EIA Study- Final Report-May 10 - UNDP

UNDP/PAPP 

PROVISIONS OF CONSULTANCY SERVICE FOR THE 

DETAILED DESIGN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF KHAN 

YOUNIS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IN GAZA STRIP 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

MAY 2009 

FINAL REPORT 

1310076 R3 – V2

Environmental Impact Assessment 

Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant May 2010 

TABLE OF CONTENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY…..……………………………………………………. ………9-17 

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 19 

1.1. PREFACE..................................................................................................................... 19 

1.2. PROJECT SETTING ...................................................................................................... 19 

1.3. SCOPE OF EIA ............................................................................................................ 20 

1.4. NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................................................. 20 

1.5. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES........................................................................................ 21 

2. REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK....................................... 22 

2.1. APPLICABLE AND RELEVANT REGULATIONS ............................................................. 22 

2.1.1. Environmental Protection and Control.......................................................... 22 

2.1.2. Legal Framework for Environmental Assessment ........................................ 22 

2.1.2.1. Environmental Law........................................................................... 22 

2.1.2.2. Environmental Assessment Policy.................................................... 23 

2.1.3. Relevant Standards ........................................................................................ 24 

2.2. ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ................................................................................. 25 

2.2.1. Palestinian Water Authority (PWA)............................................................... 25 

2.2.2. Coastal Municipal water Utility (CMWU)..................................................... 26 

2.2.3. Environment Quality Authority (EQA) .......................................................... 26 

2.2.4. Ministry of Planning (MoP)........................................................................... 26 

2.2.5. Ministry of Local Government (MoLG)........................................................ 27 

2.2.6. Ministry of Agriculture (MoA)....................................................................... 27 

2.2.7. Ministry of Health (MoH) .............................................................................. 27 

2.2.8. Ministry of National Economy (MoNE)......................................................... 27 

2.2.9. Ministry of Finance (MoF) ............................................................................ 27 

3. STUDY PROCESS AND METHODS............................................................................... 28 

3.1. SCOPING & TERMS OF REFERENCE........................................................................... 28 

3.2. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 29 

3.3. SITE VISITS AND STUDY AREA RECONNAISSANCE..................................................... 30 

3.4. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 32 

4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND ITS ALTERNATIVES.............................. 34 

4.1. PROJECT CONCEPT..................................................................................................... 34 

4.2. KHAN YOUNIS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (KY WWTP)............................... 35 

4.2.1. Background and Previous Considerations .................................................... 35 

4.2.2. Process Design Criteria and Considerations ................................................ 37 

4.2.2.1. Implementation Phases ..................................................................... 37 

4.2.2.2. Influx and Loads ............................................................................... 37 

4.2.2.3. Sludge Design Criteria...................................................................... 38 

4.2.3. Wastewater Treatment Processes .................................................................. 39 

4.2.3.1. Pretreatment ...................................................................................... 40 

4.2.3.2. Secondary Treatment (Activated Sludge) ......................................... 41 

4.2.3.3. Tertiary Treatment ............................................................................ 43 

4.2.3.4. Sludge Treatment .............................................................................. 44 

4.2.3.5. Noise and Odor Control .................................................................... 47 

4.3. INFILTRATION BASINS................................................................................................ 47 

4.4. EMERGENCY SEA OUTFALL ........................................................................................ 49 

4.5. INVESTMENT COST ..................................................................................................... 51 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 0



4.5.1. Capital Cost ................................................................................................... 51 

4.5.2. Operation and Maintenance Cost.................................................................. 51 

4.6. NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE......................................................................................... 52 

5. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT (BASELINE CONDITIONS)....................................... 53 

5.1. PHYSICAL ASPECTS .................................................................................................... 53 

5.1.1. Topography and Physiographic..................................................................... 53 

5.1.2. Geology.......................................................................................................... 54 

5.1.3. Soil ................................................................................................................. 56 

5.1.4. Groundwater.................................................................................................. 56 

5.1.5. Surface Water ................................................................................................ 60 

5.1.6. Seawater Aspects ........................................................................................... 61 

5.1.7. Ambient Air Quality ....................................................................................... 61 

5.1.8. Noise Levels ................................................................................................... 67 

5.1.9. Metro-climatologically Conditions................................................................ 68 

5.1.9.1. Climate.............................................................................................. 68 

5.1.9.2. Temperature ...................................................................................... 68 

5.1.9.3. Humidity ........................................................................................... 68 

5.1.9.4. Wind.................................................................................................. 69 

5.1.9.5. Precipitation ...................................................................................... 69 

5.1.9.6. Evaporation ....................................................................................... 70 

5.1.10. Road and Transportation............................................................................... 70 

5.2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS....................................................................................... 71 

5.2.1. Population...................................................................................................... 71 

5.2.2. Employment ................................................................................................... 72 

5.2.3. Water Demand/ Supply .................................................................................. 73 

5.2.4. Domestic Water Infrastructure ...................................................................... 73 

5.2.5. Wastewater collection.................................................................................... 74 

5.2.6. Land Use and Urban Planning...................................................................... 74 

5.2.7. Development Plans/Activities ........................................................................ 76 

5.2.8. Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources......................................... 76 

5.2.9. Human Health Aspects................................................................................... 78 

5.2.10. Local Community Perception ........................................................................ 80 

5.3. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT ...................................................................................... 83 

5.3.1. Fauna............................................................................................................. 83 

5.3.2. Flora .............................................................................................................. 84 

5.3.3. Significant Habitat......................................................................................... 86 

6. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .............................................................. 87 

6.1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 87 

6.2. PHYSICAL IMPACTS (GROUNDWATER, MARINE ENVIRONMENT, SOIL, AIR QUALITY) 94 

6.2.1. Groundwater:................................................................................................. 94 

6.2.1.1. Impacts on Groundwater Quality:..................................................... 94 

6.2.1.2. Impacts on Water Quantity: .............................................................. 96 

6.2.1.3. Particle Tracking:.............................................................................. 98 

6.2.2. Coastal and Marine Environment (seawater quality): .................................. 99 

6.2.3. Soil ............................................................................................................... 100 

6.2.4. Air quality .................................................................................................... 101 

6.3. SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACTS..................................................................................... 105 

6.4. BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS .............................................................................................. 109 

6.5. TRANS-BOUNDARY IMPACTS..................................................................................... 110 

6.5.1. Potential Impacts on Water Environment.................................................... 110 

6.5.2. Potential Impacts on Ambient Air and Noise............................................... 111 




6.6. THE IMPACT OF THE NO-ACTION TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT.............................. 112 

6.7. IMPACT SUMMERY.................................................................................................... 112 

7. EVALUATION OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................ 117 

7.1. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY.................................................................................. 117 

7.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................ 118 

7.2.1. Groundwater................................................................................................ 118 

7.2.2. Seawater and Marine Environment ............................................................. 119 

7.2.3. Soil ............................................................................................................... 119 

7.2.4. Aesthetic and Landscape Effect ................................................................... 120 

7.2.5. Air Quality ................................................................................................... 120 

7.3. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................... 122 

7.3.1. Loss of natural habitats ............................................................................... 122 

7.3.2. Deterioration of flora and fauna.................................................................. 122 

7.4. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT........................................................................... 122 

7.4.1. Cultural Heritage and archaeological resources ........................................ 122 

7.4.2. Employment Opportunities .......................................................................... 123 

7.4.3. Public Health and Safety ............................................................................. 123 

7.4.4. Land use planning........................................................................................ 124 

7.4.5. Energy consumption..................................................................................... 124 

7.5. CONSTRUCTION WASTE DISPOSAL............................................................................ 124 

7.6. REUSE OF TREATED WASTEWATER AND SLUDGE..................................................... 125 

7.7. QUANTITATIVE SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ................................................................... 125 

8. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................. 134 

8.1. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES135 

8.2. RECOMMENDED MONITORING PLAN ....................................................................... 135 

8.3. RESPONSIBILITIES FOR MITIGATION AND MONITORING ........................................ 140 

8.3.1. Implementation of environmental mitigation measures............................... 141 

8.3.2. Environmental Monitoring........................................................................... 144 

8.4. INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRAINING ........................ 145 

8.5. PUBLIC CONSULTATION ........................................................................................... 146 

8.6. EMP COST ESTIMATE AND SCHEDULE.................................................................... 148 

9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................... 150 

9.1. CONCLUSIONS.......................................................................................................... 150 

9.2. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 151 

10. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 152 

11. ANEXES ...................................................................................................................... 153 

ANNEX 1 (NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS) 

ANNEX 2 (SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY) 

ANNEX 3 (PUBLIC HEARING WORKSHOP) 

ANNEX 4 (PHOTOS) 

ANNEX 5 (FACILITY SITE MAPS) 

ANNEX 6 (TERMS OF REFERENCE AND EQA APPROVAL) 




LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE 4.1: TREATED WASTEWATER REQUIREMENT OF THE PROJECT ................. 37 

TABLE 4.2: THE INCOMING FLOWS FOR KY WWTP ...................................................... 38 

TABLE 4.3: THE DESIGN LOADS FOR KY WWTP. .......................................................... 38 

TABLE 4.4 COMPARISON OF SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES 

............................................................................................................................................... 39 

TABLE 4.5: OXYGEN REQUIREMENTS FOR BIOLOGICAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT. 

............................................................................................................................................... 42 

TABLE 4.6: INFILTRATION RATES AND HYDRAULIC LOADS FOR AL FUKHARI SITE. 

............................................................................................................................................... 49 

TABLE 4.7: TOTAL CAPITALG COST OF KY WWTP PROJECT COMPONENTS.......... 51 

THE TOTAL OPERATING COST IS SUMMARIZED IN TABLE 4.8.................................. 51 

TABLE 4.8: TOTAL OPERATING COST OF KY WWTP PROJECT. .................................. 51 

TABLE 5.1: SUMMARY OF GWT MONITORING RESULTS............................................. 58 

TABLE 5.2: RESULT OF AIR QUALITY SURVEY (SOURCE: JICA KHAN YOUNIS REPORT, 

1997) .......................................................................................................................................... 62 

TABLE 5.3: SUMMARY OF THE MEASURED POLLUTANTS AT CRUSE AND IDLE MODES 

FOR THE CARS TESTED........................................................................................................ 66 

TABLE 5.4: TYPICAL CONCENTRATIONS OF THE EXHAUST GAS COMPOSITION FOR 

BOTH DIESEL AND GASOLINE ENGINES ......................................................................... 67 

TABLE 5.5: FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF NOISE LEVELS IN DECIBEL ........................ 68 

TABLE 5.6: FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF RELATIVE HUMIDITY .................................. 68 

TABLE 5.7: FIELD MEASUREMENTS OF WIND SPEED IN M/S...................................... 69 

TABLE 5.8: AVERAGE YEARLY PRECIPITATION IN KHAN YOUNIS GOVERNORATE FROM 

1999-2009 (SOURCE: MOA, 2009).......................................................................................... 70 

TABLE 5.9: DAILY AVERAGE EVAPORATION RATE IN GAZA STATION IN MM/DAY70 

TABLE 5.10 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION FOR KHAN YOUNIS GOVERNORATE.... 71 

TABLE 5.11: PREVALENCE OF INTESTINAL PARASITIC INFECTIONS IN CHILDREN FROM 

KHAN YOUNIS GOVERNORATE, PALESTINE.................................................................. 79 

TABLE 5.12: PREVALENCE OF THE SEVEN INTESTINAL PARASITES BY AGE GROUP. 

............................................................................................................................................... 80 

TABLE 5.13 THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRES ...................................... 80 

TABLE 6.1 – PRELIMINARY MATRIX OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS93 

TABLE 6.2: NO3 PLUME DISTANCE FROM INFILTRATION BASINS............................ 96 

TABLE 6.3: TYPICAL NOISE EMISSIONS OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ........... 103 

TABLE 6.4.: LATERAL GROUNDWATER FLOW ACROSS THE BORDERS OF THE 

INFILTRATION BASINS....................................................................................................... 111 




TABLE 6.5.: IMPACT TYPES ON DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS OF THE 

PROJECT................................................................................................................................. 113 

TABLE 7.1. SEVERITY RATING MATRIX......................................................................... 118 

TABLE 7.2: QUANTITATIVE SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ................................................. 126 

TABLE 8.1: PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ..................... 137 

TABLE 8.2: POTENTIAL IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES AND INSTITUTIONAL 

RESPONSIBILITIES............................................................................................................... 144 

TABLE 8.3: PROPOSED TRAINING PROGRAM/PLAN.................................................... 145 

TABLE 8.4: PUBLIC CONSULTATION SCHEDULE AT VARIOUS PHASES ................ 147 

TABLE 8.5: ESTIMATED COST OF IMPLEMENTING THE EMP.................................... 148 

TABLE 8.6: PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE OF EMP............................... 149 




LIST OF FIGURES 

FIGURE 2.1: INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK IN THE WATER SECTOR....................... 25 

FIGURE 3.1: PROPOSED LOCATION FOR KH KY WWTP................................................ 30 

FIGURE 3.2: RAFAH SOLID WASTE LANDFILL................................................................ 31 

FIGURE3.3: ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK IN AL FUKHARI FOR IRRIGATION; THE 

WATER SOURCE IS FROM GROUNDWATER WELLS LOCATED IN MURAJ AREA (ABOUT 4 

KM TO THE WEST)................................................................................................................. 32 

FIGURE3. 4: STORM WATER COLLECTION POND THAT CAN BE COVERED BY PLASTIC 

SHEET. ...................................................................................................................................... 32 

FIGURE 4.1: GENERAL LAYOUT OF KYKY WWTP ......................................................... 34 

FIGURE 4.2: KY WWTP LAYOUT......................................................................................... 36 

FIGURE 4.4: MURAJ INFILTRATION AREA ....................................................................... 47 

FIGURE 4.5: COASTAL INFILTRATION AREA (TEMPORARY LAGOONS) .................. 48 

FIGURE 4.6: RECENT PHOTO FOR KHUZA'A (AL FUKHARI) INFILTRATION AREA 48 

FIGURE 4.7: LOCATION OF KHUSA'A (AL FUKHARI) INFILTRATION AREA ............ 49 

FIGURE 4.8: THE ROUTE FOR THE EMERGENCY PIPE LINE......................................... 50 

FIGURE 4.9: LOCATION OF OLD AND EXISTING WASTEWATER PONDS(CMWU 2008). 

............................................................................................................................................... 52 

FIGURE 5.1: TOPOGRAPHIC MAP FOR KHAN YOUNIS AND RAFAH GOV................ 53 

FIGURE 5.2A: GEOLOGICAL SECTIONS PASSING THROUGH THE KHUZA'A AREA 54 

FIGURE 5.2B: GEOLOGICAL SECTIONS PASSING THROUGH THE KY WWTP.......... 54 

FIGURE 5.2C: 3D GEOLOGICAL PRESENTATION OF THE GAZA STRIP...................... 54 

FIGURE 5.3: SOIL MAP OF GAZA STRIP (PWA, 2003) ...................................................... 37 

FIGURE 5.4: AVERAGE GROUNDWATER TABLE LEVELS IN KHAN YOUNIS 

GOVERNORATE FOR YEAR 2007. ....................................................................................... 57 

FIGURE 5.5: LOCATION OF PILOT WELL B9-BH01 AT AL FUKHARI PROPOSED 

INFILTRATION BASIN AND THE PREVIOUS STUDIES BOREHOLE LOCATIONS..... 58 

FIGURE 5.6: AVERAGE NITRATE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATER IN KHAN 

YOUNIS GOVERNORATE FOR YEAR 2007. ....................................................................... 59 

FIGURE 5.7: AVERAGE CHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATER IN KHAN 

YOUNIS GOVERNORATE FOR YEAR 2007. ....................................................................... 60 

FIGURE 5.8: SEASONAL VARIATIONS OF SULFUR DIOXIDE (µG/M3) IN DIFFERENT 

LOCATIONS AND SEASONS IN GAZA STRIP.................................................................... 62 

FIGURE 5.9: SEASONAL VARIATIONS OF NOX (µG/M3) IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS IN 

GAZA STRIP............................................................................................................................. 64 

FIGURE 5.10: SEASONAL VARIATION OF LEAD CONCENTRATION (µG/M3) IN AIR 

SAMPLES COLLECTED FROM DIFFERENT LOCATIONS OF GAZA STRIP. ................ 65 

FIGURE 5.11: QUANTITY OF USED HYDROCARBONS IN GAZA STRIP. ..................... 65 




FIGURE 5.12: WIND SPEED AVERAGE FOR YEAR 1997-2007 IN KM/H........................ 69 

FIGURE 5.13: KHAN YOUNIS MAP (PWA, 2007B)............................................................. 72 

FIGURE 5.14: REGIONAL PLAN FOR GAZA GOVERNORATES, (SOURCE: MOP, 2005)75 

FIGURE 5.15: OVERALL MAP FOR THE HISTORICAL SITES ATTRACTIONS IN THE GAZA 

STRIP......................................................................................................................................... 77 

SOURCE: MENA, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 1999............................. 77 

FIGURE 5.16: INDIVIDUAL FARMER'S AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN DUNMUS ......... 82 

FIGURE 5.17: AMOUNT OF WATER USED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES IN CUBIC 

METERS PER MONTH............................................................................................................ 82 

FIGURE 5.18: SELECTION OF FAUNA AT THE SOUTHERN PART OF GAZA STRIP. . 84 

FIGURE 5.19: SELECTION OF FLORA AT THE SOUTHERN PART OF GAZA STRIP... 85 

FIGURE 6.1: 3D MODEL LAYOUT PRESENTATION ......................................................... 94 

FIGURE 6.2: NO3 PLUME DISTRIBUTION OVER DIFFERENT YEARS OF SIMULATION 

............................................................................................................................................... 95 

FIGURE (6.3A): SIMULATED WATER LEVEL ELEVATION YEAR 2010 (+20M).......... 97 

FIGURE (6.3B): SIMULATED WATER LEVEL ELEVATION YEAR 2015 (+30M) ......... 97 

FIGURE (6.3C): SIMULATED WATER LEVEL ELEVATION YEAR 2018 (+35M) ......... 97 

FIGURE (6.3D): SIMULATED WATER LEVEL ELEVATION YEAR 2025 (>+50M)........ 97 

FIGURE 6.3: SIMULATED WATER LEVEL ELEVATION FOR YEAR 2010-2025........... 97 

FIGURE (6.4A): SIMULATED TRAVEL TIME YEAR 2010 (800M WEST) ....................... 98 

FIGURE (6.4B): SIMULATED TRAVEL TIME YEAR 2015 (2.25KM WEST).................... 98 

FIGURE (6.4C): SIMULATED TRAVEL TIME YEAR 2018 (3KM WEST)......................... 99 

FIGURE (6.4D): SIMULATED TRAVEL TIME YEAR 2025 (3.75KM WEST) .................. 99 

FIGURE 6.4: SIMULATED TRAVEL TIME FOR YEAR 2010-2025.................................... 99 

FIGURE 6.5: WATER BALANCE ZONE AREA LOCATION ............................................ 110 

FIGURE 8.1: THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE MONITORING WELLS................. 139 

FIGURE 8.2: INSTITUTIONAL SETUP FRAME WORK.................................................... 140 




List of Abbreviations 

AMSL 

ALMADINA 

consultants 

ARIJ 

BOD 

COD 

CAMP 

CEP 

CMWU 

d 

DEX 

DS 

EMCC 

EA 

EIA 

EIS 

EMP 

EQA 

FC 

FEX 

km 

KY WWTP 

L 

LA 

MEnA 

MLSS 

mg 

MOA 

MOH 

MOL 

MOLG 

MoNE 

MOP 

MOTA 

O&M 

OPT 

PA 

PAHs 

PAPP 

PCBS 

PLC 

PWA 

SS 

TC 

TSS 

ToR 

UG 


Above Mean Sea Level 

ALMADINA consultants – Environmental Management and 

Urban Planning 

Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem 

Biological Oxygen Demand 

Chemical Oxygen Demand 

Coastal Aquifer Management Program 

Center for Engineering and Planning 

Coastal Municipal Water Utility 

day 

Direct Execution Modility 

Dissolved Solids 

Engineering and Management Consulting Center 

Environmental Assessment 


Environmental Impact Statement 

Environmental Management Plan 

Environmental Protection Authority 

Faecal Coliform 

Foreign Exchange 

kilometer 

Khan Younis Waste Water Treatment Plant 

liter 

Land Authority 

The Ministry of Environmental Affairs 

mixed liquor suspended solids 

milligram 

Ministry of Agriculture 

Ministry of Health 

Ministry of Labor 

Ministry of Local Government 

Ministry of National Economy 

Ministry of Planning 

Ministry of Tourism and Antiquates 

Operation and Maintenance 

Occupied Palestinian Territories 

Palestinian Authority 

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 

Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People 

Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics 

Palestinian Legislative Council 

Palestinian Water Authority 

Suspended Solids 

Total coliform 

Total Suspended Solids 

Terms of Reference 

UNIVERSAL Group for Engineering and Consulting 

The United Nations Development Programme/ Programme of 

Assistance to the Palestinian People 




UNEP 

UV 

yr 

WHO 

The United Nations Environment Programme 

Ultraviolet 

year 

World Health Organization 




Introduction: 

Existing situation: 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Khan Younis Governorate is located in the southern part of the Gaza Strip. Khan Younis City 

is considered as the second largest city of Gaza Strip and is currently inhabited by a population 

of 187,195 persons. Total population of Khan Younis Governorate is currently 281,276 

persons. At present, 60% of Khan Younis city’s population is served by the established public 

sewer collection system. In the year 2025, 83% of the population of Khan Younis city is 

expected to be served by piped sewage system in addition to 63% for the surrounding area. 

The remaining unconnected population disposes effluents to cesspits, which are emptied 

regularly by tanker vacuum trucks. Collected septage is then discharged to the sewer network 

through one of the existing manholes. 

At present, the Khan Younis area is not served by any wastewater treatment plant. Most of the 

collected wastewater is currently transported to Al Amal storm water lagoon then to the 

temporary wastewaer treatment western lagoons near the sea, which have been constructed in 

2008 in the western part of the city. About 9000 m 3 /day of partially treated wastewater is 

disposed to the sea. 

In Khan Younis Governorate, wastewater disposal is the main environmental issue that has 

created unsanitary conditions, groundwater contamination, odor and mosquito problems 

within the governorate, which causes nuisance to the residents and affects their health. This 

has led to the high concentration of nitrates in groundwater to levels far in excess of allowable 

concentration in drinking water and recommended by the World Health Organization. It also 

triggered the current situation to the spread of many diseases among the population, where 

many studies have proven links between these diseases to water pollution. As well as the 

current situation has caused much inconvenience to the population through the emission of 

odors and the spread of mosquitoes. 

Previous studies: 

The consultant reviewed the preliminary Environmental Assessment (EA) study which was 

carried out in 1997 for Khan Younis sewerage system during the preparation of KY sewerage 

Master Plan which was prepared by Pacific International Consultants from Japan. The 

preliminary study included a very good data about the baseline environmental/ social 

conditions in the project area, which is considered a basic data for updating. The study was 

very brief focusing on the overall elements of the master plan which is considered a very 

important step in developing the current EIA full study. 

The CEP/EMCC consultants conducted in 2008 a review study for wastewater system and 

loading in Khan Younis Governorate. 

A basic study in 2006 for developing the preliminary design for KY WWTP was prepared by 

PLANCENTER Consultants from Finland under the supervision of PWA. 




ALMADINA Consultants prepared a study in 2006 for the preliminary selection/design of KY 

treated wastewater infiltration sites. The study concluded that Khuza'a (Al Fukhari site) is the 

best location for infiltrating the treated wastewater from KY WWTP. 

Initial Design report (SOGREAH-UG, 2009) which is prepared by the Consultant is 

considered the basic document for the preparation of this EIA study. A detailed review for all 

related projects and documents was done in addition to geotechnical investigation in order to 

finalize the infiltration site selection. The report presented the initial design details for the 

project elements. 

The consultant reviewed the EIA of the northern KY WWTP which was prepared in 2005. The 

study prepared by EMCC consultants Supported by Dorsch Consult from Germany. The study 

is dealing mostly with the similar project elements which are proposed in KY WWTP project. 

Description of Project Size, the Process, and Location: 

It is planned to establish Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant (KY WWTP) in the 

eastern part of the governorate within Al Fukhari area, which will treat the wastewater 

generated from the households of the town. The proposed KY WWTP will achieve a 

secondary level treatment. After that, the effluents will be discharged into infiltration basins 

for aquifer recharge, and to the sea in emergency case. KY WWTP will have a capacity of 

treating up to 44,000 m3 of raw sewage everyday, generated by the residents of the 

governorate in year 2025. 

KY WWTP project contains the following components: 

1. Review the design of pump station 8 and its main pressure line to the treatment plant, 

2. Wastewater treatment plant, 

3. The infiltration basins, and 

4. The pressure effluent and emergency line from the KY WWTP site to the infiltration basin 

and finally to the sea. 

KY WWTP will be located at a distance 600m from the nearest urban area and 10m below its 

level. The major part of land to be used for the project is a public property, belonging to the 

Municipality of Khan Younis. Most of wastewater from will reach the proposed KY WWTP 

by pressure line. The wastewater treatment technology to be used at the KY WWTP is the 

activated sludge technology. The described wastewater treatment line is designed for a 

maximum daily flow of 26,000 m3/day in the first phase (2018) and 44,000 m3/day for the 

second phase (2025), and consists of following process units: 

• inlet works and flow metering 

• screening 

• grit and grease removal 

• biological treatment with nitrification denitrification process 

• final sedimentation 

• tertiary treatment by sand filtration and UV disinfection 

• outlet works with treated effluent pumping and flow metering. 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 10



The sludge treatment includes the following steps: 

• gravity thickening for concentration of biological excess sludge 

• natural dewatering in drying beds 

• stabilization by composting. 

The proposed treatment technique for KY WWTP will be based on the Activated Sludge 

Process. Biological treatment will be carried out on 2 identical parallel lines in Phase 1 and 4 

identical parallel lines in Phase 2. Activated sludge is suspension of microorganisms, both 

active and dead, in a wastewater consisting of entrapped and suspended colloidal and 

dissolved organic and inorganic materials. The activated sludge process is aerobic, biological 

process, which uses the metabolic reactions of microorganisms to attain an acceptable effluent 

quality by removing substances exerting an oxygen demand. 

The plant will treat wastewater to a level of BOD less than 20mg/l, SS less than 15mg/l, 

nitrogen less than 25mg/l and without pathogens. This level of treatment will comply with the 

national environmental regulation. This makes it safe for aquifer recharge, or discharge in the 

nature. 

Objectives of the EIA study: 

This study is an assessment of the environmental impacts and benefits of the KY WWTP 

Project and its ecological effects on the existing and the planned situation. The EIA study will 

be conducted in order to: 

1. Ensure that the project will not have irreversible negative impacts on the environment 

including: water, soil, air, ecology and socio-economic aspect, 

2. Identify both positive and negative impacts, 

3. Develop actions and measures to mitigate negative impacts, 

4. Make sure that all stakeholders concerned are aware of the project and their views and 

comments are taken into consideration to the maximum possible extent. 

The study team: 

A Joint Venture Consortium between SOGREAH Consultants from France and UNIVERSAL 

Group for Engineering and Consulting (UG), Gaza has been assigned for the Consultancy 

Services for the detailed design of Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant (KY WWTP). 

This assignment is part of the “Construction of KY WWTP Project” and financed through a 

grant from the Government of Japan. The Client of this project is United Nations 

Development program (UNDP) / Program of Assistance to the Palestinian People (PAPP). The 

Joint Venture Consultants have chosen ALMADINA Consultants team for supporting in the 

preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment Study. 

Disclosure and Consultations: 

Public Consultations Prior to this EIA 

A comprehensive public participation program was conducted through 1996 EA preliminary 

study. Governmental agencies, NGOs, community representatives, neighboring landowners, 

and other stakeholders were involved in the process. The consultation process was performed 




by direct interviews, and public meetings. Most of the environmental issues, including 

wastewater reuse, sludge reuse, socioeconomics, aquifer water quality, were discussed in great 

details. 

Consultations during the EA process 

The public consultation during this EIA study was performed through direct interviews, filling 

questionnaires, and public meetings. The new project components were presented in front of 

them and their concerns were taken into consideration. 

Legal and Administrative Structures and requirements 

Palestinian Environmental Assessment Policy (PEAP) 

Based on the PEAP, this project (KY WWTP) was classified under the group of projects for 

which a Full EA is obligatory. The terms of reference were reviewed and approved by the 

Palestinian Environment Quality Authority (EQA). 

Potential Environmental Impacts and Benefits 

The following sections briefly summarize the significant environmental impacts and benefits 

of the proposed project. 

Impacts and Benefits at the KY WWTP Site: 

Construction 

As the KY WWTP site consists of barren land and no human settlements located at the site 

therefore, no potential environment impacts are expected during pre-construction phase. 

Around 116 dunums of land will be affected by the excavation activities and huge quantities 

of mainly clay soil will be removed from the site and may be transferred to other locations. 

These activities have significant, large scale and long-term impacts on the soil ecology. If this 

soil is not utilized for landscaping, during the wet season soil erosion will result at the site. On 

the other hand, if the excavated soil is haphazardly dumped, this will cover trees and will 

create unsightly scenes at the project site. 

Potential environmental impacts likely to occur during construction phase are: 

1. Pilling of huge amount of excavated material mainly clay soil. 

2. Nuisance to people in surrounding of site due to dust /noise /smoke generated by the 

movement of vehicles /machinery 

3. Pollution due to waste water and solid waste from the contractor’s camp 

4. Health and safety of workers at contractor’s camp which will be mitigated by proper 

training of contractor’s crew about First Aid and Health & Safety procedures; and 

5. Accident hazards for people and livestock at borrow pit and construction areas. 




The construction activities at the KY WWTP site will have positive social economic effects 

due to the creation of temporary jobs provided that Palestinian contractors and workers are 

hired for the construction activities. 

Operation 

Operation and maintenance phase of KY WWTP may cause nuisance for surrounding 

communities, depending on the climatic conditions (wind direction, wind velocity). 

However, wind direction may not have direct effects on the surroundings, because it may 

change due to the season. The major potential environment impacts are related to 

• Grit and sludge disposal which could cause environmental pollution, odor from anaerobic 

conditions, vegetation problems, clogging of structures and piping, and groundwater 

pollution through leachate. and 

The operation of the KY WWTP will have long-term positive effects on employment. 

Permanent or temporary job opportunities will be created for skilled and unskilled workers 

directly at the site itself. In addition the application of treated sludge in agricultural activities is 

considered a potential positive benefit provided that internationally recognized standards are 

respected to mitigate against sanitary and health risks. 

Impacts and Benefits at the Infiltration Site: 

Construction 

Around 95 dunums of agricultural land will be affected by the excavation activities at Al 

Fukhari infiltration basins and huge quantities of mainly clay soil will be removed from the 

site and can be used for the drying beds at KY WWTP site. These activities have small scale 

impacts on the soil ecology. 

The construction traffic, especially the transfer of the huge amounts of clay soil partly through 

residential areas, will cause nuisance for the local population (noise, dust, exhaust fumes). 

Traffic jams seem to be of minor relevance, due to the low numbers of vehicles in the relevant 

areas. 

The construction activities at the Al Fukhari infiltration site will have positive social economic 

effects due to the creation of temporary jobs provided that Palestinian contractors and workers 

are hired for the construction activities. 

Operation 

Odor can be a problem and cause some discomfort to the families living around the site of 

infiltration basin, if not properly mitigated, during the operation phase of the infiltration. 

During the infiltration of treated waste water, the saturated thickness become more than 50m 

at the end of simulation (year 2025) which means that more than 40m dome depth (thickness) 

under the recharge basins. The impact of infiltrating treated wastewater in Khuza’a’ area on 




the groundwater can be considered positive due to the fact that the current water resource in 

the area almost not exist due to limited saturated thickness and highly brackish water. After 15 

years of infiltration in the area, there will be a local aquifer existence with an average 

saturated thickness of more than 50m and extend in a radius of about 4km from the infiltration 

basins. The water quality will improve as well by diluting the existing brackish water. The 

infiltrated treated waste water will never reach any adjacent municipal well in the area 

according to the groundwater modeling results. 

The existing chloride concentration in groundwater located in vicinity of the infiltration basins 

is ranged from 2,000 to 4,000mg/L, Hence any added water with chloride less than the 

existing groundwater will certainly improve the groundwater salinity by dilution. 

The other main component to the groundwater quality is nitrate concentration. According to 

the model simulation until year 2025 taking into account all the infiltrated treated wastewater 

quantity and quality into account, the nitrate plume diameter was about 2.9 km. Long term 

simulation (year 2025) and the effect of the infiltrated wastewater move towards the 

Mediterranean sea because of the existence of pumping center in Khan Younis City, and it was 

clear that the inland distribution of plume towards the eastern border is less than the half 

distance of the NW direction due to absence of wells in the eastern side of the proposed 

infiltration basins and the plume edge doesn't reach the eastern border. 

The infiltrated treated wastewater can be used for irrigation purposes in the nearby agricultural 

areas, which can be considered as recovery area. 

When the infiltration ponds begin operating they will attract animals, especially open water 

and wetland species. New species, especially water and wetland species will inhabit the area 

and use it as shelter, food source and probably as breeding grounds. 

The necessary maintenance and monitoring activities at the infiltration site will create 

permanent jobs for local community. 

Impacts of the Emergency Sea Pipeline 

Construction 

The construction activities will cause temporary nuisance for the local population (noise, dust, 

exhaust fumes, accessibility). Traffic jams seem to be of minor relevance, due to the low 

numbers of vehicles in the relevant areas. 

Due to the disturbance caused by the construction activities wildlife species in the surrounding 

areas may migrate to other places or leave the place at least during the daily working hours 

when there is noise and dust from the construction site and the activities on the access roads. 

Still the construction activities of the pipeline will have positive social economic effects due to 

the creation of temporary jobs provided that Palestinian contractors and workers are hired for 

the construction activities. 

Operation 




In case of emergency where operational difficulties may be experienced, the 

untreated/partially treated wastewater would need to be bypassed directly into the sea. This 

would produce adverse impacts on the seawater quality and fish and other biota during the 

period of the release and for a short period. This is considered a low significant impact due to 

the short time of disposal. 

Environmental Management Plan (EMP) 

The EMP will help the Executing Agency to address the adverse environmental impact of the 

project, enhance project benefits, and introduce standards of good environmental practice. The 

primary objectives of the EMP are to: 

1. Define the responsibilities of project proponents, contractors and other role players, and 

effectively communicate environmental issues among them. 

2. Facilitate the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIA by providing 

the technical details of each project impact, and providing an implementation schedule. 

3. Define a monitoring mechanism and identify monitoring parameters to ensure that all 

mitigation measures are completely and effectively implemented. 

4. Identify training requirements at various levels and provide a plan for implementation. 

The Executing Agency of the Project construction is the UNDP. The executing agency may 

establish a Project Unit (PU) for following up the project implementation. The project will be 

implemented by the Project Unit, which will be overseen by a Project Steering Committee 

(PSC). Project Unit headed by Project Director/Manager, comprises the professional staff and 

supported by a team of consultants. It shall be responsible for overall co-ordination, planning, 

implementation and management of Project activities. CMWU will be the operator of the 

project assisted by consultants and contractors whenever needed. 

Mitigation measures: 

Pre-construction stage 

1. All the land allocated for construction of the proposed KY WWTP belongs to the 

Municipality of Khan Younis which has to be registered officially for Khan Younis 

Governorate Wastewater Treatment Plant. 

2. Private land acquisition is involved in this project at Al Fukhari infiltration site; accordingly 

the Ministry of Finanace and the Land Authority should compensate the owner and the 

framers and may be a resettlement plan is required. 

Construction stage 

The project will be executed through private contractors who will be responsible for 

implementation of environmental mitigation measures during the construction stage, while PU 

with the assistance of Environmental Consultant will supervise and monitor compliance of all 

those mitigation measures. 

1. Excavated clay soil will be removed from the site of infiltration and transferred to other 

locations. The clay may be used for covering the solid waste of Rafah Land fill and may be 

used also for agricultural purposes. 




2. Where dust generation is high, surface treating or overlaying diversion tracks with shingle; 

where necessary, and subject to the availability of water, sprinkling water across diversion 

tracks at least twice a day. 

3. Ensuring that haul-trucks carrying asphalt-concrete mix and/or aggregate fill materials are 

kept covered with tarpaulin to help contain construction material being transported between 

sites. 

4. Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours in reaches along densely populated 

areas, to minimize the impact of noise generated by construction machinery. 

5. Enforcing the applicable standards to gaseous emissions generated by construction 

vehicles, equipment, and machinery. 

6. Pollution due to wastewater and solid waste from the contractor’s camp which will be 

mitigated by providing adequate arrangement for the safe disposal of wastewater and solid 

waste; 

7. Health and safety of workers at contractor’s camp which will be mitigated by proper 

training of contractor’s crew about First Aid and Health & Safety procedures; and 

8. Accident hazards for people and livestock at construction areas, which will be mitigated by 

regulating the procurement of the borrow material and fencing the construction sites. 

Operation stage 

Upon completion of the project, CMWU will operate and run the system and will also be 

responsible for implementation and monitoring of environmental mitigation measures during 

the operation stage. During the operation stage of the Project, wastewater will be treated in 

oxidation ponds. Treated effluent will be disposed of in Khuza'a infiltration basins and could 

be used for agricultural irrigation. The effluent must comply with the National Environmental 

Quality Standards for effluent disposal. CMWU will supervise and monitor compliance of all 


1. Regular cleaning of grit/floating material and proper storage in barrels and its disposal with 

municipal solid waste; 

2. Monitor the proliferation of fly/mosquito populations and use eco-enzymes/ BT for 

controlling them. Addition of chemicals like Calcium hypochlorite or chlorine. 

3. Fencing and planting trees, around the treatment plant and the infiltration basins. 

4. Proper training of workers on health and safety measures, and use of proper storage tanks 

and protective clothing. 

5. Safe disposal of sludge for agricultural reuse and/or sanitary land filling based on the 

sludge sampling and testing that will show whether dried material fulfills agricultural reuse 

requirements. However, if the toxic materials are found in the sludge, the operator will 

carry out its safe underground disposal; 

6. Installing capable standby electrical generator in case of energy shortages. 

7. Stop swimming and fishing in the area of discharging the effluent in emergency cases. 

Monitoring plan: 

The Environmental Monitoring plan sets out a framework for monitoring the environmental 

situation at all project sites. In order to ensure that the reality complies with the demands of 

the EMP environmental, monitoring should be carried out concerning the following aspects: 

1. Groundwater monitoring 




2. Effluent Monitoring 

3. Seawater Monitoring (In outlet Point) 

4. Ambient Air Emission Monitoring 

5. Solid and Hazardous waste Monitoring 

6. Noise Level Monitoring 

7. Traffic Monitoring 

Monitoring activities will also cover the odor, mosquito and other nuisances that might be 

resulted at the plant site. This will ensure that all of the mitigation measures are within the safe 

limit and that they do not have environmental effects. 

A monitoring program has been prepared for the project. This program provides details 

regarding monitoring parameters, monitoring location, number of tests/ samples, 

method/equipment for testing, frequency and responsibility for monitoring and 

preliminary costs. Environmental Monitoring Reports will be prepared on monthly basis 

and complete record will be maintained at the site office. The environmental monitoring 

reports will be submitted to Environment Quality Authority (EQA) on quarterly basis. 

Capacity building: 

PU and CMWU staff does not currently have sufficient experience and capability for dealing 

either with implementation of environmental mitigation measures or monitoring of various 

environmental quality parameters. Hence they will require training and expertise assistance to 

perform the environmental management and monitoring and to implement the environmental 

monitoring plan. The environment specialist (consultant) will train the staff regarding record 

keeping procedures, sampling, testing, analysis and use of environmental monitoring 

equipments. They will also be briefed about prevailing environmental legislation and 

standards. 

Public consultation: 

General public, elected representatives, local community leaders including members of 

NGO’s, women groups were asked to state their current perceptions of priorities for 

improvements to the urban environmental infrastructure in their areas and about the likely 

impacts of the project during construction and operation phases. Field surveys, interviews 

were held in this connection at project preparation stage. 

The results of public consultation conducted in the area showed a strong agreement among the 

respondents that this project will improve their overall health and hygiene conditions and 

reduce risk of spread of water born diseases. However, they had the impression that there may 

be some adverse impacts on different environmental parameters during construction and 

operation of the infiltration basins at Al Fukhari area. 

During construction and operation of the Project, public consultation is planned as follows: 

1. Suggestions of the general public may be sought through press or other mass media 

whenever deemed necessary. 

2. Local NGOs, particularly working in the sector of environmental sanitation, will actively 

be involved in public representation. 




3. Citizen community representatives of the concerned municipal councils will frequently be 

contacted on matters concerning the progress, adverse impacts and mitigation measures. 




1. Introduction 

1.1. Preface 

The United Nations Development Programme/ Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian 

People (UNDP/PAPP), has received a grant from the "GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN" for the 

Construction of Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant (KY WWTP) in Gaza Strip, a part 

of which will be dedicated for the works for which the consultancy services "DETAILED 

DESIGN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF KHAN YOUNIS WASTEWATER 

TREATMENT PLANT IN GAZA STRIP" including environmental impact assessment task. 

Khan Younis Governorate is located in the southern part of the Gaza Strip. Khan Younis City 

is considered as the second largest city of Gaza Strip and is currently inhabited by a population 

of 187,195 persons (PCBS, 2007). Total population of Khan Younis Governorate is about 

280,000 persons (PCBS, 2007). 

At present, 60% of Khan Younis city’s population is served by the new established public 

sewer collection system. In the year 2025, 83% of the population of Khan Younis city is 

expected to be served by piped sewage system in addition to 63% for the surrounding area. 

The remaining unconnected population disposes effluents to cesspits, which are emptied 

regularly by tanker vacuum trucks. Collected septage is then discharged to the sewer network 

through one of the existing manholes. 

The current wastewater discharge system is considered as temporary emergency system and 

the construction of a wastewater treatment plant is very urgent. 

The wastewater strategic development plan aims at constructing an extendable and phased 

wastewater treatment plant for Khan Younis governorate. 

1.2. Project Setting 

A Joint Venture Consortium between SOGREAH Consultants from France and UNIVERSAL 

Group for Engineering and Consulting (UG), Gaza has been assigned for the Consultancy 

Services for the detailed design of Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant (KY WWTP). 

This assignment is part of the “Construction of KY WWTP Project” and financed through a 

grant from the Government of Japan. The Client of this project is United Nations 

Development programme (UNDP) / Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People 

(PAPP). 

The final output of the assignment is to produce a complete set of tender documents for KY 

WWTP, Phase 1. The assignment is divided in 6 tasks as follows: 

Task 1: Initial Design Report. 

Task 2: Topographical Survey and Geotechnical Investigation. 

Task 3: Preparation of Completed Detailed Design for KY WWTP. 

Task 4: Carrying out Environmental Impact Assessment Study. 

Task 5: Preparation of the Client’s Requirements. 




Task 6: Preparation of tender documents for KY WWTP Phase 1. 

The Joint Venture Consultants have chosen ALMADINA Consultants team for supporting in 

the preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment Study. 

1.3. Scope of EIA 

The present report is the Environmental Impact Assessment Report and includes major results, 

conclusions and recommendations of the study’s fourth task. 

The scope of the EIA will describe various components of the environment of the area(s) to be 

affected or created by the alternatives under consideration. Data and analyses in the EIA will 

be commensurate with significance of the impact. The EIA will include discussions of direct 

effects and their significance; indirect effects and their significance; possible conflicts between 

the proposed action and land use plans, polices and controls for the areas concerned, and 

conservation potential of alternatives and mitigation measures. At the same time, the EIA will 

include urban quality; historic and cultural resources and the design of the built environment, 

including the reuse and conservation potential of various alternatives and mitigation measures; 

and means to mitigate adverse environmental impacts. For each significant adverse impact, 

the section will identify proposed mitigation measure(s). 

A number of studies have been conducted earlier, especially under West Bank and Gaza Water 

and Sanitation Project Phase II: Process Selection Report (PLANCENTER, 2005) and 

Preliminary Design for the KY WWTP of KY (PLANCENTER, 2006), and Review of 

wastewater flow and load projections for KY Governorate (CEP & EMCC, 2006). 

Environmental Assessment for North Gaza Emergency Sewage Treatment Plant Project has 

been prepared by EMCC in 2005. A preliminary environmental assessment for KYKY WWTP 

was done by PACIFIC Consultant in 1996. 

After review of these studies, and taking into account latest official statistics for population 

number and growth rates, this Report for KY WWTP updates the environmental baseline data 

and provides assessment of environmental impacts and the required management and 

monitoring plan. 

1.4. Need for Environmental Impact Assessment 

Modern economic development strategies and programmes based on the use of natural 

resources and technology. Frequently, such activities involve purposeful changes and heavy 

burden on inherently complex environmental ecosystems. The changes, which consequently 

occur over time and space, are for the most part poorly understood and may often be 

unforeseen. During recent decades, public knowledge and concerns about the economy and the 

environment have changed significantly. It is now widely recognized that economic systems 

are inextricably linked to the environment and that human health and well-being depend on a 

healthy environment. 

EIA plays a central role in acquiring information on the social and environmental implications 

– including water resources implications – of development programmes and projects, 

identifying the measures necessary to protect the resource and related ecosystems and then 

ensuring that such measures are implemented. EIAs are concerned not only with impacts on 




the natural environment but also with effects on the social environment. Hence, the EIA 

touches the heart of the need for cross-sectoral integration involving project developers, water 

managers, decision-makers and the public, and provides a mechanism or tool to achieve the 

sustainable development aspect. 

1.5. Purpose and Objectives 

This study is an assessment of the environmental impacts and benefits of the KY WWTP 

Project and its ecological effects on the existing and the planned situation. The EIA study will 

be conducted in order to: 

1. Ensure that the project will not have irreversible negative impacts on the environment 

including: water, soil, air, ecology and socio-economic aspect, 

2. Identify both positive and negative impacts, 

3. Develop actions and measures to mitigate negative impacts, 

4. Make sure that all stakeholders concerned are aware of the project and their views and 

comments are taken into consideration to the maximum possible extent. 

The study should be considered as an aid to improve the decision making process as it seeks 

public opinion and external knowledge in order to ensure a maximum degree of fairness and 

balance in the final decision. 




2. REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK 

2.1. Applicable and Relevant Regulations 

The Palestinian Authority (PA) since its establishment in 1994 has worked hard to recover and 

improve the Palestinian environment and strive towards sustainable development. The PA has 

established the institutions that could deal with the challenges of building a new state and 

worked hard to build the capacity of the different ministries and agencies along with building 

the capacity of the human resources. Laws and legislations were also developed and endorsed 

to organize and manage the various sectors such as environment, water, wastewater, land use 

planning, etc. Palestinian legislative council PLC is the formal legislative body in Palestine. 

2.1.1. Environmental Protection and Control 

The PA has established a fair framework for environmental governance in the Palestinian 

context based on the principles of democracy, equity and social justice. In this direction, the 

Palestinian constitution stressed the value that the environment is a basic human right and the 

approved environmental Law 1999 stated that every Palestinian has the right to live in a clean 

environment. 

The PA has developed an environmental management model based on strategic guiding 

vision, management philosophy and approach on the global, regional and local levels, national 

environmental values, national environmental policies, EIA policy, and environmental strategy 

until 2015, and action plan focusing on the priorities in the first 3 years. Also, five lines of 

action have been defined including: 

1. Policy, planning, and Environmental multilateral agreements. 

2. Legal, regulatory and enforcement. 

3. Environmental protection including solid and liquid waste and industrial pollution 

management. 

4. Environmental resources management covering biodiversity, natural protected areas, 

desertification, and, 

5. Coastal zone protection. 

2.1.2. Legal Framework for Environmental Assessment 

2.1.2.1. Environmental Law 

The PA is acting actively in the field of water and wastewater management in terms of 

legislation, policies and strategies, seeking funds, design and implementation of several 

projects. The wastewater reuse is regulated by the 1999 Environmental law (Article 29) and by 

one of the policies of Palestinian Water Authority PWA. The Environmental law states: “The 

Ministry of Environmental Affairs MEnA, in coordination with the competent agencies, shall 

set standards and norms for collecting, treating, reusing, or disposing wastewater and storm 




water in a sound manner, which comply with the preservation of the environment and public 

health”. 

2.1.2.2. Environmental Assessment Policy 

• Goals of the policy: 

Environmental Assessment policy shall implemented to support the sustainable economic and 

social development of the Palestinian people through assisting in the following goals: 

1. Ensuring an adequate standard of life in all its aspects, and not negatively affecting the 

basic needs, and the social, cultural and historical values of people as a result of 

development activities. 

2. Preserving the capacity of the natural environment to clean and sustain itself. 

3. Conserve biodiversity, landscapes and the sustainable sue of natural resources. 

4. Avoiding irreversible environmental damage, and minimizing reversible environmental 

damage from development activities. 

• Principles underlying the policy: 

1. The application of this policy must be transparent, equitable and effectively administered in 

order to encourage environmentally sound development. 

2. Environmental assessment must enhance development, by contributing to its environmental 

sustainability, not inhabit it. 

3. Environmental assessment should begin as early as possible since it means for both 

planning and evaluating development activities through all stages including 

decommissioning. 

4. Proponents of development activities should pay the cost of carrying out the environmental 

assessment studies. Preparation of studies and reports must be carries out by specialists 

qualified to carry the work. 

5. Environmental assessment should specify measures for mitigating potential impacts, and 

for environmental monitoring and management, throughout the life of the development 

activity. 

6. Environmental assessment should clearly identify who benefits from a project and who 

suffers the negative effects. 

7. In the absence of Palestinian standards, appropriate standards will be considered in EA 

studies and in the measures and conditions included in the environmental approval of the 

projects. 

8. Stakeholder consultation is an essential component of the EA policy. 

• Responsibility for implementation: 

In fulfilling its responsibility, the ministry (Environment Quality Authority EQA) shall: 

1. Ensure that the goals and principles of the policy are and reflected in the implementation of 

the policy. 




2. Establish and manage the required implementation procedures. 

3. Provide advisory and technical guidance to individuals, organizations, agencies and 

proponents who are required to comply with or participate in implementing the policy. 

4. Produce guidelines and best management practices for complying with policy. 

5. Maintain a register for all activities currently being appraised under the policy. 

6. Establish procedures for, and ensure, the monitoring and follow-up of conditions attached 

to activity environmental approvals under the policy. 

7. Periodically evaluate the implementation of the policy and recommend adjustments or 

improvements to it. 

• Environmental assessment committee: 

a) An inter-agency environmental Assessment Committee consist of the following 

governmental agencies: 

1. Environmental Quality Authority (chair) 

2. Ministry of National Economy 

3. Ministry of Local Government 

4. Ministry of Transport 

5. Ministry of Agriculture 

6. Ministry of Health. 

7. Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities 

8. Ministry of Planning 

9. Palestinian Water Authority 

10. Palestinian Energy Authority 

Other agencies may be asked to join the committee as required to review the nature and 

location of individual projects. 

b) The EA committee shall undertake the following responsibilities according to its own 

procedures: 

1. Ensure adequate scoping of environmental assessment studies 

2. Prepare and approve terms of reference for environmental assessment study 

3. Review environmental assessment reports 

4. Recommend environmental decisions to the minister 

5. Assist the ministry to ensure compliance of the projects with environmental approvals 

conditions. 

2.1.3. Relevant Standards 

One of the most important standards related to construction of treatment plant is reuse of 

treated wastewater. The Palestinian standard for reuse of treated wastewater has been 

recognized and issued. Most of the ongoing and planed wastewater treatment projects are 

designed for reuse of treated wastewater. 




Most of the ongoing and planed wastewater treatment projects are designed for reuse of 

treated wastewater, such as Al Bireh, Hebron, Salfit and Nablus treatment plants in the West 

Bank and Gaza Northern Governorate treatment plant. 

The relevant draft or adopted laws, standards and policies is given in the Annex 1 including: 

drinking water standard, air quality standard, noise standard, etc. 

2.2. Administrative Framework 

The organization of the PWA ensures clear separation between regulatory and delivery 

functions and emphasizes that PWA is the key regulator and guardian of the water resources 

(Figure 2.1). 

Cabinet of Ministries 

Decision making level 

National water council 

Palestinian Water Authority 

Regulatory level 

Water Utilities 

Service Delivery level 

Regional 

Water 

utilities 

Water user’s 

Associations 

Figure 2.1: Institutional framework in the water sector. 

2.2.1. Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) 

PWA was established by a president decree No. 90 for year 1995. The law No. 3, 2002 states 

that the PWA is the official body responsible for water resources in Palestine, whether surface 

or ground water and including sewage water. 

The main objectives: 

1. Seeking to achieve an administration much fit for water resource usage. 

2. Seeking to secure water through the best planning for investing and developing water 

resources 

3. Making water projects and supervising their implementation. 

4. Seeking to achieve highest level of coordination and cooperation between the PWA and 

related institutions. 




Main tasks: 

1. To develop and reinforce water resources and seek for alternatives 

2. Building the central base for water information 

3. Issue licenses related to water and sewage water projects 

4. Prepare national water plans 

5. Support and develop water studies and researches 

6. Monitor water resources 

The PWA performs a lot of main programs and projects that aims at building and operate 

the Authority, develop water and sewage sectors, and perform other complementing 

activities related to PWA aims. 

2.2.2. Coastal Municipal water Utility (CMWU) 

This is supposed to be composed of an association of 19 municipalities in the Gaza Strip 

assuming the responsibility for the provision of water supply and sewerage services (operation 

and maintenance) to theses municipalities. This utility is supported by World Bank fund, 

currently by Gaza II project. 

CMWU aims to work with quality of water, to reduce the unaccounted water, to improve the 

management systems, all regarding water and wastewater for domestic and industrial use. 

2.2.3. Environment Quality Authority (EQA) 

Environment Quality Authority is responsible for environmental policies, strategies, and 

criteria to ensure ecological and environmental sound development for the surface water and 

ground water resources. 

Environmental issues were subjects of concern to the directorate of environmental planning 

from 1994-1998 as part of ministry of planning and international cooperation MOPIC. Then, 

the PA has established a ministry to be a focal point for the environmental affairs in August 

1998, to improve the environmental situation in Palestine called Ministry of Environmental 

Affairs MENA. This changed to Environment Quality Authority (EQA). The mission of 

EQA is to safeguard and protect the environment, control and limit the degradation of natural 

resources, combat desertification, prevent further pollution, enhance awareness and ensure 

environmentally sustainable development. 

This mission would be achieved by undertaking the next four roles: strategic planner, 

regulator, coordinator and monitor. 

2.2.4. Ministry of Planning (MoP) 

MoP holds a mandate regarding the coordination of international cooperation and national 

planning issues. Its directorate for physical Planning is responsible for overseeing the general 

policies, plans, and programs for spatial planning at the national and regional levels. 




Ministry of planning MOP was established in 1994 at the establishment of the PA. Formerly 

it was the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (MOPIC). MOP nowadays 

aims at physical and strategic planning for urban and rural areas, its work is on the national 

level and it works national development plans for medium and long term. 

The MOP includes different directorates that have different roles with respect to physical and 

strategic planning issues. 

2.2.5. Ministry of Local Government (MoLG) 

MoLG is responsible for local urban planning, organization of the operation of the systems via 

the municipality and participates in hearing regarding licensing. The MoLG is assigned the 

responsibility for the local government system, and put the definition of the structure of the 

local government, as well as the institutional arrangements and organizations at each level and 

the role and functions of each one. 

An intermediate level was introduced to coordinate the central government with the 

municipalities and villages called governorate. There are five governorates in the Gaza Strip, 

North, Gaza, Middle, Khan Younis and Rafah. 

2.2.6. Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) 

The main function of the MoA is the development of agriculture sector, which is the major 

water user in Palestine. There are eight directorates working with policies, planning and 

development. Also there are six department concerns the agriculture production, research, 

publicity, forestry, fisheries, veterinary services, plant protection, irrigation and administration 

and finance. 

The irrigation department deals with irrigation issue, need for water, quality demands …etc. 

The ministry of agriculture has been working since the establishment of the PA and continues 

its work which was started during the Israeli period 1967-1994. Its responsibility concerning 

the water resources is licensing water wells, data collection. 

2.2.7. Ministry of Health (MoH) 

MoH is responsible for public health aspects, water quality standards and the alleviation of 

water related health risks. In the Gaza Strip they do all the water quality testing. 

2.2.8. Ministry of National Economy (MoNE) 

MoNE is responsible for industrial wastewater effluent standards, reuse of industrial treated 

wastewater and public enquiries about water licenses. 

2.2.9. Ministry of Finance (MoF) 

Ministry of Finance holds a mandate for cost recovery and tariff issues. 




3. STUDY PROCESS AND METHODS 

The environmental impact assessment is carried out in compliance to the requirements of 

Palestinian Environmental Assessment Policy. Based on that, KY WWTP is classified as 

category "A" that is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts that are sensitive 

and diverse. This type of projects requires full scale EIA and the implementation of a 

comprehensive Environmental Management Plan (EMP), which entails mitigation measures, 

institutional setup, monitoring plan, and training. 

3.1. Scoping & Terms of Reference 

The EIA study should cover, but not limited to, the following: 

1. Review the preliminary Environmental Assessment (EA) study carried out in 1997 for 

Khan Younis Sewerage system. 

2. Provide comprehensive description of KY WWTP project components including using 

maps at appropriate scales when necessary. 

3. Generate baseline data on relevant environmental characteristics of the project components 

area including description of physical environment, biological environment, and socioeconomic 

and cultural constrains. It should include information on any changes anticipated 

before the commencement of the construction phase. 

4. Outline and examine the pertinent regulations and standards governing environmental 

quality, health and safety, protection of sensitive areas, protection of water resources and 

pollution control, land use control and seawater pollution control at the national and local 

level. 

5. Identify and determine the potential positive and negative impacts, direct and indirect 

impacts, and immediate and long-term impacts. Identify impacts that are unavoidable or 

irreversible. The assessment of the potential impacts shall include, but not limited to, 

pollution of ground water aquifer and sea water, landscape impacts of excavations and 

construction, loss of nature features habitats and species by construction and operation, soil 

contamination impacts, odor substances, noise pollution, waste and sludge disposal, and 

socio-economic and cultural impacts. 

6. Prepare and develop management plan to mitigate the negative impacts, recommend 

feasible and cost effective measures to prevent or reduce significant negative impacts to 

acceptable national level. 

7. Identify the institutional needs to implement the recommendations of the EIA. 

8. Prepare a detailed plan to monitor the implementation of the mitigation measures and the 

impacts of the project during the construction and operation of project. 

9. Carry out a workshop to obtain the views of local community and affected groups and 

keeping records of meetings and other activities communications, and comments. 




3.2. Methodology 

The planned EIA will review the previous preliminary EA that was carried out in 1997 for 

Khan Younis sewerage system. Many issues have been changed since 1997 including: 

population forecast and distribution, Israeli settlements evacuation, land use changes, 

deterioration of economy, and political changes. The planned EIA will incorporate all these 

changes. The following steps briefly describe the consultants' methodology that is used in 

conducting the required EIA: 

Data Collection and Review: 

All data relevant to the proposed project, project site, related previous studies and reports will 

be first collected, reviewed and analyzed. This task will involve, but not limited to, the 

following sources: 

Stakeholders Consultation: 

Stakeholders' consultation is an essential part of any EIA study. The main objective of such 

consultation is to ensure that all concerned stakeholders are aware of the project and their 

views and comments are taken into consideration. 

Field Investigation: 

Field investigation and tests are needed to complete the missing data for the baseline 

environment. 

Baseline Environment: 

The baseline environment is used to set the reference to evaluate or predict the different 

impacts of the project activities. Data collection and field investigations are the main sources 

to establish the baseline environment. The baseline will include description of physical 

environment, biological environment, and socio-economic environment. 

Analysis of Alternatives: 

Alternatives to the proposed project and its components that have been evaluated in the 

planning and design phase will be further analyzed considering the environmental factors. 

Assessment of Project Impacts: 

The impact of the project will be evaluated for planning, construction, and operation stages. 

Identification of impacts will include positive and negative impacts, direct and indirect 

impacts, and immediate and long-term impacts, unavoidable or irreversible impacts. Transboundary 

issues will also be considered in the assessments of some of the relevant factors 

including water quality and air quality. The assessment of the potential impacts shall include, 

but not limited to, pollution of ground water aquifer and sea water, landscape impacts of 

excavations and construction, loss of nature features habitats and species by construction and 

operation, soil contamination impacts, odor substances, noise pollution, waste and sludge 

disposal, and socio-economic and cultural impacts. 




Environmental Management Plan: 

The Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is the mean by which the adverse impacts are 

mitigated and their implementation is monitored. The EMP for this project should include the 

following main components: 

• Mitigation plan to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts to acceptable levels; 

• Monitoring plan for the important parameters; 

• Institutional setup to assure the implementation of EIA recommendations; 

• Capacity building and training needs. 

3.3. Site Visits and Study Area Reconnaissance 

The EIA team has visited the site of the KY WWTP and the infiltration basin many times. 

These visits aim at collecting on site information and data with regard to urban development, 

water resources, land use, landscaping, soil, flora and fauna, and air quality. 

The proposed location of the KY WWTP site is located in a plain area with average ground 

level of about 53 m AMSL. The southwestern part of the KY WWTP has been used by Khan 

Younis Municipality for discharging the wastewater and septage. The KY WWTP site can be 

considered a rural and barren area. (Figure 3.1) 

Figure 3.1: Proposed location for KH KY WWTP. 

It is noticed that Rafah Municipality is still dumping the solid waste in Rafah landfill, which is 

located directly to the south-west of the KY WWTP. (Figure 3.2) 




Figure 3.2: Rafah solid waste landfill. 

The Rafah solid waste landfill is situated in the southeast of the Gaza Strip, approximately 5 

km northeast of the destroyed Gaza Airport and 800 meters from the Gaza strip borderline. 

The landfill covers an area of approximately 33,000 m 2 (3.3 hectares or 33 dunums). The 

waste is not compacted and reaches a height of approximately 15-20 m above ground level. 

The landfill does not have a base lining, leachate control, or landfill gas collection systems. 

The nearest inhabited house is approximately 20 meters away, and larger settlements lie at a 

distance of about 800-1,500 meters. 

Leachate traces were observed on top of, at the side of and underneath the landfill. The water 

from the leachate appeared to evaporate quickly if exposed to the arid climate. Underneath the 

landfill, the leachate could actually enter the soil and subsequently the groundwater. Even 

though precipitation in this area (at 225 mm per annum) is low and evapo-transpiration is high, 

leachate collection should be implemented at the site considering the already precarious 

condition of the groundwater. (UNEP, 2009). The landfill can be a potential site for 

environmental hazards including negative environmental nuisances (mosquitoes, flies, odor, 

etc.). 

The southern part of Khan Younis Governorate including Khuza'a and Al Fukhari is suffering 

from groundwater scarcity and bad groundwater quality, due to that they closed all the 

agricultural and municipal wells that are located within the eastern part of the governorate. 

The main source for irrigated water in the eastern area is from the western groundwater wells 

which are located in Muraj area in addition to storm water harvesting ponds. (Figures 3.3, 3.4) 




Figure3.3: Elevated water storage tank in Al Fukhari for irrigation; the water source is from groundwater wells 

located in Muraj area (about 4 km to the west). 

Figure3. 4: Storm water collection pond that can be covered by plastic sheet. 

3.4. Literature Review 

The consultant reviewed the preliminary EA study which was carried out in 1997 for Khan 

Younis sewerage system during the preparation of KY sewerage Master Plan which was 

prepared by Pacific International Consultants from Japan. The preliminary study included a 




very good data about the baseline environmental/ social conditions in the project area, which 

is considered a basic data for updating. The study was very brief focusing on the overall 

elements of the master plan which is considered a very important step in developing the 

current EIA full study. 

The CEP/EMCC consultants conducted in 2008 a review study for wastewater system and 

loading in Khan Younis Governorate. 

A basic study in 2006 for developing the preliminary design for KY WWTP was prepared by 

PLANCENTER Consultants from Finland under the supervision of PWA. 

ALMADINA Consultants prepared a study in 2006 for the preliminary selection/design of KY 

treated wastewater infiltration sites. The study concluded that Khuza'a (Al Fukhari site) is the 

best location for infiltrating the treated wastewater from KY WWTP. 

Initial Design report (SOGREAH-UG, 2009) which is prepared by the Consultant is 

considered the basic document for the preparation of this EIA study. A detailed review for all 

related projects and documents was done in addition to geotechnical investigation in order to 

finalize the infiltration site selection. The report presented the initial design details for the 

project elements. 

The consultant reviewed the EIA of the northern KY WWTP which was prepared in 2005. The 

study prepared by EMCC consultants Supported by Dorsch Consult from Germany. The study 

is dealing mostly with the similar project elements which are proposed in KY WWTP project. 




4. Description of the Project and its Alternatives 

This chapter is prepared based on the Initial Design Report which prepared by the Consultant, 

summarizing the important aspects for developing the EIA study. 

4.1. Project Concept 

Water resources are very limited in the Gaza Strip and they form a critical factor for the 

development of human life and the agricultural sector in the area. On one hand, the treatment 

of wastewater is necessary for the protection of ground water resources and, on the other hand, 

the reuse of treated effluent will increase the quantity of water available for irrigation. The 

main disposal for the final effluent of the reclaimed wastewater is aquifer recharge and reuse 

to irrigate the agricultural areas. Sludge is recommended to be used as soil conditioner. 

The Gaza Wastewater and Drainage Master Plan proposes 3 central wastewater treatment 

plants (KY WWTP) in the Gaza Strip, all to be located within the agricultural areas close to 

the eastern borders of the Gaza Strip. An activated sludge process with extended aeration will 

be the process for each plant enabling nitrogen removal. The southern KY WWTP will serve 

the Governorate of Khan Younis. Figure 4.1 provides a general layout of these components in 

relation to the location in Khan Younis Governorate and Gaza Strip. 

Figure 4.1: General layout of KYKY WWTP 




KY WWTP project contains the following components: 

1. Review the design of pump station 8 and its main pressure line to the treatment 

plant, 

2. Wastewater treatment plant, 

3. The infiltration basins, and 

4. The pressure effluent and emergency line from the KY WWTP site to the 

infiltration basin and finally to the sea. 

4.2. Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant (KY WWTP) 

4.2.1. Background and Previous Considerations 

At present, nearly 60% of the population of Khan Younis city is temporarily served by the 

new established public sewerage collection system. But due to the absence of wastewater 

treatment plant, the collected wastewater is pumped to the existing main storm water box 

culvert, which in turn flows by gravity to a storm water infiltration pond located in the northwestern 

side of Khan Younis city. 

The municipal wastewater strategic development plan aims at constructing an extendable and 

phased sewage system in line with the available resources. Although the strategic plan of the 

project is to design and construct an extendable KY WWTP with effluent capacity for the year 

2025, the first phase of KY WWTP will be executed based on 2018 estimated capacity. 

The city of Khan Younis is divided into two catchment's zones, where the collected 

wastewater is drained by gravity to two main pumping stations (PS # 2 & PS # 3) located in 

the lowest points of the city center. Through pressure and conveyance pipelines, the effluent of 

these two pumping stations is raised to the main pumping station (PS # 8) located in the 

eastern part of the city. From Pumping Station # 8, the collected wastewater of Khan Younis 

city will be pumped to the proposed KY WWTP located in the eastern part of the Khan 

Younis Governorate. 

The proposed site of the KY WWTP is located south-east of Khan Younis city. The closest 

point of the permanent eastern site of KY WWTP is located far by around4 50 m from the 

eastern borders of the Gaza Strip in one of the sites’ corners, and by 750m in the other sites 

eastern corner. Khan Younis municipality owns the site of the KY WWTP. The available area 

for the proposed KY WWTP is 116 dunums (11.6 hectares). The shape of the site is long and 

narrow (670 meters X 170 meters). The major result of the design layout is that the planned 

facilities for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the KY WWTP can be located within the available site 

area. (Figure 4.2) 




Figure 4.2: KY WWTP layout. 




4.2.2. Process Design Criteria and Considerations 

The treated water quality requirements are summarized in table 4.1 as defined in the 

Detailed Design Report (February, 2010) of the present assignment . 

Table 4.1: Treated wastewater requirement of the project 

Parameter Unit Required effluent quality for KY WWTP 

BOD5 mg/l < 20 

Suspended solids, SS mg/l < 15 

Total nitrogen mg/l < 25 

Ammonium nitrogen, NH4-N mg/l



• Phase 1: Year 2018 

• Phase 2: Year 2025. 

4.2.2.2. Influx and Loads 

Table 4.2 summarizes the total KY WWTP incoming flows as considered in the Detailed 

Design. 

Table 4.2: The incoming flows for KY WWTP 

Parameter 

Unit 

Phase 1 

2018 

Phase 2 

2025 

Average daily flow m 3 /d 26656 44948 

Average hourly flow m 3 /h 1111 1873 

Peak coefficient 1.9 1.9 

Peak hourly flow m 3 /h 2110 3558 

Table 4.3 summarizes the total KY WWTP incoming loads as considered in the Detailed 

Design. 

Table 4.3: The design loads for KY WWTP. 

Parameter 

Unit 

Phase 1 

2018 

Phase 2 

2025 

BOD5 kg/d 14247 22399 

Total SS kg/d 19056 30486 

Total Nitrogen Kg/d 3358 5604 

Total Phosphorus kg/d 358 605 

4.2.2.3. Sludge Design Criteria 

Any sewage treatment plant will produce sludge as a by-product. The quantity and 

characteristics vary as a function of the selected sewage treatment process and the sludge 

treatment applied. The sludge treatment is selected on one side depending on the 

wastewater process and on the other side as a function of the method of final disposal of 

the sludge. This final disposal and the management of the sludge is therefore an 

important factor for the selection and the design of the sludge process. Generally, there 

are today three main options for sludge disposal: 

1. Reuse in agriculture as organic fertilizer, 

2. Incineration, and, 

3. Disposal at land fill. 

In the case of Khan Younis, the agricultural reuse option has been selected as the most 

appropriate solution: 

• Sewage treatment sludge is an excellent soil improver, due to its content of 

phosphorus and nitrogen and, in particular, due to the amendment of organic matter. It 

is a long-term environmentally sustainable solution for recycling of organic matter to 

the nature, 

• Due to absence of connected polluting industries in the project area, the heavy metals 

levels are expected to be well under the acceptable limits, 




• Agricultural land is available in the project area for sludge spreading. 

A storage area must in most cases be implemented, since sludge application is possible 

only during certain periods of the year. The sludge should be well stabilized prior to 

reuse to minimize any health risk and assure farmer’s acceptability for sludge reuse. 

Sludge shall also have reasonable dry solids content so that the cost for transportation 

to the fields is limited. 

4.2.3. Wastewater Treatment Processes 

According to the Initial Detailed Design Study (SOGREAH-UG, 2009), the advantages 

and disadvantages of the suitable treatment processes are listed hereafter in table 4.4, 

allowing a comparison between them. A number of the described processes have been 

eliminated already at the stage of detailed design since they cannot meet the effluent 

requirements and only the remaining processes are compared. 

Table 4.4 Comparison of secondary wastewater treatment processes 

Process Advantages Disadvantages 

Activated Proven and reliable process. 

sludge 

Stable performances at variations 

in hydraulic load. 

Additional tertiary treatment required 

to meet effluent quality requirements. 

Relatively high land requirements. 

SBR Process 

Bio- aerated 

filters 

Moderate cost for the base 

process. 

The process is reliable under 

condition that the plant is 

properly operated and maintained. 

Low footprint of the structures. 

Compact process, easy to cover. 

Low footprint of the structures 

Modular design makes easy to 

adapt the process to incoming 

loads and flows. 

Quick restarting, therefore 

suitable to seasonal variations in 

Long start-up of the biological process. 


to meet effluent quality requirements. 

The batch mode operation can provide 

problems when there are changes in 

pollutant or hydraulic loads. 

Over-dimensioning of aeration system 

required. 

Delicate process set-up and operation. 

Due to the mechanical and electric 

equipment in the plant and to the 

intensive treatment process, highly 

qualified staff is required for the 

operation. 


to meet treatment requirements. 

High sludge production. 

Higher investment costs than for 

activated sludge (~30%) 

Need for primary sedimentation. 




Process Advantages Disadvantages 

load. 

Sludge production more important and 

more difficult to treat. 

Modular construction and easy 

automation. 

Membrane 

bioreactors 

Very high treatment 

performances, also on fecal coli 

form. 

Uncertainty regarding real membrane 

life length and related replacement 

cost. 

No tertiary treatment required. 

Low sludge production. 

Compact process, easy to cover. 

Modular construction and easy 

automation. 

High energy demand (40 % higher 

than activated sludge). 

Need for regular membrane supply for 

replacement. 

Higher investment costs (50% higher 

activated sludge). 

High O&M costs 

The selected wastewater treatment biological process is Activated sludge and is designed 

for average daily flow of 26,656 m3/day in the first phase and 44,948 m3/day for the 

second phase, consisting of the following process units: 

• inlet works and flow metering 

• screening 

• grit and grease removal 

• biological treatment with nitrification denitrification process 

• final sedimentation 

• tertiary treatment by sand filtration and UV disinfection 

• outlet works with treated effluent pumping and flow metering. 

The sludge treatment includes the following steps: 

• gravity thickening for concentration of biological excess sludge 

• natural dewatering in drying beds 

• stabilization by composting. 

4.2.3.1. Pretreatment 

Inlet works and flow metering: 

Wastewater is conveyed to KY WWTP by two separate trunk lines: the first one comes 

from PS 8 and conveys wastewater from Khan Younis City to the treatment plant; the 

second one comes from the pumping station proposed in Khirbat Khuza’a and conveys 

effluent from the Eastern Villages to the treatment plant. Design of both of these 

pumping stations takes into account required head to assure gravity flow through the KY 

WWTP from inlet structure downstream secondary clarifiers. No additional lifting station 

is therefore needed at the KY WWTP inlet. 




Both incoming trunk lines are connected to a wastewater inlet structure, situated in head 

of the pre-treatment. 

Screening: 

The purpose of the screening is to remove large particles that could clog or otherwise 

disturb the downstream facilities. Coarse screening is not needed at KY WWTP since PS 

8 is already equipped with 40 mm coarse screen and the PS to be implemented for 

transfer of Eastern Areas wastewater should also include coarse screening in order to 

protect the transfer pumps. 

Screenings are conveyed by belt conveyer or screw conveyer towards a screenings 

compactor and then deposited into a 20 m3 skip. When the skip is full, it is loaded on a 

truck and the screenings deposited on land fill. 

Grit and grease removal: 

The grit and grease removal is carried out in a combined longitudinal tank with two 

parallel lines in the first phase and three parallel lines in the second phase. 

An aeration device will ensure that grease, oil and scum float at the surface and will 

facilitate the separation of grit from organic matter and maintain the organic matter in 

suspension. 

Each line is provided with a traveling bridge which scrapes the grease at the surface and 

collects the grit at the bottom of the tank. 

The grease is evacuated towards a hopper where surplus water is removed and grease is 

then transported to land fill by vacuum tank. 

The deposited grit is extracted by pumping or by air-lift towards a grit classifier. It is 

then conveyed to a 20 m 3 skip for evacuation to land fill. 

4.2.3.2. Secondary Treatment (Activated Sludge) 

Treatment principles: 

Biological treatment will be carried out on 2 identical parallel lines in Phase 1 and 4 

identical parallel lines in Phase 2. 

Activated sludge is suspension of microorganisms, both active and dead, in a wastewater 

consisting of entrapped and suspended colloidal and dissolved organic and inorganic 

materials. The activated sludge process is aerobic, biological process, which uses the 

metabolic reactions of microorganisms to attain an acceptable effluent quality by 

removing substances exerting an oxygen demand. 

In bio-aeration basins performed microbial floc particles are brought into contact with the 

organic components of the wastewater. Contents of the reactor basin are referred to as 

mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS), and consist for the most part of microorganisms 

and inert and non-biodegradable matter. The overall reactions, occurring in the activated 




sludge process are determined by the composite metabolism of the microorganisms in the 

activated sludge. 

Air is introduced into the system to satisfy the requirements of the activated sludge and 

to keep the activated sludge dispersed in the aeration liquor. Oxygen transfer to the 

activated sludge is accomplished by oxygen absorbed from diffused bubbles of air 

entrained in the mixed liquor. A fine bubble diffused air system consisting of diffusers 

that are submerged in the wastewater, header pipes, air mains and the blowers and 

appurtenances through which the air passes is foreseen. 

To reduce risks of sludge bulking, a contact zone will be provided at entry of each 

biological tank, where pre-treated effluent is mixed with recirculation sludge. In each 

zone, intimate blending of the mixed liquor will be performed by a submersible stirrer 

that can be adjusted and raised on a beam. The stirring power will be approximately 20 

W/m3. Contact zone volume is dimensioned for a retention time of 10 minutes for peak 

effluent flow + sludge recirculation flow. 

The biological tanks are of channel-flow type and are composed of an anoxic zone and an 

aerated zone. Reduction of carbonated pollution and nitrification is performed in the 

aerated zone. Partial denitrification (Nitrate nitrogen reduction) is also performed in this 

zone, using sequential aeration. However, denitrification needs to be completed in an 

anoxic zone in order to achieve the required Nitrate Nitrogen effluent discharge quality. 

Thus, an anoxic zone is implemented in head of the aerated zone and mixed liquor with 

high Nitrate concentration is recirculated from the aerated zone to the anoxic zone. 

Aeration system: 

Table 4.5 summarizes the corresponding oxygen requirements for biological treatment: 

Table 4.5: Oxygen requirements for biological wastewater treatment. 

Oxygen requirements 

Applied 

coefficient 

Phase 1 Phase 2 

Oxygen requirements for BOD 

removal 

0.65 9 434 kg O 2 /day 14789 kg O 2 /day 

Oxygen requirements for 

endogen respiration (sludge 

present in aerated zones) 

0.07 5909 kg O 2 /day 8864 kg O 2 /day 

Oxygen requirements for 

nitrification 

Oxygen liberation by 

denitrification 

Total daily oxygen 

requirements 

4.18 9400 kg O 2 /day 16042 kg O 2 /day 

2.8 - 5063 kg O 2 /day - 8667 kg O 2 /day 

19681 kg O 2 /day 31029 kg O 2 /day 

Aeration time 14 h/day 14 h/day 

Peak coefficient 1.5 1.5 

Theoretical peak hourly 2109 kg O 2 /h 3325 kg O 2 /h 




Oxygen requirements 

oxygen requirement 

Applied 

coefficient 

Phase 1 Phase 2 

Due to the important water depth in the aeration tanks, surface aeration system is not 

applicable at KY WWTP, despite of their lower costs. 

The required oxygen will thus be introduced in the aeration tanks as fine bubbles of 

compressed air. The aeration system will consist of adjustable air diffusers mounted on 

headers. Air diffusers consist of tubes or domes covered by a perforated rubber 

membrane that resists microorganisms and various compounds contained in the 

wastewater. 

Final sedimentation: 

Prior to clarification, and to assure correct operating conditions in the clarification stage, 

a deglazing structure is provided for each clarifier. Its function is to allow the bubbles of 

gas trapped in the turbulent mixed liquor to escape in the open air and thus sludge 

sedimentation in the clarifier is not disturbed. Each deglazing structure will be fitted with 

a surface scraper and floating matter is conveyed to a common floating matter pit from 

where it is conveyed to sludge treatment by submersible pumps. Deglazing structures are 

located between each pair of secondary clarifiers. The final step in the reduction of BOD 5 

and suspended solids is a separation of activated sludge solids from the mixed liquor. 

Presence of the large volume of flocculated solids in the mixed liquor requires that 

special consideration should be given to the design of final sedimentation tank. An 

important function of the final sedimentation tank is to maintain the wastewater quality 

produced by the preceding unit processes and to remove and return sludge to the system. 

Four circular tanks with central feed are foreseen for the Phase 1 with additional four for 

the Phase 2. For sludge collection, the rotating bridge is used which rotates along the 

sides of the sedimentation tank. The bridge serves as the support for the sludge - removal 

system, which consists of a radial. Collected sludge is conveyed to a sludge pit. Since 

upstream of final sedimentation tanks aeration basins are located, and due to fact that 

large amount of solids may be lost in the effluent if design criteria are exceeded, effluent 

overflow rates are based on peak flow conditions. 

A surface scum and light sludge scraping device will trap floating matter, which is 

conveyed to the floating matter pit of the deglazing structure. 

4.2.3.3. Tertiary Treatment 

The requirements for treated water quality are below the concentrations achievable with 

secondary treatment. Tertiary treatment is therefore required, including the following 

process units: 

• rapid sand filtration 

• UV disinfection 




Applied to secondary treated wastewater, sand filtration allows 50-80% reduction of 

suspended solids and 30 to 40% reduction of BOD 5 . 

The wastewater treated in the previous process units can meet all standards except for 

pathogens. Very good removal of nematodes eggs is achieved by tertiary sand filtration. 

However, for other pathogens, an additional treatment step is required in order to achieve 

full compliance. 

In case of KY WWTP disinfection by UV radiation is proposed, which does not create 

any byproducts. However, powerful UV lamps are required. In UV disinfection systems, 

the UV light is produced by germicidal lamps, which are submerged in an open channel. 

As the wastewater flow passes the UV lamps, the microorganisms are exposed to a lethal 

dose of UV energy. UV-rays penetrate through small particles and attack micro 

organisms at their DNA/RNA-core. This mechanism causes inability to replicate. 

4.2.3.4. Sludge Treatment 

Sludge balance: 

Sludge treatment works are designed for the following sludge production: 

• Sludge production – Phase 1................................11612 kg DS/day 

• Sludge production – Phase 2................................18202 kg DS/day 

• Excess sludge concentration ................................................8.5 g/l 

• Excess sludge volume – Phase 1................................ 1314 m3/day 

• Excess sludge volume – Phase 2................................ 2054 m3/day 

Gravity thickener: 

Thickening is the first stage in reducing the volume of the sludge. The thickening process 

usually corresponds to an increase in the concentration of the sludge collected in the final 

sedimentation tanks. 

Gravity thickeners are designed on the basis of hydraulic surface loading and solids 

loading. In order to minimize operating costs, no chemicals are added for sludge 

treatment at KY WWTP. 

Biological excess sludge enters the thickeners from above and thickener feeding is 

continuously. Thickeners are fitted with a centrally driven rotary mechanism with a 

diametric bridge. 

Scrapers positioned directly above the thickener floor transfer the deposited sludge to a 

central hopper from where it is recovered by gravity flow to the sludge pumping station. 

A vertically mounted picket fence is also attached to the rotary mechanism and enhances 

the release of interstitial water and gas contained in the sludge and allows therefore 

correct sludge settling and thickening conditions in the tank. 

Sludge drying: 




Feeder pumps at a constant flow rate to the drying beds feed sludge from thickeners. The 

sludge will be placed on the drying beds in a 20 to 30 cm layer and allowed to dry 

following two principles: 

• Drainage trough the sludge mass and supporting sand: Drainage water is collected in 

under drainage system and returned to the water treatment line upstream biological 

treatment. 

• Evaporation from the surface exposed to the air. 

The layer of sludge spread is limited to about 30cm thickness, in order to avoid clogging 

of the top layer of sand. The total drying area is divided into individual beds. Distribution 

boxes are used to divert the thickened sludge flow into the selected drying bed. Splash 

plates are placed in the drying beds in front of the thickened sludge outlet in order to 

prevent erosion of the sand and to spread the sludge over the bed. 

After drying, sludge is spendable and can be removed from the drying beds by a front 

end loader. For KY WWTP, moisture content in dried sludge is estimated to about 40% 

after 15 days. 

Drainage water collected under the drying beds is conveyed by gravity to a return 

pumping station, from where it is pumped to the distribution chamber in head of 

biological treatment. 

For conditions in KY, it is considered that 80% of sludge moisture loss in drying stage is 

drained and 20% is evaporated. The recycling flow of drainage water is thus estimated to 

279 m3/d in Phase 1 and to 436 m3/d in Phase 2, which represents about 1% of KY 

WWTP inlet flow and could be neglected in terms of flows and loads. 

Sludge composting: 

After drying, the sludge produced in KY WWTP is stabilized and transformed by 

composting. The specific objectives of sludge stabilization include following actions: 

• Decompose sludge organics to stabilized humus. 

• Reduce the mass and volume of sludge. 

• Obtain a sanitized organic soil improvement agent. 

• Destroy/control pathogenic organisms. 

A mixture of dried sludge, fresh support agent and compost product will be composed 

using a front end loader. The mixture is than disposed on the open air composting area in 

shape of windrows. During fermentation phase, windrows are regularly returned in order 

to assure sufficient aeration, which is needed to provide oxygen for the biological 

oxidation and to allow evacuation of the steam released in the compost mass. After 

fermentation phase, a ripening and storage phase constitutes the last phase of 

composting. During this phase, degradation of organic matter is completed and the 

compost obtains the final agronomic value. 

The initial moisture content in dewatered sludge and the type of support agent determines 

the required quantities of support agent. In case of KY WWTP, where dried sludge will 




have a DS content of about 40%, about two to three volumes of support agent are 

required. A wide range of organic support agents may be used: wood tips or shavings, 

sawdust, chopped straw, maize cobs, etc.; it is also possible to change support agent 

depending on local availability during the different seasons of the year. 

Figure 4.3, Illustrates the annual composting mass balance for KY WWTP Phase 1 and 

Phase 2: 

Other than the specific composting area, KY WWTP works will also be fitted with a 

mixture area and a support agent storage area, which is designed for support agent 

requirements for 2 weeks. 

Before implementation of sludge composting at KY WWTP, a market survey needs to be 

conducted in order to check possibility of marketing of the compost. Availability of an 

abundant, low-cost source of support agent close to the KY WWTP has also to be 

identified and checked for the long term. A wide range of organic support may be used. 

Figure 4.3.: Annual mass balance for sludge composting at KY WWTP (SOGEREAH-UG DD report 2010) 




4.2.3.5. Noise and Odor Control 

Treatment by chemical scrubbers is still today the most performing and the most reliable 

process for odor removal at sewage treatment plants. We therefore would propose to 

retain a solution of chemical scrubber towers for the odor treatment at the KY WWTP. 

However, odor treatment requires covering of the odor generating parts of the KY 

WWTP (inlet structure, pre-treatment, sludge treatment) and involves high investment 

and operational costs. 

Taking into account the low available budget for the KY WWTP Phase 1 project 

implementation, minimization of project costs is an important issue. Therefore, it is 

proposed at this stage no special odor treatment for KY WWTP. 

This is also in accordance with the treatment process proposed for KY WWTP and 

especially with the sludge treatment on drying beds and on composting area, which 

represent an important surface area and are therefore uncovered. 

4.3. Infiltration Basins 

Infiltration basin will receive treated wastewater from KY WWTP and discharge it to the 

ground water. There were three proposed site alternatives to implement these infiltration 

basins. 

The first alternative is located in ex-settlements Muraj area, as stated by Land Authority; 

the majority of the proposed areas are privately owned. However, it is unoccupied and 

currently used as agricultural areas. The land use of these areas is under development by 

local authorities. The area elevation at the center of the specified land in Muraj is 65.15 

m above MSL and is located 6-7 km from KY WWTP site. (Figure 4.4) 

Figure 4.4: Muraj infiltration area 




The second option is the coastal infiltration area near the sea beach. The area elevation 

ranges from 12m to 15m above MSL and is located 17 km from KY WWTP site. In 

addition, total area of this site is insufficient for infiltration of KY WWTP effluent 

volumes. (Figure 4.5) 

Figure 4.5: Coastal infiltration area (Temporary lagoons) 

Khuza'a (Al Fukhari) site is the third proposed location. Al Fukhari infiltration site has 

available top area of (97,000 m2) with a trapezoidal shape. The top soil consists of sandy 

silty clayey layer with thickness between 1 to 5m above clay layer with thickness 

between 2 to 3 m. Thus; infiltration basins can't be constructed directly on the ground. 

The clay layer will be excavated an removed from the site, then the basins will be 

backfilled by suitable soil with high hydraulic conductivity until reach the design level of 

each basin. 

Figure 4.6: Recent photo for Khuza'a (Al Fukhari) infiltration area 




Figure 4.7: Location of Khusa'a (Al Fukhari) infiltration area 

This option is finally selected by the consultant and the client after the analysis of 

detailed geotechnical investigation. The infiltration rates and hydraulic loads for Al 

Fukhari site is shown in table 4.6. The loading cycle system that will be taken is to 

operate 2 days for flooding and 4 days for drying. 

Table 4.6: Infiltration rates and hydraulic loads for Al Fukhari site. 

year 

Average inflow Hydraulic load Infiltration rate 

(m3/day) 

(m3/m2/year) 

(m/day) 

2010 13,905 75 0.62 

2015 21,673 117 0.97 

2018 26,664 143 1.19 

The hydraulic load of Al Fukhari infiltration basins is sufficient until 2018 (Phase 1). 

After 2018, the infiltration area has to be extended to reach the same hydraulic load. 

4.4. Emergency Sea outfall 

According to the final report of KY WWTP-Geotechnical and Hydrological Study for the 

infiltration system (ALMADINA-Consultants, September 2006), and based on the 

Consultant joint meetings, discussion, and sites visits with UNDP, Land Authority and 

Khan Younis Municipality representatives, several scenarios for this pressure line routes 




are jointly suggested. These routes were evaluated by the consultant technically upon the 

final selection of the infiltration site. The final route for the emergency pipe line is shown 

in figure 4.8 related to Khuza'a infiltration site. 

Figure 4.8: The route for the emergency pipe line 

The Emergency pipe line in this project is used to deliver treated sewage from the KY 

WWTP to the sea in emergency situations only. Such situations may occur when some of 

the infiltration basins are out of work for maintenance or in case that the infiltration 

basins are full of water for any reason (such as heavy rain events, etc.). 

The sea outfall is designed to deliver the treated wastewater at a point very close to the 

shore taking into account the following criteria: 

• Protecting the shore at the outfall location from erosion 

• Considering the aesthetic appearance of the outfall 

• Keeping the continuity of traffic on the shore around the outfall 

The design of the sea outfall is similar to several sea outfalls existing on the Gaza strip 

shore such as the sea outfall at Deir AL Balah shore. The difference of this design from 

other similar existing ones is that it's architectural appearance is more beautiful since it 

will be covered from the outside by especially selected rocks and its horizontal projection 

is selected to have a hexagonal shape. The level of treated wastewater inside this sea 

outfall will not rise more than 20 cm since it is open from the sea side. An energy breaker 




wall is installed inside the sea outfall to prevent the erosion at its outlet to the sea. The 

treated wastewater will move around the energy breaking wall and move with a lower 

velocity towards a rip rap channel lined with rocks. 

4.5. Investment Cost 

4.5.1. Capital Cost 

Referred to the Detailed Design report (SOGREAH-UG 2010), the total investment cost 

estimations for the project components are summarized in table 4.7. 

Table 4.7: Total capitalg cost of KY WWTP project components. 

Project component 

FEX 

Amounts 

USD 

KY WWTP (phase 1) 6652242 13508354 

Effluent pressure line 0 7838800 

Infiltration basins 0 3834324 

TOTAL 6652242 EUR 25181478 USD 

Overall total in USD 

34494617 USD 

4.5.2. Operation and Maintenance Cost 

The total operating cost is summarized in table 4.8. 

Table 4.8: Total operating cost of KY WWTP project. 

Item 

Consumption 

(kwh/y) 

Energy 

Annual 

costs 

(USD/y) 

Staff 

number 

(person) 

Personnel 

Annual 

costs 

(USD/y) 

Maintenance 

annual 

cost 

(USD/y) 

Total 

annual cost 

(USD/y) 

KY WWTP 9360000 842400 42 282600 367500 1492500 

Effluent 

pumping and 

discharge 

1095000 98600 4 19800 126100 244500 

TOTAL 941000 46 302400 493600 1737000 




4.6. No-Action Alternative 

After 2006, Khan Younis city residents initiated to connect their house connections to the 

wastewater network or mostly to the storm water network. Last year and just before the 

winter season (2007-2008), a propose construction of new retention basins in al Mawasi 

area (ex-Israeli settlements) as an emergency step as stage 1 in any case of disaster 

happen in Al Amal basin. And as further steps these basins will empty its quantity into 

the sea by constructing sea disposal pipe line (figure 4.9). 

Figure 4.9: Location of old and existing Wastewater ponds(CMWU 2008). 

At present, the Khan Younis area is not served by any wastewater treatment plant. Most 

of the collected wastewater is currently transported to the western lagoons, which have 

been constructed in 2008 in the western part of the city (close to the sea). The current 

wastewater discharge system is considered as temporary emergency system and the 

environmental situation is in danger including groundwater, soil and marine 

environment. 

The unconnected to sewerage system areas of Khan Younis Governorate especially the 

eastern villages are depending on the cesspits and or septic tanks for wastewater disposal. 

More than 30,000 units (cesspits) exist in Khan Younis Governorate according to the 

municipalities’ estimates. Where, part of the wastewater is left to percolate to the 

underground water table especially during the initial stage of the cesspits use, however a 

big portion of the collected wastewater is evacuated by suction trucks and disposed off 

finally to wastewater Lagoons or the closest manholes. This situation also contributes to 

several health and environmental impacts. 




5. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT (BASELINE CONDITIONS) 

5.1. Physical Aspects 

5.1.1. Topography and Physiographic 

Gaza Strip topographical area is characterized by, elongated ridges and depressions, dry 

streambeds and shifting sand dunes. The ridges and depression generally extend in a 

NNE-SSW direction, parallel to the coastline. They are narrow and consist primarily of 

sandstone (Kurkar). In the south, these features are tending to be covered by sand dunes. 

Land surface elevation in the southern governorates of the Gaza Strip (Khan Younis and 

Rafah Gov.) is range from zero meter to about 100 m above mean sea level (AMSL). The 

ridges and depressions show considerable vertical relief, in some places up to 60 m. 

Surface elevations of individual ridges range between 20 m and 90 m AMSL. Two high 

ridges appear on the topography map in the southern Gaza strip (Figure 5.1). The 

northern ridge covers the area of 

Bani Suhaila, Abasan, and Khuza’a. 

The second ridge covers the southern 

eastern part of Rafah and occupied 

by the Gaza International Airport 

and the industrial zone. The ridges 

elevation reaches as high as 90 

meters above MSL. Between the two 

ridges, a depression area is known 

Alfukhari area and the proposed 

location of the KY WWTP. The 

elevation at the KY WWTP is 

around 53 meters above MSL. The 

proposed site is located in the 

southeast of Khan Younis City at 

about 1Km from the eastern border 

of Gaza Strip and 400m north of 

Sofa Crossing Point. 

Figure 5.1: Topographic Map for Khan 

Younis and Rafah Gov. 

Khuza'a site is a proposed location 

for infiltration basin. The area 

elevation ranges from +68m to +75m AMSL and is located 6 Km from KY WWTP site. 




5.1.2. Geology 

Gaza aquifer is part of the regional coastal aquifer, which lies along the southeastern 

edge of the Mediterranean Sea and extends from the foothills of mountain Carmel 

southward to Gaza and northern Sinai. It is composed calcareous sandstone from the 

Pliocene-Pleistocene age, unconsolidated sands, and layers of clays. In the Gaza Strip, 

the aquifer extends about 15-20 km inland, where it overlies chalks from the Eocene and 

limestone or the Saqiye Group from the Miocene-Pliocene. The Saqiye Group is a 400 to 

1000m thick sequence of marls, marine shales, and clay stones. 

Approximately 10 to 15km inland from the coast, the Saqiye Group pinches out, and the 

coastal aquifer rests directly on Eocene chalks and classic sediments from the of 

Neogene. 

Figure 5.2a: Geological Sections Passing 

through the Khuza'a area 

Figure 5.2b: Geological Sections Passing 

through the KY WWTP 

Figure 5.2c: 3D Geological presentation of the Gaza Strip 

Near the coast in the Gaza Strip, clay layers subdivide the coastal aquifer into four 

separate sub-aquifers. They extend inland about 2 to 5 km, depending on location and 

depth. Further east, the marine clays pinch out and the coastal aquifer can be regarded as 

one hydro-geological unit. Within the Gaza Strip (figure 5.2c), the thickness of the 

Kurkar Group increases from east to west, and ranges from about 70 m near the Gaza 




border to approximately 200 m at the coastline. Layers with a low permeability are found 

in the Kurkar group. These layers are more predominant closer to the coast. 

Inspection of geologic sections conducted by the Israeli Geologic Survey (IGS) in the 

southern Gaza Strip, as well as some available water wells logs from the Palestinian 

Water Authority revealed the presence of major geologic features in the study area. 

Figure 5.2 (a, b and c) presents a generalized two geological cross section of the coastal 

aquifer. The first section is covering some of the depression area in the locality of Al- 

Fukhari close to the proposed location of the KY WWTP. The second covers a strip from 

the locality of Khuza’a ridge. The first major feature is the presence of a geologic 

depression in Al-Fukhari area fanning for a radius of approximately 2 kilometers with a 

maximum depression depth of around 30 to 40 meters. This depression is filled by 

multiple layers of clayey and silty soils as well as some alluvial sands. This fact was 

confirmed by multiple boreholes logged in the KY WWTP and shallow boreholes loged 

for some buildings in the area. The Kurkar aquifer beneath these layers is very thin with 

a depth of around 20 meters. The second major feature revealed from these sections is the 

presence of a thick unsaturated Kurkar dry aquifer in the Khuza’a area. The thickness to 

the aquitard (Saqiye group) can reach to more than 100 meters in some places. Some 

farmers (oral communications) indicated that the aquifer in the area is almost dry, a fact 

they discovered when they were trying to dig illegal agricultural wells in the area. The 

sections indicate the presence of a low permeability loamy soil on the top of the Kurkar 

formation with varying depth. 

The geological characteristics of the area of the treatment plant, as investigated by 

ALMADINA-Consultants in the year 2006, show the presence of three major geological 

features. 

The first major geologic feature is the presence of a depression between the Khuza’a tilt 

and Eastern Rafah tilt following approximately the contour line of elevation 60. This 

depression is deeper than 25 meters in some areas. The depression is filled with several 

layers of various deposits of clayey soils, silty sand, silty clay, and fine to medium sands 

of alluvial sand origins. The depth of consecutive layers varies in depth from a fraction of 

a meter to few meters. It appears that the depression is located in the area bordered by the 

Khuza’a tilt from the north to the Eastern Rafah tilt from the South. Moreover, the 

depression borders the Khuza’a tilt from the east with lower depths. The report confirms 

the fact that the site of the wastewater treatment plant is located in the middle of the 

depression where the aquifer is thin and covered by a thick accumulation of various 

clayey and silty deposits. 

The second major geologic feature found from the field investigation is the presence of 

part of the Khuza tilt. This tilt is basically a thick kurkar formation extending for more 

than 25 meters, covered by a layer of loamy to silty clay layer of varying depth. The 

interesting feature is that the kurkar layer is found close to the ground surface. The top 

soil layer is thicker reaches a depth of around 10m. It is very interesting to note though 

that in Khuza tilt, a layer of hummra, silty sand layer, of lower permeability is 

encountered. However, it is noticed that the thickness of the hummra layer is larger in the 

east (about 5 meters) and the thickness is lower as one goes to the west (thickness is 

ranged from 1 meter to 2 meters in). The thickness also decreases from the south to the 

north direction. It is anticipated therefore that the clay layers diminishes when it reaches 

that extent to the north. Common experience with similar Kurkar deposits indicates the 




presence of hummra layers of various depths every 5-15 meters. This fact was confirmed 

from the deep borehole log done by the PWA (CAMP-8) to the north of the investigated 

area about 1 kilometer to the north where repetitive similar layers of hummra were 

encountered in a deep kurkar formation. 

5.1.3. Soil 

The soil in the Gaza Strip is composed mainly of three types, sands, clay and loess as 

shown in figure 5.3. The sandy soil is found along the coastline extending from south to 

outside the northern border of the Strip, at the form of sand dunes. The thickness of sand 

fluctuates from two meters to about 50m due to the hilly shape of the dunes. 

N 

W 

E 

S 

Soil.shp 

Dark brown / Silty Clay 

Loess soils 

Loessal sandy soil 

Sandy loess soil 

Sandy loess soil over loess 

Sandy regosols 

Figure 5.3: Soil map of Gaza 

Strip (PWA, 2003) 

10 0 10 20 Kilometers 

Soils of Khan Younis area are mostly loessial soils, and the ridges consist of sandstone 

(Kurkar). Sand dunes are found along the coast to the north, south and west of the area, 

and have high rainwater infiltration capacities. According to the geotechnical 

investigations, the subsoil in the (KY WWTP) site can be generally classified into seven 

layers from top to bottom: loess clay, loess hard clay, loess silty clayey sand, loess silt 

clay, brown clay, brown silt sand and yellowish calcareous sand. 

5.1.4. Groundwater 

Ground water is the most precious natural resource in the Gaza Governorates as it is the 

only source of water supply for domestic and agricultural use. Under natural conditions, 

groundwater flow in the Gaza Strip is towards the Mediterranean Sea, where it 

discharges to the sea. However, pumping over 50 years has significantly disturbed 

natural flow patterns. Large cone of depression have formed in the north and south where 

water levels are below mean sea level, including inflow of seawater towards the major 

pumping centers. In the northern-area of the Gaza Strip groundwater levels dropped by 8 




meters between year 1935 and 1969. This drop is most apparent in the north due to 

extensive of groundwater exploitation at the eastern-northern border of the Gaza strip and 

due to Israeli activities between year 1948 and 1967. In all the Gaza Strip, between years 

1970 and 1993 groundwater levels dropped by almost 2 meters on average. This drop is 

most apparent in the south as a reflection of lower recharge from rainfall in this area. In 

the north, most wells exhibit a relatively slower drop in this period due to higher recharge 

rate. Depth to water level of the coastal aquifer varies between few meters in the low land 

area along the shoreline, and about 70 m along the eastern border. 

The groundwater elevation map for Khan Younis governorate is illustrated by figure 5.4. 

It shows sensitive area for groundwater depression where the groundwater level elevation 

drops more than 12m below mean sea level. This drop in the groundwater will led to 

lateral invasion of seawater due to pressure difference and direct contact with the aquifer, 

and also vertical invasion from deep saline water. This invasion laterally and vertically 

will affect the overall groundwater quality in the system. 

Figure 5.4: Average groundwater table levels in Khan Younis Governorate for year 2007. 

Water quality of the coastal aquifer underlying Gaza has deteriorated harshly. The main 

groundwater quality problems are elevated chloride and nitrate concentrations. In this 




report the water quality is reviewed with respect to chloride and nitrate. For simplicity, 

the reference level over which the water is to be considered a source and under which the 

water is to be considered a sink is set as follows based on the World Health Organization 

drinking water guidelines: 

• 50 mg/l for NO3- 

• 250 mg/l for Cl- 

According to the geotechnical investigation which was done by IUGAZA lab in August 

2009 for the project purpose (figure 5.5), the ground water table was appeared during 

drilling at the end of clay at depth of 58m and rise by artesian pressure to 56.5 m below 

existing ground surface at Khuza'a (Al Fukhari) infiltration site at the pilot well F9-BH01 

(x=86485.3129 m, y=78842.1137m, z=66.457m). The water table is rising up by time as 

shown at table 10. The water is salty the total dissolved solids TDS= 2380 ppm and 

chloride is 1300 ppm which is high and not suitable for irrigation plants or drinking. The 

unsaturated zone in the proposed infiltration area is about 68m, and the water level 

elevation is recorded at +10m AMSL with a very high chloride contents as well 

described later. 

Figure 5.5: Location of pilot well B9-BH01 at Al Fukhari proposed infiltration basin and the previous 

studies borehole locations. 

Table 5.1: Summary of GWT monitoring results 

Well No 

Well Elev. MSL 

(z, m) 

Ground Water 

Elevation below 

surface (m) 

GWT/year (MSL) 

F9-BH01 66.5 56.5 +10m / 2009 

BH26 74.2 68.2 +6m / 2006 

BH26 74.2 67.2 +7m / 2009 

Camp 8 81.75 77 +4.75m / 2003 

Camp 8 81.75 74.40 +7.35m / 2009 




Nitrate: 

90 per cent of Gaza's water samples were found to contain nitrate concentrations that 

were between two and eight times higher than the limit recommended by the World 

Health Organization (WHO). Organic fertilizers and wastewater are the main causes of 

the nitrate contamination in the groundwater, followed by sewage sludge and artificial 

fertilizers. This was revealed by the isotope ratios of nitrogen (15N/14N) and oxygen 

(18O/16O) in the nitrate. Isotopes are variations of the same chemical element that have a 

different number of neutrons in their nuclei. 18O and 15N are stable, i.e. non-radioactive, 

isotopes that are heavier than "normal" oxygen (16O) or nitrogen (14N) and can therefore 

be measured using a mass spectrometer. The lower 15N nitrogen isotope values in the 

sewage sludge indicate that the nitrate in the Gaza groundwater comes primarily from 

manure used as fertilizer. Between 2001 and 2007 samples from 115 municipal wells and 

50 private wells have been taken on seven occasions. Nitrate concentrations of between 

31 and 452 milligrams per liter were detected. Only 10 of the 115 municipal wells 

examined were found to have a nitrate level below the WHO guideline value. The 

situation with the private wells was equally serious: apart from three, all the wells were 

found to have nitrate levels that were between five and seven times higher than the WHO 

recommendations. 

Figure 5.6: Average nitrate concentrations in groundwater in Khan Younis Governorate for year 2007. 

The nitrate concentration in the area surrounding both the wastewater treatment plant and 

the suggested infiltration basin exceed the level recommended by the WHO. As shown 

by the nitrate level groundwater in Khan Younis governorate, figure 5.6, it is more than 

100 mg per liter. 




Chloride: 

High levels of chloride in the groundwater cause high salinity in the water supply. Less 

than 10% of the aquifer's yield is water meeting the WHO drinking standard (i.e. more 

than 250 mg/l). Some agricultural are currently reporting salinity levels of more than 

1200mg/l. Sources of high chloride content have been determined to be; seawater 

intrusion, lateral flow of brackish water from east in the middle and southern area and 

up-coning of the brine water from the base of the aquifer. The sudden rise in salinity is 

entirely consistent with entrainment of seawater wedges. The coastal aquifer holds 

approximately 5000 MCM of groundwater of different quality. However, only 1400 

MCM of this is “fresh water”, with chloride content of less than 500 mg/l. This fresh 

groundwater typically occurs in the form of lenses that float on the top of the brackish 

and/or saline ground water. That means that approximately 70% of the aquifer are 

brackish or saline water and only 30% are fresh water. 

Figure 5.7: Average chloride concentrations in groundwater in Khan Younis governorate for year 2007. 

The chloride level in the groundwater in Khan Younis governorate varies from less than 

250 mg per liter in some western areas to more than 1500 mg per liter in the eastern area, 

as shown by figure 5.7. However, the concentration in the groundwater beneath both the 

wastewater treatment plant and the infiltration basin in Khuza'a is more than 1500 mg /l. 

5.1.5. Surface Water 




Three small Wadies (Gaza, Beit Hanon and Salqah) cross the Gaza Strip from east to 

west but have little water in winter and are dry in summer. Before 1976, flooding in the 

Gaza valley caused the closure of the main (North-South) Gaza highway for few days 

each year. 

Wadi Al Salqah which is crossing Deir Albalah city is the closest one for the KY 

WWTP, the estimated distance is more than 20 km to the north. 

5.1.6. Seawater Aspects 

In the last three decades, the shore of Gaza suffered from pollution as a result of either 

authorities or citizens behavior. Direct causes for polluting certain sites of the marine 

environment are very visible, and it is totally due to the huge quantities of the wastewater 

discharged into the sea. One can identify these sites bare eyed by observing the growing 

moss in them. The pollution is also indicated by the bad odor they release. The extent of 

seawater pollution varies according to the quantity and quality of pollutant. From the 

hygienic point of view, seawater and beach in Gaza city and the northern area suffers 

high degrees of pollution. The results of the microbiological and biochemical analysis 

which were carried out in the last five years in the Environmental and Rural Research 

center at the Islamic University of Gaza, show that more than 90% of seawater samples 

exceed the recommended values for bathing water according to the WHO standards in 

Gaza city and Northern. Additionally, levels of pollutants such as fecal coliform and 

fecal streptococci were found in excess of U.S. EPA standards. The worst seawater 

pollution was found in the central part of the Gaza Strip, where effluent from Gaza City 

is discharged. Rainfall and tides were major factors affecting water quality in the winter 

season. 

Some of the practices of some citizens cannot be ignored neither, such as bathing the 

domestic animals in the sea, bathing horses, donkeys. Dogs and goats are very common 

practices that one often can see when you go to the beach. Bathing animals is another 

source of pollution that impacts the marine biology and creates a public health hazard. 

The results showed that the average size of the organism was 1.38 mm in the polluted 

site and 0.67 mm in the free site. In summer the total coliform (TC) was more than 150 

tests per 100 g sediments and decreased in winter and reached less than 30 tests per 100 g 

sediments. The TC and organism size changed closer with increase or decrease of BOD5. 

In addition, the seasonal variation has significant effects on TC and size of Ammonia 

beccarii in both locations. Finally, we can conclude that the size of Ammonia beccarii 

could be a good indicator for organic pollution level in comparison to total count. 

Through a comprehensive study carried out by Abdallaah et al. (2005), higher fecal 

indicators (both fecal coli forms and fecal streptococci) were obtained in sand rather than 

in water almost in all locations. The frequency of Salmonella and Vibrio isolation was 

also higher in sand than in water. The fecal coli forms count in sand ranged from 37 to 

13996, while it ranged from 37 to 4742 in seawater. Higher counts for fecal streptococci 

were recorded for both soil and seawater in a polluted location north Deir Elbalah. The 

count was 94566 and 8216 in soil and seawater, respectively. 

5.1.7. Ambient Air Quality 




There is increasing evidence that human activities in general have substantially added to 

the amounts of harmful gases and particles to the atmosphere. The combustion of fuel in 

automobiles and trucks produces several pollutants such as: nitrogen oxides, 

hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter. Emissions from an individual 

car are generally low compared to the smokestack, but the personal automobile is the 

single greatest polluter, as emissions from thousands of vehicles on the roads add up. 

Air quality data have been generated during this and other previous projects that include 

previous EIAs development, research projects, and environmental assessment conducted 

by UNEP. In this section air pollution data in the governorates of Gaza Strip are 

presented and analyzed. Pollutants presented are sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, lead, 

and hydrocarbons. The data is classified according to location and season. 

Sulfur Dioxide: 

Concentrations of sulfur dioxide in air samples from different areas of Gaza Strip (North 

Gaza, Gaza, Middle Zone, Khan Younis and Rafah) are presented in figure 5.8. Sulfur 

dioxide is produced as a result of burning petroleum products and from industrial 

activities. In addition, it comes from natural sources such as bio-degradation of organic 

wastes and bio-generation in liquid waste treatment plants. The concentration in Gaza 

city is the highest among the governorates. This might be explained by the fact that most 

of the industrial units are located in Gaza due to geographical and population 

distributions. 

[SO2]mg/m3 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

w inter 

sipring 

summer 

autamn 

0 

North Gaza Gaza Middel zone Khan Younis. Rafah 

Location 

Figure 5.8: Seasonal variations of sulfur dioxide (µg/m3) in different locations and seasons in Gaza Strip. 

Regardless to the statistical differences a seasonal comparison of SO2 concentration 

among all locations shows that concentration winter is nearly the lowest among all 

seasons whereas the concentrations in the other seasons are nearly evenly. 

Air quality survey was conducted in the preliminary EA study in 1997. The survey was 

done for one week from Sunday to Saturday in June 1997 at the market point which is 

located in Khan Younis city center (the most polluted area in Khan Younis Governorate). 

The result is shown in table 5.2. 

Table 5.2: Result of Air Quality Survey (source: JICA Khan Younis report, 1997) 

Items of air 

quality 

Sun. Mon. Tue. Wed. Thu. Fri. Sat. 




Sulfur dioxide 

SO2 

Suspended 

particle Matter 

(SPM) 

Carbon 

Monoxide 

(CO) 

Remark 

0.1-0.3 

0.2 

0.2-1.0 

0.5 

0-10 

2 

0.1-0.3 

0.15 

0.1-0.5 

0.3 


2 

0.1-0.3 

0.17 

0.1-1.0 

0.4 

0-20 

4 

0.1-0.3 

0.17 

0.1-1.0 

0.4 


2 

0.1-0.3 

0.17 

0.2-0.4 

0.3 


1 

0.1-0.3 

0.15 

0.05-0.25 

0.15 


2 

0.1-0.3 

0.2 

0.05-0.25 

0.1 

Upper value: Range of measured value (PPM/1 hr average for SO2 and SPM and ppm/8 hr 

average for CO). 

Lower value: Daily average of measured values. 

0-5 

1 




Some values of measured air quality are high, but they were not too large even it is 

located in the most crowded point in Khan Younes. 

Concentration of NOx in air samples of Gaza Strip: 

Seasonal concentrations of NOx in air samples collected from different locations in Gaza 

Strip are presented in figure 5.9. There is no exact general trend that characterized the 

ambient air concentrations of NOx. Similar to sulfur dioxide Gaza NOx concentrations 

are higher than other governorates, because Gaza location is more densely populated than 

other governorates and can emit NOx to the atmosphere due to fuel consumption 

transport or industrial activities. In addition, the application of organic fertilizers may 

result in ammonia emission which in turn may be oxidized to NOx in the atmosphere. 

60 

[NOx] µg/m 3 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

winter 

sipring 

summer 

autamn 

0 

North Gaza Gaza Middel zone Khan Younis. Rafah 

Location 

Figure 5.9: Seasonal variations of NOx (µg/m3) in different locations in Gaza Strip. 

Beyond the statistical variations, it can be seen that average concentrations in summer 

season was the highest among all season except Rafah which showed high average in 

spring. The lowest concentrations were in autumn. 

Concentration of lead in air samples of Gaza strip: 

Concentrations of lead in air samples collected from in different locations in Gaza strip 

are presented in figure 5.10. The highest value of Pb concentration reached nearly to 0.6 

µg/m3 in April in Gaza location which seemed the highest level in all locations beyond 

the unreasonable high concentrations found in January in Khan Younis location. It is 

obvious that concentration of lead in air samples collected from Gaza city is the highest 

among all locations. The concentration in the middle zone was also high and reached 

nearly 0.3µg/m3. These results may be explained by the fact that a lot of battery 

manufactures and recycling are relatively distributed in Gaza and middle zones. 




[Pb] µg/M3 

0.45 

0.4 

0.35 

0.3 

0.25 

0.2 

0.15 

0.1 

0.05 

0 

winter 

sipring 

summer 

autamn 

North Gaza Gaza Middel zone Khan Younis Rafah 

location 

Figure 5.10: Seasonal variation of lead concentration (µg/m3) in air samples collected from different 

locations of Gaza Strip. 

Seasonal variations of lead concentrations in air samples collected from different 

locations in Gaza strip shows that concentration of lead was higher in summer season 

than one else. The lowest concentration was in winter season in some cases. It is not 

possible to measure these isotopes in Gaza. The explanation of these results is that high 

temperature in summer may result in evaporation of organic lead compounds (Tri, Tetra 

methyl lead) which may contribute to increase lead flux to the atmosphere. The low lead 

level in winter samples may be due to the precipitation of suspended lead particulate, 

and/or solubility of lead salts in rain water. 

Hydrocarbons used in Gaza Strip: 

The quantities of hydrocarbons used in different locations of Gaza Strip for three years 

(2003, 2004, and 2005) are presented in Figure 4. Quantities of hydrocarbons in Gaza 

Strip are presented in figure 5.11. It can be seen the highest quantity of used hydrocarbon 

was found in the Gaza zone. The lowest quantity was found in the north Gaza and Rafah 

governorate. The reason of these results is that the population density. 

Total consumption (L) 

12000000 


8000000 

6000000 

4000000 

2000000 

0 

Y03 

2003 

Y04 2004 

Y05 2005 

North Gaza Gaza Midle.Zone Kh. Younis Rafah 

location 

Figure 5.11: Quantity of used hydrocarbons in Gaza Strip. 




Traffic related Air Pollution: 

According to Palestinian environmental strategy, transportation sector contributes to 50% 

of air pollution in Gaza Strip. Motor vehicle problem is mainly caused by the high 

density of traffic, the long age of the cars, and lack of appropriate licensing systems. The 

problem is exacerbated by the bad conditions of the roads and lack of professional 

planning of the Palestinian cities. 

A group of 140 gasoline-fueled vehicles were tested for 4 gases in exhaust emissions 

during a project carried out by local Palestinian NGO. These gases were carbon 

monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrocarbons (HC), and oxygen O2. The air to 

fuel ratio (lambda) was measured also. The distribution of the vehicles was made to 

represent all models and car ages working in Gaza Strip. The collected samples has been 

critically reviewed and analyzed to examine the quality of data where it showed 

consistency, reproducibility, and high precession. 

Table 5.3. summarizes the measured pollutants at cruse and idle modes for the cars 

tested. It shows that the rate of emissions both CO and CO2 at the idle speed is lower 

than their emissions at the high cruise. The opposite situation is happening for O2 and 

HC emissions. Theoretically, the rate of emission of CO and HC is expected to decrease 

during cruising mode of operation. The increase of CO is on the expense of that of CO2 

and vice versa. In general, the pollutants emission in the idle mode is higher than cruising 

mode. During idling, most engines require rich mixtures to compensate for residual 

combustion products in the cylinder. Thus carbon monoxide emissions are high during 

the idling mode. 

Table 5.3: summary of the measured pollutants at cruse and idle modes for the cars tested 

Mode of 

Idling 

Operation CO, % CO 2 % O 2 , % HC, (PPM) Lambda 

Average 2.91 10.33 4.03 901.99 1.09 

Maximum 11.93 15.22 18.40 8330.00 2.01 

Minimum 0.00 2.06 0.02 4.00 0.71 

Mode of 

Cruising 

Operation CO, % CO, % CO, % CO, % CO, % 

Average 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 

Maximum 12.17 12.17 12.17 12.17 12.17 

Minimum 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Project results indicated that most of tested cars exceeded carbon monoxide and 

hydrocarbons permissible emission limits. On the other hand, carbon dioxide emissions 

in the average are acceptable when compared with the emission limits. Pollutants 

measured were independent of the cars ages at both idle and cruise modes. This can be 

explained by two facts. First, most of the tested cars are older than the virtual car age of 

about 10 years. This made the emissions dependent on the mechanical status of the motor 

rather than the age of the motor. Secondly, the large diversity of models and makes of 

cars used in the study made the variation in emissions from different models 

overshadows the variation in emissions due to the cars age. 




Diesel versus Gasoline Engine: 

Diesel engines are heavier and bulkier than gasoline engines. They operate with less 

highly refined fuel and consume less fuel per horsepower per hour. Gasoline engines and 

diesel engines produce similar materials in their exhaust although the relative proportions 

are different. Similar to the gasoline engine, the emission of diesel engines varies 

considerably depending on the operation mode. Gasoline engines emit fewer particulate 

matters in their exhaust than diesel engines, so the exhaust looks "cleaner." Table 5.4. 

shows typical concentrations of the exhaust gas composition for both diesel and gasoline 

engines. 

A diesel engine, running at the correct fuel-air ratios (0.04) would have oxygen 

concentration of 1.5% and carbon dioxide of 13.5% in the exhaust gas. When the engine 

operate at higher fuel-air ratio of 0.094, oxygen concentration is lowered to reach of 0.3 

%, a carbon dioxide concentration of 10.2 %, and carbon monoxide would abruptly 

increase to reach 6% in the exhaust gas. 

Table 5.4: Typical concentrations of the exhaust gas composition for both diesel and gasoline engines 

Fuel Pollutant Idling Acceleration Cruising Deceleration 

Gasoline 

Carbon monoxide % 6.9 2.9 2.7 3.9 

Hydrocarbons, PPM 5300 1600 1000 10000 

Diesel 

Carbon monoxide % Trace 0.1 trace trace 

Hydrocarbons, PPM 400 200 100 300 

Results of this work shows that the proper planning of road network would reduce the 

rate of gases emission from the vehicles during peak hours by more than 50% by the end 

of the year 2030. These emission reductions are reflected positively on both the local 

environment when carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons are considered and the global 

environment when carbon dioxide emissions are considered. These results call for 

immediate interventions to bring innovative solutions of automobile emissions problem. 

The interventions might include; enforcing emission limits and regulations, maintenance 

plans of major highways, and corrective master planning of highway networks in and out 

of the Palestinian cities. 

5.1.8. Noise Levels 

The proposed project sites are located in open rural areas with no major industrial 

activities undertaken in the vicinity of the sites. Noise sources at the sites of the project 

due to human activities and natural sources. Sources include traffic noise which was 

negligible in the project sites due to low traffic volumes. The sound of the sea and winds 

were high and pronounced at the sea outfall and proposed second infiltration site. 

Baseline noise levels were measured during the period 1-4 of July 2009 in four locations 

of treatment plant site, proposed infiltration basins, and sea outfall. The average noise 

levels in the four locations are presented in table 5.5. 




Table 5.5: Field measurements of noise levels in decibel 

Location Maximum Minimum Average 

Treatment plant site 52.1 33.2 40 

Proposed infiltration site 1 51.7 35.8 41 

Proposed infiltration site 2 49.5 33.6 43 

Sea outfall 64.8 36.9 57.6 

5.1.9. Metro-climatologically Conditions 

5.1.9.1. Climate 

The whole Gaza Strip is located in a transitional zone between the temperate 

Mediterranean climate to the west and north and the arid desert climate of the Negev and 

Sinai deserts to the east and south. As a result wastewater treatment plant, infiltration 

basins, and pressure line has a typical Semi-Arid Mediterranean climate, with long hot 

dry summer caused by eastward extension of the Azores high pressure and a mild wet 

winter resulted from a penetration of mid-latitude depressions accompanied by westerly 

wind moving eastward over the Mediterranean basin. The proximity of the 

Mediterranean Sea has a moderating effect on temperatures and promotes high humidity 

throughout the year. There are two well defined seasons: the wet season starting in 

October and extending into April, and the dry season from May to September. Peak 

months for rainfall are December and January. There is an abundance of sunshine in 

Khan Younis Governorate with an average radiation of 5000 – 7500 kcal/m 2 /day in the 

summer. The mean annual solar radiation amounts to 2200 J/cm 2 /day. 

5.1.9.2. Temperature 

The average daily mean temperature in Gaza Strip ranges from 25 o C in summer to 13 o C 

in winter, with the average daily maximum temperature range from 29 o C to 17 o C and the 

minimum temperature range from 21 o C to 9 o C, in summer and winter respectively. 

5.1.9.3. Humidity 

The daily relative humidity fluctuates between 65% in daytime and 85% at night in 

summer and between 60% and 80% respectively in winter. The relative humidity was 

measured during the period 1-4 of July 2009 in four locations of treatment plant site, 

proposed infiltration basins, and sea outfall. The average relative humidity in the four 

locations is presented in Table 5.6. below. 

Table 5.6: Field measurements of relative humidity 


Treatment plant site 64.7% 55.9% 60.3% 

Proposed infiltration site 1 (Khuza'a) 70.3% 55.7% 63% 

Proposed infiltration site 2 (Muraj) 74.6% 58.6% 66.6% 

Sea outfall 73.8% 68.2% 71.0% 




5.1.9.4. Wind 

There is a considerable variation in the wind speed during the daytime, and the average 

maximum wind speed velocity is about 3.9 m/s. Storms can occur in winter when 

maximum wind speeds reach about 18 m/s. In winter the prevailing wind direction is SW 

with an average speed of 4.2 m/s and during summer the prevailing winds are from the 

NW sector (MEnA, 2001). The wind speed was measured during the period 1-4 of July 

2009 in four locations of treatment plant site, proposed infiltration basins, and sea outfall. 

The average wind speed in the four locations is presented in Table 5.7. below. Figure 

5.12 shows yearly average wind speed for the period 1997-2007. The average speed 

varies between 9 to 12 km/h during this period. 

Table 5.7: Field measurements of wind speed in m/s 


Treatment plant site 6.4 1.1 4.0 

Proposed infiltration site 1 (Khuza'a) 5.3 1.41 2.9 

Proposed infiltration site 2 (Muraj) 7.3 2.9 5.6 

Sea outfall 4.6 1.6 2.6 

Wind Speed (Km/h) 

14 

12 


8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

Year 

Figure 5.12: Wind speed average for year 1997-2007 in km/h 

5.1.9.5. Precipitation 

The rainfall data of the Khan Younis is based on the data collected from the main two 

rain stations located in Khan Younis city and Khuza’a. Daily rainfall data are available 

for Khan Younis station since 1985 but for Khuza’a station since 1999.The average 

rainfall in Khan Younis governorate from 1999 to 2008 was 263.5 (mm/year) as an 

annual precipitation as shown in table 5.8. 




Table 5.8: Average yearly precipitation in Khan Younis Governorate from 1999-2009 (source: MoA, 2009) 

Year 

Khan Younis station 

Khuza'a station 

(mm/ year) 

(mm/ year) 

1999/2000 191.80 142.20 

2000/2001 381.00 284.30 

2001/2002 311.70 258.50 

2002/2003 298.00 261.20 

2003/2004 204.40 184.00 

2004/2005 373.00 367.70 

2005/2006 270.5 214.0 

2006/2007 252 256.1 

2007/2008 178 137.8 

2008/2009 309 261.8 

Avg. yearly prec. 

276.94 236.69 

Approximated (Six years) Area of 

86.70 43.40 

Khan Younis (Km2) 

Annual Precipitation (mm/year) is 263.5 Approximated from last 10 years(1999-2008) 

5.1.9.6. Evaporation 

No direct evapo-transpiration measurements are available for Palestine. Typical 

evaporation rates for Khan Younis Governorate range from 2.1 mm/day in winter to 6.3 

mm/day in summer. Annual average pan evaporation rates in the Gaza Strip are about 

1900 mm/y. 

Monthly evaporation data has been obtained for the years1999-2005 from Gaza 

meteorological station. The data is presented in Table 5.9. The maximum evaporation 

rate is reached during summer months while minimum is during winter months 

Table 5.9: Daily average evaporation rate in Gaza station in mm/day 

YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC AVR 

1999 1.9 2.7 4.7 5.0 6.0 6.3 6.7 6.0 5.3 4.0 3.2 2.6 4.5 

2000 2.6 2.7 3.6 4.3 5.2 5.8 5.8 5.9 5.1 4.4 4.8 3.5 4.5 

2001 3.7 3.8 4.7 5.1 5.8 8.4 6.4 6.8 6.1 5.0 3.8 3.1 5.2 

2002 3.1 3.4 3.8 4.5 5.5 6.2 6.1 6.0 5.8 4.0 3.4 2.5 4.5 

2003 2.5 3.2 3.4 4.7 5.4 5.8 6.0 6.0 5.7 4.0 3.1 2.2 4.3 

2004 2.6 2.8 3.5 4.7 5.4 6.1 6.6 7.1 6.2 4.5 3.4 2.7 4.6 

2005 2.8 2.7 3.4 4.0 5.0 5.7 5.8 5.8 5.4 4.5 3.3 2.1 4.2 

AVR. 2.7 3.0 3.9 4.6 5.5 6.3 6.2 6.2 5.7 4.4 3.6 2.7 4.6 

5.1.10. Road and Transportation 

In this project, the project team did not conduct direct car counts on the local roads of 

project area. However, the project area can be considered a very low traffic rate area 

taking into consideration that it is mostly a rural/agricultural areas. Most of local roads 

within the project area are not paved. 




The project will use a branched access from 12m width Sofa Road to the west-south KY 

WWTP site corner. The length of the new access road is about 550m. The access road is 

paved and has difference in elevation not exceeding 2.0m. The paved part of the road is 

narrow and will not be adequate for the KY WWTP. Therefore, it will be reconstructed. 

5.2. Socio-Economic Aspects 

5.2.1. Population 

Khan Younis Governorate is located in the southern part of Gaza Strip as shown in figure 

5.13. Its district capital is Khan Younis City. In 2007, About 280 thousand inhabitants 

are living in Khan Younis Governorate (table 5.10). The Khan Younis governorate 

consists of seven municipalities: Khan Younis, Bani Suhaila, Abasan El-Kabira, Abasan 

El-Saghira, Quarrara, Alfukhari and the Khuza’a as shown in figure 5.13. 

Table 5.10 Population Distribution for Khan Younis Governorate 

Municipality Population Percentage 

Al Qarara 19,769 7.3% 

Khan Yunis Camp 37,705 13.9% 

Khan Yunis City 142,637 52.6% 

Bani Suheila 31,703 11.7% 

'Abasan al Jadida (as Saghira) 6,066 2.2% 

'Abasan al Kabira 18,413 6.8 

Khuza'a 9,147 3.4% 

Al Fukhkhari 5,539 2.0% 

Total 270,979 100.0% 




Figure 5.13: Khan Younis map (PWA, 2007b) 

5.2.2. Employment 

Khan Younis governorate registered the highest percentage of unemployment (38.8%) of 

the total labor forces (PCBS, 2008). The PCBS results showed that the highest 

percentage of unemployment concentrated among the youth at age group 15-29. The 

percentage registered for the age group 15-19; it reached 39.9% in Gaza Strip, followed 

by 20-24 age group it reached 47.1%, then 25-29 group, it reached 36.9% in Gaza Strip. 

The results showed that the lowest percentage of unemployment appeared among 

females who not complete any years of schooling. Whereas, the unemployment 

percentage reached 33.8% for those whom finished 13 years of schooling and above. 

While the lowest percentage among males registered for whom finished 13 years of 

schooling and above it reached 15.7% whereas the highest percentage registered for those 

who finished 1-6 years of schooling it reached 26.3%. 

Employed Persons: 

In Gaza Strip the results showed that there was an increase of those who are working in 

commerce, restaurants and hotels sector from 19.0% in 4th quarter 2007 to 22.2% in the 




1 st quarter 2008, and a decrease in the percentage of those who worked at transportation, 

storage and communication sector from 7.9% to 6.2% at the same period. 

On the other hand the results showed that the percentage of employed persons at services 

and other branches sector reached 52.0% in Gaza Strip in the 1 st quarter 2008. In Gaza 

Strip the percentage of wage employees decreased from 62.5% to 58.5%, and the 

percentage of unpaid family members decreased from 12.4% to 11.3.4%, while the 

percentage of unpaid family workers increased from 22.7% to 27.3% at the same period. 

The results showed that the public sector employed 38.7% of total employment in Gaza 

Strip. 

Wages and Work Hours: 

The average value of the nominal daily net wage of the employees in Gaza Strip the 

nominal daily net wage of the employees decreased from 64.1 NIS in the 4th quarter 

2007 and 63.6 NIS in 1st quarter 2008, compared with 66.9 NIS in the 1st quarter 2007. 

The average weekly work hours in the in Gaza Strip increased from 38.2 work hour to 

40.2 work hours. 

5.2.3. Water Demand/ Supply 

Khan Younis governorate municipalities (Khan Younis, Bani Suhaila, Abasan Kabira, 

Abasan Jadidia, Khuza'a, and Qarara) and surrounding villages suffer from real shortage 

in water supply. 

Existing water resources are limited. There are many groundwater wells which serve the 

area in addition to water delivered from MEKOROT Israeli Water Company. The total 

amount abstracted from the existing wells is about 17 MCM/yr, and about 2.5 MCM/yr 

(280 m3/hr) from MEKOROT. Comparing this amount with the required amount for 

future consumption leads to the fact that a new source of water must be introduced in 

order to overcome the expected shortage of water supply in the coming few years. 

The estimated average per capita water consumption (the amount of water actually 

provided to individuals, after system losses) is below the WHO recommended guideline 

of 150 l/c/d), also recommended by PWA. 

Most of groundwater quality in Gaza strip including Khan Younes area does not meet the 

WHO guidelines for water suitable for human consumption. The extraction of 

groundwater currently exceeds the aquifer recharge rate, accordingly the groundwater 

level is falling and chloride concentration is increasing due to seawater intrusion. The 

uncontrolled discharge of untreated sewage onto the soil and the excessive use of 

fertilizers has further polluted groundwater resources and led to high levels in certain 

areas. 

5.2.4. Domestic Water Infrastructure 

The current water supply system comprises water wells, distribution water network and 

unused concrete tanks. Water is normally abstracted from wells and discharged directly 

into the network. The current water supply system does not allow the match between the 

water demand variations and the capacity of the wells pump hence during the peak 




periods the wells pump cannot provide adequate pressures due to the high demand. 

Consequently, the water system operates divide the community into distribution zones 

where zone receives water part of the day. As a result of this distribution practice, the 

residents used to reserve storage facilities over their roofs to meet their demand during 

the periods of shut off water supply. 

5.2.5. Wastewater collection 

At present, 60% of Khan Younis city’s population is served by the new established 

public sewer collection system. In the year 2025, 83% of the population of Khan Younis 

city is expected to be served by piped sewage system in addition to 63% for the 

surrounding area which is currently have 0% connection. The remaining unconnected 

population disposes effluents to cesspits, which are emptied regularly by tanker vacuum 

trucks. Collected septage is then discharged to the sewer network through one of the 

existing manholes. 

5.2.6. Land Use and Urban Planning 

The land use map of Khan Younis as shown in figure 5.14 is based on the Regional Plan 

developed by Ministry of Planning (MoP 2005). 

Most of the populations in the southern part of Gaza (mainly Rafah and Khan Younis 

governorates) are living in very dense built-up areas with lack of basic facilities, services 

and infrastructures. The built-up areas include almost all areas used for human 

settlements, such as residential, commercial, industry, public and private service, public 

open space etc. 

Studying the Regional Plan of Gaza Governorates 2005, Urban development areas are to 

include land for most of the required purposes; residential, manufacturing industry, 

commercial, public and private services, without further subdivision, which will be 

undertaken through local planning processes. 

The land as shown in figure 5.14 is scarce and the pressure on it is increasing rapidly for 

all kinds of uses; urban, industrial, and agricultural uses. Agricultural land occupies 

about 72 km 2 , which is about to 65% of the total area of the Khan Younis governorate. It 

is expected that future expansion will be for the domestic use only. 


!(!(!(!( !( 



!( 

 

!( 

!. 

! 

!(!( 

!. 

 

! 

!( 

!( !( 

!( !( !( !( 

!( 

!( 

!( 

!( 

!( 

a 

! 

!( 

Mediterranean Sea 

!( 

!( 

a 

!( !( 

# 

!. 

!. 

Legend 

Nature Reserve 

Exeptional Natural Resource 

Important Natural Resource 

 

Cultivated Area 

Recreation Area 

! 

Recreational Beach 

 

!( 

Built-up Area 

!( !( !( 

Urban Development 

Tourism Development 

!( 

# 

Regional Centre 

Research Facility 

Airport 

!( 

SeaPort 

!. 

Fisheries Site 

!( 

!( 

! 

Free Trade Zone 

Proposed Industrial Area 

Proposed Treatment Site 

 

Desalination Plant 

!( 

 

a 

! 

Power Plant 

Existing Treatment Site 

 

Existing Industrial Area 

!( 

!( 

Plan Area Boundary 

New Railway 

New Regional Road 

! 

Upgrade Regional Road 

!( 

Lightrail Corridor 

Wadi 

! 

Governorate Line 

!. 

a 

# 

!. 

DRAFT 

!. Entry Point 

!( Archaeological Site 

a Power Sub-station 

Solid Waste 

# Existing Disposal Site 

!. 

!. 

 

0 1.25 2.5 5 Km 

Sources : 

- MOP 

- MOT 

- MOLG 

- Base Map Based on 

Cairo Agreement Map, 1994 

Aerial Photos, 1996 

Palestinian Grid 

Plan Map 6 

Updated Regional Plan for Gaza Governorates 

Palestine 2005 

Palestinian National Authority 

Ministry of Planning 

Boundaries and names are not necessarily authorative 

Figure 5.14: Regional plan for Gaza Governorates, (source: MoP, 2005) 

Alfukhari area as part of the region is classified as agricultural area. Supporting Khan 

Younis city, urban development goes slowly as most of the population prefers the city 

life and try to get far from the boarders, because of the continuous invasions made by the 

Israelis. 

The land plots surrounding the proposed location of KY WWTP are privately owned 

lands by farmers living in the eastern Khan Younis area. The land plots vary in size from 

few donums to tens of donums. The area is primarily an open agricultural field, basically 

producing different types of crops and some fruit trees. Urban development is 

characterized with scattered buildings here and there as most of the farmers and land 

owners build their houses within their farms, it is close to their work and they guard their 




properties. As a result the population density is very low in the area surrounding the KY 

WWTP. 

The overall site view is classified as fair view surrounding the site, landscaping quality 

show open field and gray color mixed between agricultural areas with brown field. And 

the topographic features are almost blain and minimum slopes characterized the 

surroundings. 

5.2.7. Development Plans/Activities 

The regional plan for Gaza Governorates proposed mostly the urban development to the 

east and protection in the west. This is due to protection natural resources including sand 

dunes and fresh groundwater and the dense agricultural area. 

KY WWTP for the southern governorates for khan Younis is proposed in the west with a 

number of regional and national projects. The Gaza airport which is implemented 10 

years ago is not operating at the moment due to the Israeli closure. The airport is located 

in the far southeast of Gaza strip. In addition to proposed Industrial Park and Free Trade 

Zone which are located adjacent to the airport in the southeast. The Regional plan is also 

proposed new rail way and new regional road go with region borders from the east. 

5.2.8. Cultural Heritage and Archaeological Resources 

The cultural heritage environment means the historical and/or geographical settings of a 

certain historical site or area which is essential to the understanding of the site/area and 

which enhance the identity and character of the site or area. 

The value of these historical monuments and is embodied in the material demonstration 

of its stones, structures often beneath the visible surface or other materials represents 

events and man behaviors theoretically or practically. It should be kept and maintained 

accurately in a way to reflect its harmony historically and geographically with their 

origins. 

Palestinian cultural heritage suffered tremendously from miserable negligence and 

consequent deterioration. During the first years of the Palestinian authority; there were 

some attempts to integrate these cultural objects in the overall development schemes in 

order to introduce cultural and economic benefit of their existence. 

The rich history of Gaza comes from its strategic location on the Mediterranean coast at 

the cross road between ancient civilizations. This location as a kind of trade corridor 

between southern Europe, Africa and Asia made it benefit or suffer from the important 

economic, cultural, scientific and military exchanges in these old civilizations. 

Consequently, archaeological sites are many and remnants rich. They represent various 

archaeological periods such as the Paranoiac, Hellenistic and Byzantine, and more recent 

historical periods such as the Mamluok and Ottoman. In terms of cultural heritage it is 

also important to include the remnants from our times, reflecting the geopolitical 

situation of Gaza in the Middle East conflicts of our century, both from the British 

Mandate Period, Egyptian Rule and the Israeli Occupation. 




Roman Site 

Laqia Site 

Jabalya Mosiac Site 

Anthedon Site 

Gaza Old City 

El Montada Mosaic Site 

Tall Ajoul Site 

El Montar Hill 

Important Historical 

Triangle 

Tall Om Amer Site 

El Khader Monastry and 

Mosque 

Tall Rafah 

Khan-Yunis Castel 

‘Abassan Mosaic 

Targeted location 

Figure 5.15: Overall Map for the Historical sites Attractions in the Gaza Strip 

Source: MENA, Ministry of Environmental Affairs 1999 

The Archeological sites and historical buildings vary between monuments, mosaic sites, 

mosques, churches and others. Generally speaking, these sites and buildings are suffering 

from the absence of adequate legislation of preservation of antiquities and monumental 

buildings. 

These sites are located all over Gaza. Particularly; in the coastal zone they are 

concentrated in the Deir al-Balah area, on both sides of Wadi Gaza, and by the ancient 

port of Gaza City (Blakhiyah, later called by the Greek name Anthedon). Sites from our 

century are mainly found in the cities, especially in the old city of Gaza. Most of the sites 

were dug up during the British Mandate. 

• Abbasan al-Kabira Mosaic Site 

Abbasan al-Kabira Mosaic Site is the only archaeological site close to the proposed 

wastewater treatment plant KY WWTP. It is more han 2km far from the KY WWTP to 

the northwest located in the existing built-up area of Abbasan small municipality nearby. 

The site is from the Byzantine period. It includes 6x3 m Mosaic basement and some ruins 

of walls. It is located in the built up area of Abbasan. The site is (1.000 m2), consists of 

6x3 mosaic basement with plants, birds, geometric figures and Greek text (606 A.C), 




with a rectangle building (Grand Temple) east-west the second part of the site is the 

temple of Khalil El Rahman (Ibrahim profit) with remittance of some marble columns. 

The site is excavated in the built up area and covered by a hall construction. It has no 

services, lacks infrastructure and is only served by a sub-road. The site is also a 

governmental land inside the built up area. 

5.2.9. Human Health Aspects 

The public health hazards resulting from wastewater collection, treatment and disposal 

have long been known. In Khan Younis governorate, traditional practices of household 

waste disposal combined with a largely inoperable wastewater collection and treatment 

system have contributed to the present situation where discharge of untreated wastewater 

is made into the sea and open areas. Human waste has many direct and indirect adverse 

consequences for human health. Most of these occur when water-related diseases are 

transmitted from ingestion or contact with contaminated water and food. 

Severely nitrate polluted area in the Gaza Strip is Khan Yunis city at which the 

maximum nitrate concentrations were recorded (more than 400 mg/l) The L-wells are 

located in Khan Yunis area where the use of cesspits is very common, as the area is not 

connected to the sewer system. Therefore, Khan Yunis area has a high-level of nitrate 

concentration in groundwater. Anthropogenic source which increased the amount of 

nitrate to harmful level is the waste materials especially from sites used for disposal of 

human sewage, industrial wastes, septic tanks which represent a major local source of 

nitrate contamination of ground water especially in Khan Younis area of Gaza Strip (Al 

Absi, 2008). 

Several cases of blue babies disease were reported in the last couple of years. A study 

done by Abu Maila, El-Nahal and Al-Agha (2004) investigated the seasonal variations in 

nitrate concentration. Nitrate was analyzed in 100 wells (47 agricultural and 53 domestic) 

in five governorates. The results showed that 90% of the tested wells have nitrate far 

beyond the allowed values set by the World Health Organization (WHO). The average 

concentration of nitrate in domestic wells is 128 mg/L in June-July and 118 mg/L in Jan- 

Feb, and for the agricultural wells, the average is 100 mg/L in June-July and 96 mg/L for 

Jan-Feb. The results suggest that the seasonal differences in nitrate concentrations of the 

domestic wells are slightly more observable than those of the agricultural wells. The 

environmental factors that control nitrate in groundwater are: a partially-confined aquifer, 

lack of a sewage system, population density, the presence of refugee camps, the presence 

of fertilizers and the annual rain. The variations in nitrate concentration of the domestic 

wells are not of considerable values. It is suggested that concrete policies in pollution 

control and/or prevention measures could be formulated upon better understanding of the 

environmental factors. 

A descriptive, cross-sectional and analytical study by Abu Naser, Ghbn, and Khoudary 

was carried out in 3 areas of the Gaza Strip, Palestine, in 2002, to determine the factors 

associated with high methaemoglobin (Met-Hb) levels in infants and the relationship 

with nitrate concentration in drinking water wells. The study found that the drinking 

water sources were likely to be the main factor for high levels of Met-Hb. Out of 338 

infants attending for vaccination, having supplemental feeding, use of boiled water and 

age 3–6 months were associated with high Met-Hb levels. 




The highest mean Met-Hb level was in Khan-Younis, where the highest mean nitrate 

concentration was recorded in drinking water. The infants from Khan-Younis had the 

highest methaemoglobin level compared with other area of Gaza strip such as Jabalia and 

Gaza city. There was a similar pattern between the Met-Hb levels of the infants and the 

nitrate levels of drinking water in the different residential areas. Khan-Younis had the 

highest nitrate level in wells and the highest mean Met-Hb level among the infants living 

in that area (5.94%). It is found that 64.6% of the infants’ families in Khan-Younis used 

tap water. This explains the higher Met-Hb levels in infants from Khan-Younis. This is 

attributed to 2 main factors: first the high level of nitrates in the sources of water, second, 

the higher use of other sources or tap water in families from Khan-Younis. Symptoms 

of diarrhea were more common among infants with high Met-Hb levels. This finding 

agrees with a report of an infant of 8 weeks who became ill with symptoms of vomiting 

and diarrhea after their mother stopped breastfeeding and began feeding with formula 

reconstituted with water from the family’s private well. 

Prevalence of intestinal parasites was assessed in 1,370 children in Khan Younis 

Governorate was studied by El-Astal (2005). The age of the children ranged from 6 to 11 

yr. Stool samples were examined by direct smear, flotation, and sedimentation 

techniques. General prevalence of intestinal parasites was 32.4%. Ascaris lumbricoides 

was found to be the most common parasite (12.8%), followed by Giardia lamblia (8.0%), 

Entamoeba histolytica (7.0%), Entamoeba coli (3.6%), Trichuris trichiura (1.6%), and 

Hymenolepis nana (1.0%). Enterobius vermicularis was detected with the scotch tape 

preparation. Of the examined children, 20.9% were positive for E. vermicularis. The 

following tables show the Prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in children from 

Khan Younis Governorate. 

Table 5.11: Prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in children from Khan Younis Governorate, 

Palestine. 

No. of children Prevalence (%) 

Protozoa 

Giardia lamblia 110 8.0 

Entamoeba histolytica 96 7.0 

Entamoeba coil 50 3.6 

Helminths 

Ascaris lumbricoides 176 12.8 

Enterobius vermicularis* 264 20.9 

Trichuris trichiura 22 1.6 

Hymenolepis nana 14 1.0 

* Scotch tape samples received from 1264 children. 

Source: El-Astal, 2005 




Table 5.12: Prevalence of the seven intestinal parasites by age group. 

Enterobius vermicularis 

(N = 264) 

Ascaris lumbricoides 

(N = 176) 

Giardia lamblia 

(N = 110) 

Entamoeba histolytica 

(N = 96) 

Entamoeba coil 

(N = 50) 

Trichuris trichiura 

(N = 22) 

Hymenolepis nana 

(N = 14) 

Source: El-Astal, 2005 

5.2.10. Local Community Perception 

Age group 

6-7 yr 8-9 year 10-11 year 

No. % No. % No. % 

P value 

104 39.4 108 40.9 52 19.7 0.05 

30 27.3 48 43.6 32 29.1 >0.05 

22 22.9 44 45.8 30 31.3 >0.05 

12 24.0 22 44.0 16 32.0 >0.05 

4 18.2 12 54.5 6 37.3 >0.05 

6 42.8 4 28.6 4 28.6 >0.05 

The socio-economic team in cooperation with the EIA team prepared a questionnaire that 

measures the perception of local communities. This will give us perception of the local 

community with regard to the implementation of the project components. 

About 415 questionnaires were distributed at 46 local communities in all over Khan 

Younis governorate in the period from 17 to 24 August 2009. Only 335 of them respond 

to the questionnaire with a response rate of 85%. 

The total number of questionnaires and their distribution over the different areas were 

identified according to the two main following factors: 

• Total population of the local community 

• The distance from the local community to the project components (Treatment plan 

and the infiltration basin) 

Table 5.13 The distribution of the questionnaires 

Municipality 

Population 

Distance range 

to project area 

Sample size 

=0.1% of 

population (A) 

Distance 

Factor 

(B) 

Total Number of 

Questionnaires= (A x 

B) 

Number of 

Respondents 

Al Qarara 19,769 7-12km 20 1.4 28 27 

KhanYunis City 

and its Camp 

180,342 5-14km 180 1.1 198 152 

Bani Suheila 31,703 9km 32 1 32 10 

'Abasan al Jadida 

(as Saghira) 

6,066 5-7km 6 2.2 13 13 

'Abasan al 

Kabira 

18,413 3-5km 18 3.8 68 68 

Khuza'a 9,147 2.5-3.5km 9 4.8 43 32 

Al Fukhkhari 5,539 1-3km 6 5.5 33 33 

Total 270,979 415 335 




Five experienced field surveyors, two males and three females, hired to conduct the field 

survey in coordination with Khan Younis Municipality. 

The Questionnaire has 55 questions divided into six parts as follows: 

1. Socio-economic Aspects of the family 

2. Housing conditions including water sources at the community 

3. Wastewater facilities at the community 

4. Solid waste and public health issues 

5. Agricultural aspects and water consumption 

6. Acceptance of new treatment facilities and infiltration 

All gathered data were analyzed using the SPSS software. The results of the analysis 

showed that, the average age of the respondents is 38 years with 59% males and 41% 

females most of them are married. About 45% of the subjects are unemployed while only 

20% are working as labors in different sectors. 

Local communities' perception about Water, wastewater and related environmental 

problems: 

• Most of the homes (99%) are connected to the water-network; most of them (56%) 

have Municipal connections, while 18% get the water from private wells. 23% of the 

population has bad quality of water while 41% have moderate quality of water only 

6% of them have good drinking water quality. 

• Only 18% of the interviewed persons confirmed that their homes are connected 

wastewater network while 82% has not connected to any wastewater network. 

• About 96.5% of the respondents conformed that they are still using the cesspits near 

their homes as the main way for wastewater disposal. 

• About 90% of the population of Khan Younis is currently suffering from mosquitoes. 

The majority of the respondents are from Fukhari, Abasan, and Eastern part of Khan 

Younis City 

• About 97% of the population of Khan Younis is willing to connect their homes to a 

new and modern wastewater network. 

• About 85% of them are accepting the establishment of the new wastewater treatment 

plant to serve their communities. 

• The 15% who are accepting the constructions of new wastewater treatment plant have 

several conditions to accept; mostly the location should be far away from the 

residential areas. 

• About 28% of the respondents had previous knowledge about the construction of new 

KY WWTP with some details on its location, donors, and implementing agency, in the 

other hand 72% they have no idea about this project. 

Local communities' Perception about Solid waste and related environmental problems: 

• About 21.5% know about the existence of Solid waste landfill to the east of Khan 

Younis most of this percentage from who are living near the location of the landfill. 

While 78.5%, have no idea about the location of the landfill. 




• Around 82.5% from the respondents are suffering from unacceptable odor coming 

mainly from solid waste and wastewater near their communities. The majority of 

these people are living in the eastern part of Khan Younis, Fukhari and Abasan. 

• About 71% of the population is suffering from dust from different sources. 

• The Majority of the population (95%) is suffering from flies because of solid waste, 

chicken farms and wastewater exited inside their residential areas. Because of that, 

78% of the population is suffering from increasing number of rats in their areas. 

Perceptions of local Farmers: 

Most of the farmers at Khan Younis Governorate owned small parcels of agricultural 

land. Around 86% of the farmers owned less than 10 dunums and 46.4% of them 

cultivated less than three dunums. 

Areas for Individual Farmer's Agricultural lands in Dunmus 

6.1-10.0d 

(14%) 

10.1-30d 

(12%) 

More than 30d 

(1%) 

Less than 3d 

(46%) 

3.1-6.0d 

(26%) 

Figure 5.16: Individual Farmer's Agricultural lands in Dunmus 

Around 56.8% of the farmers are using ground water for irrigation while 33.7% are 

cultivating rain-fed crops depending of rainfall for irrigation. Most of the farmers 96.7% 

are consuming less than 1000 cubic meters per month 52.5% of them are consuming less 

than 100 cubic meters per month. Around 41% from the farmers are accepting to irrigate 

their farms (only the trees) by treated wastewater if it is within the standards and with no 

odor and no impact on their fields. 

201 to 400m 3 

(12%) 

Amount of Water used for Agricultural Purposes 

More than 

400m 3 

(18%) 

less than 50m 3 

(33%) 

101 to 200m 3 

(18%) 

51 to 100m 3 

(20%) 

Figure 5.17: Amount of water used for agricultural purposes in cubic meters per month 




Local communities' Perception about construction of infiltration basins and related 

environmental problems: 

The majority of local population (77.6%) has no objection for construction of infiltration 

basin in their areas. However, 40% of the respondents have learnt that infiltration of 

treated wastewater have negative environmental-health impacts on their families while 

46% of them confirmed that the recharge of treated wastewater into the ground water 

have positive impact on the ground water. It seems that the scale and the duration of 

treated wastewater at the infiltration basis are not clear to the local population. About 

45% learnt that the depth of treated wastewater at the infiltration basin will exceeds one 

meter only 13% know that it will be less than one meter, while 24% have no idea about 

the water depth. 

5.3. Biological Environment 

The geographical location of Palestine being between three major continents Africa, Asia 

and Europe as well as being on the Mediterranean gives its characteristics unmatched 

elsewhere in geophysical characteristics and climate. Such a variety resulted in a rich 

biodiversity that is rarely matched in other countries. 

According to a variety of resources, Palestine flora is composed of 2780 plant species 

belonging to 126 families. Rare species account to 27.8% and those classified as very 

rare accounts to 25.6%. This is considered to be high and is directly related to their 

habitat. Some of these habitats are relatively small and varied and thus the flora that 

occupies them is in turn varied and rare. Land based fauna include 730 species divided 

into 116 mammals, 511 birds, 96 reptiles and 7 amphibians. 

The open areas in the southern part of Gaza strip show flora and fauna common to semiarid 

desert regions. The previously rich variety of animal and plant species in the wider 

region however has been drastically reduced. Due to the already very high population 

density and the ongoing increase of the population the few remaining habitats in southern 

part of Gaza strip are reduced almost day by day. 

Generally speaking biodiversity is under a serious threat due to human activities 

disrupting the ecology of the land including the use of pesticides which is an ever 

increasing threat to biodiversity. The flora and fauna in the Gaza strip suffered severe 

impacts especially during the last nine years (2000-2009) due to the Israeli depletion and 

partly leveling of green areas and agricultural land. During this period, large areas of 

agricultural or horticultural land including agricultural wells and irrigation networks were 

destroyed in the whole Gaza strip. 

5.3.1. Fauna 

Because of its geographical position, the OPT has a vast variety of wildlife. There are an 

estimated 30,904 species (PCBS, 2005; ARIJ, 2006), of which 30,000 invertebrates, 427 

birds, 297 fish, 92 mammals, 81 reptiles and 7 amphibians (PCBS, 2005; ARIJ, 2006). 




Mammals: Many species, which could be found in the area a few decades ago have 

disappeared nowadays due to increased population density, hunting, agricultural and 

residential expansion, use of chemical substances, and mechanical obstacles like fences 

between Israel and the Gaza Strip. Deer, Wolf, Porcupine, Red fox, Jackal, Striped, 

Hyaena and Wild Cat are examples for meanwhile extinguished mammal species. Most 

of the nowadays-recorded mammals are rodents. 

Birds: Bird species are recorded in the wider area. The populations of some species were 

severely diminished due to certain factors including the use of agrochemicals, hunting, 

and loss of habitats. 

Reptiles and Amphibians: Species have been reported in the southern part of Gaza strip. 

Arthropods: There is a great variety of insects in the area. Mainly due to the existing 

Rafah solid waste landfill; insects like cockroaches, beetles and flies are abundant, 

forming a rich food basis for predators like praying mantis, dragon flies and carnivore 

beetles. Beside insects, scorpions and spiders are very common in the area. 

Snails and slugs: are widespread all through the area. 

Domestic Animals: Apart from wildlife, many domestic animals like cows, sheep, goats, 

donkeys, horses, hens, etc. are commonly seen in the area. 

5.3.2. Flora 

Figure 5.18: Selection of Fauna at the southern part of Gaza Strip. 

The West Bank and the Gaza Strip contain 2076 species of plants (ARIJ, 2006). 1959 

species (in 115 families) are growing in the West Bank and 1290 species (in 105 

families) are growing in the Gaza Strip. Most of the endemic species growing in the Gaza 

Strip belong to the Papilionaceae family (13.3%). Examples of endemic species growing 

in the Gaza Strip are Erodium subintegrifolium (Geraniaceae), Iris atropurpurea 

(Iridaceae), Paronychia palaestina (Caryophyllaceae), and others, (Zohary and Michael, 

1966, 1972, 1978, 1986; Feinbrun-Dothan, Avinoam, 1991; Shmida, 2006). 




Figure 5.19: Selection of Flora at the southern part of Gaza Strip. 




Wild plant species: A wide range especially of wild shrub and flowering plant species 

can be found in areas that are not cultivated. However, no particularly protected or rare 

species have been identified during the surveys. 

Forest: in the whole Gaza Strip there is no land, which can be considered as a real forest 

area. This is because the soils are mostly sandy and the climate is unsuitable for forest 

plantation. 

Agricultural Crops: There are many agricultural plants and fruit tree species reported in 

the project area. Agriculture is based on irrigated or rainfed crops. In general, vegetables 

(including potato, tomato, eggplants, pepper, beans, etc.), citrus, fruits, almonds, and 

rainfed crops are commonly seen in Khan Younis Governorate. 

5.3.3. Significant Habitat 

According to the study team investigation, it is concluded that the project area has no 

significant habitats available. 




6. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 

6.1. Introduction 

The first attempt to assess the environmental impacts was done within the "Preliminary 

Environmental Assessment". The potential environmental impacts is prepared using the 

baseline data survey which conducted for this study, following the general 

recommendations for elaboration of the environmental impacts, using updated 

information and large amount of new data and taking into consideration all media and 

their interaction. 

In the feasibility study, Khan Younis Sewerage Master Plan, and the Gaza Strip 

Sewerage and Storm water Master Plan studies the site selection and the treatment 

process of KY WWTP was done. This was made upon the requirements of the 

National/Regional Planning Directives, constrains of the KY WWTP site and the 

project's investment and maintenance costs. Five treatment alternatives were considered 

for possible use at Khan Younis. They were: Activated Sludge Process, Sequential Batch 

Reactor (SBR), Bio Aerated filters, Membrane bio reactors, and Trickling Filters. This 

alternative treatment study was recently prepared by SOGREAH-UG Consultants as part 

of the initial detailed design Report for KY WWTP. It was proposed to apply Activated 

Sludge Process treatment process for the KY WWTP in Khan Younis. The 

implementation of the proposed project for the KY WWTP is planned to be in two 

stages. Due to that the current study will focus on the impact assessment of the 

implementation of the selected project in the selected location and technology compared 

with the case of no implementation of the project. 

In order to assess in more details possible impacts during construction, operation phase 

and post operation phase (closure) or some changes which are planned in the view of 

capacity or technology, of the sea out fall, infiltration basins, and the KY WWTP; 

following stages and activities have been taken in consideration: 

Construction stage: 

The following activities are planned in the construction phase: 

• Construction of the access roads; 

• Preparatory works at the location of the KY WWTP and excavation works; 

• Transport and disposal of surplus excavated material; 

• Construction of the structures of the KY WWTP and infiltration basins (civil works, 

use of heavy machinery and vehicles); 

• Disposal of construction waste; 

• Installation of the equipment; 

• Construction of accommodation facilities for the workers (water supply, sewerage, 

waste disposal). 

The following action are expected: 

1. Excavation 

2. Leveling 

3. Concrete work 




4. Electromechanical work 

Operation stage: 

In this phase, the following activities are planned: 

• Treatment technology/ operation of the equipment for sewerage treatment and effluent 

production; 

• Operation of equipment for sludge production and treatment (digester, drying beds 

and biogas production); 

• Sludge disposal on temporary storage at KY WWTP site. 

• Effluent recharge in filtration basin 

The following actions will be carried out: 

1. Removal and Disposal of grit and Floating material 

2. Biological Unit operation 

3. Effluent discharge to infiltration basin 

4. Emergency discharge to the sea 

5. Sludge removal and treatment 

When identifying the potential impacts of a new project, such as the proposed KY 

WWTP, the environmental impacts expected must be measured against the existing 

baseline conditions. Also, impacts may be beneficial, and occasionally both where 

opposing interests or viewpoints exist. 

The consultant identified possible and expected impacts of the different project activities 

and action in the constriction and operational phases. The EIA team assesses short- and 

long-term impacts, including both direct and indirect impacts. Table 6.1 presents 

preliminary results indicating the potential impacts, positive and adverse, of different 

project activities on the key environmental parameters. 

In general, relatively limited adverse impact can be created in different project phases. 

However, building of a KY WWTP will have a positive environmental impact on the 

Khan Younis governorate. It is expected to produce a long-term improvement in public 

health of the citizens of Khan Younis as to significantly reduce a source of chronic water 

pollution of a valuable scarce groundwater resource. Specific impacts that are anticipated 

or forecasted are discussed in detail in this chapter. 




Table 6.1 – Preliminary Matrix of Potential Environmental Impacts 

Construction Phase 

Operational Phase 

Environmental Items 

Excavation Leveling Concrete 

work 

Electromechanical 

work 

Removal/ 

Disposal of 

grit, floating 

material 

Biological 

Unit 

operation 

Effluent 

discharge 

infiltration 

basin 

to 

Emergency 

discharge to 

the sea 

Sludge 

removal 

/treatment 

Effluent and 

sludge reuse 

I. Physical Impacts 

1. Groundwater 

● ●☺ ●☺ 

2. Marine 

environmental 

3. Soil 

● ● ● ● ● ● ●☺ 

4. Air quality 

● ● ● 

II. Socio-Economic Impacts 

1. Land use and urban 

planning 

2. Employment ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ 

3. Health and safety 

● ● ● ● ●☺ 

4. Cultural heritage 

● ● 

III. Biological Impacts 

1. Flora 

● ● ● ☺ 

2. Fauna 

● ● ☺ 

3. Habitats 

● ● ☺ 

Trans-boundary Impacts 

1. Water Environment 

● ● 

2. Air Environment 

● 

● Adverse Impact 

☺ Positive Impact 

● 

☺ 




6.2. Physical Impacts (groundwater, marine environment, soil, air quality) 

6.2.1. Groundwater: 

In order to test the aquifer response to the infiltrated treated wastewater quantity and 

quality, a three dimensional ground water model is used as a tool for impact presentation. 

The chosen model was Visual Modflow 4.2 and its integrated modules (MODFLOW, 

ZONE BUDEGET, MODPATH and MT3D). The used model is being calibrated for 

different years as described in previous studies carried out in year 2006 (ALMADINA 

report for PWA-Finland studies). The model has been updated to adequate the current 

situation as year 2008 which is the starting of model simulation. 

The model was prepared for prediction phase which will presents the future conditions in 

case of applying infiltration in the proposed location of Khuza’a’. The proposed area as 

surveyed is about 9.7 hectares, while the proposed infiltrated inflow quantities are 

assumed to be as presented in table 4.2. 

The following figures are a presentation of the model structure and parameters used to 

get the prediction impact of the infiltrated treated wastewater. 

Figure 6.1: 3D Model Layout Presentation 

6.2.1.1. Impacts on Groundwater Quality: 

As described earlier that the existing chloride concentration in the proposed infiltration 

area is ranged from 2,000 to 4,000mg/L, Hence any added water with chloride less than 

the existing groundwater will certainly improve the groundwater salinity by dilution. 

Groundwater chloride concentration will improve to the better and no needs to be 

checked through the model. Knowing that the chloride ion concentration is a 

conservative in which it flow on and mix with the groundwater and it is not affected by 

any degradation and/or adsorption processes. This means that the chloride concentration 




plume of the treated infiltration wastewater will remain constant along the water path, 

except for dispersion and dilution in the distant parts of the infiltration water plume. 

The other main component to the groundwater quality is Nitrate. Running the model 

simulation till year 2025 taking into account all the infiltrated treated wastewater quantity 

and quality into account, figure 6.2 presents the plume outcome results which describe 

the spatial distribution of the infiltrated treated wastewater quality. 

Figure 6.2: NO3 Plume Distribution over different years of simulation 

Table 6.2 describe the plume spatial distribution distance from the infiltration basin area 

towards the Mediterranean Sea in the North West direction, inland towards the eastern 

border of the Gaza Strip in the South East direction, and towards Middle and Rafah 

Governorates. Long term simulation (year 2025) and the effect of the infiltrated 

wastewater move towards the Mediterranean Sea because of the existence of pumping 

center in Khan Younis City, and it is clear that the inland distribution of plume towards 

the eastern border is less than the half distance of the NW direction due to absence of 

wells in the eastern side of the proposed infiltration basins. 




Table 6.2: NO3 Plume Distance from Infiltration Basins 

Year 

North West 

Towards the 

Sea 

Plume Distance from Infiltration Basins (m) 

South East North East 

Towards the Towards 

Border 

Middle 

South West 

Towards Rafah 

2011 1,000 650 1,000 1,100 

2015 2,250 1,250 1,900 1,900 

2018 3,000 1,600 2,400 2,200 

2020 3,500 1,800 2,700 2,500 

2025 3,750 2,000 2,880 2,800 

The closest municipal well in the area is located at about 4.4Km in the north-west 

direction of the proposed infiltration area (Al Madina Riadea Well). Accordingly, the 

infiltrated water will not reach any municipal well until 2025. 

6.2.1.2. Impacts on Water Quantity: 

As field investigation presented earlier, the water level elevation is around 10m AMSL 

and the saturated thickness of the aquifer is almost 10m thick. During the infiltration of 

treated waste water, the saturated thickness become more than 50m at the end of 

simulation (year 2025) which means that more than 40m dome depth (thickness) under 

the recharge basins. Illustrative different maps of the simulated groundwater level 

elevation are shown in the following figures for different years (year 2010, 2015, 2018 

and 2025respectively as figure 6.3a, 6.3b, 6.3c and 6.3d). 

The impact of infiltrating treated wastewater in Al Fukhari Area on the groundwater can 

be considered positive due to the fact that the current water resource in the area almost 

not exist due to limited saturated thickness and highly brackish water. After 15 years of 

infiltration in the area, there will be a local aquifer existence with an average saturated 

thickness of more than 50m and extend in a radius of about 4km from the infiltration 

basins. The water quality will improve as well by diluting the existing brackish water. 

The infiltrated treated waste water will never reach any adjacent municipal well in the 

area as shown in previous figures. 

The infiltrated treated wastewater can be used for irrigation purposes in the nearby 

agricultural areas, which can be considered as recovery wells, knowing that the simulated 

figures presented are for spatial distribution and water level elevation without any kind of 

groundwater recovery, hence if a recovery wells is being considered, the plume will 

shrink as well as the water level elevation will drop from +50m AMSL based on the 

abstracted groundwater. 




Figure (6.3a): Simulated Water Level Elevation 

Year 2010 (+20m) 

Figure (6.3b): Simulated Water Level Elevation 

Year 2015 (+30m) 

Figure (6.3c): Simulated Water Level Elevation 

Year 2018 (+35m) 

Figure (6.3d): Simulated Water Level Elevation 

Year 2025 (>+50m) 

Figure 6.3: Simulated Water Level Elevation for year 2010-2025 




6.2.1.3. Particle Tracking: 

It is expected that the infiltrated wastewater will raise the groundwater level and hence 

the groundwater flow direction is towards the sea, the predicted flow path lines is 

directed towards north-west direction. The groundwater path line was predicted using the 

advection model (MODPATH). 

The model has been tested against the particles travel time to know the shape of 

expansion of the treated waste water in the groundwater. The following figures show the 

expansion of the particle dispersion in the groundwater in different years (year 2010, 

2015, 2018 and 2025 respectively as figure 6.4a, 6.4b, 6.4c and 6.4d), 

Figure (6.4a): Simulated Travel Time Year 2010 

(800m west) 

Figure (6.4b): Simulated Travel Time Year 2015 

(2.25Km west) 




Figure (6.4c): Simulated Travel Time Year 2018 

(3Km west) 

Figure (6.4d): Simulated Travel Time Year 2025 

(3.75Km west) 

Figure 6.4: Simulated Travel Time for year 2010-2025 

6.2.2. Coastal and Marine Environment (seawater quality): 

The immediate and one of the most beneficial impacts of the new treatment plant's 

construction will be the cessation of the discharge of untreated or partially treated 

wastewater to the sea and Almawasi area. As a result, local environmental conditions 

will be improved which can be expected to benefit both the local population and local 

fishery resources. 

Construction and operation of the proposed treatment plant will make significant 

reductions in the existing nutrient loads from the untreated/partially treated wastewater 

discharge. Also, total and fecal coli forms counts will be reduced significantly. This will 

have a positive impact on bathing water quality and tourism. 

On the other hand, operational difficulties may be experienced at plant start-up or during 

periods when equipment malfunctions, particularly the equipment providing aeration to 

the complete mix and partial mix lagoons. Under these conditions, the lagoons would 

probably remain intact. The effluent discharged under these emergency conditions would 

still be an improvement over the existing condition where raw/partially treated sewage is 

discharged into the sea. the temporal wastewater discharge to the sea in case of 

emergency, will affect the seawater quality for short time. 




6.2.3. Soil 

This section describes the range of potential soil quality impacts associated with the 

establishment and operation of Khan Younis wastewater treatment plant and the soil 

aquifer treatment system in Khuza’a. In both sites the soil varies from sandy to sandy 

loam in texture. 

• Construction Phase 

The most significant aspects in the construction phase of Khan Younis wastewater 

treatment plant and the infiltration basin concerning the soil impact are: Excavation 

works, road construction, ponds construction works. These will expose soils in the 

affected project areas leaving them vulnerable to erosion by surface run-off and wind. 

However, the flat topography of the proposed site would tend to reduce erosive surface 

flows. The overall threat could exist for the durations of construction works with the 

rainy season. 

On the other hand, the construction of the wastewater treatment plant will involve 

building large embankment structures on land, which will result in a loss of the option for 

alternative land use and thus represents an irreversible commitment of land resources. 

Besides, there is high possibility for soil pollution with substances due to leakages of 

fuels and oils from the heavy vehicles and machinery used for construction and due to 

applied chemicals during this phase. 

More than 157,000 m3 of soil will be lost by excavation during the construction of the 

wastewater treatment plant, additionally; more than 510,000 m3 is expected to be lost by 

excavation during the construction of the infiltration basin in Al Fukhari. Besides, the 

land in Al Fukhari site is used for agriculture, so the vegetation cover will be lost. 

Vegetation is important since protect the soil from erosion by wind. Plant’s roots help to 

maintain soil structure and facilitate water infiltration. Huge quantities of sandy to sandy 

loam of soil, is expected to be removed from the site and transferred to other locations. 

Only small amount of the excavation soil may be used for leveling activities. 

• Operation Phase 

During the operation of the plant the production of sludge and the infiltration process are 

considered the significant aspects disturbing the quality of the soil. The treated sewage 

sludge has significant organic matter content and contains macronutrients and 

micronutrients essential for plant growth. However, it can also contain potential 

contaminants such as heavy metals, organic contaminants and pathogens. The main 

environmental concern about utilization of sewage sludge on land is the accumulation of 

heavy metals in soils and a possible contamination of the food chain. Most municipal 

wastes, sewage sludge in particular, contain high concentrations of mineral nutrients (N, 

P, Ca, etc.), but also toxic heavy metals. As heavy metals generally are much higher 

concentrated in sewage sludge than commonly found in soils, the concentration of 

extractable heavy metals in soils such as Cd, Zn, Cu and Ni can be increased by sludge 

application to soil. Moreover, the fine particle structure of pure sewage sludge sometimes 

causes problems during application to soil. The fine particles have a low water retention 

capacity and – beside the nutrient supply – do not improve the soil quality, especially of 

sandy soils, significantly. 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 100



The main concern during the operation phase of the soil aquifer treatment system 

(infiltration basin in Al Fukhari) is the expected decrease in infiltration rate of the soil. 

This is due to the development of a clogging layer or Schmutzdeck at the original ground 

surface of the basin or beneath the surface. Clogging may take place in the soil as a result 

of wastewater-soil interaction. During this interaction, physical, biological or chemical 

processes go on as described below: 

• Physical processes: these processes are expected to cause surface soil clogging. 

Organic and inorganic suspended solids are found to be the dominant factor in 

creating the surface clogging. As the wastewater starts to penetrate with total 

suspended solid between 15 to 35 mg/L, the suspended solids that are larger in size 

than the soil pores does not penetrate and accumulate at the surface by means of 

straining leading to formation of clogging layer or filter cake. Later on, solids small in 

size may be suspended in the percolating water are then retained in the filter cake, 

enhancing further resistance to water flow. This reduction in the suspended solids is 

expected to take place on the surface and down to 100 mm depth in the sandy soil 

profile. 

• Biological processes: the clogging layer produces by these process is well known as 

bio-film or biomass or in general as biological soil clogging. As the bacteria in the 

percolated wastewater is attached to the solid phase of the soil profile it start to grow 

and reproduce, at the interface of wastewater and soil phases, increasing the biomass 

and extra-cellular material. By which they link themselves to gather causing clogging. 

This not often takes place in sandy soil profile, if the system is operated under 

sufficient drying time 

• Chemical clogging processes include precipitation of calcium carbonates and 

phosphates and other solids and deposits in the soil. Algal growth during flooding of 

basins due to effluent content of N (25 mg/l). This will cause raising pH of effluent to 

high value as a result of CO2 consumption by algae and then leading to CaCO3 

precipitation. Such process rarely comes to pass in sandy soil. 

6.2.4. Air quality 

• Climate: 

Wastewater handling is considered a minor source of greenhouse gas emissions in many 

countries. The existence of Khan Younis KY WWTP will not have any negative effect 

on the microclimate of the area. The microclimate will be improved against the climate 

extremities (wind and storms), by planting trees in the neighborhood of the plant. 

Wastewater is treated to remove organic matter using biological processes in which 

microorganisms consume the organic matter for maintenance and growth. 

Microorganisms can perform this biodegradation process under aerobic or anaerobic 

conditions, the latter condition producing methane (CH4). During collection and 

treatment, wastewater may be accidentally or deliberately managed under anaerobic 

conditions. Untreated wastewater may also produce methane if contained under 

anaerobic conditions. 




Fugitive emissions of this gas will contribute to the global climate change thus having 

negative impact. It is assumed that 0.065 kilograms of wastewater BOD5 are produced 

per day per capita and that 15 percent of wastewater BOD5 is an-aerobically digested 

(MCF). This proportion of BOD is then multiplied by an emission factor of 0.6 kg 

CH4/kg BOD5 

Estimated phase I CH4 Generation = (0.065) * (0.15) * (0.6) * (6300) = 36.855kg/day 

Estimated phase II CH4 Generation = (0.065) * (0.15) * (0.6) * (25500) = 149.175kg/day 

Both domestic and industrial wastewater may also be a source of nitrous oxide emissions. 

After processing, treated effluent may be discharged to a receiving water environment 

(e.g., river, lake, estuary, etc.), applied to soils, or disposed of below the surface. Nitrous 

oxide (N2O) may be generated during both nitrification and denitrification of the 

nitrogen present, usually in the form of urea, ammonia, and proteins. It is recommended 

to adopt a new overall emission factor (4 g N2O/person) to estimate N2O emissions from 

municipal KY WWTPs (activated sludge or secondary). This emission factor is based on 

the Czepiel emission factor multiplied by 1.25 to allow for co-discharged industrial 

nitrogen loadings. The nitrogen quantity associated with these emissions is calculated by 

multiplying the N2O emitted by (2 x 14)/44. 

Estimated phase I N2O Generation = (4) * (138 000) * ((2 x 14)/44) = 351 kg/year 

Estimated phase II N2O Generation = (4) * (438 000) * ((2 x 14)/44) = 1115 kg/year 

The calculated emissions of greenhouse gases from Khan Younis KY WWTP are 

considered to have negative impact on the global climate, but this impact is minimal 

when viewed against national or even regional emissions. 

• Noise 

The proposed project sites are located in open rural areas with no major industrial 

activities undertaken in the vicinity of the sites. Current noise sources at the sites of the 

project are merely due to natural sources. Man made sources include traffic noise which 

was negligible in the project sites due to low traffic volumes. The construction of the 

Khan Younis treatment plant will produce significant noise levels during the construction 

phase. During the operation phase, noise levels are not expected to exceed current 

baseline measurements. 

Construction activities will take place across the whole project components that include 

KY WWTP, infiltration basins, emergency overflow pipe, and sea outfall. In general, the 

impact of the construction will depend on; 

• The proximity of the construction activities to noise sensitive receivers (NSRs); 

• The specific heavy equipment deployed; and 

• The length of time over which the construction works are taken. 

Examining the project maps shows that the nearest NSRs lie at a distance exceeds 200 

meters from the KY WWTP, infiltration basins, and sea outfall. This makes the NSRs 




unaffected by the noise generated by the construction equipments at these sites. This fact 

is not true for the emergency overflow pipe. The pipe will penetrate rural areas where 

residential houses are scattered along the road close to the pipeline. 

Typical noise emissions from various construction equipments that may be used at the 

project sites are summarized in table 6.3. 

Table 6.3: Typical noise emissions of construction equipment 

Equipment 

Typical sound pressure levels in dB(A) at given distance 

15 m 240m 

Air compressor 75-87 51-63 

Backhoe 71-92 47-69 

Compactor 72 48 

Concrete mixer 75-88 51-64 

Front loader 72-81 48-58 

Generator 72-82 48-58 

Grader 80-93 56-69 

Pumps 70-90 44-66 

Stone crusher 85-95 61-74 

Tractors, Dozers 78-95 54-74 

Trucks 83-93 59-69 

Concrete vibrators 68-81 44-57 

Effective noise management protocols would be implemented wherever applicable 

during construction and operating phases of the life of this project. Besides this protocol 

measures, construction work will be limited to day time periods, thus avoiding the night 

time which is the most noise sensitive. The following measures should be treated as a 

part of the project proposal which include: 

• planting of buffer trees and shrubs where appropriate; 

• locating noisy equipments as far as possible from NSRs; 

• orienting equipment with high directivity to emit noise away from NSRs; 

• switching off unnecessary or idle equipments; 

• fitting of noise mufflers to mobile equipments; and 

• preventive maintenance of equipment to minimize noise emissions. 

In the light of the prevailing low ambient noise levels in the area surrounding the project 

sites, it is inevitable that some noise disturbance will be experienced, particularly during 

the construction of the emergency sea outfall pipe. Such impacts, although temporary and 

therefore reversible, are assessed to be negative and low to moderate significance. 

• Odor 

Odor is defined as "the sensation resulting from stimulation of the human sense of 

smell." Odor is a sensitive subject because perception of odors is subjective. Our 

sensitivities and reactions to odors are influenced by personal preferences, opinions, 

experiences, and the varying sensitivities of our olfactory systems. Odors are a nuisance. 

The current state of knowledge suggests that it is possible for certain odorous emissions 

to have an impact on physical health. The most frequently reported symptoms attributed 




to odors include headache, nausea, hoarseness, cough, nasal congestion, palpitations, 

shortness of breath, stress, drowsiness, alterations in mood, and eye, nose, and throat 

irritation. 

The process of wastewater collection, conveying or treatment has the potential to 

generate and release odors to the surrounding area. However, most odor problems occur 

in the collection system, in primary treatment facilities and in solids handling facilities. 

In most instances, the odors are generated as a result of an anaerobic or "septic" 

condition. Although there are many common odors associated with treatment plants, H2S 

is the most prevalent malodorous gas associated with domestic wastewater collection and 

treatment. The conditions leading to H2S formation usually favor the production of other 

odorous gases, such as ammonia and mercaptants, which may have considerably higher 

detectable odor thresholds, and consequently H2S may be an indicator of their presence. 

Exposure of receptors to levels of hydrogen sulfide above 5ppb can lead to odor 

nuisance. The Israeli ambient air quality standards limit hydrogen sulfide in urban areas 

to: 

0.161 ppb for exposure time of 30 minutes. 

0.01 ppb for exposure time of 24 hours. 

The process of Khan Younis wastewater treatment plant potential sources of foul Odor 

are the primary treatment facilities and solids handling facilities. The proposed 

wastewater treatment tanks are not expected to produce odors. This is due to the use of 

aeration process thus preventing septic conditions. The treatment plant site and proposed 

infiltration basins are located in rural agricultural area where manure is applied 

periodically for agricultural purposes. This fact makes any produced odor would not 

increase the background odor concentrations. The odor produced has low negative 

impact. Odor is expected to be produced at KY WWP pretreatment part in case of 

inappropriate handling of grit/grease removal 

• Air Quality Impacts 

This section addresses the proposed KY WWTP’s impact on air quality, both during 

construction and upon completion of the project. Air quality impacts can be classified as 

either direct or indirect. Direct air quality impacts result from emissions generated by 

stationary sources at a project or potential development site such as emissions from fuel 

burned at a site for driving any equipment at the site. Indirect air quality impacts result 

from emissions from offsite stationary sources and mobile sources generated by the 

project. 

• Construction Phase 

Construction activities related to the Proposed Project will result in limited short-term air 

quality impacts. There will be fugitive dust generated during the site preparation and 

construction phases of the Project. The potential impact from these fugitive dust 

emissions will be minimized by following the appropriate preventive measures listed in 

the mitigation section below. Vehicular emissions from construction equipment and 

construction worker vehicles are anticipated to have very minimal short-term impacts. 




None of the short-term construction related impacts are expected to cause a tangible 

increase on air pollution of the area. 

• Operation Phase 

The only long term air quality impact that may be created by the Proposed Project results 

from the potential increase in project-related vehicular exhaust emissions. The primary 

pollutants associated with vehicular exhaust emissions are NOx and CO. The Proposed 

Project will not increase traffic volumes, reduce source-receptor distances or change 

other existing conditions to such a degree as to increase air pollutants emissions. No long 

term impacts to air quality are anticipated. 

Beside the proposed site for the new wastewater treatment plant there is an old site for 

Rafah solid waste landfill which is improperly managed, landfills can cause 

contamination through three different transfer paths: air, soil and water. Air transfer is 

caused by smoke and soot from landfill fires, as well as by ash and dust from the landfill 

surface and emissions of gases such as methane and carbon dioxide. Smoke and soot 

contain high amounts of PAHs, phenols, volatile organics such as benzene, and heavy 

metals. Except for the volatile components, these substances are also present in the ash 

blown over the neighboring territory, and may be found in contaminated dust on the 

landfills. During the UNEP field visits (UNEP, 2009), fires were visible at some 

landfills. 

According to UNEP (2009) the landfill fires are a hazardous aspect of air contamination. 

They initially cause irritation of the respiratory system and, if they persist, can lead to 

asphyxiation symptoms, chronic diseases, and cancer. Landfill fires are fed not only by 

solid fuels such as wood, paper and cardboard in the waste, but also by landfill gas 

(methane) that is produced under anaerobic conditions inside the landfill itself. Even with 

no oxygen access, fires may is molder inside the landfill for months or years. They often 

create hollow spaces underneath the surface, presenting an additional physical hazard to 

people and vehicles when they cave in. Outbreaks of gases such as carbon monoxide, 

methane, and hydrogen sulfide also represent a hazard for people working on such sites. 

Carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulfide can lead to asphyxiation symptoms while 

methane can lead to deflagration. 

6.3. Socio-Economic Impacts 

The impact during the construction phase 

Constructing phase of the proposed KY WWTP to the East of Al-Fukhari area could 

cause some psychological problems to the families living to the West and to the South of 

the site. This phase will have some temporary negative impact due to noise and dust. 

Using heavy machines during excavation and leveling will produce noise and dust that 

affect the public health of the local population within 2 km distance from the site. The 

movement of the machines from and to the site will also temporarily dust and noise. 

Dust particular emissions due to the construction of KY WWTP and infiltration basin 

will partially affect the agricultural production of the surrounding farms. Agricultural 




production expected to be affected negatively by the dust, which might result of losing 

10% of the agricultural production for around 100 dunums surrounding the two sites. 

The construction of the infiltration ponds inside Al-Fukhari area will cause some 

discomfort to around 50 families living around the site. There will be some temporary 

negative impact due to noise and dust mainly during the excavation period. 

The construction of the emergency carrier pipe from the KY WWTP to the sea will have 

some temporary negative impact due to noise and obstruction of traffic and use of 

agricultural land during the construction stages but these are minimal negative impacts 

compared to the positive effects discussed above. 

During the construction of the emergency pipeline especially along the public roads 

there, is a great variety of potential health hazards by vehicle operation, activities of 

heavy machinery, open pits, and pedestrians crossing or passing by the construction sites 

or access roads. 

Due to the construction phase at the three component of the project it is expected 

temporarily traffic jam and traffic congestions at Alfukhari, Abasan, Bani Suhaila and 

Khan Younis city. 

Impacts at Full Operation of the KY WWTP and Infiltration Basin 

It is known that the ownership of the land proposed for the infiltration basin is owned and 

cultivated by one family at Al-Fukhari area. This family could loss its livelihood in case 

of construction the infiltration basin. 

Odor and mosquitoes can be a problem and cause some discomfort to around 150 

families living around the site of KY WWTP and Infiltration basin, if not properly 

mitigated, during the operation phase of the KY WWP and the infiltration. Mosquito 

larvae generally live in small, shallow water bodies where disturbance of the surface 

layer is uncommon. In the oxidation ponds treatment process, mixing vigorously. In the 

complete mix lagoon and also in the partial mix lagoons. These lagoons would not be 

suitable habitat for mosquito larvae. The polishing pond and the infiltration basins, 

however, may provide suitable habitat for mosquito breeding. 

The sludge produced by the new wastewater treatment plant will be air-dried on-site in 

sludge drying beds before moved to a sludge stockpile area. The sludge drying and 

stockpiling process will also allows flies, mosquitoes and other insects to breed. The 

impact of these insect vectors is not expected to be great. 

If sludge disposal to agricultural enterprises is carried out, sludge quality will need to be 

monitored to ensure that human health is protected. The absence of significant quantities 

of heavy metals or toxic compounds in KY WWT indicates that pathogens and 

nematodes will likely be the major health concern. The health impact is likely to be slight 

to non-existent if proper sludge stockpiling, handling and soil conditioning procedures 

are followed. 




Social Economic Benefits of the Project 

It is expected that the Project will have positive impacts on the local populations during 

both construction and operation phases. 

During construction Phase 

The Project will create short-term construction jobs and incomes for local population, 

including poor people. The construction of the new KY WWTP, infiltration bond and 

emergency pipeline will have positive economic effect through employment generation. 

During the construction phase, services of local subcontractors will be use which will 

generate job opportunities for skilled and unskilled workers in addition to services of 

engineers and others. Around 120,000 working days will be generated during the 

construction phase. 

Economical benefits to local communities expected to increase through procurement of 

local construction materials from the local market. 

During project Operational Phase 

The Project will have economic, social and health and environment benefits to local 

communities. Economic benefits include creating more than 100 long-term employment 

opportunities and increasing incomes for population. Social benefits include comfort 

brought about through improvement of natural environment and scenes. Moreover, health 

and environmental benefits can be achieved through improvement of groundwater quality 

and reduction of sickness rate and death rate of the diseases due to groundwater 

pollution. It includes reduced health risks and reduced adverse effects on human health 

and associated loss of working time, medical costs and so on. All of the above will 

contribute to improving the living standards of the local people. 

Pumping of wastewater from all over Khan Younis Governorates to the new KY WWTP 

will make new lands available due after rehabilitation of the lake and Wastewater 

lagoons at Al-Amal and Al-Mawasi areas. The new empty areas can be used, if no 

sanitary and health hazards exist for commercial, agricultural and residential purposes. 

The current locations of the wastewater lagoons prevented the use of private land 

surrounding these lagoons for productive economic activities; agricultural commercial or 

industrial due to the high-risk hazard in these areas. The removal of Al-Mawasi and Al- 

Amal lagoons will lead to a great social and health improvement as this will reduce 

health risks and provide a better and cleaner living environment for people in these area. 

Improvement in the land blocks along the road connecting Khan Younis and the new KY 

WWTP are also true. Moreover, lands around the existing KY WWTP will also increase 

in price and commercial value of lands in Al-Mawasi and Al-Amal due to the removal of 

the wastewater lagoons. 

Under the current economic conditions, recovery of all costs, including capital costs for 

the project and additional sewerage investment is not affordable for average families. 

However the O&M cost during the operation of the project will be affordable as it would 

be within 4% of the average family income even if the current water services cost is 




added. (this is estimated by the Consultant according to the existing tariff of 

water/sewerage in Gaza strip) 

A positive social effect is that the proposed site is far from any neighborhoods and thus 

will cause the least disruption to the quality of life of local residents. 

The produced treated wastewater can be considered as additional water resource and it is 

expected to be used in irrigating specific agricultural crops, which could improve the 

socio-economical situation in the project vicinity. 

The project will encourage the local governments at Al-Fukhari, Abasan, Bani Suhaila 

and Khan Younis to develop infrastructure including roads and lighting around the 

project components. 

Land use and urban planning: 

This section describes the potential land use and urban development impacts associated 

with the construction and operation of Khan Younis wastewater treatment plant KY 

WWTP and infiltration basin in Al Fukhari, land use and urban development are defined 

in the regional and local plans. 

The land use and urban development in the site of the project in both areas, KY WWTP 

location and the infiltration basin in Al Fukhari, would be consistent with the Regional 

Plan goals and objectives and the General Plan adopted by the Ministry of Local 

Government and the municipality to ensure the adequate provision of wastewater 

treatment services. The Project is responding to current and planned development needs 

on wastewater treatment in the Khan Younis governorate. 

This section will also describe the impacts to aesthetic resources that would result due to 

the construction and operation of the project. 

Construction and Operation Phase 

The most significant aspects in the construction phase of Khan Younis KY WWTP and 

the infiltration basin concerning land use and urban development impacts are: 

The surrounding area of KY WWTP is currently designated for agricultural use under the 

Regional Plan and Al Fukhari and Khuza’a General Plans. Polices and Regulations 

applied to the agricultural use focus on developing this sector to contribute to the local 

economy. 

The construction activities will affect the agriculture activities and vegetation 

surrounding the site, which may lead to disturbing the agriculture economy, 

The excavation during the construction of the wastewater treatment plant, will not affect 

the surrounding land because the site is planned for such purpose, while the excavation 

during the construction of the infiltration basin in Al Fukhari will lead to some changes 

of the surrounding land. The land in Al Fukhari site is used for agriculture, so the 

vegetation cover will be lost. 




In addition, the significant impact to aesthetic resources due to the construction and 

operation of the project are: 

The surrounding of the KY WWTP has poor landscape quality, and the visual character 

of the site is not rich. The general view of the site will not be affected seriously due to 

the construction of KY WWTP. 

On the other hand, the site and its surrounding of the infiltration basin in Al Fukhari has 

scenic resources including trees and vegetation cover, and the construction of the 

infiltration basin will damage scenic resources and degrade visual character of the site 

and its surroundings. 

To conclude, there are no land use conflict anticipated, being that the proposed project is 

compatible with the use of Al Fukhari and Khuza'a general plans and the Regional plan 

for Gaza governorates. And the project development has little impact on the visual 

character of the infiltration basin site. 

Cultural heritage: 

This section describes the potential cultural heritage impacts associated with the 

construction and operation of Khan Younis KY WWTP and infiltration basin in Al 

Fukhari. 

The locations of cultural, archeological and historical resources are defined in the local 

and regional plans 

. 

No cultural resources have been identified within the Project area as a result of any 

cultural resource surveys. The closest cultural site is Abasan Mosaic location is 

identified in the Regional plan. The location of the KY WWTP and the infiltration basin 

in Al Fukhari is not in conflict with the historic site. 

In general, excavation and other construction-related activities could cause significant 

impacts to the scientific value of the historical resources, unique archaeological 

resources, or traditional cultural properties that may be in the Project area. But the 

construction of KY WWTP and infiltration basin in Al Fukhari will not cause adverse 

effects to historical resources, including unique archaeological resources. 

To conclude, construction and operation of the KY WWTP and infiltration basin will not 

adversely affect the historic resource located in Abasan. The site has been chosen to 

avoid historic resources defined in the regional plan and the general plans. 

6.4. Biological Impacts 

Flora: 

The biodiversity of the project area is not rich with forest tree species, shrubs and annual 

or seasonal grasses. In the neighboring farms olives, figs, grapes, peaches and apples are 

cultivated. During the construction phase of the treatment plant the plant cover at the site 

will be removed. During the operational phase of the KY WWTP, the discharged 

effluents will be infiltrated to the aquifer and could be used in irrigation of specified 

crops within the area. 




Fauna: 

The fauna in the project area consists of birds, some rodents, and snakes. During the 

construction phase of the KY WWTP, these animals will be disturbed and their habitat 

affected. The physical existence of the plant might scare the birds from nesting around 

the site. 

Effluent of the KY WWTP will have a minor impact on the soil microorganisms, 

particularly beyond the immediate vicinity of the plant. In dry season, the plant effluents 

can become a water source for the wild animals and birds. 

6.5. Trans-boundary impacts 

6.5.1. Potential Impacts on Water Environment 

In order to study the lateral groundwater flow across the Gaza Strip borders, the model 

domain area is divided into 5 different zones as described in figure 6.5. Zone 1 represents 

the water balance outside Khan Younis and Rafah Governorates, while Zone 2 and 3 are 

presenting the water balance in Rafah and Khan Younis Governorate respectively. Zone 

4 presents the water balance around the infiltration basins with 500m radius and Zone 5 

is the Tran boundary zone between the infiltration basins and zone 1. This zone is 500m 

away from the infiltration basins and 2 Km wide. 

Figure 6.5: Water Balance Zone Area Location 

Table 6.4, presents the water volume across zone 5 in both direction. The results shows 

that the natural flow is from east to west and it is keeping its flow until the end of year 

2020, where afterwards (year 2025) the flow direction tries to become from west to the 

east by an amount of about 690 m3/d. This is expected if no action is taken to keep the 

groundwater inside the political border of the Gaza Strip and that by installing recovery 

and/or extraction wells at the upper and downstream of created dome of the infiltrated 

wastewater. 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 110



Table 6.4.: Lateral Groundwater Flow across the Borders of the Infiltration basins 

Time 

(year) 

Design 

flow 

(m 3 /d) 

Zone 

1 to 5 

(m 3 /d) 

Zone 

5 to 1 

(m 3 /d) 

Net flow 

(m 3 /d) 

Yearly 

Net flow 

(MCM) 

Transboundary 

Direction 

2010 19,848 1691.60 000.00 1691.60 617,434 East to West 

2015 31,488 1108.40 000.00 1108.40 404,566 East to West 

2018 38,952 0717.47 000.00 0717.47 261,877 East to West 

2020 46,944 0375.02 006.95 0368.07 134,346 East to West 

2025 66,480 00061.7 750.53 0688.83 251,423 West to East 

6.5.2. Potential Impacts on Ambient Air and Noise 

Trans boundary air pollution has become a global phenomenon with the advancement of 

knowledge concerning source receptor relationship. Atmospheric pollutants may be 

transported over long distances range from few meters to hundreds of meters away from 

their source. They cross-geopolitical boundaries and migrate across several geographic 

zones. Many trans boundary issues trace their origin to releases from specific sources 

impinging directly upon receptors in other jurisdictions. 

Although there exists a large number of bilateral and multilateral treaties, guidance 

documents, and memoranda of understanding on the subject of trans boundary 

environmental governance, there is a distinct paucity of published research in the area of 

trans boundary environmental assessment. Even in those areas where a well-developed 

institutional structure for performing trans boundary environmental assessment exists, 

there appear to be significant international legal obstacles to its implementation. 

Much of the air pollutants in Gaza Strip originate outside its borders especially from 

Israel. This is due to relatively small air pollutants emission compared to the emission 

volume of Israel industry. For example, it was estimated that air pollutants released by 

Israel in 1990 were 525,000 tons of carbon monoxide, 156,000 tons of nitrogen oxide, 

275,000 tons of sulfur oxide and 9.6 million tons of carbon dioxide. These amounts has 

been increased several folds 19 years later. 

For some time environmental assessment has taken place more or less independently 

within Israel and Palestine. The ongoing political conflict, combined with asymmetry in 

Israeli and Palestinian institutional capacities for environmental assessment, has further 

limited the independent integration of data and information by Israeli and Palestinian 

scientists on trans boundary environmental matters. Up to date no genuine assessment of 

trans boundary environmental matters – performed jointly by Israeli and Palestinian 

scientists – has occurred, and any trans boundary environmental assessment, 

cooperatively conducted, is rare. 

KY WWTP air pollution and odor may be transported across the eastern boundaries. At 

the project site, it is concluded that no long-term impacts to air quality are anticipated 

and none of the short-term construction related impacts are expected to cause a tangible 

increase on air pollution of the area. Considering odor, it is concluded that considering 

the characteristics of plant neighborhood the odor produced has negligible negative 

impact. 




6.6. The Impact of the No-Action to the Proposed Project 

Establishment of the KY WWTP will have positive environmental impacts. It is unlikely 

that it will pollute the air, the soil, or contaminate the aquifers in the area. However, if 

the KY WWTP is not established, the wastewater from the septic tanks and the sewerage 

collection system will continue discharging raw sewage into the nature and this will exert 

negative effects on the local environment and continue to create health problems. The No 

Action Alternative would see the continued release of untreated sewage into Khan 

Younis area, exacerbating the deterioration of soil and water quality. This is due to the 

acceleration load of organic and inorganic substances, which are streaming to the sea and 

groundwater with the increasing wastewater flow. The existing living environmental 

problems will become more sever and may inhibit economic and social development of 

the area in the medium and long term: 

• Degradation of the environment and reverse negative developments 

• Depletion of the aquifer 

• Dramatic decrease of both quantity and quality of the groundwater 

• Degradation of the seawater bathing quality and marine biodiversity 

• Degradation of health situation and increase of water related diseases due to poor 

sanitation system. 

6.7. Impact Summery 

Table 6.5 summarize different impact types on the different environmental elements. In 

addition, the table present the characteristic of impacts (adverse or positive impact), the 

magnitude and duration. The analysis show the consequences on the environmental 

elements based on implementation the several project activities. 




Table 6.5.: Impact types on different environmental elements of the project 

Type of 

Impact on 

Impact on Character Magnitude Duration Consequences 

Physical 

Impacts 

Groundwater B+ 

After 15 years of infiltration 

in the area, there will be a 

local aquifer existence with 

an average saturated 

thickness of more than 50m 

and extend in a radius of 

about 4km from the 

infiltration basins. 

Long term during the 

project life 

The project will eliminate the use of cesspits for 

sewage disposal in most areas of Khan Younis. It 

will improve the ground water quality through. 

The infiltrated water will raise the groundwater 

level and decrease the groundwater cone of 

depression. 

The water quality will be improved as well by 

diluting the existing brackish water. The infiltrated 

treated waste water will never reach any adjacent 

municipal well in the area as shown in previous 

figures (indicate their no’s as the figure of no3 

plumes). 

Marine environmental A+ 

About 9,000 m3 of partially 

treated sewage (The existing 

quantity discharged to the 

sea) will be stopped 


project life 

The immediate, and one of the most beneficial 

impacts of the new treatment plant's construction 

will be the cessation of the discharge of untreated 

or partially treated wastewater to the sea and 

Almawasi area. As a result, local environmental 

conditions will be improved which can be 

expected to benefit both the local population and 

local fishery resources. 

A positive impact on bathing water quality and 

tourism. 

Soil B- 

The area of the KY WWTP 

is 116 dunums , and the 

infiltration basin is 97 

dunums 

Long term 

Removal of the top soil in the KY WWTP and 

infiltration sites. Soil will be degraded. 




Type of 

Impact on 


Air quality C- 

The process of KY WWTP 

potential sources of foul 

Odor are the primary 

treatment facilities and 

solids handling facilities. 

The proposed wastewater 

treatment tanks are not 

expected to produce odors. 

There will be fugitive dust 

generated during the site 

preparation and construction 

phases of the Project. 

It is inevitable that some 

noise disturbance will be 

experienced, particularly 

during the construction of 

the emergency sea outfall 

pipe. 

Short term during the 

construction and 


project life 

Temporary impacts on vegetation and the 

surrounding community (dust ) and odor emissions 

Socio- 

Economic 

Impacts 

Land use and urban 

planning 

B+/ C- 

About 97 dunums will be 

changed from agriculture 

purposes to the use as 

infiltration basin. 

Short term, during 

the construction 

period, 

Long term 

There are no land use conflicts anticipated in the 

KY WWTP site, the proposed site is compatible 

with the regional plan and the local plans. 

The project implementation will change partially 

the land use in the infiltration basin location. 

Employment A+ 

More than 290,000 working 

days job opportunities. 

Long term 

This project will generate many job opportunities. 

Accordingly the socio economic situation an the 

living standards within the project vicinity will be 

improved. 




Type of 

Impact on 


Health and safety B+ 

All Khan Younis 

governorate inhabitants will 

be improved. 

Limited number of workers 

(15 -20) could be affected by 

some accidents and injuries 

Long term. Project 

life 

All of the people expected to have better health 

conditions expect limited number of the staff of 

the plant. 

Cultural heritage 

No expected 

Impacts 

The nearest historical site is 

more than 2km far from the 

KY WWTP. 

Long term 

The project implementation will not affect 

adversely the historical sites. 

Flora C- 

The area of the infiltration 

basin and The KY WWTP 

site will be excavated, so 

that the flora will be 

destroyed and the location of 

their habitats 

Short 

the 

period 

term, during 

construction 

The project is determined as low negative impacts 

on flora, and it will avoid the existence of listed 

and endangered species or their habitats. 

Biological 

Impacts 

Fauna C- 


basin and The KY WWTP 


that the fauna will be 

destroyed and the location of 

their habitats 

Short term, during 

the construction 

period, 

long term, 


on fauna, and it will avoid the existence of listed 


The water ponds will attract new birds to the site 

and surroundings, 

Habitats C- 


basin) and the KY WWTP 


that the habitats for flora and 

fauna in the sites will be 

destroyed 

Short 

the 

period 

term, during 

construction 


on flora, and it will avoid the existence of listed 


Planting the KY WWTP will create new habitats 

for fauna. 




Type of 

Impact on 


Transboundary 

Impacts 

Water Environment C+ 

Air Environment C- 

Groundwater model 

indicated that there will be 

no trans-boundary transport 

for any pollutant through 

groundwater due to the 

infiltration at Al Fukhari 

site. 

Increase in groundwater 

storage. 

There will be fugitive dust 

generated during the site 

preparation and construction 

phases of the Project. 

Long term 

3 years during the 


Regional increase in the groundwater level. 

At the project site, it is concluded that no longterm 

impacts to air quality are anticipated and 

none of the short-term construction related impacts 

are expected to cause a tangible increase on air 

pollution of the area. 

Considering odor, it is concluded that considering 

the characteristics of plant neighborhood the odor 

produced has negligible negative impact. 

A: Significant impact could be expected 

B: Less-than significant impact expected 

C: Low impact expected 




7. EVALUATION OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 

7.1. Evaluation Methodology 

The purpose of impact evaluation is to assign relative significance to the predicted 

impacts associated with the project, and thus determine the order in which impacts are 

to be avoided, mitigated or compensated. The following points summarized the main 

objectives of impact evaluation: 

• Distinguish between impacts that are of most concern (need to be avoided, 

mitigated or compensated) and those that are considered to be less important; 

• Organize measures of significance in a way that allows a comparison of alternative 

project proposals; 

• Facilitate the communication of results to the concerned public and to decisionmakers. 

This task cannot be undertaken by a single individual or experts. 

The evaluation process has been carried out in two stages. First, one should predict the 

nature of the impact itself, i.e., its magnitude, and then its relative value to the 

appropriate group. In the first stage, one relies on scientific and/or specialized 

knowledge. In the second stage, one is concerned with the relative values of the society 

or segments of it. This latter stage involves value judgments and is not necessarily based 

on scientific knowledge. However, these values should be based on a survey of 

constituencies in order to determine the preferences of the affected groups. Thus, value 

judgments form an integral part of assigning significance. 

Depending on the particular environmental component, evaluation of the significance of 

predicted impacts can be approached in different ways. For example, changes in air and 

water quality can be assessed against established quality and health standards, whereas 

changes in land use, flora and fauna, or scenic conditions are more difficult to evaluate. 

Key elements for assessing impact significance are: 

• Level of public concern (particularly over health and safety) 

• Scientific and professional judgment 

• Disturbance/disruption of valued ecological systems 

• degree of negative impact on social values and quality of life 

• Public perception versus the scientific/professional opinion of the risks/benefits 

involved 

The Impact rating is calculated as follows: 

Five questions are asked. A YES answer is valued as 1 and a NO answer is valued as 0. 

Calculation of the value (between 0 and 5) is done, which is the sum of YES answers 

among the following 5 questions. This is called the Impact rating. 

Questions that are asked: 

1. Is the aspect associated with any national legislation, regulations, authorizations or 

codes of practice? Or does the identified aspect involve the use of any hazardous, 

restricted or special substance? 




2. Is the aspect of concern to stakeholders? I.e. 

• Employees 

• Neighbors 

• Shareholders 

• Local community 

3. Is the identified aspect or impact clearly associated with any of the more serious 

global environmental issues? 

4. Is the aspect identified is quantifiable, is the amount of use significant? 

5. Is the frequency of use of the identified aspect significant? 

Table 7.1 has been used to evaluate the severity. Severity rating values categorized 

based on experts discussion panel taking in consideration the following aspects: 

• The impact magnitude, 

• The frequency of occurrence impact, 

• Spatial impact extent, and 

• The probability of the impacts 

Table 7.1. Severity Rating Matrix 

Rating 

Severity 

0 No impact 

1 Negligible 

2 Minor (slight or short term) 

3 Moderate 

4 Major (irreversible or long term) 

5 Severe (permanent) 

In the Significance Factor column, multiplying the impact and severity ratings will 

indicate the Significance of the aspect. 

The significance test will generate a result between 0 and 25 for each of the identified 

aspects or impacts tested. Any aspect or impact with a value greater than or equal to 8 is 

‘notable’ and any aspect or impact with a value greater than or equal to 12 is 

‘significant’. Section 7.7 presented the finding of evaluation method applied in this 

study. 

7.2. Physical Environment 

7.2.1. Groundwater 

During operation of the KY WWTP, there is a possibility for pollution of the 

groundwater due to leakages of the system for sewage treatment and effluent 

production, leakages of the system for sludge production, and due to refueling of the 

vehicles and washing of the vehicles at the site. These impacts are assessed as negative 

with very low significance considering that the KY WWTP site is characterized with 

thick clay top layer. 




On the other hand, operation of the KY WWTP will have large positive impact on the 

quality of the groundwater, as there will be no infiltration of wastewater into the 

groundwater by cesspits. 

Mitigation: 

1. The system for the treatment of the wastewater and effluent production should ensure 

minimization of leakages of wastewater to groundwater (connections between pipes 

and tanks should be water-tight); 

2. Refueling of vehicles and equipment on the site shall be strictly controlled; washing 

of vehicles and equipment on the site shall be restricted; 

3. the system for the sludge production should ensure minimization of leakages of 

sludge to groundwater (connections between pipes and tanks should be water-tight); 

4. All requirements for construction of the sludge drying beds, especially for providing 

water impermeable basis, efficient drainage system for leachate and flood protection 

structures must be respected; 

5. To provide water impermeable basis and flood protection structures on the location 

for the temporary disposal of the sludge with dangerous substances and 

measurements of leachate should be taken. 

7.2.2. Seawater and Marine Environment 

In case of emergency where operational difficulties may be experienced, the 

untreated/partially treated wastewater would need to be bypassed directly into the sea. 

This would produce adverse impacts on the seawater quality and fish and other biota 

during the period of the release and for a short period. This is considered a low 

significant impact due to the short time of disposal. 

Mitigation: 

1. Regular testing of the effluent wastewater to ensure better quality. 

2. Installing standby electrical generator in case of energy shortages 

3. Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection dose of the effluent should be increased during 

emergency cases in order to reduce pathogenic bacteria. 

4. Prevent fishing, swimming and recreation around the outfall. The prevented area 

should be identified according to regular testing of effluent and seawater quality. 

5. Maintaining equipment in good operating order. 

7.2.3. Soil 

Vegetation clearance, road construction, excavation works, and pond construction works 

will expose soils in the affected project areas leaving them vulnerable to erosion by 

surface run-off limited quantities of soil will be excavated during the construction phase 

of the treatment plant. If it coincides with the rainy season, this will cause soil erosion at 

the site. Leveling at the plant site can create soil disturbances, erosion problems and 

dusty conditions. 




The reuse of treated wastewater for irrigation will improve the fertility of agricultural 

lands of the area. Nevertheless, when unsatisfactorily treated effluents are released, 

these might contaminate the soils. 

If the grease and sludge are not properly handled and managed, they can contaminate 

the nearby soils and create unsightly conditions. 

Mitigation: 

1. The staff of the plant will be trained for proper management of greases, to avoid soil 

contamination. 

2. Periodic tests will be done to assure the quality of effluent wastewater, to avoid 

partially treated wastewater to reach the soils. 

3. Excavated soil will be utilized for landscaping and then tree planting purposes. 

7.2.4. Aesthetic and Landscape Effect 

The KY WWTP will not have any significant impact on landscape as the plant itself will 

not be visible from any housing units, nor from most of the neighboring areas. 

Mitigation: 

1. Great care have to be given to the sea outfall and the infiltration basins general 

aesthetics and landscaping. 

2. Care have to be given to the KY WWT Plant’s general aesthetics: essentially it will 

be hidden from view by green vegetation, which will be kept neat and clean. 

3. The effluent wastewater of the KY WWTP will be utilized for planting trees at the 

KY WWTP site. 

7.2.5. Air Quality 

• Dust: 

It can be anticipated that a certain amount of air borne particulate matter (dust) will be 

generated by earth moving activities during pond construction and during off loading of 

marl. This situation will be worse during the dry season and during the afternoons when 

the winds are most prevalent. Air borne particulates may pose a hazard to residents in 

the vicinity or downwind of the construction site that suffer from upper respiratory tract 

problems. Otherwise it may only be a nuisance. The impact of dusting is short-term, 

lasting for the duration of the construction activity, but it may be severe if it causes 

significant health problems. 

Mitigation: 

1. Access roads and exposed ground should be regularly wetted in a manner that 

effectively keeps down the dust. 

2. Stockpiles of fine materials should be wetted or covered with tarp (sheet) during 

windy conditions. 




3. Workers on the site should be issued with dust masks during dry and windy 

conditions. 

4. Unnecessary vehicular trips will be controlled. 

• Noise: 

The use of heavy equipment during site clearance and road construction works will 

inevitably generate noise but this should not be of any consequence to adjacent 

communities that are located sufficiently far away as to not be affected. The remoteness 

of the site should help to ameliorate noises. 

Mitigation: 

1. If necessary, local residents should be given notice of intended noisy activities so as 

to reduce degree of annoyances. 

2. Workers operating equipment that generates noise should be equipped with noise 

protection gear. Workers operating equipment generating noise levels greater than 80 

dBA continuously for 8 hours or more should use earmuffs. Workers experiencing 

prolonged noise levels of 70 – 80 dBA should wear earplugs. 

• Odor: 

Wastewater treatment plant carry a risk of odour nuisance if proper buffers between the 

treatment units and existing populations are not provided. 

Whereas one of the main sources causing odor is scum, overloading of the ponds will 

also result in odor problems because the treatment capacity will have been exceeded. 

Wind action on the ponds can also cause odors. Odor is best controlled by proper design 

and the nuisance risk is reduced by proper alignment of the ponds. The size of the ponds 

will result in some degree of wave action. The wind is the effective source of aeration 

through surface mixing, but too much wind action can disturb bottom sediments and 

also create an odor problem. The scum could be treated as a solid waste and could be 

taken to a Sanitary Landfill, after appropriate arrangements are made with the Solid 

Waste management Authority. Alternatively, the scum should be solar dried, stabilized 

and then disposed of or utilized as with the sludge. 

Mitigation: 

1. Ensure appropriate covering/ventilation of the pretreatment unit. 

2. Ensure appropriate handling and removal of grit/grease. 

3. Ensure proper sizing and alignment of the lagoons. 

4. Ensure scum is appropriately disposed of or properly stabilized. 

5. Monitor and ensure that influent sulphate levels (e.g. below 240 mg/l). 

6. Ensure that the pond series have adequate water flow and aeration to reduce the 

potential of odor formation. 

7. The perimeter of the proposed site will be vegetated with trees and plants of varying 

heights thereby forming a windbreaker. 




7.3. Biological Environment 

7.3.1. Loss of natural habitats 

Approximately 20 hectares of land will be cleared of all vegetation. As previously 

discussed, the sections of the site proposed for construction are primarily exposed 

(open) grassland. As a result, there are no significantly important floral species or 

vegetation communities that would be negatively impacted by site clearance and 

construction practices. 

Similarly, negative impacts on avifauna, associated with the loss of onsite 

vegetation/habitat, are expected to be insignificant. As previously mentioned under, 

diverse and abundant avifauna does not use the project site for nesting, breeding or 

feeding. 

Mitigation: 

Tree planting will enhance biodiversity at the site. Trees will attract many bird species 

and other animal species. 

7.3.2. Deterioration of flora and fauna 

No rare, endangered or endemic terrestrial plant or fauna species were observed during 

the site visit and there was nothing untowardly special about the vegetation on the 

project site from either an ecological or commercial point of view. With this in mind, 

the proposed development will not have a significant negative impact on the vegetation 

observed at the site. There are no sensitive, nor any unusual species of fauna or flora in 

the site area; this area is indeed primarily devoted to agriculture. 

In general, the vegetation encountered at the nodes varied from agricultural crops to 

trees to herbs and shrubs and were of no significant importance. Care should be taken in 

assessing the area for pipe laying where large trees are encountered as the extent of their 

root system may pose a problem. In areas where large trees are encountered, the other 

side consisting of herbs and shrubs may prove to be more suitable for clearing. 

Mitigation: 

reduction of the number of trips and working time of vehicles on site and other 

measures will contribute in the mitigation of the impact on the species that are found at 

the vicinity of the plant. 

7.4. Socio-Economic Environment 

7.4.1. Cultural Heritage and archaeological resources 

The nearest historical site is more than 2km far from the KY WWTP. The project 

implementation will not affect adversely the historical sites. However, archaeological 

remains could be discovered during construction activities. 




Mitigation: 

1. Monitoring of site excavations 

2. In case of finding information or signs about archeological sites, the concerned 

agency should be informed. 

7.4.2. Employment Opportunities 

Several categories of employees will be required during the construction phase. This 

will include skilled and unskilled labors, engineers, and a small number of other 

professionals. These levels of short-term employment would have a positive impact on 

the local economy and on regional unemployment. Moreover, the project operation 

will provide employment for several persons. This would represent a positive long-term 

significant impact. 

Mitigation: 

Not required. 

7.4.3. Public Health and Safety 

There is the possibility of mosquito/flies breeding in the open aeration ponds and 

channels of the KY WWTP, which can cause nuisance to the people during the summer 

months. Also possible accidents, drawings and injuries for residents and workers can be 

considered a significant negative impact. 

Occurrence of fire is not possible unless the biogas air release valves at the influent 

pressure line do not function properly and create explosive situations. 

On the other hand, the establishment of a treatment of wastewater will 

minimize/eliminate the spread of water related diseases, prevent risks of contamination 

of the soil and groundwater and contribute in the preservation of the quality of the 

environment. 

Mitigation: 

1. KY WWTP and infiltration ponds fencing is required. 

2. Proper training of workers, and use of proper protective clothing. 

3. A first aid station with trained staff, which is able to coordinate with local hospitals 

in case of emergencies 

4. Fire extinguishing equipment will be installed at the treatment plant. Actually, the 

treated effluents of the plant will be used in case of fire. In addition, chemical fire 

extinguishers will be made available at the project site. 

5. Usually mosquitoes do not travel more than 500m from their breeding sites. This will 

minimize the occurrence of nuisance for the residents. On the other hand, during the 

summer months some bio-enzymes will be used for suppressing the mosquito 

breeding. 

6. The biogas release valves will be checked and maintained periodically. 




7.4.4. Land use planning 

The construction of a wastewater treatment plant will involve building large 

embankment structures on what is a green field site. This will result in a loss of the 

options for alternative land use and thus represents an irreversible commitment of land 

resources. Although the loss of optional uses for the land in the future is considered to 

be a negative impact, in this case the land is marginal in terms of alternative agricultural 

or residential use taking into consideration it is very closed to the eastern border and the 

impact is not considered significant. 

Mitigation: 

Not required. 

7.4.5. Energy consumption 

The incremental demand on electricity for KY WWTP should be within the affordable 

capacity of the local electrical system. The expansion of the electrical system if needed 

should therefore should not cause any supply shortages to local residents. However, this 

increased demand will commensurately increase the electrical utility's use of fossil fuel 

to generate that electricity, and thus the project will indirectly incur minor negative 

impacts associated with greenhouse emissions. 

Mitigation: 

1. Mitigation measures relate to improving energy management and conservation 

practices. 

2. Sub-meters and real-time energy monitoring equipment, timers, photoelectric cells, 

thermostats, etc. should be installed. 

3. Install translucent shades and fluorescent lighting. 

7.5. Construction waste disposal 

Solid waste generated during site preparation and construction work would include cut 

vegetation and typical construction waste (e.g. wasted concrete, steel, wooden 

scaffolding and forms, bags, waste earth materials, etc.). This waste would negatively 

impact the site and surrounding environment if not properly managed and disposed of at 

an approved dumpsite. Cleared vegetation burnt onsite would generate smoke, possibly 

impacting negatively on ambient air quality and human health. Vegetation and solid 

waste, if allowed to accumulate in drainage ways, could cause localized pooling and 

flooding. Pooling of water, in turn, would create conditions conducive to the breeding of 

nuisance and health-threatening pests such as mosquitoes. Poor construction waste 

management constitutes a short-term negative impact. 

Mitigation: 

1. A site waste management plan should be prepared by the contractor prior to 

commencement of construction works. This should include designation of 

appropriate waste storage areas, collection and removal schedule, identification of 

approved disposal site, and a system for supervision and monitoring. 




2. Vegetation and combustible waste must not be burned on the site. 

3. Reusable inorganic waste (e.g. excavated sand/clay) should be stockpiled away from 

drainage features and used for in filling where necessary. 

4. Unusable construction waste, such as damaged pipes, formwork and other 

construction material, must be disposed of at an approved dumpsite. 

7.6. Reuse of treated wastewater and sludge 

The treated wastewater effluent from the KY WWTP is expected to meet the national 

requirements. The KY WWTP improvements have been designed to produce effluent 

quality that would comply with the effluent limits anticipated for crop irrigation. 

Implementation of the Project would result in enabling seasonal irrigation of agricultural 

lands with disinfected treated wastewater. Potential Impact of Sludge and irrigation by 

treated WW can be summarized as follow: 

• Potential pollution of the raw eaten crops 

• Children are often present on the farms and fallen fruit may be picked off the ground 

• labors and farmers at farms that are irrigated by treated wastewater or fertilized by 

sludge may be subjected to some danger pathogens. 

Mitigation: 

1. Specific regulation shall be followed to control the use of treated wastewater in 

irrigation according to the quality of treated wastewater and according to soil 

structure. 

2. No sludge to be used without sufficient treatment 

3. Public awareness program for the neighboring communities should be conducted 

4. Provide workers with appropriate protective clothing including rubber gloves, boots, 

long sleeved shirts and pants. 

5. train workers to wash hands and faces frequently with soap and water and make both 

available 

7.7. Quantitative Summary of Impacts 

The table bellow summarized the different impact types in the constriction and 

operational phases on various environmental elements. 




Table 7.2: Quantitative Summary of Impacts 

Project phase 

Construction 

phase 

Project 

activity 

Excavation 

Aspects or 

impact 

identification 

Dust 

Vehicles 

emissions 

Soil 

disturbance 

Destruction 

of plant cover 

Disposal of 

excavated 

materials 

Noise 

Impact Description 

Contribute to air pollution directly 

and indirectly as synergists or 

carriers of other pollutants. Can 

affect Health and local ecosystem. 

Emissions of VOCs, NOx, SOx, 

CO2 and particulate matter to 

atmosphere and thus contribute to 

air pollution, greenhouse gas 

production and global warming. 

Heavy machinery used will cause 

soil compaction. 

Plant cover present at the site will 

be removed leading to increased 

soil erosion. 

The excavated material will be 

used for landscaping, construction 

and deep rooted tree planting 

Excessive or prolonged exposure 

to noise (typically more than 8 hrs 

above 85-90 decibels) leads to 

hearing loss, which is not the case 

here. This will affect the workers 

on site. 

Impact 

Rating(5) 

4 

4 

2 

1 

2 

3 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

2 

2 

4 

4 

4 

3 

Significance 

Factor (25) 

8 

8 

8 

4 

8 

9 

Mitigation Measures 

Spraying water 

during the excavation 

phase 

Reducing number of 

trips and frequency 

of operation of the 

vehicles 

Limiting the 

excavation area 

Tree planting and 

landscaping will take 

place, which will 

reduce soil erosion. 

Soil/clay reused for 

improving degraded 

agricultural soils. 

Reduction of the 

frequency of noisy 

operation 

Leveling 

Dust 

Contribute to air pollution directly 

and indirectly as synergists or 

carriers of other pollutants. It can 

2 

1 

2 

Spraying water while 

working 




Project phase 

Project 

activity 

Concrete 

work 

Electromechanical 

work 

Aspects or 

impact 


Vehicle 

semissions 

Soil 

disturbance 

Solid waste 

disposal 

Workers' 

safety 

Noise 

Energy 

consumption 


affect health and local ecosystem. 

Emissions of VOCs, NOx, SOx, 

CO2 and particulate matter to 

atmosphere and thus contribute to 

air pollution, greenhouse gas 


Heavy machinery used will cause 

soil compaction. 

Concrete waste, carton, bags, 

wood, trees…etc. 

Risk of accidents and injuries 

Excessive or prolonged exposure 

to noise (typically more than 8 hrs 

above 85-90 decibels) leads to 

hearing loss, which is not the case 

here. This will affect the workers 

on site. 

Combustion of fuel leads to 

emissions of VOCs, NOx, SOx, 

CO2 and thus air pollution, 

acidification, greenhouse gas 


Impact 

Rating(5) 

3 

1 

3 

1 

3 

4 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

1 

1 

4 

4 

2 

4 

Significance 

Factor (25) 

3 

1 

12 

4 

6 

16 


Reducing number of 

trips, and frequency 

of operation of the 

vehicles 

Limit leveling area. 

All waste amterial 

sould be transferred 

to approved dump 

site. 

Follow safty 

instructions, workers 

should wear proper 

clothing 

Reduction of the 

frequency of noisy 

operation 

Regular testing of the 

air quality, due to 

different kinds of 

emmisions 

Solid waste 

disposal 

Carton boxes, bags, metal, 

wood…etc. 

3 

4 

12 

All waste material 

sould be transferred 




Project phase 

Operation 

Phase 

Project 

activity 

Removal and 

Disposal of 

grit and 

Floating 

material 

Aspects or 

impact 


Noise 

Soil and 

water 

pollution 

Workers' 

Health 


Excess noise at the construction 

site cause disturbance on the 

wildlife 

Risk of soil and water pollution 

from trapped grease and oil, when 

these are piled openly. 

Risk of injury or transmission of 

disease to workers removing the 

grease and sand from the grease 

trap. 

Impact 

Rating(5) 

1 

3 

2 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

2 

4 

4 

Significance 

Factor (25) 

2 

12 

8 


to approved dump 

site. 

Minimize the 

unnecessary use of 

vehicles and 

equipment. 

Regular cleaning and 

proper storage in 

barrels and its 

disposal with 

municipal solid 

waste 

Proper training of 

workers, and use of 

proper storage tanks 

and protective 

clothing 

Operation of 

Biological 

Unit 

Soil and 

Water 

Pollution 

Risk of soil and water pollution 

from trapped grease and oil, when 

these are piled openly. 

- Regular lab test to 

assure proper 

performance of the 

plant 

- Avoidance of 

accidental runoff 

water intrusion from 

the manholes of 

network 

- Awareness for 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 128 

2 

3 

6 

reducing the amounts 

of using oil and



Project phase 

Project 

activity 

Aspects or 

impact 



Impact 

Rating(5) 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

Significance 

Factor (25) 


grease. 

Energy 

consumptions 

Risk of the expansion of 

electricity, it should be within the 

affordable capacity of the system. 

4 

4 

16 

- Installation of 

energy monitoring 

equipments 

- Improving energy 

management and 

conservation 

practices. 

Effluent 

discharge to 

infiltration 

basin 

Mist 

emissions 

Workers' 

Health 

Soil pollution 

water 

pollution 

Risk for pathogenic/ diseases 

transport 



grease and sand from the grease 

trap. 

Below standard treatment leads 

into soil resources contamination 

- Below standard treatment leads 

into water resources contamination 

2 

4 

2 

4 

3 

2 

3 

4 

6 

8 

6 

16 

Planting trees, 

around the treatment 

plant. 





clothing 


effluent wastewater 

to ensure better 

quality 




quality 

Nuisance 

Risk of fly/mosquito breeding in 

the open ponds and drying beds 

that can cause nuisance to the 

2 

5 


Monitor the 

proliferation of 

fly/mosquito 




Project phase 

Project 

activity 

Aspects or 

impact 


inhabitants. 


Impact 

Rating(5) 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

Significance 

Factor (25) 


populations and use 

ecoenzymes/ BT for 

controlling them. 

Addition of 

chemicals like 

Calsuim hypochlorite 

or chlorine 

Health and 

safety 



sand/sludge from the infiltration 

basins 

2 

4 

8 





clothing 

Emergency Seawater If the final effluent contains certain 4 

2 

8 Regular testing of the 

discharge to quality bacteria like salmonella, it poses a 


the sea 

risk to contaminate the receiving 


stream and the food chain. 

quality. 

Installing standby 

electrical generator 

in case of energy 

shortages 

UV disinfection dose 

of the effluent could 

be increase during 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 

emergency cases in 

130 

order to reduce 

pathogenic bacteria 

maintainng



Project phase 

Project 

activity 

Aspects or 

impact 



Impact 

Rating(5) 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

Significance 

Factor (25) 


operating order 

Sludge 

removal and 

treatment 

Marine 

ecology 

Aesthetic 

Odor 

Soil and land 

contaminatio 

n 

Risk of the discharge of waste to 

the sea, 


the sea 


into soil and water resources 

contamination 

2 

1 

3 

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

4 

3 

9 

9 

-Stop swimming and 

fishing in the area of 

discharge. 

-Monitoring to the 

sea water quality 

-Increase the 

disinfection dose 

Consider propriate 

landscape design to 

the sea outfall 

Regular monitoring 

is to be followed for 

emissions resulted 

from sludge removal. 

Specific regulation 

shall be followed to 

control odor, 

- Specific regulation 


control safe disposal 

or use of treated 

sludge in agricultural 

purposes. 

Ground 

Water 

Pollution 



contamination 

4 

2 

8 

- Specific regulation 


control safe disposal 




Project phase 

Project 

activity 

Aspects or 

impact 



Impact 

Rating(5) 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

Significance 

Factor (25) 


or use of treated 

sludge in agricultural 

purposes. 

Wastewater and 

sludge reuse 

Soil Pollution 



contamination 

3 

4 

12 



control the use of 

treated wastewater in 

irrigation. 

Wastewater 

Reuse 

Water 

Pollution 

Agriculture 

Crops 



contamination 


into crops'/yields' 

contamination 

4 

3 

3 

4 

12 

12 





irrigation. 





irrigation. 

Health 

Risk of transmission of disease to 

farmers reusing treated wastewater 

for irrigation. 

2 

4 

8 

Advise the farmers 

not to plant 

vegetables that can 

be consumed in raw 

state. 

Sludge Reuse 

Soil Pollution 



3 

4 

12 

No sludge to be used 

without sufficient 




Project phase 

Project 

activity 

Aspects or 

impact 


contamination 


Impact 

Rating(5) 

Severity 

Rating(5) 

Significance 

Factor (25) 


treatment 

Water 

Pollution 

Agriculture 

Crops 

Health 

Marine 

ecology 

Aesthetic 



contamination 

Risk of contaminant of agriculture 

crops 

Risk of transmission of disease to 

farmers reusing treated wastewater 

for irrigation. 


the sea, 


the sea 

4 

3 

2 

2 

1 

4 

3 

3 

2 

3 

16 

9 

6 

4 

3 



treatment 



treatment 

Advise the farmers 

not to 

plant vegetables that 

can be consumed in 

raw state. 

-Stop swimming and 

fishing in the area of 

discharge. 

-Monitoring to the 

sea water quality 

-Increase the 

disinfection dose 

Consider appropriate 

landscape design to 

the sea outfall 




8. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 

Environmental management/monitoring is essential for ensuring that identified 

impacts are maintained within the allowable levels, negative impacts are mitigated at 

an early stage (before they become a problem), and the expected project benefits are 

realized. Thus, the aim of an EMP is to assist in the systematic and prompt recognition 

of problems and the effective actions to correct them, and ultimately good 

environmental performance is achieved. A good understanding of environmental 

priorities and policies, proper management of the facility, knowledge of regulatory 

requirements and keeping up-to-date operational information are basic to good 

environmental performance. 

The EMP will help the Executing Agency and the concerned authorities to address the 

adverse environmental impact of the project, enhance project benefits, and introduce 

standards of good environmental practice. 

The primary objectives of the EMP are to: 

i. Define the responsibilities of project proponents, contractors and other role 

players, and effectively communicate environmental issues among them; 

ii. facilitate the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIA by 

providing the technical details of each project impact, and providing an 

implementation schedule; 

iii. define a monitoring mechanism and identify monitoring parameters to ensure that 

all mitigation measures are completely and effectively implemented; and 

iv. identify training requirements at various levels and provide a plan for 

implementation. 

The social and environmental issues associated with this project include: 

1) Permanent acquisition about 21 hectares land for construction of the proposed KY 

WWTP and the infiltration basins. 

2) Appropriately locating temporary construction camps, asphalt plants, and waste 

disposal sites, and the environmental impact of operating these facilities. 

3) Regulating the procurement of borrow material, soil erosion during construction as 

well as in operation stage. 

4) Enhancing and maintaining avenue tree plantation along the outer boundary of the 

proposed site. 

5) Minimizing the impact on cultural sites or structures and community-owned assets 

during construction and operation. 

6) Ensuring traffic safety during construction and operation. 

7) Ensuring adequate methods of treated WW and sludge disposal. 




8.1. Summary of Potential Environmental Impacts and Mitigation measures 

As the KY WWTP site consists of barren land and no human settlements located at 

the site therefore, no potential environment impacts are expected during preconstruction 

phase. 

Potential environmental impacts likely to occur during construction phase are (i) 

nuisance to people in surrounding of site due to dust /noise /smoke generated by the 

movement of vehicles /machinery which will be mitigated by regular air testing, 

vehicle noise and smoke tests; (ii) pollution due to waste water and solid waste from 

the contractor’s camp which will be mitigated by providing adequate arrangement for 

the safe disposal of wastewater and solid waste; (iii) health and safety of workers at 

contractor’s camp which will be mitigated by proper training of contractor’s crew 

about First Aid and Health & Safety procedures; and (iv) accident hazards for people 

and livestock at borrow pit areas, which will be mitigated regulating the procurement 

of the borrow material. 

During operation and maintenance phase, potential environment impacts are related to 

(i) sludge disposal which could cause environmental pollution, odor from anaerobic 

conditions, vegetation problems, clogging of structures and piping, and groundwater 

pollution through leachate. This will be mitigated by its safe disposal for agricultural 

reuse and/or sanitary land filling based on the sludge sampling and testing that will 

show whether dried material fulfills agricultural reuse requirements. In this 

connection, the sludge will be transferred to the sludge drying beds which will be 

developed in the KY WWTP, with proper drainage provision. After drying, the treated 

sludge will be tested and based on its suitability for agricultural use; it could be sold 

out to the farmers/agriculturists. However, if the toxic materials are found in the 

sludge, the operator will carry out its safe underground disposal; and (ii) chance of 

accident at KY WWTP or health problem of operator staff and labor working at KY 

WWTP. To mitigate this impact, construction labor and staff will be trained on the 

handling/storage of material and the use of chemicals. 

8.2. Recommended Monitoring Plan 

Environmental monitoring is the timely and proper survey of the significant 

environmental impacts of a project during all project phases. Monitoring results help 

judge the success of mitigation measures in protecting the environment. They are also 

used to ensure compliance with environmental standards, and to identify necessary 

changes in the project design or operation. 

The Environmental Monitoring plan sets out a framework for monitoring the 

environmental situation at all project sites. In order to ensure that the reality complies 

with the demands of the EMP environmental, monitoring should be carried out 

concerning the following aspects: 

1. Groundwater monitoring 

2. Effluent Monitoring 

3. Seawater Monitoring (In outlet Point) 




4. Ambient Air Emission Monitoring 

5. Solid and Hazardous waste Monitoring 

6. Noise Level Monitoring 

7. Traffic Monitoring 

A monitoring program has been prepared for the project. This program provides 

details regarding monitoring parameters, monitoring location, number of tests/ 

samples, method/equipment for testing, frequency and responsibility for 

monitoring and preliminary costs. Environmental Monitoring Reports will be 

prepared on monthly basis and complete record will be maintained at the site 

office. The environmental monitoring reports will be submitted to Environment 

Quality Authority (EQA) on quarterly basis. 

Table 8.1outlines the monitoring protocols, parameters and frequencies required to be 

observed during the construction and operation of the KY WWTP project. 




Table 8.1: Proposed Environmental Monitoring Program 

No. Monitoring 

parameter 

Monitoring location 

A. Construction Stage 

1 Dust - Construction Site 

- Contractor's Camp Site, 

- Nearest settlements outside 

the site boundary 

2 Noise a) Ambient 

- Construction Site 

- Nearest Settlements outside 

the site boundary 

b) At Source 

- Vehicle/ Equipment 

3 Vehicular 

Vehicles at the Construction 

Emissions 

Site 

- Smoke 

- CO 

B. Operation Stage 

4 Gaseous Emissions At the KY WWTP site 

Ambient Air 

- CH4 

- CO 

- NH3 

- H2S 

5 Groundwater 

Contamination 

- Water Level 

- pH 

- EC 

- Major anions 

- Major cations 

- From existing Boreholes 

around the Site 

- From proposed monitoring 

wells 

No. of 

samples 

1 

1 

4 

1 

3 

3 

3 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

6 

Method/ equipment 

Visually 

Visually 

Particulate Matter 

Measurement (PM 10) 

Noise meter 

Gas analyzer/ detector 

Gas Analyzer/ Manual 

Observation 

From outsource 

Laboratory 

Standards/ 

guidelines 

150 µg/m3 

Frequency 

Daily 

Daily 

Quarterly 

Responsibility 

PU 

National 

standards 

Annex 1 Weekly PU 

National 

standards 

Annex 1 Monthly PU 

National 

standards 

Annex 1 

Values 

observed at the 

start of the filling 

operation shall be 

taken as 

reference and 

compared 

Weekly 

Twice in year 

For heavy 

metals one a 

year 

Operator (CMWU), 

PWA, EQA 


PWA, EQA 




No. Monitoring 

parameter 

- Detergents 

- Heavy Metals 

(Arsenic, Barium, 

Cadmium, Lead, 

Mercury, Nickel 

- Fecal coliform 

6 Treated effluent 

- pH 

- BOD5 

- COD 

- No3 

- NH3/ NH4 

- Oil & Grease 

- TSS 

- TDS 

- Cl 

- Mg 

- SO4 

- SO3 

- heavy metals 

- Nematode egg 

- Fecal Coliform 

7 Treated Sludge 

- Nematode egg 

- Coliform 

- Arsenic 

- Cadmium 

- Chromium 

- Lead 

Monitoring location 

At the KY WWTP site 

At the infiltration site 

At the sea outfall* 

No. of 

samples 

Method/ equipment 

2 From outsource 

Laboratory 

At the KY WWTP site 1 From outsource 

Laboratory 

Standards/ 

guidelines 

with national 

standards 

Annex 1 

Design criteria 

Design criteria 

national 

standards (Annex 

1) 

1 egg/100gm 

1 MPN/100 ml 

1 mg/kg 

20 mg/kg 

1000 mg/kg 

750 mg/kg 

Frequency 

Monthly 

For heavy 

metals one a 

year 

Every Batch 

Responsibility 


PWA, EQA 


PWA, EQA 



Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant December 2009 

Groundwater observation points: 

The effect of the infiltration of the treated wastewater should be subject to thorough monitoring 

for both water level and water quality in the aquifer. In order to make a suitable selection of the 

number and location of the observation points, the following selection criteria are used: 

1. The geographical distribution in relation to hydraulic stresses (the center and the extent of the 

water level mound). 

2. The half-life time of pathogenic bacteria. 

3. The extent and the variation of contaminant plume. 

500m 

350m 

200m 

Ground Water 

Monitoring Well 

Infiltration 

Basins 

200m 

Figure 8.1: The Proposed Location of the Monitoring Wells 

At the infiltration site, the observation points have to cover the deep part of the aquifer and the 

zone between the water table before infiltration and the water table after infiltration. Location of 

observation wells is shown in figure 8.1. 

At the North-West of the infiltration site 3 lines of observation wells should be considered: 

1. The line comprises of three observation wells located at 200 m radius from the Mid-Edge of 

infiltration basin for pathogens detection. 

2. The second line comprises of two wells located at 350 m radius from the edge of infiltration 

basin. 

3. In addition to that one observation well should be located at 500 m distance from the edge of 

infiltration basins. 




4. Two other wells should be located at the upper stream of the infiltration basins at a distance of 

200 m 

8.3. Responsibilities for Mitigation and Monitoring 

The Executing Agency of the Project construction is the UNDP/PAPP and will be implemented 

by UNDP/PAPP through the Direct Execution (DEX) Modality. The executing agency may 

establish a Project Unit (PU) for following up the project implementation. The project will be 

implemented by the Project Unit, which will be overseen by a Project Steering Committee 

(PSC). Project Unit headed by Project Director/Manager, comprises the professional staff and 

supported by a team of consultants. It shall be responsible for overall co-ordination, planning, 

implementation and management of Project activities. CMWU will be the operator of the project 

assisted by consultants and contractors whenever needed. 

Project Steering Committee (PSC) 

(Representatives from relevant institutions, PWA, , EQA, MOH, MOA, MOL, MOTA, LA Khan younis Municipality) 

Consultant 


(PU)(Project 

Implementation Unit) 

PWA 

(Regulator- owner) 

Construction Phase 

Consultants 

(-Construction 

management- 

Construction quality 

Control 

- Conduct capacity 

Building) 

Contractor 

(Construct the 

KY WWTP 

component) 

Consultant 

(- Assist in 

environmental 

monitoring, testing, 

and quality 

assurance 

- Conduct capacity 

building) 

CMWU (Operator) 

Operation Phase 

Contractor 

(responsible for 

operation, 

maintenance, 

monitoring, and 

quality control) 

Figure 8.2: Institutional Setup Frame Work 

The specific roles and responsibilities of different institutions/ agencies for implementation and 

monitoring of environmental mitigation measures in the construction and operation stages for the 

proposed KY WWTP are described hereunder: 




8.3.1. Implementation of environmental mitigation measures 

I- Pre-construction Stage: 

Municipality of Khan Younis owned land of 11.6 hectares allocated to the Project for 

construction of the proposed KY WWTP. All the land allocated for construction of the proposed 

KY WWTP belongs to the Municipality of Khan Younis which has to be registered officially for 

Khan Younis Governorate Wastewater Treatment Plant. The KY WWTP site is barren and no 

human settlements exist on the municipality owned site. Accordingly, no land acquisition or 

resettlement plan is required at the KY WWTP site. 

On the other hand, about 9.4 hectares should be allocated for the infiltration basins at Al Fukhari 

area. The proposed land is a private ownership for one person and it is currently used by framers 

for vegetable cultivation. Private land acquisition is involved in this project; accordingly the 

Authority should compensate the owner and the framers and may be a resettlement plan is 

required 

II- Construction stage: 

The project will be executed through private contractors who will be responsible for 

implementation of environmental mitigation measures during the construction stage, while PU 

with the assistance of Environmental Consultant will supervise and monitor compliance of all 


The project site has no settlements located inside it. Site is clear of any encumbrances. All the 

material will be mobilized through the existing roads and proposed access roads will be reconstructed 

by the contractor. 

Topsoil Conservation: 

The Contractor will be responsible for regulating the procurement of borrow material and 

protecting topsoil from erosion by complying with the following measures in general and may be 

specified for different project components in bill of quantities and the tender specifications: 

1. The excavation of earth fill (if required) will be limited to an approximate depth of 50 cm. 

2. Where deep ditching is to be carried out, the top 1 m layer of the ditching area will be stripped 

and stockpiled. The ditch will initially be filled with scrap material from construction and then 

leveled with the stockpiled topsoil. 

3. Excavated earthwork will be utilized for embankment and construction of access roads. 

4. Project site will be landscaped to avoid creating hazards for people and livestock. 

Management of Project Facilities: 

The contractor will be responsible for managing the operation of the construction campsite so as 

to minimize the impact of construction activities on ambient air; ensure adequate provisions for 

waste disposal, and protect the health and safety of construction workers: 

The impact of construction activities on ambient air will be minimized by: 




1. Where dust generation is high, surface treating or overlaying diversion tracks with shingle; 

where necessary, and subject to the availability of water, sprinkling water across diversion 

tracks at least twice a day. 

2. Ensuring that haul-trucks carrying asphalt-concrete mix and/or aggregate fill materials are 

kept covered with tarpaulin to help contain construction material being transported between 

sites. 

3. Enforcing the applicable standards to gaseous emissions generated by construction vehicles, 

equipment, and machinery. 

The contractor will carry out the following activities to manage the disposal of construction 

waste: 

1. Wastewater effluent from contractors’ workshops and equipment washing yards will be 

passed through gravel/sand beds to remove oil/grease contaminants before discharging it. 

2. Construction workforces will be trained in the storage and handling of materials and 

chemicals that can potentially cause soil contamination. 

3. Solid waste generated during construction and at campsites will be properly treated and safely 

disposed of only in demarcated waste disposal sites approved by the supervision consultant. 

The Contractor will be required to adopt good engineering practices to minimize safety and 

health hazards among its workers as well as the local population. Mitigation measures will 

include the following: 

1. Complying with safety precautions for construction workers as per the Labor Law. 

2. Training of workers in construction safety procedures, equipping all construction workers 

with hard boots, helmets, gloves, and protective masks, and monitoring their proper and 

sustained usage. 

Protection of Cultural and Community-Owned Assets 

The key issues that will arise during the construction phase in this regard include the impact of 

construction activities on local community resources, the impact of noise generated by 

construction machinery, and any chance discovery of historical importance. The Contractor will 

carry out the following activities to mitigate these impacts: 

1. Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours in reaches along densely populated 

areas, to minimize the impact of noise generated by construction machinery. 

2. Guidelines will be established to minimize the wastage of water during construction 

operations and at camp sites. 

3. The Contractor will be required to maintain close liaison with local communities to ensure 

that conflicts, if any, related to the utilization of water for project purposes are resolved 

quickly. 

4. Construction camp staff will be trained to identify and report possible archaeological 

discoveries to the contractor. 

5. Any discovery of archaeological artifacts will be reported to the Ministry of Archaeology and 

Tourism. 

Pedestrian and Traffic Safety 




The Contractor will carry out the following activities to ensure pedestrian and traffic safety 

during construction: 

1. All necessary measures will be taken to ensure the safety of traffic during construction, 

including barricades (including signs, pavement markings, flags, and lights) erected. 

2. Construction vehicles, machinery and equipment will remain confined within their designated 

areas of movement. 

3. The Contractor will be required to ensure that construction work does not hinder local 

people’s access to the main streets. 

4. Constructing temporary ramps and diversion routes will facilitate pedestrians and livestock 

when crossing the highway. 

III- Operation and Maintenance Stage: 

Upon completion of the project, CMWU will operate and run the system and will also be 

responsible for implementation and monitoring of environmental mitigation measures during the 

operation stage. Treated effluent will be disposed in Al Fukhari infiltration basins and could be 

used for agricultural irrigation purposes. 

The overall potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures and institutional 

responsibilities are summarized in table 8.2. 




Table 8.2: Potential impacts, mitigation measures and institutional responsibilities 

Project Stage Project Activity Potential Environmental 

Impacts 

Pre-construction 

stage 

Land 

Acquisition 

And 

resettlement 

Private land acquisition is 

involved in this project; 

about 9.5 hectares are 

required for the infiltration 

basins. 

Proposed Mitigation 

Measures 

KY WWTP will be 

constructed on state 

owned land so no 

Compensation of 

land is required. 

The Authority should 

compensate the owner and 

the framers at the infiltration 

basins and may be a 

resettlement plan is required. 

Institutional 

Responsibilities 

LA, PWA, 

MOLG, MOF 

and Khan 

Younis 

Municipality 

Construction 

stage 

Movement of 

Vehicles / 

Machinery 

Nuisance to people in 

surrounding of site due to 

Dust / Noise / Smoke. 

- Regular Air Testing 

-Vehicle Noise & Smoke 

Tests. 

PU 

Contractor’s 

Camp 

Pollution due to 

Wastewater and Solid 

Waste. 

- Safe disposal of 

wastewater and solid waste. 

Contractor/ PU 

Contractor’s 

Camp 

Health & safety of workers 

can be affected. 

-Training of Contractor’s 

crew about First Aid and 

Health & Safety procedures. 

PU 

Operation / 

maintenance stage 

Borrow pits 

Treated effluent 

and Sludge 

disposal 

Accident hazards for people 

and livestock. 

-Environmental pollution 

- Odor emission 

- Mosquitoes 

- Vegetation problems 

- Clogged structures and 

piping. 

-Regulating the procurement 

of the borrow material. 

- Adequate monitoring. 

Contractor/ PU 

Operator 

(CMWU), 

PWA, EQA 

Working of 

operator’s Staff 

& labor on KY 

WWTP Site 

Any chance of accident at 

KY WWTP or health 

problem of workers. 

- Construction force will be 

trained on the project of 

storage, handling and 

material and use of 

chemicals. 

Operator 

(CMWU), 

PWA, EQA 

8.3.2. Environmental Monitoring 

The environmental monitoring plan to be enforced during construction will be implemented by 

PU with possible assistance of Consultants. The PU staff will be trained by the Consultants to 

perform the environmental monitoring functions during the operation stage. Consultant/Resident 

Engineer are being engaged to train PU Staff during construction and meantime period. EQA 

may externally monitor various project related activities in order to ensure that the project 

operations are in compliance with the requirements of applicable National Environmental 

Legislation. 




8.4. Institutional Development and Environmental Training 

PU and CMWU staff does not currently have sufficient experience and capability for dealing 

either with implementation of environmental mitigation measures or monitoring of various 

environmental quality parameters. Hence they will require training and expertise assistance to 

perform the environmental management and monitoring and to implement the environmental 

monitoring plan. The environment specialist (consultant) will train the staff regarding record 

keeping procedures, sampling, testing, analysis and use of environmental monitoring 

equipments. They will also be briefed about prevailing environmental legislation and standards. 

The proposed training program for different staff with their field of training is given in table 8.3 

in addition to on-the-job training by the environmental consultants. 

Table 8.3: Proposed Training Program/Plan 

Sr. 

No. 

1 

2 

Persons to be 

Trained 

Top Management of 

PU 

Environmental 

monitoring Staff 

Duration Subject/Course Trainer 

5 days/Year 

8 days/ year 

3 Construction Staff 6 days/ year 

4 

Operation and 

Maintenance 

Staff 

6 days/ year 

5 Laboratory Staff 8 days/ year 

-Awareness about Environmental 

Management. 

-Legal requirements 

- National environmental standards. 

-Awareness about Environmental 

Management. 

-Environmental Aspects 


- Legal requirements and its 

application to environmental 

aspects. 

- Operational control of KY 

WWTP. 

- Environment Monitoring. 

- National environmental standards. 

- Occupational Health & Safety 

- Emergency preparedness 

- Awareness about Environmental 

Management 

- Work instructions for 

Maintenance & operation of KY 

WWTP. 

-Occupational Health & Safety 

-Sampling and analytical 

Procedures. 

-Handling and storage of chemicals. 

Environmental 

consultant 

Environmental 

consultant 

Environmental 

consultant 

Environmental 

consultant 

Environmental 

consultant 




8.5. Public Consultation 

Local community perception with regard to the implementation of the project components is 

carried out in Khan younis governorate. This gave the perception of the general public about this 

project which gave an overall positive results (Annex 2). 

The results of public hearing/consultation (Annex 3) conducted in the area showed a strong 

agreement among the attendees (official stakeholders representatives, general public, local 

community leaders including members of NGO’s, women groups) that this project will improve 

their overall health and hygiene conditions and reduce risk of spread of water born diseases. 

However, they had the impression that may be some adverse impacts on different environmental 

parameters during construction and operation stages of the project. Table 8.4 shows the proposed 

public consultation schedule at various phases of the Project. 

During construction and operation of the project, public consultation is planned as follows: 

1. Suggestions of the general public may be sought through press or other mass media whenever 

deemed necessary. 

2. Local NGOs, particularly working in the sector of environmental sanitation, will actively be 

involved in public representation. 

3. Citizen Community Board (CCB) of the concerned municipal councils will frequently be 

contacted on matters concerning the progress, adverse impacts and mitigation measures. 




Table 8.4: Public Consultation Schedule at Various Phases 

Project Stage Stake- Holders Type of 

Consultation 

Preconstruction 

Public 

Meetings/ 

Representatives, Structured 

stage 

NGOs, 

Interviews 

Residents of the 

City 

Topics of Consultation 

Problem areas in sewerage 

system, existing waste 

water disposal facilities, 

demand and supply 

situation, operation and 

maintenance efficiency 

and design requirements of 

KY WWTP, etc. , impacts 

and measures to overcome 

these impacts. 

Frequency of 

Consultation 

Once at the end of 

final detailed design 

stage. 

Affected Persons, 

Residents of 

Nearby 

Villages 

Meetings/ 

Structured 

Interviews 

People’s perception about 

the wastewater disposal, 

nature and extent of 

wastewater’s effects on 

their lives, livelihood, 

environment, etc.; and 

measures to minimize 

these effects. 

Once before 

undertaking the 

implementation of 

KY WWTP. Several 

residents were 

interviewed. Treated 

waste water is 

acceptable for 

agricultural purposes. 

There will not be 

contamination of 

ground water, Water 

borne diseases will 

decrease. 

Construction 

stage 

Operation / 

maintenance 

stage 

Public 

Representatives/ 

officials/ Affected 

Persons 

Officials/ 

Representatives of 

NGOs 

Formal Meetings 

Formal Meetings 

Disturbance to the people 

living and working around 

KY WWTP site, measures 

to minimize the 

disturbance, environmental 

nuisance, 

public safety measures, 

etc. 

Evaluation of disposal 

methods, environmental 

hazards, mitigation 

measures, involvement of 

NGOs, public safety 

measures, etc. 

Every two months 

during the 


Quarterly meetings 

during the O&M 

phase. 




8.6. EMP Cost Estimate and Schedule 

The cost of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) is divided into several parts to reflect 

the different phases of the project and the requirements of each phase. 

Table 8.5 lists the main components of EMP and the related estimated costs. The cost of EMP 

includes the costs of the capacity building, public consultation and the quality control 

requirements for the construction period (2 years) and 5 years of operation. Other items of 

mitigation measure, which are not listed in the table, shall be considered in the contractors' 

contracts. 

Table 8.5: Estimated cost of implementing the EMP. 

Item Unit Quantity Unit cost $US Construction 

phase US$ 

Environmental consultant 

to be hired for training: 

-Top management staff. 

- Project management staff 

- Construction staff 

- Operation and 

maintenance staff 

- Laboratory staff. 

Local Environmental 

specialist is to be hired to 

ensure compliance with the 

environmental management 

plan 

Quality test for influent / 

effluent and aquifer 

monitoring 

Operatio 

n phase 

US$ 

days 30 300 3,000 6,000 

yearly 7 4000 8,000 20,000 

Yearly 5 50,000 250,000 

Construction of wells 7 wells 7 6,000 42,000 

Environmental auditing, yearly 4 4,000 16,000 

Public consultation workshop 6 1,000 2,000 4,000 

Air quality monitoring Yearly 7 3,000 6,000 15,000 

(noise, odor, dust) 

Miscellaneous yearly 7 4,000 8,000 20,000 

Sub-total 69,000 331,000 

Total 400,000 

A schedule for the implementation of the various activities of the Environmental Management 

Plan is prepared and shows the duration of the activities and timing of the proposed periodic 

assessments as shown in Table 8.6. 




Table 8.6: Proposed implementation schedule of EMP. 

Item 

Pre-construction/ 

construction phase 

5 years of the operation phase 

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 

Meeting with public 

X 

representatives 

Meeting with affected persons X 

2 meetings with public 

representatives 

X X 

2 meetings with officials X X 

Top management staff 

X 

Environmental Monitoring X 

staff 

Construction staff 

X 

Operation and maintenance 

X 

staff 

Laboratory staff 

X 

Ensuring compliance with EMP X X X X X X X 

Environmental auditing X X X X 

Air quality monitoring X X X X X X X 

Water quality monitoring X X X X X 

Public 

consultation 

Capacity 

building 




9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

9.1. Conclusions 

Through the full assessment and evaluation of all environmental concerns of KY WWTP project 

it can concluded that the establishment of the KY WWTP in Al-Fukhari area will bring a net 

ecological, economic, social and health benefits for the Khan Younis governorate and its 

inhabitants. It will achieve at least a secondary level treatment for the wastewater generated at 

household level. On the other hand, some of the project components are envisaged to have a 

temporary or short term negative impacts depending on the different phases and components of 

the project. These impacts were discussed in great details in this report. Some of the 

environmental issues of special concern are summarized below. 

Water resources and water quality: during all phases, the project will have positive impacts on 

the water balance in the aquifer as it will contribute 9 to 15 MCM of reusable water per year to 

the aquifer recharge in phase 1 and phase 2 respectively. Regarding groundwater quality, the 

infiltrated water has chloride concentration of drinking water (



Socio-economic: The construction phase will have positive effects on employment. During the 

construction phase, services of local subcontractors will be used which will generate job 

opportunities for skilled and unskilled workers in addition to professional services of engineers 

and others. Transferring treated wastewater for the KY WWTP will provide additional land at 

AL Mawasi area due to the removal of the existing wastewater collection ponds. This land must 

be tested for contaminants, and then rehabilitated. The construction work will have positive 

economic effect through employment generation and use of Palestinian contractors for 

construction activities. The construction of the project especially at Al Fukhari infiltration site 

will cause some discomfort to the families around the site. Odor and mosquitoes can be a 

problem if not properly mitigated for. 

9.2. Recommendations 

In order to alleviate the expected negative impacts and to make the project environmentally 

sounder, an EMP was prepared, and it includes: the mitigation plan; the necessary institutional 

setup; the monitoring and enforcement requirements; and the capacity building requirements. All 

the recommendations/ mitigations mentioned in the study should be financed, and incorporated 

in the construction and supervision contracts. The the main recommendations to mitigate the 

negative impacts of the project is presented in the environmental statement section. 




10. REFERENCES 

1. Abu Maila, Y. , El-Nahal, I. ,and Al-Agha, M. R. (2004). Seasonal variations and mechanisms of 

groundwater nitrate pollution in the Gaza Strip. Environmental Geology, vol. 47, no1, pp. 84-90 . 

Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. 

2. Abu Naser, A.A. Ghbn, N. and Khoudary R. (2007). Relation of nitrate contamination of groundwater 

with methaemoglobin level among infants in Gaza. WHO- Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 

Volume 13 No. 5 September - October, 2007. 

3. Al Absi Awni (2008). Nitrate contamination of ground water and Methemoglobinemia in Gaza Strip. 

Al-Aqsa Unversity. 

4. ALMADINA-Consultants, (2006), khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant Infiltration System - 

Geotechnical and Hydrological Study 

5. Applied Research Institute (ARIJ, 2006) Status of the Environment in Palestine, Jerusalem Palestine. 

6. Baalousha, H. (2008). Analysis of Nitrate Occurrence And Distribution in Groundwater in The Gaza 

Strip Using Major Ion Chemistry. Global NEST Journal, Vol 10, No 3, pp 337-349. 

7. CEP & EMCC, (2008). Review of wastewater flow and load projections for KY Governorate 

8. CMWU, 2008: Hydrogeological Assessment for the Causes of Groundwater Level Rise and Seepage 

in Al Mawasi Area (Khan Younis) 

9. El-Astal, Zakaria (2005). Survey of Intestinal Parasites Among Children in Khan Younis Governorate, 

Gaza Strip, Palestinian Authority. Comparative Parasitology 72(1):116-117. 2005 doi: 10.1654/4172. 

10. EMCC-Dorsch Consult, (2005), Environmental Assessment for North (Beit Lahia) Gaza Emergency 

Sewage Treatment Plant 

11. Environment Quality Authority (EQA) (1999), Environmental law 1999 - Article 29. Gaza Palestine. 

12. JICA Khan Younis report, (1997), The Study on Sewerage Development Plan in the Area of khan 

Younis 

13. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc, (2000), Integrated aquifer management plan: Final report. Gaza Coastal 

Aquifer Management Program, (CAMP) Final report. 

14. Ministry of Environmental Affairs (MENA 1999), the Palestinian Environment Strategy. Gaza 

Palestine 

15. Ministry of Planning, (MoP, 2005), the Regional plan for Gaza Governorates. Palestine 

16. Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics: PCBS (2007), Statistical Brief. Ramallah Palestine 

17. Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics: PCBS (2008), Statistical Brief. Ramallah Palestine 

18. PLANCENTER, (2005), Preliminary Design for the KY WWTP of KY. Palestine 

19. SOGREAH-UG, (2009), Detailed Design for Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant, Initial Design 

Report. 

20. SOGREAH-UG, (2009), Detailed Design for Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant, Detail 

Design Report. 

21. United Nations Environment Program (UNEP, 2009), environmental Assessment of the Gaza Strip. 




11. ANEXES 

ANNEX 1 (NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS) 

ANNEX 2 (SOCIO-ECONOMIC SURVEY) 

ANNEX 3 (PUBLIC HEARING WORKSHOP) 

ANNEX 4 (PHOTOS) 

ANNEX 5 (FACILITY SITE MAPS) 

ANNEX 6 (TERMS OF REFERENCE AND EQA APPROVAL) 




Annex 1 (National Environnemental Standards) 

1. Palestinian Standards for Treated Wastewater (table 1 and table 2) 

2. Palestinian Standard for Ambient Air Quality (table 3) 

3. Palestinian Standard for Outdoor Noise (table 4) 




: 

جدول رقم (1): 

الاشتراطات القياسية الفلسطينية للمياه العادمة المعالجة آحد أقصى ما لم يذآر خلاف ذلك 

الخاصية 

ملجم/لتر 

ما لم يذآر غير ذلك 

تصريف إلى 

بعد 

البحار على 

تغذية الخزان الجوفي 

بالترشيح 

ري 

أعلاف جافة 

ري 

أعلاف خضراء 

ري حدائق ملاعب و 

متنزهات 

ري محاصيل صناعية و 

حبوب 

ري أشجار حرجية و 

غابات 

ري أشجار حمضيات 

ري أشجار زيتون 

ري أشجار لوزيات 

500 متر 

45 

45 

45 

60 

60 

40 

45 

60 

40 

60 

الأآسجين الممتص حيويا BOD5 

150 

150 

150 

200 

200 

150 

150 

200 

150 

200 

الأآسجين الممتص آيميائياً‏ COD 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

0.5 

1 

1 

الأآسجين المذاب DO 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

أآثر من 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1500 

1200 

1500 

1500 

1500 

- 

المواد الذائبة الكليةTDS 

40 

40 

40 

50 

50 

30 

40 

50 

50 

60 

المواد الصلبة العالقة الكلية TSS 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

9 -6 

الرقم الهيدروجيني pH 

خالية 

خ الية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

اللون (PCU) Color 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

0 


الزيوت والشحوم Fat Oil &Greas 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

0.002 

1 

الفينول Phenol 

15 

15 

15 

15 

15 

15 

15 

15 

5 

25 

المنظفات الصناعية MBAS 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

15 

25 

النترات–نيتروجين (N) NO3 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

50 

- 

- 


5 

الأمونيوم–نيتروجين (N) NH4 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 

50 



النتروجين العضوي.نيتروجين 

O.K.N 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

15 

5 

الفوسفات-فسفور (P) PO4 

400 

600 

400 

500 

500 

350 

500 

500 

600 

- 

الكلوريد Cl 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 

500 



الكبريتات SO4 

200 

200 

200 

200 

200 

200 

200 

200 

230 

- 

الصوديوم Na 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

60 

150 

- 

الماغنسيوم Mg 

400 

400 

400 

400 

400 

400 

400 

400 

400 

- 

الكالسيوم Ca 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 


9 

9 

9 

- 

نسبة ادمصاص الصوديوم SAR 





ملجم/لتر 

ما لم يذآر غير ذلك 

تصريف إلى 

على بعد 

البحار 

تغذية الخزان 

الجوفي بالترشيح 

ري 

أعلاف جافة 

ري 

أعلاف خضراء 

ري حدائق ملاعب 

و متنزهات 

ري محاصيل ناعية 

و حبوب 

ري أشجار حرجية 

و غابات 

ري أشجار 

حمضيات 

ري أشجار زيتون 

ري أشجار لوزيات 

500 متر 

5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

0.1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 

200 

5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


5 

0.1 

0.2 

5 

0.2 

0.2 

1 

0.02 

0.01 

2 

0.05 

0.1 

0.001 

0.05 

0.7 


1 

0.05 

0.2 

2 

0.2 

0.2 

0.1 

0.02 

0.01 

5 

0.1 

0.05 

0.001 

0.05 

1 


5 

0.05 

0.2 

2 

0.2 

0.2 

0.1 

0.02 

0.01 

5 

0.1 

0.5 

0.001 

1 

2 

50000 

Al 

Ar 

النحاس Cu 

Fe 

Mn 

Ni 

Pb 

Se 

Cd 

الزنك Zn 

السيانيد CN 

Cr 

Hg 

Co 

B 

لألمنيوم 

الزرنيخ 

الحديد 

المنغنيز 

النيكل 

الرصاص 

السيلينيوم 

الكادميوم 

الكروم 

الزئبق 

آوبالت 

البورون 

بكتيريا القولون البرازية 

Faecal Coliform (CFU/100ml) 

الجراثيم الممرضة Pathogens 

الأميبا و الجارديا 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

خالية 

خالية 

خالية 

Amoeba & Gardia (Cyst/L) 

الديدان الدائرية النيماتودا 

Nematodes (Eggs/L) 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

أقل من 1 

(-) : غير محددة 




(2) الجدول رقم 

مراقبة نوعية المياه العادمة 

الرقم 


الفحوصات الميكروبيولوجية 

التحري عن جراثيم القولون و القولون البرازية 

تكرارية العينات 

عينة 

فترة التقييم*‏ 

3 شهور 

أسبوعين / 

-1 

التحري عن الجراثيم الممرضة 

عينة أسبوعين 

عينة 

في حالة ظهور نتيجة أي عينة إيجابية يتم أخذ 

عينتين إضافيتين بفارق يومين بينهما،‏ و إذا آانت 

نتائج هذه العينات إيجابية يتم إيقاف استعمال المياه 

للري لحين زوال التلوث.‏ 

/ / صيفاً**‏ 

/ شهر / شتاءً***‏ 

الفحوصات البيولوجية 

- التحري عن الديدان المعوية و الأوليات 

الفحوصات الكيميائية 

الفحوصات الروتينية 

الفحوصات الخاصة بالعناصر النادرة و الثقيلة 

عينة 

عينة 

عينة 

سنة 

سنة 

سنة 

/ شهرين 

/ شهر 

/ سنة 

-2 

-3 

(*) 

(**) صيفاً:‏ 

(***) شتاءً:‏ 

فترة التقييم:‏ تعتمد الفترة السابقة لمرحلة التقييم أساساً‏ للحكم على نوعية المياه.‏ 

الفترة من بداية شهر أيار و حتى نهاية شهر تشرين أول.‏ 

الفترة من بداية شهر تشرين ثاني و حتى نهاية شهر نيسان.‏ 




- الاشتراطات القياسية:‏ 

يشترط ألا تزيد تراآيز الملوثات في الهواء المحيط عما هو محدد في الجدول رقم (3). 

(3) 

الملوث 

جدول رقم 

الزمن المأخوذ 

الحد الأقصى المسموح به 

150µg/m 3 

24 ساعة PM 10 

70µg/m 3 

30,000µg/m 3 

CO 

10,000µg/m 3 

8 ساعات 1µg/m 3 

3 

0.5µg/m 3 

400µg/m 3 

200µg/m 3 24 

NO 2 

100µg/m 3 

200µg/m 3 

O3 

120µg/m 3 

8 ساعات 

الأوزون 

350µg/m 3 

250µg/m 3 24 

SO 2 

60µg/m 3 

الدقائق العالقة 

أول أآسيد الكربون 

Pb 

الرصاص الكلي 

ثاني أآسيد النيتروجين 

ثاني أآسيد الكبريت 

سنوي 

ساعة 

شهور 

سنوي 

ساعة 

ساعة 

سنوي 

ساعة 

ساعة 

ساعة 

سنوي 



Khan Younis Wastewater Treatment Plant 

- الاشتراطات القياسية:‏ 

يشترط ألا تزيد شدة الضوضاء في البيئة الخارجية عما هو محدد في الجدول رقم (4). 

جدول رقم (4) 

معايير شدة الضوضاء في المناطق المختلفة للبيئة الخارجية 

نوع المنطقة 

الحد الأقصى نهارا 

7 صباحاً—‏‎8‎ مساءاً‏ 

الحد الأقصى ليلا 

8 مساءاً-‏‎7‎ صباحاً‏ 

(dB) 

30 

40 

45 

50 

65 

75 

(dB) 

40 

50 

55 

65 

75 

85 

* 

مناطق سكنية ريفية،‏ مناطق استجمام،‏ 

مدارس،‏ مستشفيات 

مناطق سكنية عادية 

مناطق سكنية بها بعض الورش والأعمال التجارية أو 

على طريق عام 

مناطق تجارية 

مناطق صناعية 

حفلات،‏ مهرجانات 




Annex 2 (Socio-economic survey) 

1. Questionnaire 

2. Total number of respondents to the local communities perceptions 


لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 



استبيان خاص 

بسكان المناطق المحيطة بمشروع انشاء محطة معالجة المياه العادمة في 

محافظة خانيونس 

القسم الأول:‏ 

معلومات عامة 

-1 

-2 

-3 

-4 

-5 

6- الجنس 

-7 

-8 

رقم الاستمارة 

‏(اختياري)‏ 

الاسم الجمعة ‎7‎‏)السبت التاريخ 

‎3‎‏)الثلاثاء ‎4‎‏)الأربعاء ‎5‎‏)الخميس ‎1‎‏)الأحد ‎2‎‏)الاثنين اليوم/التاريخ عبسان الكبيرة 

2) عبسان الجديدة مدينة خانيونس مكان السكن ‎6‎‏)غير ذلك حدد---‏ 

‎5‎‏)بني سهيلا العمر:‏ 

أنثى 

ذآر 

3) غير ذلك 

متزوج/ة أعزب-عز باء 

الحالة الاجتماعية:‏ 5) غير ذلك 

بدون موظف مزارع المهنة الحالية 

2) غير لاجئ 

لاجئ 9- وضع اللجوء:‏ بكالوريوس وأعلى 

دبلوم متوسط ثانوي ابتدائي أو إعدادي 10- المستوى التعليمي:‏‎1‎‏)‏ أمي 4) ضعيف جدا 

متوسط 

آيف تصف الوضع الاقتصادي للأسرة؟ 1) جيد 12 ما هو متوسط الدخل الشهري لأسرتكم ‏(بالشيكل):‏ 

4) خزاعة 

(6 

(4 

(6 

(3 

(2 

(3 

(5 (4 

(3 ضعيف 

(2 ___________ 

(2 

(2 

----------------------- 

(1 

__________ 

(1 

(1 

1) عامل 

(1 

(2 

-11 

(2 

القسم الثاني:‏ أوضاع السكن:‏ 

13- طبيعة سكنك الحالي؟‎1‎‏)‏ بيت ريفي من طابق واحد 

14- ملكية السكن...........؟ 

2) شقة في عمارة من عدة طوابق 

بيت مخيم 

(2 

بيت ملك 1) 

15- عدد أفراد الأسرة المقيمين في نفس المنزل/العمارة؟ 

ايجار 3) غير ذلك 

2 

16- هل المنزل متصل بشبكة الكهرباء؟ 1) 

نعم 

(3 

17- هل المنزل متصل بشبكة مياه؟ 

نعم لا)‏ 

18- مصدر مياه الشرب لافراد الاسرة 

مياه بلدية مياه ميكوروت 

بئر مياه خاص 

4) شراء مياه معالجة 

5) غير ذلك اذآره 

2 

(2 

(1 

(1 

19- آيف تصف نوعية مياه الشرب التي تصل منزلك 

مقبولة 

‎1‎‏)ممتازة 

4) سيئة 5) سيئة للغاية 

(2 جيدة (3 

2 

20- هل يوجد في المنطقة أمراض لها علاقة بتلوث المياه أو نقصها 1) 

نعم 

21- إذا آانت الاجابة نعم حدد نوع المرض؟---------------------------------------‏ 

22- قيمة الفاتورة الشهرية للمياه لمنزلك؟ 

(1 30 شيكل (2 50-40 شيكل (3 60-50 شيكل (4 

اآثر من 60 شيكل حدد 


لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 



القسم الثالث:‏ شبكة الصرف الصحي 

2 

23- هل يوجد في منطقتكم شبكة صرف صحي؟ ( 1 

نعم 

3) لا أعلم 

24- اذا آانت الاجابة لا فما هي الطرق المستخدمة في تصريف المياه العادمة 

1) حفر امتصاصية 2) طرحها في الشارع لا اعلم 

(3 

2 

25- هل تعاني من مشاآل متعلقة بانتشار البعوض؟ 1) 

نعم 

2 

26- هل ترحب بشبك منزلك بشبكة صرف صحي جديدة و متطورة؟ 1) 

نعم 


2 

27- هل ترحب باقامة محطة لمعالجة مياه الصرف الصحي لخدمة هذه المنطقة؟ 1) 

نعم 


28- اذا آانت الاجابة لا ما هي شروطكم لاقامة مثل هذا المشروع ------------------- 

29- اذا آانت الاجابة لا ما هي شروطكم لاقامة مثل هذا المشروع ------------------- 

2 

31- هل سمعت عن مشاريع للصرف الصحي ستقام في هذه المنطقة 1) 

نعم 

32- إذا آانت الاجابة نعم ما هي أهم المعلومات لديك حول هذا الموضوع مثل 

القسم الرابع:‏ النفايات الصلبة 

) 

الموقع,‏ المساحة,‏ الخ)‏ 

2 

33- هل تعلم بوجود مكب للنفايات الصلبة قريب من منطقة سكناك؟ 1) 

نعم 

(4 

(3 

34- اذا آانت الاجابة نعم آم يبعد المكب عن منزلك؟ 

اقل من ‎1000‎متر من ‎2000-1000‎متر 

من 3000-2000 متر 

اآثر من 4000-3000 متر 

(2 

(1 

2 

35- هل تعاني من روائح آريهة خلال هذا العام او العام الماضي؟ 1) 

نعم 

(2 

(1 

36- اذا آانت الاجابة نعم ما هو مصدر تلك الروائح 

مكب النفايات مصانع مياه مجاري 

4) غير ذلك حدد 

(3 

2 

37- هل تعاني من مشاآل غبار في المنطقة؟ 1) 

نعم 

38- اذا آانت الاجابة نعم حدد ما هو مصدر ذلك الغبار ------------------------------- 

2 

39- هل تعاني من مشاآل انتشار الذباب في هذه المنطقة؟ 1) 

نعم 

40- اذا آانت الاجابة نعم حدد ما هو مصدر انتشار الذباب 

------------------------------- 

2 

41- هل تعاني من مشاآل انتشار الفئران و القوارض في هذه المنطقة؟ 1) 

نعم 

42- اذا آانت الاجابة نعم حدد ما هو مصدر انتشار الفئران و القوارض 

-------------------------- 

---------- دونم 

القسم الخامس الزراعة : 

43- ما هي مساحة الارض التي تقوم بزراعتها 

44- ما هي أنواع المزروعات التي قمتم بزراعتها خلال هذا العام ------------- 


لا)‏ 

لا)‏ 



(2 

45- ما هو مصدر المياه المستخدم في الزراعة؟ آبار جوفية 1) 

مياه أمطار مجمعة 

مياه صرف صحي معالجة 

4) غير ذلك حدد-----‏ 

(3 

46- آم آوب تستهلك شهرياً‏ للزراعة؟ -------------------------- 

47- آم يكلف سعر الكوب لري المزروعات؟ 

---------------- 

2 

(1 

-48 

هل تعلم بأن مياه الصرف الصحي المعالجة تستخدم في ري المزروعات 

نعم 

2 

(1 

49- اذا آنت مزاعاً:‏ و توفر في هذه المنطقة مياه معالجة و صالحة لرى المزروعات وبأسعار منخفضة هل تقبل بذلك؟ 

نعم لا)‏ 3) لا أعلم 

50- اذا آانت الاجابة لا ما هي شروطكم لقبول تلك المياه لاستخدامهتا في الزراعة ---------------- 

2 

(1 

51 

القسم السادس : حقن المياه للخزان الجوفي:‏ 

- هل ترحب باقامة حوض لترشيح المياه المعالجة وحقنها للخزان الجوفي في منطقتكم 

نعم لا)‏ 3) لا أعلم 

2 

52- هل يوجد آثار سلبية لحقن المياه المعالجة؟ 1) 

نعم 


2 

(1 

53- هل تعتقد بأن حقن المياه المعالجة حسب المعايير سيساهم في تحسين المخزون الجوفي للمياه 

3) لا اعلم 

لا)‏ 

نعم 

54- هل تعتقد بأن أحواض ترشيح المياه تكون فيها المياه عميقة ‏(أآثر من 

3) لا اعلم 

لا)‏ 

نعم 

1 متر)؟ 

2 

2 

(1 

(1 

55- رغبنا في إجراء مقابلة أخرى مكملة لهذه المقابلة،‏ هل تسمحوا لنا بذلك؟ 

لا)‏ 

نعم 

رقم التلفون أو الجوال:__________________‏ 

وقت خروج الباحث للمنزل:‏ 

الدقيقة 

الساعة 

ملاحظات الباحث/ة:‏ 

............................................................................................................................................................. 

............................................................................................................................................................. 

......................................................................................................................................................... 




Total number of respondents to the local communities perceptions 

Municipality Community Number of Respondents 

KhanYounis City Center 11 

Muasi 12 

Sater 11 

AlKateba 2 

AlMahata 7 

Al-Amal 10 

KhanYounis Camp 14 

Shiekh Nasser 8 

Baten El-Sameen 8 

Joret Al-Loot 5 

Qezan Abu Rashwan 14 

Qezan Al-Najar 13 

Al-Manara 13 

Al-Salam 13 

Qa’a AlQureen / Ma’an 11 

Total Number of Questionnairs at KhanYounis 152 

Al-Qarara North Al-Qarara 13 

South Al-qarara 14 

Total Number of Questionnairs at Al-Qarara 27 

Al-Fukhari Europian Hospital area 7 

Al-Umor 23 

Municipality area 2 

Abu Hadeed 1 

Total Number of Questionnairs at Al-Fukhari 33 

Abassan Al-Kabeera Abu Daka 13 

Abu Sabha 2 

Abu Salah 2 

Abu Tabash 2 

Abu Ta’ema 15 

Abu Tear 2 

Abu Zarefa 2 

Abu Amer 3 

Al-Shwaf 2 

Qdeah 6 

Al-Faraheen 6 

Wadi Saber 13 

Total Number of Questionnairs at Abassan Al-Kabeera 68 

Abssan Al-Jadeda Abu Anza 5 

Daghma 4 

Al-A’safeer 4 

Total Number of Questionnairs at Abassan Al-Jadeda 13 

Khuza’a Abu Rida 5 

El-Qra 2 

Al-Najar 5 

Abu Erjela 5 

Radwan 4 

Rook 4 

Sadah 4 

El-A’leat 3 

Total Number of Questionnaires at Khuza’a 32 

Bai Suhila 10 

Total Number of Questionnaires at KhanYounis 

Governorate is 

335 




Annex 3 (Public Hearing workshop) 




Provision of consultancy Services for the Detailed Design for the 

Construction of Khan Younis 

Waste Water Treatment Plant in Khan Younis – (KYWWTP) 

Conclusions of the final workshop (Public Hearing) 

Environmental Impact Assessment of KY WWTP 

Date: Wednesday 30/12/2009 

Time: 9:00 - 13:30 

Place: Khan Younis Municipality – Assembly Room 




TABLE OF CONTENTS: 

1. Agenda 

2. List of participants 

3. Summary and conclusions 

4. Workshops’ Power Point Presentations 

5. Executive summary in Arabic 

6. Photos of the workshop 




1. Agenda 

Date: Wednesday 30/12/2009 

Time: 9:00 - 13:30 

Place: Khan Younis Municipality – Assembly Room 

TIME TOPIC NAME/ TITLE Organization 

9:00 - 9:30 Registration All 

9:30 – 10:00 Clients/ Stakeholders/ Partners 

9:30 - 9:40 Mr. Sufian Abu Samra Ministry of Local Government (MoLG) 

9:40 - 9:45 Mr. Mohammad Jawad Al-Farah (Mayor of Khan Youis Municipalities 

Khn Younis) 

Opening/ Welcoming words 

9:45 - 9:50 Mr. Ahmed Yaqubi (D.G of Water Resources Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) 

Planning) 

9:50 - 9:55 Mr. Farid Ashour Coastal Municipal Water Utility (CMWU) 

9:55 – 10:00 

Mr. Ashraf Abu Shamala (Project Manager) United Nations Development Program (UNDP) 

10:00 – 11:25 EIA Results EIA team 

10:00 – 10:15 Project Description Dr. Fahed Rabah 

(Deputy Project Manager) 

10:15 – 10:35 Environmental Impact Identification Prof. Samir Afifi (EIA team leader) 

SOGREAH-UG Consultants 

10:35 – 10:50 Environmental Impacts on 

Groundwater 

Dr. Thaer Abu Shbak (Soil and Water quality 

Expert) 

10:50 – 11:10 Break 

11:10 – 11:25 Impacts Evaluation and management Prof. Samir Afifi (EIA team leader) 

SOGREAH-UG Consultants 

Plan 

11:25 – 12:25 Discussion and conclusions 

12:25 – 13:30 Lunch 




2. List of Participants 

NO. Name Organization Telephone Mobile E-Mail 

Mr. Mohammad Al Fara Mayor, Khan Younis Municipality 

1 Mr. Issa Ali Al-Nashar Rafah Municipality 2145170 0599601336 - 

2 Mr. Ali Barhoum 

Rafah Municipality 

2145170 0599815100 - 

3 Mr. Samir Barhoom 

Rafah Municipality 

2145170 0599726096 - 

4 Mr. Raed Daboor Khan Younis Municipality - 0599377401 - 

5 Mr. Yassin M. Al-Astal Khan Younis Municipality - 0599362166 - 

6 Mr. Abd Allah Ahmed Jouda - 2075879 0599264315 Jouda12345@hotmail.com 

7 Mr. Mohammed Ayoub Radi Khan Younis Municipality 2554142 0599368648 Radimohammad@hotmail.com 

8 Eng. Mounis Faris CARE International - 0599402079 fmounis@hotmail.com 

9 Mr. Mohammed Lafi CARE International - 0598935498 mohlafi@yahoo.com 

10 Eng. Mahmoud Abo Haya 

Khan Younis Municipality 

- 0599722201 - 

11 Mr. Ebrahim Naji Al Astal 

Khan Younis Municipality 

- 0599198443 - 

12 Eng. Ashraf Abo Shamalah UNDP - 0599606792 - 

13 Eng. Mohy Al Deen Al Farra Ministry of Local Government - 599526344 mohyfarra@yahoo.com 

14 Mr. Zohdy Al-Greez Ministry of Local Government - 0599834395 - 

15 

Eng. Sufian A. Samra 

Ministry of Local Government - - - 





16 Eng. Bha’a Al-Agha Environment Quality Authority - 0599254783 Bahaa.alagha@gmail.com 

17 Mr. Tarik Yousef Amour 

18 Mr. Iyad Muhanna 

Al-Fukhari Association for Rural 

Development 

Preventive Medicine / Ministry of 

Health 

2069065 0599301750 - 

2070076 0599614615 - 

19 Eng. Majed M. Ghannam CMWU - 0599267105 M-ghannam@cmwu.ps 

20 Mr. Raed Khalaf Allah Journal of Palestine - 0599669715 - 

21 Mr. Abd Al-Rauf Asfour Municipality of New Abasan - 0599408049 - 

22 Mr. Abdel-Rahman Shaath Khan Younis Municipality - 0599790978 - 

23 Eng. Saadi Ali Palestinian Water Authority - - - 

24 Eng. Sami Hamdan Palestinian Water Authority - - - 

25 Majdoulin Al-Dahdouh ICRC - 0598943934 - 

26 Eng. Ghassan Al-Qishawi G.V.C - 0599834099 gqishami@yahoo.com 

27 Dr. Mohammed Alwan Islamic University - 0599150066 - 

28 Mr. Bilal Al-Shmali Civil Defense - 0598944521 - 

29 Mr. Basim Ismaeel Braika 

Neighborhood committees Baten Al- 

Sameen 

- 0598267099 - 

30 Mr. Yassin Zuhair Usrof Khan Younis Municipality - - - 

31 Dr. Fahad Rabah Universal Group 2825557 - frabah@hotmail.com 

32 Eng. Kamal Muammar Khan Younis Municipality 2071331 0599815525 Kamalm-v62@yahoo.com 

33 Eng. Farid Shaban CMWU/Rafah - 0599189905 faridshaban@hotmail.com 

34 Eng. Abdel Fattah Abu Musa Chairman of Khan Younis camp - 0599988435 aabomosa@gmail.com 





35 Eng. Salem Salim Abu Amr 

District 

Institute of Water / Al-Azhar 

University 

- 0599832708 sabuamr@hotmail.com 

36 Eng. Zeidan Abu Zuhri UNRWA 2887899 0599461493 z.abuzuhri@unrwa.org 

37 Eng. Yahya Mohi-Din al-Astal UNRWA - 0599418859 Yahya_maldeen@yahoo.com 

38 Ms. Wissal Bassam Jouda Culture and Free Thought - 0599377910 - 

39 Mr. Suhail Ramadan Shubair Chairman of the district Jouret Allut 2052224 0599063085 - 

40 Mr. Abdel-Halim Abu Samra Palestinian Center for Human Rights 2061025 0599608803 - 

41 Eng. Hatem Abu Al-Tayef Khan Younis Municipality - - hatemtayef@yahoo.com 

42 Mr. Jihad Suleiman Al-Amour Al-Fukhari Municipality 2068194 0599365779 - 

43 Mr. Shadi Nayef Abu Namous Center Martyrs Khan Younis - 0599537371 - 

44 Eng. Ahmed Kullab Palestinian Water Authority - 0599267124 Ahmed_kullab@hotmail.com 

45 Eng. Zuhdi Salah UNRWA 2887358 0599815448 z.salah@unrwa.org 

46 Dr. Khamis Jawdat Al. Najjar Legislative Council 2051322 0599605544 najarkh@yahoo.com 

47 Dr. Riad Ali Abu Shamala Member of the Municipal Council - - - 

48 Ms. Iman Abdul Rahim Akil UNICEF 2862400 0599259809 eaqeel@unicef.org 

49 Mr. Mustafa Salman al-Shawaf Municipality of Abasan Al Kabira 2073505 0599469666 - 

50 Eng. Yehya Abu-Obaid CMWU 2141222 0599170915 y.obaid@cmwu.ps 

51 Mr. Basim Shorrab - - 0599378797 basemsh@gmail.com 

52 Mr. Wesam Al-Sharkawi 

Preventive Medicine / Ministry of 

Health 

- 0599065048 Wes_bsb@hotmail.com 





53 Eng. Farid Ashour CMWU - 0599189260 fsashour@cmwu.ps 

54 Mr. Nizar Ayesh 

55 Eng. Fuad Al-Amoudi 

President of the Pharmacists 

Syndicate 

President of the Engineers 

Association Khan Younis 

2536844 0599709324 - 

- 0598885047 - 

56 Mr. Ahmed Al-Yacoubi Palestinian Water Authority - 0599425726 ahmedyagubi@hotmail.com 

57 Eng. Ashraf Abu Amsha ICRC - 0599607534 - 

58 Eng. Mahmoud Riad Suleiman GVC – PAG - 0599061413 Mahmoud.sulyman@yahoo.com 

59 Dr. Noman Alwan Islamic University - 0599926028 - 

60 Mr. Ahmed Sobhi Zo'rob 

Chairman of the Committee Mawasi 

neighborhood 

- 0599619763 - 

61 Eng. Youssef Haj Yousif Khan Younis Municipality 2079331 0599815541 - 

62 Dr. Ahmed Abu Foul Islamic University - 0598924156 afoul@iugaza.edu 

63 Mr. Ibrahim Khalaf Allah 

64 Mr. Mohamed Zakaria al-Agha 

65 Dr. Youssef Abu Mayla 

66 Mr. Awad Taher al-Astal 

Agriculture Department of Khan 

Younis 

Director of the Municipality of Khan 

Younis 

Al-Azhar University / Institute of 

Water and Environment 

Assembly of the Commonwealth 

sons Astal Charity 

2051102 0599885822 - 

2054451 - - 

2832912 0599704465 abumayla@gawab.com 

2065194 0598096433 - 

67 Eng. Ismail Ahmed Al-Shawaf Khuzaa Municipality 2084077 0599742782 Shwf62@hotmail.com 

68 Dr. Samir Afifi Al-MADINA Consultants 2131506 - safifi@iugaza.edu 

69 Dr. Hassan Hamouda University of Palestine - 0599467643 h.hamouda@up.edu 

70 Dr. Ali Tayeh University of Palestine 2840454 0599880412 Al2007.i@hotmail.com 





71 Eng. Amin Mohamed Hassanein Khan Younis Municipality - 0599815540 Eng.amen@hotmail.com 

72 Ms. Maya Al-Farra 

The Palestinian Center for Organic 

Agriculture 

2053677 0599623645 Pocaa2003@hotmail.com 

73 Mr. Saed Ibrahim Al-Tartory Islamic University - 0599993358 startory@iugaza.edu 

74 Dr. Osama Mohammed Shahin Al-MADINA Consultants - 0599722474 ushahin@hotmail.com 

75 Eng. Mahmoud Jadallah OXFAM - 0599773017 Eng.m.jadallah@hotmail.com 

76 Mr. Abd Elkader Alreqb Khan Younis Municipality 2071088 0599413440 - 

77 Dr. Khalid Qahman Al-MADINA Consultants 2883219 - Kqahman@gmail.com 

78 Dr. Thaer Abu Shabak Al-MADINA Consultants 2883219 - - 

79 Eng. Tayseer Mushtaha Al-MADINA Consultants 2883219 - - 

80 Eng. Shady Skaik Al-MADINA Consultants 2883219 0599307007 Shady_eng79@hotmail.com 

81 Ms. Afaf al-Khalidi Save the Children - Palestine 2848705 0599884413 pscf@palnet.com 

82 Mr. Essam El-Din Abu-Dakka Retired government employee 2073820 0598866138 - 

83 Mr. Emad Mohsin Association of Palestinian farmers - 0599738866 Imad_mohsin@hotmail.com 

84 Mr. Saeb Lqan 

Municipality of Khan Younis (press 

release) 

2054451 0599481754 Saebpress@hotmail.com 

85 Dr. Mohammed A. Muammar Nasser Hospital 2061026 0599384140 Faris.org@hotmail.com 

86 Dr. Samir Motaweh UNRWA Khan Younis 2051061 0599413752 - 

87 Eng. Nihad Al-Khatib CMWU 2881446 0599267106 Nehad8@hotmail.com 

88 Eng. Mahmoud Shatat CMWU/KFW 2881446 0599330224 mshatat@kfw.cmwu.ps 

89 Mr. Mohammed Odeh Al-Agha 

The Office of the Legislative Council 

- Khan Younis 

2079020 0599481347 plckhy@yahoo.com 





90 Mr. Mohammed Yasin Al-Astal Islamic University 2051093 0599111420 Mohamed.astal@yahoo.com 

91 Mr. Abd Al-Rahim Abadleh Municipality Al-Qrara 2070388 0599405570 - 

92 Mr. Tarek Abdel-Aziz Zakout Al-Haq Center - 0599051490 - 

93 Mr. Ghareeb Saed Al-Sonwar Center of Al-Mezan - 0599461678 - 

94 Ms. Iman Al-Husseini UNDP 2822167 - - 

95 Ms. Rima Abu Medin UNDP 2822167 0548174039 - 

96 Dr. Fouad Daoud Gmasi The Ministry of Health 2801323 0599415891 Fouadj12@live.com 

97 Mr. Osama Jaber Kuhail 

Head of contractors association in 

Gaza governorates 

2823199 0599435363 Hkhk-76@hotmail.com 

98 Eng. Tayseer Aziz CCC 2823199 0599480221 - 

99 Mr. Kamal Al-Nagar Municipality Khuzaa - 0599408354 - 




3. Summary and Conclusions of the Public Hearing 

3.1 Introduction 

After performing the Environmental Impact Assessment study, EIA, and issuing its draft report, a 

main EIA workshop has been conducted on 30 Dec. 2009 to present and discuss the EIA 

methodologies, EIA impacts, findings, outputs and recommendations and to obtain the view and 

comments of professionals and the community different affected groups. 

On 22 Dec. 2009, invitations have been distributed to a wide discipline of officials, professionals, 

community leaders and affected groups seeking their attendance and participation in the EIA 

workshop. 

The EIA Public Hearing Workshop was managed and organized by UNDP/PAPP (the client), JV 

consultant SOGREAH & UG (the consultant) in cooperation with the project’s counterparts. 

3.2 Workshop objectives: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reviewing the environmental significance of Khan Younis Waste Water Treatment Plant 

Project to whole community; main impacts and challenges. 

Presenting and reviewing the main components of KY WWTP. 

Presenting and discussing the draft final results of the Environmental Impact Assessment 

study (EIA) and the main contents of the EIA. 

Presenting the EIA methodologies, different environmental impacts, findings and outputs. 

Presenting mitigation measures, environmental management plan and informing the 

different stakeholders about the EIA conclusions and recommendations. 

Listening to the opinions and comments of the stakeholders to incorporate them in the final 

EIA report. 

Enhance the community participation and obtaining the view of the community, their 

comments, concerns and recommendations. 

3.3 Workshop Proceedings: 

 

 

 

A brief Introductory welcome and words introduced by the general director of MoLG, Khan 

Younis Mayor, PWA’s and CMWU’s representatives and UNDP project Manager thanking 

the Government of Japan (GOJ) for their kind role and generous contributions to assist the 

Palestinian people and appreciating UNDP role and efforts to implement KY WWTP. The 

introducers reviewed the environmental significance of KY WWTP to whole community, 

the current dire environmental status due to absence of functional WWTP, project 

challenges and appealed and asked the GOJ and UNDP to work in allocating the addition 

fund required to accelerate constructing a complete and functional waste water treatment 

plant. 

The EIA’s team presented and reviewed the main components of KY WWTP; the main 

contents of the EIA study; presented in details the EIA methodologies, findings, different 

environmental impacts and outputs; mitigation measures, environmental management plan 

and recommendations. 

An open and free discussion session was succeeded to obtain the view of community 

members and participants, their comments, feedback, concerns and recommendations, which 

proceeded by positive and valuable contributions and successfully ended by a conclusion 

and closure of the workshop. 




3.4 Workshop Opening: 

Prof. Samir Afifi, JV consultant Sogreah & UG 

Prof. Afifi started the meeting by welcoming the attendees and presenting the objective of the EIA Public 

Hearing Workshop. 

Eng. Sufian A. Samra, MoLG 

Mr. Abu Samra addressed the importance of the KY WWTP project. Mr. Abu Samra manifested that Khan 

Younis Governorate is still exposed for long-term to serious environmental impacts due to absence of 

functional sewage systems and functional waste water treatment plant. He indicated that Khan Younis is 

still living under minimum sanitary infrastructural needs and the congestion of the population led to 

ground water pollution generated from the large number of the existing cesspits and sewage wells, which 

constitute serious source of hygienic pollution that affecting the population’s health. 

He illustrated that despite hard efforts pursued in the past years; different obstacles have 

prevented the implementation of KY WWTP, such as the obstacles that prevented the earlier 

implementation of it through a previous contribution of the Government of Japan since 1998. 

Due to such obstacles over the past years; the environmental impacts continued to escalate to 

serious levels, and he called to consolidate all possible efforts to support and implement this very 

vital and strategic project for the benefit of the whole community. 

Mr. Mohammad Al Fara, the Mayor of Khan Younis Municipality 

Mr. Al-Farra declared that the establishment of the treatment plant is a dream of two hundred thousand 

inhabitants of the city of Khan Younis which will serve as well the seven municipalities of Khan Younis 

governorate, as it is expected to serve half a million of people in the year 2025. 

He presented a brief narrative relevant to historical status of the sewage disposal system in Khan 

Younis Governorate, current environmental conditions, facts, latest development of the sewage 

disposal system up to the current progress of KY WWTP project which executed by UNDP; 

appreciating the Government of Japan and UNDP roles for their support to the Palestinian people 

and the residents of Khan Younis in particular. He also expressed his thanks for the former mayors for 

their efforts to initiate and implement part of the sewage networks, secure the required land of the 

treatment plant and working to secure required funds. 

He presented the dire environmental impacts and the serious health conditions that Khan Younis 

is currently passing through due to absence of functional waster water treatment plant, lack of 

financial resources and lack of construction materials due to crossings closure, which put the 

sanitary system and conditions in Khan Younis under emergency conditions. 

He presented at the same time the environmental and the socio-economical benefits of the project 

to the whole community, and called the Palestinian Government and all concerned authorities to fulfill 

their responsibilities, stand by the municipality and work on developing contingency plans to protect the 

residents of Khan Yunis from the environmental risks till constructing the main strategic and permanent 

KY WWTP. He called as well all potential donors to pursue efforts to allocate additional fund 

needed to assist Khan Younis residents. 




Mr. Ahmed Yaqubi, PWA 

Mr. Yaqubi introduced the environmental necessity of having a functional WWTP to alleviate the 

environmental impacts, to protect the ground water resources and to diminish the pollution of the 

ground water and drinkable water in Khan Younis area, shedding that serious indicators are 

pointing toward a close imminent of a humanitarian catastrophe in case of delaying or not 

implementing KY WWTP. 

Eng. Farid Ashour, CMWU 

Mr. Ashour presented a brief clarification concerning the current serious problems of the waste 

water sector in Khan Younis area and the efforts done to implement emergency and temporary 

solutions to aid the residents and municipalities to overcome the harsh conditions generated due 

to the closure of the Gaza crossings and the lack of the construction materials, calling for a quick 

implementation of a permanent and effective solution by constructing KY WWTP. 

Eng. Ashraf A. Shamala, UNDP 

Mr. Abu Shamala introduced firstly that UNDP is thanking the Government of Japan for their 

continuous and mark able support to help the Palestinian people and appreciating the GOJ role in 

allocating a generous fund to implement KY WWTP. The counterparts’ mutual efforts in 

supporting the project activities have been thanked and highly appreciated. Up to date progress of 

KYWWTP has been briefed along with the project main challenges; shedding that the project’s 

ownership is belonging to the whole community and called for more involvement and 

participation of the community and the whole concerned authorities to support implementing a 

functional and environmentally sound project and operating it in a sustainable basis, and called to 

consolidate all efforts to work in securing the additional fund required. 

3.5 Workshop Presentations: 

Following the introductory welcome and words, the EIA team started a power point presentation comprises 

of four sessions explained the main components of KY WWTP; the main contents of the EIA study, 

details the EIA methodologies, findings, different environmental negative and positive impacts 

such as physical impacts, socio-economical impacts, biological impacts, trans-boundary impacts, 

potential impacts, impacts on ground water and water resources, mitigation measures, 

environmental management plan and recommendations. 

3.5.1 Introductory Session - EIA Study Contents 

Presented by: Prof. Samir Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

Prof. Afifi presented in brief the EIA study contents which is composed of 9 chapters including the 

institutional/legal framework; methodology, project description; baseline conditions; impact assessment; 

impact evaluation; management plan and the study conclusions. 

3.5.2 Session 1- Project Description 

Presented by: Dr. Fahed Rabah, Sogreah & UG 

Dr. Rabah explained the project location, components, capacity and number of beneficiaries, treatment 

process and technology, project phases and effluent criteria. The project will include: WWTP; infiltration 

basins; Effluent and emergency pressure line to the infiltration basins and sea outfall. The proposed 

technology for wastewater treatment is basically aerobic treatment using activated sludge method 

(oxidation ditches). 




3.5.3 Session 2 - Environmental impacts of the project 

Presented by Prof. Samir Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

Prof. Afifi presented the study outputs related to the different expected impacts of the project in the 

construction and operation phases. He presented introduction concerning the existing environmental 

conditions, EIA methodology, baseline environmental conditions including physical, socio-economical and 

biological environment. He presented as well the different environmental negative and positive 

impacts such as physical impacts, socio-economical impacts, biological impacts, trans-boundary 

impacts. Through out the presentation, he also clarified that the project itself is an environmental 

project. Due to that the negative impacts of this project are not major and the overall impact of this project 

is very positive on the environment and public health. 

3.5.4 Session 3 - Environmental impacts of the project on groundwater 

Presented by: Dr. Thaer A. Shbak, Sogreah & UG 

Dr. Abu Shbak introduced an introduction explaining that the location of the infiltration basins was 

selected according to extensive geotechnical and hydro geological investigations carried out previously and 

during the detailed design phase of KY WWTP project. 

He presented as well that the hydro geological status at Khan Younis Governorate, the infiltration capacity 

and the ground water modeling setup. The impact assessment is done based on groundwater model for flow 

and transport aspect. He illustrated the expected impacts of the project on groundwater quantity and 

quality, whereas the model showed that the overall impact on the ground water aquifer is very positive due 

to the infiltration of treated wastewater, where as the local aquifer at Al Fukhari area will be improved in 

terms of quantity and quality. It is predicted that after 15 years of infiltration the groundwater level will rise 

up to more than 30 m under the infiltration basins. 

3.5.5 Session 4- Impact Evaluation, Environmental Management Plan, Recommendations and 

conclusion: 

Presented by: Prof. Samir Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

Prof. Afifi briefed the impact evaluation methodology, the evaluation process and summary of significant 

impacts. He also presented the proposed environmental management plan including the mitigation 

measures; environmental monitoring plan, the required institutional setup, recommendations and 

conclusion. 

3.6 Workshop Open Discussions: 

Prof. Samir Afifi opened the floor for attendees’ free comments and discussion. The open discussion 

session lasted for one hour and 30 minutes aimed to obtain the view of community members and 

participants, their comments, feedback, worries, concerns and recommendations. Many effective 

contributions were introduced by many interveners, characterized by positive attitude and high sense of 

responsibility. Some professional contributions and comments have been introduced by some professional 

interveners concerning the biological treatment; the treatment process and the EIA contents and 

methodologies. Many effective and positive contributions were reflected by other interveners emphasizing 

on the vital necessity and importance of KY WWTP project to the whole community of Khan Younis 

Governorate, calling to accelerate constructing KY WWTP, Phase I, to improve the current dire 

environmental and health conditions and to enable diminishing the related widely spread water-born 

diseases. At the same time, calling the officials and the concerned authorities and institutions to take the 

EIA recommendations and the environmental management plan into serious concern to have an 

environmentally sound and sustainable project. Some interveners asked about the implementation program 

of the construction phase under the current circumstances; especially in relevance to security requirements 

and coordination needed to enter the permanent eastern site of KY WWTP, lack of construction materials 

and lack of financial resources; appealing and calling UNDP to work in securing the additional fund 

required to construct the necessary components of KY WWTP, Phase I, to have it a functional and 

operational one. 




Interventions and Discussions of Round 1: 

1. Abdelkader Al Reqb (Mayor of Bani Suhaila Municipality): 

He mentioned that Khan Younis region lives in environmental and health tragedy, and that 

groundwater is not suitable for domestic use and called to accelerated implementation of the project as 

it considered a vital and important need for the whole population, since the project would help 

alleviate the diseases prevalent among many of the population and to save their lives. He also called to 

accelerate implementing sewage systems in the eastern villages to alleviate the harsh environmental 

conditions of the residents of the eastern villages. 

2. Mohammed Al-Astal: (Khan Younis Municipality) 

It is not worth to pump and dispose the treated waste water to the sea, while we are in bad need for 

such quantities of treated waste water to be used for the agricultural purposes. 

3. Mohamed Lafi (CARE International Organization) 

He intervened by few questions: 

• When the project will be implemented and the time frame needed to implement KY WWTP, Phase I? 

• How the construction materials can be available and secured for the construction phase under the 

current circumstances of closure and restrictions of importing construction materials? 

• How the treatment plant will be operated and energy provided under current conditions of electricity 

shortage and cut? 

• Is there a plan for establishing a power plant and using sludge to generate the needed electricity? 

4. Ahmed Zo'orob (Leader of Al-Mawasi local Community Committee) 

He intervened by some notes and comments, 

• Highlighted the suffering of the people of Al-Mawasi regarding water pollution due to the 

existing western waste water lagoons. 

• Al-Mawasi wells become contaminated and trees started to dry up. 

• Al-Mawasi area is considered the food basket of the Gaza Strip. 

• Residents of Al Mawasi are suffering and they have fear of flooding of the existing lagoons 

on their farms and homes. 

• There are negative impacts of pumping the sewage into the sea creating sea water pollution 

and affecting the marine environment. 

• If there is a line to the sea we hope to be in the sea 200 meters far from the shoreline. 

• He called to start the project as soon as possible. 

5. Eng. Abdel Fattah Abu Musa (Leader of Khan Younis Camp Community Committee) 

He intervened by some notes and comments, 

• This project is strategic and very important for the whole residents of Khan Younis. 

• Khan Younis camp, and Al–Amal district are suffering from the problem of sanitation due to absence of 

treatment plant. 

• There are about 12,000 cesspits at the camp and Al –Amal district. 

• Some households have to dig two cesspits to overcome disposing their waster water due to the cesspits 

floods, and some residents have to evacuate their cesspits once every three days. 

• There is a serious fear and risk of the collapse of the existing sewage lagoon at Al - Amal district. 

• Appeal to all to accelerate the implementation of this very vital and important project. 




6. Dr. Khamis -Najjar (Member of the Legislative Council) 

Thanked all who contributed to this project with several observations: 

• Gaza Strip experts are planning very well, but when implementation started the application will not be as it 

was planned. Implementation should be as planned. 

• Calling for the creation of jobs for the people of the region and priority should be given to them. 

• Provide alternative routes and have a clear plan for it during the implementation period. 

• Emphasized that water shall be sprayed in the routes during the implementation processes and he hoped that 

water is available to do so! 

• What to do with the vaccination of diseases if it is not available? 

• What is the alternative solution in case of power cuts and how the accessibility to the eastern site can be 

guaranteed? 

7. Dr. Jameel Mottawa'a (UNRWA-Khan Younis – Community Leader) 

• He wondered that there could be some voices against this very vital and important environmental project! He 

proposed to form a committee to advocate this project (to support the project implementation). 

8. Esam Abu-Dakka (Retired Legal Advisor of Khan Younis Municipality - Resident of Abassan Al 

Kabira Town). 

• There are many problems related to the waste water systems and the treatment plant prevented implementing 

it previously. 

• Wonder when the project will be implemented? And called for supporting it. 

• It time to plan and work to end the sanitation problems of Bani Suhaila city and the eastern villages and to 

work in parallel to establish sewage networks. 

• Emphasized that the project shall include and serve the residents of the eastern villages. 

9. Eng. Bahaa Al-Agha (Environment Quality Authority). 

• Technically, there was a study of environmental impact assessment for the project in 1997, why it is being 

carried out and repeated again? 

• For Treatment / the method used is the Oxidation Ditches they need a high cost and high technology which 

fits the developed and stabled situations. 

• And wondering how to overcome the problems of power cuts due to the siege? 




Answers and Replies on Iterventions of Round 1 

Prof. Samir Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

• All possible efforts will be done to proceed and accelerate the implementation of the very vital project, and to 

secure the additional fund required. 

• The local community involvement and support is needed for successful implementation and operation of the 

project. 

• The carrier pressure line will be used to transfer the treated waste water to the infiltration area and in case of 

emergency cases to the sea. The strategic objective of treating the waste water is to be used finally for 

infiltration to enhance the ground water aquifer and or to be used for the agricultural purposes. 

• To ensure successful implementation of plans, the implementation and operation plans of the local authorities 

need to be followed by the Legislative Council and relevant governmental institutions. 

• It's true, that there was a preliminary EA study in the year 1997, but today we have a different site and 

different design, accordingly a more comprehensive EIA study is needed. 

• Concerning the treatment process and technology, the land in the Gaza Strip is very limited. Due to that 

appropriate technology of activated sludge was selected because of its high efficiency in removing the 

organic compounds and nitrogen removal and need less area of land in comparison to other technologies, and 

the selected technology is in a line with the Palestinian sewerage master plan. If we want to minimize the site 

area needed to be establish the treatment plant, a high sophisticated technology will be needed and thus the 

construction and operation cost will relatively be high. 




Dr. Fahed Rabah, Sogreah & UG 

• The effluent criteria of the treated waste water to be used for infiltration and irrigation of agriculture can 

be achieved by using a modern technology like the Oxidation Ditches; which is considered one of the 

best biological treatment options. Its main advantage is the generation of small quantities of sludge with 

more stabilized sludge, which leads for very low odor problem. 

Eng. Ashraf Abu Shamala (UNDP) 

• The detailed design is planned to be accomplished in February 2010 and planned to be succeeded by the 

tendering processes required for launching the construction stage of KY WWTP, Phase I, which will be 

constructed by international and local contractors, and the construction phase is envisaged to start in 

July- August 2010. 

• The plan is to have a comprehensive waste water treatment plant constructed with its all necessary 

components to be a functional one, where the project’s total cost is estimated by around $ 50 million. 

The available amount is $ 14.83 million, funded by the Government of Japan, and by that there is a 

deficit of the whole budget required for constructing KY WWTP, Phase I, estimated of around $ 35 

million and there is a need for the intervention of all concerned parties and authorities to secure the 

required additional fund. UNDP on its part will make all possible efforts required for the resources 

mobilization, and planning to approach the Gulf States through a forthcoming mission trying to get the 

required additional fund. 

Mr. Mohammad Al Fara (Mayor of Khan Younis) 

• Emphasized the formation of a supporting committee to support the project implementation. 

• And concerning the implementation phase, all are realizing that the general conditions in the Gaza Strip 

are very difficult and anxieties are real and we hope that the project will be implemented as soon as 

possible, and we are wishing all success. 


10. M. Mustafa Shawaf (Mayor of Abasan Al Kabiera) 

• In the Arabic EIA executive summary which distributed in the Workshop, it's noted that not all areas of 

Khan Younis Governorate will be connected to the treatment plant during the project’s period, and this 

indicates that there are some areas wouldn’t be served in the first 8 years of the operation phase. 

• And he requested from the consultant to prepare a typical design of the cesspits to be distributed to 

citizens in case of delaying or postponing the project. 

11. Osamah Kuhail ( Head of Gaza Contractor’s Union) 

• He appreciated the conduction of this important workshop and stressed that it is important and necessary 

to conduct similar workshops for other different projects. 

• Concerning idea of the international tendering and hiring international contractors /from our experience 

we believe that these international parties send not more than one or two engineers to follow up the 

project and the rest of work is done by local actors. 

• He proposed to split the project implementation activities into several parts to give more chance for the 

local contractors, and at the same time, this process will make the completion of the project faster. 

12. Eng. Zeidan Abu Zuhri (UNRWA) 

• Any EIA study of any project shall include the environmental impacts that could be generated in case of 

not implementing the project, as this was not presented. 

• Called the political decision makers to support UNDP to secure the required additional fund. 

• Recommend to include a chapter for public or community participation in order to hear the community 

concerns and to facilitate the implementation processes. 

13. Bilal Al Shamali (Civil Defense) 

• The project is very positive and I did not notice any negative impacts. However, in work plans and in 

case of project failure or stopping the implementation at a specific step, there should be an alternative. 

• Is Khan Younis Municipality will continue the project activities or will neglect the residents suffer and 

complaints. 




14. Eng. Zuhdi Salah (UNRWA) 

• Appreciated all efforts and thanks all concerned parties, and mentioned that it is an ambitious plan to 

construct a treatment plant in the southern area. 

• What is the depth of the aquifer in the project’s area to illustrate the impact of infiltrating the treated 

waste water on the ground water, simulation may be used. 

• If you use treated water for agriculture, it must be used for non-eatable crops and it shall depend on 

BOD and as per the pollutants. 

• A study for sludge re-use should be implemented as fertilizers, or sludge incineration may be used. 

• Is it possible to implement the project in the current conditions? 

15. Eng. Yehya Abu Obeid (CMWU) 

• There is a sea water intrusion at the western side of the aquifer. 

• As shown by the presented ground water modeling, the infiltration of the treated wastewater will 

increase ground water level/pressure. Accordingly is there a possibility to make the infiltration basins to 

prevent the sea water intrusion? 

• He believed that the project was possible in the previous periods to be implemented in different stages if 

it was supported by government, and called the government and all concerned authorities to secure the 

required financial resources. 

• Concerning the land acquisition, the government was unable to provide the required land for setting up 

such a project. In such cases there must be local and community support for these projects. 

• Concerning the regional scheme - Is there a possibility to extend the project to include all the southern 

area of the Gaza Strip? 

• He mentioned that the infiltration basins are positive approach and efficient in removing pollutants and 

is there a need to implement the rapid sand filtration in the treatment plant. Recovery wells may be used 

instead of rapid sand filter units. 

16. Iman Aqeel (UNICEF) 

• The sewerage network in Khan Younis is incomplete and this part must be taken into consideration and 

account by the concerned authorities, and the work of the networks and the treatment plant shall go on 

parallel. 

17. Eng. Farid Ashour (CMWU) 

• Is the treated water can be used in drip irrigation for agriculture. 

• Study the impact of the treated wastewater on the soil of agriculture land. 

• Concerning impact evaluation (multiplying the impact rate and the size of the impact) asked if this 

formula is developed by the consultant or it is international model. 




18. Mohammed Muammar (Nasser Hospital) 

• If the project is not implemented what will happen and what will be the environmental impacts? Do not 

forget the incident of Om Al Nasser near North Gaza WWTP!! 

• It was a difficult decision to dispose the sewage to the temporary western lagoon and to the sea. 

However if it was not done like that, Khan Younis town could be flooded by waste water. 

• All Khan Younis residents, community groups and leaders, legislative council and government are all 

responsible and guilty for delaying implementing this important project up to date. 

• The project is excellent, and asked how the costs of the project will be financed? 

• How and where the excavated soil produced during the construction phase will be transferred? How the 

smell will be treated? 

• Emphasized on the necessity of infiltrating the treated waste water and to re-use it in agriculture, 

especially as there are water wells in the eastern area are very limited and the available wells are very 

saline. 

• Asked about the route of the effluent pressure line to the sea and its location to minimize impacts. 


Dr. Samir Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

• Due to the workshop’s limited time, we are not able to display all EIA study different details in our 

presentation. However and concerning the no action alternative and the community participation issues 

are considered and included in the EIA report in details. 

• A part of the public hearing/ consultation was undertaken through social survey by getting response on 

335 questionnaires. The overall response was positive concerning the implementation of KY WWTP. 

• Through out the EIA study, there is a management and monitoring plan and the relevant proposed 

steering committee have to follow-up the implementation of the management plan. 

• Concerning the high salinity in the KhanYounis Governorate, it has two sources, sea water intrusion at 

the western side and the lateral saline flow towards the aquifer from the eastern side. 

• The Plant design is flexible, which is based on phases and the plant can be extended. 

• As shown in the presentation and according to the ground water modeling, the ground groundwater 

level will raise, which will increase the ground water storativity. 

• It was illustrated that the ground water depth under the infiltration basin is around 78 m, and according 

to ground water modeling the ground water quality will be improved as the salinity of infiltrated treated 

waste water will be less than the salinity of the existing ground water. 

• Reference to the geotechnical investigation, thick clay layers was found in Muraj area and the 

possibility for infiltrating treated wastewater in the western side will not be feasible. The ground water 

depth in the western areas located close to the sea is shallow and close to the municipal wells. 

• Concerning expanding the sewerage networks it is not recommended to expand the networks without 

implementing the first phase of the treatment plant to avoid more environmental consequences. 

• The calculation of impact evaluation is based on a well known method which is included in many 

references. 




Eng. Ashraf Abu Shamala 

• This workshop is a part of the EIA study and it is one of the important actions taken to assure public 

hearing and community participation. 

• KY WWTP is an extendable treatment plant designed for flow and loads for the year 2025 taking into 

consideration the population’s growth rate. KY WTP will be implanted into phases, where in the year 

2025, 83% of the households of Khan Younis City and 64% of the households of the surrounding 

localities are expected to be connected to sewage networks. 

• The project will be implemented by international and local contractors, and the project will be split into 

packages reference to available resources. Both international and local contractors will be engaged to 

construct the different components as appropriate, and it will be a benefit for local contractors to 

exchange knowledge and codes of practice in constructing such sophisticated project, which needs 

relevant experienced international contractor/s, especially in the treatment processes, AIC and relevant 

electro mechanical fields. 

• Similar successful modality of engaging international and local consultants is currently implemented in 

the current contract of the detailed design phase of KY WWTP by engaging SOGREAH consultants; 

French International consultant and Universal Group; local Palestinian consultant. 

• UNDP will make all possible coordination and efforts to facilitate entering the construction materials 

needed for implementing the project. 

• Concerning the land acquisition, called all concerned parties and authorities to finalize acquiring the 

land required for the infiltration basins, especially as the construction phase is planned to be launched 

after finalizing the detailed design. . 

Dr. Fahed Rabah, Sogreah & UG 

• The Land of the proposed plant is currently a property of Khan Younis Municipality, and there is 

possibility for land extension if it is needed and the plant is an extendable treatment plant. 

• The rapid sand filter is a one of the treatment processes needed to reduce BOD, and suspended solids in 

order to meet the specified effluent criteria in order to be used for infiltration and irrigation purposes. At 

the same moment UV disinfection will be used at last stages to ensure that microbiological contents are 

meeting the specified effluent criteria. 

• According to the ground water modeling, the infiltrated treated waste water will be extended in a spatial 

manner with average diameter of about 7 km, and after 15 years it will not reach the closest municipal 

water well. Accordingly recovery wells for mitigation measures are not required. However for 

agricultural purposes; recovery wells scheme can be established in future reference to available financial 

resources. 

• Mitigation measures have been taken into account in the detailed design to alleviate the odor, such as 

covering the inlet and grit removal units, in addition to selecting aerobic treatment process to minimize 

the odor. 

• The detailed design is including treating the sludge, and the sludge will be composted. Thee compost 

can be distributed to farmers as soil conditioner. 

• Different scenarios of the route of the effluent pressure line have been developed and thoroughly 

discussed with the client and the counterparts taking into consideration all relevant aspects to minimize 

the environmental impacts. 

Prof Samir Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

• Concerning the treatment technology is based on aerobic treatment process, aiming to minimize 

nuisance to community regarding odor emissions. However, in case of mal-function or overloading of 

the treatment plant, the odor emissions can happen due to anaerobic conditions especially if the depth of 

waste water is more than 4 meters. 

• Concerning the excavated soil, there is a great need for the excavated clay soil; which could be used in 

covering Rafah solid waste landfill, which is located beside the permanent eastern site of KY WWTP, 

and also could be used for agricultural purposes. 

• The supporting committee is encouraged to support and enhance all efforts to secure the additional fund 

required to implementing the project. 


19. Tayseer Aziz (Contractor’s Union) 

• Notes that the industrial waste has not been addressed, and it shall be taken into consideration in special 

treatment. 




• Asked about the proper treatment process to minimize odor emission, is aerobic or anaerobic. Why the 

project is not designed to be anaerobic. There is a problem in the Gaza WWTP related to odor. 

20. Yehya Al-Astal (UNRWA) 

• Appreciated the hard efforts done up to date to accelerate the project and thanked all concerned parties. 

• Proposed to distribute the study to professionals and to appoint a local coordinator for the project to 

accelerate its implementation. 

21. Issa al-Nashar (Mayor, Municipality of Rafah) 

• Despite that Khan Younis Municipality has many old trails to have a sewerage system, and having a 

master plan, but it is unfortunate city due to not implementing comprehensive sewage networks and 

treatment plan, which has been stopped in the past few times due to different obstacles and reasons . 

• Asks if there is approval of Israeli concerned authorities on the permanent eastern site of KY WWTP, 

and if the accessibility is granted to enter it. 


Eng. Ashraf Abu Shamala (UNDP) 

• The closest point of the permanent eastern site of KY WWTP is located far by around 450 m from the 

eastern borders of the Gaza Strip in one of the sites’ corners, and by 750 m in the other sites eastern 

corner. Relevant clauses of Oslo Agreement concerning construction close to borders have been 

reviewed. 

• UNDP had carried out several successful security coordination for the detailed design’s working team to 

access KY WWTP eastern site and to perform relevant activities. The topographical survey, 

geotechnical investigations and the EIA on-site activities have been carried out successfully. 

Dr. Fahed Al Rabah, Sogreah & UG 

• Anaerobic treatment process is effective to remove organic materials at the primary stage, however it 

has odor problem which is not preferred and was not selected for KY WWTP. Anaerobic treatment 

process shall be followed by aerobic process to achieve sufficient removal of organic and suspended 

matters. The aerobic treatment is considered the most successful and appropriate treatment for the urban 

areas and this method globally applied. 




Dr. Samir Al-Afifi, Sogreah & UG 

3.7 Closing: 

• Concerning the sludge treatment and reuse, the concerned authorities are enhanced to develop or 

improve the national pertinent regulations to enable using it efficiently in the agricultural sector. 

Prof. Afifi concluded that KY WWTP project is very important and vital project for Khan Younis governorate as it will 

improve the environmental situation and the public health aspects, especially as it classified as and environmental 

project. He assured that all comments raised by the attendees will be considered and adopted in the final report of the 

EIA study, and it is very important to include the EIA mitigation measures in the detailed design and the relevant 

tender documents in order to implement the project efficiently. 

The Workshop Adjourned at 13:30. 




4. Workshops’ Power Point Presentations 

Introductory Session: 

Dr. Samir Afifi,,, EIA team leader 




Session 1: 

Dr. Fahed Rabah ,,, Deputy Project Manager 






















Session 2: 











Session 3: 

Dr. Thaer Abu Shbak,,, 













Session 4: 











مقدمة 

5. Executive summary in Arabic (distributed for the workshop 

attendees) 

: 

لمشروع 

ملخص دراسة تقييم الاثر البيئي 

إنشاء محطة معالجة المياه العادمة في خانيونس 

تقع محافظة خانيونس في الجزء الجنوبي من قطاع غزة ويبلغ عدد سكانها حوالي 295 الف نسمة ، 

ويوجد في المحافظة 7 بلديات وهي خانيونس ، بني سهيلا ، عبسان الكبيرة ، عبسان الجديدة ، 

خزاعة ، الفخاري والقرارة.‏ و تعتبر مدينة خانيونس هي المدينة الأآبر في المحافظة والثانية في 

قطاع غزة حيث يسكنها حوالي 195 الف نسمة.‏ 

تشكل طريقة التخلص من مياه الصرف الصحي في محافظة خانيونس مشكلة آبيرة تلقي بظلالها 

السلبية على وضع البيئة والصحة العامة وتهدد الثروات الطبيعية.‏ و ظلت أزمة الصرف الصحي 

تتفاقم في المحافظة بالرغم من الجهود المتواصلة التي بذلت لانشاء نظام صرف صحي يخدم غالبية 

سكان المحافظة والذي أعيق تنفيذه لأسباب متعددة.‏ وبعد إخلاء المستوطنات الإسرائيلية من 

المستوطنين عام 2005 بدأت فرص الإعمار وإصلاح البنية التحتية المهدمة تصبح أآثر 

حيث تقدمت الحكومة اليابانية في نهاية عام بمنحة آريمة لإنشاء محطة معالجة المياه 

العادمة في خانيونس والتي تقدر قيمتها ب 14.83 مليون دولار وذلك من خلال برنامج الأمم 

أن تساهم السلطة الفلسطينية بتقديم التصاميم التفصيلية للمشروع 

المتحدة الإنمائي 

والتي لم تنفذ في حينه نتيجة لعجز التمويل.‏ وفي نهاية عام وبعد موافقة الحكومة اليابانية 

على إقتطاع تكاليف إجراء التصاميم التفصيلية من الميزانية المرصودة ، تم البدء في العمل عليها 

من خلال برنامج الأمم المتحدة الإنمائي في خطوة متقدمة لإنشاء محطة معالجة المياه 

العادمة في خان يونس،‏ وحصل التحالف الإستشاري والمكون من شرآة SOGREAH الفرنسية 

عطاء تصميم المشروع 

و المجموعة العالمية للهندسة والإستشارات 

والتي تعتبر دراسة تقييم الآثر البيئي للمشروع جزء من هذا العطاء.‏ 

الوضع القائم:‏ 

واقعية ، 

2007 

2005 

(UNDP) 

Group) (Universal على 

(UNDP) على 

تؤآد التقارير الصادرة عن جهات مختلفة بأن منطقة خانيونس تعد من أآثر المناطق التي تعاني من 

مشاآل مياه الصرف الصحي على مستوى مناطق قطاع غزة ، نظراً‏ لحاجتها الحيوية لاستكمال 

المشاريع الخاصة بتجميع و معالجة مياه الصرف الصحي.‏ 

في الوقت الحالي يعتبر غالبية سكان محافظة خانيونس غير متصلين بشبكة صرف صحي ، حيث 

يتم تصريف المياه العادمة عبر حفر امتصاصية والتي يقدر عددها بحوالي 30 الف حفرة 

إمتصاصية.‏ عند امتلائها يتم سحب المياه العادمة منها بواسطة شاحنات تفريغ لتصل في النهاية الى 

الشبكة القائمة من خلال احد مناهل شبكة الصرف الصحي الواقعة في بعض احياء مدينة خانيونس 

والتي تم إنشاءها في السنوات الأخيرة.‏ 




%40 

يقدر حاليا عدد السكان المتصلين بشبكة الصرف الصحي ب من إجمالي سكان المحافظة ، و 

من المتوقع ان يتصل بالشبكة حوالي من سكان مدينة خانيونس في العام 2025 و حوالي 

من باقي سكان المحافظة.‏ 

%83 

%63 

حتى الان لم تخدم منطقة خانيونس بأي محطة آاملة لمعالجة مياه الصرف الصحي.‏ مع العلم ان 

اغلب مياه الصرف الصحي المجمعة من مدينة خانيونس تنقل الى برآة ترشيح مياه الأمطار الواقعة 

شمال حي الأمل و من ثم تحول إلى المحطة المؤقتة لمعالجة مياه الصرف الصحي القريبة من البحر 

والتي تقع في الجزء الغربي للمدينة في منطقة المواصي.‏ حيث يتم تصريف مياه الصرف الصحي 

المعالجة جزئيا من هذه البرك الى البحر وتقدر الكمية التي يتم تصريفها بحوالي 9000 م‎3‎‏/يوميا.‏ 

يعتبر التخلص من مياه الصرف الصحي بالطريقة الحالية في محافظة خانيونس مصدرا آبيرا 

للتلوث البيئي الذي يخلق وضعا غير صحي على مستوى المحافظة،‏ حيث ترتب على ذلك تلوث 

المياه و التربة.‏ وقد أدى ذلك إلى ارتفاع نسبة ترآيز املاح النترات في المياه الجوفية إلى معدلات 

تفوق بكثير الترآيز المسموح به في مياه الشرب والموصى به من قبل منظمة الصحة العالمية.‏ آما 

ادى الوضع الحالي الى انتشار الكثير من الأمراض بين سكان المحافظة حيث اثبتت آثير من 

الدراسات ارتباط هذه الأمراض بتلوث المياه.‏ وآذلك تسبب الوضع الحالي بكثير من الازعاج 

للسكان من خلال انبعاث الروائح الكريهة وانتشار البعوض.‏ 

وصف المشروع:‏ 

سيتم انشاء محطة مياه الصرف الصحي لمحافظة خانيونس ضمن موقع خاص يقع بالقرب من حدود 

المحافظة الشرقية.‏ وسيعالج هذا المشروع المياه العادمة التي تنتج من المحافظة ، وسينتج عن 

المحطة مستوى متقدم من المياه المعالجة ومن ثم سيتم نقلها الى احواض لترشيحها للمياه الجوفية.‏ 

وفي حالة الطوارئ سيتم الضخ الى البحر لفترات محدودة جدا.‏ 

سيتم تصميم محطة معالجة متكاملة تخدم المحافظة للعام 2025 و سيتم تنفيذها على مرحلتين:‏ 

الاولى لاستيعاب تدفق يومي بمعدل حتى العام 

حتى العام 

3 

، 2018 والثانية بمعدل 44000 م 

3 

26000 م 

.2025 

.1 

.2 

.3 

.4 

يحتوي المشروع على المكونات التالية:‏ 

التصميم التفصيلي لمحطة معالجة مياه الصرف الصحي.‏ 

التصميم التفصيلي لاحواض ترشيح المياه المعالجة للخزان الجوفي.‏ 

تصميم الخط الناقل من محطة معالجة مياه الصرف الصحي الي احواض الترشيح و خط 

الطوارئ المؤدي إلى البحر.‏ 

انشاء المرحلة الأولى من محطة معالجة مياه الصرف الصحي شاملة احواض الترشيح 

وخط النقل والطوارئ.‏ 

تبعد محطة مياه الصرف الصحي حوالي 1 آيلومتر عن اقرب منطقة سكنية مع العلم بوجود بعض 

مساآن للمزارعين في المنطقة الزراعية القريبة ، ومكب للنفايات الصلبة خاص بمحافظة رفح.‏ 

وتعود ملكية الارض التي ستقع عليها محطة معالجة مياه الصرف الصحي الى بلدية خانيونس.‏ 




معظم المياه العادمة التي ستصل المحطة ستنقل عبر خطوط ضخ ، والتقنية المقترح استخدامها في 

عملية المعالجة هي طريقة الحماة المنشطة sludge) (Activated والتي تعتبر من افضل الطرق 

التكنولوجية المستخدمة في عمليات المعالجة.‏ 

،BOD 

) (TN والخلو من 

سيتم تصميم المحطة لتعالج المياه العادمة حتى تصل الى مستوى اقل من ‎20‎ملجم/لتر من 

و‎15‎ ملجم/لتر من المواد العالقة ،(SS) واقل من لتر من النيتروجين 

الميكروبات والطفيليات ، بما يتوافق مع الانظمة البيئية الفلسطينية ، مما يجعل المياه المعالجة مقبولة 

لتغذية الخزان الجوفي و ري بعض انواع المحاصيل.‏ 

اهداف دراسة تقييم الاثر البيئي:‏ 

25 ملجم/‏ 

تعتبر هذه الدراسة تقييما للاثار البيئية السلبية والإيجابية التي تنتج عن انشاء هذا المشروع ، 

وتتلخص اهداف هذه الدراسة في التالي:‏ 

التأآد من ان هذا المشروع لن يؤثر سلبيا على البيئة بجوانبها الاجتماعية والاقتصادية ، 

الطبيعية والحيوية.‏ 

تحديد وتقييم اهم الاثار الناتجة سواء الايجابية او السلبية.‏ 

تطوير ووضع الاحتياطات اللازمة لتقليل الاثار السلبية.‏ 

التأآد بان آل الجهات المعنية حكومية ، غير حكومية او سكان محليين على معرفة 

بالمشروع ، وان وجهة نظرهم وملاحظاتهم تؤخذ بالحسبان في إتخاذ القرارات ذات العلاقة 

بتنفيذ المشروع.‏ 

.1 

.2 

.3 

.4 

التاثيرات والمنافع البيئية المتوقعة:‏ 

يعد المشروع مشروعا بيئيا يهدف للمحافظة علي البيئة و الصحة العامة والحد من الآثار السلبية 

الناتجة عن الصرف غير الصحي للمياة العادمة ، حيث تعتبر المشاآل البيئية و الأمراض السائدة و 

المرتبطة بصورة مباشرة أو غير مباشرة بالصرف الصحي في محافظة خانيونس من أعلى 

المعدلات في القطاع.‏ 

1. المنافع والتأثيرات المحتملة في موقع المحطة:‏ 

مرحلة الانشاء:‏ 

تقدر مساحة الأرض المخصصة للمحطة ب‎115‎ دونم و تقع في ارض خالية ولا يوجد أي تجمعات 

سكنية قريبة منها.‏ سيتعرض هذا الموقع لاعمال الحفر والإنشاء حيث سيتم ازالة وترحيل آميات من 

التربة تتكون غالبيتها من الطين.‏ واذا توزعت هذه التربة بشكل عشوائي فسيؤدي ذلك الى تغطية 

الاشجار المجاورة بالغبار.‏ بالمقابل يمكن استخدام التربة المزالة لزيادة خصوبة الأراضي الزراعية 

الرملية وآذلك تغطية مكب النفايات الصلبة المجاور لموقع المحطة.‏ 

سيتم وضع برامج خاصة بمعالجة الآثار السلبية أو تخفيفها آما هو موضح بصورة مختصرة في 

خطة الادارة البيئية.‏ 




سيكون لنشاطات البناء في موقع المحطة تأثيرات اقتصادية و اجتماعية ايحابية ناتجة عن خلق 

فرص عمل مؤقتة لسكان المنطقة المجاورة للمشروع بشكل خاص وسكان المحافظة بشكل عام.‏ 

مرحلة التشغيل:‏ 

بالنسبة لمرحلة عمل وتشغيل و صيانة محطة المعالجة قد يحدث ازعاج مؤقت ومحدود جدا 

للتجمعات السكنية القريبة وذلك تبعا لحرآة الرياح الشرقية خلال ساعات الليل فقط.‏ ومع ذلك فان 

تاثيرات الرائحة ستكون طفيفة وذلك لان الرياح السائدة التي تهب في المنطقة تاتي من الجهة الغربية 

، والمنطقة المحيطة بالمحطة غير آهلة بالسكان ، اضافة إلى ان النظام المقترح في المعالجة 

لايحتوي على احواض معالجة لاهوائية و التي تكون عادة هي المصدر الرئيسي لإنبعاث الروائح.‏ 

بالمقابل سيكون أثناء فترة تشغيل المحطة تاثيرات بيئية وصحية ايجابية على المدى الطويل لجميع 

سكان المحافظة ، اضافة الى ان المحطة ستوفر آميات من المياه والحمأة المعالجة التي يمكن 

استخدامها في الانشطة الزراعية بشرط استخدامها حسب المعايير المعتمدة ، آذلك ستوفر اعمال 

تشغيل وصيانة المحطة فرص عمل دائمة و مؤقتة سواء للمتخصصين او العمال.‏ 




2. التاثيرات والمنافع في موقع احواض الترشيح الى المياه الجوفية 


تقدر مساحة الأرض المقترحة لأحواض الترشيح بحوالي 95 دونم و تقع في ارض زراعية في 

منطقة الفخاري.‏ سيتعرض هذا الموقع لاعمال الحفر حيث سيتم ازالة وترحيل آميات من التربة 

تتكون غالبيتها من الطين.‏ حيث يمكن استخدام التربة المزالة لزيادة خصوبة الأراضي الزراعية 

الرملية وآذلك تغطية مكب النفايات الصلبة المجاور لموقع المحطة.‏ 

سيتسبب مرور وسائل النقل اثناء الحفرونقل التربة من خلال المناطق السكنية في ازعاج 

المواطنين ) ضوضاء،‏ غبار،‏ دخان عادم السيارات)‏ والتي يجب اخذ الإجراءات التخفيفية الكافية 

للحد منها.‏ 

سيكون لنشاطات الإنشاء في موقع احواض الترشيح تاثيرات اقتصادية واجتماعية ايجابية نتيجة 

لتوفر فرص عمل للمواطنين المجاوريين للمشروع.‏ 


يتوافق ترشيح المياه المعالجة للخزان الجوفي في منطقة الفخاري مع الإستراتيجية المائية الفلسطينية 

في ظل عدم توفر مصدر آاف للمياه ، خاصة وأن المياه الجوفية في المنطقة الشرقية محدودة جدا 

وتعاني من إرتفاع شديد في مستوى الملوحة ، حيث يتراوح ترآيز املاح الكلوريد في المياه الجوفية 

التي تقع بالقرب من احواض الترشيح بين 2000 ملج/لتر،‏ لذلك فان اضافة المياه المعالجة 

للخزان الجوفي سوف تقلل من ملوحة المياه الجوفية وتؤدي إلى تحسين نوعيتها.‏ 

1500 و 

من المتوقع انه بعد 15 سنة من الترشيح في المنطقة سيكون هناك خزان جوفي محلي،‏ بسمك اآثر 

من 50 م تحت منطقة احواض الترشيح ويمتد بقطر وحسب نتائج النموذج الرياضي الذي 

اعتمدت عليه الدراسة فان المياه المعالجة التي يتم ترشيحها لن تصل الى أي من آبار البلديات 

المجاورة التي تستخدم للإستهلاك المنزلي.‏ وبالتالي ستوفر احواض الترشيح زيادة في المياه الجوفية 

في المنطقة التي يمكن ان تستعمل في ري الاراضي الزراعية القريبة بعد ضخها عبر الآبار 

وتحسين الإنتاج الزراعي.‏ 

7 آم.‏ 

من المتوقع بعد تشغيل احواض الترشيح ايجاد بيئة حيوية جديدة للكائنات الحية وخصوصا الطيور 

التي ستجد لها مكان ملاءم للحياة ، إضافة الى ما سبق ستوفر أعمال التشغيل و الصيانة والمراقبة 

في موقع احواض الترشيح وظائف دائمة و مؤقتة للسكان المحليين.‏ 

SOGREAH/UG CONSULTANTS 210



3. الاثر الناتج عن خط انابيب البحر الطارئ:‏ 


سيتم إنشاء خط ضغط رئيسي بطول 18 آم وقطر ‎80‎سم لنقل المياه المعالجة من المحطة إلى 

احواض الترشيح والى البحر في حالة الطوارئ.‏ ستتسبب نشاطات الحفر والترآيب لخط الضخ 

بإزعاج مؤقت للمواطنين في منطقة العمل ‏(ضوضاء ، غبار،‏ دخان عادم)‏ ويمكن ان تظهر حالات 

ازدحام مرورية بسيطة بسبب حرآة المرآبات.‏ آذلك فان انشاء خط الانابيب سيكون له اثار ايجابية 

وذلك نتيجة لخلق فرص عمل جديدة.‏ 


سيتم ضخ المياه المعالجة جزئيا في حالة الطوارئ الى البحر حين يكون هناك اعطال رئيسية في 

محطة المعالجة مما يتعذر ضخ الناتج إلى احواض الترشيح.‏ ومن المتوقع ان ينتج عن ذلك تاثيرات 

سلبية مؤقتة على نوعية مياه البحر والحياة البحرية خلال فترة الضخ الطارئة.‏ 

خطة الادارة البيئية وتقليل الآثار البيئية:‏ 

من خلال هذه الدراسة تم اقتراح خطة للادارة البيئية والمراقبة والتي ستساعد الجهات المنفذة 

والمشغلة للمشروع على تقليل التاثيرات السلبية من خلال تنفيذ الإجراءات التخفيفية المقترحة.‏ 

سيؤدي تنفيذ هذه الخطة الى زيادة ايجابيات المشروع ومنافعه وتتلخص خطة المراقبة البيئية 

المقترحة في العناصر التالية:‏ 

مراقبة عملية معالجة المياه العادمة والحماة من خلال اخذ عينات بشكل دوري 

رصد تسرب ورشح المياه من عناصر المشروع.‏ 

مراقبة نوعية المياه الجوفية في آبار اختباريه حول الموقع.‏ 

مراقبة مياه البحر من خلال اخذ عينات من المياه والتربة.‏ 

. 

مراقبة معدل انتشار البعوض في المناطق السكنية المجاورة وانتشار الروائح الكريهة.‏ 

للعاملين و إعطائهم اللقاحات اللازمة للوقاية من 

الطبية الدورية إجراء الفحوصات الأمراض.‏ 

.1 

.2 

.3 

.4 

.5 

.6 

و يمكن تلخيص اهم الإجراءات التخفيفية التي يجب تنفيذها للحد من الآثار السلبية للمشروع في 

الجداول التالية:‏ 




الآثار البيئية السلبية خلال مرحلة الإنشاء * 

إجراءات التخفيف 

الآثار 

- استخدام وسائل حماية الأذن من الضوضاء عند العمل 

الضوضاء من معدات الإنشاء 

على مسافات تقل من 5 م من معدات الإنشاء.‏ 

انتشار التربة والغبار نتيجة أعمال الحفر - تنفيذ إجراءات لمنع انتشار الغبار عن طريق رش 

الطرق المؤقتة المستخدمة للوصول للموقع بالماء.‏ 

والانبعاث من معدات الإنشاء 

تراآم آميات من التربة الطينية نتيجة أعمال - استخدام هذه التربة في تغطية مكب النفايات الصلبة 

المجاور للمحطة.‏ 

الحفر.‏ 

- استخدام التربة الناتجة في تحسين خصوبة التربة 

الرملية لغرض زراعتها.‏ 

إعاقة المرور على الطرق نتيجة حرآة - استخدام الطرق البديلة 

- اختيار الأوقات الملائمة للحرآة 

معدات الإنشاء 

انبعاث الغازات من عوادم السيارات - عمل الصيانة الدورية للمعدات للتقليل من الإنبعاثات 

التعرض لظروف خطرة خلال أعمال الحفر 

والإنشاء 

* 

الضارة.‏ 

- استخدام إجراءات الوقاية والحماية للعاملين آاستخدام 

السياج وأطواق الحماية وارتداء مستلزمات الأمان و 

السلامة.‏ 

- تزويد موقع الإنشاء بمحطة إسعاف أولية ووسيلة 

اتصال سريع.‏ 

الآثار البيئية السلبية خلال مرحلة التشغيل 

إجراءات التخفيف 

الآثار 

- استخدام وسائل تصريف محكمة للمياه الخارجة من 

تلوث التربة نتيجة لنقل او ترحيل الحمأة الحمأة لضمان عدم تسربها للتربة.‏ 

وتخزينها 

- تنفيذ نظام عزل محكم لأحواض المعالجة وخطوط 

تلوث المياه الجوفية نتيجة امكانية حدوث النقل لمنع الرشح للتربة التحتية والمياه الجوفية.‏ 

رشح من خلال احواض معالجة المياه العادمة او تجفيف الحماة او الخطوط الناقلة 

انبعاث روائح من أحواض تجفيف الحمأة 

ومصائد الرمل في بداية المحطة.‏ 

تكاثر البعوض والحشرات الضارة.‏ 

تدهور الوضع الصحي للعاملين بالمحطة.‏ 

تلوث مياه البحر نتيجة الضخ في حالة 

الطوارئ.‏ 

- تنفيذ إجراءات التحكم مثل تغطية مصيدة الرمل وتفادي 

تخزين الحمأة المجففة لمدة طويلة في الموقع.‏ 

- زراعة حزام اخضر حول محطة المعالجة وتوفير ادارة 

سليمة لمنشآت المحطة بحيث تتضاءل فرص تكون 

الروائح وانتشارها خارج المحطة.‏ 

- استخدام المبيدات الحشرية للقضاء على مواطن تكاثر 

البعوض ‏(استخدام المبيدات البيولوجية الغير ضارة 

بالإنسان)‏ 

- إجراء الفحوصات الطبية الدورية للعاملين بالمحطة.‏ 

- إعطاء اللقاحات اللازمة.‏ 

- توفير وحدة إسعاف أولية بشكل دائم في مكان المحطة.‏ 

- استخدام إجراءات الوقاية والحماية لمنع السباحة 

والصيد بالقرب من مكان المصب.‏ 

- التأآد من أن جرعة التعقيم للمياه التي تضخ إلى البحر 

باستخدام الاشعة الفوق بنفسجية آافية لضمان قتل 

الميكروبات والجراثيم.‏ 




* 

لمراجعة التفاصيل الخاصة بدراسة الاثار المحتملة و اجراء التخفيف المقترحة يمكن الرجوع الى التقرير الكامل و الخاص بدراسة الاثر 

البيئى 




6. Photos of the workshop 







Annex 4 (Photos) 

1. Sea-outfall Site 

1.1 Filed measurements at Sea outfall site 1.2 Filed measurements at sea outfall site 

1.3 Typical Flora Species at KhanYounis Sea outfall site 1.4 KhanYounis Existing Sea outfall site 

1.5 Beach of KhanYounis at the sea outfall site 1.6 Beach of KhanYounis at the sea outfall site 




2. Coastal Infiltration Site vicinity (Al-Mawasi) 

2.1 Palm trees around the site 2.2 Cultivated areas around the site 

2.3 Sand dunes at the site 2.4 Sand dunes at the site 




3. Morage Infiltration Site 

3.1 Filed measurements at the site 3.2 Deep boreholes for geotechnical investigation 

3.3 .Al-Aqsa University near the site 3.4 Al-Aqsa University near the site 

3.5 Existing water well at the site 3.6 Cultivated area at the site 




4. Al Fukhari Infiltration Site (Al-Fukhari) 

4.1- Cultivated area at the site 4.2- Meetings with the local communities 

4.3- Cultivated area at the site 4.4- Flora Species at the site 

4.5- Biodiversity at the site 4.6- Cultivated area at the site 




5. Allocated site of KY WWTP 

5.1 Field measurements at the site 5.2 Field measurements at the site 

5.3 Flora at the site 5.4 Rafah Landfill site to the South-West of the proposed site 

5.5 Old wastewater dumping site (the proposed site) 




6. Socio-Economic field investigation 

6.1- interview with local community members 6.2- interview with local community members 






Annex 5 (Facility Site Maps) 

Access roads to KY WWTP 




Water supply to KYWWTP site – point of water supply connection 




Electricity connection to KYWWTP site – point of electricity connection 




Annex 6 (Terms of reference and EQA approval) 

1. TOR 

2. EQA approval 




1. TOR 




2. EQA approval

EIA Study- Final Report-May 10 - UNDP

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?