDR. Key conclusions were as follows:
Tidal ranges and tidal phasing (including the complex imbalances between subsequent low and high
waters) are predicted extremely well by the model.
The level of tidal agreement is within a few percent – well within the accuracy required for this type of
assessment – demonstrating that the model can accurately reproduce the characteristics of the spring
and neap mixed tides at the site.
The model performs well relative to the measured current data (reproducing many of the complex current
variations at the site that are important for plume dispersion).
Based on the quality of calibration, we are confident that reliable study conclusions have been obtained.
The dispersion of the discharge plumes over the wider area, and their concentrations at nearby sensitive
sites, would not be significantly changed by further improvements to the calibration.
On this basis, as originally described in Reference 1, the quality of the original calibration is considered to be
high, and already demonstrates that the local model is suitable for the purposes of the dispersion
assessment. Further analysis was carried out to give further confidence in the model near Aquadopp-2,
where predicted peak speeds during some of the flood tides were slightly lower than those observed:
Aquadopp-2 was effectively sheltered by the Khalifa Port reclamation on the flood tide, in a region where
peak current speeds change by ±0.05-0.1 m/s within a few hundred metres.
As the instrument was located on the edge of this eddy, only a very small change to the size and shape
of the eddy would be required to cause the differences seen.
These differences are small, and would not significantly affect the dispersion of the discharge plumes
over the wider area.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Moreover, as the model predicts smaller peak flood current speeds at this location than observed (i.e. the
sheltering effect is slightly increased in the model), this would tend to give more conservative dilution
predictions in the mid-field (i.e. the model may tend to predict higher mid-field brine concentrations).
Further analysis of the distribution of the currents (which are important for residual movement and
dispersion of plumes), showed clear alignment between the model predications and observed conditions,
and that the general drift trends in the model are appropriately represented for the purposes of the
dispersion assessment.
Since the previous studies, additional data have been obtained:
4 x ADCPs
additional tide gauge records
larger bathymetry survey.
Comparison with the model reinforces the original conclusions that the model is aligned with observed data
and that the model is well suited for use in the dispersion assessments at the site.
Conclusions of the rationale underpinning selection of the 3 km

outfall configuration
As the baseline salinity footprint already extends a significant distance from the site, the outfall
configuration was established on the basis of limiting further/additional impacts of the IWP discharge
over and above those of the existing discharges on the already elevated baseline salinities.
A comparison of the relative performance for a range of different outfall layouts/configurations was
possible based on the data and results already available from the 2018 EIA (Reference 2).
On the basis of this comparison, it was found that pipeline lengths between 3 km and 7 km give similar
overall footprints.
The potential for increased near-field mixing was not considered during the concept phase. This matter
was also duly noted by EAD in its review of the July 2018 EIA: “The EIA should explore the option of
brine outfall pipe, with single and multiple ports diffusers, and based on this assessment EAD has the
right to approve other outfall option than preferred by the proponent.”
In-line with best practice and following EAD’s comments/requirement, the proposed 3 km outfall was
configured with an appropriate multiport diffuser, using established formulae/leading research on brine
jets, to promote rapid near-field mixing and enhanced performance.
Basic comparisons were made between the average salinity footprints predicted for the previously
consented 7 km outfall and the improved 3 km outfall. Although it is acknowledged that test conditions for
the comparison were not identical, and the tests were based on different modelling systems, the
comparisons show:
the predicted average +2 ppt footprints extend around:
– 9 km offshore for the concept phase 7 km outfall
– 6 km offshore for the proposed 3 km outfall.
the predicted average +1 ppt footprints extend:
– more than 12 km offshore for the concept phase 7 km outfall
– around 7 km offshore for the proposed 3 km outfall
Comparing the predicted areas:
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
– In relative terms there is little difference between the average extents of the +2 ppt excess
salinity footprints for the 7 km and 3 km outfalls. The plume for the 7 km outfall case extends
further offshore and the plume for the 3 km outfall extends further east .
– The average area with excess salinities of more than 1 ppt is reduced for the 3 km outfall (around
60 km2 compared with 90 km2 for the previously consented outfall).
Based on this comparison, the proposed 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser performs at least as well
as the concept phase 7 km outfall when considering the average +2 ppt excess salinity footprints,
and reduces the average +1 ppt footprint compared with the concept phase 7 km outfall.
Comparing the relative merits of the proposed 3 km outfall and the concept phase 7 km outfall:
Focusing 60% of the discharge load towards the offshore end of the 7 km outfall would result in a
further area of higher concentration outside the area currently affected by the discharge of the
existing Taweelah complex.
The proposed 3 km outfall is situated close to the existing area of impact and is configured to limit the
overall impact area compared with the concept phase 7 km outfall.
The locations of 15 sensitive receptors were provided to HR Wallingford and the cumulative impact of the
existing plants within the Taweelah Complex and the IWP was predicted in the model. The sensitive
receptors included the most critical habitats at Ras Ghanada (coral reef, seagrass, mangrove and
intertidal mudflats for birds), similar far-field habitats to the southwest of the project site and seagrass
habitat adjacent to Khalifa Port. These results show that the IWP has a particularly small increase in
salinity at the designated sites.
Important ancillary considerations that further support/justify the selection of the 3 km outfall in
preference to the concept phase 7 km outfall include (but may not necessarily be limited to):
A 7 km long marine pipeline would require significantly more dredging, pipeline laying and trench
backfilling activities. This would increase the extent of the impact of the project construction as well
as the duration of the impacts as the construction period may be expected to be increased due to the
offshore extent of the works.
A 3 km long marine pipeline reduces the volume of marine works and hence serves to reduce
associated potential impacts of the construction. The reduced construction schedule also mitigates
impacts during construction.
There is a potential permanent operational “cost” associated with the longer 7 km offshore discharge
option in terms of pumping requirements which manifest themselves as losses for the plant. In order
to discharge all the required process streams into a long 7 km outfall pipeline system, higher residual
pressures/headlosses must be overcome, requiring an energy “cost” to the system.
An appropriately configured 3 km outfall may allow gravity discharge of the plant discharges, thereby
reducing energy loss / “cost” and increasing overall plant efficiency.
The 3 km outfall arrangement effectively contributes to a reduced overall “environmental impact
footprint”/”carbon footprint” compared with the previously consented 7 km option.
The proposed 3 km outfall makes use of the “flushing” potential generated by currents accelerating
through the gap in the existing Khalifa Port causeway, which are predicted to slightly increase after
planned expansion of Khalifa Port.
In some respects, the proposed 3 km outfall may be less affected by future sheltering effects of the
planned Khalifa Port expansion, compared with the 7 km outfall. The port’s offshore expansion would
reduce the dilution at the offshore part of the 7 km outfall, where 60% of the brine was to be discharged.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
In summary, we conclude: the initial 7 km long outfall concept design did not account for
potential improvements in dilution that can be achieved through the use of an appropriate
multiport diffuser. We revised the initial concept, using appropriate best practice
techniques for brine diffuser design. By increasing the amount of ambient seawater
entrained into the near-field region of mixing, we have produced a proposed outfall
configuration with a 3 km pipeline that gives a similar overall plume footprint to the initially
proposed concept, while reducing the potential energy requirements and impacts due to
construction.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Contents
Summary
1. Introduction _________________________________________________________ 1
2. Initial model calibration ________________________________________________ 1
2.1. Original comparisons with data ......................................................................................................... 1
2.2. More detailed calibration analysis ..................................................................................................... 3
2.3. Summary of initial model calibration ................................................................................................. 6
3. Additional data collection ______________________________________________ 6
3.1. SGS current data............................................................................................................................... 7
3.2. SGS tide gauge data ....................................................................................................................... 15
3.3. Fugro data ....................................................................................................................................... 15
3.4. Comparisons with the hydrodynamic model ................................................................................... 18
3.5. Bathymetry ...................................................................................................................................... 23
3.6. Summary of additional data and implications for modelling ............................................................ 24
4. Rationale underpinning selection of the 3 km outfall configuration ______________ 25
4.1. Background ..................................................................................................................................... 25
4.2. Mixing zone and impact of the discharge ........................................................................................ 25
4.3. Review and assessment of alternative design options ................................................................... 26
4.4. Outfall diffuser configuration to increase near-field mixing ............................................................. 29
4.5. Salinity impact / performance comparison ...................................................................................... 30
4.6. Comparison of new (3 km) and concept phase (7 km) outfalls ....................................................... 32
4.6.1. Outfall Configuration .......................................................................................................... 32
4.6.2. Diffuser ............................................................................................................................... 33
4.7. Impacts at sensitive receivers ......................................................................................................... 33
4.8. Important and significant ancillary considerations and consequential benefits .............................. 34
4.9. Khalifa Port Expansion .................................................................................................................... 34
4.10. Conclusions and summary on the rationale underpinning the selection of a 3 km outfall and
multiport diffuser .............................................................................................................................. 35
5. References ________________________________________________________ 37
Figures
Figure 2.1: Aquadopp current profiler and tide gauge locations ................................................................. 1
Figure 2.2: Comparison of predicted and observed water levels at the tide gauge ................................... 2
Figure 2.3: Comparison of predicted and observed current speeds and direction at Aquadopp-1 ............ 3
Figure 2.4: Comparison of predicted and observed current speeds and direction at Aquadopp-2 ............ 3
Figure 2.5: Predicted peak flood and ebb current patterns near the Aquadopp current meters ................ 4
Figure 2.6: Tidal ellipses showing the observed and predicted current distributions at the two
Aquadopp locations .................................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 3.1: Locations of the new instruments and the original Aquadopps ................................................ 7
Figure 3.2: SGS-ADCP-1 sensor readings (upper frame) and QA scores (lower frame) ........................... 9
Figure 3.3: SGS-ADCP-1 depth-averaged current data ........................................................................... 10
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.4: SGS-ADCP-1 tidal ellipse ....................................................................................................... 10

Figure 3.5: SGS-ADCP-2 sensor readings (upper frame) and QA scores (lower frame) ......................... 11
Figure 3.7: SGS-ADCP-2 tidal ellipse ....................................................................................................... 12
Figure 3.8: SGS-ADCP-3 sensor readings (upper frame) and QA scores (lower frame) ......................... 13
Figure 3.10: SGS-ADCP-3 tidal ellipse ..................................................................................................... 14
Figure 3.11: SGS tide and converted ADCP pressure gauge data .......................................................... 15
Figure 3.12: Fugro-1 current sensor readings (upper frame) and QA scores (lower frame) .................... 16
Figure 3.13: Fugro-1 depth-averaged current data................................................................................... 17
Figure 3.14: Fugro-1 tidal ellipse .............................................................................................................. 17
Figure 3.15: Qualitative comparisons between currents and water levels observed at SGS-ADCP-1
(17 August – 6 September 2019) and predictions of the hydrodynamic model (15 May –
4 June 2018) ............................................................................................................................................. 19
4 June 2018) ............................................................................................................................................. 20
4 June 2018) ............................................................................................................................................. 21
Figure 3.18: Qualitative comparisons between currents and water levels observed at Fugro-1 (24
June – 27 July 2019) and predictions of the hydrodynamic model (15 May – 4 June 2018) ................... 22
Figure 3.19: Previous (HDR/SGS) and new (Fugro) survey areas........................................................... 23
Figure 3.20: Differences between model bathymetry and new survey data ............................................. 24
Figure 4.1: Outcomes of alternative brine effluent discharge points and loads – Part 1 .......................... 27
Figure 4.2: Outcomes of alternative brine effluent discharge points and loads – Part 2 .......................... 28
Figure 4.3: Projected bottom salinity (10-day average) across from Taweelah domain using a 7 km
outfall distributing the IWP brine at km 2 (10%), km 3 (10%), km 4 (10%), km 5 (10%), km 6 (30%)
and km 7 (30%) ......................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 4.4: Predicted average excess salinity at the bed, 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser,
typical winds .............................................................................................................................................. 31
Figure 4.5: Approximate average plume footprints for originally consented 7 km outfall (isolines),
No table of figures entries found.
and new 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser (filled contours) .................................................................... 32
DER6082-RT003-R03-00
Taweelah IWP
1. Introduction
A seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) Independent Water Project (IWP) is being
developed at the existing Taweelah Power and Desalination Complex. Seawater will be
drawn through an open intake to produce 200 MIGD of potable water. Reject brine will be
returned to sea through a submerged multiport diffuser outfall.
HR Wallingford has previously carried out hydrodynamic/dispersion modelling and diffuser studies to support
the design of the intake/outfall configuration, and to support the process to obtain related environmental
approvals from EAD (Reference 1). EAD provided comments on these studies and requested additional data
collection to give further confidence in the model predictions.
This report summarises subsequent assessments and data collection that have been carried out in response
to EAD comments and following discussions with EAD on 22 May and 18 June 2019.
2. Initial model calibration

2.1. Original comparisons with data
To ensure that the hydrodynamic model
predictions (water levels, current speed
and direction) were suitable for use in
the dispersion assessment,
HR Wallingford’s local 3D model was
validated using current meter and tide
gauge data provided for the study by
HDR.
Two current profiler (Aquadopp)
instruments were deployed
approximately 2 km and 5 km offshore
from the project site, over the period
May to June 2018. In addition, one tide
gauge was deployed in the marina,
south-east of the ADP Khalifa Port
causeway, to record variations in water
levels. The instrument locations are Figure 2.1: Aquadopp current profiler and tide gauge locations
shown in Figure 2.1.
The model was run for the survey period, with parameters varied (within physically realistic ranges) to give
as close a match as possible with the observed currents and water levels.
Time-series of observed and predicted water levels at the tide gauge are shown in Figure 2.2. As shown in
this figure, the model predicts the tidal ranges (and tidal phasing, including the complex imbalances between
subsequent low and high waters) extremely well (to within just a few percent of those observed). This is well
within the accuracy required for this type of assessment. Based on HR Wallingford’s experience of this type
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 1
Taweelah IWP
of study, particularly in the coastal waters of Abu Dhabi and the wider Arabian Gulf, the level of agreement
between the predicted and observed water levels is excellent. It is a clear demonstration that the model is
being forced by boundary conditions that include the correct tidal harmonic constituents, which means that
the model can accurately reproduce the characteristics of the spring and neap mixed tides at the site.
observations model
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
Figure 2.2: Comparison of predicted and observed water levels at the tide gauge
Source: Reference 1
Time-series of observed and predicted depth-averaged current speeds and directions are shown in
Figure 2.3 (Aquadopp-1, inshore) and Figure 2.4 (Aquadopp-2, further offshore).
At both locations, current directions (including the directions of rotation through the tide) are well reproduced
by the model, particularly in the important area closer to the offshore part of the proposed IWP outfall (near
Aquadopp-2), where the reject brine plume will develop. This is important as it means the model will predict
the correct direction of mid- to far-field dispersion through the tide. From a hydrodynamic modelling
perspective, this is particularly hard to achieve at this site, as the reclamations of the nearby Khalifa port
generate a relatively complex system of currents and eddies.
Daily peak current speeds are generally reproduced to within a few centimetres per second of those
observed. It is noted that the predicted current speeds match those observed very closely during the second
half of the survey period, which gives a good level of confidence that the model is capable of predicting
currents in the area to the level of accuracy required for this type of study. During the first half of the
measurement period (over the period of transition between spring and neap tides – where current speeds
are also weaker), the predicted peak current speeds during the flood (rising) tide are a little lower than those
observed (initially assessed to be due to small changes in the position of the eddy that forms adjacent to the
Khalifa Port reclamation - further analysis has been carried out concerning this matter as described below).
As the currents at the site are very weak (particularly during the first half of the survey period), small speed
changes may appear to represent large proportions of the overall current speed. In reality, these differences
are small in absolute terms and do not detract from the key conclusions that:
the model performs well relative to the measured data (reproducing many of the complex water level and
current variations at the site that are important for plume dispersion);
based on the quality of calibration, we are confident that reliable study conclusions have been obtained;
the dispersion of the discharge plumes over the wider area, and their concentrations at nearby sensitive
sites, would not be significantly changed by further improvements to the (already good) calibration.
On this basis, as originally described in Reference 1, the model was deemed fit for the purposes of the
required dispersion and recirculation assessment. However, further analysis is presented in Section 2.2.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 2
Taweelah IWP
0.4
current speed (m/s)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
observations model
360
270
180
90
0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
0.4
current speed (m/s)
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
observations model
360
270
180
90
0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
2.2. More detailed calibration analysis

As discussed above, the quality of the original calibration is considered to be high, and – in our opinion –
demonstrated that the local model is suitable for the purposes of the dispersion assessment. EAD’s
comments on the model calibration focused on the comparisons between current speeds during the first half
of the period presented, during which the predicted peak speeds during the flood tide were lower than those
observed, particularly at Aquadopp-2 (offshore).
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 3
Taweelah IWP
The flood (rising) tide approaches the Taweelah site from the east, generating tidal currents that flow
towards the west. On the ebb (falling) tide, currents flow towards the east. Predicted current patterns and
current speeds during peak flood and peak ebb are shown in Figure 2.5.
On the flood tide:
Aquadopp-2 is in a region of water that is effectively sheltered by the port’s offshore reclamation.
An anti-clockwise flowing eddy forms in the waters between the reclamation and the instrument,
which can be seen in the left frame of Figure 2.5.
Peak current speeds change by ±0.05-0.1 m/s within a few hundred metres of the instrument.
Aquadopp-2 is located on the edge of this eddy, and therefore only a very small change to the size
and shape of the eddy (perhaps a shift of just a few hundred metres or even less) would be required
to cause the differences described in Section 2.1.
In reality, these flood tide differences are small, and would not significantly affect the dispersion of
the discharge plumes over the wider (far-field) area.
Moreover, as the model predicts smaller peak flood current speeds at this location than observed
(i.e. the sheltering effect is slightly increased), this would tend to give more conservative dilution
predictions in the mid-field (within several hundred metres of the outfall). The model may therefore
tend to predict higher mid-field brine concentrations.
On the ebb tide:
Currents at Aquadopp-2 flow almost parallel to the mainland, only slightly deflected towards offshore
by the presence of the port reclamation.
Peak speeds in the area increase slightly (by about 0.05 m/s) a few hundred metres east, where the
currents accelerate and deflect around the reclamation, but current speeds and directions are very
similar for a few kilometres along a line offshore and inshore of the instrument.
The peak ebb current speeds are well represented by the model. This gives confidence that the
differences described in Section 2.1 (which are small in absolute terms) are related to the
representation of the sheltered region during the flood tide.
Peak flood Peak ebb
Figure 2.5: Predicted peak flood and ebb current patterns near the Aquadopp current meters
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 4
Taweelah IWP
Dispersion of marine discharges is also affected by residual currents, which generate a net movement over
several tides/days. These occur due to imbalances between ebb and flood currents, and also wind-induced
drifts. The distribution of the currents is sometimes analysed through the use of “tidal ellipses”, which are
scatter plots that show the eastward and northward components of the depth-average current (“u” and “v”)
plotted against each other. Observed and predicted tidal ellipses are shown for the two Aquadopp locations
in Figure 2.6.
As is normal for this type of analysis, the observations show more scatter than the model at both locations.
However, of key importance is the general distribution of the currents:
At Aquadopp-1, which is closest to the shore:
The principal axes of the observed and predicted currents are parallel and perpendicular to the
shoreline.
The observed currents show a general trend towards the north-east, which is well reproduced by the
model.
At Aquadopp-2, close to the eddy that forms in the sheltered region near the port’s offshore reclamation:
The principal axes of both the observed and predicted currents are north-south / east-west.
The observed currents show a general trend towards north, which is also well-reproduced by the
model.
The analysis of “tidal ellipses” shows clear alignment between the model predications and observed
conditions, and that the general drift trends in the model are appropriately represented for the purposes of
the dispersion assessment.
Aquadopp-1 Aquadopp-2
0.5 0.5
observations observations
0.4 0.4
v (m/s)
v (m/s)
model model 0.3

0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
u (m/s) u (m/s)
-0.1 -0.1
-0.2 -0.2
-0.3 -0.3
-0.4 -0.4
-0.5 -0.5
Figure 2.6: Tidal ellipses showing the observed and predicted current distributions at the two Aquadopp
locations
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 5
Taweelah IWP
2.3. Summary of initial model calibration

HR Wallingford’s local 3D model was originally verified using current meter and tide gauge data provided for
the study by HDR. Key conclusions were as follows:
Tidal ranges and tidal phasing (including the complex imbalances between subsequent low and high
waters) are predicted extremely well by the model.
The level of tidal agreement is within a few percent – well within the accuracy required for this type of
assessment – demonstrating that the model can accurately reproduce the characteristics of the spring
and neap mixed tides at the site.
The model performs well relative to the measured current data (reproducing many of the complex current
variations at the site that are important for plume dispersion).
Based on the quality of calibration, we are confident that reliable study conclusions have been obtained.
The dispersion of the discharge plumes over the wider area, and their concentrations at nearby sensitive
sites, would not be significantly changed by further improvements to the calibration.
On this basis, as originally described in Reference 1, the quality of the original calibration is considered to be
high, and – in our opinion – already demonstrates that the local model is suitable for the purposes of the
dispersion assessment. Further analysis was carried out to give further confidence in the model near
Aquadopp-2, where predicted peak speeds during some of the flood tides were slightly lower than those
observed:
Aquadopp-2 was effectively sheltered by the Khalifa Port reclamation on the flood tide, in a region where
peak current speeds change by ±0.05-0.1 m/s within a few hundred metres.
As the instrument was located on the edge of this eddy, only a very small change to the size and shape
of the eddy would be required to cause the differences seen.
In reality, these differences are small, and would not significantly affect the dispersion of the discharge
plumes over the wider area.
Moreover, as the model predicts smaller peak flood current speeds at this location than observed (i.e. the
sheltering effect is slightly increased in the model), this would tend to give more conservative dilution
predictions in the mid-field (i.e. the model may tend to predict higher mid-field brine concentrations).
Further analysis of the distribution of the currents (which are important for residual movement and
dispersion of plumes), showed clear alignment between the model predications and observed conditions,
and that the general drift trends in the model are appropriately represented for the purposes of the
dispersion assessment.
3. Additional data collection

Following discussions with EAD, HDR and its consultant Southern Gulf Surveys (SGS) deployed three
Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) devices at the following three locations (shown in Figure 3.1):
SGS-ADCP1: in the centre of the opening between the port causeway
SGS-ADCP2: near the centre point of the proposed IWP outfall diffuser
SGS-ADCP3: a few hundred metres offshore of the north-west corner of the port reclamation.
SGS also deployed a tide gauge, at the same location as the previously deployed tide gauge (Figure 2.1).
As part of related studies, Fugro also deployed instruments (also marked in Figure 3.1):
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 6
Taweelah IWP
Fugro-1: near the landward end of the proposed diffuser.

HR Wallingford has carried out quality assurance (QA) checks on the four new data sets, and extracted key
information from the measurements for comparison with the hydrodynamic model. Our data review is
summarised in the following sections.
Figure 3.1: Locations of the new instruments and the original Aquadopps
3.1. SGS current data

SGS-ADCP-1
This instrument was deployed in the centre of the opening between the port causeway and recorded water
levels and current speeds/directions between 17 August and 6 September 2019. Sensor readings and
quality scores are shown in Figure 3.2, and the current data are summarised in Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4.
Quality checks on the data indicate that the instrument was appropriately deployed, and QA scores were
very high over most of the deployment. The instrument was tilted slightly and showed some motion during
the survey, but not enough to affect the recorded speeds and directions. Data from some of the midwater
bins occasionally had a lower QA score than those in the upper and lower water column during deployment,
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 7
Taweelah IWP
but any small effects have been removed by the depth averaging process over the upper, midwater and
lower bins.
As might be expected, currents flow through the causeway rectilinearly (that is, with clearly defined flood and
ebb directions, along an approximately straight line). On the flood (rising) tide, currents flow towards south
south-west (around 200°N), with peak spring tide speeds around 0.5 m/s. On the ebb (falling) tide, currents
flow back towards north north-east (around 20°N), with peak spring tide speeds around 0.3 m/s.
SGS-ADCP-2
This instrument was deployed at the centre point of the proposed outfall diffuser location, approximately
2 km south-west of the port causeway opening. Water levels and current speeds/directions were recorded
between 17 August and 6 September 2019. Sensor readings and quality scores are shown in Figure 3.5, and
the current data are summarised in Figure 3.6 and Figure 3.7.
Quality checks on the data indicate that the instrument was appropriately deployed, and QA scores were
very high over almost all the deployment. The instrument was tilted slightly and showed some motion during
the survey, but not enough to affect the recorded speeds and directions.
At this location, currents show less clearly defined flood and ebb directions, generally rotating clockwise
through the tidal cycle. Peak spring and neap tide speeds were around 0.1 m/s and 0.2 m/s, respectively.
SGS-ADCP-3
This instrument was deployed a few hundred metres offshore of the north-west corner of the port
reclamation, and recorded water levels and current speeds/directions between 17 August and 6 September
2019. Sensor readings and quality scores are shown in Figure 3.8, and the current data are summarised in
Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10.
Quality checks on the data indicate that the instrument was appropriately deployed. Again the instrument
was slightly tilted and there is some motion over the course of the deployment, but not enough to affect the
recorded speeds and directions. A spike in the data around 31 August may indicate temporary disturbance of
the frame, but the remainder of the data appear to be unaffected. QA scores were high over the deployment,
but the bins nearest the surface were of slightly lower quality. This is likely due to wave action at this more
exposed location, and the effects will have been effectively removed through depth-averaging.
Current directions show some scatter, which is consistent with the instrument being located close to the eddy
and accelerating region that forms off the north-west corner of the reclamation, but flood and ebb directions
are still relatively well defined. On the flood tide, currents flow towards roughly south south-west, with peak
speeds of around 0.5 m/s. On the ebb tide, currents flow approximately due north, and are marginally
weaker.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 8
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.2: SGS-ADCP-1 sensor readings (upper frame) and QA scores (lower frame)
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 9
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.3: SGS-ADCP-1 depth-averaged current data
Figure 3.4: SGS-ADCP-1 tidal ellipse
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 10
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 11
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 12
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 13
Taweelah IWP
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 14
Taweelah IWP
3.2. SGS tide gauge data

Data from the gauge deployed by SGS were converted to tidal elevations relative to mean sea level (MSL)
using observations from a tide pole, with the data cross referenced to the pressure sensor records obtained
from the three ADCPs. The converted data are shown in Figure 3.11. The observed tidal ranges are similar
at each of the three sites, with spring and neap tide ranges around 2 m and 1 m respectively.
Figure 3.11: SGS tide and converted ADCP pressure gauge data
3.3. Fugro data

Currents were measured a few hundred metres from SGS-ADCP-2, close to the landward end of the
proposed outfall diffuser section, which is approximately 2 km south-west of the port causeway opening.
Current speeds and directions were recorded between 23 June and 27 July 2019, although the tide gauge
record runs for longer (until 6 August 2019). Sensor readings and quality scores are shown in Figure 3.12,
and the current data are summarised in Figure 3.13 and Figure 3.14.
Quality checks on the data indicate that the instrument was appropriately deployed and the instrument was
stable during the survey. QA scores were very high over the deployment, with the bins nearest the surface of
slightly lower quality. This will not affect the usability of the data; the effects will be effectively removed
through depth-averaging.
As for the currents recorded at SGS-ADCP-2 nearby, flood and ebb current directions are not always clearly
defined, and there is a general clockwise rotation through the tidal cycle. Peak spring and neap tide speeds
were around 0.1 m/s and 0.2 m/s, respectively, consistent with those recorded at SGS-ADCP-2 (although
over a different period).
The instrument was configured to collect wave data, but little wave activity was recorded at this location.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 15
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.12: Fugro-1 current sensor readings (upper frame) and QA scores (lower frame)
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 16
Taweelah IWP
Figure 3.13: Fugro-1 depth-averaged current data
Figure 3.14: Fugro-1 tidal ellipse
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 17
Taweelah IWP
3.4. Comparisons with the hydrodynamic model

A comparison was made between the observed current data described above and the predictions of the
hydrodynamic model over the previous calibration period (May-June 2018). For the comparison, a period of
spring and neap tides was chosen from the model simulation, with similar tidal ranges to those observed
during the new surveys. While the tidal ranges are similar, the comparison between the model and
observations is not direct, as the winds and overall shape of the tides are not precisely the same for the two
periods. Nevertheless, the qualitative comparisons and agreement reinforce the original conclusions that the
model is well aligned with observed data and that the model is suitable for use in the dispersion
assessments at the site.
SGS-ADCP-1
As described in Section 3.1, currents flow through the opening between the port causeway with clearly
defined flood and ebb directions. Currents and water levels recorded over the survey period (17 August – 6
September 2019) are shown alongside those predicted by the model over the calibration period (15 May – 4
June 2018) in Figure 3.15. Peak spring and neap tide speeds are typically 0.55 m/s and 0.4 m/s,
respectively, in both the model and observations.
SGS-ADCP-2
Currents near the centre point of the proposed outfall diffuser location have less clearly defined flood and
ebb directions, with a general clockwise rotation through the tidal cycle. Currents and water levels recorded
over the survey period (17 August – 6 September 2019) are shown alongside those predicted by the model
over the calibration period (15 May – 4 June 2018) in Figure 3.16. Peak spring and neap tide speeds are
typically 0.1 m/s and 0.2 m/s, respectively, in both the model and observations.
SGS-ADCP-3
A few hundred metres offshore of the north-west corner of the port reclamation, an eddy and region of
accelerating currents form as flows are deflected by the port structures. Currents and water levels recorded
over the survey period (17 August – 6 September 2019) are shown alongside those predicted by the model
over the calibration period (15 May – 4 June 2018) in Figure 3.17. Peak spring tide currents are in the range
0.4-0.5 m/s in both the model and observations. Peak neap tide currents are slightly stronger in the model
than in the observations, but this may be expected, as the neap tides during the survey were slightly smaller
than those simulated during the model calibration period.
Fugro-1
Currents close to the landward end of the proposed outfall diffuser show similar behaviour to those a few
hundred metres north (SGS-ADCP-2). Currents and water levels recorded over the survey period (24 June –
27 July 2019) are shown alongside those predicted by the model over the calibration period (15 May – 4
June 2018) in Figure 3.18. As for SGS-ADCP-2, currents show less clearly defined flood and ebb directions,
generally rotating clockwise through the tidal cycle. Peak spring and neap tide speeds were typically 0.1 m/s
and 0.2 m/s, respectively, in both the model and observations.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 18
Taweelah IWP
Observed (17 August – 6 September 2019) Model (15 May – 4 June 2018)
Tide
observations model
1.5 1.5

1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
-0.5 -0.5
-1 -1
-1.5 -1.5
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018
Current speed Current speed

observations additional_ADCP_all_res2d_16 model additional_ADCP_all_res2d_16
0.7 0.7
0.6 0.6
current speed (m/s)
current speed (m/s)

0.5 0.5
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018
Current direction Current direction

observations additional_ADCP_all_res2d_16 model
360 360
current direction (°N)

270 270
180 180
90 90
0 0
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018
Figure 3.15: Qualitative comparisons between currents and water levels observed at SGS-ADCP-1 (17 August – 6 September 2019) and predictions of the hydrodynamic model (15 May – 4 June 2018)
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 19
Taweelah IWP
Tide
observations model
1.5 1.5

1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
-0.5 -0.5
-1 -1
-1.5 -1.5
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018

0.25 0.25
current speed (m/s)
current speed (m/s)

0.20 0.20
0.15 0.15
0.10 0.10
0.05 0.05
0.00 0.00
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018

360 360

270 270
180 180
90 90
0 0
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 20
Taweelah IWP
Tide
observations model
1.5 1.5

1 1
0.5 0.5
0 0
-0.5 -0.5
-1 -1
-1.5 -1.5
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018

0.5 0.5
current speed (m/s)
current speed (m/s)

0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.0 0.0
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018

360 360

270 270
180 180
90 90
0 0
17/08/2019 19/08/2019 21/08/2019 23/08/2019 25/08/2019 27/08/2019 29/08/2019 31/08/2019 02/09/2019 04/09/2019 06/09/2019 15/05/2018 17/05/2018 19/05/2018 21/05/2018 23/05/2018 25/05/2018 27/05/2018 29/05/2018 31/05/2018 02/06/2018 04/06/2018
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 21
Taweelah IWP
Observed (24 June – 27 July 2019) Model (15 May – 4 June 2018)
Tide
observations model
7 1.5

6.5 1
6 0.5
5.5 0
5 -0.5
4.5 -1
4 -1.5
24/06/2019 29/06/2019 04/07/2019 09/07/2019 14/07/2019 19/07/2019 24/07/2019 15/05/2018 20/05/2018 25/05/2018 30/05/2018 04/06/2018 09/06/2018 14/06/2018

0.25 0.25
current speed (m/s)
current speed (m/s)

0.20 0.20
0.15 0.15
0.10 0.10
0.05 0.05
0.00 0.00
24/06/2019 29/06/2019 04/07/2019 09/07/2019 14/07/2019 19/07/2019 24/07/2019 15/05/2018 20/05/2018 25/05/2018 30/05/2018 04/06/2018 09/06/2018 14/06/2018

360 360

270 270
180 180
90 90
0 0
24/06/2019 29/06/2019 04/07/2019 09/07/2019 14/07/2019 19/07/2019 24/07/2019 15/05/2018 20/05/2018 25/05/2018 30/05/2018 04/06/2018 09/06/2018 14/06/2018
Figure 3.18: Qualitative comparisons between currents and water levels observed at Fugro-1 (24 June – 27 July 2019) and predictions of the hydrodynamic model (15 May – 4 June 2018)
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 22
Taweelah IWP
3.5. Bathymetry
As described in Reference 1, the local model bathymetry was defined using information from international
hydrographic offices, supplemented with data from a local survey provided by HDR. The survey data were
collected by SGS on behalf of HDR in June 2018 and the survey report is an appendix of the EIA report
dated July 2018 (Reference 2). The SGS/HDR survey area extended 2 km offshore and 500 m alongshore,
as shown in Figure 3.19. The detailed local data were merged with sparser hydrographic office data, which
means that bed levels beyond the edges of the survey were estimated using interpolation and extrapolation.
We originally recommended that the exact bed levels outside the survey area were confirmed through a
wider survey area during subsequent studies.
Since the earlier studies, an additional bathymetric survey was performed by the main EPC Contractor,
SEPCOIII, and executed by FUGRO (Reference 3). The methodology and results of this survey were
reviewed by HR Wallingford and found acceptable for the purpose of detailed design. The new survey
covered a wider area, including the proposed outfall diffuser, as shown in Figure 3.19.
Figure 3.19: Previous (HDR/SGS) and new (Fugro) survey areas
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 23
Taweelah IWP
HR Wallingford has compared the model bathymetry with the recent survey. Immediately around the diffuser,
maximum bed level differences are a just few tens of centimetres (just a few percent of the total water
depth). This shows that local water depths are very well represented in the model. Nearer the shore, the
survey showed deeper bed levels close to the existing intake (by around 1 m) and some shallower regions
were found immediately along the coastline. Such differences are unlikely to change the study conclusions.
Figure 3.20: Differences between model bathymetry and new survey data
3.6. Summary of additional data and implications for modelling

Since the previous studies described in Reference 1, additional data have been obtained:
4 x ADCPs
additional tide gauge records
larger bathymetry survey.
Comparison with the model reinforces the original conclusions that the model is aligned with observed data
and that the model well suited for use in the dispersion assessments at the site.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 24
Taweelah IWP
4. Rationale underpinning selection of the 3 km

outfall configuration
4.1. Background
HR Wallingford previously carried out hydrodynamic/dispersion modelling and diffuser studies to support the
design of the intake/outfall configuration, and to support the process to obtain related environmental
approvals from EAD (Reference 1). EAD provided comments on these studies and requested more
information on the decision to adopt the proposed multiport diffuser configuration (nominally located ~3 km
offshore) compared with the initial concept arrangement (7 km pipeline), which was previously considered
and approved by EAD.
EAD’s key comments are as follows:
“The suggested design of the outfalls was not compared to any other alternative designs or scenarios, it
is not clear or proved that the selected location, length, configuration are the best option of good
dispersion of the discharged brine. The selected design should be compared with a concept outfall
design pipe of 7 km, already approved by EAD.”
“It is not clear what parameters (environmental, technical, financial etc ... ) led to the decision of changing
the initial (concept phase) outfall design, this is a key factor for this study and EAD mentioned several
times that a clear and scientifically justified approach for the design change should be developed within
the EIA.”
“No other options for the outfall length was discussed, no scenarios was developed and presented to
show that the selected configuration and length is the best option for brine dispersion. Only the
paragraph provided in the summary key of findings entitled "Siting of the SWRO Outfall and Associated
Effluent Dispersion Patterns" gave in a narrative way why the outfall design and location was adopted.
(chapter 6.3 just reiterate the options developed in the EIA 2018 and did not compare it with the current
design).”
“The rise in salinity is unlikely to comply with a nominal mixing zone requirement of DeltaS of 2 PSU at
500 metres from the point of discharge". Since this was not the case with the concept design phase with
a pipe of 7 km, the study should state if there is other parameters which justify changing the outfall pipe
length and design. (feasibility for example, as per Water Reuse Association 2011, seawater desalination
cost white paper, the discharge facility cost between 10 to 30% of the capital cost, or even higher).”
The following sections address these key comments and set-out the considerations and rationale behind the
proposed shorter multiport diffuser. A relevant comparison of the proposed and previously consented
arrangements is also provided, which emphasises the advantages of the proposed location and
configuration.
4.2. Mixing zone and impact of the discharge

As shown in modelling undertaken by both HDR (Reference 2) and HR Wallingford (Reference 1), it can be
readily assessed that for existing “baseline” conditions, the existing salinity footprint due to the existing
discharges at the site extends several kilometres along and offshore, covering a large area.
The modelling work previously undertaken by HDR and presented in the EIA documentation (Reference 2)
adopted a criterion for the allowable maximum excess salinity (ΔS) of +2 ppt (or +2 psu) at the edge of
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 25
Taweelah IWP
“nominal” 500 m mixing zones around the points of discharge. The choice of 500 m is not referenced to any
applicable local or international regulations or guidance.
In the absence of an applicable fixed regulatory mixing zone size and, more importantly, as the baseline
salinity footprint already extends a significant distance from the site, the outfall configuration was established
on the basis of limiting further/additional impacts of the IWP discharge over and above those of the existing
discharges on the already elevated baseline salinities, and limiting impacts at nearby sensitive receivers.
4.3. Review and assessment of alternative design options

The modelling work previously undertaken by HDR (Reference 2) compared the performance of a wide
range of potential outfall configurations, with total offshore lengths ranging from 0.8 km to 7 km. These are
listed in Table 66 and Figure 74 of Reference 2, and the relevant components are reproduced below in
Figure 4.1, Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3.
From the data and results described in Reference 2, it can be readily assessed that none of the options
(including the previously selected/consented 7 km outfall) can meet a target excess salinity of +2 ppt above
ambient within a distance of several kilometres. As discussed in Reference 1, this is due to the presence of
the existing discharges, which already elevate the salinity above +2 ppt over a wide area.
However, comparing the several alternative designs presented in Reference 2 and the figures below, we
note the following key performance characteristics:
Outfall configurations that discharge between the shoreline (near the existing discharge channel) and
around 1.6 km offshore clearly produced the largest footprints, with an area above +2 ppt predicted to
extend more than 12 km offshore.
Some dilution improvements are predicted when the outfall is extended to 2 km offshore.
Further dilution improvements are predicted for outfalls extending 3 km offshore, resulting in an area
above +2 ppt extending around 10 km offshore.
For the pipeline options extending 6-7 km, the predicted areas above +2 ppt extend around 8.5-9 km
offshore.
For the options tested, this shows that changing the pipeline length between 3 km and 7 km results in only
relatively small overall footprint changes. This is perhaps to be expected, as making the pipeline longer
brings the outfall into the more sheltered region to the west of the Khalifa Port reclamation.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 26
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.1: Outcomes of alternative brine effluent discharge points and loads – Part 1
Source: Reproduced from Table 66 of Reference 2
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 27
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.2: Outcomes of alternative brine effluent discharge points and loads – Part 2
Source: Reproduced from Table 66 of Reference 2
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 28
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.3: Projected bottom salinity (10-day average) across from Taweelah domain using a 7 km outfall
distributing the IWP brine at km 2 (10%), km 3 (10%), km 4 (10%), km 5 (10%), km 6 (30%) and km 7 (30%)
Source: Reproduced from Figure 74 of Reference 2
4.4. Outfall diffuser configuration to increase near-field mixing

In HR Wallingford’s assessment and review of the alternative design options (see above), it was also
appreciated that the potential for increased near field mixing had not been considered during the concept
phase.
This matter was also duly noted by EAD in their review of the July 2018 EIA: “The EIA should explore the
option of brine outfall pipe, with single and multiple ports diffusers, and based on this assessment EAD has
the right to approve other outfall option than preferred by the proponent.”
The July 2018 EIA (Reference 2) also noted that “It might be necessary to conduct further optimization using
a CORMIX or CFD (Computational fluid dynamics) software along with a far-field model such as ECOM, to
optimize the sizing of the outfall with the purpose of reducing its length or installing judiciously designed
diffusers.”
Hence, HR Wallingford’s starting point for the outfall configuration noted the following:
For the initial options tested by HDR, increasing the pipeline length between 3 km and 7 km resulted in
only relatively small overall +2 ppt plume footprint changes. This is perhaps to be expected, as making
the pipeline longer brings the outfall into the more sheltered region to the west of the Khalifa Port
reclamation.
In-line with best practice and following EAD’s assessment/requirement, there was potential to increase
the outfall dilution performance using a multiport diffuser system, to induce rapid near-field mixing and
enhance the performance of a shortened outfall.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 29
Taweelah IWP
The following methodology was therefore adopted for configuration of the outfall/diffuser arrangement:
1. Choose a starting point for the first (shoreward) port that:
a. Sits largely outside of the main core of the existing plumes;
b. Avoids the existing submarine cable and gas pipeline; and,
c. Has sufficient water depth for diffuser operation/performance.
2. Identify a combination of port orientations and diameters that maximises trajectories (and therefore
dilution) before the brine reaches the seabed, while minimising interaction between jets from
neighbouring ports.
3. Use established formulae and the leading research on brine jets (derived from References 4, 5 and 6) to
determine minimum required port separation, distances to impact with the seabed, impact dilution rates
and near-field extents.
4. Assess the dispersion / far-field development of the plume to confirm the improved mixing of the
discharge, in terms of the extents of the +2 ppt and +1 ppt excess salinity plumes, compared with those
predicted for the concept phase (7 km) outfall design.
5. Confirm the limited concentrations at key nearby sensitive receivers.
Hence, following the review of alternative design/location options for the outfall and also following application
of established formulae/leading research on brine jets, the following arrangement for the outfall was
developed (Reference 1):
Nominal “3 km outfall corridor” comprising twin outfall pipes and a total of 61 ports spaced at 8 m.
The first pipe will be 2.5 km long, with a diffuser section over the final 500 m section (hence extending to
2.5 km total length).
The second pipe will be 3 km long, with a diffuser section over the final 500 m section (hence extending
to 3 km total length).
As the two pipelines are close together, this essentially makes a single diffuser section, approximately 1
km long – with the end of the diffuser section located ~3 km offshore.
The first pipe will have with 30 single-port risers, equally spaced along the diffuser section, and the
second will have 31 ports (that is, 61 ports for the combined outfall – each spaced at ~8 m).
Port diameters are ~0.35 m, which gives exit velocities of ~2.9 m/s.
4.5. Salinity impact / performance comparison

The average salinity footprints for the two outfall configurations (7 km outfall pipeline and improved 3 km
pipeline/diffuser) are shown overlaid for comparison purposes in Figure 4.5. It is noted that the test
conditions in each case are not identical (for example, the 7 km outfall case has no winds applied, whereas
typical winds are applied for the 3 km outfall case), and the model systems used for the two outfalls are
different. Nevertheless, this figure allows a simple comparison between the footprints predicted for the
originally consented 7 km outfall, and the improved 3 km configuration. Note that the original HDR modelling
results were presented as total salinities (with the assumed background salinity of 40 ppt included), whereas
the new model results are presented as excesses above the ambient. Therefore, the 41 ppt and 42 ppt
contours in the original modelling roughly correspond to the +1 ppt and +2 ppt contours in the new modelling.
As shown in Figure 4.5, the predicted average +2 ppt footprints extend around:
9 km offshore for the concept phase 7 km outfall
6 km offshore for the proposed optimised 3 km outfall.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 30
Taweelah IWP
Similarly, the predicted average +1 ppt footprints extend:

more than 12 km offshore for the concept phase 7 km outfall
around 7 km offshore for the proposed optimised 3 km outfall.
In relative terms there is little difference between the average extents of the +2 ppt excess salinity
footprints for the 7 km and 3 km outfalls. The plume for the 7 km outfall case extends further offshore but
the plume for the 3 km outfall extends further east.
The average area with excess salinities of more than 1 ppt is reduced for the 3 km outfall (around 60 km2
compared with 90 km2 for the previously consented outfall).
Based on this comparison the proposed 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser performs at least as well as the
concept phase 7 km outfall when considering the average +2 ppt excess salinity footprints, and reduces the
average +1 ppt footprint compared with the concept phase 7 km outfall.
Figure 4.4: Predicted average excess salinity at the bed, 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser, typical winds
Source: Reproduced from Figure 4.11 of Reference 1
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 31
Taweelah IWP
Figure 4.5: Approximate average plume footprints for originally consented 7 km outfall (isolines), and new
3 km outfall with multiport diffuser (filled contours)
Note: Not identical test conditions, and different models were used, only presented for approximate comparison.
4.6. Comparison of new (3 km) and concept phase (7 km) outfalls

4.6.1. Outfall Configuration
Concept Phase 7km Outfall (Reference 2)
Outfall length: 7 km
Number of discharge openings: six (6) discrete discharge locations (not functioning as a “diffuser”)
Location and percentage of load discharged at each outfall openings:
km 2: 10% of load
km 3: 10% of load
km 4: 10% of load
km 5: 10% of load
km 6: 30% of load
km 7: 30% of load.
Proposed 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser (Reference 1)
Twin outfall pipes laid closely adjacent
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 32
Taweelah IWP
Diffuser section, approximately 1 km long, starting 2 km offshore and ending 3 km offshore

Effective diffuser section comprising 61 ports each spaced at ~8m with port diameters ~0.35 m (exit
velocities of ~2.9 m/s)
Discharge flows distributed evenly over the length of the 1 km diffuser section.
Advantages of the proposed 3 km option
The concentration of the discharge of 60% of the load at the offshore end of the 7 km outfall necessarily
results in a focus for the discharge well outside the area currently already affected by the discharge of the
existing Taweelah complex.
The proposed 3 km outfall is situated close to the existing area of impact (near the area currently already
affected existing Taweelah Complex discharges) while also giving increased mixing with the available
ambient seawater.
4.6.2. Diffuser
Concept Phase 7 km outfall (Reference 2)
The proposed configuration of 6 discrete openings spaced at 1 km is not configured to increase near-
field mixing of the brine with the available ambient seawater.
Proposed 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser (Reference 1)
The proposed 3 km outfall incorporates a diffuser arrangement in-line with established formulae/leading
research on brine jets to increase initial dilution and near-filed mixing.
Advantages of the proposed 3 km option
Enhanced initial dilution and near-field mixing with the available ambient seawater.
4.7. Impacts at sensitive receivers

The analysis presented for the concept phase 7 km outfall design (Reference 2), makes no reference to the
predicted recirculation at the existing ADWEA/Taweelah Complex intake.
From the 3 km outfall modelling assessment (Tables 4.1 and 4.4 of Reference 1):
The predicted average baseline excess salinity at the existing Taweelah Complex intake is 1.2 ppt
Including the IWP, this is predicted to increase to an average of 1.8 ppt.
receptors included the most critical habitats at Ras Ghanada (coral reef, seagrass, mangrove and intertidal
mudflats for birds), similar far-field habitats to the southwest of the project site and seagrass habitat adjacent
to Khalifa Port. These results show that the IWP has a particularly small increase in salinity at the designated
sites. Further details are provided in Reference 1.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 33
Taweelah IWP
4.8. Important and significant ancillary considerations and

consequential benefits
In the preceding assessments, comparisons between the concept phase 7 km outfall and the new 3 km
outfall have focused on changes to the salinity footprints due to the IWP discharge. In terms of the
overall/wider environmental impact of the outfall arrangement it is also important to consider a range of other
general and consequential impacts when evaluating the merits and advantages of the 3 km outfall compared
to the concept phase 7 km outfall.
In this respect, some selected important ancillary considerations are outlined below that further
support/justify the selection of the 3 km outfall in preference to the concept phase 7 km outfall. The listed
ancillary considerations noted below are limited to selected key/significant considerations and is not intended
to be exhaustive.
backfilling activities. This would increase the extent of the impact of the project construction as well as
the duration of the impacts as the construction period may be expected to be increased due to the
A 3 km long marine pipeline minimises the volume of marine works and hence serves to minimise
option in terms of pumping requirements which manifest themselves as losses for the plant. In order to
discharge all the required process streams into a long 7 km outfall pipeline system, higher residual
An appropriately configured 3 km outfall would allow gravity discharge of the plant discharges, thereby
These ancillary and consequential benefits of the proposed 3 km outfall arrangement compared with the
concept phase 7 km outfall effectively contribute to a reduced overall “environmental impact
footprint”/”carbon footprint” for the proposed option compared with the previously consented concept option.
4.9. Khalifa Port Expansion

In the case of the concept phase 7 km outfall, the two discharge openings 6-7 km offshore (where 60% of
the discharge is released), are located in an area offshore of the existing Khalifa Port footprint. The speed
difference plots shown in Figure 5.6 of Reference 1 indicate that planned future expansion of the Khalifa Port
reclamation generates a sheltered region to the west of the expanded port area, over which peak current
speeds are reduced. This region covers the area where the two furthest offshore discharge openings will be
located and therefore the future performance of this configuration could be reduced – notably as 60% of the
discharge is concentrated in this affected area.
It is generally best practice to avoid siting outfall discharges in sheltered regions, as this reduces the
potential for mixing and flushing.
The proposed 3 km outfall arrangement avoids immediate discharge to the area west of the planned Khalifa
Port expansion. Moreover, the arrangement makes use of the “flushing” potential generated by currents
accelerating through the gap in the existing Khalifa Port causeway. The current speeds through the gap in
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 34
Taweelah IWP
the Khalifa Port causeway are predicted to increase after the Port expansion, and peak speeds are predicted
to slightly increase at the outfall site itself. (Figure 5.6 of Reference 1).
In some respects, the proposed 3 km outfall may be less affected by future sheltering effects of the planned
Khalifa Port expansion, compared with the longer outfall concept option. The port’s offshore expansion would
reduce the dilution at the offshore part of the 7 km outfall where 60% of the brine discharge was
concentrated in this concept option.
As an additional consideration, the proposed outfall corridor associated with the 7 km outfall crosses a
narrow area between the Dolphin pipeline (and its 200 m width protection area on each side of the pipeline)
and the Khalifa Port perimeter and would create a further obstruction to the future expansion of Khalifa Port.
Whereas, the proposed 3 km outfall corridor avoids the narrow area between the Dolphin pipeline and the
Khalifa Port perimeter and will not impact the construction works for the expansion of the Port.
4.10. Conclusions and summary on the rationale underpinning the

selection of a 3 km outfall and multiport diffuser
As the baseline salinity footprint already extends a significant distance from the site, the outfall
configuration was established on the basis of limiting further/additional impacts of the IWP discharge
over and above those of the existing discharges on the already elevated baseline salinities.
A comparison of the relative performance for a range of different outfall layouts/configurations was
possible based on the data and results already available from the 2018 EIA (Reference 2).
On the basis of this comparison it was found that pipeline lengths between 3 km and 7 km give similar
overall footprints.
The potential for increased near-field mixing was not considered during the concept phase. This matter
was also duly noted by EAD in its review of the July 2018 EIA: “The EIA should explore the option of
brine outfall pipe, with single and multiple ports diffusers, and based on this assessment EAD has the
right to approve other outfall option than preferred by the proponent.”
In-line with best practice and following EAD’s comments/requirement, the proposed 3 km outfall was
configured with an appropriate multiport diffuser, using established formulae/leading research on brine
jets, to promote rapid near-field mixing and enhanced performance.
Basic comparisons were made between the average salinity footprints predicted for the previously
consented 7 km outfall and the improved 3 km outfall. Although it is acknowledged that test conditions for
the comparison were not identical, and the tests were based on different modelling systems, the
comparisons show:
the predicted average +2 ppt footprints extend around:
– 9 km offshore for the concept phase 7 km outfall
– 6 km offshore for the proposed 3 km outfall.
the predicted average +1 ppt footprints extend:
– more than 12 km offshore for the concept phase 7 km outfall
– around 7 km offshore for the proposed 3 km outfall
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 35
Taweelah IWP
– In relative terms there is little difference between the average extents of the +2 ppt excess
salinity footprints for the 7 km and 3 km outfalls. The plume for the 7 km outfall case extends
further offshore but the plume for the 3 km outfall extends further east.
– The average area with excess salinities of more than 1 ppt is reduced for the 3 km outfall (around
60 km2 compared with 90 km2 for the previously consented outfall).
Based on this comparison the proposed 3 km outfall with multiport diffuser performs at least as well
as the concept phase 7 km outfall when considering the average +2 ppt excess salinity footprints,
and reduces the average +1 ppt footprint compared with the concept phase 7 km outfall.
Comparing the relative merits of the proposed 3 km outfall and the concept phase 7 km outfall:
Focusing 60% of the discharge load towards the offshore end of the 7 km outfall would result in a
further area of high concentration outside the area currently affected by the discharge of the existing
Taweelah complex.
The proposed 3 km outfall is situated close to the existing area of impact and hence is configured
with a view to limiting the overall impact area compared with the concept phase 7 km outfall.
receptors included the most critical habitats at Ras Ghanada (coral reef, seagrass, mangrove and
intertidal mudflats for birds), similar far-field habitats to the southwest of the project site and seagrass
habitat adjacent to Khalifa Port. These results show that the IWP has a particularly small increase in
salinity at the designated sites.
Important ancillary considerations that further support/justify the selection of the 3 km outfall in
preference to the concept phase 7 km outfall include (but may not necessarily be limited to):
backfilling activities. This would increase the extent of the impact of the project construction as well
as the duration of the impacts as the construction period may be expected to be increased due to the
A 3 km long marine pipeline reduces the volume of marine works and hence serves to reduce
option in terms of pumping requirements which manifest themselves as losses for the plant. In order
to discharge all the required process streams into a long 7 km outfall pipeline system, higher residual
An appropriately configured 3 km outfall may allow gravity discharge of the plant discharges, thereby
The 3 km outfall arrangement effectively contributes to a reduced overall “environmental impact
footprint”/”carbon footprint” compared with the previously consented option.
The proposed 3 km outfall makes use of the “flushing” potential generated by currents accelerating
through the gap in the existing Khalifa Port causeway, which are predicted to slightly increase after
planned expansion of Khalifa Port.
In some respects, the proposed 3 km outfall may be less affected by future sheltering effects of the
planned Khalifa Port expansion, compared with the 7 km outfall. The port’s offshore expansion would
reduce the dilution at the offshore part of the 7 km outfall, where 60% of the brine was to be discharged.
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 36
Taweelah IWP
In summary, we conclude: the initial 7 km long outfall concept design did not account for potential
improvements in dilution that can be achieved through the use of an appropriate multiport diffuser. We
revised the initial concept, using appropriate best practice techniques for brine diffuser design. By increasing
the amount of ambient seawater entrained into the near-field region of mixing, we have produced a proposed
outfall configuration with a 3 km pipeline that gives a similar overall plume footprint to the initially proposed
concept, while reducing the potential energy requirements and impacts due to construction.
5. References
1. Taweelah IWP: Brine dispersion modelling and recirculation study, HR Wallingford Report DER6082-
RT001-R03-00, May 2019
2. Environmental Impact Assessment: Taweelah DoE IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant, EAD Ref
S2275, July 2018
3. Bathymetric and Geophysical Survey Report, Intake and Outfall System Marine Survey Work for
Taweelah 200MIGD RO Independent Water Project, FUGRO Report ref. MRU078-SR (Rev 1), 26 July
2019
4. Abessi, O., and Roberts, P.J.W., “Dense Jet Discharges in Shallow Water”, J. Hyd Eng., 142 (1), 2016
5. Wood, M.J., and Mead, C.T., "Dense Jet Assessment Procedure", Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on Marine Waste
Water Discharges and Coastal Environment, Cavtat, Croatia, 27-31 Oct. 2008
6. Wood, M.J., Henno, F. and Mead, C.T., "Validation of computational models for hypersaline and other
dense marine discharges". Proc. 7th Int. Symp. on Env. Hyd., Singapore, 7-9 Jan. 2014
DER6082-RT003-R03-00 37
organisation. We deliver practical solutions to the complex water-related
challenges faced by our international clients. A dynamic research programme
underpins all that we do and keeps us at the leading edge. Our unique mix
of know-how, assets and facilities includes state of the art physical modelling
laboratories, a full range of numerical modelling tools and, above all,
enthusiastic people with world-renowned skills and expertise.
FS 516431
EMS 558310
OHS 595357 HR Wallingford, Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BA, United Kingdom
© HR Wallingford
Presentation to EAD
Taweelah DoE 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Appendices

Plant
Taweelah RO 200 MIGD, Abu
Dhabi, UAE-Environmental
Impact Assessment:
Brine dispersion and
recirculation studies
Presentation to EAD - 22 May 2019
©"HR"Wallingford"2019
Overview
! Introduction"
! Baseline"conditions"and"environmental"thresholds
! Hydrodynamic"modelling
! Discharge"assessment
! Baseline"discharge
! Taweelah"IWP"discharge
! Khalifa"Port"expansion
! Study"limitations
22"May"2019 Taweelah"IWP"brine"dispersion"modelling"and"recirculation"study Page"2 ©"HR"Wallingford"2019

Introduction
! Proposed"IWP:
! near"existing"Taweelah"Complex
! to"produce"200"MIGD"potable"water
! reject"brine"discharged"through"a"
submerged"multiport"diffuser"outfall."
! Marine"modelling"carried"out"to"
inform:
! intake"and"reject"brine"outfall"design
! environmental"approval.

Existing"facilities
Existing"Taweelah"complex
! Flow:"171.3"m3/s
! Excess"salinity"(ΔS):"+"3.3"ppt
! Excess"temperature"(ΔT):"+"10.3°C
ADP"outfall
! Flow:"9.3"m3/s
! Excess"salinity"(ΔS):"+"3.9"ppt
! Excess"temperature"(ΔT):"+"3.6°C

Proposed"IWP
Intake
! Intake"flow: 27.8"m3/s
Outfall
! Outfall"flow: 17.3"m3/s
! ΔS:" +"27.4"ppt
! ΔT: +"2°C

Environmental"regulations
! Federal"standards:"salinity"<"5%"background"at"the"edge"of"a"mixing"zone.
! This"means"ΔS"~ 2"ppt."
! No"set"mixing"zone"size,"so"results"are"presented"as:
! Max/average"plume"extents,"showing"areas">"+2"ppt
! Concentrations"at"sensitive"sites

Hydrodynamic"modelling
Local"flow"model
! Tidal"boundaries"from"Arabian"Gulf"model
! Wind"conditions"from"ERA5
! Bathymetry"from"
! international"hydrographic"offices
! supplemented"with"local"survey
! Mesh"resolution"~50"m"near"the"site

Model"calibration
observations model
1.5
tide1elevation1(mMSL)
1.0
0.5
0.0
!0.5
!1.0
!1.5
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
0.4
current3speed3(m/s)
0.3
0.2
0.1
Aquadopp(1
0.0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
observations model
360
curent1direction1(°N)
270
180
90
0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
0.4
current3speed3(m/s)
0.3
0.2
Aquadopp(2 0.1
0.0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018
observations model
360
curent1direction1(°N)
270
180
90
0
01/06/2018 03/06/2018 05/06/2018 07/06/2018 09/06/2018 11/06/2018 13/06/2018 15/06/2018 17/06/2018 19/06/2018

Model"calibration"– notes"for"previous"slide
! Tidal"ranges"predicted"to"within"just"a"few"percent"of"those"observed"
" well"within"the"accuracy"required"for"this"type"of"assessment"
! Current"directions"(including"the"tidal"rotations)"are"well"reproduced,"
particularly"closer"to"the"offshore"part"of"the"proposed"IWP"outfall,"where"the"
reject"brine"plume"is"likely"to"develop."
! Daily"peak"current"speeds"generally"reproduced"to"within"a"few"cm/s
! During"1st"half"of"survey,"2nd daily"peak"speed"is"underNpredicted."
! Likely"due"to"small"changes"in"the"position"of"eddy"that"forms"next"to"Khalifa"Port.
! Unlikely"to"affect"the"overall"study"conclusions.
! Model"current"speeds"match"observations"to"within"a"few"cm/s"during"2nd half.
On"this"basis,"the"local"model"was"deemed"suitable"for"the"purposes"
of"the"assessment.
Discharge"assessment
Model"strategy
! Predict"baseline"conditions"(existing"thermal@saline"discharge"dispersion)
! Predict"future"conditions"(including"proposed"IWP)
Test"conditions
! Range"of"winds
! ERA5"hindcast dataset
! Compares"well"with"site"observations"(therefore"allows"longer"term"tests)
! Two"periods:"typical"and"stronger"(Shamal)"winds
! Two"full"spring@neap"cycles
! Ideally"would"run"longer"simulations"looking"at"additional"conditions.

Baseline"conditions
Baseline"(existing)"plume"animation

Baseline"conditions"– summary
! Existing"plumes"generate"a"large"area"with"ΔS">"+2"ppt
! more"than 10"km"east"or"west"of"the"site during"typical"wind"scenario
! 15"km" during"stronger"wind"scenario
! Excess"salinities"/"recirculation
! Existing"intake:" 3J4"ppt"
! New"IWP"intake"site:" 3.5J4.5"ppt
Existing(intake
Taweelah IWP(intake

Taweelah"IWP"discharge
Concept"outfall"location:
! Outside"existing"plume"main"core
! Avoid"existing"submarine"cable"and"gas"pipeline
! Sufficient"water"depth"for"operation/performance
Diffuser"configuration:
! Port"orientations/diameters"to"maximise"jet"mixing
! Minimise"seabed"impact
! Minimise"interaction"between"neighbouring"jets
! Use"appropriate"methods"to"determine:
! minimum"required"port"separation
! distances"to"impact"with"the"seabed
! impact"dilution"rates
! nearMfield"extents.
Concept"outfall"location:
! Outside"existing"plume"main"core
! Avoid"existing"submarine"cable"and"gas"pipeline
! Sufficient"water"depth"for"operation/performance
Diffuser"configuration:
! Configure"to"meet"Federal"standards"in"the"
absence"of"existing"discharges.
! Use"farLfield"model"to"predict"effects"on"overall
salinities"at"the"site

Concept"outfall:
! 2"outfall"pipes"extending"together"offshore
! Pipe"1:
! 2.5"km"long,"diffuser"section"over"final"500"m
! 30"x"Ø"0.35"m"singleIport"risers
! Pipe"2:
! 3"km"long,"diffuser"section"over"final"500"m
! 31"x"Ø"0.35"m"singleIport"risers
! Ports"angled at"30° upwards from seabed
! Ports"normal"to"the"pipeline
! In"the"absence"of"existing"discharges,"this"would
give"ΔS"<"2ppt"a"few"metres"from"the"outfall.
Use"farIfield"model"to"predict"effects"on"
overall"salinities"at"the"site
Mid4/far4field"animation

Comparison"with"baseline:
! Maximum"+"2"ppt
! Typical"winds

Comparison"with"baseline:
! Average"+"2"ppt
! Typical"winds

Mid4/far4field"modelling"summary
! IWP"plume"mixes"with"existing"discharges
! Combined"plume"is"denser"" extends"further"offshore"than"baseline
! Salinities"in"vicinity"of"outfall"and"to"NE"are"higher"than"baseline.
! Typical"winds:"partial"reduction"in"W"extent"compared"with"baseline"
! Stronger"(Shamal)"winds:"area">"2"ppt"increased"alongshore

Sensitive"sites
! Latitude! Longitude!
Fringing!Reef!
R1# 24°51'46.80"# 54°42'43.20"#
R2# 24°51'3.60"# 54°42'3.60"#
R3# 24°50'6.00"# 54°41'34.80"#
Patch!Reef!
R4# 24°41'35.62"# 54°35'17.76"#
R6# 24°38'33.99"# 54°31'38.29"#
Fringing!Reef!with!Macro!Algae!
R5# 24°44'42.00"# 54°38'20.40"#
Sea!grass!
SG1# 24°49'51.60"# 54°42'50.40"#
SG2# 24°48'10.80"# 54°41'56.40"#
SG3# 24°46'44.40"# 54°41'6.00"#
SG4# 24°42'46.80"# 54°36'43.20"#
SG5# 24°41'42.00"# 54°37'44.40"#
Mangrove#
M1# 24°48'39.60"# 54°43'58.80"#
M2# 24°44'20.40"# 54°40'4.80"#
Mudflat!
MF1# 24°49'4.80"# 54°43'19.20"#
MF2# 24°43'1.20"# 54°39'18.00"#

Sensitive"sites"– typical"winds
R1 R2 R3
R4 R6 R5
SG1 SG2 SG3
SG4 SG5 M1
M2 MF1 MF2

Sensitive"sites"– stronger"winds
R1 R2 R3
R4 R6 R5
SG1 SG2 SG3
SG4 SG5 M1
M2 MF1 MF2

Recirculation"summary
At"existing"Taweelah"Complex"intake
ΔS#(ppt), red#is#including#IWP#outfall
wind#condition average 95th>percentile maximum
typical 1.2"(1.8) 2.5"(2.8) 3.7"(4.0)
stronger 1.2"(1.6) 3.1"(3.2) 3.9"(4.1)
At"proposed"IWP"intake
ΔS#(ppt), red#is#including#IWP#outfall
wind#condition average 95th>percentile maximum
typical 1.4"(2.1) 3.1"(4.0) 3.6"(4.9)
stronger 1.4"(2.0) 3.8"(4.1) 4.5"(5.0)

Khalifa Port"expansion
! Potential"effects"of"future"port"expansions"were"simulated.
! Peak"current"speeds"are"reduced"in"a"region"west"of"the"reclamation,"but"increase"
through"the"gap"in"the"causeway."
! Predicted"average"current"speeds"are"similar"near"the"proposed"IWP"site"before"and"
after"development."


! Dispersion"simulations"including"
proposed"port"layout"show"that"
! the"overall"plume"extents"are"similar"
for"the"two"layouts,"although"
! area"exceeding"+2"ppt"can"be"
increased"by"several"km
! Maximum"footprint

! Dispersion"simulations"including"
proposed"port"layout"show"that"
! the"overall"plume"extents"are"similar"
for"the"two"layouts,"although"
! area"exceeding"+2"ppt"can"be"
increased"by"several"km
! Average"footprint

Study"limitations
Timescale"set"by"DoE"has"been"challenging
Several"modelling"approximations"have"been"necessary
Potential"areas"of"investigation"for"subsequent"stages:
! ReFvisit"nearF/farFfield"model"coupling"to"use"a"more"advanced"method
! Longer"simulations
! Wider"range"of"wind"conditions
! Seasonal"sensitivity

APPENDIX I – SOIL ANALYSIS LABORATORY RESULTS
(2018 & 2019)
APPENDIX J– GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS
LABORATORY RESULTS
ATTACHMENT 1
DRAFT LOGS OF BORING

Project Name: ADWEA Taweelah Site in Abu Dhabi
Borehole Log DRAFT
Borehole No.
Project No: S18000039
BH-SGW-01
Location: Taweelah, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Client/Owner: Hydroqual ASA Sheet 1 of 1
Total Depth (m): 5.00 Drilling Method: Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Medium: Mud Core Dia. (mm):
Ground Level (m): Boring Started: 24/05/2018 Boring Dia. (mm): Casing Depth (m):
Coordinates: N= 2,740,227 Boring Completed: 24/05/2018 Casing Dia. (mm): Water Level (m):
E= 265,203 Rig: ARDCO III Driller: Water Depth (m): 3.15
Samples SPT Records Core Recovery
(Thickness)
Reduced
Legend
Scale
Field Records
Level
UCS
Depth
(m)
Description of Strata
(m)
(m)
Type and Depth N TCR SCR RQD
Number (m)
0-15 (cm) 15-30 (cm) 30-45 (cm) FI (MPa)
0-7.5 7.5-15 15-22.5 22.5-30 30-37.5 37.5-45 Blows (%) (%) (%)
(cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm)
Light yellowish gray, fine to coarse

grained, Slightly Gravelly, Silty SAND.
AU1 0.00 - 5.00 (5.00)
5
5
END OF BORING (5.0m)
Undisturbed Sample Key: Disturbed Sample Key: Abbreviations: Remarks:

CS: Core Sample BS: Bulk Sample Ground Water Table * The samples were described in accordance with standard BS
TCR: Total Core Recovery 5930:2015.
TB: Tricone Bit * Advance the Borehole from 2.0m - 5.0m without sampling to
DB: Drive Barrel SCR: Solid Core Recovery
install Piezometer.
SPT:Standard RQD: Rock Quality Designation **Description of strata in borehole log is visual description only.
SH: Shelby Tube Penetration Test FI: Fracture Index
AU:Auger UCS:Unconfined Comp. Strength
HPD: High Pressure N.U.: Not Used
Dilatometer COS: Continuous
Sample N.E.: Not Encountered
Logged By: Geo. Aitzaz Checked By: Eng. Phillip

App. B, Sec.B- Page 1/
Borehole Log DRAFT
Borehole No.
BH-SGW-02
(Thickness)
Reduced
Legend
Scale
Field Records
Level
UCS
Depth
(m)
(m)
(m)
Number (m)
0-15 (cm) 15-30 (cm) 30-45 (cm) FI (MPa)
0-7.5 7.5-15 15-22.5 22.5-30 30-37.5 37.5-45 Blows (%) (%) (%)
Yellowish gray, fine to coarse grained,

Gravelly, Silty SAND.
AU1 0.00 - 5.00 (5.00)
5
5

install Piezometer.

Borehole Log DRAFT
Borehole No.
BH-SGW-03
(Thickness)
Reduced
Legend
Scale
Field Records
Level
UCS
Depth
(m)
(m)
(m)
Number (m)
0-15 (cm) 15-30 (cm) 30-45 (cm) FI (MPa)
0-7.5 7.5-15 15-22.5 22.5-30 30-37.5 37.5-45 Blows (%) (%) (%)
Light yellowish gray, fine to coarse

AU1 0.00 - 5.00 (5.00)
5
5

install Piezometer.

Borehole Log DRAFT
Borehole No.
BH-SGW-04
(Thickness)
Reduced
Legend
Scale
Field Records
Level
UCS
Depth
(m)
(m)
(m)
Number (m)
0-15 (cm) 15-30 (cm) 30-45 (cm) FI (MPa)
0-7.5 7.5-15 15-22.5 22.5-30 30-37.5 37.5-45 Blows (%) (%) (%)
Light yellowish grya, fine to coarse

AU1 0.00 - 5.00 (5.00)
5
5

install Piezometer.

APPENDIX K – SOUND LEVEL METER CALIBRATION
CERTIFICATE
APPENDIX L – NOISE MONITORING RESULTS
Date Location Start time End time LA eq LA max LA min LA 90 LA 10
30.06.2018 N1 15:27 15:57 64.6 81.4 61.7 63.2 65.5
29.06.2018 N2 19:40 20:10 56.9 71.1 52.5 55.1 58.1
29.06.2018 N3 18:58 18:28 60.4 72.9 56.3 58.5 61.8
29.06.2018 N4 18:07 18:37 58.5 73.3 55.5 57.3 59.4
29.06.2018 N5 15:54 16:24 54.0 74.6 46.9 50.2 55.1
29.06.2018 N1 20:28 20:58 67.3 74.3 64.1 65.8 68.4

29.06.2018 N2 21:27 21:47 58.3 64.0 53.2 56.1 60.0
29.06.2018 N3 21:58 22:28 61.2 77.8 57.9 59.6 62.3
29.06.2018 N4 22:42 23:12 67.3 71.0 65.6 66.6 67.8
29.06.2018 N5 23:58 0:28 51.3 61.0 48.1 49.6 52.3
01.07.2018 N1 19:42 20:12 62.8 82.0 60.2 61.6 63.5

01.07.2018 N2 18:59 19:29 50.1 75.7 47.1 48.4 51.3
01.07.2018 N3 18:18 18:48 55.3 72.1 52.1 53.8 56.2
01.07.2018 N4 17:38 18:08 66.9 80.1 64.9 66.1 67.5
01.07.2018 N5 16:19 16:49 51.4 64.2 41.5 44.4 57.4
01.07.2018 N1 20:13 20:43 62.6 69.7 60.3 61.6 63.4

01.07.2018 N2 20:57 21:27 52.0 80.1 46.8 49.0 51.3
01.07.2018 N3 21:42 22:12 56.1 61.2 53.2 54.8 57.3
01.07.2018 N4 22:24 22:54 67.3 78.5 65.1 66.5 67.8
01.07.2018 N5 23:41 0:11 54.0 64.8 45.9 48.1 56.7
Daytime Nighttime
Location Date LA eq Federal Limit Date Location LA eq Federal Limit
N1 Weekend 64.6 60 Weekend N1 67.3 50
N1 Weekday 62.8 60 Weekday N1 62.6 50

Taweelah Iwp Esia Vol 4 30092019 v2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Taweelah Iwp Esia Vol 4 30092019 v2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater

Reverse Osmosis Plant

Environmental & Social

5Cs Project Number 1305/001/071

Document Title Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Volume 4-

Client ACWA Power

5Cs Project Manager Eva Muthoni Kimonye

5Cs Project Director Ken Wade

1 29/05/2019 ESIA Volume 4-Appendices EMK KRW KRW

1 Financial Capital Regardless of location, mode of delivery or

5 Capitals Environmental and Management Consulting

APPENDIX B – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT TERMS OF REFERENCE REPORT

APPENDIX C – AMBIENT AIR QUALITY INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE ___ 6

APPENDIX D – AIR QUALITY LABORATORY RESULTS _______________________ 7

APPENDIX E – MARINE WATER ANALYSIS (2018 & 2019) _________________ 8

APPENDIX F – MARINE SEDIMENT ANALYSIS (2018 & 2019) ________________ 9

APPENDIX G – MARINE ECOLOGY RESULTS ____________________________ 10

APPENDIX H – HR WALLINGFORD MARINE MODELLING __________________ 11

APPENDIX I – SOIL ANALYSIS LABORATORY RESULTS (2018 & 2019) _________ 12

APPENDIX J– GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS LABORATORY RESULTS _____________ 13

APPENDIX K – SOUND LEVEL METER CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE _____________ 14

APPENDIX L – NOISE MONITORING RESULTS____________________________ 15

Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant iii

Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant Appendices

Taweelah 200 MIGD IWP Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant Appendices

Abu Dhabi, UAE

ILF Consulting Engineers

Project : ILF SWRO Plant Taweelah

Client : ILF Consulting Engineers

HDR Project No. : TBC

HDR Doc. No. : ILF SWRO Plant Taweelah_ToR Report_230518_Rev1

Issued To: Environment Agency Abu Dhabi

Issued By: HDR Middle East LLC

Environmental Impact - Positive or negative impact that occurs to an environmental component

Hazard - Same as Environmental Hazard.

Hydrodynamic Modeling - Hydrodynamic modelling is central in most modelling tasks in the

‫‪10 | March 2018‬‬

‫اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ .ES-A‬ﻧﻄﺎق اﻟﻤﻌﺎﯾﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻠﯿﺔ ﻟﻨﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‬

‫‪37 – 19‬‬ ‫درﺟﺔ ﻣﺌﻮﯾﺔ‬ ‫درﺟﺔ اﻟﺤﺮارة‬

‫اﻟﺠﺪول ‪ .ES-A‬ﻧﻄﺎق اﻟﻤﻌﺎﯾﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻠﯿﺔ ﻟﻨﻈﺎم ﺳﺤﺐ ﻣﯿﺎه اﻟﺒﺤﺮ‬

‫‪11 | March 2018‬‬

‫‪12 | March 2018‬‬

‫ﻧﻤﺬﺟﺔ اﻟﺘﻮزﯾﻊ اﻟﻌﺪدي‬

‫‪13 | March 2018‬‬

‫ﺗﺪاﺑﯿﺮ اﻟﺘﺨﻔﯿﻒ ﻣﻦ ﺣﺪ اﻵﺛﺎر واﻟﺘﻮﺻﯿﺎت‬

‫‪14 | March 2018‬‬

Table ES-A. Operational seawater intake parameters ranges

Parameter Units Design Envelope

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 42,000 - 45,000

Table ES-A. Operational seawater intake design parameters

Minimum Seawater Demand 2,278,730 m3/day

Potable Water Production 902,216 m3/day

Concentrate for Sea Disposal* ~ 1,376,514 m3/day

Salinity of Concentrate ~80 PSU

1.2 Study Approach

Numerical Dispersion Modeling

Mitigation Measures and Recommendations

2.1 Project Title and Project Proponent

Table 1 Project Proponent

Address: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, PO Box 32800

Telephone Number: +971 2 207 7777

Fax Number: +971 2 671 3750

Contact Person: Name: Aisha Ahmed Al Mansoori

Position: Power Generation Engineer