JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY (JICA)

DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE

MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
MALAYSIA

THE PREPARATORY SURVEY

FOR INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT
INCORPORATING INTEGRATED FLOOD MANAGEMENT
WITH ADAPTATION OF CLIMATE CHANGE

FINAL REPORT

Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

JANUARY 2011

CTI ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD.

YACHIYO ENGINEERING CO., LTD.
GED
CR(10)
11-031
 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY (JICA)

DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE

MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT
MALAYSIA

THE PREPARATORY SURVEY

FOR INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT
INCORPORATING INTEGRATED FLOOD
MANAGEMENT
WITH ADAPTATION OF CLIMATE CHANGE

FINAL REPORT

Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

JANUARY 2011

CTI ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD.

YACHIYO ENGINEERING CO., LTD.
The Currency Exchange Rate as of September 13, 2010 is as follows:

RM 1.00 = JPY 27.08

List of Reports
Summary
Volume 1: Common Contexts
Volume 2: Muar River Basin
Volume 3: Pahang River Basin
VOLUME 3.
PAHANG RIVER BASIN
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Location Map
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Plates
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

The Pahang River

sandbar

Estuary of the Pahang River with sandbars enclosing Lower midstream of the Pahang River, at Lubok
the river mouth, leaving narrow outlet to the South Paku, Maran District.
China Sea.

Water Utilization

There are a number of irrigation schemes in the Some upstream stretches of the river is being used for
Pahang River Basin. This is the Paya Kertau recreational purposes by the local people.
Irrigation Scheme at Maran District.

Environmental Issues Flood Management Facilities

There are a number of sand dredging projects The existing flood warning siren at Kpg. Chedong,
alongside the Pahang River. Improper management Maran.
of these sand dredging operations may result in
siltation of river water.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Plates The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

2007 Flood

The December 2007 flood in Mentakab Town. A The owners of commercial premises in Mentakab
major part of the town center was seriously Town were suffering serious flood damages and
inundated. financial losses in the December 2007 flood.

Semantan River

Interview with local residents at Taman Sagumpas 1 Resident pointing the flood level by December 2007
Date : 27th April 2010 flood at commercial area of Mentakab Town
Venue : Mentakab, Pahang

Pahang River at Semantant River confluence point. Aquaculture in Semantan River upstream of Temerloh
Semantan River on the left hand side. Town

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

The Preparatory Survey

for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Integrated Flood Management
with Adaptation of Climate Change

Final Report
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table of Contents

Location Map of Pahang River Basins

Plates
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................. i
List of Tables....................................................................................................................................... vi
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................... xi
Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................... xvi
Measurement Units ........................................................................................................................ xviii

CHAPTER 1 Physical and Biological Condition....................................................................1-1

1.1 Topography.........................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Geology ..........................................................................................................................1-2
1.3 Meteorology and Hydrology ..............................................................................................1-2
1.3.1 Rainfall .....................................................................................................................1-5
1.3.2 Tide ..........................................................................................................................1-5
1.4 River Condition ..................................................................................................................1-6
1.4.1 River System ............................................................................................................1-6
1.4.2 River Features...........................................................................................................1-7
1.4.3 River Structures ......................................................................................................1-10
1.4.4 Bank Erosion .......................................................................................................... 1-11
1.4.5 Sediment Condition and Sediment Load ................................................................1-12
1.4.6 River Landscape .....................................................................................................1-12
1.5 Flood Condition................................................................................................................1-13
1.5.1 General Feature of Flood........................................................................................1-13
1.5.2 Past Flood Event.....................................................................................................1-14
1.5.3 Probable Inundation Area .......................................................................................1-17
1.5.4 Vulnerable Area to Flood........................................................................................1-18
1.6 Ecosystem ........................................................................................................................1-18
1.6.1 Environmental Sensitive Areas...............................................................................1-19
1.7 Water Resources Potential ................................................................................................1-21
1.7.1 Surface Water .........................................................................................................1-21
1.7.2 Groundwater ...........................................................................................................1-22
1.7.3 Drought Frequency and Past Damage ....................................................................1-22
CHAPTER 2 Socioeconomic Condition ..................................................................................2-1
2.1 Local Government ..............................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Legislation and Institution..................................................................................................2-1
2.2.1 Legislation ................................................................................................................2-1
2.2.2 Institution..................................................................................................................2-3
2.3 Population and Economic Profile .......................................................................................2-5
2.3.1 Population.................................................................................................................2-5
2.3.2 Gross Regional Domestic Products (GRDP)............................................................2-5
2.3.3 Labor Forces and Industrial Perspectives .................................................................2-6

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and i

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

2.4 Agriculture, Stockbreeding and Fishery .............................................................................2-6

2.4.1 Agriculture................................................................................................................2-6
2.4.2 Stockbreeding ...........................................................................................................2-7
2.4.3 Fishery ......................................................................................................................2-8
2.5 Water Use and Water Resources .........................................................................................2-9
2.5.1 Outline of Water Resources Development................................................................2-9
2.5.2 Domestic and Industrial Water Supply .....................................................................2-9
2.5.3 Irrigation .................................................................................................................2-19
2.5.4 Hydro-Electric Power Generation ..........................................................................2-20
2.5.5 Navigation ..............................................................................................................2-22
2.6 River Water Quality ..........................................................................................................2-22
2.6.1 Environmental/Water Quality Safeguarding...........................................................2-22
2.6.2 River Water Quality Monitoring.............................................................................2-24
2.6.3 Management of Pollution Sources..........................................................................2-27
2.7 Land Use .........................................................................................................................2-36
2.7.1 Regional Development Context..............................................................................2-36
2.7.2 Land Use in the Pahang River Basin ......................................................................2-38
2.7.3 River Reserve..........................................................................................................2-40
2.8 River Basin Information Management .............................................................................2-41
2.8.1 National Spatial Data Infrastructure .......................................................................2-41
2.8.2 River Basin Information System by DID ...............................................................2-42
CHAPTER 3 Climate Change Impact Analysis .....................................................................3-1
3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Analysis of Observed Data .................................................................................................3-1
3.2.1 Temperature Data......................................................................................................3-2
3.2.2 Rainfall Data.............................................................................................................3-4
3.2.3 Tide Data...................................................................................................................3-7
3.2.4 Overview of the Observed Data................................................................................3-8
3.3 Availability of Climate Change Projection Data ................................................................3-8
3.3.1 GCM Data.................................................................................................................3-8
3.3.2 RCM Data.................................................................................................................3-9
3.3.3 Emission Scenarios.................................................................................................3-10
3.4 Climate Change Impact Analysis with Climate Model Result .........................................3-11
3.4.1 Impact on Temperature ...........................................................................................3-11
3.4.2 Impact on Rainfall and Evapotranspiration ............................................................3-11
3.4.3 Sea Level Rise ........................................................................................................3-15
CHAPTER 4 Basic Analysis and Survey for IRBM and IFM Planning ..............................4-1
4.1 Digital Terrain Modeling and GIS Database ......................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Generation of DTM ..................................................................................................4-1
4.1.2 Preparation of GIS Database ....................................................................................4-2
4.2 Cross-Sectional Survey.......................................................................................................4-4
4.2.1 Target Rivers and Cross Section Locations ..............................................................4-4
4.2.2 Details of the Main Operations.................................................................................4-5
4.2.3 Results of Cross-Sectional Survey............................................................................4-6
4.3 Population Projection..........................................................................................................4-6
4.4 Hydrological Analysis ......................................................................................................4-10
4.4.1 Objective and Analysis Process ..............................................................................4-10
4.4.2 Data Availability .....................................................................................................4-10
4.4.3 Rainfall Analysis.....................................................................................................4-12
4.4.4 Development of the Flood Simulation Model ........................................................4-16
4.4.5 Flood Prediction......................................................................................................4-22
4.5 Methodology of Economic Analysis.................................................................................4-26
4.5.1 Estimation of Flood Damage ..................................................................................4-26
4.5.2 Economic Analysis .................................................................................................4-27

ii CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

4.6 Climate Change Impact Assessment on Water Resources................................................4-33

4.6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................4-33
4.6.2 Development of Long-term Runoff Model.............................................................4-33
4.6.3 Climate Change Impact on Water Resources .........................................................4-36
CHAPTER 5 Preparation of IRBM Plan................................................................................5-1
5.1 Basic Conditions for Preparation of IRBM Plan ................................................................5-1
5.1.1 Objectives of IRBM Plan .........................................................................................5-1
5.1.2 Target Year of IRBM Plan ........................................................................................5-1
5.2 Identification of Issues for IRBM.......................................................................................5-1
5.2.1 Water Utilization.......................................................................................................5-1
5.2.2 Environment .............................................................................................................5-8
5.2.3 Flood.......................................................................................................................5-15
5.3 Core Issues and Problem Analysis....................................................................................5-19
5.3.1 Identification of Core Issues...................................................................................5-19
5.3.2 Problem Analysis....................................................................................................5-19
5.4 Federal and State Policies.................................................................................................5-28
5.4.1 Federal Policies ......................................................................................................5-28
5.4.2 State Structural Plan 2020 ......................................................................................5-30
5.5 Proposed Policies, Strategies, Measures and Projects/Actions.........................................5-32
5.5.1 Proposed Policies....................................................................................................5-32
5.5.2 Strengthen Institutional Setup ................................................................................5-32
5.5.3 Ensure Sustainable Water Utilization .....................................................................5-46
5.5.4 Create a Sustainable and Pleasant River Environment...........................................5-60
5.5.5 Build a Resilient Society to Floods ........................................................................5-84
5.6 Roadmap for Implementation of IRBM Plan ...................................................................5-84
CHAPTER 6 Formulation of IFM Plan..................................................................................6-1
6.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................6-1
6.1.1 Policy, Strategies and Measures ...............................................................................6-1
6.1.2 Objective of IFM Plan ..............................................................................................6-1
6.2 Past and On-going Flood Mitigation Activities ..................................................................6-2
6.2.1 Structural Measures ..................................................................................................6-2
6.2.2 Non-Structural Measures..........................................................................................6-5
6.2.3 Maintenance of River and Drainage Structures...................................................... 6-11
6.3 Planning of Framework ....................................................................................................6-12
6.3.1 Target Year of IFM Plan .........................................................................................6-12
6.3.2 Setup of Future Conditions.....................................................................................6-12
6.3.3 Design Scale of Structural Measures......................................................................6-12
6.3.4 IFM Approach ........................................................................................................6-12
6.4 Proposed Measures for IFM Plan .....................................................................................6-13
6.4.1 Structural Measures ................................................................................................6-13
6.4.2 Examination of Structural Measures ......................................................................6-13
6.4.3 Non-Structural Measures........................................................................................6-17
6.5 Organization for Implementation .....................................................................................6-21
6.5.1 Implementation Program ........................................................................................6-21
6.5.2 Organization for Implementation ...........................................................................6-21
6.6 Environmental and Social Considerations........................................................................6-22
6.6.1 Necessity of IEE .....................................................................................................6-22
6.6.2 Scoping (Preliminary Scoping) ..............................................................................6-24
6.7 Selection of Project for Feasibility Study.........................................................................6-26
CHAPTER 7 Basic Studies for Feasibility Study on Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project ..7-1
7.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................7-1
7.1.1 Project Area ..............................................................................................................7-1
7.1.2 Project Purpose and Project Component ..................................................................7-1

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and iii

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

7.2 Description of Project Area ................................................................................................7-2

7.2.1 Natural Condition .....................................................................................................7-2
7.2.2 Socio-Economic Condition.......................................................................................7-4
7.2.3 Past Flood Event .......................................................................................................7-6
7.3 Preparation of Ortho-map and Cross Section Survey .........................................................7-8
7.3.1 Objectives .................................................................................................................7-8
7.3.2 Preparation of Ortho-map .........................................................................................7-8
7.3.3 River and Drainage Cross Section Survey................................................................7-9
7.4 Geological Survey ............................................................................................................7-10
7.5 Asset Assessment Survey .................................................................................................7-14
7.5.1 Target Property and Sampling Number ..................................................................7-14
7.5.2 Survey Result..........................................................................................................7-15
7.6 Hydrological and Hydraulic Studies.................................................................................7-15
7.6.1 Flood Simulation ....................................................................................................7-15
7.6.2 Stormwater Runoff Analysis...................................................................................7-22
7.7 Preliminary Design for Structural Measures.....................................................................7-26
7.7.1 Design Criteria........................................................................................................7-26
7.7.2 Proposed Flood Control Facilities ..........................................................................7-27
7.7.3 Study Case for Structural Measures........................................................................7-29
7.7.4 Alternative 1 ...........................................................................................................7-29
7.7.5 Alternative 2 ...........................................................................................................7-31
7.7.6 Comparison between Alternative 1 and 2 ..............................................................7-33
7.8 Cost Estimate for Structural Alternative Measures...........................................................7-34
7.8.1 Constitution and Conditions of Project cost ...........................................................7-34
7.9 Methodologies Economic Evaluation...............................................................................7-37
7.9.1 Objective.................................................................................................................7-37
7.9.2 Preconditions ..........................................................................................................7-37
7.9.3 Mesh Data...............................................................................................................7-38
7.9.4 Benefits ...................................................................................................................7-38
7.9.5 Costs .......................................................................................................................7-39
7.9.6 Calculation of Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction ...........................7-40
7.9.7 Calculation of EIRR, B/C and NPV .......................................................................7-41
CHAPTER 8 Feasibility Study on Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project ...............................8-1
8.1 Proposed Structural Measures ............................................................................................8-1
8.1.1 Design Concept.........................................................................................................8-1
8.1.2 Studies on Alternatives .............................................................................................8-2
8.1.3 Selection of Optimum Plan.......................................................................................8-8
8.1.4 River Amenity and Landscaping...............................................................................8-9
8.2 Proposed Non-Structural Plan ..........................................................................................8-11
8.2.1 Existing Non-structural Measures in Temerloh Area..............................................8-11
8.2.2 Current Condition of the Project Area ....................................................................8-19
8.2.3 Issues on Non-structural Measures in the Project Area ..........................................8-23
8.2.4 Proposed Non-structural Measures.........................................................................8-24
8.3 Adaptation of Climate Change .........................................................................................8-31
8.3.1 Concept of Adaptation Measures............................................................................8-31
8.3.2 Necessity and Point of Adaptation Measures .........................................................8-31
8.3.3 Flood Risk Assessment ...........................................................................................8-32
8.3.4 Proposed Adaptation Measures...............................................................................8-39
8.4 Implementation Plan.........................................................................................................8-40
8.4.1 Project Cost.............................................................................................................8-40
8.4.2 Implementation Schedule .......................................................................................8-41
8.4.3 Organization for Project implementation................................................................8-44
8.4.4 Economic Evaluation and Financial Considerations ..............................................8-47
8.5 Environmental and Social Consideration .........................................................................8-51

iv CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

8.5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................8-51

8.5.2 Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE)..................................................................8-52
8.5.3 Discussion on Necessity of EIA with DID .............................................................8-60
8.5.4 Mitigation and Monitoring Plan .............................................................................8-60
8.6 Toward Project Implementation .......................................................................................8-68
8.6.1 Operation and Effect Monitoring Indicators...........................................................8-68
8.6.2 Consulting Services ................................................................................................8-68

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and v

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

List of Tables

Table 1.3.1 Monthly Average Sea Levels at Tanjung Gelang ......................................................1-6

Table 1.4.1 10 year Average of Monthly Averaged and Maximum and Minimum Daily
Discharge (St. 357410)..............................................................................................1-8
Table 1.4.2 Annual Discharge/ Rainfall Volume and Runoff Ratio of Pahang River Basin ........1-9
Table 1.4.3 Major River Structures............................................................................................1-10
Table 1.4.4 Dam and Reservoir Operated by DID .....................................................................1-11
Table 1.5.1 Flood Condition on January 1971 Flood.................................................................1-15
Table 1.5.2 Number of Evacuees by dstrict (Nov. 1988 flood)..................................................1-16
Table 1.5.3 Peak Water Level ....................................................................................................1-16
Table 1.5.4 Maximum Number of Evacuees (6th to 29th Dec.) ................................................1-16
Table 1.5.5 Vulnerable Areas .....................................................................................................1-18
Table 1.6.1 Common Flora Species in the Pahang River Basin.................................................1-18
Table 1.6.2 Criteria and Development Control for ESA............................................................1-20
Table 1.7.1 Comparison of Water Resources .............................................................................1-22
Table 2.1.1 Local Administrative Units in Pahang River Basin ..................................................2-1
Table 2.2.1 Tasks of Relevant Agencies for River Basin Management .......................................2-3
Table 2.3.1 Population and Population Density ...........................................................................2-5
Table 2.3.2 GRDP in 2000 ...........................................................................................................2-5
Table 2.3.3 Labor Forces .............................................................................................................2-6
Table 2.3.4 Labor Forces by Sector .............................................................................................2-6
Table 2.4.1 Planted Area by Major Crop .....................................................................................2-7
Table 2.4.2 Planted Area of Other Crops .....................................................................................2-7
Table 2.4.3 Livestock in the Pahang River Basin ........................................................................2-8
Table 2.4.4 Number of Fishermen in the Pahang River Basin.....................................................2-8
Table 2.4.5 Number of Ponds and Cages in the Pahang River Basin ..........................................2-9
Table 2.4.6 Production of Aquaculture in the Pahang River Basin (2008) ..................................2-9
Table 2.5.1 Treatment Plants in the Pahang River Basin ...........................................................2-11
Table 2.5.2 Current Consumption of Domestic Water in Pahang River Basin ..........................2-13
Table 2.5.3 Existing and Proposed Dams in Pahang River basin ..............................................2-13
Table 2.5.4 Domestic and Industrial Water Demand in the Pahang River basin........................2-14
Table 2.5.5 Proposed Source Works in the Pahang River basin ................................................2-15
Table 2.5.6 Source Works of Pahang to South Selangor Water Transfer ...................................2-18
Table 2.5.7 Source Works of Pahang to North Selangor Water Transfer ...................................2-18
Table 2.5.8 Small-Scale Irrigation Schemes in Pahang River Basin (2007)..............................2-19
Table 2.5.9 Irrigation Schedule for non-granary schemes .........................................................2-19
Table 2.5.10 Projected Annual Irrigation Water Demand Pahang River basin ............................2-20
Table 2.5.11 Existing Hydro-Electric Power Station ...................................................................2-21
Table 2.5.12 Prospective Major Hydropower Projects ................................................................2-21
Table 2.5.13 Hydropower Project in Implementation..................................................................2-21
Table 2.6.1 Summary of Main Activities under DOE’s Jurisdiction..........................................2-22
Table 2.6.2 DOE Water Quality Index Classification ................................................................2-24
Table 2.6.3 Water Quality Status of the Pahang River and its Tributaries, 2004-2007..............2-26
Table 2.7.1 Land Use Planning Framework in Malaysia ...........................................................2-36
Table 2.7.2 Breakdown of Existing and Future Land Uses........................................................2-38
Table 2.7.3 Minimum River Reserve Widths.............................................................................2-40
Table 2.8.1 Categorization under the RBIS ...............................................................................2-43
Table 3.1.1 Impact Projection on Asia Region by IPCC..............................................................3-1
Table 3.3.1 Data Availablity of GCMs.........................................................................................3-8
Table 3.3.2 Data Availablity of RCMs .........................................................................................3-9
Table 3.3.3 SRES Scenarios.......................................................................................................3-10
Table 3.4.1 Projected Surface Temperature of Pahang River Basin ..........................................3-11
Table 3.4.2 GCMs Utilized for Climate Change Impact Analysis on Precipitation...................3-12

vi CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 3.4.3 8 days Rainfall and Incremental Ratio obtained based on CGCM3.1(T47),
Canada ....................................................................................................................3-13
Table 3.4.4 Incremental Ratio of 8 days Rainfalls for Various ARI and Period ........................3-13
Table 3.4.5 GCMs and RCMs used for Analysis.......................................................................3-14
Table 3.4.6 Incremental Ratio of Annual and Monthly Precipitation and Evapotranspiration
Relative to 1990 ......................................................................................................3-15
Table 3.4.7 Projected Global Average Sea Level Rise...............................................................3-15
Table 4.1.1 Map Projection, Coordinates System and Vertical Datum........................................4-2
Table 4.1.2 Layer Structure of GIS Database ..............................................................................4-3
Table 4.1.3 Main Categories of the Land Use Data.....................................................................4-3
Table 4.3.1 Population Projection by Sub-District ......................................................................4-7
Table 4.3.2 Population Projection by Local Authority ................................................................4-8
Table 4.4.1 List of River Gauge Stations................................................................................... 4-11
Table 4.4.2 List of Rain Gauge Stations ....................................................................................4-12
Table 4.4.3 Basin Mean Annual Maximum 8 day Rainfall........................................................4-14
Table 4.4.4 8 day Rainfall for Various Return Periods ..............................................................4-15
Table 4.4.5 Sub-basin Surface Classification ............................................................................4-16
Table 4.4.6 Hydrological Model Parameters .............................................................................4-19
Table 4.4.7 Hydraulic Parameters..............................................................................................4-20
Table 4.4.8 Enlargement and Incremental Ratio for simulation ................................................4-23
Table 4.4.9 Proportion of Pervious and Impervious Area..........................................................4-23
Table 4.4.10 Proportion of Pervious and Impervious Area..........................................................4-24
Table 4.4.11 River Water Level at Selected Points......................................................................4-25
Table 4.4.12 Projected River Water Level at Pekan ....................................................................4-26
Table 4.5.1 Damage Rates for Houses and Housing Movables.................................................4-29
Table 4.5.2 Damage Rates for Public Structures and Their Movables ......................................4-30
Table 4.5.3 Damage Rates for Paddy.........................................................................................4-30
Table 4.5.4 Damage Rates for Rubber.......................................................................................4-30
Table 4.5.5 Damage Rates for Palms.........................................................................................4-30
Table 4.5.6 Damage Rates for Other Crop Trees .......................................................................4-31
Table 4.5.7 Damage Rates for Horticulture ...............................................................................4-31
Table 4.5.8 Basic Unit of Damages in Built Up Areas ..............................................................4-31
Table 4.5.9 Basic Unit of Damages to Paddy and Other Crops.................................................4-32
Table 4.5.10 Share Rate of Planted Area by Crops......................................................................4-32
Table 4.5.11 Annual Average Mitigated Damages to Be Expected .............................................4-32
Table 4.6.1 Meteorological Data Used to Estimate Evapotranspiration ....................................4-34
Table 4.6.2 Incremental Ratio Relative to 1990 ........................................................................4-37
Table 4.6.3 Annual Average, and Monthly Maximum and Minimum Discharge......................4-39
Table 4.6.4 Environmental Flow Defined in Tennant Method ..................................................4-39
Table 5.1.1 Planning Terms of Past Similar Studies ....................................................................5-1
Table 5.2.1 Summary of Major Water Utilization Issues in relation to IRBM ............................5-1
Table 5.2.2 Distribution of Authority for Water Utilization ........................................................5-2
Table 5.2.3 An Overview of Potential Environmental Issues......................................................5-9
Table 5.2.4 Distribution of TSS levels....................................................................................... 5-11
Table 5.2.5 Issues for IRBM related to Flood............................................................................5-16
Table 5.2.6 Summary of Flood Records for Pahang River Basin ..............................................5-16
Table 5.4.1 Policies and Targets of the 9th Malaysia Plan ........................................................5-28
Table 5.4.2 Policies and Strategies Related to IRBM in the 10th Malaysia Plan ......................5-29
Table 5.4.3 NPP Policies related to IRBM ................................................................................5-30
Table 5.4.4 Policies related to IRBM for Pahang State .............................................................5-31
Table 5.4.5 Implementation Methodologies and Indicators for Social Facility Policies ...........5-31
Table 5.5.1 Core Issues and Proposed Policies..........................................................................5-32
Table 5.5.2 Proposed Strategies and Measures for Strengthen Institutional Setup....................5-32
Table 5.5.3 Summary of Proposed Institutional Arrangements .................................................5-33
Table 5.5.4 Proposed Members of RBC ....................................................................................5-35

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and vii

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 5.5.5 Proposed Main Functions of RBC ..........................................................................5-36

Table 5.5.6 Advantage and Disadvantage of RBC.....................................................................5-38
Table 5.5.7 Advantages and Disadvantages of New Organizations...........................................5-42
Table 5.5.8 Component of River Basin Information..................................................................5-45
Table 5.5.9 Proposed Policy, Strategies and Measures ..............................................................5-47
Table 5.5.10 Summary of Environmental Flow Methods ............................................................5-50
Table 5.5.11 Warning Stage for Drought in Malaysia..................................................................5-51
Table 5.5.12 Drought Levels........................................................................................................5-51
Table 5.5.13 Restructuring Schedule of Water Services Industry................................................5-54
Table 5.5.14 Indicative Examples of Meter Accuracy .................................................................5-60
Table 5.5.15 Proposed IRBM Strategies and Measures towards Creating a Sustainable and
Pleasant River Environment....................................................................................5-62
Table 5.5.16 An Overview of the Existing Wastewater Treatment Pilot Projects by DID...........5-69
Table 5.5.17 DID’s Pilit Project for FOG Trap at the Medan Selara Teratai Food-Court in
Alor Star, Kedah......................................................................................................5-70
Table 5.5.18 Proposed Policy, Strategies and Measures ..............................................................5-84
Table 5.6.1 Proposed Roadmap for IRBM for Pahang River Basin ..........................................5-85
Table 6.2.1 Budget Allocation for 9th MP for Pahang River Basin.............................................6-2
Table 6.2.2 On-going Flood Mitigation Projects for Pahang River Basin (as of Nov. 2009) ......6-3
Table 6.2.3 Reservoir Required for Flood Mitigation..................................................................6-4
Table 6.2.4 Regulation of Development Activities ......................................................................6-7
Table 6.2.5 Telemetry Network for Water Level and Rainfall (Infobanjir, Pahang Basin)..........6-8
Table 6.2.6 Responsibility of Relevant Institutions for Flood Management .............................6-10
Table 6.2.7 Rehabilitation Work and Expenditure in 2008 ........................................................6-11
Table 6.3.1 Determination of Future Conditions at 2025...........................................................6-12
Table 6.4.1 Conceivable Structural Measures for Pahang River Basin .....................................6-13
Table 6.4.2 Descriptions of Dam and Dam Sites .......................................................................6-14
Table 6.4.3 Effectiveness of Flood Control Dam Reservoirs.....................................................6-15
Table 6.4.4 Effectiveness of Jengka Diversion ..........................................................................6-15
Table 6.4.5 Flood Protection Works for Urban Centers .............................................................6-16
Table 6.4.6 Effectiveness of Protection of Urban Centers .........................................................6-17
Table 6.4.7 Flood Mitigation Project in Maran and Jerantut Town ...........................................6-17
Table 6.4.8 Proposed Specific Non-structural Measure Projects ...............................................6-18
Table 6.4.9 Summary of Capacity Development Project...........................................................6-18
Table 6.4.10 Proposed Programs and Activities for Capacity Development Project...................6-18
Table 6.4.11 Proposed Number of Telemetry Stations.................................................................6-19
Table 6.4.12 Project Cost for Integrated Flood Forecasting and Warning System ......................6-20
Table 6.5.1 Tentative Implementation Program of IFM Plan ....................................................6-21
Table 6.6.1 Proposed Flood Mitigation Project in the Pahang River Basin...............................6-22
Table 6.6.2 Project Classification in Malaysia...........................................................................6-23
Table 6.6.3 Project Classification and Environmental Review..................................................6-24
Table 6.6.4 Project Classification Results..................................................................................6-24
Table 6.6.5 Scoping of Proposed Project in the Pahang River Basin ........................................6-25
Table 6.7.1 Project for Feasibility Study....................................................................................6-26
Table 7.1.1 Project Component....................................................................................................7-1
Table 7.2.1 Climate Characteristics at Temerloh Station .............................................................7-2
Table 7.2.2 Feature of Semantan River........................................................................................7-3
Table 7.2.3 Population and Area of Temerloh..............................................................................7-4
Table 7.2.4 Population and Area of Mentakab Town...................................................................7-5
Table 7.2.5 Gender Ratio .............................................................................................................7-5
Table 7.2.6 Racial Composition (%)............................................................................................7-5
Table 7.2.7 Historical Flood Record ............................................................................................7-6
Table 7.2.8 Waning Level ............................................................................................................7-7
Table 7.3.1 Methodology of Cross Section Survey .....................................................................7-9
Table 7.4.1 Feature of the Silty Clay .........................................................................................7-10

viii CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 7.4.2 Feature of the Silty Clay .........................................................................................7-12

Table 7.5.1 Survey Area.............................................................................................................7-14
Table 7.5.2 Respondents and Survey Items ...............................................................................7-14
Table 7.5.3 Main Survey Results on Assets in Semantan ..........................................................7-15
Table 7.6.1 ARI of Observed 8 days Rainfall............................................................................7-16
Table 7.6.2 Enlargement Ratio for Flood Simulation ................................................................7-17
Table 7.6.3 Model Parameters ...................................................................................................7-18
Table 7.6.4 Simulation Cases.....................................................................................................7-20
Table 7.6.5 River Water Level of Semantan River ....................................................................7-21
Table 7.6.6 Basin Characteristics...............................................................................................7-24
Table 7.6.7 Peak Discharge and Runoff Volume .......................................................................7-26
Table 7.7.1 Design Water Level.................................................................................................7-26
Table 7.7.2 Proposed Flood Control Facilities ..........................................................................7-27
Table 7.7.3 Basic shape of Bund ...............................................................................................7-28
Table 7.7.4 Proposed Bunds on Temerloh-Mentakab Area .......................................................7-29
Table 7.7.5 Road Upgrade .........................................................................................................7-30
Table 7.7.6 Retarding Basin and regulation pond......................................................................7-30
Table 7.7.7 Dimension of Sluice way ........................................................................................7-31
Table 7.7.8 Dimension of Pump Stations ..................................................................................7-31
Table 7.7.9 Proposed Bunds on Temerloh-Mentakab Area .......................................................7-31
Table 7.7.10 Road Upgrade .........................................................................................................7-32
Table 7.7.11 Dimension of River Gate ........................................................................................7-32
Table 7.7.12 Dimension of Retarding Basin................................................................................7-32
Table 7.7.13 Scale of Pump Station.............................................................................................7-33
Table 7.7.14 Comparison of River Facility for Temerloh and Mentakab ....................................7-33
Table 7.7.15 Comparison of River Facility for Mentakab ...........................................................7-33
Table 7.8.1 Construction Base Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measures
in Temerloh and Mentakab Area .............................................................................7-35
Table 7.8.2 Compensation Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measuresin
Temerloh and Mentakab Area .................................................................................7-36
Table 7.8.3 Administration, Investigation, Design and Construction Supervision Cost ...........7-36
Table 7.8.4 Project Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measures in
Temerloh and Mentakab Area .................................................................................7-37
Table 7.9.1 Summary of Mesh Data of Semantan in 2009 ........................................................7-38
Table 7.9.2 Inundation Depth and Damage Rate .......................................................................7-39
Table 7.9.3 Rate of Damages on Public Facilities to Damages on Non-Public
Buildings/Assets .....................................................................................................7-39
Table 7.9.4 Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction ...................................................7-40
Table 7.9.5 Summary Table Form for Cost and Benefit of the Project......................................7-41
Table 8.1.1 Design Concept.........................................................................................................8-1
Table 8.1.2 Conception for Adaptation to Climate Change .........................................................8-4
Table 8.1.3 Function of Flood Mitigation Measures in Alternatives ...........................................8-7
Table 8.1.4 Advantage and Disadvantage of Flood Mitigation Measures in Alternatives...........8-7
Table 8.1.5 Area of Land Acquisition..........................................................................................8-8
Table 8.1.6 Criteria for the Selection of Alternatives ..................................................................8-8
Table 8.2.1 Existing Non-Structural Measures in Temerloh/Mentakab..................................... 8-11
Table 8.2.2 Flood Warning Water Level at the Monitoring Stations .........................................8-14
Table 8.2.3 Organization Configuration for Flood Management in Temerloh District .............8-16
Table 8.2.4 List of Evacuation Center and its Seating Capacity in the Project Area .................8-17
Table 8.2.5 Statistics for Flood Preparedness in Pahang State ..................................................8-18
Table 8.2.6 Peak Water Level Ranking at Temerloh Station .....................................................8-20
Table 8.2.7 Estimated Flood Water Level in Mentakab.............................................................8-20
Table 8.2.8 Peak Water Level at Temerloh Station and Mentakab ............................................8-20
Table 8.2.9 Affected Areas by 2007 Flood Event in Temerloh/Mentakab.................................8-20
Table 8.2.10 Number of Victims at Evacuation Center, Temerloh District .................................8-21

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and ix

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 8.2.11 Cost Estimate for the AMRFF System....................................................................8-27

Table 8.2.12 Proposed Non-Structural Measures in Temerloh/Mentakab ...................................8-31
Table 8.3.1 Projected Relationship between ARI and 8days Rainfall Depth in 2025................8-32
Table 8.3.2 Characteristics of Each Zone ..................................................................................8-33
Table 8.3.3 Potential Flood Risk by 50years ARI Flood ...........................................................8-36
Table 8.3.4 Incremental Ratio of 1day Rainfall with ARI of 10years........................................8-38
Table 8.3.5 Peak Discharge and Runoff Volume under Future Climate Condition....................8-38
Table 8.3.6 Capacity of Proposed Ponds and Runoff Volume to be Detained ...........................8-39
Table 8.3.7 Conceivable Adaptation Measures in Non-Structural .............................................8-39
Table 8.4.1 Project Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measures in
Temerloh and Mentakab Area .................................................................................8-41
Table 8.4.2 Major Construction Works for Temerloh and Mentakab Site .................................8-41
Table 8.4.3 Public Holiday in 2010 ...........................................................................................8-42
Table 8.4.4 Average Rainy Days................................................................................................8-42
Table 8.4.5 Annual Working Day for Major Work ....................................................................8-43
Table 8.4.6 Performance of Construction Machines in Earth Work ..........................................8-43
Table 8.4.7 Performance of Main Construction Work ..............................................................8-43
Table 8.4.8 Responsibility on Implementation of Structural Measures .....................................8-45
Table 8.4.9 Responsibility on Implementation of Non-Structural Measures .............................8-46
Table 8.4.10 Projection of Population and Number of Houses/Shops of Semantan....................8-47
Table 8.4.11 Economic Cost (Alternative 1)................................................................................8-47
Table 8.4.12 Economic Cost (Alternative 2)................................................................................8-48
Table 8.4.13 Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction in 2025 (Altenative 1 & 2) ........8-48
Table 8.4.14 Summary of Costs and Benefits in Economic Prices (Alternative 1) .....................8-48
Table 8.4.15 Summary of Costs and Benefits in Economic Prices (Alternative 2) .....................8-49
Table 8.4.16 EIRR, B/C and NPV of the Project, and their Sensitivity (Alternative 1) ..............8-49
Table 8.4.17 EIRR, B/C and NPV of the Project, and their Sensitivity (Alternative 2) ..............8-49
Table 8.4.18 Cost Items of Project (Alternative 1) ......................................................................8-50
Table 8.4.19 Assumed Terms and Conditions of Loan ................................................................8-50
Table 8.4.20 Repayment and Interest Payment of Loan (Alternative 1)......................................8-50
Table 8.4.21 Federal Development Expenditure for Economic Services and Social Services ....8-51
Table 8.4.22 O&M Budget of Temerloh District DID .................................................................8-51
Table 8.5.1 Alternatives of Structural Measure for the Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project .....8-51
Table 8.5.2 Major Environmental Setting in the Project Area (Temerloh) ................................8-53
Table 8.5.3 Major Environmental Setting in the Project Area (Mentakab)................................8-54
Table 8.5.4 Scoping Result ........................................................................................................8-55
Table 8.5.5 Scoping Matrix........................................................................................................8-56
Table 8.5.6 Impact on Social Environment................................................................................8-57
Table 8.5.7 Impact on Natural Environment..............................................................................8-58
Table 8.5.8 Pollution due to Implementation of Proposed Project ............................................8-58
Table 8.5.9 Mitigation Plan for the Impact on Social Environment ..........................................8-60
Table 8.5.10 Mitigation Plan for the Impact on Natural Environment ........................................8-61
Table 8.5.11 Mitigation Plan for the Pollution.............................................................................8-62
Table 8.5.12 Monitoring Plan for Impact on Social Environment...............................................8-65
Table 8.5.13 Monitoring Plan for Impact on Natural Environment .............................................8-65
Table 8.5.14 Monitoring Plan for Impact by Pollution ................................................................8-65
Table 8.5.15 Monitoring Items.....................................................................................................8-66
Table 8.5.16 Proposed Frequency of Monitoring ........................................................................8-68
Table 8.6.1 Proposed Operation and Effect Monitoring Indicators ...........................................8-68

x CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

List of Figures

Figure 1.1.1 Topographical Map of Pahang River Basin ..............................................................1-1

Figure 1.2.1 Geological Map of Pahang River Basin....................................................................1-2
Figure 1.3.1 General Climatic Characteristics of the Pahang River Basin ...................................1-3
Figure 1.3.2 Climate Characteristics at Cameron Highlands, Batu Embun, .................................1-4
Figure 1.3.3 Annual Rainfall Distribution in Pahang River Basin................................................1-5
Figure 1.3.4 Basin Mean Monthly and Annual Rainfall based on 1999-2008 Data......................1-5
Figure 1.3.5 Daily Average, Maximum and Minimum Sea Levels...............................................1-6
Figure 1.4.1 The Pahang River System.........................................................................................1-7
Figure 1.4.2 River Bed of Pahang River and Its Tributaries .........................................................1-8
Figure 1.4.3 Monthly Average, Maximum and Minimum Daily Discharges based on
1999-2008 Observation Data (St. 357410) ...............................................................1-8
Figure 1.4.4 Monthly Maximum Daily Discharge (1999-2008, St. 357410) ................................1-9
Figure 1.4.5 Relation between Annual Rainfall and Annual Average Runoff Ratio .....................1-9
Figure 1.4.6 Flood Water Level Profile (5-Year Return Period) For Pahang River ....................1-10
Figure 1.4.7 Site Pictures of Structures for Flood Mitigation .....................................................1-10
Figure 1.4.8 Site Pictures of Bank Erosion Site .......................................................................... 1-11
Figure 1.4.9 Sediment Load Rating Curve..................................................................................1-12
Figure 1.4.10 Some of the Local Plan Proposed Riverfront Recreational and Landscape Areas
................................................................................................................................1-13
Figure 1.5.1 Flood Discharge at Lubok Paku..............................................................................1-14
Figure 1.5.2 Flood Inundation Area on December 1971 Flood...................................................1-15
Figure 1.5.3 Flood Map for December 2007...............................................................................1-17
Figure 1.5.4 Probable Flood Inundation Areas............................................................................1-17
Figure 1.6.1 Wildlife Protection Areas in and surrounding the Pahang River Basin ..................1-19
Figure 1.6.2 Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA) in the Pahang River Basin .........................1-20
Figure 1.7.1 Annual Water Budget of Pahang River Basin.........................................................1-21
Figure 2.2.1 Operational Procedure for Dissemination of River Level Information ....................2-5
Figure 2.5.1 New Legislative Framework on Water Supply Services.........................................2-10
Figure 2.5.2 Location of Treatment Plants in Pahang River Basin ............................................. 2-11
Figure 2.5.3 Existing and Proposed Dam Reservoirs..................................................................2-14
Figure 2.5.4 Outline of Raw Water Transfer Scheme (Pahang to South Selangor Transfer) ......2-18
Figure 2.5.5 Water Transfer Route (Pahang to North Selangor) .................................................2-19
Figure 2.5.6 Location of Irrigation Intake...................................................................................2-20
Figure 2.5.7 Location of Existing and Future Hydropower Projects in the Pahang River Basin...2-21
Figure 2.6.1 Water Quality Management Framework of DOE ...................................................2-22
Figure 2.6.2 DOE Water Quality Monitoring Stations (2007) ....................................................2-25
Figure 2.6.3 Water Quality Status of the Pahang River and its Major Tributaries, 2007 ............2-27
Figure 2.6.4 Framework of Sewerage Management in relation to Water Quality
Management............................................................................................................2-28
Figure 2.6.5 Concept of Sewerage Service .................................................................................2-29
Figure 2.6.6 Basic Framework on the Control of Industrial Effluents ........................................2-30
Figure 2.6.7 Basic Framework of Solid Waste Management ......................................................2-32
Figure 2.6.8 Framework of the Management of Livestock Farms in relation to Water Quality
Management............................................................................................................2-33
Figure 2.6.9 Environmental Framework of Large Scale Agricultural and Logging Activities ...2-34
Figure 2.6.10 Framework of Sand Dredging Activities in relation ...............................................2-35
Figure 2.7.1 Major Growth Conurbations of Peninsular Malaysia .............................................2-37
Figure 2.7.2 Urban Hierarchy .....................................................................................................2-38
Figure 2.7.3 Existing/Committed Land Uses (2000) and Land Use Zones (2020) in the
Pahang River Basin.................................................................................................2-39
Figure 2.7.4 Typical Flow of Application for Development Involving River/River Reserve .....2-41

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and xi

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 2.8.1 MaCGDI in the overall MyGDI Management Structure.........................................2-42

Figure 2.8.2 Concept of MaCGDI’s Role in Promoting Data Sharing among Data Providers
and Users.................................................................................................................2-42
Figure 2.8.3 Proposed Structure of River Basin Information under the National Register of
River Basin Study 2001 ..........................................................................................2-42
Figure 2.8.4 Framework of RB-DSS Development and Maintenance ........................................2-43

Figure 3.2.1 Location of Meteorological and Hydrological Stations ............................................3-2

Figure 3.2.2 Observed Temperature Data......................................................................................3-2
Figure 3.2.3 Month Average Temperature of 1989-1998 and 1999-2008 .....................................3-3
Figure 3.2.4 Observed Annual Precipitation .................................................................................3-4
Figure 3.2.5 Month Average Rainfall of 1989-1998 and 1999-2008.............................................3-5
Figure 3.2.6 Number of Events with Daily Rainfall Exceeding 50mm.........................................3-5
Figure 3.2.7 Annual Maximum Daily Rainfall..............................................................................3-6
Figure 3.2.8 Annual Maximum Consecutive Days with No Rainfall............................................3-7
Figure 3.2.9 Monthly Average Sea Level at Tanjung Gelang since 1984......................................3-7
Figure 3.3.1 Schematic view of the Grid Extracted to Represent the Basin..................................3-9
Figure 3.3.2 Grid of RCMs............................................................................................................3-9
Figure 3.3.3 Scenarios for GHG Emissions from 2000 to 2100 (in the absence of additional
climate policies) and Projections of Surface Temperatures ....................................3-10
Figure 3.4.1 Temporal Plot of Projected Surface Temperature ...................................................3-11
Figure 3.4.2 Comparison of GCM Results to Observed Data .....................................................3-11
Figure 3.4.3 Frequency Plot of Pahang River Basin based on Result of CGCM3.1(T47),
Canada.....................................................................................................................3-12
Figure 3.4.4 Incremental Ratios for 100 years ARI 8 days Rainfall (2025) ................................3-13
Figure 3.4.5 Simulated Flood Area by 100 years Return Period Flood Event under Current
and 2025 Conditions ...............................................................................................3-14
Figure 3.4.6 Monthly and Annual Precipitation and Evapotranspiration Incremental Ratio of
2025 Relative to 1990 .............................................................................................3-15
Figure 4.1.1 Method of DTM Generation .....................................................................................4-2
Figure 4.1.2 Example of Created GIS Database............................................................................4-4
Figure 4.2.1 Target Rivers and Cross Section Locations...............................................................4-4
Figure 4.2.2 Field Site of Cross Section Survey............................................................................4-5
Figure 4.2.3 Example of Cross Section .........................................................................................4-6
Figure 4.4.1 Example of Annual Precipitation Data Examination. Station 3429096 was
Excluded from Further Analysis .............................................................................4-10
Figure 4.4.2 Location of Gauging Stations..................................................................................4-11
Figure 4.4.3 Thiessen Distribution and Area Represented by Each Station ................................4-13
Figure 4.4.4 Examples of Temporal rainfall and River Discharge During Major Flood Events
.................................................................................................................................4-13
Figure 4.4.5 Temporal Cumulative Rainfall of Major Flood Events...........................................4-14
Figure 4.4.6 Correlation of Annual Maximum 8 day Rainfall with and without st.4227001......4-15
Figure 4.4.7 Result of Rainfall Probability Analysis (Pahang River Basin)................................4-15
Figure 4.4.8 Sub-basin Schematization .......................................................................................4-16
Figure 4.4.9 Nonlinear Reservoir Representation of Sub-basin ..................................................4-17
Figure 4.4.10 Schematic View of Infiltration Loss by Uniform Loss Method ..............................4-17
Figure 4.4.11 Schematic View of the Flood Simulation Model ....................................................4-18
Figure 4.4.12 Sub-basins and Channel Chainage of Pahang River Basin .....................................4-18
Figure 4.4.13 Model Verification: Flood Area...............................................................................4-20
Figure 4.4.14 Model Verification: Observed Water Level versus Simulation Result....................4-21
Figure 4.4.15 Rainfall Distribution in Major Flood Events...........................................................4-22
Figure 4.4.16 Schematic View of Constant Discharge Method.....................................................4-24
Figure 4.4.17 Location of Structural Mitigation Measures ...........................................................4-24
Figure 4.4.18 Water Level and its Difference Relative to No Mitigation Measures in 100 years
Return Period Flood Event .....................................................................................4-25

xii CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 4.4.19 Simulated Flood Area by 100 years Return Period Flood Event ............................4-26
Figure 4.5.1 Methodology for Estimation of Flood affected Population and Land Uses............4-27
Figure 4.6.1 Sub-basin for Long-term Runoff Model .................................................................4-33
Figure 4.6.2 Total Intake in Sub-basins.......................................................................................4-34
Figure 4.6.3 Irrigation Intake and Treatment Plant in Pahang River Basin.................................4-35
Figure 4.6.4 Schematic View of the Tank Model and Its Parameters..........................................4-35
Figure 4.6.5 Model Verification: Observed and Simulated Discharge........................................4-36
Figure 4.6.6 Average Monthly Rainfall and Evapotranspiration obtained based on
Meteorological data of 1999-2008..........................................................................4-37
Figure 4.6.7 Temporal Plot of Simulated Daily Discharge (Temerloh) .....................................4-37
Figure 4.6.8 Average Monthly Discharge ...................................................................................4-38
Figure 4.6.9 Flow Duration Curve ..............................................................................................4-40
Figure 4.6.10 Number of Days with Discharge below “Good” Flow at Temerloh .......................4-40
Figure 4.6.11 Number of Days with Discharge below “Good” Flow and “Outstanding” Flow
at the River Mouth ..................................................................................................4-41
Figure 4.6.12 Annual Water Budget of Pahang River Basin.........................................................4-42
Figure 5.2.1 Comparison of Demand and Supply for Pahang River Basin...................................5-4
Figure 5.2.2 Comparison of Demand and Supply by District .......................................................5-5
Figure 5.2.3 NRW Rate by State in Malaysia ...............................................................................5-7
Figure 5.2.4 NRW Rates of Foreign Countries .............................................................................5-8
Figure 5.2.5 Chicken Slaughtering at Mentakab Market ............................................................5-10
Figure 5.2.6 Temerloh Market.....................................................................................................5-10
Figure 5.2.7 Existing Agricultural Areas in the Pahang River Basin (2002)............................... 5-11
Figure 5.2.8 Sand dredging and construction activities along the Pahang River ........................ 5-11
Figure 5.2.9 Some Locations with Possible Agrochemical Pollution .........................................5-12
Figure 5.2.10 Newspaper Report about Government Actions on Agrochemical Pollution at
Cameron Highlands ................................................................................................5-12
Figure 5.2.11 Environmental Sensitive Areas and Water Catchment Areas..................................5-13
Figure 5.2.12 News Report about Tasik Cini ................................................................................5-13
Figure 5.2.13 Announce of Tasik Chini as a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve .................................5-14
Figure 5.2.14 Flood Inundation Areas of 2007 Flood ...................................................................5-17
Figure 5.2.15 Bank Erosion and Protection Work.........................................................................5-17
Figure 5.2.16 Pahang River Mouth Project...................................................................................5-18
Figure 5.3.1 Problem Tree for Institutional Setup.......................................................................5-20
Figure 5.3.2 River Management Works ......................................................................................5-21
Figure 5.3.3 Problem Tree for Water Utilization.........................................................................5-23
Figure 5.3.4 Problem Tree for Water Quality..............................................................................5-25
Figure 5.3.5 Problem Tree with Core Issue, “Flood Causes Damage” .......................................5-26
Figure 5.5.1 Proposed Structure of RBC in Pahang River Basin ................................................5-34
Figure 5.5.2 Proposed Framework of Water Resources Department ..........................................5-41
Figure 5.5.3 Proposed Framework of River Basin Management Office .....................................5-42
Figure 5.5.4 Information Management Process ..........................................................................5-45
Figure 5.5.5 Economical Breakeven Point for NRW ..................................................................5-54
Figure 5.5.6 Cause of NRW ........................................................................................................5-55
Figure 5.5.7 Potential ‘Hotspots’ ................................................................................................5-79
Figure 6.2.1 Location of On-going Projects..................................................................................6-3
Figure 6.2.2 Project Site Pictures ..................................................................................................6-4
Figure 6.2.3 Site Pictures of Bentong Project ...............................................................................6-5
Figure 6.2.4 Flood Map for 2007 Flood Event in Lower Part of Pahang State (DID) ..................6-6
Figure 6.2.5 Discharge Forecasting by LTFM ..............................................................................6-8
Figure 6.2.6 Atmospheric Based Rainfall & Flood Forecasting (AMRFF) Model.......................6-9
Figure 6.2.7 Photos of Siren and Signboard..................................................................................6-9
Figure 6.2.8 Site Pictures of Maintenance Work......................................................................... 6-11
Figure 6.4.1 Location of Flood Control Dams ............................................................................6-14
Figure 6.4.2 Location of Jengka Diversion .................................................................................6-15

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and xiii

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 6.4.3 Proposed Telemetry Stations (Rainfall & Water level) ...........................................6-20
Figure 6.5.1 Organization for Implementation ............................................................................6-22
Figure 7.1.1 Temerloh-Mentakab Flood Mitigation Project Area .................................................7-1
Figure 7.2.1 Climate Characteristics at Temerloh Station .............................................................7-2
Figure 7.2.2 Topographic Map in the Target Area.........................................................................7-3
Figure 7.2.3 Boundaries of Municipality and Town......................................................................7-4
Figure 7.3.1 IFSAR Data (Left) and Ortho Image (Right) ............................................................7-8
Figure 7.3.2 Two Test Sites (Green) and Leveling Points (Red) ...................................................7-9
Figure 7.3.3 Sample Part of Ortho-map ........................................................................................7-9
Figure 7.3.4 Location of Cross Section Location and Sample of Cross Section...........................7-9
Figure 7.4.1 Boring Location of Temerloh..................................................................................7-10
Figure 7.4.2 Borehole log of Temerloh Area ...............................................................................7-11
Figure 7.4.3 Boring Location of Mentakab .................................................................................7-12
Figure 7.4.4 Borehole log of Mentakab Area .............................................................................7-13
Figure 7.5.1 The Coverage of Survey Area in Temerloh and Mentakab ....................................7-14
Figure 7.5.2 The Number of Samples in Temerloh and Mentakab..............................................7-14
Figure 7.6.1 Thiessen Distribution and Area Represented by Each Station ................................7-15
Figure 7.6.2 8 days Rainfall for Various Return Periods at the Reference Point.........................7-16
Figure 7.6.3 Schematic View of the Basin and River Model ......................................................7-17
Figure 7.6.4 Rainfall Distribution of Dec 2007 Flood ................................................................7-17
Figure 7.6.5 Observed Water Level and Simulation Result ........................................................7-18
Figure 7.6.6 Model Verification: Flood Area...............................................................................7-19
Figure 7.6.7 Location Plan of Structural Measures .....................................................................7-20
Figure 7.6.8 Predicted River Water Level with/without Structural Measures .............................7-21
Figure 7.6.9 Inundation Area by 50 years ARI Flood (No structure measures) ..........................7-22
Figure 7.6.10 IDF Curve ...............................................................................................................7-23
Figure 7.6.11 Design Temporal Rainfall .......................................................................................7-23
Figure 7.6.12 Schematic View of the Runoff Model.....................................................................7-24
Figure 7.6.13 Runoff Coefficient...................................................................................................7-25
Figure 7.6.14 Examples of Stormwater Hydrograph.....................................................................7-25
Figure 7.7.1 Design Water Level of Gemas Area ........................................................................7-27
Figure 7.7.2 Schematic View of Bund.........................................................................................7-28
Figure 7.7.3 Schematic View of Shortcut Channel......................................................................7-28
Figure 8.1.1 Selection of Protection Area......................................................................................8-2
Figure 8.1.2 Relationship Between Design Scale and Characteristics of Target Area ..................8-3
Figure 8.1.3 Plan of Structural Measures for Alternative-1...........................................................8-5
Figure 8.1.4 Plan of Structural Measures for Alternative-2...........................................................8-6
Figure 8.1.5 Current Landscape of Semantan River Bank near Temarloh (left) and Mentakab
(right) ........................................................................................................................8-9
Figure 8.1.6 Locations of the Drawings ........................................................................................8-9
Figure 8.1.7 Preliminary Landscape Drawings ...........................................................................8-10
Figure 8.2.1 Monitoring Process and Dissemination of Flood Warning System.........................8-12
Figure 8.2.2 Flood Warning Siren (Kg. B. Kapur) and Flood Warning Board (Kg. B. Pulau)....8-12
Figure 8.2.3 An Example of Flood Warning Board and Historical Flood Marks (DID
Manual) ...................................................................................................................8-13
Figure 8.2.4 Flood Warning System at Hydrology Division and DID Pahang State...................8-13
Figure 8.2.5 Communication and Information on Flood Forecasting among Agencies..............8-14
Figure 8.2.6 Prepared Guideline for each Administration (State, District, Sub-District) ............8-15
Figure 8.2.7 Communication Flow on Flood Management Information among Agencies .........8-18
Figure 8.2.8 Stilt Houses along Semantan River(Kg. Pdng. Kerbau, Kg. Lompat) ....................8-19
Figure 8.2.9 Areas and Contour Line Equivalent to the Flood Level in 1971 and 1988 Flood
Event (Temerloh) ....................................................................................................8-21
Figure 8.2.10 Areas and Contour Line 40m, 37m and 35m in Elevation......................................8-22
Figure 8.2.11 Project Components for Non-structural Measures in Temerloh/ Mentakab............8-24
Figure 8.2.12 Flood Fighting Activities in Japan ..........................................................................8-25

xiv CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Table of Contents
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 8.2.13 Atmospheric Model-based Rainfall and Flood forecasting (AMRRF) System ......8-26
Figure 8.2.14 System Flow from Rainfall Forecasting to Discharge Prediction...........................8-27
Figure 8.2.15 Flood Hazard Map in Temerloh and Mentakab (by JICA) .....................................8-28
Figure 8.2.16 Low Land Areas (Currently Non-cultivated Area, Swamp Area) ...........................8-29
Figure 8.2.17 Low Land Areas to be regulated by Municipal Council, Temrloh..........................8-30
Figure 8.2.18 Flood Fighting Drills and Sandbag Pilling Technique (in Japan) ...........................8-30
Figure 8.3.1 Projected Relationship between ARI and 8days Rainfall Depth in 2025................8-32
Figure 8.3.2 Zones for Risk Assessment .....................................................................................8-33
Figure 8.3.3 River Water Level of 50year ARI Flood under Current and 2025 Climate
Condition (Upper Panel: River water level, Lower Panel: Water level difference
relative to current climate condition)......................................................................8-34
Figure 8.3.4 Flooded Area by 50years ARI Flood (Current Condition)......................................8-34
Figure 8.3.5 Building Submergence Criteria...............................................................................8-36
Figure 8.3.6 Flood Risk Maps of Temerloh and Mentakab Conurbation....................................8-37
Figure 8.3.7 Incremental Ratio of 10years ARI 1 day Rainfall Depth by 2025 ..........................8-38
Figure 8.4.1 Construction Schedule for Temerloh & Mentakab Flood Mitigation Project .........8-44
Figure 8.4.2 Organization for Implementation............................................................................8-44
Figure 8.5.1 Proposed Monitoring Points (Alternative-1)...........................................................8-67
Figure 8.5.2 Proposed Monitoring Points (Alternative-2)...........................................................8-67

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and xv

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Abbreviations The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Abbreviations

AMRFF Atmospheric model-based rainfall and flood forecasting system

AR4 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report
ARI Average Recurrence Interval
ASMA Alam Sekitar Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.
B/C Benefit/Cost
BAKAJ Johor Water Regulatory Body (Badan Kawalselia Air Johor)
BKSA Water Regulatory Body (Badan Kawalselia Air)
BOD/BOD5 Biochemical oxygen demand
BORDA Bremen Overseas Research and Development Association
COD Chemical oxygen demand
CORPRI Model Corporatization and Privatization Model
DID Department of Irrigation and Drainage
DEWATS Decentralised Wastewater Treatment Solution
DMRC Disaster Management and Relief Committee
DO Dissolved oxygen
DOCC District Disaster Operations Control Center
DOE Department of Environment
DTGSM Peninsular Malaysia Geodetic Vertical Datum (Datum Tegak Geodesi Semenanjung Malaysia)
DTM Digital Terrain Model
DVS Department of Veterinary Service (Jabatan Perkhidmatan Veterinar)
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
EPU Economic Planning Unit (Unit Perancang Economi)
EQA Environmental Quality Act 1974
EQR Environmental Quality Report
ESA Environmental Sensitive Area
EXCO Executive Council
GCM General Circulation Model
GEV General Extreme Value
GHG Greenhouse gas
GRDP Gross Regional Domestic Products
HH Household
IEE Initial Environmental Evaluation
IFM Integrated Flood Management
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IRBM Integrated River Basin Management
IST Individual septic tank
IWK Indah Water Konsortium Sdn. Bhd.
IWRM Integrated Water Resources Management
JAS Department of Environment (Jabatan Alam Sekitar)
JBA Water Supply Department (Jabatan Bekalan Air)
JBIC Japan Bank for International Cooperation
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
JKPS River Management Committee (Jawatankuasa Pengurusan Sungai)
JKR Public Works Department (Jabatan Kerja Raya)
JMG Department of Mineral and Geoscience (Jabatan Mineral dan Geosains)
JPBD Department of Town and Country Planning (Jabatan Perancangan Bandar dan Desa)
JPBB Disaster Management and Relief Committee (Jawatankuasa Pengurusan dan Bantuan Bencana)
JPBBD District Disaster Management and Relief Committee (Jawatankuasa Pengurusan dan Bantuan Bencana
Daerah)
JPPH Valuation and Property Services Department (Jabatan Penilaian dan Perkhidmatan Harta)
JUPEM Department Survey and Mapping Malaysia (Jabatan Ukur dan Pemetaan Malaysia)
Kg. Village (kampung)
KL Kuala Lumpur
LA Local authority
LKIM Malaysian Fisheries Development Board (Lembaga Kemajuan Ikan Malaysia)
LTFM Linear Transfer Function Model
LUAN Kedah Water Management Authority (Lembaga Urus Air Negeri Kedah)
LUAS Selangor Water Management Authority (Lembaga Urus Air Selangor)
MaCGDI Malaysian Center for Geospatial Data Infrastructure
MCM Million cubic meter
Mld Million liter per day
MMD Malaysian Meteorologial Department
MRSO Malaysian Rectified Skew Orthomophic
MyGDI Malaysian Geospatial Data Infrastructure
NAHRIM National Hydraulic Research Institute of Malaysia
NCLG National Council for Local Government

xvi CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Abbreviations
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

NGVD National Geodetic Vertical Datum

NH3-N Ammoniacal nitrogen
NPV Net present value
NRE Natural Resources and Environment
NRW Non-Revenue Water
NSC National Security Council
NWQS National Water Quality Standard
NWRC National Water Resources Council
NWRD National Water Resources Department
NWRS National Water Resources Study (2000)
NWRS National Water Resources Study, Malaysia (JICA, 1982)
NWSC Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara
OJT On-the-job training
PAAB Water Asset Management Company (Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad)
PERHILITAN Department of Wildlife and Natural Park Peninsular Malaysia (Jabatan Perlindungan Hidupan Liar dan
Taman Negara, Semenanjung Malaysia)
PFA Pig farm area
ppm Part per million
PRECIS Providing Regional Climate Impact Studies
PTG Land and Mines Office (Pejabat Tanah dan Galian)
PWCC PricewaterhouseCoopers Consulting Sdn. Bhd.
RBC River Basin Committee
RB-DSS National River Basin Decision Support System
RB-IMS River Basin Infrastructure Management System
RBMO River Basin Management Office
RBO River Basin Organization
RB-SMS River Basin Geographical Information System
RB-SMS River Basin Simulation Modeling System
RCM Regional Climate Model
RegHCM-PM Regional Hydroclimate Model of Peninsular Malaysia
RM Ringgit Malaysia
RMK-10 Tenth Malaysia Plan
RMK-8 Eighth Malaysia Plan
RMK-9 Ninth Malaysia Plan
RRB National Register of River Basin Study
RRB2 Second Phase of the National Register of River Basin Study
RTU Remote Terminal Unit
SAINS Syarikat Air Negeri Sembilan Sdn. Bhd.
SAJ Johor Water Company (Syarikat Air Johor)
SBMO Sub-Basin Management Office
Sg. River (sungai)
SPAN Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara
SS Suspended solids
st. Station
STP Sewage treatment plant
SWM SWM Environment Sdn. Bhd.
SWRC State Water Resources Council
TDS Total dissolved solids
Tg. Tanjung
TNB Tenaga Nasional Berhad
TOR Terms of Reference
TSS Total suspended solids
UPEN State Economic Planning Unit (Unit Perancang Ekonomi Negeri)
UPPP Federal Project Implementation Unit (Unit Pelaksanaan Projek Persekutuan)
USD US Dollar
USEPA The United States Environmental Protection Agency
W.L. Water Level
WRD Water Resources Department
WQI Water Quality Index

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and xvii

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Measurement Unit The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Measurement Units

(Length) (Time)
mm : millimeter(s) s, sec : second(s)
cm : centimeter(s) min : minute(s)
m : meter(s) h, hr : hour(s)
km : kilometer(s) d, dy : day(s)
y, yr : year(s)
(Area)
mm2 : square millimeter(s) (Volume)
cm2 : square centimeter(s) cm3 : cubic centimeter(s)
m2 : square meter(s) m3 : cubic meter(s)
km2 : square kilometer(s) l, ltr : liter(s)
ha : hectare(s) mcm : million cubic meter(s)

(Weight) (Speed/Velocity)
g, gr : gram(s) cm/s : centimeter per second
kg : kilogram(s) m/s : meter per second
ton : ton(s) km/h : kilometer per hour

xviii CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 1 PHYSICAL AND BIOLOGICAL CONDITION

1.1 Topography

The Pahang River Basin, which is the largest river basin in Peninsular Malaysia with the catchment area
of about 29,000 km3, situated between the Titiwangsa Range in the west and Timur Range in the east. The
Titiwangsa Range, which runs north and south like a backbone of Peninsular Malaysia, generally ranges
in elevation from 1,000 to 1,500 m with several peak summits reaching about 2,000 m. Timur Range runs
north and south along the coastal plain in the east edge of the Basin, ranging generally from 300 to 600 m
in elevation with some peak summits reaching about 1,500 m. Additionally, the Gunung Tahan mountain
range, which has the highest peak (2,187m) of Peninsular Malaysia, runs south and north in the central
northern part of the basin.

A wide peneplaine spreads from Kuala Tembeling to Temerloh and continues southernly along the Bera
River to the basin boundary with Muar River Basin. The peneplain extends easterly along the Pahang
River from Temerloh and joins the coastal plain in the lowest stretch of the Pahang River. Low-lying
areas along the Pahang River and tributaries in the peneplaine and the coastal plain are flood plains during
floods. Topographic map of the Pahang River Basin is presented in Figure 1.1.1.

Figure 1.1.1 Topographical Map of Pahang River Basin

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-1
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1.2 Geology

The Pahang River Basin covers 293,000 km2 in the central part of Peninsular Malaysia, being sandwiched
by the Titiwangsa Range in the west and the Timur Range in the east both of which are expanding in the
north-norheastern direction. The eastern coastal plain has a geologic structure formed in the Quaternary
period.

Actually, the geological structure of the Basin is so complex that it has not been clarified completely yet.
According to collected geological maps, sedimentary rocks and metamorphic rocks in various grades of
all the periods from Silurian to Cretaceous are folded in a series of major structures trending
north-northwestly. Especially, Jurassic-Triassic sediments/rocks predominately cover most of the basin.
Additionally, 170km-long massive granite zone is seen on the eastern basin boundary along the
Titiwangsa Range. Massive granite exposures are also seen on the Timur Range and the western part of
the central plain.

According to past studies, the sedimentary rocks comprise siltstone, sandstone, quartzite, conglomerate
and limestone which have been influenced by mild regional metamorphism. There are also acid volcanic
rocks comprising intermediates of tuffs and lavas. These acid volcanic rocks are interbedded between the
above-said sedimentary rocks. Quartzite, limestone and conglomerate of the Pahang River Basin are hard
rocks, but silty and tuffaceous rocks are likely to get soft and fissile if exposed on the ground.

Figure 1.2.1 Geological Map of Pahang River Basin

1.3 Meteorology and Hydrology

The Pahang River Basin is located at the east coast region of Peninsular Malaysia. The region
experiences maximum rainfalls around the months of November to December, while the driest months
are June and July. Except the highland areas (Cameron Highlands), the daily maximum and minimum
temperatures are around 32°C and 23°C respectively, whereas the relative humidity is generally around
80-90% with daily evaporation of about 3 mm. Figure 1.3.1 and Figure 1.3.2 summarized the climatic
characteristics of the region based on the data of meteorological stations in and in the vicinity of the
Basin.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-2
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Cameron Highlands Batu Embun

Height 1545.0 m a.s.l. Height 59.5 m a.s.l.
Daily max. temperature 22.7°C Daily max. temperature 32.4°C
Daily min. temperature 15.3°C Daily min. temperature 23.0°C
Relative humidity 90.1% Relative humidity 86.0%
Annual rainfall 3031 mm Annual rainfall 2161 mm
Annual no. of rain days 235 Annual no. of rain days 187
Daily evaporation 1.9 mm Daily evaporation 3.3 mm

Temerloh Pekan
Height 39.1 m a.s.l. Height 4.0 m a.s.l.
Daily max. temperature 32.9°C Daily max. temperature 32.3°C
Daily min. temperature 23.2°C Daily min. temperature 23.4°C
Relative humidity 83.6% Relative humidity at 8:00 am 91.8%
Annual rainfall 1966 mm Rrelative humidity at 2:00 pm 68.7%
Annual no. of rain days 175 Annual rainfall 2785 mm
Daily evaporation 3.3 mm Annual no. of rain days 171
Note: The climatic data are 1999-2008 average.
Source: Stations Cameron Highlands, Batu Embun, Temerloh and Sekolah Menengah Ahmad Pekan, Malaysian Meteorological
Department, 2009

Figure 1.3.1 General Climatic Characteristics of the Pahang River Basin

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-3
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Rainf alls an d Raindays

600 30

500 25

400 20

Rainfall, mm

Raindays
300 15

200 10

100 5

0 0
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Annual rainfall at Cameron Highlands Annual rainfall at Batu Embun

Annual rainfall at Temerloh Annual rainfall at Pekan
Annual raindays at Cameron Highlands Annual raindays at Batu Embun
Annual raindays at Temerloh Annual raindays at Pekan

Temperatu re & Relative Humidity

40 100

80
30

Relative humidity, %
Temperature, C

60

20

40

10
20

0 0
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Mean max temperature at Cameron Highlands Mean max temperature at Batu Embun
Mean max temperature at Temerloh Mean max temperature at Pekan
Mean min temperature at Cameron Highlands Mean min temperature at Batu Embun
Mean min temperature at Temerloh Mean min temperature at Pekan
24-hr mean relative humidity at Cameron Highlands 24-hr mean relative humidity at Batu Embun
24-hr mean relative humidity at Temerloh Mean relative humidity at 8:00am at Pekan
Mean relative humidity at 2:00pm at Pekan

Evaporation
5
Mean daily evaporation, mm

0
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Mean daily evaporation at Cameron Highlands Mean daily evaporation at Batu Embun
Mean daily evaporation at Temerloh

Source: Stations Cameron Highlands, Batu Embun, Temerloh and Sekolah

Menengah Ahmad Pekan, Malaysian Meteorological Department, 2009

Figure 1.3.2 Climate Characteristics at Cameron Highlands, Batu Embun,

Temerloh and Pekan

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-4
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1.3.1 Rainfall

20 rainfall stations were selected to assess the annual rainfall (see Chapter 4 for selection process).
Location and ID numbers of the rainfall stations are shown in Figure 1.3.3 with the annual rainfall
distribution. The annual rainfall varies from approximately 1,700 to 2,800mm within the basin and
relatively high annual rainfalls are observed from Cameron Highlands to the east coast along the north
boundary of the basin. Rainy season starts from September and maximum monthly average rainfalls are
observed at November or December for all the stations. Basin mean annual rainfall obtained from 10
years rainfall data of 1999-2008 is 2,136mm (see Figure 1.3.4).

St. 4019063 Average Monthly Rainfall

(1999-2008)
500
400

Rainfall(mm)
4514032
! 4414036 300

! 4419047200
! 100
0
St.4514032 Average Monthly Rainfall
J F M A M J J A S O N D
(1999-2008) 4227001
500
4120064 !
400
Rainfall(mm)

! 4122067
St.4227001 Average Monthly Rainfall
300 (1999-2008)
200 4019063
! 500
! 400

Rainfall(mm)
100
0 3924071 300
! 200
J F M A M J J A S O N D 3818057
! 100
3717052 0
! 3726089 J F M A M J J A S O N D
3723077
! !
St. 3421134 Average Monthly Rainfall
3533102
(1999-2008) 3524080 !
500 3431099
3421134 ! !
400
Rainfall(mm)

!
300 3325086
200 !
100 St. 3431099 Average Monthly Rainfall
(1999-2008)
0 500
J F M A M J J A S O N D 3122142 400
Rainfall(mm)

! 300
St. 3122142 Average Monthly Rainfall
200
(1999-2008)
500 100
2922018
400 0
Rainfall(mm)

!
300 J F M A M J J A S O N D
200 High : 2880.57
100 2725094
0 !
J F M A M J J A S O N D Low : 1670.25
Figure 1.3.3 Annual Rainfall Distribution in Pahang River Basin

Basin Average Monthly Rainfall(1999-2008) Basin Average Annual Rainfall(1999-2008)

500
2600
400
Rainfall(mm)

2400
Rainfall(mm)

Average: 2136mm
300 2200
200 2000
1800
100 1600
0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov.Dec.

Figure 1.3.4 Basin Mean Monthly and Annual Rainfall based on 1999-2008 Data
(Left Panel: Monthly Rainfall, Right Panel: Annual Rainfall)

1.3.2 Tide

10 year (1999-2008) data of Tanjung Gelang, the closest tide observation station to the Pahang river
mouth, was obtained from Department of Survey and Mapping (JUPEM). Figure 1.3.5 shows the daily
average, maximum and minimum sea level, and Table 1.3.1 shows ones for respective months based on
10 years observation. Monthly average sea levels from October to March are observed to be above annual

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-5
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

average which coincides with rainy season of the Pahang River Basin. The table shows that past annual
maximum sea levels were recorded in January, November or December.
Tanjung Gelang Average Maximum Minimum
3
Sea level (DTGSM m)

2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Figure 1.3.5 Daily Average, Maximum and Minimum Sea Levels

Table 1.3.1 Monthly Average Sea Levels at Tanjung Gelang

(DTGSM m)
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec
Average 0.35 0.29 0.19 0.15 0.09 -0.02 -0.05 0.00 0.09 0.26 0.30 0.49
1999 Maximum 1.95 1.68 1.47 1.59 1.80 1.63 1.50 1.38 1.40 1.79 1.98 2.35
Minimum -1.14 -1.32 -0.95 -1.17 -1.38 -1.61 -1.65 -1.37 -0.99 -1.05 -1.17 -1.06
Average 0.34 0.33 0.26 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.01 -0.01 0.11 0.16 0.35 0.35
2000 Maximum 1.94 1.61 1.49 1.46 1.66 1.80 1.71 1.59 1.42 1.61 1.88 1.98
Minimum -1.25 -1.17 -0.83 -1.01 -1.29 -1.53 -1.66 -1.60 -1.07 -1.00 -1.00 -1.35
Average 0.32 0.32 0.21 0.16 0.05 -0.03 0.00 0.02 0.11 0.21 0.36 0.37
2001 Maximum 1.91 1.88 1.60 1.50 1.52 1.60 1.71 1.63 1.49 1.57 1.94 1.86
Minimum -1.50 -1.22 -1.03 -1.09 -1.44 -1.63 -1.60 -1.55 -1.13 -0.98 -0.97 -1.24
Average 0.32 0.28 0.19 0.14 0.08 0.00 -0.04 0.01 0.03 0.17 0.29 0.31
2002 Maximum 1.99 1.93 1.50 1.70 1.67 1.56 1.46 1.48 1.44 1.68 1.82 1.84
Minimum -1.38 -1.22 -1.06 -1.14 -1.46 -1.52 -1.63 -1.51 -1.22 -0.99 -1.13 -1.44
Average 0.35 0.27 0.21 0.10 0.03 -0.02 -0.03 0.00 0.05 0.20 0.32 0.43
2003 Maximum 1.91 1.82 1.45 1.63 1.75 1.62 1.68 1.49 1.50 1.93 2.05 2.06
Minimum -1.17 -1.15 -0.99 -1.32 -1.64 -1.72 -1.65 -1.44 -1.22 -1.17 -1.30 -1.51
Average 0.22 0.19 0.09 0.04 -0.02 -0.02 -0.04 0.09 0.27 0.30 0.33
2004 Maximum 1.66 1.65 1.52 1.76 1.79 1.71 1.63 1.41 1.77 1.88 2.18
Minimum -1.21 -0.99 -1.24 -1.52 -1.69 -1.79 -1.74 -1.15 -1.05 -1.40 -1.42
Average 0.27 0.18 0.20 -0.05 -0.04 0.07 0.17 0.28 0.36
2005 Maximum 2.00 1.80 1.67 1.65 1.52 1.45 1.63 1.91 1.93
Minimum -1.48 -1.42 -1.13 -1.80 -1.66 -1.26 -1.16 -1.26 -1.37
Average 0.30 0.30 0.19 0.12 0.09 -0.03 -0.06 -0.01 0.09 0.19 0.27 0.45
2006 Maximum 2.06 1.82 1.56 1.59 1.64 1.57 1.49 1.50 1.46 1.65 1.98 2.16
Minimum -1.35 -1.18 -1.10 -1.29 -1.55 -1.64 -1.72 -1.57 -1.23 -1.22 -1.24 -1.25
Average 0.34 0.16 0.20 0.16 0.05 0.00 -0.04 -0.03 0.07 0.17 0.37 0.38
2007 Maximum 1.84 1.72 1.58 1.64 1.80 1.75 1.56 1.38 1.35 1.94 2.20 2.00
Minimum -1.27 -1.37 -1.06 -1.41 -1.61 -1.65 -1.70 -1.46 -1.30 -1.37 -1.26 -1.44
Average 0.35 0.36 0.24 0.16 0.08 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.21 0.37 0.44
2008 Maximum 1.98 1.73 1.50 1.67 1.78 1.84 1.69 1.60 1.35 1.81 2.08 2.14
Minimum -1.18 -0.97 -0.97 -1.34 -1.61 -1.66 -1.82 -1.49 -1.26 -1.12 -1.25 -1.41
Average 0.33 0.27 0.21 0.13 0.06 -0.01 -0.02 0.00 0.08 0.20 0.32 0.39
1998
-2008 Maximum 2.06 1.93 1.67 1.70 1.80 1.84 1.71 1.63 1.50 1.94 2.20 2.35
Minimum -1.50 -1.42 -1.13 -1.41 -1.64 -1.72 -1.82 -1.74 -1.30 -1.37 -1.40 -1.51

1.4 River Condition

1.4.1 River System

The length of the Pahang River is about 530 km. It is classified as a national river as it flows across two
States, namely Negeri Sembilan and Pahang. The mainstream of the Pahang River is formed by two main
tributaries i.e. the Jelai River and the Tembeling River. The Jelai River emerges from the Titiwangsa
Range at the northwestern tip of the Pahang River Basin, while the Tembeling River originates from the
Timur Range at the northeastern edge of the Basin. Flow velocities of both rivers are high due to the
relatively narrow and steep river channels. The Jelai River flows southeastward and the Tembeling River

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-6
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

flows southwestward, towards the central part of the Basin and both meet at Kuala Tembeling to form the
Pahang River.

Due to gentle terrains, the velocity drops and the river channel of the Pahang River proper is wider and
shallower compared to the Jelai River and the Tembeling River. The Pahang River flows southward
along the valley created by the Benum Range to the west and the Gunung Tahan Range to the east. After
flowing for about 100 km, the River joins with the Semantan River, another main tributary of the Pahang
River. The Semantan River emerges from southern part of the Titiwangsa Range, adjacent to the State
boundary between Pahang and Selangor. It flows in the west to east direction and meets with the Pahang
River at Temerloh. Not far after joining with the Semantan River, due to limitation of hilly areas between
the Titiwangsa Range and Chini Hill, the Pahang River changes its flow direction toward northeast and
meets with the Tenang River that originates from the southern tip of the Titiwangsa Range in Negeri
Sembilan. After joining with the Jengka River, the flow direction changes again towards east, then
reaches the alluvial plain, and finally discharges to the South China Sea near Pekan town.

There are two main natural lakes in the Pahang River Basin namely the Lake Bera and the Lake Chini,
which are the largest and second largest natural freshwater lakes in Malaysia. Figure below shows the
basic river network of the Pahang River.

Figure 1.4.1 The Pahang River System

1.4.2 River Features

(1) Bed Slope

Figure 1.4.2 is the river bed profile of the Pahang River and its tributaries with chainage from the river
mouth. The average bed slope of the main stream is approximately 0.016% (1/6,200), and 0.051%

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-7
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(1/1,900), 0.034% (1/2,900) and 0.024% (1/4,100) respectively for major tributaries namely Semantan
River, Jelai River and Tembeling River.
90 Pahang Tembeling Jelai Lipis Tekman
Kerau Semantan Triang Bera Jengka
Jempul Luit Mentiga Lepar Serting
80

70

60
Elevation(DTGMS m)

50

40

30

20

10

-10
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
Chainage(km)

Figure 1.4.2 River Bed of Pahang River and Its Tributaries

(2) River Discharge

Station 3527410 (Lubok Paku) which is the most downstream stage station in the Pahang River basin
was selected for further analysis on the river discharge characteristics of the basin (see Chapter 4 for
location of the observation station).

Table 1.4.1 and Figure 1.4.3 show the monthly and annual average discharges with monthly
maximum/ minimum daily discharges based on the latest 10 year (1999-2008) data.

Table 1.4.1 10 year Average of Monthly Averaged and Maximum and Minimum Daily
Discharge (St. 357410)
(m3/s)
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Ave.
Ave. 944 611 538 687 676 487 390 369 487 733 1035 1313 689
Max. 1770 1146 869 1064 1195 808 674 674 874 1268 1672 2603 ---
Min. 509 371 316 460 378 325 264 252 294 393 637 608 ---
Pahang Riv., Lubok Paku(1999-2008)
3000
ave. max. min.
2500
Discharge(m3/s)

2000

1500

1000

500

0
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Figure 1.4.3 Monthly Average, Maximum and Minimum Daily Discharges based on
1999-2008 Observation Data (St. 357410)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-8
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

River discharge rises above its annual average of 690m3/s from October to January next year which is
consistent with the rainy season identified in Section 1.3.1. Most major flood events occur in
December as seen in Figure 1.4.4 which shows maximum daily discharge of each month obtained
from the 10 year data.
Pahang Riv., Lubok Paku(1999-2008)
Maximum Dally Discharge(m3/s)
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Figure 1.4.4 Monthly Maximum Daily Discharge (1999-2008, St. 357410)

(3) Runoff Ratio

Annual average runoff ratio was calculated based on the annual river discharge volume of st. 37410
and annual basin average rainfall data of latest 10 years (1999-2008). It should be noted that the
catchment areas of the basin and st. 357410 are 28,770 km2 and 25,600km2 respectively. As shown in
the Table 1.4.2, average annual runoff ratio varies from approximately 0.3 to 0.5 and average is
approximately 0.4. The ratio has a tendency to increase with increase in annual rainfall as shown in
Figure 1.4.5.

Table 1.4.2 Annual Discharge/ Rainfall Volume and Runoff Ratio of Pahang River Basin
Discharge Rainfall
Runoff Ratio
(million m3) (million m3)
1999 34,606 68,096 0.51
2000 29,245 65,284 0.45
2001 25,438 66,096 0.38
2002 18,386 49,032 0.37
2003 20,179 57,545 0.35
2004 18,912 56,714 0.33
2005 14,590 51,722 0.28
2006 23,987 59,148 0.41
2007 32,002 73,534 0.44
2008 27,364 67,686 0.40
Average 24,471 61,485 0.39
0.6

0.5
Runoff Ratio

0.4

0.3

0.2
1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Annual Precipitation(mm)
Figure 1.4.5 Relation between Annual Rainfall and Annual Average Runoff Ratio

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-9
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(4) Flow Capacity

The existing flow capacity of the Pahang River and major branch rivers were firstly estimated by the
non-uniform calculation method using the mean higher high water level (EL+1.00m) at Tanjung Gelang
near the estuary of the Pahang as the boundary condition at the downstream end. Then, channel flow
capacities were estimated through comparison between the calculated flood water levels and the existing
bank levels. The results of the estimation are illustrated in Figure 1.4.6.

As indicated in the figure, some sections of the Pahang River can not accommodate even the probable
flood discharge of 5-year ARI. Especially at most of the sections of the middle stretch between Lubok
Paku and Temerloh, it is seen that the calculated water level exceeds the bank levels. This low flow
capacity is one of the main causes of extensive flood inundation along the River.
60 5000

Jerantut
50 4000

Temerloh
40 3000
Elevation(DTGSM m)

Lubok Paku

Discharge(m3/s)
30 2000

20 1000
Pekan

10 0
Water Level Left Bank
0 Right Bank River Bed -1000
Discharge(ARI: 5yrs)
-10 -2000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300
Chainage(km)
Discharge derived from runoff analysis and 1dimensional river simulation in Chapter 4
Figure 1.4.6 Flood Water Level Profile (5-Year Return Period) For Pahang River

1.4.3 River Structures

Based on collected information and previous study reports, major river structures in the Pahang River
related to flood mitigation and their location is summarized below.
Table 1.4.3 Major River Structures
Major River Structure Location
Rock Groin Pekan, Kuala Pahang
Bund Pekan, etc
Tidal Gate Pekan, etc
Dam Bentong, Cameron Highland, etc.

Figure 1.4.7 Site Pictures of Structures for Flood Mitigation

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-10
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Most of bridges crossing at the Pahang, the Semantan and other rivers have been reconstructed to
high-standard bridges in line with the new highway network. The spans and girders of these bridges are
long and high enough to allow flood discharge flow smoothly in the river channels.
There are five dam structures operated by DID in the Pahang River basin. They are all categorized into
small dams.

Table 1.4.4 Dam and Reservoir Operated by DID

Dam Reservoir
Name of Completed Crest Crest Surface
Dam Year Height Area Capacity
Type Length Elevation Area
(m) (km2) (MCM)
(m) (m) (km2)
Old Repas 1925 Earth 13.4 210 143.29 10 0 NA
New Repas 1963 Earth 20.0 40 128.96 11 0.4 0.05
Pontian 1985 Earth 15.5 350 7.5 170 40.0 20.00
Anak Endau 1985 Earth 18.0 700(L) 23.0 36 38.0 7.20
Perting 2003 Porous 21.5 138.6 118.0 125 NA 1.05

1.4.4 Bank Erosion

It seems that there is a cycle of bank erosion and aggradation on the Pahang River and major tributaries
such as the Tembeling River and the Semantan River. The river banks, especially at bend in meandering
stretches are undergoing constantly erosion and aggradation. Normally the severe erosion occurs during
floods.

To protect the river bank from erosion, rock groins were installed against the bank erosion at Pekan by
DID. It was identified by the site survey by the JICA Study Team that the bank erosion is less progressive
due to the protection work. The JICA Study Team also found that the bank erosion was still active in the
right bank of the Semantan River at Kg. Lompat. According to information from DID Pahang, the bank
erosion sites have been identified in the Bentong River Basin, and the protection work of gabion
revetments, concrete revetment, wood piling and vegetation cover has been provided.

However, bank erosion has not become a serious issue for the Pahang River Basin yet. It is probably
because such erosion sites are still limited to jangle or agricultural areas located far away from residential
areas and important river structures.

Figure 1.4.8 Site Pictures of Bank Erosion Site

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-11
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1.4.5 Sediment Condition and Sediment Load

(1) Sediment Yield

Generally excessive soil erosion in the basin and consequent generation of sediment load in the river
system causes siltation in the river channels and mouth, which leads to increased tendency to flooding
due to the decrease of the flow capacity of the channels, to interruption of boat navigation and to
reduction of the effective capacity of dam reservoirs.

As described in Section , the Pahang river mouths have been suffering from silatation for a long time.
To cope with thse problems, DID has commenced “Protection and Rehabilitation Project for Pahang
River Mouth” under the 9th Malaysia Plan.

(2) Total Sediment Load in Pahang River

As to the Sediment Load in the Pahang River, there are two informative past studies, that is, “Concept
Design Report of River Mouth 2006” by DID and “Pahang River Basin Study, 1974” by Australian
consultants. Both studies reached the same conclusion that the total sediment load is 4.5 mil. tons per
year although the proportion of both the suspended load and the bed load are different. Briefs of both
the studies regarding sediment are described as follows.

In the former study, the yearly suspended load was estimated at 3.3 mil. tons and the bed load was
calculated estimated at 35 % of the suspended load (i.e. 1.2 mil. tons of bed load) in reference to the
past research and study such as Mutreja (1986), Design of Small Dams (1987), Borland and Maddock
(1951) and R.S. Varshney. According to the latter study, the bed load estimated by Einstein-Brown
formula is 2.0 mil. tons per year and the suspended load was estimated at 2.5 mil. tons per year by
using the rating curve, that is 45% of the total load is bed load and 55 % of that is suspended load.

Source: Pahang River Basin Study, 1974

Figure 1.4.9 Sediment Load Rating Curve

1.4.6 River Landscape

River landscaping and riverfront development is part of the river corridor management. It is now widely
recognized that rivers have many other values in addition to drainage and water supply uses. The DID
Manual (March 2009) elaborated that one of the objectives of river corridor management is for
enhancement of opportunities for public outdoor recreation, education and scenic enjoyment, which is
deemed very closely related to river landscaping and riverfront development.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-12
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

MARAN

1. Park

2. Jogging track

3. Landscape 4. Cross-section of the Maran River 5. Camping site

JERANTUT FERI

BENTONG

Gate
Sign
Open theatre

Pedestrian walkway

Children playground
Carpark

Source: Local Plans in Pahang

Figure 1.4.10 Some of the Local Plan Proposed Riverfront Recreational and Landscape Areas

The planning and control of river landscaping and riverfront development are under the jurisdiction of
local authorities. The general guidelines and concepts of river landscaping and riverfront development
are contained in the Local Plan of each local authority. The existing Local Plans in the Pahang River
Basin has identified all the major existing riverfront recreational and landscape areas along the Pahang
River and its tributaries, and proposals have also been made for new riverfront parks and upgrading of
existing riverfront recreational spots. Figure 1.4.10 shows some of the proposed riverfront development
concepts contained in the Local Plans.

1.5 Flood Condition

1.5.1 General Feature of Flood

Based on collected water level records, normally the flood peaks in the Pahang River Basin happen in the
period from November to January under the influence of the north-east monsoon. The inundation
duration of the relatively large flood is one or two weeks and the flood prone areas were spread
corresponding to the physical features along the Pahang River and its tributaries, changing the width from
about 2 to 20km. Especially, the middle stretch of the Pahang River forms the widest flood prone area
between Mentakab and Chenor.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-13
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1.5.2 Past Flood Event

According to records of past floods, the January 1971 flood was the second largest flood next to the one in
1926 which was recognized in the Malaysian memory as the biggest flood since the 19th century,
although this information is meager. The Annual maximum daily discharges observed at Lubok Paku and
annual maximum basin mean 8 day rainfall since year 1969 is illustrated in Figure 1.5.1. Those in 2007
and 1988 follow the 1971 flood in terms of 8 day rainfall.
Maximum 8 daysMaximum
Rainfall 8 days Annual
RainfallMaximum Daily
Daily Discharge
Peak Discharge Average
DailyAnnual Maximum
Average Daily Discharge
Discharge

0
14,000
100
12,000

Precipitation (mm)
200
Discharge (m3/s)

10,000
300
8,000
400
6,000 500
4,000 600
2,000 700
0 800
1969/70
1970/71
1971/72
1972/73
1973/74
1974/75
1975/76
1976/77
1977/78
1978/79
1979/80
1980/81
1981/82
1982/83
1983/84
1984/85
1985/86
1986/87
1987/88
1988/89
1989/90
1990/91
1991/92
1992/93
1993/94
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/2000
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
Hydrological year

Figure 1.5.1 Flood Discharge at Lubok Paku

Of these floods, the conditions of January 1971 flood (the largest flood in last 40 years), November 1988
flood and December 2007 flood are described below. Their recorded peak water levels at Temerloh are
38.31m, 34.53m and 34.02m which are three highest in the past 40 years. As to the 1926 flood, the
information is too insufficient to describe the condition of that.

(1) January 1971 Flood

The January 1971 flood is the biggest flood in the past 4 decades with the inundation area of about
3000 km2, 150,000 evacuees and loss of 24 lives, which caused the flood damages of 38 million US
dollars including the intangible damages. The scale of 1971 flood is over the 100 year ARI based on
the hydrological probability analysis using the 8 day rainfall in Section 4.4. According to the
Australian study, this significant flood was caused by two series of heavy rainfalls which continued
from 26th through 28th December 1970 and from 30 December 1970 through 5th January 1971. The
total rainfall amount in 17 days from 26th December through 5th Janaury was summed up to 1,830 mm
on the east coast, 517mm in the Tembeling and 687 mm in the Jelai catchments. The river discharge
peaked on 8th January at the Temerloh observatory and on 4th and 5th January on the two major
tributaries. The flood inundation duration was about two weeks in major towns such as Pekan,
Mentakab and Temerloh.

The flood conditions of the major cities and towns are summarized in Table 1.5.1 and a flood
inundation map by the Australian study is presented in lood in Figure 1.5.2.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-14
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Merapoh
(
pia
S. Se

S.
Sa
S. T

t
S.
e
Tanah Rata lum

¯
rau

T ah
(
nu r

S. Se

an
Ringlet S. T e

ecau
(
S. Lemoi

S. Tanum

S. Tembeling
S. K
cil
i Ke

S.
ela
S. J

T
er
m
Padang Tengku

us
u
(

ta
Kuala Lipis

Be

S.
s
(

Ke
i
S.
S.

Lip

ru
T EK

S.

m
A I
Kuala Tembeling
(
Benta
S.
Batu Malim ( Batu Balai Te
( S. ( Jerantut ka
m

S.
Do (
ng ( Jerantut Feri

Ce
CherohDong

ka
( (

S.
g
ian

Kio
S. L

S. K
Sungai Ruan

S. Poh
am Raub( S. S
emp

era
S. S ( ebu
i Bandar JengkaSg. Jerik

u
Bkt. Fraser ( (

oi
Kuala Kerau
S. Lompat

S. Kundang
S. Jem
( (
S. Sri Jaya
S. K
T (
er

S. Jengka

pul
is
elau

Kerdau Maran

S. L
( Tajau(
g Kuala Pahang

e
Bentong

S.
han
(

p ar
S. Pertin
(g Pa (

Luit
antan( Lanchang Chenor S. Pekan
S. Sem ( Temerloh ( (
s

Mentakab
(
S. Benu

Karak
(
Chini

S.
(

Me
Mengkarak

nt
Telemong (

iga
( Bera Bandar 32
Legend Teriang
( S. (
S. K

( Be
Simpang PelangaiMengkuang ra
ena

(
Town (
boi

(
Durian TipusKemayan
S. Serting

( ( Kpg. Sg. (Buloh

Kpg. Chennah
1971 Flood (Sg. Muntoh ( Simpang Durian
( Lui Muda
Titi (
(
Kuala Klawang Petaling Pertang FELDA Serting Hilir
(( ( ( Air Hitam
(
0 5 10 20 30 40 Simpang (Pertang
Kilometers ( Bandar Seri Jempol
Bahau
(

Source: Pahang River Basin Study, 1974

Figure 1.5.2 Flood Inundation Area on December 1971 Flood

Table 1.5.1 Flood Condition on January 1971 Flood

Urban Area Major Cause of Flood Flood Feature
Pekan - Flooding from Pahang River - Two to There Weeks
- Depth 1.5 m
Temerloh - Flooding from Pahang River - Depth from 2 to 3 m
- Damages of USD 0.8 mil.
- Town Isolated for 3 days
Mentakab - Flood (From Pahang River) - 1.5 week
- Depth of 5.0 m
- Damages of USD 1.2 mil
Kuala Lips - Flood from Pahang River - Depth of 3 m
- 12 days
Raub - Flood by high intensity storm duration storm - N/A
Maran - Flood from Maran River - N/A
Bentong - Flood by local rainfall and Inadequate Storm - 30 hours
water Drains - Depth of 1m
Jerantut - Flood from tributary caused the cut of - Main part of the town was above flood level
communication Road (town was not
inundated)
Teriang - Flood from Teriang River - Depth of 2m in on lower ground
- Main part of the town was above flood level
Lanchang - Flood from tributary - Depth of 3 m
- Main part of the town was above flood level
Karak - Flood from tributary Telemong River caused - Main part of the town was above flood level
the cut of communication road
Benta - Flood from tributary caused the inundation of - Depth of 3 m
main road of small town - Many of the houses on higher ground was
above flood level
Kuala - Flood from Pahang River - Depth of 1m to 3m
Tembeling
Source: Pahang River Basin Study, 1974

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-15
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(2) November 1988 Flood

The basin was hit by an intensive rainfall in November 1988 causing approximate damage of RM 7
million. Water level stations in the basin observed peak levels between 19th and 26th of Novemmber.
The maximum 8 day rainfall of Ulu Tekai, Lubok Paku, Temelroh and Pekan were 457mm, 288mm,
226mm and 795mm respectively. The numbers of evacuees are as in Table 1.5.2.

Table 1.5.2 Number of Evacuees by dstrict (Nov. 1988 flood)

District Max. number of evacuees
Kuala Lipis 4,127
Raub 1,159
Kuantan 1,125
Temerloh 4,987
Jerantut 5,317
Pekan 2,144
Source: DID Flood Report

(3) December 2007 Flood

The Pahang River Basin was hit by the flood between 10th and 18th December 2007 that included
several districts such as Rompin, Pekan, Lipis, Kuantan, Bera, Maran and Temerloh, due to the highly
intensive rainfall for 17 days across the entire basin. The total rainfall during the 17 days from 5th to
21st December 2007 is 965mm, 919mm, 496mm and 383mm at the telemetric stations, namely, Sungai
Lembing, Sungai Chini, Lubuk Paku and Temerloh respectively.

The December 2007 flood can be recognized as the third largest flood in terms of basin mean 8 day
rainfall. The water level exceeded the danger level at the Lubok Paku, Temerloh, Pekan stations as
shown Table 1.5.3. According to the District DID offices, the tributaries were not able to release the
flood water because of the backwater from the main Pahang Riverl. According to field survey, the
inundation depth ranges from 1.0 to 2.0 m at Pekan Center and from 0.5 to 2.0 at the major towns in
Temerloh and Maran districts.
Table 1.5.3 Peak Water Level
Station Observed water level Warning levels
Chini River 17.04m (1.19m above danger level) Normal 14.02 m, Alert : 14.93 m, Danger: 15.85 m
Yap River 54.28m (5th highest, 2.28m above danger level) Normal 44 m, Alert : 48 m, Danger: 52 m
Lubuk Paku 22.47m (3rd highest, 3.47m above danger level) Normal 14. m, Alert : 17 m, Danger: 19 m
Temerloh 34.020m (3rd highest, 1.02m above danger level) Normal 26 m, Alert : 29 m, Danger: 33 m
Pekan 4.04m (0.38m above danger level) Normal 2.44 m, Alert : 3.06 m, Danger: 3.66 m
Source: DID Flood Report

The long duration flood forced people to stay at designated evacuation centres in Rompin, Maran,
Kuantan, Pekan, Raub, Bera, Jerantut, Bentong, Temerloh and Kuala Lipis districts for as long as 22
days at the maximum, as shown in the Table 1.5.4. On the other hand, a total of 8 casualties were also
recorded in the state of Pahang, for example one casualty at Rompin, two at Pekan, three at Temerloh
and two at the Maran district respectively. The flood damages were estimated at RM 263 million by
DID.
Table 1.5.4 Maximum Number of Evacuees (6th to 29th Dec.)
District Max. number of evacuees by district Duration
Rompin 3,442 (14th) 22 days
Maran 4,402 (13th) 22 days
Kuantan 4,428 (15th) 22 days
Pekan 10,811 (17th) 21 days
Bera 2,652 (17th) 20 days
Raub 630 (12th) 4 days
Jerantut 433 (14th) 6 days
Bentong 138 (12th) 2 days
Temerloh 4,910 (16th) 7 days
Lipis 100 (13th) 2 days
Source: DID Flood Report

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-16
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

A flood map, which was delineated by DID using satellite images, is shown in Figure 1.5.3, although
the northern part of the river basin was excluded form the mapping area.

Source: DID
Figure 1.5.3 Flood Map for December 2007

1.5.3 Probable Inundation Area

(1) Flood Map

For the purpose of identification of areas vulnerable to flood and the determination of the flood plains
for the flood simulation modeling in Section 4.4, probable flood areas were delineated based on the
existing flood maps by “Pahang River basin Study, 1974”, “National Registration of River Basin,
2003” and DID as shown Figure 1.5.4.

Figure 1.5.4 Probable Flood Inundation Areas

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-17
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1.5.4 Vulnerable Area to Flood

Considering the above mentioned past flood records and flood maps, the vulnerable areas in the level
of towns and settlements are summarized as shown in Table 1.5.5. The population in this table
indicates that of densely populated towns and centers of local authorities. One of the major causes of
flood “Overflowing of river” is checked if the area is located inside the flood inundation areas of
Figure 1.5.4 while the “inadequate drainage system” is checked if design scale of trunks of the
rainstorm drainage system is less than ARI of 25 years.

Table 1.5.5 Vulnerable Areas

Urban Area (town Major Cause of Flood
Population Inside Probable Along Pahang Along
and the center of Overflowing Inadequate Drainage
(2000) Flood Area River Tributary
local authority) of River System
Pekan 4017 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Maran 389 ✔ N/A ✔
Chenor 2789 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Mengkarak 2001 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Kerayong 1570 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Teriang 6747 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Simpang Durian 566 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Sungai Buloh 417 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Temerloh 6224 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔ ✔
Mentakab 14442 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Lanchang 1527 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Sungai Dua 578 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Kuala Kerau 1033 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Kuala Tembeling 284 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Kuala Lapis 12145 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Penjum 748 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Padang Tengku 332 ✔ N/A ✔ ✔
Raub 22057 ✔ ✔
Jerantut 10425 ✔
Benton 22231 ✔ ✔
Karak 2534 ✔ ✔ ✔
Benta 1998 ✔ ✔ ✔
Note: Green color indicates that the flood inundation occurred in the 1971 Flood.

1.6 Ecosystem

As reported in “National Water Resources Study 2000-2050”, natural vegetation in the Pahang River
Basin generally comprises lowland tropical rainforests (lowland Dipterocarp forest, hill Dipterocarp
forests, upper Dipterocarp forests and heath forests), lower and upper montane forests, swamps and
low-lying forests and forest plantation. The common flora species are listed in Table 1.6.1.

The Pahang River Basin includes some wildlife reserves and sanctuaries, which expected to house a rich
diversity of terrestrial faunal life. This includes a large number of rare and endangered species that
protected by law. Figure 1.6.1 shows the main conservation areas in and surrounding the Pahang River
Basin.

Table 1.6.1 Common Flora Species in the Pahang River Basin

Forest type Characteristics
Lowland tropical rainforests
ƒ Lowland Dipterocarp forest Usually dense, with many thousands species of trees as well as shrubs, herbs
and woody climbers
ƒ Hill Dipterocarp forest Similar to lowland Dipterocarp forest
ƒ Upper Dipterocarp forest Characterised by Shorea platyclados
Lower and upper montane forest Fagaceae and Lauraceae, Preris ovalifolia, Rhododendron spp. and
Vaccinium spp.
Peat swamp forests and mangrove forests Along the coast
Forest plantation Pinus caribaea, Araucaria spp., Acacia mangium, Gmelina arborea and
Paraserianthes falcataria
Source: Summarized from the National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-18
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CAMERON HIGHLANDS TAMAN NEGARA

Main protected fauna: Main protected fauna:
− Tiger − Rhinoceros
− Elephant
− Tiger
− Seladang
− Tapir
− Serow
− Helmeted hornbill

CHINI WILDLIFE
RESERVE
Main protected fauna:
FRAZER HILL − Elephant
Main protected fauna: − Tapir
− Tiger − Tiger

KRAU WILDLIFE
RESERVE
Main protected fauna:
− Elephant
− Seladang
− Tiger BERA WILDLIFE
− Tapir RESERVE
− Helmeted hornbill Main protected fauna:
− Elephant
− Seladang
− Tapir
− Tiger

Source: National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

Figure 1.6.1 Wildlife Protection Areas in and surrounding the Pahang River Basin

1.6.1 Environmental Sensitive Areas

Effective and sustainable management of natural environment is one of the vital aspects of integrated
river basin management. Forests play a vital role in safeguarding water supply, providing forest produce
and recreational places, and acting as a gene pool. Wetlands play an important role in flood mitigation
and recharging groundwater storage. Currently, Protected Areas (PA) in Peninsular Malaysia include
gazetted National and State Parks, Wildlife Reserves/Sanctuaries and Protected Forests. Despite these
PA being gazetted, there are provisions that allow degazettement for short-term economic purposes.
(National Physical Plan, 2005)

In order to ensure effective management of these environmentally sensitive areas, under the National
Physical Plan, the Government has demarcated these areas as Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA).
There are three ranks of ESA. The criteria for demarcation of ESA and the development control imposed
on these areas are elaborated in Table 1.6.2. Figure 1.6.2 shows the ESA zones in and surrounding the
Pahang River Basin.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-19
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 1.6.2 Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA) in the Pahang River Basin

Table 1.6.2 Criteria and Development Control for ESA

Rank Criteria for demarcation* Development control
ESA Rank 1 All protected areas, potential protected areas, No development, agriculture or logging shall
wetlands, catchment areas of existing and be permitted except for low-impact nature
proposed dams and areas above 1000 m a.s.l. tourism, research and education.

ESA Rank 2 All other forests, wildlife corridors, buffer No development or agriculture. Sustainable
zones around ESA Rank 1 areas and area logging and low impact nature tourism may be
within 300-1000 m a.s.l. permitted subject to local constraints.

ESA Rank 3 Buffer zones around ESA Rank 2 areas, Controlled development where the type and
catchment areas for water intakes, areas for intensity of the development shall be strictly
groundwater extraction, areas with erosion risk controlled depending on the nature of the
greater than 150 ton/ha/year, areas within constraints.
150-300 m a.s.l.

*In relation to IRBM

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-20
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1.7 Water Resources Potential

1.7.1 Surface Water

The Pahang River Basin is the biggest in terms of catchment area in the Peninsular Malaysia. It has a
total catchment area of 28,770km2, 26,580 km2 (92.4%) of which is located in Pahang State and 2,190
km2 (7.6%) as the rest is located in Negeri Sembilan State.

Figure 1.7.1 presents water balance in the entire Pahang River Basin that was obtained from a long-term
runoff analysis, of which details are given in Section 4.5. This figure includes future cases with impacts
of climate change.

Unit:
Unit: mcm
mcm Red:
Red: current
current Blue:
Blue: 2025
2025 Green:
Green: 2050
2050
upper basin
Rainfall 8,212
Rainfall
67,691 70,610 71,918 Tembeling river
67,691 70,610 71,918 evapotranspiration 8,776 6,465 6,909 6,974
37,105 8,964
net precipitation 37,711
30,586 38,603

intake 32,899
33,315 intake 1
195 14,676
15,684 other rivers
river mouth
30,390 15,937 2,765 2,954 3,017
32,837
33,253
detail Semantan river
2,939 3,141 3,208

20,318
SEA 21,717 Intake 62
Intake 22,100
other rivers
133 10,205 11,057 11,090

river mouth
30,390
32,837
33,253

SEA
Figure 1.7.1 Annual Water Budget of Pahang River Basin

According to this figure, the present total annual runoff volume is 30,586 million m3. This corresponds to
1,063 mm of effective rainfall, or 25,702 m3 per capita of the river basin population, as shown in Table
1.7.1. The Pahang River Basin is not so rich in runoff volume per catchment area compared to the average
of Peninsular Malaysia, but its per capita runoff volume is outstanding, 3.7 times grater than the
peninsular average. This abundant river water is expected to be utilized not only for comsumption within
the basin but also for supply to neibouring water-shortaged states such as Selangor and Negeri Sembilan.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-21
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 1
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 1.7.1 Comparison of Water Resources

River Basin Pahang Muar Peninsular Malaysia
Annual Runoff Volume (million m3) 30,586 4,360 152,330***
Catchment Area (km2) 28,770 6,140 131,344
Basin Population (thousand) 1,190* 660* 22,056**
Annual Runoff Volume per Catchment
1.063 0.710 1.159
Area (million m3/km2)
3
Annual runoff volume per capita (m ) 25,702 6,606 6,907
* Estimated population at 2010 by JICA Study Team
** Population at 2008 (Department of Statistics, Malaysia)
*** Data source : National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

1.7.2 Groundwater

According to “National Water Resources Study 2000-2050 (NWRS 2000-2050)”, there is ample ground
water potential in the river and coastal alluvium. Probably due to the abundant surface water, however,
groundwater utilization has not been developed so much in the Pahang River Basin. Only in remote areas,
where it is expensive to construct piped water supply systems to serve a small population ground water
sources are developed. There are also some privately owned wells drilled in industrial estates in Gambang,
Bentong and Lanchang.

The National Water Resources Study recommended that existing wellfields be kept in a working
condition by operating them for a few days a month, and that these wellfields be used when surface
sources become polluted by accidental oil spills, or in periods of acute drought.

1.7.3 Drought Frequency and Past Damage

Malaysia had rarely experienced continuous drought phenomena until severe droughts occurred in
1982-1983 and 1997-1998 by the El-Nino phenomena. Half of Malaysian territory was affected during
the droughts and faced shortage of water in all states, among them Sabah and Sarawak was the most
severely affected. There has not ever reported any serious drought in the Pahang River Basin according to
the organizations concerned, thanks to a plenty of water resources.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd. 1-22
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 2 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITION

2.1 Local Government

Malaysia is a federal nation consisting of eleven (11) states (Johor, Kedah, Kelantan, Melaka, Negeri
Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor and Terengganu) in peninsular, two (2) states (Sabah
and Sarawak) in East Malaysia and three federal territories.

In principle, excluding Kelantan state, the local administrative unit in Malaysia is composed of three
layers: State, Administrative District and Local Authority. As stipulated in Local Government Act (Act
171) in 1976, Local Authority is defined as City Council, Municipal Council and District Council.

The Pahang River Basin (28,770 km2) involves two states of Pahang and Negeri Sembilan, namely
92.4 % (26,580 km2 ) is in Pahang State and the remaining 7.6 % (2,190 km2 ) is in Negeri Sembilan. The
administrative units in local level in the states are summarized in Table 2.1.1. 10 districts of Pahang State
and 2 districts of Negeri Sembilan State fall in the Pahang River Basin.

Table 2.1.1 Local Administrative Units in Pahang River Basin

State Administrative Local Authorities
District City Council Municipal Council District Council
Pahang - Bera - - Kuantan - Cameron Highlands
- Bentong - Temerloh - Jerantut
- Cameron - Bentong - Lipis
Highlands - Maran
- Jerantut - Pekan
- Kuantan - Raub
- Lipis - Rompin
- Maran - Bera
- Pekan
- Raub
- Temerloh
Negeri - Jelebu - Jelebu
Sembilan - Jempol - Jempol

The National Council for Local Government (NCLG) was established in accordance with the amendment
of Federal Constitution in 1960. NCLG is chaired by the Minister of Housing and Local Government and
consists of federal ministers pertaining to the local administration and representatives from each state
government. NCLG is the superior body to formulate national policies for the promotion, development
and control of local governments for the legislative administration. All state governments have obligation
to consult with NCLG when they propose new constitutions and legal reforms regarding local
government authorities.

2.2 Legislation and Institution

2.2.1 Legislation

(1) Legislative Framework for River Basin Management

The Waters Enactment No. 5 /2007 was formulated in Pahang state. This Enactment stipulates the
authorities of State Authority, the rules for river management including transfer of raw water, land
development along the river, prohibition of activities, penalties, and so on.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Firstly the responsibility of State Authority is clearly stipulated for the control, management and
regulation of water resources and raw water in the State. The most remarkable feature of this
Enactment is to appoint a public officer as Director of Water Resource in order to carry out the
provision of the Enactment properly. The duties of Director of Water Resources stipulated in the
Enactment are described below.

• To issue licenses under section 18,

• To exercise regulatory functions in respect of water resources and raw water including the
determination of standards of facilities and services, and the performance and enforcement
thereof,

• To plan and develop guidelines and strategies, standards and procedures relating to the
control, management, conservation and utilization of water resources and raw water,

• To promote efficiency in the supply of raw water,

• To ensure the optimum supply of raw water at reasonable prices,

• To ensure that all reasonable demands for raw water are satisfied,

• To ensure that licensees are able to finance the carrying on of the activities which they are
authorized by their licenses to carry on,

• To promote and encourage the abstraction and supply of raw water with a view to the
economic development of the State of Pahang,

• To investigate any accident involving any part of a raw water supply system or arising out
of operation and maintenance of any raw water supply system or raw water supply service,

• To require a licensee to perform any duty imposed on him by or under this Enactment or
any regulation made,

• To advise the State Authority on any matter relating to water resources and supply of raw
water,

• To prescribe a code of practice for licensees,

In order to practice the above tasks of the Director of Water Resources, the State Secretary was
appointed as the Director, and has issued the eighty three (83) licenses by May 2010 for the industrial
water use.

In line with river basin management, the State Authority has responsibility to define the boundaries of
the catchment areas and to specify the types of activities permitted within the defined catchment areas.
Once the catchment areas are defined, the catchment areas are declared by the State Authority to be
prohibited areas and any activities except specified activities are not allowed to be done.

The stipulation of this Enactment mainly focuses on the control and management of raw water supply
and environmental conservation through the issuance of relevant licenses by the Director. Type,
application, termination and penalties of required licenses for abstraction, supply and diversion of raw
water are clearly stipulated in the Enactment. Moreover, the State Authority can issue a raw water
protection order if there is a significant and immediate threat or risk to the quantity or quality of raw
water.

2-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(2) Legislative Framework for Flood Management

In Malaysia, law specified for flood management has not been formulated. Instead, there are the
following guidelines for flood management.

• Directive No. 20 regarding the Policy and Mechanism on National Disaster and Relief
Management, National Security Council, 1997.

• Circular No. 2/2003 regarding Guidelines for Management of Flood Disaster during the
Monsoon Seasons and Flash Flood, DID, 2003.
Directive No. 20 stipulates the mechanism for the natural disaster management. Under this integrated
emergency management system in the Directive, the functions and responsibilities of various relevant
agencies in federal, state and district level are defined for the smooth and practical implementation of
disaster relief.

Circular No. 2 stipulates the tasks and functions of DID before, during and after the occurrence of
flood disaster. This describes the necessary preparation and actions of state and district DID in each
phase to minimize the damages by flood disaster.

2.2.2 Institution

(1) Institutional Framework for River Basin Management

In the State level, various government agencies are involved in river basin management in Malaysia as
shown in Table 2.2.1.

Table 2.2.1 Tasks of Relevant Agencies for River Basin Management

State Government Agency Tasks related to River Basin Management
State Economic Planning Unit - To formulate economic development plans
Department of Irrigation and Drainage - To implement infrastructure works including
irrigation, drainage, flood mitigation & river works
- To collect hydrological data
- To advise matters on water, river sand mining, flood
mitigation, river reserves & development of river bank
to the Department of Lands and Mines
- To maintain the river facilities
Water Regulatory Body (BKSA) - To advise state government for regulation of water
supply system
- To regulate water supply operators for appropriate
water use
Department of Environment - To monitor and control water quality of river system
Land Office - To control and regulate land use & development
Local Authorities - To be responsible for urban sanitation, solid waste
collection, etc.

The functions of state DID are similar with those of federal DID. However, state DID has more
operational functions in the state. State DID conducts infrastructural works related to irrigation,
drainage, flood mitigation works, river works, etc by both federal and state funds. Hydrological data
collection is also one of its tasks. Moreover, after the construction, all relevant river facilities are
maintained by state DID. It also provides technical advices to the Department of Land and Mines and
other relevant government agencies in respect to water-related issues.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(2) Institutional Framework for Flood Management

In Malaysia, National Security Council (NSC) has responsibility for the disaster management
including natural disasters (landslide, flood, storm, etc.) and other types of disasters (industrial
disaster, fire outbreaks, etc.) and has branch offices in both states and districts.

The disaster management is handled according to the level of incident based on the following
definition of disaster as stipulated in Directive No. 20.

„ Level I Disaster: Localized incident which the authority at the district level is able to
control

„ Level II Disaster: More serious incident covering more than two (2) districts and having
potential of spreading to other areas which the authority at the state level
is able to control

„ Level III Disaster: Incident resulting from the Level II Disaster with more complexity
covering more than two (2) states to be controlled by the authority at the
central level

Moreover, for the purposes of managing the disasters, the Disaster Management and Relief Committee
(DMRC or Jawatankuasa Pengurusan dan Bantuan Bencana: JPBB) is set up in the federal, state and
district levels based on the disaster levels. DMRC is a coordination mechanism among the relevant
government agencies for emergency response.

Since the flood disaster mostly threatens the local residents and their assets, District DMRC has a main
role to save people’s lives and properties. According to Directive No. 20, District DMRC is chaired by
District Officer and consists of relevant district agencies such as police, fire and rescue department,
health office, social welfare office, information office, etc. and local authorities with the following the
main duties.

• to coordinate the disaster and relief management requirement, such as to determine the provision
of logistics assistance and the requisition of equipment/machinery required and so on

• to activate the District Disaster Operations Control Center (DOCC)

• to determine the distribution of duties among the agencies involved at the District DOCC

• to identify and set up evacuation center

• to ensure that the search and rescue operation are smoothly and effectively carried out

For the assessment and determination of flood disaster levels and necessity of evacuation, information
on river water level which is mainly managed by state and district DID needs to be disseminated
among the relevant agencies. Moreover, for the activation of DMRC with regard to the search and
rescue operations, preparation of equipment and machinery, and other emergency assistance, smooth
and immediate coordination among the above agencies is required. The chart for information
channeling and communication in disaster and relief management is shown in Figure 2.2.1

2-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Disaster Operations Control

Malaysia Control
DID HQ Chairman of Central DMRC Center (DOCC)
Center (MCC)
NSC Operations Room
Fire &
NSC SMART Defence Rescue
Operations Operations Operations Dept.
Room Room Room Operations
Room

Disaster Operations Control

Contingent Control State Secretary
State DID Center (DOCC)
Center (CCC) (Chairman of State DMRC)
State NSC Operations Room

Disaster Operations Control

District Control District Officer
District DID Center (DOCC)
Center (DCC) (Chairman of District DMRC)
District NSC Operations Room

Chief of Sub-District
(Kepala Mukim)

Head of Village
(Kepala Kampung)

Village Organization for

Village Security
(AJK Kampung)

Residents

Source: Directive No. 20 regarding the Policy and Mechanism on National Disaster and Relief Management, National Security
Council, 1997, and interview results
Figure 2.2.1 Operational Procedure for Dissemination of River Level Information

2.3 Population and Economic Profile

2.3.1 Population

Population projection was conduced based on the census data. The total population in the Pahang River
Basin was projected to be 1,190,000 at 2010 and 1,480,000 at 2025 respectively.

Table 2.3.1 Population and Population Density

Item 2010 2025
Population 1,190,000 1,480,000
Population Density per km2 41 51

2.3.2 Gross Regional Domestic Products (GRDP)

The Pahang River flows down across the two states of Pahang and Negeri Sembilan. There are available
data on GRDP only for 2000 as shown in Table 2.3.2. GRDP per capita of the both the states are as small
as half of the national average, proving that the Pahang River Basin has been less developed.

Table 2.3.2 GRDP in 2000

a) GRDP At 1987 Constant Price (million RM)
Item Malaysia N. Sembilan (1) Pahang (2)
GRDP in 2000 209,365 5,356 9,794
Annual Growth Rate from 10 Year Ago 6.77% 6.93% 8.60%
b) GRDP per capita At 1987 Constant Price (RM)
Item Malaysia N. Sembilan (1) Pahang (2)
GRDP per capita in 2000 14,584 6,228 7,453
Annual Growth Rate from 10 Year Ago 8.29% 7.32% 6.57%
Sources: (1) Rancangan Struktur Negeri Sembilan 2002 - 2020,
(2) Rancangan Structur Negeri Pahang 2002 - 2020.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

2.3.3 Labor Forces and Industrial Perspectives

Table 2.3.3 gives labor forces of the two states from 2004 to 2008. Economically active population has
been slightly increased, although the labor force participation rate has been fluctuated up and down.

Table 2.3.3 Labor Forces

Description Year Negeri Sembilan Pahang
2004 593.0 887.4
Population in Age of 15 - 64 Years Old 2005 606.6 911.9
(1,000) 2006 619.3 935.3
2007 631.8 958.3
2008 644.2 980.8
2004 65.6% 63.0%
2005 63.1% 62.1%
Labor Force Participation Rate 2006 63.8% 59.6%
2007 63.7% 61.1%
2008 62.7% 60.6%
2004 389.0 559.1
2005 382.8 566.3
Labor Force (1,000) 2006 395.1 557.4
2007 402.5 585.5
2008 403.9 594.4
2004 4.28% 1.85%
2005 6.45% 5.43%
Unemployment Rate 2006 6.52% 5.51%
2007 6.44% 5.08%
2008 n.a. n.a.
Source: "State/District Data Bank" 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, Department of
Statistics, Malaysia.

Table 2.3.4 presents labor forces by sector. In Pahang, the sharing rate of “Agriculture” is dominant, and
one of four labor forces are engaged in agriculture. “Whole Sales, Retail Trade, Repair of Vehicles and
Furniture” and “Manufacturing” follow “Agriculture”. In Negeri Sembilan, “Manufacturing” is the
highest, followed by “Agriculture” and “Whole Sales, Retail Trade, Repair of Vehicles and Furniture” by
a narrow margin.

Table 2.3.4 Labor Forces by Sector

(%)
Whole Public
Trans- Extra-
Sales, Real Admini- Private
Agri- Electri- port, Finan- Territo-
Mining Retail Hotels Estate, stration, Health Other HH
culture, city, Storage cial rial
and Manufact- Const- Trade, and Renting Defencea Edu- and Com- with
State Year Hunting Fishery Gas and and Inter- nd Organi- Total
Quarry- uring ruction Repair of Restau- and cation Social munity Emp-
and Water Com- mediat- zations
ing Vehicles rants Business Compul- Work Services loyed
Forestry Supply muni- ion and
and Activities sory Persons
cation Social Bodies
Furniture
Security
2003 15.8 0.1 0.3 21.7 0.4 9.3 12.7 7.6 6.0 1.5 4.2 7.2 6.0 2.0 2.1 3.1 0.0 100.0
2004 15.6 0.2 0.3 21.6 0.8 7.8 14.9 7.7 5.6 2.3 4.1 6.4 6.0 1.6 2.4 2.7 0.0 100.0
Negeri
Sembilan 2005 13.7 0.1 0.3 20.8 1.1 8.7 14.5 7.8 6.1 2.1 3.9 8.0 6.1 2.0 2.1 2.7 0.0 100.0
2006 15.5 0.1 0.4 20.2 0.5 8.1 14.1 7.0 5.8 2.3 3.7 10.0 5.5 2.2 2.2 2.4 0.0 100.0
2007 16.0 0.1 0.2 18.2 0.6 9.7 15.6 7.4 5.1 2.0 4.5 7.7 6.4 2.1 2.2 2.1 0.1 100.0
2003 24.7 0.9 0.5 12.4 0.4 10.0 14.3 8.4 2.8 1.1 2.9 7.6 7.8 2.3 2.3 1.5 0.1 100.0
2004 25.6 0.7 0.3 10.3 0.3 8.8 15.8 9.0 3.5 0.9 2.5 8.8 6.7 1.9 2.5 2.2 0.2 100.0
Pahang 2005 27.8 0.9 0.4 11.1 0.5 7.8 15.6 8.1 3.6 1.2 1.9 7.9 6.7 2.6 2.8 1.1 0.0 100.0
2006 28.3 0.8 0.4 11.8 0.6 7.4 14.3 9.0 2.7 1.3 2.4 6.8 7.2 2.4 3.1 1.4 0.1 100.0
2007 28.0 1.5 0.3 10.0 0.7 7.0 14.2 9.4 2.9 1.5 2.9 7.7 7.0 2.2 2.7 2.0 0.0 100.0
Source: "State/District Data Bank" 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, Department of Statistics, Malaysia.

2.4 Agriculture, Stockbreeding and Fishery

2.4.1 Agriculture

As seen in the precedent section, agriculture is one of the most important industries in the Pahang River
Basin. Table 2.4.1 and Table 2.4.2 show planted area by crop for the two states.

2-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

In both the states oil palm is overwhelming other crops, occupying about 90% of the agricultural lands. In
Pahang State the second is fruit trees, and the third is paddy, while the second is Coconut, and the third is
Rubber in Negeri Sembilan State.

Table 2.4.1 Planted Area by Major Crop

(ha)
Paddy Oil Palm Coconut
State Year (All Rubber Small Small Total
Estate
Season) Holding Estate Holding
2003 2,025 15,393 122,028 144,582 903 30,625 315,556
Negeri 2004 2,648 13,285 130,248 151,694 903 30,625 329,403
Sembilan 2005 2,030 12,087 143,538 153,189 646 27,804 339,294
2006 2,310 10,962 148,488 158,365 224 22,741 343,090
2007 1,105 10,669 155,613 151,025 615 19,883 338,910
2003 6,921 13,151 561,770 21,506 1,947 1,074 606,369
2004 6,239 9,072 555,630 23,218 1,947 1,074 597,180
Pahang 2005 5,539 8,553 582,341 24,480 0 2,097 623,010
2006 6,545 7,696 596,162 27,128 0 2,387 639,918
2007 7,415 7,569 612,238 29,213 50 4,841 661,326
Source: “State/District Data Bank” 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, Department of Statistics,
Malaysia.

Table 2.4.2 Planted Area of Other Crops

(ha)
Herbs/
Fruits Veget-
State Year Pulses Peppers Aromatic Flowers Total
Trees ables
Crops
2004 9,077 666 508 169 1 7 10,428
2005 8,439 701 182 342 1 9 9,674
Negeri 2006 8,821 546 183 277 2 11 9,840
Sembilan 2007 8,812 541 272 196 3 15 9,839
2008 8,794 655 771 207 3 15 10,445
2009 9,150 660 800 220 5 20 10,855
2004 24,962 6,302 508 330 64 229 32,395
2005 22,255 5,980 476 324 117 296 29,448
2006 23,723 10,498 520 336 137 301 35,515
Pahang
2007 23,373 6,007 543 n.a 227 282 30,432
2008 22,044 6,534 627 717 229 285 30,436
2009 22,950 6,540 630 760 250 290 31,420
Source: "Perangkaan Agro-Makanan 2009" Ministry of Agriculture, Malaysia.

2.4.2 Stockbreeding

Table 2.4.3 shows livestock from the year 2002 through the year 2008 in the Pahang River Basin. Its
features can be summarized as below.
• Number of the livestock fluctuated within a small range for the 5 years.
• Cattle ranks first, holding a majority of the total number of livestock in the Pahang River Basin
although swine comes first both in the Peninsular Malaysia and in the whole of Malaysia.
• The Pahang River Basin has approximately 20% or more of cattle in the whole of Malaysia.
• The majority of cattle in the Pahang River Basin is being kept in Pahang State side.
• The fewest livestock is swine contrary to the Peninsular Malaysia and the whole of Malaysia.
• Moreover, there is no swine in N. Sembilan State portion.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 2.4.3 Livestock in the Pahang River Basin

(head)
Year Type of Pahang N.Sembilan Pahang P. Malaysia Sabah Sarawak Malaysia
Livestock Portion Portion R.Basin
Cattle 155,814 2,290 158,104 663468 41,154 9,532 714,154
Buffaloes 25,437 228 25,665 79,387 40,934 10,924 131,245
2002 Goats 21,335 1,563 22,898 196,777 28,940 9,078 234,795
Sheep 10,056 1,393 11,449 118,715 1,747 5,374 125,836
Swire 6,968 0 6,968 1,486,708 99,179 461,289 2,047,176
Cattle 170,404 2,042 172,446 698,705 42,380 11,415 752,500
Buffaloes 26,211 193 26,404 80,023 42,160 11,185 133,368
2003 Goats 24,009 1,310 25,319 207,522 29,800 9,655 246,977
Sheep 9,831 1,098 10,929 109,004 1,800 4,327 115,131
Swire 6,383 0 6,383 1,421,657 114,780 534,249 2,070,686
Cattle 195,184 2,080 197,264 731,484 43,860 12,040 787,384
Buffaloes 26,458 163 26,621 83,454 43,210 11,434 138,098
2004 Goats 22,705 1,303 24,008 225,520 29,370 9,504 264,394
Sheep 10,007 1,100 11,107 109,511 1,840 4,147 115,498
Swire 7,808 0 7,808 1,483,515 83,299 544,033 2,110,847
Cattle 172,209 1,894 174,103 723,771 45,170 12,375 781,316
Buffaloes 22,481 138 22,619 79,495 44,500 9,237 133,232
2005 Goats 27,140 1,397 28,537 247,460 30,250 9,960 287,670
Sheep 7,429 991 8,420 109,898 1,890 4,134 115,922
Swire 7,535 0 7,535 1,528,942 120,000 386,705 2,035,647
Cattle 151,037 1,725 152,762 731,732 45,802 12,210 789,744
Buffaloes 18,460 119 18,579 77,581 44,144 9,150 130,875
2006 Goats 33,679 2,831 36,510 245,769 30,280 9,811 285,860
Sheep 11,148 1,474 12,622 106,849 1,824 3,770 112,443
Swire 6,560 0 6,560 1,528,443 115,440 391,345 2,035,228
Source; Veterinary N. Sembilan, Veterinary Pahang

2.4.3 Fishery

Number of Fishermen, ponds and cages for aqua culture in the Pahang River Basin are presented in Table
2.4.4 and Table 2.4.5.

Table 2.4.6 shows the production of Aquaculture in 2008. Based on these tables, the following can be
summarized.
• Fishermen of Sea and River are 4,473 persons and 898 persons respectively.
• Fishermen of Sea are limited at Kuantan district and Pekan district near downriver.
• On the contrary, the fishermen of River can be seen the whole area.
• Both ponds and cages for brackish water are limited at Pekan district and Kuantan district.
• Ponds for freshwater are occupied a majority by Jerantut district and Raub district.
• Production of Aquaculture in 2008 is 134,524 mt, that is occupied a majority by freshwater ponds,
brackish water ponds and freshwater cages.

Table 2.4.4 Number of Fishermen in the Pahang River Basin

District Sea River Total
Bera 0 52 52
Jerantut 0 268 268
Kuantan 3,136 69 3,205
Lipis 0 76 76
Maran 0 189 189
Pekan 1,337 103 1,440
Temerloh 0 141 141
Total 4,473 898 5,371
Source; Department of Fisheries Pahang

2-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 2.4.5 Number of Ponds and Cages in the Pahang River Basin
Ponds Cages
District
Freshwater Brackish water Freshwater Brackish water
Bentong 192 0 117 0
Bera 57 0 176 0
Jerantut 570 0 529 0
Kuantan 131 16 104 46
Lipis 212 0 529 0
Maran 39 0 167 0
Pekan 34 560 2,057 508
Raub 286 0 693 0
Temerloh 36 0 1,070 0
Total 1,557 576 5,442 554
Source; Department of Fisheries Pahang

Table 2.4.6 Production of Aquaculture in the Pahang River Basin (2008)

(million ton)
Marine Freshwater Brackish water Freshwater Brackish water Cement Total
Ponds Ponds Cages Cages Tanks
122,114.8 3,594.8 5,958.7 2,652.6 68.4 134.3 134,523.6
Source; Department of Fisheries Pahang

2.5 Water Use and Water Resources

2.5.1 Outline of Water Resources Development

Because of the biggest catchment area in the Peninsular Malaysia, the Pahang River Basin has been given
a lot of surface water resources. The total surface water resources of the Pahang River are much more
than not only the current water demands in both the states of Pahang and Negeri Sembilan State but also
the future ones. For this reason, Pahang State occupying a majority of the Pahang River Basin has agreed
to transfer surplus water resources to Selangor State.

Surface water has been developed for domestic and industrial water supply and for irrigation. In line with
increase of population, modernization of life style and industrial development water demand for domestic
and industrial water supply has been increasing, while irrigation water demand is expected to decrease
due to decline of rise production. Reflecting the abundant surface water, there are only two small dam
reservoirs for water supply and irrigation in the vast Pahang River Basin. Intake structures such as pumps
and weirs that rely upon run of river flow are used for water abstraction from the main river and its
tributaries.

It is said that there is ample ground water potential in the river and coastal alluvium. Probably due to the
abundant surface water, however, ground water utilization has not been developed so much in the Pahang
River Basin. Only in remote areas, where it is expensive to construct piped water supply systems to serve
a small population ground water sources are developed. There are also some privately owned wells
drilled in industrial estates.

2.5.2 Domestic and Industrial Water Supply

(1) Water Supply Services

As explained in Section 2.2 of Volume 1 Common Context, reform of water supply and sewerage
sectors is going on in Malaysia with the objective of creating an efficient and sustainable water
services industry as shown in Figure 2.5.1. With an amendment of the Federal Constitution and

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

creation of two acts, the Federal Government became to regulate the water and sewerage services
industries in terms of licensing regulating services operators, while state governments retain the power
to regulate water resources, water catchment areas and river basins. The water services industry will be
privatized and integrated with the sewerage industry.

The reform is now at the final stage, although its transitional operation is already being implemented in
some states under the regulation of SPAN. According to the 10th National Plan, the reform will be
completed in the planning period, in which establishment of tariff-setting mechanism to allow full cost
recovery will be completely phased in and water supply and sewerage services will be integrated and
initial efforts will be made to introduce integrated water and sewerage tariffs.

Negeri Sembilan State already migrated into the new regime in 2008 with SAINS, a corporatized
company as water supply services operator, while Pahang State also plans to migrate into it in 2010
with a newly established state water supply department, which will be privatized finally.

Ministry of Energy, Green National Water Resources

Technology and Water Council

Policy Coordinate
States
National Water Services
(e.g. BKSA)
Commission (SPAN)
Regulate Owner of Water
Regulate
& Licensing Operator
&
Licensing
Lease Payments
Water Asset Management
Company (PAAB) Water Operators

Lease Water Assets

Water Supply
Consumers

Figure 2.5.1 New Legislative Framework on Water Supply Services

(2) Treatment Plants and Consumption

There are 65 water treatment plants in the Pahang River Basin. The total water supply capacity is
712,003 m3/day, and the annual consumption volume is 152 to 171 million m3/year according to their
operation records between 2004 and 2008, accounting for as small as about 0.5% of the total surface
water potential of 31 billion m3. Figure 2.5.2 presents location of the water treatment plants, Table
2.5.1 gives a list of the water treatment plants. Table 2.5.2 presents the current consumption volume by
district.

2-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Pahang State

N. Sembilan State

Figure 2.5.2 Location of Treatment Plants in Pahang River Basin

Table 2.5.1 Treatment Plants in the Pahang River Basin

District and Name of design Capacity
No. Raw Water Source State
Treatment Plant (m3/day)
Kuala Lipis
1 Sg. Jelai 15,909 Sg. Jelai
2 Benta 7,273 Sg. Lipis
3 Bukit Betong 4,546 Sg. Jelai
4 Kechau 9,091 Sg. Kechau
5 Mela 3,636 Sg. Jelai Pahang
6 Batu 9 Halt 2,273 Sg. Jelai
7 Sg. Temau 2,727 Sg. Temau
8 Merapoh 3,182 Sg. Persit
9 Chegar Perah 1,136 Tubewell
Sub-total 49,773
Raub
1 Bukit Fraser 4,032 Sg. Hijau

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-11

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

District and Name of design Capacity

No. Raw Water Source State
Treatment Plant (m3/day)
2 Teras 1,872 Sg. Teras
3 Sg. Bilut 11,470 Sg. Bilut
4 Sg. Klau 8,960 Sg. Klau
5 Sg. Kloi 9,371 Sg. Kloi
6 Sg. Semantan 13,399 Sg. Kenaboi
7 Kuala Medang 6,,340 Sg. Triang
Empangan
8 Ulu Sungai 2,400
Sg. Beringin/Sg Beringin
Sub-total 57,844
Jerantut
1 Bt. Embun Fasa 1,2 & 3 33,318 Sg. Pahang
2 Bt Balai 7,200 Sg. cheka
3 Jengka 8 22,909 Sg. Tekam
4 Padang Pioi 2,727 Sg. Retang
5 Sg. Tekam 3,984 Sg. Tekam
6 Sg. Tekam Utara 4,909 Sg. Tekam
7 Kota Gelangi 4,145 Sg. Tekam
8 Lepar Utara 4,900 Sg. Lepar
9 Seberang Tembeling 4,800 Sg. Tembeling
10 Kg. Bantal 1,636 Sg. Tembeling
Sub-total 90,528
Bentong
1 Fasa 2 45,000 Sg. Serting
2 Batu 4 3,636 Sg. Benus
3 Karak 7,920 Sg. Karak
4 Penjuring 681 Sg. Penjunring
5 Sg. Gapoi 1,818 Sg. Perting
6 Jawi-jawi 2,500 Sg. Teriang
7 Janda Baik 13,250 Sg. Benus
8 Lurah Bilut 8,640 Sg. Bilut
9 Sertik 1,364 Sg.Klau
10 Mempaga 45,000 Sg. Klau
Sub-total 129,809
Cameron Highlands
1 Merapoh 11,364 Sg. Habu
2 Kuala Terala 20,455 Sg Ichat sumber cac
Sub-total 31,819
Temerloh Pahang
1 Lubuk Kawah 81,819 Sg. Pahang
2 Jenderak Kampung 8,182 Sg. Pahang
3 Jenderak Utara 9,091 Sg. Kerau
4 Mempateh 5,455 Sg. Semantan
Sub-total 104,547
Bera
1 Triang 54,546 Sg. Triang
2 Bera Kompleks 10,000 Sg. Bera
3 Sg. Bera 17,955 Sg. Bera
Sub-total 82,501
Maran
1 Kg. New Zealand 3,545 Sg. Ulu Luit
2 Pekan Tajau 10,091 Sg. Pahang
3 Simpang Jengka 12,136 Sg. Pahang
4 Jengka 3-7 6,727 Sg. Jengka
5 Ulku Jempul 7,046 Sg. Jempol
6 Chenor 7,682 Sg. Pahang
7 Bukit Kertau 5,182 Sg. Pahang
8 Batu Sawar 12,000 Sg. Pahang
9 Jengka Utama 35,455 Sg. Pahang
Sub-total 99,865
Pekan
1 Lepar 4,318 Sg. Pahang
2 Belimbing 364 Sg. Pahang
3 Chini 16,773 Sg. Pahang
4 Sekor 8,636 Sg. Pahang
5 Peramu 19,091 Sg. Pahang
Sub-total 49,182

2-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

District and Name of design Capacity

No. Raw Water Source State
Treatment Plant (m3/day)
Kuantan
1 Lepar Hilir 20,454 Sg. Lepar
2 Paya Bungor 1,500 Sg. Berkelah Pahang
Sub-total 21,954
Total 686,003
Jelebu
1 Kuala Klawang 6,400 Sg. Kemin
2 Titi 11,400 Sg. Kenaboi Negeri
3 Lakai 8,200 Sg.Triang Sembilan
Sub-total 26,000
Total 26,000
G. Total 712,003
Source : JBA Pahang, SAINS N.Sembilan

Table 2.5.2 Current Consumption of Domestic Water in Pahang River Basin

m3/year
No District 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 State
1 Kuala Lipis 9,864,232 14,296,000 12,606,068 14,164,584 15,645,044
2 Raub 17,459,626 17,171,395 16,960,817 20,184,323 21,243,344
3 Jerantut - 19,410,527 19,460,551 18,251,809 21,062,065
4 Bentong 15,756,938 16,366,428 15,712,475 15,817,212 14,744,944
5 C. Highlands 4,097,372 2,686,773 4,274,970 4,228,877 4,528,877
6 Bera 14,919,504 12,933,489 12,429,603 13,081,577 14,307,310 Pahang
7 Temerloh 29,932,481 29,172,361 30,912,932 33,027,264 38,694,304
8 Maran 67,220,746 27,067,187 25,527,829 24,535,373 15,978,934
9 Pekan* 6,659,438 10,012,824 7,979,302 12,685,414 14,849,807
10 Kuantan* 4,429,805 4,460,381 4,578,226 5,127,372 6,028,871
Sub-Total 170,340,142 153,577,365 150,442,773 161,103,805 167,083,500
1 Jelebu 1,373,100 1,386,970 1,400,979 1,415,131 1,429,425 N.S.
Total 171,713,242 154,964,335 151,843,752 162,518,936 168,512,925
Source: JBA Pahang, SAINS N.Sembilan
* The consumption in the Pahang River basin of Pekan District and Kuantan District are assumed respectively 92 % and 5 % of
each district consumption to take into consideration the ratio of the design capacity of WTP inside and outside the Pahang
River basin.

(3) Dam Reservoirs

There are 2 existing dam reservoirs in Bentong District. In addition to them 8 dam reservoirs are
proposed. Their location is shown in Figure 2.5.3.

Table 2.5.3 Existing and Proposed Dams in Pahang River basin

No. Dam Existing Proposed Catchment Area (km2) Storage Capacity State
(Million m3)
1 Lipis/Sia x 412.4 Being collected.
2 Liang x 255.5 Being collected.
3 Sempam x 117.5 Being collected.
4 Kenong x 79.7 Being collected.
5 Telemong x 356.4 Being collected. Pahang State
6 Kelau x 335.2 135
7 Benus-Upper x 91.1 Being collected.
8 Chamang x 42.7 Being collected.
9 Lower Perting x 116.8 Being collected.
10 Teriang x 60.0 Being collected. N. S. State
Source; JBA Pahang , SAINS N. Sembilan

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-13

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Pahang State

N. Sembilan State

Figure 2.5.3 Existing and Proposed Dam Reservoirs

(4) Water Demand

The water demand for domestic and industrial water supply has been estimated under three types of
projection scenarios, namely Low Growth, Planning Growth and High Growth, according to “National
Water Resources Study 2000-2050”. Taking advantage of this estimation, the water demand by district
was arranged as shown in Table 2.5.4. The total water demand is estimated at 1.7 billion m3/year for
the low growth scenario, at 2.3 billion m3/year for the planning growth scenario and 2.6 billion m3/year
for the high growth scenario respectively.

Table 2.5.4 Domestic and Industrial Water Demand in the Pahang River basin
Annual Water Demand (Million m3/year)
Scenario State District
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Bentong 51 72 92 113 135 156
C. Highlands 15 23 31 40 50 59
Jerantut 49 72 97 126 158 191
Pahang Kuantan 9 14 19 25 33 40
State Lipis 43 62 82 104 127 149
Low Portion Maran 76 118 164 227 297 372
Growth Pekan 56 86 115 148 183 216
Raub 46 63 80 98 118 136
Temerloh 122 178 232 288 346 397
N. Sembilan
Jelebu 21 27 32 39 46 52
Portion
Total 489 714 943 1,210 1,492 1,770

2-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Annual Water Demand (Million m3/year)

Scenario State District
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Bentong 64 90 114 147 182 217
C. Highlands 17 25 33 41 49 57
Jerantut 63 103 143 194 248 303
Pahang Kuantan 9 15 20 29 38 47
State Lipis 44 64 82 105 128 151
Planning Portion Maran 85 137 189 262 339 417
Growth Pekan 44 72 100 137 175 215
Raub 46 67 87 109 133 156
Temerloh 136 230 325 447 577 708
N. Sembilan
Jelebu 22 29 37 46 55 64
Portion
Total 530 831 1,129 1,517 1,924 2,335
Bentong 70 99 125 162 201 239
C. Highlands 19 28 36 45 54 63
Jerantut 70 113 157 213 273 333
Pahang Kuantan 10 16 22 32 42 52
State Lipis 48 70 90 115 141 166
High Portion Maran 93 151 208 288 372 459
Growth Pekan 48 79 110 150 193 236
Raub 51 74 95 120 146 171
Temerloh 149 253 358 492 634 778
N. Sembilan
Jelebu 23 32 43 55 66 78
Portion
Total 581 914 1,244 1,672 2,122 2,576
Sources; National Water Resources Study 2000-2050
Note; The demand projection in Kuantan District and Pekan District are assumed 5 % and 92 % of the total demand
projection to take into consideration the ratio of the design capacity of Water Treatment Plant inside and outside
the Pahang River basin.

(5) Proposed Source Works

To meet the increasing water demand, investment should be made continuously. Table 2.5.5 presents
sources works proposed for the Pahang River Basin compiled by the JICA Study Team based on
collected information from JBA Pahang, SAIN Negeri Sembilan and “National Water Resources
Study 2000-2050”.

Table 2.5.5 Proposed Source Works in the Pahang River basin

Current
Year of Increased
Supply
District Source Works Commis- Capacity State
Capacity
sioning (Mld)
(Mld)
Extend Jawi-Jawi or new work by 4.5 Mld out put for Pelangai/Telemong 2000 134.3
Area
Commission Benus Dam for 95 Mld for Bentong and close Bt. Tinggi (34 2002 181.1
Mld) and Batu 4 intakes (14.16 Mld)
Extend Karak capacity by 8 Mld for Karak Area 2010 189.1
Commission Perting Dam for Bentong to increase Bentong Ph II by 139.6
Bentong 129.8 Mld Pahang
-Stage I : by 69.8 Mld 2018 258.9
-Stage II: by 69.8 Mld 2025 335.7
Further increase of Jawi-Jawi or new works for Pelangai/Telemong Area 2020 265.9
by 7 Mld
Further extend Karak capacity by 8 Mld for Karak Area 2030 343.7
Commission Chamang Dam/Repas diversion for Bentong to yield 45 Mld 2043 388.7

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Current
Year of Increased
Supply
District Source Works Commis- Capacity State
Capacity
sioning (Mld)
(Mld)
Construct Upper Terla Scheme Stage I for Ulu Telom Area by 16 Mld 2000 47.8
Construct Upper Terla Scheme Stage II for Ulu Telom Area by 7 Mld 2005 54.8
Cameron Construct Sg. Habu Scheme Stage II for Ringlet/Bertam Area by 6 Mld 2015 60.8
31.8
Highlands Construct Upper Terla Scheme Stage III for Ulu Telom Area by 6 Mld 2020 66.8
Construct Upper Terla Scheme Stage IV for Ulu Telom Area by 11 Mld 2030 77.8
Construct Sg. Habu Scheme Stage III for Ringlet/Bertam Area by 7 Mld 2035 84.8
Increase Upper Utara Intake (J4) capacity for Pulau Tawar Area by 8 Mld 2000 98.5
Increase Sg. Tekam Utara Intake (J3) capacity for Pulau Tawar Area by 6 2000 104.5
Mld
Increase Batu Balai Intake (J1) capacity for Ulu Cheka/Damak Area by 5 2000 109.5
Mld
Increase Sg. Tekam Intake (J2) capacity for Pulau Tawar Area by 5.5 Mld 2020 115.0
Increase Sg. Tekam Utara Intake (J3) capacity for Pulau Tawar Area by 9 2025 124.0
Mld
Jerantut 90.5 Increase Batu Balai Intake (J1) capacity for Ulu Cheka/Damak Area by 8 2030 132.0
Mld
Increase Lepar Utara Intake (J4) capacity for Pulau Tawar Area by 16 Mld
-Stage I : 8 Mld 2030 140.0
-Stage II : 8 Mld 2035 163.0
Increase Jerantut Intake (J6) capacity for Jerantut Area by 20 Mld
-Stage I : 10 Mld 2030 150.0
-Stage II : 10 Mld 2045 173.0
Increase Mela Intake (J9) capacity for Tembeling Area by 5 Mld 2030 155.0
Increase Lepar Hilir Intake (K10) capacity for Kg. New Zealand Area by 2000 27.73
5.73 Mld
Kuantan 22.0 Construct New Intake on Sg. Lepar for Ulu Lepar Area for 2.5 Mld 2000 30.23
Increase Lepar Hilir Intake (K10) capacity for Kg. New Zealand Area by 6 2020 36.23
Mld
Increase Merapoh Intake (L7) capacity for Telang Area by 4 Mld 2010 53.8
Increase Benta Intake (L5) capacity for Budu/Tj Besar Area by 4.46 Mld 2015 58.26
Increase Kuala Lipis Intake (L2) capacity for Penjom Area by 25 Mld
-Stage I : 10 Mld 2020 68.26
Lipis 49.8 -Stage II : 15 Mld 2035 90.88 Pahang
Increase Bukit Bentong Intake (L6) capacity for Batu Yon Area by 2.62 2020 70.88
Mld
Increase Merapoh Intake (L7) capacity for Telang Area by 5 Mld 2030 75.88
Increase Bkt. Kertau Intake (M6) capacity for Kertau Area by 10 Mld 2000 109.9
Construct New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for Jengka 2000 139.9
Area by 30 Mld
Increase capacity of New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for 2010 174.9
Jengka Area by 35 Mld
Increase capacity of New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for 2015 198.9
Jengka Area by 24 Mld
Maran 99.9 Increase capacity of New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for 2020 222.9
Jengka Area by 24 Mld
Increase capacity of New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for 2025 255.9
Jengka Area by 33 Mld
Increase capacity of New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for 2030 288.9
Jengka Area by 33 Mld
Increase capacity of New Intake on Sg. Pahang near Batu Sawar (M3) for 2040 323.9
Jengka Area by 35 Mld
Construct New Intake on Sg. Sekor for Pahang Tua Area by 27 Mld 2000 76.2
Increase K. Lepar Intake (P4) capacity for Lepar Area by 6 Mld 2008 82.2
Pekan 49.2
Extend New Intake on Sg. Sekor for Pahang Tua Area by 35 Mld 2020 117.2
Extend New Intake on Sg. Sekor for Pahang Tua Area by 30 Mld 2040 147.2
Increase Teras Intake (R8) capacity for Teras Area by 7 Mld 2000 64.8
Increase Sg. Ruan Intake (R2) capacity for Gali Area by 3.5 Mld 2000 68.3
Increase Raub Intake (R6) capacity for Raub Area by 16 Mld 2005 84.3
Increase Sg. Cheroh Intake (R5) capacity for Bkt. Talam Area by 2.37 Mld 2010 86.67
Raub 57.8
Increase Teras Intake (R8) capacity for Teras Area by 2 Mld 2010 88.67
Increase Sg. Ruan Intake (R2) capacity for Gali Area by 6 Mld 2020 94.67
Increase Raub Intake (R6) capacity for Raub Area by 20 Mld 2035 114.67
Increase Sg. Ruan Intake (R2) capacity for Gali Area by 6 Mld 2040 120.67

2-16 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Current
Year of Increased
Supply
District Source Works Commis- Capacity State
Capacity
sioning (Mld)
(Mld)
Implement Temerloh/Mentakab Scheme –Stage I for K. Kerau/Jenderak 2000 114.5
Area to increase capacity by 10 Mld
Implement Temerloh/Mentakab Stage II works for Mentakab Area to 2015 169.5
increase capacity by 55 Mld
Implement Triang Baru Stage II Works for Triang Area to increase capacity 2025 206.5
by 37 Mld
Increase capacity of Sg. Bera intake for Bera Area by 15 Mld 2025 221.5
Temerloh 104.5 Increase Temerloh/Mentakab Stage III works for Mentakab Area to 2030 261.5 Pahang
increase capacity by 40 Mld
Increase Temerloh/Mentakab Stage II for K. Kerau/Jenderak Area to 2030 274.5
increase capacity by 13 Mld
Increase Temerloh/Mentakab Stage IV works for Mentakab Area to 2035 314.5
increase capacity by 40 Mld
Increase Temerloh/Mentakab Stage V works for Mentakab Area to increase 2045 354.5
capacity by 40 Mld
Kuala Klawang WTP Phase II, 6 Mld 2001 32.0
Negeri
Jelebu 26.0 Kuala Klawang WTP Phase III, 16 Mld 2018 48.0
Sembilan
Kuala Klawang WTP Phase IV, 16 Mld 2035 64.0
Sources: National Water Resources Study 2000-2050, JBA Pahang, SAINS N. Sembilan

(6) Inter-state Water Transfer

Inter-state Water Transfer projects were recommended in “National Water Resources Study
2000-2050”. In line with the recommendation, the Pahang-South Selangor Water Transfer Project is
now being implemented.

(a) Pahang to South Selangor

In 2001, the Inter-State Raw Water Transfer Scheme from Pahang State to Selangor State was
approved by the Federal Government for implementation, and, it is being implemented.

The original proposed scheme involves construction of two dams at Sg. Kelau and Sg. Telemong,
37.5 km of tunnel and two river intakes. However, the proposed dam site at Sg. Telemong has been
rejected by the Pahang State Government due to adverse social and environment impact. The
revised scheme now consists of a higher Sg. Kelau Dam, a 44.6 km long tunnel and river intake and
Pump Station etc. Objective of this project is to deliver 1,890 Mld.

Loan Agreement for this scheme was signed between the Government of Malaysia and the
Government of Japan on 31st March 2005. According to the original implementation schedule,
construction works was supposed to be commenced in February 2008 and is expected to be
completed in February 2013. However, due to a number of issues and problems the project was
initiated only on 1st June 2009, and is expected to be completed on May 30, 2014. The outline of
this scheme is shown in Table 2.5.6 and illustrated in Figure 2.5.4.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-17

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 2.5.6 Source Works of Pahang to South Selangor Water Transfer

Facility Profile
Kelau Dam Dam Type: Earth fill
Catchment Area: 335.2 km2
Reservoir Volume ; 135 million m3
Water Transfer Tunnel Length ; 44.6 km, Diameter ; 5.2 m
Intakes, Pumping Station, Weir Type ; Concrete Weir,
Pipeline Pump Unit ; 12 x 3.48 m3/s
Pipeline ; 11.8 km x 3 m (diameter), 2 lanes
Source: Kettah

Source: Kettah

Figure 2.5.4 Outline of Raw Water Transfer Scheme (Pahang to South Selangor Transfer)

(b) Pahang to North Selangor

According to “National Water Resources Study 2000-2050”, it is proposed that two

inter-connected reservoirs be constructed to transfer additional water to the Kerling River, a
tributary of the Selangor River as shown in Table 2.5.7 and. The proposed Inter-State Raw Water
Transfer Scheme from Pahang State to North Selangor State was approved by the Federal
Government for implementation in 2001. Detailed design was already completed, and the scheme
is expected to be commissioned in 2013.

Table 2.5.7 Source Works of Pahang to North Selangor Water Transfer

Source Works in Pahang State Regulated Yield (Mld) Remarks
Liang Dam Reservoir 610
Lipis/Sia Dam Reservoir 1,090 Including tunnel between reservoirs
Sempam Dam Reservoir 230
Kenong Dam Resevoir 120
North transfer tunnel 2,050 Design capacity
Source: National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

2-18 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Source: National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

Figure 2.5.5 Water Transfer Route (Pahang to North Selangor)

2.5.3 Irrigation

(1) Irrigation Schemes

There is no granary area in the Pahang River Basin. However, there are four small-scale irrigation
schemes in the river basin ( three in Pahang State and one in Negeri Sembilan State), as summarized in
Table 2.5.8, and Table 2.5.9 presents general irrigation schedule for these small-scale schemes.
Figure 2.5.6 shows the location of intakes for these irrigation schemes. Since all these intakes have no
water storage facility, they rely on unregulated run of river flow.

Table 2.5.8 Small-Scale Irrigation Schemes in Pahang River Basin (2007)

Division District Planted Area (ha) Production (ton)
N. Sembilan State Jelebu 155.46 720.28
Temerloh 9.81 17.81
Maran 57.88 192.99
Pahang State
Jerantut 14.00 61.70
Total 81.69 272.50
Total 237.15 992.78
Source : Department of Agriculture N. Sembilan, Sistem Pemantauan Berkomputer Projek (SPBP)

Table 2.5.9 Irrigation Schedule for non-granary schemes

Season Start Irrigation Stop Irrigation
Main Season August February
Off-Season March July

In Cameron Highlands, there is extensive cultivation of tea, vegetables, fruits and flowers. Tea estates
rely on rainfall but vegetables, fruits and flower cultivation draws irrigation water from mountain
streams.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-19

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 2.5.6 Location of Irrigation Intake

(2) Water Demand for Irrigation

According to “the National Water Resources Study 2000-2050”, there are no Granary areas, while
there are many minor schemes both in Pahang State and Negeri Sembilan State. Many of irrigation
schemes already have been abandoned because of a combination of (largely) social factors, lack of
labor in rural area, out-migration of able-bodied workers, etc, resulting in an overall very low cropping
intensity. In the long term, these schemes are likely to be converted for housing or high value crop
cultivation.

Therefore, there will be a decrease in irrigation demand through the year 2050. Consequently, the
water demand for Irrigation in the Pahang River basin is arranged as shown in Table 2.5.10., based on
the estimation in “the National Water Resources Study 2000-2050”.
Table 2.5.10 Projected Annual Irrigation Water Demand Pahang River basin
Annual Irrigation Water Demand (Million m3)
Irrigation Schemes 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Remarks
Mini Granary Schemes* 21 10 10 10 10 10 Pahang State
Minor Irrigation Scheme 54 27 27 27 27 27 N. Sembilan State
Mini Granary Schemes 21 10 10 10 10 10
Minor Irrigation Schemes 54 27 27 27 27 27 Pahang River Basin
Total 75 37 37 37 37 37
* Includes commercial estates and high value crops.
Source; National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

2.5.4 Hydro-Electric Power Generation

Hydro-electric power generation in the Pahang River basin is summarized below.

(1) Existing Hydro-Electric Power Station

There is one major scheme, the Cameron Highlands project, which has two power stations in the upper
reach as shown in Table 2.5.11. The Sultan Yusuf Power Station and the Habu Power Station were
completed in 1963 and can provide an energy output of 350 GWh/year.
The Cameron Highlands project involves transfer of water from the Telom River and the Bertam
River, both headwater tributaries of the Pahang River through a system of tunnels to the Ringlet Falls
reservoirs and release to the main hydropower plant at Jor located in the headwaters of the Batang
Pahang River in the State of Perak. Discharged water is then utilized for further power generation by
the Batang Pahang scheme in Perak.
There has been much silting of the Ringlet Falls reservoirs. Sediment removal from the fringes of the
reservoirs has been an on-going process but it is arguable whether the measures taken have been a
success or have been proven to be economically viable. It is understood that the main Telom tunnel
had been partially filled with sand which has significantly reduced flows. Therefore, the Tenaga

2-20 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

National Berhad carried out a life extension project from 2003 to 2008. This life extension project also
includes the dredging of Ringlet Reservoir and the removal of substantial volumes of sediments to
permanent disposal areas away from the reservoir.
Table 2.5.11 Existing Hydro-Electric Power Station
Station Name Generation of Electricity
Sultan Yusuf Power Station 350 GWh/year
Habu Power Station
Source: National Water Resources Study 2000-2050

(2) Planned Hydro-Electric Schemes

There are 3 prospective hydropower projects in the Pahang River basin as shown in Table 2.5.12.
Table 2.5.12 Prospective Major Hydropower Projects
Project Proposed Capacity(MW) Estimated Energy (GWh/year) Remarks
High Telom Dam 132 117.3 Storage
Tekai 4.8+86.2 34.54+152.64 Storage
Maran 112.5 138.74 Storage
Source: TNB

(3) Hydro-Electric Scheme in Implementation

There is 1 hydropower project under construction in the Pahang River basin as shown in Table 2.5.12.
Table 2.5.13 Hydropower Project in Implementation
Project Proposed Capacity(MW) Estimated Energy (GWh/year) Remarks
Ulu Jelai 372 406 Storage
Source:TNB

Habu Station

Ulu Jerai Station

Yussuf Station
High Telom Dam Station Tekai Station

Maran Station

Pahang State

Existing Power Station

Proposed Power Station Negeri Sembilan State

Figure 2.5.7 Location of Existing and Future Hydropower Projects in the Pahang River Basin

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-21

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

2.5.5 Navigation

According to the organization concerned, navigation activity is not seen so much in the Pahang River
Basin because land transportation has been well developed.

2.6 River Water Quality

As part of the integrated river basin management, it is necessary to control the river water quality
according to its intended uses. The Department of Environment (DOE) is the key agency in water quality
management. As illustrated in Figure 2.6.1, DOE has three main roles in this respect, i.e. safeguarding
the river water quality (the environment), monitoring of the water quality status and environmental
education. This section elaborates the first two of the said roles. Subsequently, major sources of water
pollution in the Basin are explained and the existing water quality management measures (administrative
measures) being implemented against these pollution sources are highlighted.

Department of Environment

Planning

Environmental/ River Water Environmental

Water Quality Quality Education &
Safeguarding Monitoring Awareness

Monitoring River water Environmental

quality information
Enforcement monitoring by dissemination;
ASMA Environmental
campaigns,
programs, etc.

Legend:
Reporting
National level
State level
Annual Report Environmental River basin level
Quality Report National & State levels
Figure 2.6.1 Water Quality Management Framework of DOE

2.6.1 Environmental/Water Quality Safeguarding

The environmental/water quality safeguarding role of DOE in relation to the integrated river basin
management (IRBM) is governed by the Environmental Quality Act 1974 (EQA) and its Regulations,
Orders and Rules. Table 2.6.1 summarizes the main activities under DOE’s jurisdiction (in relation to
IRBM).
Table 2.6.1 Summary of Main Activities under DOE’s Jurisdiction
in Water Quality Management
No Activities Main EQA Aspects under Main control mechanism
Regulation/Order control
1 ‘Prescribed Activities’ (refer to EQA): EQ (Prescribed Overall − Preliminary EIA
− Agricultural activities; Activities) environmental − Detailed EIA
− Airport constructions; (Environmental impacts − Post-EIA monitoring and
− Drainage and irrigation projects; Impact Assessment) auditing
− Land reclamation works; Order 1987
− Fishery activities;
− Forestry activities;

2-22 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

No Activities Main EQA Aspects under Main control mechanism

Regulation/Order control
− Housing developments;
− Industrial activities;
− Infrastructure developments;
− Port constructions;
− Mining activities;
− Petroleum industrial activities and
developments;
− Power generation and transmission
projects;
− Quarrying activities;
− Railway constructions;
− Transportation developments;
− Resort and recreational development;
− Waste treatment and disposal activities;
− Water supply works.

2 Premises which discharge sewage onto or EQ (Sewage) Sewage − Notification of new source of
into any soil, or into any inland waters or Regulations 2009 discharges sewage discharge or release to
Malaysian waters, other than any housing DOE.
or commercial development or both having − Self monitoring of sewage
a population equivalent of less than 150. discharge.
− Operation of STP by
‘competent person’.
− Compliance with Standards A
or B. (refer to EQA)

3 Premises which discharge or release EQ (Industrial Industrial − Notification of new or altered

industrial effluent or mixed effluent, onto Effluent) effluents and sources of discharge of
or into any soil, or into inland waters or Regulations 2009 mixed industrial effluent or mixed
Malaysian waters (other than the premises effluents effluent to DOE.
as specified in the First Schedule of the EQ − Compliance with the ‘Guidance
(Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009). Document on the Design and
Operation of Industrial Effluent
Treatment System’.
− Self monitoring of effluent.
− Operation of effluent treatment
system by ‘competent person’.
− Compliance with Standards A
or B. (refer to EQA)

4 Solid waste transfer stations and landfills EQ (Control of Leachate from − Notification of new sources of
which discharge or release leachate. Pollution from Solid solid waste leachate discharge to DOE.
Waste Transfer transfer − Self monitoring of leachate.
Station and Landfill) stations and − Compulsory on the provision of
Regulations 2009 landfills leachate treatment system.
− Operation of leachate treatment
by ‘competent person’.
− Compliance with Standards A
or B. (refer to EQA)

5 Premises occupied or used for the EQ (Prescribed Industrial − Written Permission

production or processing of: Premises) (Raw effluents − Parameter limits for
− Raw natural rubber in technically Natural Rubber) watercourse discharge (refer to
specified from, latex from including Regulations 1978 EQA)
prevulcanised or the form of modified
and special purpose rubber; and
− Conventional sheet, skim, crepe or any
other form of raw rubber not already
described in quantities of 5 tonnes or
more per day or with a production or
processing capacity of a similar
quantity.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-23

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

No Activities Main EQA Aspects under Main control mechanism

Regulation/Order control
6 Premises occupied or used for the EQ (Prescribed Industrial − Written Permission
processing of oil-palm fruit or oil-palm Premises) (Crude effluents − Parameter limits for
fresh-fruit bunches into crude palm-oil, Palm-Oil) watercourse discharge of
whether as an intermediate or final product. Regulations 1977 effluent (refer to EQA)

7 ‘Scheduled Wastes’: EQ (Scheduled Storage, − Written Permission

− SW1: Metal and metal-bearing wastes; Wastes) Regulations transportation, − Inventory of Schedule Wastes
− SW2: Wastes containing principally 2005 treatment and − Consignment Note for
inorganic constitutes which may disposal of Scheduled Wastes
contain metals and organic materials; toxic and
− SW3: Wastes containing principally hazardous
organic constituents which may contain wastes
metals and inorganic materials;
− SW4: Wastes which may contain either
inorganic or organic constituents;
− SW5: Other wastes (any residues from
treatment or recovery of scheduled
wastes above)

2.6.2 River Water Quality Monitoring

(1) Water Quality Monitoring By DOE

DOE is the key government agency responsible in the monitoring and enforcement of river water
quality. Through Alam Sekitar Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. (ASMA), DOE conducts regular water quality
monitoring for 143 river basins (2007) throughout Malaysia. The total number of monitoring stations
for the whole country is 1,064 (2007) while there are 91 stations (2007) within the Pahang River Basin
(Malaysia Environmental Quality Report, 2007).

(2) Water Quality Classification

The Water Quality Index (WQI) is being used by DOE as the basis for general assessment of a
watercourse in relation to pollution load categorization and designation of its beneficial uses as
stipulated in the National Water Quality Standards for Malaysia (NWQS).

WQI is calculated from six (6) main parameters contained in the NWQS, namely dissolved oxygen
(DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammoniacal nitrogen
(NH3-N), suspended solids (SS) and pH. The basis of water quality classification based on WQI is
shown in Table 2.6.2.

Table 2.6.2 DOE Water Quality Index Classification

Parameter Unit Class
I II III IV V
Ammoniacal Nitrogen mg/l < 0.1 0.1-0.3 0.3-0.9 0.9-2.7 > 2.7
Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/l <1 1-3 3-6 6-12 > 12
Chemical Oxygen Demand mg/l < 10 10-25 25-50 50-100 > 100
Dissolved Oxygen mg/l >7 5-7 3-5 1-3 <1
pH - > 7.0 6.0-7.0 5.0-6.0 < 5.0 > 5.0
Total Suspended Solid mg/l < 25 25-50 50-150 150-300 > 300
WQI > 92.7 76.5-92.7 51.9-76.5 31.0-51.9 < 31.0
Source: Malaysia Environmental Quality Report, 2007

2-24 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(3) Water Quality Status

As mentioned above, there are 91 water quality stations within the Pahang River Basin (see Figure
2.6.2). Table 2.6.3 presents the water quality trend of the Pahang River and its major tributaries from
2004 to 2007 while Figure 2.6.3 illustrates the water quality classes according to the 2007 water
quality monitoring results.

The Malaysia Environmental Quality Report (EQR) 2007 published by DOE reported that the overall
WQI of the Pahang River and its tributaries is ‘86’, which is comparable to Class II water quality and
can be considered as ‘Clean’ river. As indicated in the aforementioned table, the WQI of the Pahang
River in 2007 was 87, which falls within Class II of the WQI. Among the 49 main tributaries being
monitored, only the Burung River falls within Class I (WQI 93), while the Anak Sg. Lepar River and
the Batu River are comparable to Class III, which means that these rivers are slightly polluted.

From the evaluation on the detailed water quality monitoring data provided by DOE, it is suspected
that the main reason of the deterioration of water quality at the aforementioned two slightly polluted
rivers is due to runoff of fertilizers from the adjacent plantations and small holders agricultural
activities. This is evidenced from the seasonal increases of NH3-N, NO3, PO4, BOD and COD. Also,
in general the mainstream of the Pahang River and most of its tributaries are facing the problem of
siltation, which could be due to riverbank erosion, sand dredging activities as well as land
developments such as plantations and urban developments. This can be seen from the high readings of
TSS, TDS and turbidity.

Legend
DOE water quality monitoring station
#

!H
Major Town
Pahang River and its Major Tributaries
State Boundary
Pahang River Basin

Figure 2.6.2 DOE Water Quality Monitoring Stations (2007)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-25

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 2.6.3 Water Quality Status of the Pahang River and its Tributaries, 2004-2007
River No. of 2007 2006 2005 2004
station WQI River Class WQI River Class WQI River Class WQI River Class
(2007) status status status status
Anak Sg. Lepar 1 76 SP III 75 SP III 74 SP III - - -
Batu 1 74 SP III 78 SP II 53 P III 73 SP III
Belayar 1 88 C II 89 C II 93 C I - - -
Bentong 4 87 C II 89 C II 84 C II 87 C II
Benus 2 89 C II 90 C II 88 C II 90 C II
Bera 3 85 C II 84 C II 83 C II - - -
Berkapor 1 89 C II 88 C II 83 C II - - -
Bertam 3 86 C II 86 C II 85 C II - - -
Bilut 1 82 C II 85 C II 85 C II 88 C II
Burung 1 93 C I 94 C I 93 C II - - -
Chini 1 87 C II 86 C II 77 SP II - - -
Habu 1 91 C II 90 C II 83 C II - - -
Jelai 2 85 C II 89 C II 88 C II 87 C II
Jempol 2 86 C II 89 C II 89 C II 90 C II
Jengka 2 83 C II 85 C II 78 SP II 85 C II
Kelau 2 86 C II 89 C II 90 C II 89 C II
Kertam 1 82 C II 84 C II 84 C II 84 C II
Koyan 1 88 C II 89 C II 88 C II 91 C II
Kundang 1 80 SP II 81 C II 84 C II 81 C II
Lenggok 1 92 C II 92 C II 93 C I - - -
Lepar 3 87 C II 87 C II 89 C II - - -
Lipis 3 88 C II 90 C II 91 C II 90 C II
Luit 1 87 C II 87 C II 89 C II 89 C II
Maran 1 84 C II 88 C II 88 C II 87 C II
Mentiga 2 86 C II 85 C II 83 C II - - -
Mokek - - - - - - - 83 C II - - -
Pahang 8 87 C II 87 C II 88 C II 88 C II
Penjuring 1 92 C II 94 C I 92 C II 93 C I
Pertang 2 86 C II 89 C II 87 C II 88 C II
Perting 1 90 C II 93 C II 88 C II 91 C II
Ringlet 1 86 C II 81 C II 85 C II - - -
Semantan 3 86 C II 86 C II 88 C II 88 C II
Serting 5 84 C II 78 SP II 79 SP II 81 C II
Siam - - - - - - - 1 C II 90 C II
T. Paya Bungor 1 85 C II 84 C II 85 C II - - -
Tahan 1 92 C II 93 C I 90 C II - - -
Tanglir 1 81 C II 90 C II 84 C II 90 C II
Tasik Bera 1 85 C II 87 C II 88 C II - - -
Tasik Chini 10 87 C II 96 C I 92 C II - - -
Tekal 1 88 C II 79 SP II 84 C II 82 C II
Tekam 2 84 C II 88 C II 87 C II 90 C II
Telang 1 88 C II 91 C II 89 C II 90 C II
Telemong 1 89 C II 92 C II 91 C II 89 C II
Telom 2 88 C II 88 C II 91 C II - - -
Tembeling 1 89 C II 90 C II 87 C II - - -
Teranum 1 86 C II 94 C I 92 C II 94 C I
Teras 1 81 C II 93 C I 91 C II 93 C I
Terla 1 90 C II 92 C II 93 C I - - -
Teriang 2 87 C II 87 C II 84 C II - - -
Tringkap 1 85 C II 85 C II 90 C II - - -

Deterioration of water quality that requires attention

Source: Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2004-2007.

2-26 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Sg.Batu
Anak Sg. Lepar

Legend
Class II water quality
Class III water quality
!H
Major Town
State Boundary
Pahang River Basin
Note: Classification based on the water quality of monitoring station(s) at each river/stream.
Source: Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2004-2007.
Figure 2.6.3 Water Quality Status of the Pahang River and its Major Tributaries, 2007
2.6.3 Management of Pollution Sources

As the reduction of pollutants from source is widely regarded to be the best approach in water pollution
management, as part of the integrated water quality management, it is necessary to look into all the above
pollution sources. However, as explained in the Inception Report that preparation of IRBM is at
conceptual level, no detailed investigation on each of the pollution sources was carried out in this Survey.
Instead, the following subsections elaborated the present administrative environmental/water quality
management measures being implemented by the Government for the main pollution sources i.e. sewage,
industrial effluents, solid waste disposal, wastewater discharge from livestock farms, sediment load from
agricultural, logging and sand dredging activities. In the subsequent stage of the Survey, policies and
strategies to manage these pollution sources are proposed.

(1) Sewage

Generally, sewage means any liquid or wastewater discharge containing human excreta, animal or
vegetable matters in suspension or solution derived from domestic activities (Water Services Industry
Act 2006 (Act 655) and Environmental Quality (Sewage and Industrial Effluents) Regulations 1979).

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-27

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(a) Sewerage Management

Sewerage management sector is governed mainly by the Water Services Industry Act 2006 (Act
655), while the Environmental Quality (Sewage) Regulations 2009 under the Environmental
Quality Act 1974 (Act 127) regulates effluents from sewage treatment plants. Figure 2.6.4
illustrates the overall concept of sewerage management in relation to water quality control.
Water Services Industry Act 2006

Requirements on:
; Construction, operation and maintenance
of public/private sewerage systems and
septic tanks
; Connection to public sewerage system
; Provision of drainage for sewage
; Discharges into public sewer

SPAN

Centralized municipal Individual houses and

Housing scheme of ≥30 units
sewerage system housing schemes of < 30 units

Municipal sewerage systems Public sewerage systems Private sewerage system

IWK IWK Premise owners

; Operation and maintenance of ; Operation and maintenance of ; Each premise owner is
public sewerage systems public sewerage systems responsible for the operation
; Refurbishing and upgrading ; Refurbishing and upgrading and maintenance of his/her
existing sewage treatment existing sewage treatment STP/IST as required under the
facilities facilities Water Service Industry Act
; Planning and building new ; Planning and building new 2006.
sewerage infrastructure sewerage infrastructure

Approval
Notification
Monitoring Reporting Enforcement
Compliance
Enforcement Reporting
Detailed EIA
Requirements Discharge Requirements

DOE

Environmental Environmental Quality (Sewage) Regulation

Quality 2009
(Prescribed
Activities) (EIA)
Order 1987

SPAN: Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara

IWK: Indah Water Konsortium Sdn. Bhd.

Figure 2.6.4 Framework of Sewerage Management in relation to Water Quality Management

(b) Sewerage Service

There are two main types of sewerage systems/services. Generally, all houses under housing
schemes of more than 30 units are connected to public sewage treatment plants (STPs), whereas,

2-28 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

individual houses and housing schemes of 30 units or less are provided with individual septic tanks
(ISTs). Indah Water Konsortium Sdn. Bhd. (IWK), a wholly-owned company of the Minister of
Finance Incorporated, is responsible for operating and maintaining the public sewage treatment
plants and network of underground sewerage pipelines.

(c) Discharge Requirement

The newly enforced Environmental Quality (Sewage) Regulations 2009 stipulates that discharges
from sewage treatment plants must comply with either Standard A or Standard B under the Second
Schedule of the said Regulations. Generally, discharges into any inland waters within the
catchment areas (water supply catchment areas) must comply with Standard A. On the other hand,
discharges into any other inland water shall comply with Standard B. However, depends on the
date of approval of the subject sewage treatment plant, the discharge requirements are different.

(d) Issues and Needs

As mentioned above, IWK is responsible for operating and maintaining the public sewage
treatment plants, refurbishing and upgrading existing sewage treatment facilities as well as the
planning and building new sewerage infrastructure. Under the present requirement, all housing
schemes with 30 or more units of houses are required to have centralized STPs. These STPs are
being built by the housing developers and operated and maintained by IWK. (see Figure 2.6.5)

Housing development Individual houses or

of more than 30 units housing development of 30
units or less

; STPs are built by the ; ISTs are suitable for single dwellings or
developers, while IWK is individual buildings with population equivalent
responsible for the operation (PE) up to 150 and installed where there is no
and maintenance of the STPs. central sewerage system.
; They only partially treat sewage.
; Under the Water Services Industry Act 2006,
owner of premises with septic tanks is
responsible for the maintenance of the septic
tank, whereby desludging should be done
licensed operators at least once in every two
years.

Figure 2.6.5 Concept of Sewerage Service

For the case of housing schemes of less than 30 units, individual houses and village houses, only
individual septic tanks (IST) are required. These houses are required to desludge their ISTs at least
once every two years. Under the Malaysian Sewerage Industry Guidelines, it is stated that ISTs are
regarded only as temporary treatment system before connecting to the centralized sewer systems.
There are three issues that must be highlighted:

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-29

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

• Despite that all the subject house owners are required to desludge their ISTs at least once
in every two years, there are still some non-compliances and it is very difficult to monitor
and enforce.
• A large portion of village houses are being built without following the procedures
stipulated by the local authorities and without obtaining any Occupation Permits, thus it is
very difficult to ensure the provision of proper IST according to the Malaysian Sewerage
Industry Guidelines for Septic Tanks published by SPAN.
• The sewerage development by IWK is guided by the Sewerage Catchment Strategies that
only cover the urban areas, while those areas beyond these service areas will not be
provided with any centralized sewerage system, at least for the near future.

(2) Industrial Effluent

Industrial effluent means liquid water or wastewater produced by reasons of the production processes
taking place at any industrial premises (Environmental Quality (Sewage and Industrial Effluents)
Regulations 1979). Depends on the type of industrial premises, discharge of untreated industrial
effluent may result in contamination of surface and groundwater.

(a) Control of Industrial Effluent

The control of industrial effluent is mainly governed by the Environmental Quality Act 1974,
specifically the Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluents) Regulations 2009. The main agency
in regulating industrial effluent is DOE. Figure 2.6.6 below illustrates the basic framework on the
control of industrial effluents.
Environmental Quality Act 1974
and its Regulations/Orders

Department of Environment
Approval
Monitoring
Enforcement
INDUSTRIAL PREMISES

Water
Prescribed EIA/
quality/effluent
Activities1 Detailed EIA
monitoring

New source or altered

effluent2 Effluent
Written Notification/
Non-Prescribed Written Permission monitoring
Prescribed
Activities1 Premise3

Others
1
Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order 1987
2
As stipulated under Regulation 4, Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluents) Regulations 2009
3
(a) The Crude Palm Oil Mill; (b) The Raw Natural Rubber Processing Mill; and (c) The Treatment and Disposal Facilities of Scheduled
Waste

Figure 2.6.6 Basic Framework on the Control of Industrial Effluents

(b) Discharge Requirements

The control of discharges industrial effluent is under the jurisdiction of DOE. The newly enforced
Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluents) Regulations 2009 under the Environmental Quality
Act 1974 stipulated that construction of any premises that may result in a new or altered source of

2-30 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

discharge of industrial effluent or mixed effluent must notify the Director General of DOE in
writing. It is also stipulated that discharge must comply with either Standard A or Standard B of
effluent conditions as specified under the Fifth Schedule of the abovementioned Regulations.

(c) Issues and Needs

From the Working Group discussions, it is found that there is generally no major issue in relation to
water quality management, however, attention must be paid to the following matters:
• Under the Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations 2005, sludge from
drinking water treatment is being classified as ‘Scheduled Waste’ whereby there are strict
requirements on its handling, transportation, storage and disposal. Also, under the newly
enforced Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009, prior written
permission from DOE is required for any discharge or disposal of any sludge generated
from water treatment plant onto or into any soil, land or inland water (Section 23).

(3) Solid Wastes

The Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 (Act 672) defines solid waste as any
scrap material or other unwanted surplus substance or rejected products arising from the application of
any process, any substance required to be disposed of as being broken, worn out, contaminated or
otherwise spoiled, or any other material that is required by the authority to be disposed of.

Solid waste is another source of river water pollution. Improper solid waste management may result in
indiscriminate disposal of solid wastes which eventually may result in deterioration of surface and
groundwater quality. Improper management of solid waste disposal sites such as sanitary landfills may
also result in seepage of high contaminating leachate into groundwater.

(a) Solid Waste Management

In Pahang, the solid waste management concessionaire is Alam Flora Sdn Bhd (Alam Flora). The
scope of service of the concessionaires includes the storage, collection, transfer, haulage,
intermediate processing and disposal of solid waste. Figure 2.6.7 general framework of solid
waste management in the Pahang River Basin in relation to water quality management.

(b) Discharge Requirements

The construction of solid waste landfill facilities and incineration plants is subject to the
Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order 1987,
whereby Detailed Environmental Impact Assessment (Detailed EIA) study is required. Besides,
the control of discharges from these facilities is subject to the requirements of the newly enforced
Environmental Quality (Control of Pollution from Solid Waste Transfer Station and Landfill)
Regulations 2009. It is stipulated that discharge must comply with the standard specified under the
Second Schedule of the abovementioned Regulations.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-31

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Solid Waste and Public Cleansing

Management Act 2007

AIM
To provide for and regulate the
management of controlled solid
waste and public cleansing

Department of National Solid

Waste Management,
Ministry of Housing and Local
Government
; Propose policies, plan and
strategies
; Exercise regulatory function
; Grant licenses and approval
; Set standards, specifications and
codes of practices
Solid Waste and
Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Public Cleansing
Management Corporation Management
Corporation Act
; Recommend and implement
2007 (Act 673)
policies, strategies and enforce
the law and regulations

Alam Flora Sdn Bhd (Pahang)

SWM Environment Sdn Bhd (N.S.)

Solid Waste Management

; Storage, collection, transfer,
haulage, intermediate processing
and disposal.

EIA requirements Leachate discharge requirements

Department of
Environment

Environmental Quality (Prescribed Environmental Quality (Control of

Activities) (Environmental Impact Pollution from Solid Waste Transfer
Assessment) Order 1987 Station and Landfill) Regulations 2009

Figure 2.6.7 Basic Framework of Solid Waste Management

(c) Issues and Needs

Based on the discussions with Working Groups, issues and needs with respect to solid waste
management in relation to integrated river basin management for the Pahang River Basin are:
• With the enforcement of the Environmental Quality (Control of Pollution from Solid
Waste Transfer Station and Landfill) Regulations 2009, Alam Flora must ensure that all
the solid waste transfer stations and landfills under its jurisdiction comply with the
Regulations. Among the new requirements is the provision of leachate treatment systems
for all solid waste transfer stations and landfills.

2-32 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

• Currently, the service areas of Alam Flora only cover the operation area of local
authorities. Areas outside of these local authorities are not provided with any solid waste
management service. Although the population size is comparatively smaller,
indiscriminate disposal of solid wastes may result in deterioration of both surface and
ground water quality.

(4) Livestock Farms

Waste discharge, either in the form of waste water or animal faeces, is another significant source of
river water pollution. The common livestock in the Pahang River Basin includes poultry, cattle, goat
and pig. Pollution load from pig farm is particularly significant that must not be ignored in the
integrated river basin management. In the Pahang River Basin, the licensing of livestock farms is
under the jurisdiction of local authorities (see Figure 2.6.8).

Animal Act 1953

Department of Veterinary
Services

R&D Disease
Support Control

No direct
control Control and
LIVESTOCK enforcement on Department of
Local Authorities Licensing Environment
FARMS effluent and waste
disposal

Figure 2.6.8 Framework of the Management of Livestock Farms in relation to Water Quality
Management
(a) Issues and Needs

There are quite a number of smallholder pig farms in the Pahang River Basin. Since over 10 years
ago, the Malaysian Government has initiated the concept of regrouping the individual pig farms
into centralized modern pig farm areas (PFA) with proper wastewater treatment facilities. In
Negeri Sembilan, a PFA was built at Bukit Pelanduk (adjacent to the Pahang River Basin).
However, according to Working Group members, there are problems in relocating the existing
individual farms to the PFA. While for the case of Pahang, presently there is no PFA in or adjacent
to the Pahang River Basin. All the pig farms are operating individually but the Department of
Veterinary Services is imposing discharge requirement of 250 ppm BOD5.

(5) Agricultural and Logging Activities

Large scale agricultural and logging activities are among the main causes of river siltation. This
happens mainly during the development stage of plantations when natural vegetation and land cover
are removed during earthworks for terracing and road construction etc. Besides, runoff of
agrochemicals is also polluting the rivers. Figure 2.6.9 illustrates the environmental management
framework of large scale agricultural and logging activities.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-33

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

UPEN approval PTG approval EXCO approval

Large-scale agriculture Small holder agriculture Issuance of logging

(>50 acres) (< 50 acres) license by Forestry
Dept

Plantation Logging Operation

Management Plan Plan

Non-Prescribed Prescribed Non-Prescribed

Activities Activities Activities

EIA DEIA DOE

Approval

Logging Logging
Small-scale agriculture Plantation Operation Operation
Monitoring,
Monitoring,
Feedback,
Feedback,
Enforcement
Enforcement
Forestry
Environmental Requirement Management
Requirement

Forestry
Department of Environment Department
PTG: Lands and Mines Office

Figure 2.6.9 Environmental Framework of Large Scale Agricultural and Logging Activities

(a) Issues and Needs

One of the main concerns of agricultural activities on water quality management is the runoff of
agrochemicals such as pesticides and fertilizers into waterways. For large scale agricultural
activities, they are partially monitored by DOE through the EIA requirements. For the
smallholders’ farms, both DOE and DOA have no directly control on the application of pesticides
and fertilizers. The main issue with respect to the runoff of agrochemicals that have drawn
attention from Government as well as the general public is the runoff of agrochemicals from
vegetable farms in Cameron Highlands to the rivers, particularly the Terla River, a tributary of the
Telum River (a main tributary of the Pahang River). In this matter, DOE has conducted
investigation on the water quality of the Terla River and concerned authorities have carried out
enforcements such as demolition of vegetable plots within river reserves.

(6) Sand Dredging

Some parts of the Pahang River and its tributaries are under licenses for sand dredging. Although to
some extent sand dredging activities help in issues related to sedimentation and rise of riverbed,
improper management of these dredging activities may result in adverse environmental impacts such
as siltation of river water, riverbank erosion and loss of aquatic flora and fauna.

For sand dredging projects involving an area of 50 hectares and above, they are subject to EIA
requirements under the Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact

2-34 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Assessment) Order 1987. The environmental management of these projects, as stipulated in the EIA
Reports, shall be closely monitored by DOE. However, for the case of small scale project, as no EIA is
required, DOE has no direct involvement in those projects. There is no direct monitoring of
environmental impacts of these projects. In this case, monitoring and enforce rely mainly on the Lands
and Mines Office, which is the licensing authority for the activity. Figure 2.6.10 illustrates the basic
framework of sand dredging activities in relation to environmental management.

Proposed Sand Dredging

Dredging Operation

Issuance of license Lands and Mines

Dredging License Office
Technical advice

DID
Periodic monitoring
Dredging
Operation
Enforcement

Figure 2.6.10 Framework of Sand Dredging Activities in relation

to Environmental Management

(a) Issues and Needs

Although the licensees are submitting regular reports to the Lands and Mines Office, these reports
are focusing more on dredge volume rather than environmental management aspects. During the
application of dredging license, DID is responsible in providing technical evaluation on the
proposed dredging method and so on while during operational stage, DID is responsible to monitor
the dredging activities. From the Working Group discussions, it is understood that the monitoring
has been ineffective as DID has no enforcement power in this respect.

As mentioned above, only those projects with 50 hectares of more are subject to EIA requirements.
Environment management for projects below EIA requirements is ineffective in general. Data
shows that most of the sand dredging licenses in the Pahang River Basin are small scale, which are
not subject to EIA requirement. It is thus crucial to ensure proper environmental management by
these operators.

Also, it was reported during the Working Group meeting that gold mining activities are also
causing siltation of river water.

(7) Other Sources of Pollution

The above subsections elaborated six main water pollution sources. There are still many other sources
of pollution, which mostly are urban-based, for instance wastewater discharge from wet markets,
restaurants, hawker centers and abattoirs, disposal of oil and grease from vehicle workshops and
construction sites, sewage disposals from village houses, etc. Due to time limitation, the present
Survey is not investigating all these pollution sources in detail. However, these aspects must be taken
into consideration when formulating the integrated water quality management policies and strategies
in the subsequent stage of the Survey.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-35

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

2.7 Land Use

Land use planning in Malaysia is practiced at three tiers of government. At the national level, land use
planning is mainly guided by the National Physical Plan, while at the State level, it is guided by the
Structure Plans. Land use planning at the local level (district or local authority area) is guided by the
Local Plans. Table 2.7.1 below summarized the land use planning framework in Malaysia.

Table 2.7.1 Land Use Planning Framework in Malaysia

Level Plan Responsible Agency
National National Physical Plan JPBD
State Structure Plans JPBD
District/Local Authority Area Local Plans JPBD/LA
JPBD: Town and Country Planning Department; LA: Local Authority

2.7.1 Regional Development Context

The regional development pattern of the Pahang River Basin is mainly guided by the National Physical
Plan, the National Urbanization Policy and the Pahang and Negeri Sembilan Structure Plans. From these
plans and policy, it can generally be concluded that agricultural development would continue to be the
major land development in the Pahang River Basin, at least for the next 10 to 15 years. As elaborated in
the later section, in 2000 about one-third of the total Basin area was under agricultural use, while by 2020,
it is expected that the proportion will be increased to about 40%. Nonetheless, a huge portion of the Basin,
particularly those in the State of Pahang, would be conserved for environmental and tourism purposes.
Among the major conservation areas are the Taman Negara, Tasik Chini and Tasik Bera wetlands and the
Krau reserve (refer to Section 1.6). In terms of urban development, besides the existing settlement
centers such as Pekan, Maran, Bandar Jengka, Bera, Kuala Lipis, Bentong, Raub and Tanah Rata in
Pahang, and Bahau in Negeri Sembilan, a medium scale urban conurbation is expected to take place at
Temerloh-Mentakab and Pekan regions (are further elaborated in the later sub-section). And, the
southern tip of the Basin, areas within Negeri Sembilan is expected to have relatively more rapid urban
development due to spillover of developments from the Kuala Lumpur Conurbation. The following
subsections explain the growth conurbation and urban hierarchy in the Pahang River Basin.

(1) Growth Conurbation

The National Physical Plan has identified the major growth conurbations and urban growth centers in
Peninsular Malaysia as shown in Figure 2.7.1. From the figure, it can be seen that the Pahang River
Basin is not located within any national, regional and sub-regional growth conurbations. However, the
National Physical Plan and the National Urbanization Policy have identified that the
Temerloh-Mentakab region as a District Growth Conurbation that known as the Temerloh
Conurbation. Besides, Pekan area serves as the southern region of the Kuantan Conurbation (Regional
Growth Conurbation) that stretches from Bandar Chukai and Kemaman in the north, Kuantan at the
central part and Pekan at the south. Hence, it is expected that urban growth rates of
Temerloh-Mentakab and Temerloh regions would be relatively higher compared to other regions of the
Basin.

2-36 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Source: National Physical Plan, 2005

Figure 2.7.1 Major Growth Conurbations of Peninsular Malaysia

(2) Urban Hierarchy

Under the National Physical Plan and the National Urbanization Policy, the major urban centers in
Peninsular Malaysia are being divided into several hierarchies according to their designated functions.
The major urban centers in the Pahang River Basin include three hierarchies of urban center i.e.
Sub-Regional Centers, Major Settlement Centers and Minor Settlement Centers listed in the Pahang
and Negeri Sembilan Structure Plans (see Figure 2.7.2). The National Urban Policy provides details
on the target populations and necessity amenities for each hierarchy of settlement centers as.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-37

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Source: Rancangan Struktur Negeri Sembilan 2001-2020, Rancangan Struktur Negeri Johor 2020

Figure 2.7.2 Urban Hierarchy

2.7.2 Land Use in the Pahang River Basin

Land use affects surface runoff. It is an important factor that must be considered in flood management.
Also, conversion of forests to agricultural and urban usages may give pressures to water quality hence it
must be taken into consideration in water quality management and water catchment management. This
section compiles the land use information of the Pahang River Basin which serve as the supporting
information in the integrated river basin management and integrated flood management.

Based on the information from the Negeri Sembilan and Pahang Structure Plans, existing land uses (2000
land uses) and land use zoning plan (2020) of the Pahang River Basin are compiled in Figure 2.7.2. The
following Table 2.7.2 summarized the land use breakdowns.

Table 2.7.2 Breakdown of Existing and Future Land Uses

Land Use Existing/Committed (2000) Future (2020)
Land area (km2) % Land area (km2) %
Built-up areas 242 0.8 1456 5.1
Agricultural areas 8108 28.2 11224 39.0
Forests 20285 70.5 15648 54.4
Waterbody 135 0.5 442 1.5
Total 28770 100.0 28770 100.0

2-38 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

EXISTING/
COMMITTED
LANDUSES
(2000)

Note: Built-up areas are areas under

predominantly urban use but
comprising a variety of land uses such
as residential, commercial, industrial
and institutional uses together with
supporting facilities such as roads,
public utilities, open spaces, parks and
LANDUSE ZONES (2020)
vacant lands.

Source: Pahang and Negeri Sembilan Structure Plans (with some changes according to the respective local plans)

Figure 2.7.3 Existing/Committed Land Uses (2000) and Land Use Zones (2020) in the Pahang
River Basin

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-39

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

2.7.3 River Reserve

River reserve is the lands adjoining both banks of river that has been gazetted under Section 62 of the
National Land Code as reserved land (State land) for public purpose (‘River Reserve’). It is one of the
important elements in river corridor management. Among the main functions of river reserves are:
• As the buffer zones to protect adjacent properties and communities from riverbank
erosions and during the event of floods;
• As reserved lands for river improvement works/infrastructure; and
• Conservation of flora and fauna.
(1) Widths of River Reserves

Under the DID Manual, it is recommended that the minimum widths of river reserves shall be as shown
in Table 2.7.3.

Table 2.7.3 Minimum River Reserve Widths

Top width of river Minimum reserve width an each bank
> 40 m 50 m
30-40 m 40 m
20-30 m 30 m
10-20 m 20 m
5-10 m 10 m
<5m 5m

(2) Gazette of River Reserves

Although it is stipulated in the DID Manual that all lands along the rivers shall be set aside as river
reserves (see Table 2.7.3), DID has no legal jurisdiction and control on those lands not unless they are
gazetted as ‘river reserves’ under Subsection 62 of the National Land Code. Once gazetted, DID will
have full legal jurisdiction on the usage of lands within the river reserves for public purposes such as
flood mitigation, river channel improvement etc.

According to DID, gazetting of river reserves under Subsection 62 has not been implemented.
Gazetting under Subsection 13, which is less stringent, has been implemented only for three states of
Pahang, Johor and Selangor (Klang River only). This has resulted in that some of the rivers are flowing
within alienated lands. Also, it may hamper the execution of river improvement projects.

(3) Development within River Reserves

For all developments involving river and/or river reserve, strict procedures that different from the
normal developments must be followed. Figure 2.7.4 illustrates the general flows of development
involving river and/or river reserve. DID publication entitled ‘Pembangunan Melibatkan Sungai dan
Rizab Sungai’(Garis Panduan DID Bil.1 Tahun 2000) provides further detail on this matter.

2-40 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Submission of application to
State DID

Yes
Is EIA required?

Preparation and Approval No

submission of EIA
Report to DOE
Is the information No
complete?
Yes
Investigation/Comments by
District Engineer

Is additional Yes
information
required?

No
Reply from District Engineer

Reply to Applicant

Figure 2.7.4 Typical Flow of Application for Development Involving River/River Reserve

2.8 River Basin Information Management

One of the vital prerequisites for effective integrated river basin management is a comprehensive and
effective river basin information management system that can be shared among the related agencies in
basin management. Integrated river basin management involves cross-sectoral management with
multi-agency involvement. It requires a huge and wide range of database and information.

2.8.1 National Spatial Data Infrastructure

To fulfill the need for land and geospatial information for planning and development, the Government has
initiated the development of a Geospatial Data Infrastructure (MyGDI). The Malaysian Center for
Geospatial Data Infrastructure (MaCGDI) under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment has
the responsibility to coordinate the development and implementation activities of MyGDI. Figure 2.8.1
illustrates the position of MaCGDI in the overall MyGDI management structure.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-41

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 2 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

National Land Council

MyGDI National Coordinating Committee

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment

MyGDI Standards MyGDI State

Technical Committee Coordinating Committee
MacGDI MyGDI State
MyGDI Framework
Technical Committee Technical Committee

MyGDI Clearinghouse Federal Geospatial State Geospatial Data

Technical Committee Data Providers Provider
Source: MaCGDI, 2009

Figure 2.8.1 MaCGDI in the overall MyGDI Management Structure

MaCGDI serves as the clearinghouse for GIS databases of various agencies as shown in Figure 2.8.2.
PROVIDERS CLEARIANGHOUSE USERS

Federal
Government

State
Government
Web Browser

Government
Agencies MyGDI
Internet Explorer Internet
GIS Software
Commercial

Source: MaCGDI, 2009

Figure 2.8.2 Concept of MaCGDI’s Role in Promoting Data Sharing among Data Providers
and Users

2.8.2 River Basin Information System by DID

In 2001, through DID, the Government commissioned the National Register of River Basins Study
(RRB1) to facilitate the formulation of a management system to support integrated river basin
management in the country. The said study proposed the establishment a National River Basin Decision
Support System (RB-DSS) to facilitate the integrated management of all river basins in the country (see
Figure 2.8.3). The RB-DSS comprises River Basin Information Management System (RB-IMS), River
Basin Geographical Information System (RB-GIS) and River Basin Simulation Modeling System
(RB-SMS) (see Figure 2.8.4).

National River Basin Decision

Support System (RB-DSS)

River Basin Information River Basin Geographical River Basin Simulation

Management System Information System Modeling System
(RB-IMS) interrelated (RB-GIS) interrelated (RB-SMS)

Source: MaCGDI, 2009

Figure 2.8.3 Proposed Structure of River Basin Information under the National Register of
River Basin Study 2001

2-42 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 2
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

RB-SMS
develop, maintain, U
DID update S
(as Secretariat) RB-GIS E
R
RB-IMS S

data input
Internet

periodic update
Relevant Agencies 4 levels of internet
security control:
− Public access
− Inter-agency
User Manual
− Intra-agency
− Restricted access
to designated users

Source: MaCGDI, 2009

Figure 2.8.4 Framework of RB-DSS Development and Maintenance

At the time of writing this report, the aforementioned RRB2 study was still in progress. However, a
web-based RB-IMS known as ‘River Basin Information System’ (RBIS) has been developed for trial run
within the DID internet network, which in future will be opened to the public. In the RBIS, the data and
information are grouped in 16 categories as listed in Table 2.8.1.
Table 2.8.1 Categorization under the RBIS
Category Description
1. Administrative and Boundaries of administrative, river basin and sub-basins.
management boundaries
2. Policy guidelines Policies guidelines that are important for the management of water and
land resources in a river basin.
3. Legal and regulatory Legal and regulatory requirements pertinent to the management of an
requirements administrative unit, which include legislations, standards and guidelines.
4. Institutional set-up Institutional involved in the management of an administrative unit or river
basin.
5. Community stakeholders Community stakeholders in an administrative unit or river basin.
6. Existing environment Thematic databases describing the existing environment in three
categories i.e. natural resources environment, economic development
environment, socio development environment.
7. Management issues and Land and water management issues and problems pertinent to the
problems management of an administrative unit or river basin.
8. Management objectives and Management objectives and targets for every management issues and
targets problems identified in an administrative unit or river basin.
9. Management programs Management programs associated with each management issue and
problem.
10. Monitoring and enforcement Monitoring items and enforcement agencies associated with each
management program.
11. Education and awareness Education and awareness program carried out in an administrative unit or
river basin.
12. Research and development Related research and development projects in an administrative unit or
river basin.
13. Emergency preparedness and Related Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans in an administrative
response unit or river basin.
14. Budget and finance Budgets and financial resources associated with each of the above
management programs and projects.
15. Documents management Summary of relevant study documents.
16. Management review Management review report on the progress in addressing the management
issues and problems in the administrative unit or river basin.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 2-43

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 3 CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACT ANALYSIS

3.1 Introduction

Climate Change that accompanies global warning is now becoming a serious concern to be shared by all
people in the world. The 4th Assessment Report was published in 2007 by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) showing more realistic impacts of climate change, as presented in Table 3.1.1.
Namely in coastal and low-land areas, especially, both the frequencies and scales of floods, storm-surge
and other disasters are predicted to increase due to sea level rise, frequent heavy precipitation events.
Serious droughts are also likely to increase due to a greater degree of fluctuation in precipitation. Climate
change, unless people address it appropriately, may shake the foundation of people’s life, as well as those
on ecosystems, water resources, foods, industries, and human health.

Table 3.1.1 Impact Projection on Asia Region by IPCC

Item Projection
Water Availability By the 2050s, freshwater availability in Central, South, East and South-East Asia, particularly in
large river basins, is projected to decrease.
Flooding Coastal areas, especially heavily populated megadelta regions in South, East and South-East Asia,
will be at greatest risk due to increased flooding from the sea and, in some megadeltas, flooding
from the rivers.
Natural resources and Climate change is projected to compound the pressures on natural resources and the environment
Environment associated with rapid urbanisation, industrialisation and economic development.
Endemic morbidity and Endemic morbidity and mortality due to diarrhoeal disease primarily associated with floods and
mortality droughts are expected to rise in East, South and South-East Asia due to projected changes in the
hydrological cycle.
Source: “Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, IPCC”

To cope with these impacts, the IPCC report suggests that it be as important to promote “adaptation” to
climate change as to promote “mitigation” since climate change “mitigation” centered around the
reduction of greenhouse gases has limitations, and the climate change impacts would continue over
centuries even when “mitigation” is implemented. Malaysia also committed in the 10th Malaysia Plan to
adopt a dual strategy in addressing climate change impacts: firstly, adaptation strategies to protect
economic growth and development factors from the impact of climate change; and secondly, mitigation
strategies to reduce of green house gases.

In accordance with the suggestion of IPCC and the Malaysian policy, this Preparation Survey aims to
propose adaptation measures to anticipated impacts of climate change, especially those on flood
phenomena. For this purpose, firstly it is studied by closely examining observed meteorological and
hydrological data whether there are any tangible signs of climate change or not. Then, existing climate
change projection results by foreign and domestic research institutes are analyzed to project climate
change impacts localized in the target river basin, the Pahang River Basin.

3.2 Analysis of Observed Data

Following items were analyzed to illustrate change in observed data of the years.

- Temperature data;

- Rainfall data; and

- Tide data.

Location of meteorological stations operated by MMD and hydrological stations operated by DID could
be found in Figure 3.2.1.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 3.2.1 Location of Meteorological and Hydrological Stations

3.2.1 Temperature Data

Figure 3.2.2 shows the observed monthly average temperature of Cameron Highlands, Temerloh and
Pekan, together with 5years moving average and its trend. As seen in the figures, observed data of
Temarloh and Pekan show temperature rise and their rates are approximately 0.013oC/year and
0.034oC/year respectively. Temperature data of Cameron Highlands show no significant trend.
21
Cameron Highlands
20
Temeprature( C)

19
o

18

17

16

15
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

Figure 3.2.2(1) Observed Temperature Data

3-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

30
Temerloh
Temeprature(oC) 29

28

27

26

25

24
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

30
Pekan
29
Temeprature( C)

28
o

27

26

25

24
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

Figure 3.2.2 (2) Observed Temperature Data

Figure 3.2.3 shows month average temperature of 1989-1998 and 1999-2008, and their difference. As
indicated in the figure, temperature in Pekan show rise in all month. Temeperature of Cameron
Highlands and Temerloh show conspicuous rise in November and December.
19.5 Increase 0.8 28.0 Increase 0.8
Cameron Highlands 1989-1998 Temerloh 1989-1998
19.0 1999-2008 0.6 27.5 1999-2008 0.6
Temp. Increase(o C)

Temp. Increase(o C)
Temperature(o C)

Temperature(o C)

18.5 0.4 27.0 0.4

18.0 0.2 26.5 0.2

17.5 0.0 26.0 0.0

17.0 -0.2 25.5 -0.2

16.5 -0.4 25.0 -0.4

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

29.0 0.8
Pekan
28.5 0.6
Temp. Increase(oC)
Temperature(o C)

28.0 0.4

27.5 0.2

27.0 0.0

26.5 Increase -0.2

1989-1998
26.0 1999-2008 -0.4
J F M A M J J A S O N D

Figure 3.2.3 Month Average Temperature of 1989-1998 and 1999-2008

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

3.2.2 Rainfall Data

(1) Annual Precipitation

As in Figure 3.2.4, basin average annual precipitation data in Pahang River Basin show no significant
trend. However, data of station 3431099 and 4514032 show clear increasing trend.
4000 4000
Basin Average 3122142
3500 3500
Precipitation(mm)

Precipitation(mm)
3000 3000
2500 2500
2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
4000 4000
3421134 3431099
3500 3500
Precipitation(mm)

Precipitation(mm)
3000 3000
2500 2500
2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
4000 4000
3723077 4019063
3500 3500
Precipitation(mm)

Precipitation(mm)

3000 3000
2500 2500
2000 2000
1500 1500
1000 1000
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
4000
4514032
3500
Precipitation(mm)

3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

*Hydrological year: July until June next year

Figure 3.2.4 Observed Annual Precipitation

Figure 3.2.5 shows month average rainfall of 1969-1988 and 1989-2008, and their difference. As
indicated in the figure, all observed data as well as basin average rainfall show increase in December
which is in the rainy season.

3-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

300 30 300 Increase 80

Basin Average 3122142 1969-1988
250 20 250 1989-2008 60
Monthly Rainfall(mm)

Monthly Rainfall(mm)
Increase(mm)

Increase(mm)
200 10 200 40

150 0 150 20

100 -10 100 0

50 Increase -20 50 -20

1969-1988
0 1989-2008 -30 0 -40
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
300 Increase 80 600 Increase 100
3421134 1969-1988 3431099 1969-1988
250 1989-2008 60 500 1989-2008 80
Monthly Rainfall(mm)

Monthly Rainfall(mm)
Increase(mm)

Increase(mm)
200 40 400 60

150 20 300 40

100 0 200 20

50 -20 100 0

0 -40 0 -20
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
300 60 300 60
3723077 4019063
250 40 250 40
Monthly Rainfall(mm)

Monthly Rainfall(mm)
Increase(mm)

Increase(mm)
200 20 200 20

150 0 150 0

100 -20 100 -20

Increase
50 -40 50 1969-1988 -40
Increase 1989-2008
0 1969-1988 -60 0 -60
J F M A M J J A S 1989-2008
O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
350 80
4514032
300 60
Monthly Rainfall(mm)

250 40
Increase(mm)

200 20
150 0
100 Increase -20
50 1969-1988 -40
1989-2008
0 -60
J F M A M J J A S O N D

Figure 3.2.5 Month Average Rainfall of 1989-1998 and 1999-2008

(2) Rainfall Event

Figure 3.2.6 shows number of rainfall events with daily rainfall exceeding 50mm in the past 40years.
Average number of event in 1998-2007 clearly increased in station 3431099 and 4514032 relative to
that of 1968-1977. No clear trend could be found in data of other stations.
20 19 15 14
4.9event/yr
3122142 3421134
6.4event/yr 12
(1988-2007)
Number of Event
Number of Event

15 (1988-2007) 10 4.9event/yr 10 10
7.5event/yr 10 9 9
(1968-1977) 11 (1968-1977) 8
10 10 10
9 7 7 7 7 7 7
10 8 8 8 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7 5 5
6 6 6 6 6 6 6
5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 2 2
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1
0
0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

Figure 3.2.6(1) Number of Events with Daily Rainfall Exceeding 50mm

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

20 5.2event/yr 1818
10.5event/yr 20
17
3431099 (1968-1977) (1988-2007) 3723077
15
7.1event/yr
Number of Event

Number of Event
15 14 15
13 13 13
(1968-1977) 6.3event/yr
12 12 12 12 12 12
11 11 11 (1988-2007)
10 1010 10 10 10
9 9 9 9 9 9
10 8 8 8 8 10 8 8 8 8
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 2

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
20 5.3event/yr 5 1.8event/yr 2.7event/yr
6.8event/yr
4019063 16 (1988-2007) 4514032 (1968-1977) 4 (1988-2007)
4 4 4
(1968-1977)
4
Number of Event

Number of Event
14
15
12 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
10 3
9
10 8 8 8 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
7 7 7 7 2
6 6 6 6 6 6 6
5 5 5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 3 3 3
2 2 2 2 1
1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
*Hydrological year: July until June next year

Figure 3.2.6(2) Number of Events with Daily Rainfall Exceeding 50mm

Increasing trend could be seen in the annual maximum daily rainfall of station 3122142 and 3723077,
Figure 3.2.7.
200 200
Ann. Max. Daily Rainfall(mm)

Ann. Max. Daily Rainfall(mm)

3122142 3421134l

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
400 300
Ann. Max. Daily Rainfall(mm)

Ann. Max. Daily Rainfall(mm)

3431099 3723077
250
300
200

200 150
100
100
50

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

300 200
Ann. Max. Daily Rainfall(mm)

Ann. Max. Daily Rainfall(mm)

4019063 4514032
250
150
200

150 100
100
50
50

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

*Hydrological year: July until June next year

Figure 3.2.7 Annual Maximum Daily Rainfall

3-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(3) Consecutive Days with No Rainfall

Here the term “consecutive days with no rainfall” is defined as number of consecutive days with
rainfall below 1mm/day. As shown in Figure 3.2.8, no significant change or increase trend are
observed in all stations except for data in station 34211341 which shows decreasing trend.
100 100
3122142 3421134l
80 80
Number of Days

Number of Days
60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
100 100
3431099 3723077
80 80
Number of Days

Number of Days
60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
100 100
4019063 4514032
80 80
Number of Days

Number of Days

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
*Hydrological year: July until June next year

Figure 3.2.8 Annual Maximum Consecutive Days with No Rainfall

3.2.3 Tide Data

Figure 3.2.9 is monthly averaged sea level of Tanjung Gelang with its 1year moving average and
trend line. The figure tells us that sea level has rising trend with approximate rate of 3mm/year and
annual average sea level has rose 7cm since 1984.
0.5 Month Average 1year Moving Average
Tanjung Gelang
0.4
Sea level (DTGSM m)

0.3

0.2
z
0.1

0.0

-0.1
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Figure 3.2.9 Monthly Average Sea Level at Tanjung Gelang since 1984

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

3.2.4 Overview of the Observed Data

Following trends were revealed through above analysis of the observed data.

- Temperature data of Temerloh and Pekan indicate rise by 0.013 and 0.034oC/year. However, no
significant change could be seen in ones of Cameron Highlands;

- No significant trend was observed in annual precipitation of Pahang River Basin;

- No significant trend was observed in the number of event with daily rainfall exceeding 50mm/day.
However, increase in annual maximum rainfall was observed in some stations which could be an
indication of increase in intense rainfall event;

- Increasing trend in maximum consecutive days with no rainfall was observed in some of the stations
in Pahang River Basin; and

- Sea level has rising trend and its rate since 1984 is approximately 3mm/year.

3.3 Availability of Climate Change Projection Data

3.3.1 GCM Data

GCMs (Global Circulation Models) aim to project global scale climate change with coarse spatial
resolution. 19 GCMs out of 25 have daily surface average projection outputs until end of 21 century
available for the study purposes. The 19 GCMs are listed in Table 3.3.1 with period of projection, which
were used for further analysis.

Table 3.3.1 Data Availablity of GCMs

Model ID Data Availability

20C3M* A1B
BCC-CM1, China
BCCR-BCM2.0, Norway 1981-1999 2056-2065, 2081-2099
CCSM3, USA 1950-1999 2046-2065, 2080-2099
CGCM3.1(T47), Canada 1961-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
CGCM3.1(T63), Canada 1961-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
CNRM-CM3, France 2046-2065, 2081-2100
CSIRO-Mk3.0, Australia 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
CSIRO-Mk3.5, Australia 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
ECHAM5/MPI-OM, Germany 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
ECHO-G, Germany/Korea 1959-1998 2043-2062, 2078-2098
FGOALS-g1.0, China
GFDL-CM2.0, USA 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
GFDL-CM2.1, USA 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
GISS-AOM, USA 1961-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
GISS-EH, USA
GISS-ER, USA 1961-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
INGV-SXG, Italy 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
INM-CM3.0, Russia
IPSL-CM4, France 1961-2000 2045-2064, 2080-2099
MIROC3.2(hires), Japan 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
MIROC3.2(medres), Japan 1961-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
MRI-CGCM2.3.2, Japan 1981-2000 2046-2065, 2081-2100
PCM, USA 1890-1999 2040-2059, 2080-2099
UKMO-HadCM3, UK
UKMO-HadGEM1, UK
*Historical experiment of 20 Century

Daily outputs of the grid that includes the center of the basin were extracted from the GCM result to
represent the whole basin as shown in Figure 3.3.1.

3-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Center of the Basin

GCM Grid extracted to represent the Basin GCM Grid

GCM Grid GCM Grid

Figure 3.3.1 Schematic view of the Grid Extracted to Represent the Basin

3.3.2 RCM Data

In addition to the available GCM results above, projection data of two Malaysia-made Regional Climate
Models (RCMs) are available. NAHRIM and University of California jointly developed Regional
Hydroclimate Model of Peninsular Malaysia (RegHCM-PM) with spatial resolution of 9km (longitude
and latitude). Malaysian Meteorological Department (MMD) has developed a Regional Climate Model
(RCM) as well with spatial resolution of 50km, covering Southeast Asia including whole Malaysia
utilizing Providing Regional Climate Impact Studies (PRECIS) model developed by Hadley Centre, UK.
Available data are as shown in Table 3.3.2.

Table 3.3.2 Data Availablity of RCMs

RegHCM-PM by NAHRIM
- Period of Historical Experiment: 1984-1993
- Scenario for projection: IS92a
- Projection Period: 2026-2035, 2041-2050
- Target Area: Peninsula Malaysia
- Spatial Resolution: 9km x 9km
- Available outputs: Precipitation (daily), Temperature (daily) etc.
PRECIS by MMD
- Period of Historical Experiment: 1960-1990
- Scenario for projection: A1B
- Projection Period: 2001-2099
- Target Area: Southeast Asia
- Spatial Resolution: 50km x 50km
- Available outputs: Precipitation (daily), Temperature (daily) etc.

All daily outputs of the grids partially or completely covers the basin were extracted from the RCM
results for further analysis.

Figure 3.3.2 Grid of RCMs (Left Panel: RegHCM-PM, Right Panel: PRECIS)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

3.3.3 Emission Scenarios

Projections of climate change impacts depend upon the scenario of future greenhouse gases emission.
IPCC published a new set of scenarios in 2000 for use in the Third Assessment Report (Special Report on
Emissions Scenarios - SRES). The SRES scenarios were constructed to explore future developments in
the global environment with special reference to the production of greenhouse gases and aerosol
precursor emissions.

The SRES team defined four narrative storylines, labelled A1, A2, B1 and B2, describing the
relationships between the forces driving greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions and their evolution during
the 21st century for large world regions and globally. Each storyline represents different demographic,
social, economic, technological, and environmental developments that diverge in increasingly
irreversible ways. Moreover, three scenarios were further developed from A1 scenario, characterising
alternative developments of energy technologies: A1FI (fossil intensive), A1T (predominantly
non-fossil) and A1B (balanced across energy sources). These six scenarios are summarized in Table
3.3.3.

Table 3.3.3 SRES Scenarios

SRES Senario World assumed by the scenario Direction of Technology
A1FI A world of very rapid economic growth, a global population that Fossil intensive
A1T peaks in mid-century and rapid introduction of new and more Predominantly non-fossil
A1B efficient technologies. Balanced across all sources
A very heterogeneous world with high population growth, slow economic development and slow
A2
technological change
A convergent world, with the same global population as A1, but with more rapid changes in economic
B1
structures toward a service and information economy.
A world with intermediate population and economic growth, emphasising local solutions to economic,
B2
social, and environmental sustainability

In this survey the A1B scenario, which gives mid-range projection values, is selected as a representative
scenario of the six scenarios. Namely projection results only under the A1B scenario were collected and
used for the following analysis. As for Regarding RegHCM-PM by NAHRIM, projection results under
the old scenario, IS92a1 were used, because the old scenario projections are alone available for this model.
Whatever scenario is applied, impact projection results are not so significantly different until around 2050
at least, as shown in Figure 3.3.3.

Source: AR4
Figure 3.3.3 Scenarios for GHG Emissions from 2000 to 2100 (in the absence of additional
climate policies) and Projections of Surface Temperatures

1
IS92a: a 'business-as-usual' type scenario, had been in wide use by the climate modeling and vulnerability, impacts
and adaptation communities, but the SRES scenarios are now commonly used.

3-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

3.4 Climate Change Impact Analysis with Climate Model Result

3.4.1 Impact on Temperature

Figure 3.4.1 and Table 3.4.1shows the temperature change between 2001 and 2100 relative to the last
decade average of 20 Century (1991-2000) in Pahang River Basin.

All 19 GCMs shows rise in the future temperature of Pahang River Basin ranging 0.9 to 3.0oC at 2046-2055
and 1.6 to 4.7 oC at 2086-2095 with average of 1.6 oC and 2.6 oC respectively compared with end of 20 Century.
Two RCMs namely RegHCM-PM and PRECIS shows rise in the future temperature as well which is
consistent with the results of GCMs.
GCM Max.
6 GCM Average
GCM Min.
5 RegHCM-PM, NAHRIM
Temperature Anomaly( C)

PRECIS, MMD
o

-1
2001 2011 2021 2031 2041 2051 2061 2071 2081 2091

Figure 3.4.1 Temporal Plot of Projected Surface Temperature

Table 3.4.1 Projected Surface Temperature** of Pahang River Basin
Temperature. Change Temperature. Change
(oC at 2046-2055* relative to 1991-2000)
Model (oC at 2086-2095 relative to 1991-2000)
Average Range Average Range
GCMs +1.6oC +0.9-3.0 +2.6oC +1.6-4.7
RegHCM-PM +1.6oC - - -
PRECIS +2.2oC - +3.2oC -
* 2041-2050 for RegHCM-PM
** Under A1B Scenario. I92a Scenario for RegHCM-PM.

3.4.2 Impact on Rainfall and Evapotranspiration

Before the climate change impact analysis on precipitation, GCMs with insufficient agreement with
observed precipitation was excluded from further analysis. GCM results and long term monthly average
were compared as shown in Figure 3.4.2.
CSIRO-Mk3.0, Australia(1981-2000) MIROC3.2(medres), Japan(1981-2000)
500 model 500 model
Precipitation(mm)

Precipitation(mm)

observed observed
400 400
300 less rain in rainy 300
season
200 200
100 100
0 0
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
PCM, USA(1980-1999) CNRM-CM3, France(1981-2000)
500 model 500 model
Precipitation(mm)

Precipitation(mm)

observed observed
400 400
less rain in rainy
300 300
season
200 200
100 100
0 0
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
Figure 3.4.2 Comparison of GCM Results to Observed Data (Left Panel: Example of GCMs
excluded from further analysis, Right: Example of GCMs used for further analysis)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-11

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

13 GCMs shown in Table 3.4.2 below were selected for further analysis.

Table 3.4.2 GCMs Utilized for Climate Change Impact Analysis on Precipitation
- BCCR-BCM2.0, Norway - GFDL-CM2.1, USA
- CGCM3.1(T47), Canada - GISS-AOM, USA
- CGCM3.1(T63), Canada - INGV-SXG, Italy
- CNRM-CM3, France - IPSL-CM4, France
- ECHAM5/MPI-OM, Germany - MIROC3.2(hires), Japan
- ECHO-G, Germany/Korea - MIROC3.2(medres), Japan
- GFDL-CM2.0, USA
RegHCM-PM and PRECIS are proved to have sufficient agreement with observed data by NAHRIM and
MMD respectively. Detail could be found in:

- Study of the Impact of Climate Change on the Hydrologic Regime and Water Resources of Peninsular
Malaysia, NAHRIM, September 2006; and

- Climate Change Scenario for Malaysia 2001-2099, MMD, January 2009.

(1) Impact on Heavy Rainfall Events

In this section climate change impact on heavy rainfall event will be analyzed based on GCM and
RCM results.

Based on past rainfall data, duration of rainfall which cause major flood event is estimated to be
approximately 8 days (see Chapter 4 for details). Therefore, annual maximum 8 days rainfalls were
calculated based on the results of GCMs and RCMs for the period of 2046-2065 and 2081-2100 which
corresponds to approximately 40 years and 90 years from present. Then rainfalls with average
recurrence interval (ARI) of 100, 50, 30, 20, 10, 5, 2 years return period were calculated and compared
to that of current condition (1981-2000) to obtain incremental ratio for rainfall with various ARIs.

Figure 3.4.3 shows the relation between non-exceedance probability and 8 days rainfall for
“CGCM3.1(T47), Canada”, one of the GCMs. 8 days rainfalls with various ARI and their incremental
ratio relative to present could be obtained as Table 3.4.3 based on probability analysis as in the figure.

Pahang River Basin Pahang River Basin Pahang River Basin

1981-2000 2046-2065 2081-2100
Non-exceedance probability (%)

Nonexceedance probability (%)

Nonexceedance probability (%)

ARI (years)
ARI (years)

ARI (years)

General Extreme Value (GEV) distribution, Plotted on Log-Normal Probability Paper

Figure 3.4.3 Frequency Plot of Pahang River Basin based on Result of CGCM3.1(T47),
Canada

3-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 3.4.3 8 days Rainfall and Incremental Ratio obtained based on CGCM3.1(T47),
Canada (Upper table: 8 days Rainfalls, Lower table: Incremental ratio relative to 1990(1981-2000))
8 days Rainfall (mm)
ARI (years)
100 50 30 20 10 5 2
1990 381.8 346 320.8 301.4 269.2 237.6 193.5
2050 409.3 391.9 377.4 364.6 339.7 309.6 254.7
2090 522.6 460.1 417.4 385.4 333.8 285.1 220.3
Incremental Ratio relative to 1990 (1981-2000)
ARI (years)
100 50 30 20 10 5 2
1990 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
2050 1.07 1.13 1.18 1.21 1.26 1.30 1.32
2090 1.37 1.33 1.30 1.28 1.24 1.20 1.14

The average incremental ratio was obtained by applying above analysis to all GCMs and RCMs. The
projected 8days rainfall incremental ratios of 2025 with ARI of 100 years obtained are shown in
Figure 3.4.4. Incremental Ratios vary in the range of 0.8 to 1.6 and the arithmetic average of all
models could be obtained as 1.1.
ARI: 100 years (2025)

RegHCM-PM, NAHRIM
PRECIS, MMD
BCCR-BCM2.0, Norway
CNRM-CM3, France
CGCM3.1(T63), Canada
CGCM3.1(T47), Canada
GISS-AOM, USA
GFDL-CM2.0, USA
GFDL-CM2.1, USA
INGV-SXG, Italy
MIROC3.2(hires), Japan
MIROC3.2(medres), Japan
ECHO-G, Germany/Korea
ECHAM5/MPI-OM, Germany
IPSL-CM4, France
GCM Average

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Incremental Ratio

Figure 3.4.4 Incremental Ratios for 100 years ARI 8 days Rainfall (2025)

Table 3.4.4 show the future projected increase in the 8 days rainfalls for respective ARI. The results
indicate 10-40% increase in 8 days rainfall by the year 2050, then it shows continues increase until end
of the century.

Table 3.4.4 Incremental Ratio of 8 days Rainfalls for Various ARI and Period
ARI GCM Proportion of models
Period RegHCM-PM PRECIS Average* Maximum**
(years) Average that show increase
2025 1.13 1.09 1.13 1.1(1.1) 1.1(1.6) 80%(12/15)
100 2050 1.42 1.15 1.23 1.3(1.2) 1.4(2.1) 80%(12/15)
2090 - 1.54 1.37 1.5(1.4) 1.5(3.0) 86%(12/14)
2025 1.07 1.05 1.13 1.1(1.1) 1.1(1.5) 87%(13/15)
50 2050 1.32 1.08 1.22 1.2(1.2) 1.3(1.9) 87%(/1315)
2090 - 1.42 1.36 1.4(1.4) 1.4(2.5) 86%(12/14)
2025 1.01 1.01 1.12 1.0(1.1) 1.1(1.4) 93%(14/15)
20 2050 1.19 1.02 1.20 1.1(1.2) 1.2(1.6) 93%(14/15)
2090 - 1.30 1.34 1.3(1.3) 1.3(2.0) 93%(13/14)
2025 0.97 0.99 1.11 1.0(1.1) 1.1(1.3) 80%(12/15)
10 2050 1.12 0.98 1.18 1.1(1.2) 1.2(1.5) 87%(13/15)
2090 - 1.21 1.32 1.3(1.3) 1.3(1.8) 93%(13/14)
*Numbers in the parenthesis are arithmetic average of all models
**Numbers in the parenthesis are maximum of all models

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-13

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 3 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Flood risk could be further aggravated as a result of projected increase in heavy rainfall events as
analyzed above. Figure 3.4.5 is simulation result of flood area in rainfall event of 100 years return
period under current and 2025 condition (see Chapter 4 for simulation model). Predicted total flood
area with water depth above 10cm is 1,028km2 in current condition while 1,185km2 under projected
2025 condition. It should be noted that future land use change is also considered in the simulation.
However, given that no significant change in land use is expected by 2025, major cause of the increase
is assumed to be due to climate change.
Kuala Tembeling
Jerkoh !
! Benta
!

Cheroh Dong
! !

Sungai Ruan
Raub !
!
Bandar Pusat Jengka
Teras !
!
Kuala Kerau
!

Sungai Penjuring
!
Kerdau Maran
! !
Bentong
!
Lanchang
! Mentakab Chenor Pekan
! ! !
Sungai Dua Temerloh
! !
Karak
!

Bukit Tinggi
! Mengkarak
!
Telemong
!
Teriang
!
!
Manchis
! Mengkuang Current
!
Kemayan
Durian Tipus
! Sungai Buloh
! 2025
Simpang Durian
Kampung Chennah ! !
!

Figure 3.4.5 Simulated Flood Area by 100 years Return Period Flood Event under Current
and 2025 Conditions

(2) Impact on Annual Precipitation and Evapotranspiration

Climate Change impact on annual and monthly precipitation and evapotranspiration will be analyzed
in this section based on GCM and RCM results.

Models used in this analysis are listed in Table 3.4.5. They are the models listed in Table 3.4.2 with
both rainfall and evapotranpiration results available.

Table 3.4.5 GCMs and RCMs used for Analysis

- RegHCM-PM, NAHRIM - ECHO-G, Germany/Korea
- PRECIS, MMD - GFDL-CM2.0, USA
- BCCR-BCM2.0, Norway - GISS-AOM, USA
- CGCM3.1(T47), Canada - INGV-SXG, Italy
- CGCM3.1(T63), Canada - MIROC3.2(hires), Japan
- CNRM-CM3, France - MIROC3.2(medres), Japan
- ECHAM5/MPI-OM, Germany - IPSL-CM4, France

Incremental ratios of precipitation and evapotranspiration due to climate change impact are Figure
3.4.6 and Table 3.4.6.

3-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 3
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

2.0 RegHCM-PM, NAHRIM 2.0

Precipitation(2025) Evapotranspiration(2025) RegHCM-PM, NAHRIM
1.8 PRECIS, MMD 1.8 PRECIS, MMD
GCM ave.
1.6 1.6 GCM ave.
Average
Average
1.4 1.4
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
b

b
v

v
r

g
n

n
ay

ay
t
ar

ar

t
p
c

c
al

al
Ju

Ju
Ap

Ap
Oc

Oc
Fe

Fe
No

No
Ja

Ja
Au

Se

Au

Se
Ju

Ju
De

De
nu

nu
M

M
M

M
An

An
Figure 3.4.6 Monthly and Annual Precipitation and Evapotranspiration Incremental Ratio
of 2025 Relative to 1990

Table 3.4.6 Incremental Ratio of Annual and Monthly Precipitation and

Evapotranspiration Relative to 1990
Precipitation
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Ann.
RegHCM-PM 1.07 0.90 0.93 1.01 1.21 0.94 0.50 1.45 0.70 1.24 1.18 1.30 1.06
2025 PRECIS 0.99 0.89 0.99 0.99 1.01 1.03 0.97 1.04 1.02 1.03 1.07 1.00 1.01
GCMs 1.14 1.18 1.06 0.96 1.03 1.07 1.04 1.25 1.06 1.00 1.02 1.04 1.04
Average 1.07 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.08 1.01 0.84 1.25 0.93 1.09 1.09 1.12 1.04
RegHCM-PM 0.80 0.66 1.02 1.19 1.31 1.08 0.64 1.70 1.08 1.28 0.96 0.93 1.06
PRECIS 0.99 0.82 0.99 0.98 1.02 1.05 0.95 1.07 1.03 1.05 1.12 1.01 1.02
2050
GCMs 1.24 1.31 1.10 0.93 1.06 1.11 1.07 1.43 1.10 1.00 1.04 1.08 1.07
Average 1.01 0.93 1.03 1.03 1.13 1.08 0.89 1.40 1.07 1.11 1.04 1.01 1.05
Evapotranspiration
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Ann.
RegHCM-PM 1.14 1.09 0.97 1.06 1.12 1.02 0.74 1.15 0.95 1.04 1.15 1.22 1.07
2025 PRECIS 0.97 0.99 0.93 0.97 0.96 0.98 1.03 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.98
GCMs 1.04 0.99 0.99 1.03 1.01 1.02 1.00 0.99 0.97 1.00 1.02 1.02 1.01
Average 1.05 1.02 0.96 1.02 1.03 1.01 0.92 1.04 0.97 1.00 1.05 1.07 1.02
RegHCM-PM 1.08 0.95 0.97 1.10 1.21 1.09 0.92 1.25 1.29 1.21 1.12 1.05 1.11
PRECIS 0.94 0.98 0.89 0.95 0.93 0.96 1.05 0.96 0.97 0.96 0.98 0.97 0.96
2050
GCMs 1.06 0.99 0.98 1.04 1.02 1.03 1.00 0.99 0.96 0.99 1.03 1.04 1.01
Average 1.03 0.97 0.94 1.03 1.05 1.03 0.99 1.07 1.07 1.05 1.04 1.02 1.03

The results show no significant change in both annual precipitation and evapotranspiration. However,
projected monthly precipitation shows 25% increase at August in 2025 relative to 1990.

3.4.3 Sea Level Rise

Sea level is projected to rise as a result of global warming. Table 3.4.7 shows model-based projection of
global average sea level rise for 2090-2099. Sea level rise by 2025 could be estimated to be 0.12m
relative to 1980-1999 under A1B scenario based on linear interpolation. However, it should be noted
values may differ in the future due to limited understanding on important effects deriving sea level rise as
stated in the IPCC report.

Table 3.4.7 Projected Global Average Sea Level Rise

Case Sea level rise

(m at 2090-2099 relative to 1980-1999)
B1 scenaio 0.18-0.38
A1T scenario 0.20-0.45
B2 scenaio 0.20-0.43
A1B scenaio 0.21-0.48
A2 scenaio 0.23-0.51
A1FI scenaio 0.26-0.59
Source: IPCC, The 4 Assessment Report

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 3-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 4 BASIC ANALYSIS AND SURVEY FOR IRBM AND IFM PLANNING

4.1 Digital Terrain Modeling and GIS Database

Digital topographic data are very useful for the geospatial analyses. Especially, the DTM (Digital Terrain
Model) and river data are very important for the flood analyses. In this Survey, generation of DTM and
GIS database for the Pahang River Basin have been carried out by the local company under the
supervision of the JICA Study Team using materials below provided from DID:
a) GIS data of ESRI Shape file from the existing 1/50,000-scale topographic maps for all over
Malaysia,
b) Geo-referenced scanned images of the existing 1/50,000-scale topographic maps for the
Study area,
c) Land use data of ESRI Shape file by Cadastral Agency,
d) Basin boundary data in ESRI shape format for Pahang Rivers Basin, and
e) Hardcopy flood maps at 1/10,000 scale (86 sheets) covering some area within the Pahang
River Basin.

4.1.1 Generation of DTM

The contour lines and the spot heights of 4.1 a) and the 1/10,000-scale flood maps of 4.1 e) have been
used to generate the DTM. The specifications of the DTM are the following:
• Coordinates system: Kertau RSO Malaya Meters (See 4.1.2 Generation of GIS Database)
• Vertical datum: DTGSM
• Grid size or Spacing: 50m / Data format: ESRI Grid ASCII
• Significant digit: One digit below decimal point (e.g. 55.4)
The elevation accuracy of the existing 1/50,000-scale topographical maps is thought about 10m. The
elevation accuracy of the existing flood maps is thought about 2.5m, but coarser than 50m in some areas
where contour lines are not available. Therefore, a particular method must has been thought out to merge
the different type data.

If a DTM from each type of maps is generated respectively and after that the generated two DTMs are
merged, some discrepancy of elevation values must happen in overlapped areas of the two DTMs. To
solve this problem, the contour lines were selected depending on three areas. The selected contour lines
are the following:
• All contour lines in the outside of the flood map area were selected from the existing
1/50,000-scale topographic maps.
• Contour lines that are equal to or less than 50m were selected from the 1/10,000-scale flood maps
in the flood map area.
• Contour lines that are higher than 50m were selected from the 1/50,000-scale topographic maps
in the flood map area.

The selected contour lines and the spot heights of the two different maps were used to generate the whole
DTM at one step. See Figure 4.1.1. A formula of conversion between LSD and DTGSM is DTGSM =
LSD – 0.093m, which has been calculated using the national benchmarks in the river basin area.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

a) Counter lines in the outside of the flood map area

Merged DTM

b) Counter lines =< 50m in the flood map area

c) Contour lines > 50m in the flood map area

Figure 4.1.1 Method of DTM Generation

4.1.2 Preparation of GIS Database

The GIS database has been prepared editing the ESRI Shape files provided by DID. The provided Shape
files were expected to be prepared from the CAD data such as DWG format of AutoCAD software that
were created digitizing the existing 1/50,000-scale topographic maps. Although the Shape files had
almost all necessary map features, there were a lot of input errors such as wrong elevation values of the
contour line and spot height, lack of double line rivers, doughnut lake polygons without hole, etc. About
land use data for Pahang, Negeri Sembilan and Johor, another data set of ESRI Shape file from the
Cadastral Agency also was used for the preparation. The coordinates system of the GIS database is
selected “Kertau RSO Malaya Meters” in ArcGIS. The detail information is shown in Table 4.1.1.

Table 4.1.1 Map Projection, Coordinates System and Vertical Datum

Projection: Geographic Coordinate System:
Rectified_Skew_Orthomorphic_Natural_Origin GCS_Kertau
False_Easting: 804671.299775 Angular Unit: Degree (0.017453292519943299)
False_Northing: 0.000000 Prime Meridian: Greenwich (0.000000000000000000)
Scale_Factor: 0.999840 Datum: D_Kertau
Azimuth: -36.974209 Spheroid: Everest_1830_Modified
Longitude_Of_Center: 102.250000 Semimajor Axis: 6377304.063000000100000000
Latitude_Of_Center: 4.000000 Semiminor Axis: 6356103.038993154700000000
XY_Plane_Rotation: -36.869898 Inverse Flattening: 300.801699999999980000
Linear Unit: Meter (1.000000)
Vertical datum:
LSD (See 4.1.1 Generation of DTM)

The GIS databases have been prepared in two types, namely one on administrative boundary and the other
on the river basin boundary. The difference between both the databases is only covered area, therefore,
here the layer structure of the administrative boundary are alone shown in Table 4.1.2.

4-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 4.1.2 Layer Structure of GIS Database

Category Data Type Description
Administrative
Polygon State boundary, District boundary, Municipal boundary
boundary
Airport, Motorized track (class 4), Causeway, Dual carriageway,
Dual highway, Footpath, Motorized track (class 3), Road under
Road Line construction, Main road - one way 1b, Main road - two way 1a,
Single highway, Unsurfaced road - one way 2b, Unsurfaced road -
two way 2a
Railroad Line Double track, Single track, Light rail, Other rail, Rail station
Point Waterfall
Double line river, Single line river, Island, Single line river and
Water body Line
center line of double line river, Canal, Rapid,
Polygon Double line river, Lake, Swamp, Mud, Reservoir
Point Dam, Bridge
Water related feature Line Island, Shoreline, Water pipe
Polygon Island, Sand
Town Point Town
Land use Polygon Tin mine, Rock
Point Digital Terrain Model (50m interval)
Digital terrain model
Grid Digital Terrain Model (50m grid)
Note: An extension of each Shape file name, _XXX shall be used to identify the target state or basin. The
definition is following; Pahang State: _phg, Negeri Sembilan State: _ns, Melaka State: _mlk, Johor State: _jhr,
Pahang River Basin: _phgrb, Muar River Basin: _muar

Some land use data from the Cadastral Agency were needed to be converted from their original
coordinates system to “Kertau RSO Malaya Meters”. Main categories of the land use data are shown in
Table 4.1.3. The example of the created GIS database is shown in Figure 4.1.2.

Table 4.1.3 Main Categories of the Land Use Data

Current Activity
Animal Husbandry, Oil Palm, Open Ground, Other Crops, Other Main
Agriculture
Crop, Paddy, Rubber, vacant land, Village, Water Scheme
Business and Services Business and Services, Market, Ranhill Office, Services, Trade Complex
Forest Forest, Land Forest, Natural Mangrove, Sea Swamp Forest
Industry Light Industry, Medium Industry, Mine / Quarry
Drain, Electric Supply, Infrastructure, Telecommunication, Waste
Infrastructure and Utility
Disposal, Water Supply
Institution and Community Cemetery, Community Facilities, Education, Government Used, Health,
Facilities Religious, Security, Welfare House
Landscape/ Recreation, Open Ground, Separate Zone, Sports Facilities,
Open Ground and Recreation
vacant land
Residence Organized Housing, Organized Residence, Village, Village Housing
Transport Main Road, Road, Transport Facilities
Vacant Land Idle Land, vacant land
Water Body Natural, River, Sea, Water Body

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 4.1.2 Example of Created GIS Database

4.2 Cross-Sectional Survey

The requirement of the cross-sectional survey for the Pahang River Basin was approximately 930km
along the main stream and tributaries. A total of 203 cross sections were planned, and two stages, namely
Urgent Plan (79 cross sections) and Basic Plan (124 cross sections) were designed considering the
monsoon season. The survey of Urgent Plan started on October 11 and finished in November 2009. The
Basic Plan was completed by the beginning of March 2010.

4.2.1 Target Rivers and Cross Section Locations

The cross section interval for the main stream is about 2.5km – 10km, and 108 sections were surveyed. As
for the tributaries, Mentiga (A), Ayer Hitam(A1), Lepar (B), Luit (C), Kemak (C1), Jempul (D), Irok (E),
Jengka (F), Bera (G), Serting (H), Teriang (I), Semantan (J), Tekal Kecil (K), Kerau (L), Sebui (M), Mai
(N), Tekam (O), Tembeling (P), Jelai (Q), and Lipis (R) Rivers were subjected to the cross sectional
survey with the interval of about 2 km – 10km. nd the cross section locations of the tributaries are shown
in Figure 4.2.1.

Figure 4.2.1 Target Rivers and Cross Section Locations

4-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

4.2.2 Details of the Main Operations

(1) Planimetric and Height Control by GPS

Planimetric and height control survey were carried out by RTK GPS positioning system utilizing
JUPEM’s MyRTKNet service and also by using D-GPS Navcom STARfire for the establishment of
any GPS reference station and tidal observation station. The survey was referenced to the Malaysian
Rectified Skew Orthomophic (MRSO) coordinate system and National Geodetic Vertical Datum
(NGVD, the same as DTGSM).

(2) Cross Sectional Survey

For the bathymetric survey, continuous echo soundings were carried out and depths were logged into
the online navigation system at intervals of not more than 10m interval along the profiles. A single
frequency single beam of echo sounder ( - 200/210 kHz) was used for the survey with the transducer
mounted over the side of the survey vessel. Positioning and navigation of the survey vessel during the
survey were observed by real time differential GPS. The system comprise of a satellite reference
station and a mobile station on the survey vessel. The real-time DGPS mobile on the survey vessel
were integrated into a computer operating on the General Navigation, Positioning and Processing
Package. (See Figure 4.2.2)

Cross section survey for shallow and small rivers was carried out by topographic profiling method.

(3) Land Survey in Riverbanks and Islands

The topographic profiles were carried out from the bathymetric profiles landward with the landward
limit at 5m to 15m from the riverbanks or up to the higher ground by Electronic Total Station and
leveling poles from established control stations nearby. The survey was done in the islands within the
survey lines. (See Figure 4.2.2)

(4) Water Level Measurement

The water level at one selected location along the surveyed line was measured using a tide pole
whenever echo sounding survey was being carried out.

(5) Measurement of Bridges

In each bridge, the location coordinates, number of the piers, size of each pier and soffit levels of the
bridge (in case the levels are lower than the river bank height) were measured even if the bridge was
not at any cross section point.

Echo Sounding Survey Land Survey of River Bank

Figure 4.2.2 Field Site of Cross Section Survey

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

4.2.3 Results of Cross-Sectional Survey

The following results with digital photos at each river section site have been prepared.
• Bathymetric and topographic profiles at a horizontal scale of 1/500 and vertical scale of 1/100 in
A3 size (see Figure 4.2.3)
• Typical diagram of the bridges in A3 size
• Digital topographic and bathymetric dataset by ASCII format

Figure 4.2.3 Example of Cross Section

4.3 Population Projection

The most important factor in this kind of study is to make clear population at the target year. Accordingly,
population projection is made in this Survey as a projection of socio-economic framework.

In Malaysia, they have 2 administrative boundaries under districts of states as “Sub-District” and “Local
Authority”. The term “Sub-District” (locally called as “MUKIM”) means an administrative classification
under state that covers whole territory of state. Therefore, the total population of “Sub-Districts” is the
same population of “District”. But, there is no any government office in it. On the other hand, the term
“Local Authority” means the other administrative classification under the same state that covers
ordinance-designated built up areas in the same districts of state including towns and cities. And, there is
the government office in it. But, the total population of “Local Authority” is not the same with that of
“District”.

Population growths are different with each other between urban and low population areas. From this
viewpoint, the population projection is to be made for both the Sub-Districts and Local Authorities. The
target year of the Survey has been set as the year 2025. Accordingly, the population projection has been
made by 2025 based on the existing available data on population. The projection results for the two states
were presented in Table 4.3.1 and Table 4.3.2.

4-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 4.3.1 Population Projection by Sub-District

a) Pahang State
District Sub-District 1980 1991 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025
Bentong 96,689 123,408 139,963 157,763 176,088
Bentong 39,381 44,157 59,120 87,415 106,169 127,994 152,890
Pelangai 15,223 17,298 16,987 18,251 23,158 27,961 23,753
Sabai 17,937 22,510 20,582 22,113 28,059 33,878 28,780
Cameron Highlands 28,077 39,704 48,899 60,373 74,126
Ringlet 5,939 6,538 7,401 8,754 9,585 10,520 11,559
Tanah Rata 5,550 7,247 8,198 8,793 8,908 8,902 8,774
Ulu Telom 8,875 11,770 12,478 22,157 30,406 40,951 53,792
Jerantut 80,685 102,608 119,381 140,062 164,652
Burau 3,297 3,212 3,862 5,167 5,994 6,906 7,881
Kelola 4,577 219 264 347 402 466 539
Kuala Tembeling 2,959 2,578 2,699 3,354 3,908 4,623 5,508
Pedah 15,045 21,272 25,633 32,390 37,372 43,894 52,309
Pulau Tawar 19,492 21,382 21,552 24,529 28,457 34,755 43,981
Tebing Tinggi 2,375 2,785 2,820 3,176 3,680 4,512 5,755
Teh 6,496 7,475 7,551 8,520 9,875 12,099 15,409
Tembeling 4,413 5,686 6,826 8,714 10,067 11,783 13,930
Ulu Cheka 6,536 7,462 7,171 7,711 8,945 11,166 14,634
Ulu Tembeling 2,657 2,476 2,307 8,699 10,682 9,860 4,708
Kuantan 344,319 452,473 510,108 570,204 632,763
Beserah 7,207 9,593 11,744 14,344 15,727 17,165 18,658
Kuala Kuantan 136,917 200,712 269,721 355,989 401,094 447,693 495,698
Penor 3,085 4,487 5,767 7,330 8,166 9,040 9,950
Sungai Karang 9,622 20,051 31,625 47,695 56,997 67,144 78,136
Ulu Kuantan 9,467 5,952 8,434 7,928 7,752 7,508 7,316
Ulu Lepar 3,055 15,179 17,028 19,188 20,372 21,654 23,004
Lipis 73,557 97,310 116,051 139,415 167,401
Batu Yon 5,058 8,258 9,988 12,280 13,620 15,110 16,761
Budu 5,383 5,152 4,889 9,433 15,166 24,068 36,787
Cheka 4,167 4,210 5,022 6,744 7,929 9,330 10,946
Gua 4,350 5,066 3,849 10,686 16,505 22,793 28,962
Kechau 1,727 4,363 5,782 7,981 9,362 10,984 12,887
Kuala Lipis 10,536 11,457 12,106 12,717 12,979 13,211 13,415
Penjon 7,489 10,403 10,089 12,090 13,046 14,150 15,294
Tanjong Besar 2,759 2,583 2,902 3,088 3,088 3,088 3,088
Telang 4,311 4,953 5,698 6,758 7,379 8,062 8,805
Ulu Jelai 10,981 11,831 13,232 15,533 16,978 18,619 20,455
Pekan 97,751 120,321 136,140 153,474 169,609
Bebar 8,191 15,529 14,939 18,284 22,543 26,974 28,954
Ganchong 1,266 1,199 1,329 1,408 1,493 1,572 1,663
Kuala Pahang 5,082 5,910 6,837 8,130 8,881 9,701 10,590
Langgar 2,435 3,175 4,357 6,279 7,480 8,841 10,363
Lepar 3,813 4,501 4,752 5,155 5,573 6,053 6,567
Pahang Tua 2,736 5,975 11,076 19,331 24,479 30,309 36,819
Pekan 18,904 22,303 23,652 26,548 28,042 29,654 31,344
Penyol 4,763 24,890 27,802 31,330 33,184 35,180 37,274
Pulau Manis 1,210 1,245 1,462 1,902 2,200 2,551 2,954
Pulau Rusa 673 648 567 535 527 517 509
Temai 879 804 978 1,419 1,738 2,122 2,572
Raub 79,488 92,136 100,291 109,726 120,365
Batu Taham 3,918 10,169 11,287 12,598 13,302 14,051 14,841
Dong 3,705 4,129 3,681 4,071 4,274 4,514 4,745
Gali 41,499 44,468 49,816 58,839 64,567 71,106 78,455
Sega 4,409 4,055 4,108 4,556 4,909 5,357 5,901
Semantan Ulu 4,737 4,527 4,708 5,282 5,715 6,247 6,877
Teras 4,842 4,248 4,367 5,138 5,775 6,581 7,554
Ulu Dong 1,304 1,489 1,521 1,652 1,749 1,871 1,992
Temerloh 136,214 165,579 184,561 205,929 229,510
Bangau 1,869 2,719 4,565 7,831 9,943 12,375 15,126
Jenderak 16,294 19,668 20,299 21,880 23,906 26,278 28,826
Kerdau 4,051 5,124 4,867 4,628 4,513 4,401 4,292
Lebak 1,534 1,658 1,535 1,425 1,373 1,323 1,274
Lipat Kajang 1,005 1,141 1,387 1,803 2,066 2,368 2,707
Mentakab 23,735 31,885 42,267 57,723 66,998 77,305 88,643
Perak 22,847 30,074 38,129 49,340 55,838 62,931 70,619
Sanggang 3,449 4,699 4,123 3,645 3,427 3,222 3,029

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

District Sub-District 1980 1991 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025

Semantan 13,996 18,202 16,517 15,050 14,366 13,714 13,090
Songsang 2,051 2,845 2,525 2,255 2,131 2,014 1,903
Maran 112,606 134,605 148,022 161,226 177,662
Bukit Segumpal 8,499 11,269 11,812 13,178 14,352 15,632 17,025
Chernor 56,874 79,922 78,318 93,383 102,137 110,103 120,717
Kertau 4,794 4,869 5,189 5,818 6,240 6,733 7,299
Luit 12,188 14,204 17,287 22,226 25,292 28,757 32,620
Bera 77,685 95,130 99,299 101,171 103,683
Bera 17,247 32,418 36,036 40,266 42,564 44,992 47,560
Teriang - 36,474 41,649 54,864 56,735 56,179 56,123
Source of basic data in 1980, 1991, 2000: Department of Statistics, Malaysia.

b) Negeri Sembilan State

District Sub-District 1980 1991 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025
Jelebu 40,012 37,194 38,270 40,265 42,692 45,556
Galami Lemi 6,121 7,981 8,427 8,910 9,675 10,505 11,407
Hulu Kelawang 2,203 1,826 1,295 1,033 955 883 817
Hulu Teriang 4,510 3,653 4,024 5,568 6,787 8,303 10,118
Kenaboi 1,075 1,287 1,322 1,358 1,430 1,505 1,585
Kuala Kelawang 5,308 5,334 4,331 3,761 3,770 3,778 3,787
Peradong 2,163 1,845 1,770 1,882 2,015 2,200 2,436
Pertang 10,495 12,350 10,714 10,826 10,883 10,940 10,997
Teriang Hilir 4,855 5,736 5,311 4,930 4,750 4,577 4,410
Jempol 125,010 132,087 135,224 138,280 141,842
Jelai 67,159 19,006 21,295 27,182 30,174 33,398 37,054
Kuala Jempol 16,802 9,403 10,566 11,948 12,705 13,511 14,367
Rompin 21,461 50,545 50,002 49,467 49,202 48,939 48,676
Serting Hilir 7,674 25,454 26,902 28,472 28,704 28,550 28,397
Serting Ulu 14,065 17,625 16,245 15,017 14,438 13,882 13,347
Source of basic data in 1980, 1991, 2000: Department of Statistics, Malaysia.

Table 4.3.2 Population Projection by Local Authority

a) Pahang State
District Local Authority/Town 1980 1991 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025
Bentong 83,965 96,689 123,408 139,963 157,763 176,088
LA Bentong 66,674 85,098 96,515 108,789 121,425
Bentong 22,921 23,962 22,231 20,676 20,517 20,358 20,201
Bukit Tinggi 1,111 1,370 1,275 1,276 1,324 1,373 1,425
Karak 4,535 3,525 2,543 1,955 1,749 1,566 1,401
Manchis 1,188 908 660 508 454 406 363
Sungai Dua 992 962 578 423 381 343 309
Sungai Punjuring 800 637 402 289 254 224 198
Telemong 2,084 1,744 1,751 1,758 1,762 1,765 1,769
Remainder of LA 17,614 37,234 111,984 122,956 134,824 147,090
Cameron Highlands 25,555 28,077 39,704 48,899 60,373 74,126
LA Camreron Highlands 23,573 33,335 41,055 50,688 62,235
Ringlet 2,085 2,555 2,608 2,635 2,635 2,635 2,635
Tanah Rata 5,545 7,110 8,088 8,855 9,113 9,287 9,376
Remainder of LA 12,877 21,844 29,307 38,766 50,223
Jerantut 74,547 80,685 102,608 119,381 140,062 164,652
LA Jerantut 36,287 46,147 53,690 62,991 74,050
Jerantut 6,589 8,917 10,425 11,682 12,145 12,498 12,740
Kuala Tembeling 271 301 284 276 276 276 276
Remainder of LA 25,578 34,189 41,269 50,217 61,034
Kuantan 255,974 344,319 452,473 510,108 570,204 632,763
LA Kuantan 282,345 371,033 418,293 467,573 518,872
Beserah 5,129 5,294 5,380 5,423 5,467 5,511
Gambang 2,385 1,892 1,705 1,619 1,537 1,459
Kuantan 131,547 86,360 266,859 240,529 228,389 216,934 206,162
Tanjung Lumpur 1,731 1,476 1,363 1,259 1,162
Remainder of LA 6,569 121,943 181,499 242,377 304,577
Lipis 68,276 73,557 97,310 116,051 139,415 167,401
LA Lipis 37,008 48,959 58,388 70,142 84,223
Bentah 2,792 2,218 1,998 1,966 1,941 1,893 1,847
Jerkoh 1,160 1,133 865 723 685 649 615
Muara Lipis 10,183 10,735 12,145 14,796 16,485 18,440 20,661

4-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

District Local Authority/Town 1980 1991 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025
Padang Tengku 625 609 332 234 210 189 169
Penjom 927 877 748 669 654 638 623
Remainder of LA 20,920 30,569 38,413 48,334 60,308
Pekan 86,179 97,751 120,321 136,140 153,474 169,609
LA Pekan 39,916 49,132 55,592 62,670 69,259
Menasi 646 509 513 516 549 585 623
Pekan 5,059 4,783 4,017 3,559 3,465 3,372 3,283
Remainder of LA 35,386 45,057 51,578 58,713 65,353
Raub 73,085 79,488 92,136 100,291 109,726 120,365
LA Raub 50,153 58,133 63,279 69,232 75,944
Cheroh 2,920 2,577 2,789 3,545 4,128 4,847 5,704
Dong 1,297 1,472 950 705 645 590 539
Raub 22,907 21,298 22,057 23,045 23,251 23,458 23,668
Sungai Ruan 5,020 4,409 4,882 5,457 5,605 5,757 5,913
Teras 1,482 337 757 1,721 2,103 2,256 2,055
Remainder of LA 18,718 23,661 27,547 32,324 38,064
Temerloh 118,015 136,214 165,579 184,561 205,929 229,510
LA Temerloh 134,253 163,195 181,904 202,965 226,206
Kerdau 1,048 924 633 498 475 452 431
Kuala Kerau 1,701 1,379 1,033 854 846 838 830
Lanchang 1,235 1,360 1,527 1,781 1,935 2,107 2,297
Mentakab 13,305 14,680 14,442 13,966 13,909 13,853 13,797
Temerloh 8,176 8,768 6,224 6,224 6,224 6,224 6,224
Remainder of LA 110,394 141,180 160,170 181,467 204,903
Maran 110,264 112,606 134,605 148,022 161,226 177,662
LA Maran 39,492 47,207 51,913 56,543 62,308
Bandar Pusat 10,864 13,907 15,734 17,802 20,141
Jengka
Chenor 281 238 292 446 560 699 863
Maran 633 477 389 338 348 358 368
Remainder of LA 27,947 32,516 35,270 37,684 40,935
Bera 68,892 77,685 95,130 99,299 101,171 103,683
LA Bera 77,671 95,113 99,281 101,153 103,664
Kemayan 2,110 1,504 1,256 1,148 1,050 959
Kerayong 2,017 1,570 1,290 1,169 1,060 961
Mengkarak 1,793 2,001 2,635 3,024 3,469 3,981
Mengkuang 1,560 1,731 2,276 2,609 2,992 3,431
Teriang 7,952 6,747 5,445 4,892 4,394 3,948
Remainder of LA 64,118 82,211 86,439 88,188 90,385

b) Negeri Sembilan State

District Local Authority/Town 1980 1991 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025
Jelebu 40,012 37,194 38,270 40,265 42,692 45,556
LA Jelebu 9,434 9,707 10,213 10,829 11,555
Durian Tipus 459 390 272 216 209 201 194
Jelebu Estate 856 606 423 336 342 349 355
Kanpung Chennah 624 382 314 285 258 234
Kuala Kelawang 2,395 2,055 1,378 1,073 1,025 980 937
Pertang 1,676 1,420 1,046 857 836 815 795
Simpang Durian 711 636 1,387 1,765 1,991 2,246 2,533
Simpang Pertang 1,347 1,272 566 526 507 489 472
Sungai Buloh 611 548 973 1,331 1,433 1,542 1,660
Sungai Muntoh 679 632 417 378 369 361 352
Titi 4,594 2,962 429 341 322 304 288
Remainder of LA 2,161 2,569 2,893 3,283 3,735
Jempol 122,033 125,010 132,087 135,224 138,280 141,842
LA Jempol 58,298 61,598 63,061 64,486 66,147
Bahau 10,260 8,580 7,771 7,069 6,904 6,742 6,585
Batu Kikir 325 331 143 124 120 116 112
Kuala Jelai 515 219 157 132 126 121 116
Mahsan 460 171 379 425 416 407 398
Rompin 297 232 176 159 155 151 147
Serting 1,381 3,151 4,319 5,057 5,921 6,932
Remainder of LA 46,521 49,370 50,284 51,029 51,858
Source of basic data in 1980, 1991, 2000: Department of Statistics, Malaysia.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

4.4 Hydrological Analysis

4.4.1 Objective and Analysis Process

The objective of this section is to identify the magnitude of floods for respective return periods which
provide a basis to define designed safety level. This analysis was based on past rainfall data available in
the basin.

Then a flood simulation model was developed which are composed of runoff model, one-dimensional
river channel model and two-dimensional flood plain model. This flood model serves as a tool to
evaluate flood risks, efficiency of potential flood mitigation measures and impacts of climate change.

4.4.2 Data Availability

Temporal rainfall data, river water level and discharge data were collected from DID Hydrology and
Water Resources Division based on the inventory of the gauging stations.

Then rain gauging stations were selected for further analysis following the steps below.
- Step 1: Stations currently in operation were selected;
- Step 2: Stations with long term data were selected (i.e. station which started before Jan. 1975 when
90% of the current stations were in operation were selected);
- Step 3: Reliable station with total missing data of less than 365 days since Jan. 1975 were selected;
- Step 4: Station with reliable data (annual average data were examined as in Figure 4.4.1 and station
with unreliable data were excluded); and

3429096 3430097 3431099 3532101 3533102 3534103

5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500 Annual precipitation far below
0 nearby stations
1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008

Figure 4.4.1 Example of Annual Precipitation Data Examination. Station 3429096 was
Excluded from Further Analysis
- Step 5: If there were more than one stations which fulfill the above criteria within approximately
10km distance, station with less missing data were selected for final screening.
All gauging stations are listed in Table 4.4.1 and Table 4.4.2 with their location in Figure 4.4.2.

4-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 4.4.1 List of River Gauge Stations

Water Level Discharge
Station
ID Hourly Data Daily Data Hourly Data Daily Data
Available Period Available Period Available Period Available Period
3024443 1974/12/3- 1974/12/3- 1974/12/3- 1974/12/3-
3125441 1999/10/20- 1999/10/20- - 1999/10/20-
3224433 1972/11/11- 1972/11/11- 1972/11/11- 1972/11/11-
3318401 - 1986/8/28-1992/5/14 - -
3329401 1984/11/21- 1984/11/21- 1984/11/21- 1984/11/21-
3424411 - 1963/1/2- - 1963/1/2-
3519426 1966/3/1- 1966/3/2- 1970/1/1- 1970/1/1-
3525405 - 1988/8/6-2007/12/7 - -
3527410 - 1972/12/16- - 1972/12/29-
3626401 1988/6/9- 1988/6/9- 1991/1/1- 1988/6/10-
3629403 1972/11/23- 1972/11/24- 1972/11/23- 1972/11/24-
4019462 1965/7/1- 1965/7/2- 1965/7/1- 1965/7/2-
4023412 - 1972/10/26- - 1972/10/26-
4121413 1972/11/18- 1972/11/18- 1972/12/21- 1972/12/21-
4218416 1973/10/6- 1973/10/6- 1973/10/6- 1973/10/6-
4219415 1974/8/15- 1974/8/15- - -
4223450 1973/11/14- 1973/11/14- 1988/6/28- 1988/6/29-
4320401 1982/8/21- 1982/8/21- 1985/1/24- 1985/1/25-
324454 1973/11/154- 1973/11/15- 1973/11/14-2009/8/20 1973/11/15-

4514031
(!
45130334514032
!( !( 4424112
44140374414038
!(!(!(4414036 4419047 !(
!( 43241134324454
43190484320066 *!(
#
!
( (
! 4320401
42180424218416
*!( 42190014219415
# *
#
42231154223450 4227001
!(
*
#
4218043
(
! 4120064 4121413 *!(
# !(
!( # * 4122067 4123116
4127001
4019063
!( !( !(
!( 4019044 4023001 4023412
!(4019462
39170503918060# * !(39200584020001 3921068# *!( 3924071
!( 3918053!( 3918059 !( 39220693923070 !( 3924072
(
! !( (
!
!( (!!( 3818057 !( 3824001 3828091
3819056 3823075 !(
3726073 !(
3818054
3717052!( !( !(
!( 3718122
3717001 3723077
!( 3726089
!( !( !( 36290983629403
!( 3623078 3626090 3626401 !( #* 3631001
3628001
!(
3523079
*
# !( (
! !(
3533102
35191253519426 !(
352313735240803525405 3527410
3532101
!( 3534103
*!(
# 3421134 !( !( 3424411 * !(
# 3425088 *
# !( 3527092 3429096 (
!
3431099 !(
3433105
!( !(
3430097
!( 3423138!(3424081
3420131
*!( 33240823325086
#
!(
!( !(
(
! 3334161
3318401 !(3324083!(3325085 3329401
*!( 3318127
# !(
!(3223084 !( *
#
!( 3224433
3121143
3221001 *
# 3125441
!( 3122142
!( (! 3122021 *
#
3020016 3023098
3024443
!( !( 3022001!( *
# 3026156
!( !(
2922018
!( 2924096
!( st_Rf_Ph_basin
Rain Gauge Stations
2820011
!(
2823091
!( !( * River
# Gauge Stations
st_Wl_Ph_basin
2824093
!( 2725094
!(
Figure 4.4.2 Location of Gauging Stations

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-11

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 4.4.2 List of Rain Gauge Stations

Station Hourly Data Daily Data Station Available Period of Available Period of Daily
ID Available Period Available Period ID Hourly Data Data
2725094 - 1935/6/2- 3717052 - 1959/1/12-
2820011 1995/6/14- 1959/1/1- 3718122 - 1947/4/1-
2823091 1995/6/21- 1959/3/9- 3723077 - 1962/9/14-
2824093 1995/6/22- 1930/7/3- 3726073 - 1948/2/1-
2922018 - 1947/7/1- 3726089 - 1931/1/2-
2924096 1975/10/5- 1947/7/1- 3818054 1970/7/1- 1948/1/1-
3020016 2008/3/21- 1959/1/1- 3818057 - 1935/1/3-
3022001 1998/1/4- 2000/2/2- 3819056 - 1949/1/1-
3023098 1995/6/22- 1959/9/1- 3823075 - 1961/1/1-
3026156 1970/6/29- 2000/8/16- 3824001 - 1971/2/1-
3121143 1975/9/3- 1975/12/1- 3828091 2008/8/28- 1972/5/1-
3122021 1995/6/21- - 3917050 - 1949/1/1-
3122142 - 1948/2/1- 3918053 - 1961/1/2-
3221001 - 1965/7/1- 3918059 - 1947/4/3-
3223084 - 1959/1/11- 3918060 - 1947/4/26-
3318127 - 1954/1/1- 3920058 - 1949/1/3-1994/6/30
3324082 2005/11/17-2006/5/15 1961/12/1- 3921068 2005/9/6-2006/5/16 1950/10/1-
3324083 - 1959/1/11- 3922069 - 1947/8/5-
3325085 2006/3/8-2006/5/15 1961/1/1- 3923070 - 1950/10/1-1986/12/31
3325086 - 1948/5/7- 3924071 - 1947/3/1-
3334161 - 1961/1/1- 3924072 1970/6/29- 1959/9/1-
3420131 - 1947/8/1- 4019044 - 1969/1/31-
3421134 - 1947/6/17- 4019063 - 1938/7/11-
3423138 - 1966/1/1- 4020001 - 1970/7/2-
3424081 1970/6/27- 1946/1/1- 4023001 1973/11/8- 1973/11/9-
3425087 - 1955/5/1- 4120064 1970/7/2- 1947/6/2-
3425088 - 1961/1/1- 4122067 2008/11/6- 1961/1/1-
3429096 - 1960/7/1- 4123116 - 1962/9/1-
3430097 - 1960/7/1- 4127001 1973/11/2- 1974/3/29-
3431099 - 1960/11/1- 4218042 - 1969/2/12-2005/3/31
3433105 - 1968/9/1- 4218043 - 1969/2/6-
3519125 - 1947/9/2- 4219001 1974/7/9- 1974/7/9-
3523079 2005/9/20-2006/5/15 1950/4/2- 4223115 1970/6/27- 1948/12/31-
3523137 - 1930/7/7- 4227001 1973/10/20- 1973/12/27-
3524080 2005/5/10-2006/5/15 1961/1/3- 4319048 - 1966/8/3-
3527092 - 1931/1/1- 4320066 2005/12/1- 1965/7/1-
3532101 - 1949/10/1- 4324113 - 1948/6/18-1986/12/30
3533102 1970/7/4- 1948/2/1- 4414036 2005/1/11-2008/12/11 1947/11/19-
3534103 - 1948/3/7- 4414037 - 1948/4/9-
3623078 - 1947/5/6- 4414038 - 1948/4/13-
3626090 - 1931/1/1- 4419047 1971/5/16- 1962/5/31-
3628001 1975/7/24- 1975/5/31- 4424112 2008/7/30- 1974/3/31-
3629098 2006/6/28- 1932/5/1-2005/6/29 4513033 1975/7/1-2008/12/10 1929/2/3-2008/12/10
3631001 2005/11/8- 1974/12/31- 4514031 - 1948/3/31-
3717001 1975/10/14-2004/8/5 1975/10/14-2004/8/4 4514032 - 1964/3/31-
Hatched rain gauge stations are ones selected for further analysis

4.4.3 Rainfall Analysis

The average recurrence interval (ARI) of rainfall was analyzed in this section based on the rainfall data
obtained from 19 rain gauge stations selected in Section 4.4.2. However, due to lack of sufficient number
of stations and observation period, no station was selected from northeast part of the basin. According to
“Pahang River Basin Study, 1974” this part of the basin is said to have relatively large annual
precipitation compared with the basin mean value. Thus, lack of observation data from the northeast part
of the basin may lead to underestimation of the basin mean rainfall which caused major flood events.
Therefore, station 4227001 was added for further analysis in addition to the 19 stations selected which has
the least missing data compared with nearby stations (number of missing data are 2,244 days, 3,664 days
5,315 days for st.4227001, st.4127001 and st.4424112 respectively).

4-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(1) Rainfall Duration

14 major flood events from the last 20 years were selected to identify duration of rainfalls which are
cause of floods. Then basin average rainfalls were calculated based on Thiessen distribution
represented by each rain gauge station as shown in Figure 4.4.3.

2
4514032
St. ID Area(km )
(! 4414036 2922018 1244
!( 4419047
!( 2725094 875
3122142 1430
4227001
4120064 !( 3325086 1773
!( 4122067 3421134 1994
4019063 !(
3524080 689
!(
3924071 3431099 1784
!(
3818057 3533102 406
!(
3717052 3717052 1238
!( 3723077 3726089
3723077 1062
!( !(
3726089 2016
3533102
3524080 !( 3818057 1166
3431099
3421134 !( !( 3924071 1292
!(
3325086 4019063 1002
!(
4120064 735
3122142
4122067 1557
!( 4419047 3079
4414036 1069
2922018
!( 4514032 357
4227001 4003
2725094
!(

Figure 4.4.3 Thiessen Distribution and Area Represented by Each Station

Figure 4.4.4 are examples of temporal basin average rainfall and river discharge at the station
3527410 the most down stream river gauge station in the Pahang River.
01/12/90 06/12/90 11/12/90 16/12/90 21/12/90 26/12/90 31/12/90 01/12/07 06/12/07 11/12/07 16/12/07 21/12/07 26/12/07 31/12/07
Precipitation(mm)

Precipitation(mm)

0 0
10 20
Daily

Daily

20 40
30 60
40 80
50 100

6000 6000
3527410 3527410
5000 5000
Discharge(m3/s)

Discharge(m3/s)

4000 4000
3000 3000
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
01/12/90 06/12/90 11/12/90 16/12/90 21/12/90 26/12/90 31/12/90 01/12/07 06/12/07 11/12/07 16/12/07 21/12/07 26/12/07 31/12/07

Figure 4.4.4 Examples of Temporal rainfall and River Discharge During Major Flood Events
(Left Panel: Dec. 1990 Flood and Right Panel: Dec. 2007 Flood)

Then temporal cumulative rainfalls of 14 major floods events were obtained as Figure 4.4.5 which
indicates that more than 90 % of the total rainfall are observed within the first 8 days in most flood
events. Therefore, 8 days is identified as rainfall duration which causes severe flood events.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-13

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Jan.90 Dec.90 Dec.91 Nov.92 Dec.93

Nov.94 Dec.98 Jan.00 Dec.01 Dec.03
Dec.04 Feb.06 Dec.06 Dec.07
100

Cumulative Rainfall (%) 80

60

40

20

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Duration(days)

Figure 4.4.5 Temporal Cumulative Rainfall of Major Flood Events

(2) Probability Analysis

Latest 40 years rainfall data were used to estimate rainfall for various return periods.

First annual maximum 8 day rainfalls were calculated using data of all 20 stations and with 19 stations
excluding Station 4227001, and were compared as Table 4.4.3 and Figure 4.4.6.

Table 4.4.3 Basin Mean Annual Maximum 8 day Rainfall

Maximum annual 8 day rainfall Maximum annual 8 day rainfall
Year* Year*
With 4227001 Without 4227001 With 4227001 Without 4227001
1968 117.7 Not available 1988 239.7 269.5
1969 124.7 Not available 1989 113.2 Not available
1970 489.9 Not available 1990 167.5 181.1
1971 281.2 Not available 1991 185.2 197.2
1972 203.2 Not available 1992 158.1 164.6
1973 132.9 Not available 1993 176.2 217.6
1974 109.8 117.4 1994 170.4 193.8
1975 189.8 201.2 1995 157.7 216.2
1976 98.3 108.6 1996 105.7 115.1
1977 141.4 139.9 1997 95.3 102.4
1978 119.5 121.8 1998 216.5 276.3
1979 207.9 Not available 1999 126.8 132.3
1980 116.5 118.7 2000 113.2 109.3
1981 101.9 94.6 2001 186.4 220.0
1982 110.6 102.8 2002 83.6 90.2
1983 175.7 232.4 2003 116.2 151.3
1984 170.3 179.7 2004 133.9 133.0
1985 140.0 128.2 2005 137.6 185.6
1986 124.3 135.4 2006 141.7 129.2
1987 205.8 214.1 2007 317.3 353.4
* Hydrological year: July until June next year

4-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

500

Maximum 8days Precipitation(mm)

400
y=1.11x

with 4227001
300

200

100

0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Maximum 8days Precipitation(mm)
without 4227001

Figure 4.4.6 Correlation of Annual Maximum 8 day Rainfall with and without st.4227001

As indicated in the figure, annual maximum rainfall estimated by all station data is estimated to be
11% more than the one estimated without st.4227001. Therefore, 1.11 was multiplied to the values
obtained based on 19 stations to avoid underestimation of the annual maximum rainfall.

Figure 4.4.7 shows rainfalls for various return periods based on general extreme value distribution
and return period for maximum rainfall in each year. It is estimated that ARI of maximum 8 day
rainfall in 1971 and 2007 were 112 years and 23 years respectively.

Maximum Maximum
Year ARI Year ARI
Pahang River Basin Rainfall Rainfall
1969-2008 1968 130.6 1.4 1988 269.5 9
1969 138.5 1.6 1989 125.7 1.4
1970 543.8 112 1990 181.1 3
1971 312.2 15 1991 197.2 4
Nonexceedance probability (%)

1972 225.6 5 1992 164.6 2

1973 147.5 1.8 1993 217.6 5
1974 117.4 1.2 1994 193.8 3
ARI (years)

1975 201.2 4 1995 216.2 5

1976 108.6 1.2 1996 115.1 1.2
1977 139.9 1.6 1997 102.4 1.1
1978 121.8 1.3 1998 276.3 10
1979 230.8 6 1999 132.3 1.5
1980 118.7 1.3 2000 109.3 1.2
1981 94.6 1.06 2001 220.0 5
1982 102.8 1.1 2002 90.2 1.04
1983 232.4 6 2003 151.3 1.9
1984 179.7 3 2004 133.0 1.5
1985 128.2 1.4 2005 185.6 3
1986 135.4 1.5 2006 129.2 1.4
General Extreme Value (GEV) distribution, Plotted on
1987 214.1 4 2007 353.4 23
Log-Normal Probability Paper

Figure 4.4.7 Result of Rainfall Probability Analysis (Pahang River Basin)

Annual maximum 8 day rainfalls for various return periods are as in Table 4.4.4.

Table 4.4.4 8 day Rainfall for Various Return Periods

ARI(yrs) 200 150 100 80 50 30 20 10 5 3 2 1.5
8 day
633.3 587.2 527.5 497 437.7 380.2 339.1 276.7 222.2 185.3 156.5 134.5
Rainfall (mm)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

4.4.4 Development of the Flood Simulation Model

(1) Outline of the Model

(a) Runoff model

USEPA Nonlinear Runoff model was applied to calculate the discharge from each sub-basin. This
model idealizes sub-basins into rectangle with flow direction perpendicular to the width, and could
account for land use variation by classifying the sub-basin to three sub-areas shown in Table 4.4.5
and Figure 4.4.8. This scheme is suitable for predictions in river basins which land use are subject
to change in the future.

Table 4.4.5 Sub-basin Surface Classification

Depression
Sub-area Perviousness
Storage
A1 Impervious Yes
A2 Pervious Yes
A3 Impervious No

Sub-basin width

l
n ne
rc
ha A2
e
riv
to
el ow
Fl
nn
ha
rc
ri ve
to Pervious
ow A1
Fl l
n ne
c ha
er A3
riv
to
ow Impervious
Fl

Figure 4.4.8 Sub-basin Schematization

(Flows from each sub-area go directly to river channel)

The flow to the river channel is computed by Manning’s equation:

1
q= (d − d p ) 5 / 3 i 1 / 2 , and
n
continuity equation:
∂d ∂q
+ =r ,
∂t ∂x
where
q = flow per unit width,
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient,
d = water depth,
d p = depression water depth,
r = rainfall intensity, and
i = slope.

4-16 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Infiltration from pervious area was computed by uniform loss method which simulates infiltration
as an initial followed by continues amount. The initial loss specifies the depth of rainfall infiltrates
before any runoff occurs. The continuing absolute loss occurs after the initial loss has been
satisfied as shown in Figure 4.4.10.
Rainfall
Rainfall Evaporation Intensity
Initial loss

d
q
dp
Continuous loss
Infiltration Time

Figure 4.4.9 Nonlinear Reservoir Figure 4.4.10 Schematic View of

Representation of Sub-basin Infiltration Loss by Uniform Loss Method

(b) Hydraulic Model

Basic equation for channel flow is composed of the gradually varied one-dimensional unsteady
flow equation and continuity equation.
The continuity equation with lateral inflow is:
∂A ∂Q
+ =q
∂t ∂x
and momentum equation is written as:
∂Q ∂ Q 2 ∂H QQ
+ ( ) + gA = − gn 2
∂t ∂x A ∂x AR 4 / 3
where
A = cross-sectional area,
Q = discharge,
q = lateral inflow,
H = hydraulic head,
R = hydraulic radius,
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient, and
g = gravitational acceleration.
The equations for reproducing hydraulic behavior in the flood plains are two-dimensional shallow
water equation and continuity equation as shown below.
∂H ∂ (hu ) ∂ (hv)
+ + =0
∂t ∂x ∂y
∂u ∂u ∂u ∂H n2 u 2 + v2
+u +v = −g − gu
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂x h4/3
∂v ∂v ∂v ∂H n2 u 2 + v2
+u +v = −g − gv
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂y h4/3
where
u , v = velocity to x and y direction,
h = water depth,
H = hydraulic head,
n = Manning’s roughness coefficient, and
g = gravitational acceleration.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-17

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

River Basin

Rainfall

run off

flo
od
Runoff Model pl
ai
n

over topping

return flow
2D 1D 2D
water level calculation point

2D-model representing flood plain

1D-m
odel velocity calculation points
repre
Hydraulic Model senti
ng o
pen c
h anne
1D/2 l
D flo
w exc
hang
e

Figure 4.4.11 Schematic View of the Flood Simulation Model

(c) Pahang River Basin Model

Pahang River Basin was divided into 31 sub-basins based on its river network as in Figure 4.4.12,
and hydrologic parameters were fixed as in Table 4.4.6 through calibration. Parameter regarding
land use is based on the land use data developed by JPBD which classifies the land use into five
groups namely, “agricultural land”, “forest”, “water-body”, “transportation, infrastructure and
utility” and “buildup area”. Latter two are categorized as impervious area.

Serau Tanum
Tembeling
Telum
Kecau
Tembeling0420KM
!(

Jelai0787KM
!(
Jelai Kecil Jelai0563KM Tembeling0200KM
Hulu Jelai !( !(
Jelai0227KM Tekai
!(
Tembeling0000KMJelai0000KM
Hilir Jelai !( Pahang290KM
!( Tekam
Pahang280KM
!( Pahang270KM
Lipis Pahang !(I
Tekman0000KMTekman0189KM
!(
!( !(Pahang260KM
Mai0094KM
!(
!(
Sebui0029KMMai0000KM !(
Kerau Kerau0184KM !( !(!( Sebui0000KM
!( Jempul Lepar
!(
Pahang230KM !( Kerau0000KM
Pahang220KM !( Jengka0518KM Jempul0130KM
Tekal0190KM !(
!( Jengka
(
! !(
Luit Luit0207KM Lepar0159KM
Pahang200KM
!(
!(
Tekal0000KM !( !(
Pahang030KM
Hulu Bentong Semantan Semantan0418KM !( Jengka0202KM !(!(
Pahang VIII !( !( Pahang020KM
(
! (
! Jengka0000KM Luit0000KM Lepar0000KM
!( !( Pahang010KM
Semantan1010KM !( Pahang190KM!( !(
!(
Bentong
!( (
! Semantan0734KM Semantan0000KM Pahang
!( !(
VIIHitam0000KM
!( (
!!(
Hitam0010KM Pahang005KM
!(!( !(!(Mentiga0000KM Pahang IX
(
!
!( Pahang180KM !( Pahang130KM Pahang080KM
Pahang170KM Bera0000KM
!( Pahang140KMPahang VI
!(
Pahang!( II Mentiga0261KM
!(
Triang0000KM
Bera0193KM
Pahang IV Mentiga
Pahang160KM !( !( !(
!(
Triang0413KM
!( Bera0384KM
!(
Triang0845KM
!( Bera0627KM
Teriang !(

Bera

Red circle indicate the location of cross-section and numbers are chainage from the river-mouth or confluence point

Figure 4.4.12 Sub-basins and Channel Chainage of Pahang River Basin

4-18 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 4.4.6 Hydrological Model Parameters

Catchment Runoff Infiltration

Sub-area Area (km) Width Area Roughness Initial Continuing
Slope Land Use
(km) (%) Coefficient Loss (mm) Loss (mm/hr)
Telum 1,077 20 0.001 Pervious 99.2 0.1 30.0 0.5
Impervious 0.8 0.014 - -
Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.5
Jelai Kecil 890 40 0.001
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Serau 638 10 0.001 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.5
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Hulu Jelai 689 10 0.00041 Pervious 99.6 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.4 0.014 - -
Tanum 1,117 10 0.00041 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Lipis 2,095 100 0.004 Pervious 99.3 0.1 30.0 0.3
Impervious 0.7 0.014 - -
Kecau 759 10 0.00041 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
HilirJelai 917 20 0.00031 Pervious 99.9 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.1 0.014 - -
Tembeling 3,756 30 0.001 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Tekai 1,481 20 0.0003 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Tekam 751 10 0.00041
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Pahang I 1,521 100 0.001 Pervious 99.3 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.7 0.014 - -
Kerau 445 10 0.0001 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Hulu 253 150 0.001 Pervious 96.4 0.1 60.0 0.2
Bentong Impervious 3.6 0.014 - -
Bentong 1,705 20 0.001 Pervious 99.5 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.5 0.014 - -
Semantang 961 20 0.001 Pervious 97.8 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 2.2 0.014 - -
Pahang II 398 10 0.00027 Pervious 99.7 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.3 0.014 - -
Teriang 2,129 50 0.001 Pervious 98.5 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 1.5 0.014 - -
Bera 2,317 30 0.0002 Pervious 96.9 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 3.1 0.014 - -
Pahang III 32 10 0.0002 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Jengka 568 10 0.00037 Pervious 97.5 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 2.5 0.014 - -
Pahang IV 325 10 0.00013 Pervious 99.7 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.3 0.014 - -
Jempul 485 5 0.00085 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Pahang V 23 10 0.00016 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Luit 335 10 0.001 Pervious 98.7 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 1.3 0.014 - -
Pahang VI 220 5 0.00016 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Mentiga 363 10 0.0002 Pervious 97.7 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 2.3 0.014 - -
Pahang VII 477 10 0.0001 Pervious 99.9 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.1 0.014 - -
Lepar 1,062 7 0.0003 Pervious 99.9 0.1 25.0 0.4
Impervious 0.1 0.014 - -
Pahang VIII 133 10 0.00013 Pervious 100.0 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 0.0 0.014 - -
Pahang IX 839 10 0.00014 Pervious 95.8 0.1 30.0 0.4
Impervious 4.2 0.014 - -

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-19

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Hydraulic parameters were fixed as shown in Table 4.4.7 through trial calculations.

Table 4.4.7 Hydraulic Parameters

Main stream chainage of
0.03
0– 100km
Roughness
1D River Model Main stream chainage of
Coefficient 0.035
100 – 180km
Other sections 0.04
Roughness Coefficient of Flood Plains 0.5
2D Flood Model
Spatial Resolution 500m x 500m

(2) Validation of the Model

The flood simulation model was verified by reproducing December 2007 flood which caused the most
sever flood damages in recent years. The ARI of the basin mean 8 day rainfall is estimated to be 23
years which is the second largest in the last 40 years. Sufficient observation data including satellite
flood image has been obtained in this flood which are indispensable data for model calibration.

Figure 4.4.13 shows flood areas based on satellite observation and that developed based on the model
result and Figure 4.4.14 is the temporal plots of observed river water level and calculated results. The
figures indicate that the simulation result agrees well with observed data and it could be utilized to
evaluate the impact of climate change as well as effectiveness of various flood mitigation measures.

Tanah Rata Tanah Rata

Ringlet Ringlet

Jerantut Jerantut

Padang Tengku Padang Tengku

Kuala Lipis Kuala Lipis

Penjum Penjum
Kuala Tembeling Kuala Tembeling
Jerkoh Jerkoh
Benta Benta

CherohDong CherohDong

Raub Raub
Teras Sungai Ruan Bandar Pusat Jengka Teras Sungai Ruan Bandar Pusat Jengka
Kuala Kerau Kuala Kerau

Sungai Penjuring Sungai Penjuring

Kerdau Maran Kerdau Maran
Bentong Bentong
Lanchang Chenor Pekan Lanchang Chenor Pekan
Sungai Dua Temerloh Sungai Dua Temerloh
Karak Mentakab Karak Mentakab
Bukit Tinggi Bukit Tinggi Mengkarak
Mengkarak
Telemong Telemong
Teriang Teriang
Manchis Kerayong Manchis Kerayong
Kemayan Kemayan
Sungai Buloh Sungai Buloh
Simpang Durian Durian Tipus Simpang Durian Durian Tipus
Kampung ChennahTiti Kampung ChennahTiti
Kuala KlawangPetaling Pertang Kuala KlawangPetaling Pertang
Jelebu Estate Serting Jelebu Estate Serting

Bahau Bahau

Figure 4.4.13 Model Verification: Flood Area

(Top Panel: Observation, Bottom Panel: Simulation Result)

4-20 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07

0

Rainfall(mm/day)
Bukit Betong
20
Jeram Bungor
40
60
80 Basin Average Rainfall
100
Lubok Paku 75
Pekan Observed (water level)

Water Level(DTGSM m)
Temerloh Bkt. Betong(4219415)
Calculation (water level)
70

65

60

55
12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07
65 Observed (water level)
Water Level(DTGSM m)

Jeram Bungor(4121413)
Calculation (water level)
60

55

50

45
12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07
40 Observed (water level)
Water Level(DTGSM m)

Temerloh(3424411)
Calculation (water level)
35

30

25

20
12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07
30 Observed (water level)
Water Level(DTGSM m)

Lubok Paku(3527410)
Calculation (water level)
25

20

15

10
12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07
10 Observed (water level)
Water Level(DTGSM m)

Pekan(3434401)
Calculation (water level)
5

-5

-10
12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07

Figure 4.4.14 Model Verification: Observed Water Level versus Simulation Result

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-21

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

4.4.5 Flood Prediction

This section demonstrates flood simulation results conducted under various conditions including
existence of potential flood mitigation measures. Details on flood mitigation measures could be found in
Chapter 5.

(1) Calculation Condition

(a) Rainfall Pattern

As indicated in Figure 4.4.15, similar rainfall pattern is observed in Pahang River Basin during
major flood events. That is, there is relatively heavy rainfall along the east and less rainfall along
the west. Since December 2007 is largest flood event with sufficient observation data, this rainfall
pattern was used for further analysis. Rainfall distribution of this rainfall event shows typical
pattern of heavy rainfall event in Pahang River Basin.
November 1988 December 1993

4514032 4514032
!( !(
4414036 4414036
!( 4419047 !( 4419047
!( !(

4227001 4227001
!( !(
4120064 4120064
!( !(
4122067 4122067
!( !(
4019063 4019063
!( !(
3924071 3924071
!( !(
3818057 3818057
!( !(

3717052 3717052
!( !(
3723077 3726089 3723077 3726089
!( !(
!( !(

3533102 3533102
3524080 !( 3524080 !(
!( 3431099 !( 3431099
3421134 !( 3421134 !(
!( !(
3325086 3325086
!( !(

!(
3122142
High : 819.201 !(
3122142 High : 546.384
2922018 2922018
!( !(

2725094
Low : 62.4144 2725094
Low : 35.5236
!( !(

December 1995 December 1998

4514032 4514032
!( !(
4414036 4414036
!( 4419047 !( 4419047
!( !(

4227001 4227001
!( !(
4120064 4120064
!( !(
4122067 4122067
!( !(
4019063 4019063
!( !(
3924071 3924071
!( !(
3818057 3818057
!( !(

3717052 3717052
!( !(
3723077 3726089 3723077 3726089
!( !(
!( !(

3533102 3533102
3524080 !( 3524080 !(
!( 3431099 !( 3431099
3421134 !( 3421134 !(
!( !(
3325086 3325086
!( !(

!(
3122142 High : 593.755 !(
3122142
High : 993.782
2922018 2922018
!( !(

2725094
Low : 11.8841 2725094
Low : 18.345
!( !(

December 2001 December 2007

4514032 4514032
!( !(
4414036 4414036
!( 4419047 !( 4419047
!( !(

4227001 4227001
!( !(
4120064 4120064
!( !(
4122067 4122067
!( !(
4019063 4019063
!( !(
3924071 3924071
!( !(
3818057 3818057
!( !(

3717052 3717052
!( !(
3723077 3726089 3723077 3726089
!( !(
!( !(

3533102 3533102
3524080 !( 3524080 !(
!( 3431099 !( 3431099
3421134 !( 3421134 !(
!( !(
3325086 3325086
!( !(

!(
3122142 High : 785.283 !(
3122142
High : 709.558
2922018 2922018
!( !(

2725094
Low : 21.2628 2725094
Low : 90.9369
!( !(

Figure 4.4.15 Rainfall Distribution in Major Flood Events

4-22 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(b) Downstream Water Level

Downstream boundary condition was fixed based on observed temporal tide data of Tanjung
Gelang. That is, observed data was used for simulation under current condition, and 0.12m was
added for simulation under 2025 condition in order to reflect the impact of sea level rise due to
climate change.

(c) Enlargement Ratio and Incremental Ratio

Enlargement ratio was introduced to create rainfalls for various return periods. This ratio was
multiplied to observed rainfall pattern in order to adjust the actual 8 day rainfall to rainfall of
targeted return periods. In addition, incremental ratio was introduced for projection under 2025
condition to reflect the impact of climate change. The ratios are as in Table 4.4.8.

Table 4.4.8 Enlargement and Incremental Ratio for simulation

Return Period Dec. 2007
2 5 10 20 50 100 flood
8 day rainfall(mm) 156.5 222.2 276.7 339.1 437.7 527.5 356.0
Enlargement Ratio 0.44 0.63 0.78 0.96 1.24 1.49 -
Incremental Ratio 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 -
(d) Land Use

Future land use was calculated based on the JPBD data in order to reflect the change in runoff in the
future. Parameters are shown in Table 4.4.9.

Table 4.4.9 Proportion of Pervious and Impervious Area

Area (%) Area (%)
Sub-basin Land Use Sub-basin Land Use
Current 2025 Current 2025
Telum Pervious 99.2 99.2 Pahang II Pervious 99.7 73.7
Impervious 0.8 0.8 Impervious 0.3 26.3
Pervious 100.0 100.0 Pervious 98.5 80.8
Jelai Kecil Teriang
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 1.5 19.2
Serau Pervious 100.0 100.0 Bera Pervious 96.9 92.6
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 3.1 7.4
Hulu Jelai Pervious 99.6 99.6 Pahang III Pervious 100.0 100.0
Impervious 0.4 0.4 Impervious 0.0 0.0
Tanum Pervious 100.0 100.0 Jengka Pervious 97.5 87.6
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 2.5 12.4
Lipis Pervious 99.3 99.3 Pahang IV Pervious 99.7 99.3
Impervious 0.7 0.7 Impervious 0.3 0.7
Kecau Pervious 100.0 99.9 Jempul Pervious 100.0 100.0
Impervious 0.0 0.1 Impervious 0.0 0.0
HilirJelai Pervious 99.9 91.8 Pahang V Pervious 100.0 100.0
Impervious 0.1 8.2 Impervious 0.0 0.0
Tembeling Pervious 100.0 100.0 Luit Pervious 98.7 94.0
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 1.3 6.0
Tekai Pervious 100.0 100.0 Pahang VI Pervious 100.0 100.0
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 0.0 0.0
Pervious 100.0 100.0 Pervious 97.7 97.7
Tekam Mentiga
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 2.3 2.3
Pahang I Pervious 99.3 88.5 Pahang VII Pervious 99.9 99.9
Impervious 0.7 11.5 Impervious 0.1 0.1
Kerau Pervious 100.0 100.0 Lepar Pervious 99.9 97.7
Impervious 0.0 0.0 Impervious 0.1 2.3
Hulu Pervious 96.4 96.4 Pahang VIII Pervious 100.0 99.8
Bentong Impervious 3.6 3.6 Impervious 0.0 0.2
Bentong Pervious 99.5 97.6 Pahang IX Pervious 95.8 76.5
Impervious 0.5 2.4 Impervious 4.2 23.5
Pervious 97.8 84.6
Semantang
Impervious 2.2 15.4

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-23

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(e) Simulated Cases

Flood simulations were conducted under various cases as listed in Table 4.4.10. Details of flood
mitigation measures could be found in Chapter 6.

Table 4.4.10 Proportion of Pervious and Impervious Area

Calculated Prediction
Simulation Cases Description
ARIs (years) Condition*
1. No flood Without any flood mitigation
1. Current Current
mitigation measures under current condition
measure Without any flood mitigation
2. Target year 2025
measures under 2025 condition
1. Jengka Prediction under existence of Jengka
2, 5, 10, 20, 50 2025
Diversion diversion channel
2. Structural 2. Telum/ Jelai and 100 Prediction under existence of Telum/
2025
flood Kecil Dam Jelai Kecil Dam
mitigation 3. Tembeling Prediction under existence of
measure 2025
Upper Dam Tembeling Upper Dam
4. Tekai Lower Prediction under existence of Tekai
2025
Dam Lower Dam
* Land use and climatic conditions were reflected to simulations

Constant discharge method was introduced for dams flood control operation. This method allows
outflow at designed discharge level (ARI of 2 year discharge was applied in the analysis) and
amount exceeding this level will be stored at the dam. Schematic view of the control method is
shown in Figure 4.4.16.
Storage capacity

Stored volume
Discharge

Volume

Natural discharge

Controlled discharge
Time

Figure 4.4.16 Schematic View of Constant Discharge Method

Catchment Area: 2,850km2

Storage Volume: 2.11x109m3
Catchment Area: 2,840km2 Tembeling Dam
Storage Volume: 1.74x109m3 X
Telum/JelaiKecil Dam Tekai Lower Dam
X Kuala Lipis X
! Catchment Area: 1,390km2
Storage Volume: 0.51x109m3

Jengka Diversion Channel

Cross-section
10m Lubok Paku Pekan
300m Temerloh ! !
!

Figure 4.4.17 Location of Structural Mitigation Measures

4-24 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(2) Results

The simulated result shows rise in river water level as a result of climate and land use change which
could be seen in Table 4.4.11. This indicates possible increase in flood risks in the future if no flood
mitigation measures were put in place. Four flood mitigation measures were simulated and the results
are shown in the table and Figure 4.4.18. The result indicates that Jengka diversion channel is
effective to drastically reduce water level in vicinity of Temerloh. This could also be found in Figure
4.4.19 as reduction of flood area along the section near Temerloh. However, the diversion is predicted
to increase the water level downstream during flood events. Further analysis on flood mitigation
measures are conducted in Chapter 6.

Table 4.4.11 River Water Level at Selected Points

Location Kuala Lipis Temerloh Lubok Paku Pekan
ARI ARI ARI ARI
Case ID 5 50 100 5 50 100 5 50 100 5 50 100
1-1 59.61 62.93 64.26 30.66 35.19 36.45 17.74 21.99 23.17 2.93 4.66 5.21
1-2 59.90 63.57 65.00 31.33 35.92 37.19 18.52 22.69 24.02 3.25 5.00 5.64
2-1 59.90 63.57 65.00 29.14 33.05 34.16 18.55 23.02 24.56 3.27 5.15 5.87
2-2 59.81 62.74 63.93 31.32 35.80 37.04 18.50 22.61 23.93 3.24 4.97 5.59
2-3 59.90 63.44 64.75 31.15 35.27 36.55 18.38 22.35 23.67 3.22 4.89 5.49
2-4 59.90 63.48 64.84 31.14 35.52 36.80 18.37 22.48 23.81 3.21 4.93 5.54

80 Pahang River(ARI: 100years) Telum/Jelai Kecil Dam

70

Tembeling Riv.
60 Kuala Lipis
Tekman Riv.
Water level(DTGSM m)

Triang Riv.
50 Kerau Riv. Jelai River
Bera Riv. Semantan Riv. No Measures(2025)
Jengka Riv.
40 Jengka Diversion
Jempul Riv. Telum/Jelai Kecil Dam
Tembeling Upper Dam
30 Temerloh
Luit Riv. Tekai Lower Dam

Lepar Riv. Lubok Paku

20
Jengka Diversion

10

Pekan
0
2
Jengka Diversion
Pahang River(ARI: 100years) Telum/Jelai Kecil Dam
Water level difference relative to no flood

1 Tembeling Upper Dam

Tekai Lower Dam
Jelai River
mitigation measures(m)

-1

-2

-3

-4
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Chainage(km)

Figure 4.4.18 Water Level and its Difference Relative to No Mitigation Measures in 100 years
Return Period Flood Event (Top Panel: Water level, Bottom Panel: Water level difference)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-25

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Lubok Paku Pekan

Temerloh ! !
!

Figure 4.4.19 Simulated Flood Area by 100 years Return Period Flood Event
under 2025 Condition

(3) Climate Change Impact on Ongoing Flood Mitigation Project in Pekan Town

Pekan is the royal town of the Pahang State, located approximately 8km upstream of the river mouth.
Flood mitigation project of the town is at the stage of detail design and it is ready for implementation.
The major components of the project are construction of polder system to protect the town from over
topping of Pahang River and surrounding water-bodies, and improvement of urban drainage system.

In this section, planned polder system was evaluated by comparing its designed elevation with
projected river water level along town of Pahang under 2025 condition reflecting the impact of climate
and land use change. The designed elevation of the polder is 4.88 DTGSM m which is aimed to
protect the town against high water level of 25 years return period with additional 0.6 or 0.62m as
freeboard (MegaConsult, The Detailed Design of Flood Mitigation Project for Pekan Town, Pahang
Preliminary/ Conceptual Design Report, April 2007). Projection was conducted without any flood
mitigation measures in the upstream.

Projected river water level at Pekan for various return periods are shown in Table 4.4.12. The result
indicates that designed elevation of the polder system in ongoing project could cope with projected
changes by 2025 both in climate and land use.

Table 4.4.12 Projected River Water Level at Pekan

(DTGSM m)
Return period (years) 2 5 10 20 25 50 100
River water level 2.54 3.25 3.76 4.30 4.49 5.00 5.64

4.5 Methodology of Economic Analysis

4.5.1 Estimation of Flood Damage

For the estimation of flood damage, firstly it is necessary to know the land use and population of the
inundation areas. In this respect, GIS (ArcView) and Ms Excel were used to the analysis. The
methodology is summarized in the following Figure 4.5.1.

4-26 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Population by LA Population by Mukim

overlay

Population by Local Authority Population by mukim was compiled

(LA) area and town was compiled based on data from Statistics Dept.
based on data from Statistics Dept. then input into GIS.
then input into GIS.
overlay result

Land use Population by LA & Mukim Flood simulation results

overlay overlay

2000 and 2020 land use maps were Overlay analysis produces Flood simulation results were
compiled based on information of population densities of all towns, converted to GIS format in the
each State Structure Plan. remaining LAs and remaining form of 500m x 500m grids with
mukim areas. different depths of inundation.

Overlay results (attribute table) of the above three maps were exported to Excel for further analysis. Based on the land area and
population density of each land use polygon and water depth (depth of inundation) for each simulation grid, total land area of
each land use type by inundation depth for each simulation case can be obtained by totaling up the data as shown below.
Simulation Land use Area Pop. Simulation Case 1 Simulation Case 2
grid no. density Water Agric Forest B.U. Pop Water Agric Forest B.U. Pop
depth depth
1 Agriculture xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
1 Forest xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
2 Agriculture xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
2 Forest xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
2 Built up xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
3 Built up xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
4 Agriculture xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
4 Built up xx km2 xx/km2 xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy
5 …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….
6 …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….
7 …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….
TOTAL xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy xm xx km2 xx km2 xx km2 yy

Figure 4.5.1 Methodology for Estimation of Flood affected Population and Land Uses

4.5.2 Economic Analysis

Economic analysis is conducted in following steps:

(1) Identify damage items which are likely to be incurred;
(2) Estimate unit value for each damage item;
(3) Estimate the annual average flood damages by calculating flood damages for various return
periods under the “with project” and “without project” conditions;
(4) Calculate economic benefit of the project as differences in economic loss under “with project”

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-27

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

and “without project”; and

(5) Compare the economic benefit with the cost of the projects, and evaluate its feasibility by
indices such as economic internal rate of return (EIRR), net present value (NPV), and the B/C
Ratio.
(1) Identification of Damage Item

Following damage items were identified considering the characteristics of the Pahang River Basin.

(a) Residential Areas

• Damages to domestic houses and housing movables

• Damages to livestock
• Business suspension losses of shops, restaurants, etc.
• Damages to public facilities such as roads, bridges, etc.
• Damages to public structures such as schools, public assembly halls including mosques,
governmental offices etc. and their movables
(b) Agricultural Areas

• Damages to paddy
• Damages to rubber trees and production losses
• Damages to oil palm trees
• Damages to coconut trees
• Damages to other crop trees

• Damages to mixed horticultures

(2) Identification of Damage Items

(a) Built Up Areas

• Damages to domestic houses and housing movables
• Damages to livestock belonging to domestic households
• Business suspension losses of shops, restaurants, etc.
• Indirect damages to public facilities as roads, bridges, etc.
• Indirect damages to public structures as primary schools, junior high schools, public holes
including mosques, governmental offices, etc. together with their movables

(b) Agricultural Areas

• Damages to paddy
• Damages to rubber trees and production losses
• Damages to oil palm trees
• Damages to coconut trees
• Damages to other crop trees
• Damages to mixed horticultural trees

4-28 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(3) Identification of Basic Unit of Damages

(a) Built Up Areas

(i) Houses and Furniture of Domestic Households

Unit value of domestic house is assumed at RM18,050/bldg (at 2009 price) based on results of
“National Water resources Study, 1982, JICA ( the JICA NWRS study)” as well as to take
characteristics of the Pahang River Basin into account. Unit value of movables per house is
assumed at 80 % of the value of house based on similar projects in developing countries. The
adopted damage rate by inundation depth is as shown in the following table according to the
similar projects:

Table 4.5.1 Damage Rates for Houses and Housing Movables

Damage Rate for
Inundation Depth (cm) Damage Rate for House Housing Movables
Under Floor
20 - 49 0.030 -
Above Floor
Less than 50 0.053 0.086
50 - 99 0.072 0.191
100 - 199 0.109 0.331
200 - 299 0.152 0.499
Over 300 0.220 0.690
Source: Guideline of Economic Analysis in Flood, Japan.
Number of houses is calculated by population. In this case, the average family size is assumed
at 4.41 persons/HH at present. Here, duration of inundation has been gotten at 7 days or more in
every scale of floods in probability

(ii) Damages to Livestock

Basic value of damages to livestock is assumed at 13.8 times of total estimated amount of unit
value of house and housing movables according to the above-said JICA NWRS study.

(iii) Business Suspension Losses of Shops, Restaurants, Etc.

According to the JICA NWRS study, business suspension loss is assumed at 3.5 times of unit
value of house and housing movables.

(iv) Indirect Damages to Public Facilities as Roads, Bridges, Etc.

This indirect damages are assumed at 30 % of the total amount of damages to house/housing
movables, damages to livestock and business suspension losses of shops and restaurants
according to the JICA NRWS study too as well as to take characteristics of the Pahang River
Basin into account.

(v) Indirect Damages to Public Structures as Primary Schools, Junior High Schools,
Public Halls including Mosques, Governmental Office, Etc.

According to the JICA NWRS study as well as to take characteristics of the Muar River Basin
into consideration, evaluated unit value of public structure is assumed at RM4,813,370/bldg (at
2009 price). Basic value of them is assumed at 120 % of the value of building based on the
similar project in the developing countries. Damage rate is adopted as shown in the following
table according to the similar projects in developing countries.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-29

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 4.5.2 Damage Rates for Public Structures and Their Movables
Inundation Depth (cm) Damage Rate for Buildings Damage Rate of Movables
Under Floor
20 - 49 - -
Above Floor
Less than 50 0.180 0.127
50 - 99 0.314 0.276
100 - 199 0.419 0.379
200 - 299 0.539 0.479
Over 300 0.632 0.562
Source: Guideline of Economic Analysis in Flood, Japan.
Here, it is estimated that one public structure exists per every 5,000 residents.

(b) Agricultural Areas

(i) Damages to Paddy

There are 2 types of rice farming in Malaysia, namely paddy rice and field rice, and the price
ranges from 620 to 1,270 RM/ha for the former type and 540 to 1,010 RM/ha for the latter (at
1980 price). Unit farm gate price of 2,070 RM/ha was obtained by converting the above prices
into the present value and averaging them. It may be noted that unit yield of 3.4 tons/ha is
considered in this price. Damage rate applied for paddy is shown in the following table.
Duration of inundation is 7 days or more in all flood scales. Therefore, the highlighted damage
rate in the table was adopted in this study.
Table 4.5.3 Damage Rates for Paddy
Inundation Depth (cm) Under 50cm 50 cm - 99 cm Over 100 cm
Duration(days) 1-2 3-4 5 - 6 Over 7 1-2 3-4 5 - 6 Over 7 1 - 2 3-4 5-6 Over 7
Damage Rate (%) 21% 30% 36% 50% 24% 44% 50% 710% 37% 54% 64% 74%
Source: The Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Technical Criteria for River Works

(ii) Damages to Rubber Trees and Production Loss

Based on the JICA NWRS study, only young trees below the age of three are withered due to
inundation, and it is assumed that 3% of rubber trees in the plantation will be replaced with new
trees every year. Therefore, 9% of the trees in plantation are not tolerant to flood events. Cost
for planting new rubber trees to replace damaged ones is 6,931 RM/ha at 2009 price, and
mortality rate of them by inundation is shown in the following table.
Table 4.5.4 Damage Rates for Rubber
Duration (days) Inundation Depth(cm) Damage Rate (%)
7 25 5
14 25 15
21 25 60
28 25 100

The amount of rubber that could be collected from plantation per day is 9.47 kg/ha, based on the
JICA NWRS study, and suspension period was estimated to be 50% of inundation period. Farm
gate price of rubber is assumed to be 6.57 RM/kg at 2009 price.

(iii) Damages to Oil Palm Trees

9% of the trees are below age of three and are vulnerable to inundation. Cost for planting new
oil palm trees to replace damaged ones is 4,693 RM/ha at 2009 price, and mortality rate of oil
palm is shown in the following table.
Table 4.5.5 Damage Rates for Palms
Duration (days) Inundation Depth(cm) Damage Rate (%)
7 25 10
14 25 20
21 25 70
28 25 100

4-30 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(iv) Damages to Coconut Trees

Based on the JICA NWRS study, only young trees below the age of three are withered due to
inundation, and it is assumed that 2% of coconut trees in the plantation are replaced with new
trees every year. Therefore, 6%of the trees in plantation are not tolerant to flood events. Cost
for planting new rubber trees to replace damaged ones is RM 8,279/ha at 2009 price, and
mortality rate of them by inundation is shown in the following table. The damage rate of oil
palm is applied for coconut trees as well.

(v) Damages to the Other Crop Trees

Based on the JICA NWRS study, only young trees below the age of three are withered due to
inundation, and it is assumed that 10% of the trees in plantation is below this age. The cost to
replace damaged crop trees with new young trees is 8,520 RM/ha at 2009 price. Mortality rate
is shown in the following table.

Table 4.5.6 Damage Rates for Other Crop Trees

Duration (days) Inundation Depth(cm) Damage Rate (%)
4 25 10
8 25 25
12 25 60
16 25 100

(vi) Damages to the Mixed Horticulture

Cost for planting new trees to replace withered ones below the age of 3 years due to inundation
is assumed to be RM 6,979 /ha at 2009 price based on the JICA NWRS study. Damage rates
applied are shown in the following table.

Table 4.5.7 Damage Rates for Horticulture

Duration (days) Damage Rate (%)
4 10
8 25
12 50
16 75
20 100

Basic units of flood damages were obtained as following two tables as a result of above
estimations. Anticipated benefit derived from improvement of the living condition by flood
management measures were estimated and added in the table as well. The benefit is estimated to be
60 % of the total amount of damages to domestic houses and movables, livestock, public facilities
and business suspension losses.

Table 4.5.8 Basic Unit of Damages in Built Up Areas

(RM/House or building As of 2009)
Basic Unit of Damages Basic Unit of Indirect Damages and Benefit
Business Damages to
Inundation Depth Damages to Houses Damages to Damages to Land Value Public Structures
Livestock Suspension Public Facilities Increased
(cm) Losses
Mova- Sub- Accumu- Accumu- Accumu- Accumu-
Houses bles total Amount lated Amount lated Amount lated Amount lated Structure Movables Total
Under Floor 542 ― 542 ― 542 ― 542 162 704 317 1,021 ― ― ―
Less than
957 765 1,722 23,756 25,478 4,305 29,783 8,935 38,717 17,423 56,140 866,407 132,040 998,447
50
Above 50 ～ 99 1,300 1,040 2,339 32,272 34,611 5,848 40,459 12,138 52,597 23,669 76,266 1,511,398 500,575 2,011,973
Floor 100 ～ 199 1,967 1,574 3,541 48,856 52,397 8,854 61,251 18,375 79,626 35,832 115,458 2,016,802 917,242 2,934,044
200 ～ 299 2,744 2,195 4,939 68,129 73,068 12,346 85,414 25,624 111,039 49,967 161,006 2,594,407 1,491,265 4,085,672
Over 300 3,971 3,177 7,148 98,608 105,756 17,870 123,626 37,088 160,714 72,321 233,035 3,042,050 2,051,559 5,093,609

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-31

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 4.5.9 Basic Unit of Damages to Paddy and Other Crops

I. At Present Condition
(a) Paddy  (b) Crops Other than Paddy 
Weighted Basic Unit of Damages (RM/ha) Weighted
Basic Unit of Average by Coconuts Other Tree Horti- Average
Inundation Damages Rubber Oil Palm
Duration Depth (m) Planted Return Palms Crops culture by
（RM/ha) Area Duration Planted
Period Product-
（RM/ha) (year) (days) Mortality ion Total Mortality Mortality Mortality Mortality Area
0.10 - 0.20 1,035 274 Loss （RM/ha)
0.20 - 0.50 1,035 274 2 9 94 280 374 47 99 511 2,617 556
0.50 - 1.00 1,470 389 5 11 94 342 436 86 99 511 2,617 583
Over 7 1.00 - 1.50 1,532 405 10 12 94 373 467 105 99 511 2,617 597
Days 1.50 - 2.00 1,532 405 20 13 94 404 498 124 99 852 3,926 809
2.00 - 3.00 1,532 405 50 15 374 467 841 163 348 852 3,926 974
3.00 - 4.00 1,532 405 100 16 374 498 872 182 348 852 3,926 988
Over 4.00 1,532 405
A
II. At Future Condition in 2025 
(c) Paddy  (d) Crops Other than Paddy 
Basic Unit of Weighted Basic Unit of Damages Weighted
Damages by Average by Coconuts Other Tree Horti- Average
Inundation Inundation Rubber Oil Palm Palms Crops culture
Duration Depth (m) Planted Return by
Depth Area Period Duration Product- Planted
（RM/ha) （RM/ha) (days)
(year) Mortality ion Total Mortality Mortality Mortality Mortality Area
0.10 - 0.20 1,035 274 Loss （RM/ha)
0.20 - 0.50 1,035 274 2 9 94 311 405 84 99 213 1,309 373
0.50 - 1.00 1,470 389 5 11 94 342 436 84 99 213 1,309 386
Over 7 1.00 - 1.50 1,532 405 10 12 94 404 498 84 99 511 2,617 608
Days 1.50 - 2.00 1,532 405 20 13 94 436 529 296 348 511 3,926 852
2.00 - 3.00 1,532 405 50 15 374 498 872 296 348 852 3,926 995
3.00 - 4.00 1,532 405 100 16 374 529 903 296 348 852 3,926 1,008
Over 4.00 1,532 405

The share rates of planted area by crops based on the JICA NWRS study are as shown in the
following table.

Table 4.5.10 Share Rate of Planted Area by Crops

Crops Share Rate
Mixed Horticulture 14.64%
Rubber 39.99%
Oil palm 6.84%
Coconuts 10.17%
Other Tree Crops 1.90%
Paddy 26.46%
Total 100.00%

(4) Identification of Annual Average Flood Damage Reduction

Expected annual average flood damage reduction (may be converted into “Economic Benefit”) under
occurrence of 100year ARI were estimated by using the above mentioned basic units and flood
simulation result mentioned in the previous section.

Table 4.5.11 Annual Average Mitigated Damages to Be Expected

(1,000RM)
Projects Amount
Temerloh 6,466
Mentakab 3,642
Kuala Lipis 364
Teriang 1,484
Jengka No damages mitigated
Telum Jelai Kecil Dam 7,059
Tembeling Upper Dam 36,574
Tekai Lower Dam 27,511

4-32 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

4.6 Climate Change Impact Assessment on Water Resources

4.6.1 Introduction

There are concerns on possible degradation of river ecosystem or decrease in amount of available water
resources as a result of the change in rainfall pattern due to climate change. In this section, preliminary
assessment of possible climate change impact on water resources in Pahang River Basin was conducted
based on impact analyses presented in the previous chapter.

First, tank model was developed in order to simulate long-term runoff in the Pahang River Basin. Then,
runoff simulation was conducted under the current and future conditions. The simulation results were
analyzed to assess the climate change impact on water resources.

4.6.2 Development of Long-term Runoff Model

(1) Sub-basins

Since observed data are indispensable to determine parameters required in the tank model, the Pahang
River Basin was divided into four sub-basins as in Figure 4.6.1 based on the location of gauging
stations with which reliable data are available. Sub-basins are Pahang(1), Tembeling, Pahang(2) and
Pahang(3).

Tembeling
Cameron
Highlands Area:5,237km2
Kg. Merting
Pahang(1)
Area:13,818km2
Batu Ebmun

:Meteorological station Temerloh

:Rainfall station Pekan
Lubok Paku
:Gauging station
:Basin divide Temerloh
Pahang(3)
Area:3,429km2
Pahang(2)
Area:6,288km2

Figure 4.6.1 Sub-basin for Long-term Runoff Model

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-33

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(2) Rainfall and Evapotranspiration

Rainfall and evapotranspiration are two input data to the tank model. Amount of rainfall for respective
sub-basin were obtained based on observed data using the Thiessen polygon as shown in Figure 4.6.1.

Potential evapotranspiration was estimated by FAO Penman-Monteith Method following the DID
manual. The equation is given by:

900
0.048Δ ( Rn − G ) + γ u 2 (e s − e a )
T + 273ra
ET0 =
Δ + γ (1 + 0.34u 2 )

where ET0 is reference evapotranspiration (mm/day), Rn is net radiation (MJ/m2/day), G is soil heat
flux (MJ/m2/day), T is mean daily air temperature at 2m height (oC), u2 is wind speed at 2m height
(m/s), es is saturation vapor pressure (kPa), ea is actual vapor pressure (kPa), Δ is slope vapour
pressure curve, and γ is psychometric constant (kPa/ oC).

Meteorological data used to estimate ET0 are tabulated in the following table. Location of
meteorological stations could be found in Figure 4.6.1.

Table 4.6.1 Meteorological Data Used to Estimate Evapotranspiration

Temperature (month Relative Area
Wind Speed (month Solar Radiation
Sub-Basin average, maximum Humidity Represented
average) (month average)
and minimum) (month average) (km2)
Cameron Highlands Cameron Highlands Cameron Highlands 1,968
Pahang(1) Batu Embun Temerloh Temerloh 6,187
Temerloh Temerloh Temerloh 5,664
Tembeling Batu Embun Temerloh Temerloh 5,237
Pahang(2) Temerloh 6,288
Pahang(3) Pekan Temerloh Temerloh 3,429
* Evapotranspiration of Pahang(1) was obtained by weighted average of area represented by respective meteorological stations

(3) Water Intake Data

Total monthly water intake of 2004 to 2008 from each sub-basin are shown in Figure 4.6.2 which
were obtained by accumulating actual amount of intake at irrigation schemes and water treatment
plants within respective sub-basin. Location of irrigation intakes and treatment plants are shown in
Figure 4.6.3. Intake amount were deducted from the calculated runoff discharge of each sub-basin.
0.05 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 5 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Tembeling Pahang(1)
0.04 4
Intake(m 3 /s)
Intake(m /s)

0.03 3
3

0.02 2

0.01 1

0.00 0
Jan Feb Mac Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mac Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
5 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 5 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Pahang(2) Pahang(3)
4 4
Intake(m 3 /s)

Intake(m 3 /s)

3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
Jan Feb Mac Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mac Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Figure 4.6.2 Total Intake in Sub-basins

4-34 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Tembeling
Pahang(1)
Tembeling
Kg. Merting

Intake
Intake Pahang(2)
Pahang(1) Pahang(3)
Temerloh

Intake Pahang(3)
Lubok Pak

Intake river
intake
Water treatment plant
gauging station
Pahang(2) Irrigation intake

Figure 4.6.3 Irrigation Intake and Treatment Plant in Pahang River Basin

(4) Tank Model Parameters and Their Verification

Four-layer tank model was introduced to simulate time lag between occurrence of rainfall and runoff
in Pahang River Basin in appropriate manner. The model parameters were fixed through trial
processes and are tabulated in Figure 4.6.4.
Parameters
Tembeling Pahang(1) Pahang(2) Pahang(3)
α1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2
α2 0.15 0.1 0.1 0.1
α3 0.15 0.25 0.15 0.15
β1 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.12
β2 0.09 0.09 0.03 0.03
γ1 0.07 0.08 0.2 0.2
γ2 0.0019 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004
δ 0.0001 0.00005 0.0001 0.0001
Initial condition
Tembeling Pahang(1) Pahang(2) Pahang(3)
Ha1(mm) 50 30 30 30
Ha2(mm) 10 10 20 20
Sl1(mm) 10 10 30 30
Hb(mm) 10 10 10 10
Sl2(mm) 10 10 10 10
Hc(mm) 10 10 10 10
Sl3(mm) 45 30 10 10
Sl4(mm) 610 50 50 50

Figure 4.6.4 Schematic View of the Tank Model and Its Parameters

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-35

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 4.6.5 shows simulated and observed discharge of 2006-2008 at Kg.Melting, Temerloh and
Lubok Paku. The figure tells us that the simulation results agree well with the observed data and the
model parameters are appropriate.
2000 0
1800 20
1600 40
1400
Kg.Melting
60
discharge(cms)

Rainfall

rainfall(mm)
1200
80
1000 Calculation
100
800 Observed
600 120
400 140
200 160
0 180
2006/01/01 2006/04/02 2006/07/02 2006/10/01 2006/12/31 2007/04/01 2007/07/01 2007/09/30 2007/12/30 2008/03/30 2008/06/29 2008/09/28 2008/12/28

2000 0
1800
1600 Rainfall 20
1400 Temerloh Calculation
discharge(cms)

40
Observed

rainfall(mm)
1200
1000 60
800
600 80
400 100
200
0 120
2006/01/01 2006/04/02 2006/07/02 2006/10/01 2006/12/31 2007/04/01 2007/07/01 2007/09/30 2007/12/30 2008/03/30 2008/06/29 2008/09/28 2008/12/28

2000 0
1800 20
1600 Rainfall 40
Lubok Paku
Calculation
1400 60
discharge(cms)

Observed

rainfall(mm)
1200 80
1000 100
800 120
600 140
400 160
200 180
0 200
2006/01/01 2006/04/02 2006/07/02 2006/10/01 2006/12/31 2007/04/01 2007/07/01 2007/09/30 2007/12/30 2008/03/30 2008/06/29 2008/09/28 2008/12/28

Figure 4.6.5 Model Verification: Observed and Simulated Discharge

(Top panel: Kg. Melting, Middle panel: Temerloh, Bottom panel: Lubok Paku)

4.6.3 Climate Change Impact on Water Resources

In this section, the above mentioned model was used to conduct long-term runoff simulation under the
current and future conditions (2025 and 2050). Then, the results under the future conditions were
compared with those under the current condition to assess the possible climate change impact.

(1) Simulation Condition

Two simulation inputs, namely rainfall and evapotranspiration, of the long-term (10years) runoff
analysis were obtained based on meteorological data of 1999-2008. That is to say, observed rainfall
data of 1999-2008 and potential evapotranspiration obtained from observed meteorological data of the
same period were the input to the runoff simulation under the current condition. For the future
simulation cases, incremental ratio of respective month obtained in Chapter3 were multiplied to
rainfall and potential evapotranspiration used for that of current condition. Intake data were based on
current amount extracted from the river as the national water resources plan is currently under review
to be updated and it is not possible to for see future water demand at this point. Therefore, this
projection enables to highlight the impact of climate change. It is noted that for years of which intake
data are not available, those of the next year were applied.

Incremental ratios are tabulated in Table 4.6.2, and basin average monthly rainfall and
evapotranspiration are shown in Figure 4.6.6.

4-36 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 4.6.2 Incremental Ratio Relative to 1990

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Precipitation 2025 1.07 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.08 1.01 0.84 1.25 0.93 1.09 1.09 1.12
2050 1.01 0.93 1.03 1.03 1.13 1.08 0.89 1.40 1.07 1.11 1.04 1.01
Evapo- 2025 1.05 1.02 0.96 1.02 1.03 1.01 0.92 1.04 0.97 1.00 1.05 1.07
transpiration 2050 1.03 0.97 0.94 1.03 1.05 1.03 0.99 1.07 1.07 1.05 1.04 1.02
10
Basin Average Monthly
Rainfall current 2025 2050
Rainfall(mm/day) 8

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
10
Evapotranspiration(mm/day)

current 2025 2050

Evapotranspiration
8
Monthly Potential

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Figure 4.6.6 Average Monthly Rainfall and Evapotranspiration obtained based on

Meteorological data of 1999-2008
(Top Panel: Basin Average Rainfall, Bottom Panel: Potential Evapotranspiration)

(2) Simulation Result

Figure 4.6.7 and Figure 4.6.8 shows 10year simulation results of discharge under the current and
future conditions. Figure 4.6.8 tells us that annual average discharge is projected to increase in the
future. However, no significant change could be seen between discharge of 2025 and 2050. Average
monthly discharge of February, March and July are projected to decrease relative to the current
condition.
100000 Current
Temerloh 2025
10000 2050
Discharge(m3/s)

1000

100

10
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

100000 Current
2025
10000 2050
Discharge(m3/s)

1000

100

10
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Figure 4.6.7(1) Temporal Plot of Simulated Daily Discharge(Temerloh)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-37

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

100000
River mouth
10000
Discharge(m3/s)

1000

100
Current
2025
10 2050
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

100000

10000
Discharge(m3/s)

1000

100
Current
2025
10
2050
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 4.6.7(2) Temporal Plot of Simulated Daily Discharge(River mouth)

10,000
Temerloh current

Monthly
Monthly Average Discharge(m 3 /s)

Average(current)
2025
699m3/s
1,000
686m3/s Monthly Average(2025)

642m3/s 2050

Monthly Average(2050)
100
average(current)

average(2025)

average(2050)
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month
100,000
current
River mouth
Monthly Average(current)
Monthly Average Discharge(m /s)
3

2025
10,000
Monthly Average(2025)
2,186m3/s
2050
2,155m3/s
Monthly Average(2050)
2,012m3/s
1,000
average(current)

average(2025)

average(2050)
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Month

Figure 4.6.8 Average Monthly Discharge (Top panel: Temerloh, Bottom panel: River mouth)

Table 4.6.3 shows annual average, and maximum and minimum monthly discharge obtained from
10years simulation. Figures in the table indicate increase in annual mean discharge. They also

4-38 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

indicate that hydrological extremes may magnify in the future; increase of maximum monthly
discharge and decrease of minimum monthly discharge. These results are consistent with river flow
projection by NAHRIM which is also tabulated in the table.

However, as seen in Table 3.4.6 and Figure 3.4.6, projected magnitude of the future precipitation and
evapotranspiration increase/decrease vary model to model, and uncertainties lie in river flow projected
in this section. Therefore, river flow should be carefully monitored to cope with unforeseen changes.

Table 4.6.3 Annual Average, and Monthly Maximum and Minimum Discharge obtained
from 10 years Simulation
(m3/s)
Maximum Monthly Minimum Monthly
Annual Mean Discharge
Discharge Discharge
Current Future Current Future Current Future
686 699 2,932 2,625 63 57
Temerloh 642 2,591 60
(2025) (2050) (2025) (2050) (2025) (2050)
2,155 2,186 10,555 9,473 243 235
River mouth 2,012 9,342 249
(2025) (2050) (2025) (2050) (2025) (2050)
Projection at 718 2,177 123
Temerloh by 670 (2025-2034 and 1,697 (2025-2034 and 156 (2025-2034 and
NAHRIM* 2041-2050) 2041-2050) 2041-2050)
* Study of the Impact of Climate Change on the Hydrologic Regime and Water Resources of Peninsular Malaysia, Sep. 2006
** Figures in parenthesis indicate period/year of projection

(3) Impact Assessment

(a) Flow Duration

The climate change impact was assessed by change in the number of days during which river
discharge falls below environmental flow obtained under the current. 20 and 40% of annual
average flow (AAF), which correspond to “good” and “outstanding” flow defined in Tennant
Method, were used as indexes for assessing the change in river flow regime.

Table 4.6.4 Environmental Flow Defined in Tennant Method

Narrative description of general condition Recommended flow regime
of flow for maintaining aquatic habitat (% of AAF)
Flushing or maximum 200
Optimum range 60-100
Outstanding 40
Excellent 30
Good 20
Fair or degrading 10
Poor or minimum 10
Severe degradation <10

Figure 4.6.9 is flow duration curves developed based on the 10 year runoff simulation under the
current and future conditions. Horizontal axis of the figure indicates the number of days which
exceed specific discharge per year. Therefore, arrowed periods shown in the figures indicate
number of days with discharge below 20 and 40 % of AAF. Figure 4.6.10 and Figure 4.6.11 show
number of days with discharge below 20 and 40% of current AAF.

These figures tell us that the base flow is projected to slightly increase, and the number of days with
discharge below “good” and “outstanding” flow will also slightly decrease in the future.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-39

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

3,000
Temerloh
400
2,500
current
2025
Temerloh
2050
current e-flow(40%of AAF)
current e-flow(20%of AAF)
current
2,000
2025
discharge(cms)

1,500 2050
300 current e-flow(40%of AAF)
1,000
current e-flow(20%of AAF)
40%of AAF 257m3/s
2025

discharge(cms)
500

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
current
days(10year)
200
2025

20%of AAF 128m3/s current

100

0
280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360
days(10year)

10,000 1,200
9,000
river mouth
current river mouth
8,000
2025
2050
1,100 current
7,000
current e-flow(40%of AAF)
current e-flow(20%of AAF)
2025
1,000 2050
discharge(cms)

6,000

5,000
900 current e-flow(40%of AAF)
4,000
40%of AAF 805m3/s current e-flow(20%of AAF)
3,000
800
2025
discharge(cms)

2,000

1,000 700
0
current
0 50 100 150 200
days(10year)
250 300 350
600
500 2025
20%of AAF 402m3/s
400
current
300
200
100
0
280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360
days(10year)

Figure 4.6.9 Flow Duration Curve (Top panel: Temerloh, Bottom panel: River mouth)
160
current
Temerloh(days with discharge below 40% of AAF)
days with discharge below e-flow(days)

2025
140 2050
average(current)
120 average(2025)
average(2050)
100

80 7 6 day/ ye ar
7 2 day/ ye ar
60 6 5 day/ ye ar

40

20
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 4.6.10(1) Number of Days with Discharge below “Good” Flow at Temerloh

4-40 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 4
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

160
river mouth(days with discharge below 40% of AAF) current

days with discharge below e-flow(days)

140 2025
2050
average(current)
120 average(2025)
average(2050)
100

80 7 5 day/ ye ar
7 1 day/ ye ar
60
6 2 day/ ye ar
40

20
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 4.6.10(2) Number of Days with Discharge below “Outstanding” Flow at Temerloh
80
Temerloh(days with discharge below 40% of AAF) current
days with discharge below e-flow(days)

70 2025
2050
60 average(current)
average(2025)
50 average(2050)

40

30

20 1 9 day/ ye ar

1 7 day/ ye ar
10
1 6 day/ ye ar
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
80
river mouth(days with discharge below 40% of AAF) current
days with discharge below e-flow(days)

2025
2050
60 average(current)
average(2025)
average(2050)

40

20 1 5 day/ ye ar
1 4 day/ ye ar
1 4 day/ ye ar
0
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 4.6.11 Number of Days with Discharge below “Good” Flow (Top panel) and
“Outstanding” Flow (Bottom panel) at the River Mouth

(b) Water Balance

Figure 4.6.12 shows annual water balance based on above simulation results. Diagram on the left
shows annual water budget of Pahang River Basin, and one on the right explains water budget in
more detail.

As seen in the figure, amount of available water resources is projected to increase by 8% and 9% by
2025 and 2050 relative to the current condition. The figure also tells us that total amount of water
intake in the Pahang River Basin is as small as 0.6% of its natural discharge.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 4-41

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 4 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Unit:
Unit: mcm
mcm Red:
Red: current
current Blue:
Blue: 2025
2025 Green:
Green: 2050
2050
upper basin
Rainfall 8,212
Rainfall
67,691 70,610 71,918 Tembeling river
67,691 70,610 71,918 evapotranspiration 8,776 6,465 6,909 6,974
37,105 8,964
net precipitation 37,711
30,586 38,603

intake 32,899
33,315 intake 1
195 14,676
15,684 other rivers
river mouth
30,390 15,937 2,765 2,954 3,017
32,837
33,253
detail Semantan river
2,939 3,141 3,208

20,318
SEA 21,717 Intake 62
Intake 22,100
other rivers
133 10,205 11,057 11,090

river mouth
30,390
32,837
33,253

SEA
Figure 4.6.12 Annual Water Budget of Pahang River Basin

4-42 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 5 PREPARATION OF IRBM PLAN

5.1 Basic Conditions for Preparation of IRBM Plan

5.1.1 Objectives of IRBM Plan

The objective of the IRBM Plan is proposed as follows:

Objective: to provide a road map for realization of sustainable management of land and water in the
Pahang River Basin, focusing on water utilization, river environment and flood management.

5.1.2 Target Year of IRBM Plan

The planning term is a period within which projects and actions are planned so as to be implemented and
completed. The target completion year is the end of the planning term.

Table 5.1.1 presents planning terms of past master plan studies on flood mitigation, water resources
management and river basin management. Except for National Water Resources Study 2000-2050, the
planning terms are between 15 and 18 years. Following the past practices, it is suggested that the planning
term of the IRBM and IFM plans of the Preparatory Survey be 15 years from 2011 to 2025. In this way the
proposed IRBM and IFM plans covers the planning terms of the 10th, 11th and 12th Malaysia Plans.

Table 5.1.1 Planning Terms of Past Similar Studies

Name of Study Planning term Target completion year
National Water Resources Study, October 1982 18 years 2000
Comprehensive Management of Muda River Basin, December 1995 15 years 2010
National Water Resources Study 2000-2050, March 2000 50 years 2050
Sungai Langat Integrated River Bain Management Study, August 2005 15 years 2020
Master Plan Study on Flood Mitigation and River Management for
16 years 2020
Bernam River Basin, January 2005
5.2 Identification of Issues for IRBM

5.2.1 Water Utilization

The Pahang River Basin is blessed with abundant water resources owing to its biggest catchment area in
Peninsular Malaysia. The water resources in the Pahang River Basin have been utilized for a variety of
activities, such as domestic and industrial water supply, irrigation supply, fishery, hydropower generation,
and so on, since old times as explained in Section 2.5.

Issues of water utilization in the Pahang River Basin in relation to integrated river basin management
(IRBM) can be summarized in Table 5.2.1.

Table 5.2.1 Summary of Major Water Utilization Issues in relation to IRBM

Major Governing
Subject Issues Responsible Agency
Law
• Due to lack of inter-agency and inter-state coordination, the river
Institution basin management is far from integrated one.
• The river is improperly managed due to poor technical capacity
Land Office, DID Land Code
of Land Office and poor legislative capacity of DID.
Water Quantity • In future seawater intrusion might be increased due to sea level
BKSA, JPS Waters Enactment
management rise as a result of climate change.
• There are some districts in the Pahang River Basin of which KeTTHA, JBA, Waters Enactment
water intake capacities are insufficient to future water demands SAINS, BKSA, NWRC Act
facilities are not SPAN, PAAB SPAN Act

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Major Governing
Subject Issues Responsible Agency
Law
• Environmental flow has been hardly considered in the water
BKSA, JPS, DOE
resources development plans.
• Groundwater has been hardly developed. JMG, BKSA Pahang Geological
and N. Sembilan Survey Act
• Restructuring of water supply industry has been delayed. KeTTHA, JBA,
NWRC Act
SAINS, BKSA,
Water Supply SPAN Act
SPAN
Services
• NRW rate are as high as 52.8 % in Pahang State and 53.2 % in
JBA, SAINS, PAAB
Johor State.
Irrigation Water • Irrigation water supply was once stopped at Kuala Lipis due to
JPS
Supply poor canal maintenance.

(1) Institution

For the regulation of water utilization, various agencies in both Federal and State levels as shown in
Table 5.2.2.

Table 5.2.2 Distribution of Authority for Water Utilization

Responsible Agency Relevant Legislative
Regulation of Water Services on:
- Irrigation/Agriculture DID Irrigation Areas Act 1953
- Domestic/Industrial SPAN, WAMCO, National Water Services Commission Act 2006,
Operators Water Services Industry Act 2006
- Hydropower KeTTHA, TNB Electricity Supply Act 1990
- Groundwater JMG Geological Survey Act 1974,
National Land Code 1965
Regulation on Water Abstraction BKSA State Water Enactment
Regulation of River Activity:
- Fishery/Aquaculture DOFi Fisheries Act 1985
- Inland Navigation DOFi The Merchant Shipping Ordinance 1952,
The Port Authorities Act 1963
Permission of River Infrastructure LO, DID Waters Act 1920, Local Government Act 1976
SPAN: National Water Services Commission (Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara)
BKSA: State Water Regulatory Body (Badan Kawalselia Air) in Pahang State
WSD: Water Supply Department
WAMCO: Water Asset Management Company
KeTTHA: Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water
TNB: Tenaga Nasional Berhad
JMG: Minerals and Geoscience Department
DOFi: Department of Fishery
LO: Land Office

Regulation of water services is responsible under several agencies, such as DID for irrigation, SPAN
for domestic and industrial water supply and public sewerage services, KeTTHA for hydropower, and
JMG for groundwater. Diversion and abstraction of water from rivers is prohibited except when
licensed by State Water Regulatory Body (BKSA) in the state. Each agency plays a key role for
regulation and monitoring of water use. However, due to the lack of inter-agency coordination, each
above agency conducts the water regulation and management independently based on their own
policies and strategies. Moreover, because the interstate coordination on river basin management
among the concerned states in the river basin has not been well organized, the water allocation control
from upstream to downstream has not been coordinated in the basin level.

Issuance of permission for land use including river area is under the jurisdiction of Land Office in state
government. Land Office has District Land Office in each district, so, as a front line, it regulates and
monitors the land and river use. On the other hand, DID does not have any jurisdiction on river use.
Thus, it only gives advice to the Land Office from the technical point of view. It is pointed out that

5-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Land Office does not have sufficient technical staff for the proper river management. Moreover, it
tends to regulate the land use without considering the environmental impact.

(2) Water Resources Quantity

As explained in Section 1.7 and Section 2.5, the Pahang River Basin is blessed with water resources
due to the vast catchment area and the less population. The total annual river runoff volume is 31
billion m3, while the present total capacity of intake facilities for industrial and domestic water supply
and irrigation is as small as 195 million m3. This means that only 0.6 % of the river water is being used
for water supply and irrigation. The rest, 99.4 % flows freely into the sea, without being utilized.

Therefore, it can be said that the Pahang River Basin is still un developed river basin and has a big
potential as a water resource for future water uses not only within the river basin but also for the
neighboring states like Selangor and Negeri Sembilan. If the water resources of the Pahang River
Basin are examined very closely, however, there might be found some issues that will possibly affect
the sustainable water utilization of the Pahang River Basin in future. They are impacts of Climate
Change, water resources development plans, environmental flow and groundwater, and are discussed
below:

(a) Climate Change

It is said that climate change will make droughts severer. The long-term runoff analysis in this
Preparatory Survey (refer to Section 4.6) shows that the minimum monthly discharge will slightly
decrease as an impact of climate change. NAHRIM also presented a similar study result in 20061.
This indicates that the water-rich Pahang River Basin will possibly fall into water-short condition in
future, depending upon the evolution of Climate Change.

It might be seawater intrusion that more attention should be paid to. According to IPCC, sea level is
projected to rise by 0.21 to 0.48 m at 2090 to 2099 relative to 1980-1999 under A1B scenario. By
interpolation, the rise at 2025, the target year is estimated to be 0.12 m. Since there are so many
intake facilities for water supply in the lower tidal stretches, sea water intrusion boosted by the sea
water rise should be on the watch.

(b) Development Plan (Water Demand and Supply Balance)

As discussed in the above, the surface river water of the Pahang River Basin is very abundant, and
has a lot of potential for future developments. In order to ensure sufficient water supply, however,
water source and supply facilities should be continuously developed so as to meet increasing
demands. From this point of view, to confirm if the existing projects/plans will correctly respond to
the future water demands, the future demands and the facility capacities are compared as shown in
Figure 5.2.1 and Figure 5.2.2. Figure 5.2.1 compares the total demand and the total supply
capacity of the entire river basin, and Figure 5.2.2 compares those of each district to look into the
demand and supply balance at the district level.

These figures include four kinds of water demands proposed in the National Water Resources Study
2000-2050 (those based on three different growth scenarios and the one based on demand projection
by district derived from mukim requirements), the supply capacity of the existing projects/plans and
the actual consumption for the past 5 years 2004-2008. The 10-yearly staged supply capacity line
was drawn by the JICA Study team to simplify the facility capacity that will increase with short
steps. Details of this simplification and the used data for the two figures are presented in
Supporting Report Sector IV: Water Utilization.

1
“Study of the Impact of Climate Change on the Hydrologic Regime and Water Resources of Peninsular Malaysia”, Final
Report, September 2006, NAHRIM

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

According to Figure 5.2.1, the supply capacity will increase in harmony with the two lowest
demands, namely the low growth scenario demand and the district based demand projection. There
is still a margin as much as 200 Mld or more between the two demands and the actual consumption.
As far as the demand and supply balance at the basin level is concerned, it seems that there will be
no problem if these projects/plans are implemented as planned.

If situation of each district is looked into, however, some problems can be found. Figure 5.2.2
shows that the actual consumption has already reached the water supply capacity for districts of
Temerloh and Raub, and there are no room for water supply capacity. The existing projects/plans of
these districts should be reviewed and modified. Moreover, when these existing projects/plants are
reviewed and modified, it is strongly required that demand projection should also be reviewed with
due regard to actual consumption because there are big differences between demand projection and
actual consumption, especially at districts of Bentong, Jelebu, C. Highlands and Temerloh.
Fortunately “Review of National Water Resources Study 2000-2050” is now going on. It is
expected that these discrepancies will be adjusted in the review.

Figure 5.2.1 Comparison of Demand and Supply for Pahang River Basin

5-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 5.2.2 Comparison of Demand and Supply by District

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(c) Environmental Flow

Environmental flow concept means enough water is left in our rivers, which is managed to ensure
downstream environmental, social and economic benefits. When constructing a water flow
-regulating structure like a dam or a barrage on a river, a certain flow (environmental flow) should
be kept released downstream from the structure not to affect environmental, socio-economic
conditions in the downstream. It is written in the Subsection 3.5.4.3 of DID Manual Volume 2.
River Management, that it would be therefore desirable that minimum environmental flows for
each river basin be specified that will allow and facilitate measures to be taken to avoid the decline
of the valuable ecosystem.

In Malaysia, however, this environmental flow has not been necessarily specified for all river
basins. There are several dams that do not release water downstream at all. They are Talang Dam in
the Muar River Basin, Batu Dam in the Klang River Basin and Muda Dam in the Muda River Basin,
for example. Certain lengths of the river courses below the dams, which used to be full of water,
now are usually completely dry. These drastic environmental changes mush have given a significant
impact on bio-diversity. According to officials concerned of Pahang State, there is no dam in
Pahang State that stops river flow. There are many dam projects for water supply and hydropower in
the Pahang River Basin, and it is definitely necessary to ensure sufficient environmental flow for the
proposed dam projects.

(d) Alternative Water Resources

It has not ever developed an alternative water resources due to the ample surface water in the
Pahang River Basin. However, this might have a risk of stumbling into a grave situation in a future
contingency, such as a water crisis, a heavy drought or contamination in rivers. (Recently, the
unscheduled water supply cut happened after a water treatment plant had to be closed due to high
levels of ammonia in the water and consequently, over a million people were affected in several
districts in the Klang Valley and in Putrajaya. See the box shown below.) The Pahang River Basin
is rich in groundwater as in the case of surface water. Probably due to its abundant surface water,
however, groundwater utilization has not been developed so much in the Pahang River Basin. Only
in remote areas, where it is expensive to construct piped water supply systems to serve a small
population ground water sources are developed.

The National Water Resources Study 2000-2050 recommended that existing wellfields be kept in a
working condition by operating them for a few days a month, and that these wellfields be used when
surface sources become polluted by accidental oil spills, or in periods of acute drought.

The National Water Resources Study 2000-2050 recommended that existing wellfields be kept in a
working condition by operating them for a few days a month, and that these wellfields be used when
surface sources become polluted by accidental oil spills, or in periods of acute drought.
<Taps dry in four districts>
More than 1.2 million consumers in four districts, namely
Petaling, Hulu Langat, Sepang and Kuala Langat District,
have been hit by water supply disruptions after the
Sungai Semenyih water treatment plant closed due to
high levels of ammonia in water drawn from Sungai
Kembong. The source of the contamination was traced to
a “failed” retention wall at a sanitary landfill.
The plant was reopened after the ammonia content
dropped to a safe level.
Source; “The Star, Wednesday 8 September 2010”

5-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(3) Water Supply Service Industry

(a) Restructuring of Water Service Industry

Reform of water supply and sewerage sectors is going on in Malaysia with the objective of creating
an efficient and sustainable water service industry. With an amendment of the Federal Constitution
and a creation of two acts, the Federal Government became to regulate the water and sewerage
services industries in terms of licensing regulating services operators, while state governments
retain the power to regulate water resources, water catchment areas and river basins. The water
service industry will be privatized and integrated with the sewerage industry.

The reform is now at the final stage, although its transitional operation is already being implemented
in some states under the regulation of SPAN. According to the 10th National Plan, the reform will
be completed in the planning period, in which establishment of tariff-setting mechanism to allow
full cost recovery will be completely phased in and water supply and sewerage services will be
integrated, and initial efforts will be made to introduce integrated water and sewerage tariffs.

Negeri Sembilan State already migrated into the new regime in 2008 with SAINS, a
semi-governmental corporation as water supply services operator, while Pahang State also plans to
migrate into it in 2010 with a newly established state water supply department. Both the operators
will be fully privatized in the future.

(b) Non Revenue Water

Non-Revenue Water (hereinafter referred to as NRW), which is defined as the difference between
the measured supply and the metered and billed consumption is an operational issue for every water
supply entities in Malaysia. NRW rate by state is presented in Figure 5.2.3, and those of foreign
countries are also presented in Figure 5.2.4 for reference.

The NRW rates of Pahang State and Negeri Sembilan State are 52.8 % and 53.1% respectively,
about 15% higher than the national average of 37%. The two states are regarded as the 2nd and 3rd
worst states following Sabah States. It is easily conceivable that these high NRW rates are one of the
main financial constraints of the water supply operators. Tokyo of Japan is proud of its world-lowest
NWR rate of 4.5% as an actual performance for the fiscal year of 2008.

States NRW (%)

2005 2006 2007 2008
NRW(%)
Johor 35.50 32.46 31.20 31.30 100%

Kedah 43.80 45.00 41.70 44.90 2005 2006 2007 2008

Kelantan 40.00 44.40 48.40 49.30 80%

Melaka 28.80 27.00 29.80 30.00

60%
N. Sembilan 53.00 60.10 53.80 53.10
Pulau Pinang 19.40 18.60 16.80 16.90
40%
Pahang 49.70 46.40 53.60 52.80
Perak 30.60 30.70 30.10 31.10 20%
Perils 36.30 35.54 34.10 31.20
Sabah 57.20 57.00 56.30 55.70 0%
Johor Kedah Kelantan Melaka N.Sembilan Pulau Pahang Perak Perlis Sabah Sarawak SelangorTerengganu
WP. LabuanNational
Sarawak 24.70 32.00 30.50 29.40 Pinang Average
Selangor 38.40 36.60 34.70 33.90
NRW by State in Malaysia
Terrengganu 34.70 31.50 38.50 38.00
WP. Labuan 24.00 36.00 35.90 33.10
National
37.70 37.70 37.10 37.00
Average
Data source: Malaysia Water Industry Guide 2007, 2009

Figure 5.2.3 NRW Rate by State in Malaysia

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Country NRW (%)

Germany*1 7 100%
90%
Denmark*1 10 80%

NRW (%)
England & Wales*1 19 70%
60%
France*1 29 50%
1 40%
Italy* 29 30%
1 20%
Nigeria* 90 10%
India*2 40 0%
y k s e ly ria dia sia nam ia n) ries es
Indonesia*2 30 an ar ale nc Ita ige In one ys pa t tri
erm e nm & W Fra N d ie
t ala (Ja oun un
Vietnam*2 35 G D nd In V M o C Co
ky d g
Malaysia*3 37 gla To lope opin
En e l
Tokyo (Japan)* 4
4.5 ev ve
Developed Countries*5 15 Comparative Figure of NRW D De
Developing Countries*5 35
Sources; *1: Wikipedia, *2 : Gloval Water Market (2008)
*3 : Malaysia Water Industry Guide (2009)
*4 : Bureau of Waterworks, Tokyo Metropolitan Government
*5 : Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Board Discussion Paper Series Paper No.10

Figure 5.2.4 NRW Rates of Foreign Countries

Causes of NRW can be classified into two major components, namely physical losses and
non-physical losses. Physical loss is due to pipe leakages, leakage in the distribution system,
overflows from reservoirs, fire-fighting usage. Non-physical loss is caused by unauthorized usage
(illegal supplies and theft), inaccurate meter usage, billing system and meter reading error.
Improvement of NRW rate makes sufficient contributions to water supply schemes, such as it can
reduce source works scale properly. Therefore, all the water supply entities have committed to
reduce and maintain NRW rate to an economic level. SAINS is taking the following actions for
countermeasures to reduce NRW rate in N. Sembilan State.
‐ Exchange of customer meters
‐ To control the activities of water stealing
‐ Planning for the NRW project affected areas
‐ Provide training to staff on the use of tools more effectively
‐ Planning a public awareness campaign for employees and the public
‐ Detection of active leakage
‐ Installation of Telemetry System
‐ Taking prompt remedial action on all leaks and burst pipes

(4) Irrigation Water

According to “the National Water Resources Study 2000-2050”, many of irrigation schemes have been
abandoned because of a combination of (largely) social factors, lack of labour, etc., and these schemes
are likely to converted to housing or high value crop cultivation in the long term.

Irrigation water supply is quite unstable because it entirely relies on unregulated run-of river flows.
Moreover, water taken at intakes is led into paddy fields through canals, therefore, it is essential for
irrigation activity to retain the function of canals. Water supply once stopped at Kuala Lipis because
the drainage system was not maintained properly. It is required to maintain those irrigation facilities in
good condition.

5.2.2 Environment

In order to identify the major environmental issues in the Pahang River Basin in relation to integrated
river basin management, investigation on the existing environmental condition was carried out from
September 2009 to December 2009. Based on the evaluation on the existing environmental conditions

5-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

and discussions with the officials of various departments and agencies, a number of environmental issues
have been identified. In order to reconfirm the appropriateness of those issues, consultations with various
stakeholders have been carried out during the same period, for example Working Group Meetings,
Stakeholders Meetings as well as direct consultations with agencies concerned. Table 5.2.3 gives an
overview of the potential environmental issues in the Pahang River Basin in relation to integrated river
basin management. Out of these issues several outstanding issues that require further actions, i.e. issues
that either has not been addressed or the measures are inadequate are discussed as below:

Table 5.2.3 An Overview of Potential Environmental Issues

Responsible
Potential issue Possible causes Major governing law
Agencies
Discharge of domestic wastewater IWK. ƒ Water Services Industry Act 2006
ƒ Environmental Quality Act 1974
Discharge of industrial effluents DOE. [EQ (Industrial Effluent)
Regulations 2009]
Wastewater discharge from pig farms DVS. ƒ-
ƒ Local Government Act 1976
Wastewater discharge from wet markets LA
ƒ By-Laws
ƒ Local Government Act 1976
Wastewater discharge from restaurants LA
ƒ By-Laws
ƒ Local Government Act 1976
Wastewater discharge from hawkers LA
ƒ By-Laws
ƒ Local Government Act 1976
ƒ By-Laws
Disposal of oil and grease from vehicle
Licensed Operators. ƒ Environmental Quality Act 1974
workshops
[EQ (Scheduled Wastes)
Deterioration of Regulations 2005]
water quality Leakage of leachate from ƒ Solid Waste and Public Cleansing
Alam Flora
landfills/dumpsites Management Act 2007
Indiscriminate disposal of solid wastes ƒ Solid Waste and Public Cleansing
Alam Flora
into waterways Management Act 2007
ƒ Environmental Quality Act 1974
Direct disposal of drinking water
JBA, SAINS [EQ (Scheduled Wastes)
treatment sludge
Regulations 2005
ƒ Local Government Act 1976
Erosion at construction sites LA, DOE ƒ By-Laws
ƒ Environmental Quality Act 1974
Erosion due to logging activities Forestry Dept. ƒ National Forestry Act 1984
Erosion due to agricultural activities DOE. ƒ Environmental Quality Act 1974
Lands and Mines
Sand dredging activities ƒ National Land Code
Office
Runoff of agrochemicals from
DOE ƒ Environmental Quality Act 1974
plantations and smallholder farms
ƒ National Land Code
ƒ Town and Country Planning Act
Large-scale agricultural development JPBD.
Loss of biodiversity 1976
ƒ Local Government Act 1976
Logging activities Forestry Dept. ƒ National Forestry Act 1984
ƒ Town and Country Planning Act
1976
Developments within Environmental JPBD, Forestry
Threats to ESAs ƒ Local Government Act 1976
Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and water Dept., LA, Lands
and water resource ƒ National Land Code
catchment areas and Mines Office
ƒ Water Resources Enactment 2007
ƒ National Forestry Act 1984
Note:
Special attention required.

(1) Discharge of Wastewater from Wet-Market

Wet-market is one of the main local level commercial facilities in Malaysia, including the Pahang
River Basin area. Almost all towns in the river basins are provided with wet-markets. These
wet-markets are built and maintained by the respective Local Authorities and trading spaces are rented

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

to local traders for selling of local produces like fresh vegetables, fishes, chicken meat, beef, pork, and
so on. These wet-markets become a center of local level commercial activities in all sizes of towns.
For example the following photo shows the external view of Mentakab wet-market that known as
Pasar Mentakab (Mentakab Market).

Besides trading, there are many associating activities being carried out in the market, such as
slaughtering of chicken, cleaning and preparation of meats and fishes. The issue is that wastewater
mixed with animal bloods, some intestines and feather from chicken slaughtering and fish preparation
activities is being discharged into the drains without any treatment. Sungai Kedah Basin Management
Plan revealed that BOD value of the wastewater can be as high as 400 to 450 mg/l, with discharge
volume of as much as 100 m3/day. From the Structure Plans, there are a total of 55 towns in the Pahang
River Basin that being categorized as sub-regional center, major settlement center and minor
settlement center. If each of these wet markets discharges 50 m3/day of wastewater with BOD value of
400 mg/l, the total BOD discharge into the environment in the Pahang River Basin is as much as 1,100
kg BOD/day.

Chicken slaughtering activities at Mentakab Market

At Mentakab Market, wastewater mixed with animal blood, some intestines and feather is directly discharge into
adjacent drains.
Figure 5.2.5 Chicken Slaughtering at Mentakab Market
However, it must also note that, site visit found that some wet-markets have been upgraded and
provided with wastewater treatment facilities. The following photos show the Temerloh Market with
wastewater treatment facilities.

Temerloh Market is provided with wastewater treatment facilities

Figure 5.2.6 Temerloh Market

(2) Siltation Due to Sand Dredging Activities, Construction Activities and Large-scale
Agricultural Developments

Based on the water quality monitoring results provided by the Department of Environment, out of 311
samplings at 80 locations along the Pahang River and its tributaries in 2008, TSS contents of about
19% of the total samples exceeded the DOE target water quality of NWQS Class II (National Water

5-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Quality Standards) (see Table 5.2.4). Furthermore, about 4% of the samples showed Class IV/V water
quality, far exceeded the DOE target water quality.

Table 5.2.4 Distribution of TSS levels

TSS level Class I Class II Class III Class IV/V
(≤ 25 mg/l) (≤ 50 mg/l) (≤ 150 mg/l) (> 150 mg/l)
Number of sample 203 51 46 11
Percentage 65% 16% 15% 4%

There are many causes of high TSS content in river

water. Site observation and discussion with Working
Group members found that it is mainly due to large
scale agricultural developments, sand dredging
activities, large scale construction earthworks as well
as natural riverbank erosion.

According to the Pahang and Negeri Sembilan

Structure Plans, the total existing agricultural area in
the Pahang River Basin is about 8,200 km2 (about 28%
of the total land area). Due to removal of natural forest
cover, these agricultural activities have accelerated the
erosion rate, particularly during earthwork phase of
the development. Although erosion rate will be Source: Pahang & N. Sembilan Structure Plans
reduced after stabilization of the plantation, the
erosion is still very high compared to the natural forest Figure 5.2.7 Existing Agricultural
area. Past study (Sg. Langat IRBM Plan) revealed that Areas in the Pahang River Basin (2002)
CP factor of agricultural land is as much as 20 times of
forest area.

Sand dredging is another activity that causes river siltation. Although sand dredging is important in
maintaining or increasing the flow capacity of rivers, improper environmental management during
dredging and washing operations may result in siltation of river. In Pahang Sand dredging projects are
licensed by the District Land Office (approved by the EXCO of the State Government), while DID is
responsible to provide technical evaluation during licensing application stage and monitoring during
operational stage. From the Working Group discussions, it is found that monitoring by DID has been
ineffective as DID has no enforcement power in this respect.

Figure 5.2.8 Sand dredging (left) and construction activities (right) along the Pahang River

Construction activities are also contributing to the increase of TSS in the river, particularly during
earthwork stage of the construction works. Although the provision of silt trap and other erosion
control measures can reduce runoff of soil particles into waterways, increase of TSS is inevitable.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-11

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(3) Runoff of Agrochemicals

Besides causing soil erosion, another main

Sg. Batu
concern of agricultural activities is the runoff of
agrochemicals such as fertilizers, herbicides, Anak Sg. Lepar
and pesticides into waterways. For large-scale
agricultural activities, they are partially
monitored by the Department of Environment
through the EIA requirements. However, for
smallholder farms, the usage of agrochemicals
depends very much on the awareness of the
farmers (although the sale of pesticides is
subject to the Pesticides Act 1974). Tasik Cini

From the water quality monitoring data

provided by the Department of Environment, Figure 5.2.9 Some Locations with Possible
out of the 390 river water samples collected at Agrochemical Pollution
various locations and months in the Pahang
River Basin, a total of 28 samples showed
ammonical nitrogen contents within Classes III
to V of NWQS. Among the rivers being
monitored, ammonical nitrogen readings of Sg.
Batu and Anak Sg. Lepar are particularly high.

The issue of agrochemical runoff at Cameron

Highlands has drawn attentions from both the
Government as well as the publics. A study
undertaken by the Department of Environment
in 2005 that entitles A Study on Pollution
Prevention and Water Quality Improvement
Program of Rivers in Cameron Highlands
revealed that the riverbank of the tributaries of
the Telum River such as the Terla River, Kial
River and the Teringkap River are seriously
encroached by smallholder vegetable farms.
Uncontrolled application of agrochemicals and
improper storage of pesticides have resulted in
runoff and leakage of agrochemicals into rivers.
Soil sampling detected residues of common
pesticides such as aldrin, alpha-BHC,
beta-BHC, delta-BHC, lindane, 4,4-DDD,
4,4DDE, 4,4DDT, dieldrin, endosulfan I,
endosulfan II, endosulfan sulphate, endrin
aldehyde, heptachlor and heptachlor epoxide
(<0.003 mg/kg to <0.005 mg/kg). Recently the
Source: The Star, 24 Dec 2009
authorities concerned have carried out
enforcement activities such as demolition of Figure 5.2.10 Newspaper Report about
vegetable plots within river reserves. Government Actions on Agrochemical Pollution at
Cameron Highlands

(4) Land Development within ESA and Catchment Area for Raw Water Intake

The Pahang River Basin is ecologically, culturally and environmentally very important. Taman
Negara, Tasik Bera (a RAMSAR site), Tasik Cini (Biosphere Reserve), Krau Wildlife Reserve

5-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Cameron Highlands, Fraser Hill as well as the Orang Asli settlement areas are among the
environmentally and culturally sensitive areas (see Figure 5.2.11). Besides, as shown in the same
figure, a huge portion of the basin is within catchment area for raw water intake. The National Physical
Plan categorizes these catchment areas as Rank 3 Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESA) that requires
strict development control, in which the type and intensity of the development shall be strictly
controlled depending on the nature of the constraints.

Legend
ESA Rank 1
ESA Rank 2
ESA Rank 3
State Boundary
District Boundary
Pahang River Basin
Pahang River and its Major Tributaries
!H
Major Town

Source: Pahang & N. Sembilan Structure Plans Source: National Physical Plan

Figure 5.2.11 Environmental Sensitive Areas (left) and Water Catchment Areas (right)

In line with this, the Pahang Structure Plan

2002-2020 recommended that a
comprehensive ESA Management Plan
should be prepared by the Pahang State
Economic Planning Unit. However, so far
such plan still has not been prepared. As a
result, there is inadequate specific and clear
guideline to guide the authorities concerned
as well as the private investors for
developments within these ESAs and
catchment areas.

(5) Degradation of Natural

Environmental and Water Quality at
Tasik Chini

This issue is actually related to the earlier

three issues. Erosion, siltation, agrochemical
runoff and inadequate control of land
developments in the Tasik Chini catchment
have resulted in degradation of natural
environment and deterioration of water Source: The Star, 15 December 2008
quality.
Figure 5.2.12 News Report about Tasik Cini

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-13

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

In a study conducted by the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) in 2006 entitles Hydrology and
Water Quality and Land-use Assessment of Tasik Chini’s Feeder Rivers, Pahang Malaysia, it was
found that ammoniacal nitrogen and phosphate contents in the feeder rivers of Tasik Chini are quite
high, with readings as high as 0.57 mg/l and 0.50 mg/l respectively. It could be due to pollution loads
from the adjacent plantations and smallholder agricultural activities (as well as urban activities).

This issue has drawn serious attention from the

State Government of Pahang. As shown in the
above newspaper report, the Pahang
Government has requested allocation from the
Federal Government to rehabilitate the natural
environment of Tasik Chini.

However, it must be noted that this issue is being

addressed by both the Malaysian Government as
well as the international community. In May
2009, the UNESCO has chosen Tasik Chini as a
Biosphere Reserve. Besides, the Government
has established the Tasik Chini Research Center
to undertake research on biodiversity, water, soil
and other environmental aspects. A research Source: UNESCO homepage
center on a 10-acre site adjacent to the lake has
been built. One of the main objectives of the Figure 5.2.13 Announce of Tasik Chini as a
Center is to assist the Pahang State Government UNESCO Biosphere Reserve
to rehabilitate Tasik Chini as an important
natural heritage for the State as well as for the
country.

What is a biosphere reserve?

Biosphere reserves are areas of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems promoting solutions to reconcile the
conservation of biodiversity with its sustainable use. They are internationally recognized, nominated
by national governments and remain under sovereign jurisdiction of the states where they are located.
Biosphere reserves serve in some ways as ‘living laboratories’ for testing out and demonstrating
integrated management of land, water and biodiversity.

What are the benefits of biosphere reserves?

The biosphere reserve concept can be used as a framework to guide and reinforce projects to enhance
people’s livelihoods and ensure environmental sustainability. UNESCO’s recognition can serve to
highlight and reward such individual efforts. The designation of a site as a biosphere reserve can raise
awareness among local people, citizens and government authorities on environmental and
development issues. It can help to attract additional funding from different sources. At the national
level, biosphere reserves can serve as pilot sites or ‘learning places’ to explore and demonstrate
approaches to conservation and sustainable development, providing lessons which can be applied
elsewhere.

(Source: UNESCO)

(6) Disposal of Water Treatment Sludge

Drinking water treatment process involves various processes to treat raw water to potable water. In the
treatment process, the backwash water together with the settled solids in the sedimentation tank forms
residues are known as water treatment sludge. Thus water treatment sludge can be considered as a
by-product of water treatment process. As alum and polyaluminium chloride (PACI) are commonly
used as coagulants, it is expected that aluminium content in the residue is high. In a study initiated by
the Malaysian Water Association (MWA) entitles Study on Characteristic, Treatment and Disposal of

5-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Drinking Water Treatment Plant Residue, sampling and laboratory tests were carried out for 16
randomly selected water treatment plants in Peninsular Malaysia, including two in the State of Pahang.
Analyses revealed that aluminium content in the water treatment sludge can be as high as 79,200 mg/l.
The value is very much higher than the Standard B of 15 mg/l level stipulated in the Environmental
Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009.

In Malaysia, water treatment sludge has been categorized as Scheduled Waste (category SW204) under
the Environmental Quality (Scheduled Waste) Regulations 2005 that reads ‘sludge containing one or
several metals including chromium, copper, nickel, zinc, lead, cadmium, aluminium, tin, vanadium
and beryllium’. Under this Regulation, special method is required for the storage, transportation,
treatment, and disposal of the water treatment sludge. Besides, if the discharge volume exceeds 60 m3
per day, it is also subject to the requirements of the Environment Quality (Industrial Effluent)
Regulations 2009. The said Regulations clearly stated that industrial effluent means any waste in the
form of liquid or wastewater generated from manufacturing process including the treatment of water
for water supply or any activity occurring at any industrial processes.

From the Working Group Meetings, it is confirmed that it has been an issue wherein the water
treatment sludge containing high aluminium is not treated according to the Schedule Waste
requirements. This is particularly true for the old plants whereby the residues are directly discharged
into rivers. According to the Department of Environment, so far the Department has not made any
strict enforcement on this matter, but the issue should be solved as soon as possible.

On the other hand, according to the abovementioned study, the original designs of most of the
treatment plants are using conventional systems. Therefore, usually there are no provision for sludge
treatment and disposal. This makes it very difficult to the operators to retrofit the residue treatment
facilities. The said study further recommended that land, land application or monofill of dewatered
sludge should be allowed as a means of disposal.

(7) Institution

Since the water quality issue is related to many sectors, such as water supply, sewerage, industrial
effluence, livestock farming, etc., many institutions based on their jurisdiction act for regulation and
management of water quality. However, especially, local authorities shall be responsible for the
control of wastewater discharge from wet market, but in fact they do not have enough capability to take
necessary countermeasures to fulfill the water quality standards and Environmental Quality Act, and to
facilitate the wastewater treatment plants for ensuring the water quality.

The Land Office has authority on issuance of license for sand dredging in the river. For issuing the
license, DID is responsible in providing technical advise on the proposed dredging methods, and,
during operation stage, DID is in charge of monitoring the dredging activities. The function of DID is
quite limited only to give technical advise to Land Office for licensing since DID has no legislative
authority on it. Moreover, it is pointed out in the Working Group discussion that monitoring activity by
DID is not effective since DID has no enforcement power.

5.2.3 Flood

(1) General

Based on discussions at the working group and stakeholder meeting, site reconnaissance and basic
analyses, issues related to floods in the Pahang River Basin may be summarized in Table 5.2.5. They
are categorized to four subjects, flood damage, institution, data/information management and flood
mitigation plans/projects.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 5.2.5 Issues for IRBM related to Flood

Major Plan/manual/
Responsible
Subject Issues Governing guidelines/Stand
Agency
Law ard
The flow capacity is very low in the whole of the river
DID
course.
The recent flood generated casualties. NTC, DID
The river banks of the main stream and the tributaries are
DID
eroded.
Siltation is significant in the river mouth. DID
Some of old facilities (bridges, dam reservoirs, etc.) should JKR, KTM, Water Act,
Flood damage
be replaced or maintenanced. TNB 1920
Mentakab suffers from the long duration of flooding due to
DID
poor drainage system.
Temerloh and Mentakab towns are received flood damages
due to the backwater of the Pahang River disturbing the flow DID
of the Semantan River.
Pekan is vulnerable to floods due to the effect of high tides. DID
No opportunities are available for various sectors to discuss
NRE, DID
about IFM.
Institution
National Land
There are illegal settlers inside the river zones. DID DID Manual
Code
The format of the flood report changes every year. DID
Data/information management is poor. It is difficult to find
Data/information at the DID headquarters data that were sent from district DID
management DIDs.
Number of hydrological stations is insufficient. DID DID Manual
Observed hydrological data are poor in reliability. DID DID Manual
The old master plan prepared in1970s has not been revised
DID
yet.
Priority for protection is unclear. DID
Community residents are poor in understanding about flood DID, Local
Flood mitigation hazard areas. Authorities
plans/projects There is no adaptation measure of Climate Change. DID
No guidelines are available for evacuation activities after an DID, Local
automatic siren station sounds. Authorities
Local
Dissemination of evacuation order was delayed.
Authrities

(2) Description of Issues

(a) Flood Damages

Mainly due to the low capacity of the river channels, the Pahang River and its tributaries often
generated flooding along all the stretches. According to flood records, the flood in 1926 is the
historically maximum flood, followed by those of 1971, 1988 and 2007. Table 5.2.6 presents
records of the last three floods, and the flood inundation areas by the 1971 flood is shown in Figure
5.2.14.

Table 5.2.6 Summary of Flood Records for Pahang River Basin

January 1971 November 1988 December 2007
Inundation area (km2) 3,500 Not available 484
Number of evacuees 150,000 people affected 17,700 31,900
Number of causalities 24 - 8
Flood damage 38 million USD 7 million RM 263 million RM
8 day rainfall (mm) 544 270 353
8 day rainfall scale (ARI) 112 years 9 years 23 years
Inundation duration 1 to 3 weeks 8 days 1 to 3 weeks
Source: “Pahang River Basin Study, 1974”
“National Register of River Basins, 2003”
Flood Reports, DID

5-16 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

pia
S. S e

S. S
at
S.
Tanah Rata

Tah
nur

S. Serau
Ringlet S. Te

an
nu
Ta

uca
S.
S. Lemo i

S. Ke
cil

S. Tembeli ng
i Ke

S.
Jela

Te
S.

rm
Padang Tengku

us
u
eta
Kuala Lipis

S.
B

Ke
S.
S.

ru
TE
Penjum

m
KA
Kuala Tembeling I
S. Jerkoh Benta
L ipi
s
Jerantut

S.
CherohDong m
ka

Ce
l Te

S. Dong
io S.

ka
g S. K
ian
S. L

S. K
Raub

S . Poh
S. Ber kela h
Teras

era
Sungai Ruan
Kuala Kerau

oi
S. Kunda ng
S. Jem
Sungai Penjuring
Maran

S. L e
Kerdau

pul
Bentong ng

par
S. L
Lanchang aha
Chenor S. P Pekan

uit
S. Kaw ang
Sungai Dua Temerloh
Karak Mentakab
Bukit Tinggi

ga
Mengkarak

nt i
Me
Telemong
Legend

S.
Teriang
Manchis Kerayong
Urban Center

era
Sungai Buloh Kemayan

B
Kampung Chennah

S.
Flood Area Durian Tipus Kilometers
Titi 20 10 0 20
Petaling Pertang
Serting
Kuala Klawang
Bahau

Figure 5.2.14 Flood Inundation Areas of 2007 Flood

It is seemed that there is a cycle of bank erosion and aggradation on the Pahang River and its major
tributaries such as the Tembeling River and the Semantan River. The river banks, especially at bent
portions in meandering stretches are undergoing constantly erosion and aggradation. Normally
severe erosion occurs during floods.

Rock groin against bank erosion, at JPS Pekan Bank erosion, the Semantan River at Kg. Lompat,
Station Pahang

Figure 5.2.15 Bank Erosion and Protection Work

The Pahang river mouths have been suffering from siltation for a long time. There is a fishing port
on the left bank of the northern course, and fishing boats are going out to the sea through the natural
waterway formed by the water flow of the Pahang River. However, entering and leaving the port at
the river mouth is generally very difficult during low tide. In addition, the narrow and shallow river
mouths raise the flood water, which spilled over Pekan Town several times in the past.

To cope with these problems, DID has commenced “Protection and Rehabilitation Project for
Pahang River Mouth” under the 9th MP (RMK-9). The project is comprised of construction of
breakwaters, navigation channel, coastal and river protection works, and bypass channel at Pulau

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-17

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Syed Hassan. The construction work of breakwaters at Kuala Pahang is progressing about 40 % as
of November 2009.

Pahang River mouth, involves main River protection work of rock groin near
breakwaters at the north channel Kuala Pahang
Figure 5.2.16 Pahang River Mouth Project

Some facilities became too old to function as planned due to poor maintenance. It was pointed out at
the working group meetings that an old bridge fell down during the 2007, and that a dam reservoir
for hydro power generation is filled up with sediments. Bunds that were constructed under the 3rd to
8th Malaysian Plans based on the master plan proposed by “Pahang River Study , 1974” has been
already so devastated that reconstruction is proposed in the new project “Flood Mitigation Project
for Pekan Town”.

(b) Institution

Many agencies are involved in flood issues, but almost no opportunities were available for
discussing about them. The recent creation of the technical committee for IRBM is expected to
provide such an opportunity.

As stipulated by the Local Government Act 1976 (Act 171) and Street, Drainage and Building Act
1974 (Act 133), the local authority has legal jurisdiction to construct and maintain the drainage
facilities in the urban area. On the other hand, under the Ministerial Functions Act 1969 (Act 2),
DID is entrusted with the responsibility for flood mitigation programs. Practically, DID has
undertaken to construct and maintain the urban drainage as the local authority cannot ensure its
technical and financial capability for the proper drainage management. Moreover, the responsibility
between local authority and DID is overlapped due to the above conditions. For example, DID
mainly manage the river system, but some rivers, especially small rivers have been maintained by
the local authority.

Legal enforcement seems still insufficient. Gazetting of river reserve has not been conducted at all
in Negeri Sembilan State. This has resulted in encroachment of river banks that should have
functioned as buffer areas against flood and erosion and wildlife/riparian habitats.

(c) Data/Information Management

Indispensable for effective integrated flood management is a comprehensive and effective river
basin information management system that can be shared among the related agencies in the river
basin. the Malaysian Government has initiated the development of a Geospatial Data Infrastructure
(MyGDI). The Malaysian Center for Geospatial Data Infrastructure (MaCGDI) under the Ministry
of Natural Resources and Environment has the responsibility to coordinate the development and
implementation activities of MyGDI. In addition, the Government, through DID, also has also
started the development of a National River Basin Decision Support System (RB-DSS) to facilitate
the integrated management of all river basins in the country. a web-based RB-IMS known as ‘River

5-18 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Basin Information System’ (RBIS) has been developed for trial run within the DID internet
network, which in future will be opened to the public.

In a few years the above data/information management system making full use of ICT (Information
and Communication Technology) will be put into practical use. On the other hand, however, efforts
to enhance the quality of raw data should be continued. It is often pointed out that the number of
hydrological stations is insufficient and that the quality of the observed data is very low. Complaints
from DID staff that the format of the flood report has been changed so often, and that data sent from
the DID district offices were often lost at the headquarters were also collected during the working
group meetings.

(d) Flood Mitigation Plans/Projects

Immediately after the 1971 flood, a full-scaled master plan study for the Pahang River Basin,
“Pahang River Basin Study, 1974” was conducted by Australian consultants, and several flood
mitigation measures including protection of urban centers , and multipurpose dams, etc, were
propsed. This JICA survey is the first full-scaled basin-wide study in about 40 years after the
Australian study. “National Water Resources Study” was conducted by JICA in 1982, the study did
no more than propose a conceptual flood mitigation plan. Therefore, the Australian master plan is
only one existing master plan, which was already outdated. The IFM plan proposed by this survey
that takes into account impacts of Climate Change will replace the Australian master plan.

During the working group meetings it is pointed out that community residents are poor in
understanding about flood hazard areas, and that no guidelines are available for evacuation
activities after an automatic siren station sounds. These issues should be also considered for
planning the IFM plan. It is also pointed out that dissemination of evacuation order to local residents
by policemen was lagged during the 2007 flood that killed 8 people. Although it is unknown
whether the delay of the order dissemination was relevant to the 8 casualties, improvement of the
flood forecasting and warning system must be necessary.

5.3 Core Issues and Problem Analysis

5.3.1 Identification of Core Issues

According to the discussions in Section 5.2, there are a variety of issues related to IRBM. If they are
carefully categorized, most of them could be converged into four core issues. They might be:

„ Weak institutional framework for IRBM/IFM,

„ Insufficient Water Utilization,

„ Deterioration of Water Quality, and

„ Flood Damage.

5.3.2 Problem Analysis

In order to set up strategies and measures to fulfill the proposed IRBM policies, a problem analysis is
made for each of the four core issues. In the problem analysis, issues that could be direct and indirect
causes of the core issue are first selected by referring to discussions in Section 5.2. Then they are arranged
in the form of “Problem Tree”, based on the cause-effect relationship hierarchy among the issues.

Direct causes of the core issue, which are on the second level of the problem tree just behind the core
issue, can be regarded as issues of strategy level. Causes of the lower levels could be regarded as issues at
measure level.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-19

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(1) Institutional Setup

The issues on institutional setup were identified in each sector: water use, environment and flood.
However, for the implementation of IRBM, the sector-based institutional issues shall be analyzed
based on the integrated point of view. The problems as institutional setup for IRBM are summarized in
Figure 5.3.1
No national policy for
Relevant institutions IRBM/IFM
prioritize their own
policy No coordination
framework for river
basin management
Insufficient
coordination Many laws related to
water management

Legislative
Existing water act is
jurisdiction is
not suitable for IRBM
complicated

There is no
integrated water law

Technical capacity of
Land Office is not
Jurisdiction for sufficient
physical control is not
properly allocated
Jurisdiction of DID is
limited
Weak institutional
Poor river
framework for
administration River reserve is not
IRBM/IFM
properly gazetted

Information on river
conditions and
facilities is not well
Administrative control organized
is not suitably
conducted Water allocation is
not wholly regulated

Regulation on
activities affecting
river is not effective

Insufficient
observation points
Unreliable data
Insufficient river Data analysis is not
information proper
management
No integrated
database

Possible to Difficult to Being improved by

improve improve existing/planned projects

Figure 5.3.1 Problem Tree for Institutional Setup

(a) Insufficient coordination among relevant agencies

The first issue on the institutional framework for IRBM is the insufficient inter-agency and
interstate coordination among the stakeholders. This issue is led by the sector-based policies and
programs have been carried out by relevant institutions without considering the integration and
coordination. The absence of integrated national water policy is one of the reasons to accelerate the
sector-based approaches. During the course of JICA preparatory survey, the river basin committees

5-20 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

were established to discuss on the issues in the river basin among the relevant federal and state
government agencies.

The complicated mandates based on the various sectoral legislatives are also causing the insufficient
coordination. Legislative jurisdiction on each sector related to IRBM can be seen in various laws as
shown in Chapter 2 of Part 1 Common Contexts. Moreover, the existing Waters Act 1920 does not
clearly stipulate the authorities and their functions for river management.

The federal DID has been making an effort to formulate the national water policy and law
considering the effective implementation of IRBM in Malaysia.

(b) Inappropriate river management

As described above, the following targets need to be managed in the integrated way by the
application of IRBM: the mitigation of flood damages, maintenance of river flow and conservation
of river environment. For the implementation and achievement of IRBM in Pahang River Basin, the
relevant agencies for river management, environmental management and water management shall
conduct their mandates as defined in the legislatives. In line with environmental management and
water management, DOE and BKSA are primary agencies respectively. However, as mentioned
before in this chapter, there is no institution authorized by the law to be a main agency for river
management. Land Office has a legal jurisdiction to control lands and rivers but it does not have
sufficient technical capacity. On the other hand, DID has been traditionally engaged in the river
management without legal background. Therefore, a principal agency with legislative jurisdiction
for the river management shall be defined in the legal documents. As a principle agency for river
management, the following works shall be conducted properly.

River Construction Work

- Flood
Physical Control River Maintenance Work Management
O&M of River Infrastructure

Designation of River Management Area

Formulation of River Inventory - Water Volume

Control
Administrative Control
- River
Permission for River Use
Environment
Restriction of Activity affecting River

Figure 5.3.2 River Management Works

As for the physical control of the river, even though the Land Office has jurisdiction for the control
of river, canal and siltation, it seems not to have sufficient technical capability to carry out proper
river management. On the other hand, DID has technical capacity to conduct the physical works, but
it does not have legislative jurisdiction for river management.

Moreover, the river management area is not defined due to the poor progress of gazetting of river
reserve. River inventory seems not to be well organized. Since various institutions, such as DID,
SPAN, KeTTHA, JMG, and BKSA have authority for the regulation of water related services and
licensing, the water allocation control and monitoring in the river basin is not sufficiently
coordinated. Activities affecting river environment such as river sand dredging is not well regulated
due to the lack of technical capacity and incentive of Land Office and lack of legislative jurisdiction
of DID for river management.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-21

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(c) Insufficient river information management

DID, as a secretariat, has developed the river basin information system named National River Basin
Decision Support System (RB-DSS) to facilitate the integrated management of all river basins in
Malaysia, consisting of three systems: River Basin Information Management System (RB-IMS),
River Basin Geographical Information System (RB-GIS), and River Basin Simulation Modeling
System (RB-SMS). A web-based RB-IMS known as “River Basin Information System (RBIS) has
been developed for trial run within the DID internet network. The composition of RBIS is supposed
to be information on institutions and legislatives for river management, socio-economic and
environmental data in the river basin, budgetary information for river management
projects/programs, etc. However, it is pointed out that the quality of raw data in terms of
hydrological information is very low.

(2) Water Utilization

The Issues on the water utilization related to IRBM in the Pahang River Basin are summarized in
Section 5.2.1. Figure 5.3.4 shows the “Problem Tree” for the water utilization in the Pahang River
Basin based on the abovementioned issues.

(a) Insufficient Water Resources

Insufficient Water Resources in the Pahang River Basin mean possibility of drought by climate
change impact, insufficient water resources development plans, insufficient environmental flow and
non-existence of alternative water resources. The Pahang River Basin has a possibility of drought
by the evolution of climate change in the future. The actual consumption has already reached the
water supply capacity at a few districts. Those districts are required to review their water supply
plans on the basis of the results of “Review of National Water Resources Study 2000-2050”. The
environmental flow has not been considered as some dams do not release water downstream during
normal times. It is required to determine the environmental flow for maintaining aquatic habitat and
river function in the Pahang River Basin because there are many planned dam projects in the basin.
Groundwater is hardly utilized in the Pahang River Basin due to the ample surface water, however,
it is important to study groundwater potential as an alternative water resource against contingencies,
such as a water crisis, a heavy drought or contamination in rivers.

(b) Improper Water Supply Service Operation

Improper Water Supply Service Operation means the delay of restructuring of water services
industry, the discrepancy between the development plan and the water demand, and the prominent
NRW rate. The reform of water service should be completed in the 10th National Plan period. N.
Sembilan State already migrated into the new regime in 2008 and Pahang State is planned to be
migrate into it in 2010. It is required to migrate into new regime and establish tariff-setting
mechanism to allow full cost recovery. Non-Revenue Water rate in the Pahang River basin is
assumed more than 50 % from the NRW rates of the two states in the year 2008. This Prominent
NRW rate has a great influence on water supply scheme. It is therefore required to reduce it to the
breakeven point urgently.

(c) Insufficient Irrigation Water Supply

Insufficient Irrigation Water Supply means a situation being incapable of water abstraction or
supplying water. Water supply once stopped at Kuala Lipis because the drainage system was not
maintained properly. It is required to maintain those irrigation facilities in good condition.

5-22 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 5.3.3 Problem Tree for Water Utilization

(3) River Environment (Water Quality)

Figure 5.3.4 overleaf presents the ‘Problem Tree’ of water quality issue in the Pahang River Basin. It
elaborates the roots of water quality issue in the Pahang River Basin. From left to right, the ‘Problem
Tree’ identifies the main sources of water pollution (second column from left), then elaborates the
possible causes of those water pollution sources at two to three levels (third to fifth columns from left).
From the figure, is can be seen that there are four main water polluting sources i.e. wastewater
discharge, solid waste disposal, erosion/siltation, and runoff of agrochemicals.

(a) Wastewater Discharge

Wastewater discharge includes domestic wastewater, industrial effluent, wastewater from

commercial activities such as wet-markets, restaurants and hawker centers, used oil and grease from

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-23

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

vehicle workshops, and leachate from dumpsites and landfills. As shown in the figure, most of
these sources of wastewater have been addressed by various agencies concerned. The management
of sewage discharge is under the jurisdiction of SPAN and IWK, discharge of industrial effluent is
regulated by DOE, the control of wastewater discharge from commercial activities is under the
responsibility of Local Authorities, while Alam Flora (Pahang) are SWM (Negeri Sembilan) are
responsible to implement integrated waste management. However, it must be highlighted here that
wastewater discharge from wet-market and disposal of water treatment sludge are still the
outstanding issues that must be addressed.

(b) Solid Waste Disposal

Solid waste disposal includes indiscriminate disposal of garbage (particularly into the rivers and
waterways) and construction wastes. These issues are being handled by the Local Authorities and
Alam Flora/SWM.

(c) Erosion/Siltation

There are four main causes of Erosion/Siltation, namely construction works (particularly those
involving large scale land clearing and earthworks), logging activities, agricultural activities, and
sand dredging activities. For the first three, to some extent, they are being managed by the Local
Authorities, Forestry Department, and DOE (via EIA requirements) respectively. Although there is
no large scale sand dredging operation, inadequate control of small scale operations may result in
siltation as well as riverbank erosion.

(d) Runoff of Agrochemicals

Runoff of agrochemicals is another issue that must be addressed. Water quality monitoring data
show that nutrient contents in the river are generally high. The issue of agrochemical pollution in
Cameron Highlands and Tasik Chini has drawn concerns from the public, media as well as the
government agencies concerned.

(e) Inventory of Pollution Loads

One very important issue identified here is that an inventory of pollution loads for the Pahang River
Basin is not available. There are piece and parcels of information on various pollution sources that
are kept by different agencies, but this information is not organized and difficult to be accessed but
other agencies due to absence of a centralized database, and there is no single agency responsible for
establishment and maintenance of this database. For example, DOE is keeping the database on
industrial effluents, sewage discharge database is kept by IWK, information on individual septic
tank is incomplete, partially kept by IWK and Local Authorities, and there is no complete database
on runoffs from agricultural activities.

5-24 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Village houses are constructed without

obtaining approval from LA
Improper or absent of ISTs
Existence of squartters

Unwillingness to pay for the service

Discharge of domestic Unmaintained ISTs
wastewater
Inadequate enforcement

High initial cost

Limited coverage of sewerage
network
Unwillingness to pay for the service

Inadequate enforcement
Non-compliance with
regulations High cost to install wastewater
treatment facilities
Discharge of industrial
Illegal operators Inadequate enforcement
effluent
Old plants do not have residue
treatment and disposal facilities

Difficult & costly to retrofit old plants

Direct disposal of water
treatment sludge Limited land for lagoons and drying
beds at the existing plant sites

Wastewater discharge Inadequate enforcement

Old markets are not completed with

wastewater treatment facilities
Wastewater discharge from
Costly to upgrade the existing markets
wet markets
Chicken slaugthering activities are
being carried out at the markets
Some operators are not installing oil
Discharge of wastewater from Wastewater discharge from traps
commercial activities restaurants
Oil traps are not properly maintained

Illegal hawkers
Wastewater discharge from
hawker centers Open-air hawkers without proper oil
traps

Inadequate enforcement
Disposal of used oil & grease Indiscriminate disposal of
from vehicle workshops used oil and grease Insufficient waste oil collection
operator
Old facilities are dumpsites
Leakage of leachate from are without lining
landfills/dumpsites Difficult to find suitable site
for new sanitary landfill
Indiscriminate disposal of
Deterioration of water quality Lack of awareness
garbage into waterways
Solid waste disposal No/Insufficient facilities for
Indiscriminate disposal of construction wastes
construction wastes
Inadequate enforcement

Inadequate erosion control

Erosion at construction sites
measures

Illegal logging
Erosion due to logging
activities Insufficient erosion control
measures

Huge agricultural areas

Erosion/siltation
Erosion due to agricultural Inssufficient buffer zones for
activities rivers
Insufficient erosion control
measures
Insufficient siltation control
measures
Siltation by sand dredging DID has no enforcement
activities power
Most of the projects are small
scale thus not subject to EIA
Over application of
agrochemicals
Runoff of agrochemical due to
rains
Runoff of agrochemicals from Insufficient buffer zones for
Runoff of agrochemicals
plantations and farms rivers/streams
Improper storage of
agrochemicals

Farming within river reserves

Possible to (further) improve, and additional Being improved by existing/

Difficult to improve
measures are necessary to solve the issue planned projects/agencies

Figure 5.3.4 Problem Tree for Water Quality

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-25

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(4) Floods

With the core issue “Flood causes damages”, the problem analysis was made to make clear the
structure of the issues, and finally to identify strategies and measures to improve the core issue. The
problem tree is presented in Figure 5.3.5.

Issue Issues
at Policy Level at Strategy Level Issues at Measure Level

Climate changes. Much CO2 is emitted.

Bigger floods occur Forest is decreased.

Finance is Priority of Pahang Existing master plan

insufficient River is low. is outdated.
Structural measures
are insufficient. Impact of Climate
Flood water Planning/design is Change is not
overflows inappropriate. considered.
river.bank
Observed data are
poor in reliability. Data management is
Capacity of State and poor.
Maintenance of
District DIDs is Past flood records
structures is poor.
insufficient. are not utilized.

Siltation occurs at Existing master plan

river mouth is outdated.

Flood areas are not Supports of federal

Flood hazard map is Capacity of District
taken into account for and state DIDs are
not available. DIDs is insufficient.
Flood causes land use planning. insufficient.
damage
Some people do not
(Core Issue) understand necessity
of river reserve.
Many land owners
People live in Gazetted river
are opposing to
flood-prone areas reserve is limitted. Some people do not
gazetting.
want restrictions on
their lands.

People are not aware Flood hazard map is

People live in river of threats of floods. not available.
zone illegally.

Legal enforcement is
poor.

Supports from
Local government Federal and state
No guidelines are governments are
agencies and district
available for insufficient.
DIDs have no
People can not evacuation activities.
enough capacity.
evacuate safely.
Observed data is
poor in reliability.
Accuracy of flood
Early warning is not forecasting and
given properly. warning system is Number of
low hydrological stations
is insufficient.
Dissemination od
warning is very slow.

Being improved by
Possible to improve Difficult to improve existing/planned projects.

Figure 5.3.5 Problem Tree with Core Issue, “Flood Causes Damage”

5-26 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Three direct causes of the core issue were conceived. They are “Flood water overflows river bank”,
“People live in flood prone areas” and “People can not evacuate safely”.

(a) Causes of “Flood water overflows river bank”

The first direct cause, “Flood water overflows river bank” is physical one. Four secondary causes,
“Bigger flood occurs”, “Structural measures are insufficient”, “Maintenance of structures is poor”
and “Siltation occurs in river channel” are conceived.

As discussed in Chapter 3 of the Interim Report, more intensified rainfall is projected as an impact
of the Climate Change, resulting in the occurrence of bigger floods. Efforts to reduce emission of
greenhouse gases should be made, but it will be impossible to completely control impacts of
Climate Change by the target year 2025 at least. Adaptation measures should be considered as this
JICA survey proposes. In addition, decrease of forests by logging is another cause of increase of
flood discharge. This is a cause of siltation in river channel, too.

Insufficiency of structural measures, which is further caused by insufficient finance for

implementation and/or inappropriate planning/design. Low quality of observed hydrological data
and poor data/information makes it difficult to elaborate appropriate plans/projects. Non-existence
of an updated master plan is also an indirect cause of the insufficient structural measures, although
this issue will be solved if the IFM plan proposed in this JICA preparatory survey is accepted by the
Malaysian Government. Maintenance of constructed structures is generally responsibility of state or
district DIDs, which need technical and financial supports from the federal DID.

As explained in Section 5.2.3, the Pahang river mouths have been suffering from silatation for a
long time. However, DID has commenced “Protection and Rehabilitation Project for Pahang River
Mouth” under the 9th MP (RMK-9). If the project is completed, the problem of river mouth siltation
will be solved.

(b) Causes of “People live in flood prone areas”

The second direct cause of the core issue, “People live in flood prone areas” is social one. Three
secondary causes are conceived. They are “Flood areas are not taken into account for land use
planning”, “Gazetted river reserve is limited” and “People live in river zone illegally”.

Non-availability of flood hazard maps seems a main cause of inappropriate land use planning. This
is probably due to insufficient capacity of district DIDs. Poor legal enforcement by authorities
allows people to live in river zones illegally. These people are generally not aware of threats of
floods.

(c) Causes of “People live in flood prone areas”

The third direct cause, “People can not evacuate safely” is regarding people’s activities during
floods. According to the flood record of the 2007 flood, 8 people were killed. The relevant
authorities should take this tragedy very seriously.

Two secondary causes are conceived. They are “No guidelines are available for evacuation
activities” and “Early warning is not given properly”. Local government authorities and district
DIDs do not have enough capacity to prepare community-based flood management plan including
guidelines for evacuation activities. Low accuracy of the present flood forecasting and warning
system is based on poor quantity and quality of the hydrological data. It seems that the present
method of warning dissemination by policemen takes too much time.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-27

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

5.4 Federal and State Policies

5.4.1 Federal Policies

Federal policies related to IRBM are presented in the Five Year Malaysia Plan (FYMP) and the National
Physical Plan (NPP).

(1) Five Year Malaysia Plan (FYMP)

In the 8th Malaysia Plan, covering 2001 - 2005, the integrated river basin approach was emphasized for
the first time. This plan also encouraged state government to establish water management bodies such
as LUAS to ensure proper planning, monitoring, enforcement and management of water resources on a
river-basin basis.

The 9th Malaysia Plan (2006 – 2010) aims to concentrate the country's efforts on priority areas which
ultimately leads to achieving Vision 2020 (Malaysia is a fully developed country by the year 2020.
These priority areas encompass the nation's global competitiveness, human capital development,
national integration, ethnic relations, distribution of income and wealth and the quality of life. Major
policies related to IRBM highlighted in the 9th Malaysia Plan are presented in Table 5.4.1.

Table 5.4.1 Policies and Targets of the 9th Malaysia Plan

Sector Policies and Targets
Water • Efforts are undertaken to conserve the quality and improve the quality of existing water resources as
Supply well as identify potential water resources.
• The water demand and the water production for domestic and industrial use are expected to increase to
1,184 mld and 1,340 mld in 2010, respectively.
• The efficiency of water supply is improved through NRW reduction programme with measures
including strict enforcement against water theft, pipe and meter replacements, GIS mapping of
distribution networks, rehabilitation of distribution systems and upgrading of existing WTPs as well as
setting up of operation centers. The target NRW for the State of Pahang is 40%, 475 mld in 2010.
• To increase accessibility to potable water in rural areas, priority will be given to states with low supply
coverage such as Sabah, Sarawak, Pahang, Kelantan, Trengganu and Kedah.
• The groundwater exploration and development programme is also undertaken to supply water to other
water shortage areas and for irrigation.
• IWRM (Integrated Water Resources Management) approach is promoted to achieve sustainable water
resources development.
• Non-structural measures to improve water supply services continue to be implemented including the
promotion of wise use of water.
• The SPAN is operationalised during the Plan period to regulate water supply and sewerage services in
Penisular Malaysia. In addition WAMCO(Water Asset Management Company) is established to
develop future water supply structures.
Sewerage • Sewerage services continue to be expanded to ensure the quality of effluent discharged into receiving
water bodies comply with environmental standards and safeguard public health.
• Upgrading, rehabilitation, and refurbishment of existing sewerage treatment systems, which are in the
catchments of public water supply systems continue to be given priority.
• Awareness campaigns on the importance of managing wastewater and sewerage systems for
maintaining cleanliness and protecting the environment as well as water resources is intensified.
Flood • Continuous efforts are undertaken to reduce flood hazards in the Klang Valley as well as other flood
Mitigation prone areas throughout the country with the implementation of both structural measures such as the
construction of flood retention ponds, river improvement works and flood diversion as wellas
nonstructural measures such as landuse control s and integrated flood forecasting, warning and response
systems.
• The Urban Stormwater Management Manual for Malaysia (MASMA) is extended to new development
areas throughout the country.

5-28 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

The 10th Malaysia Plan (2011-2015) was tabled by the Prime Minister in Parliament in June 2010.
In his speech it was stressed that the 10th Malaysia Plan is critical for the continuation of the national
agenda to realize Vision 2020. The 10th Malaysia Plan targets the gross national income per capita to
increase to RM 38,850 in 2015; and this requires the GDP to grow 6 % per annum.

Regarding policies related to IRBM, the IWRM approaches are continued to be encouraged in
planning, managing, protecting and rehabilitating water resources. It is noted that the 10th Malaysia
Plan committed that Malaysia would adopt a dual strategy in addressing climate change impacts,
first adaptation strategies to protect economic growth and development factors from the climate
change impacts. And second mitigation strategies to reduce emission of greenhouse gases. Table
5.4.2 presents policies and strategies related to IRBM in the 10th Malaysia Plan.

Table 5.4.2 Policies and Strategies Related to IRBM in the 10th Malaysia Plan
Sector
Strategies Measures Contents
Policies
Develop a long-term strategy • Establish the National Water Resources Policy (NWRP).
• Expand the implementation of IRBM approaches in
for water resource
planning, managing, protecting and rehabilitating water
management to achieve water resources.
security • Provide RM 5 billion for flood mitigation.
• Complete the migration of state water operators
• Move towards full cost recovery
Continue efforts to restructure
• Drive efficiency in operations and capital expansion
Manage water the water services industry • Improve water services infrastructure
endowment and • Integrate water and sewerage services
Provide
Supply • Strengthen the enforcement on industrial effluents and
efficient sewage discharge in line with the revisions to the regulations
public utilities under the Environmental Quality Act 1974.
and services • Assess the total maximum daily load and carrying capacity
(Public Protect rivers from pollution of rivers for both points and non-point sources of pollution.
Utilities) • Revise the current Water Quality Index
• Develop the National Marine Water Quality index to replace
the current Marine Water Quality Criteria and Standards
• Expand outreach and awareness programs
Provide support to local • Relive local authorities of solid waste management and
authorities public cleansing by privatization
Restructure
Deliver comprehensive and • Stringently manage the performance of the three
Solid Waste
Sanitary services concessionaires
Management
Ensure waste is managed in a
• Promote 3R (the reduce, reuse, recycle)
sustainable manner
• Develop a robust risk framework to assess and quantify the
climate risk and prioritise measures to address those risks
Protect the Nation from the
• Implement policy decision framework to ensure that future
Risks of Climate Change
infrastructure investments are climate resilient
(Climate Adaptation)
• Enhance capacity in the field of climate prediction and
Develop a modeling
climate resilient • Create stronger incentives for investments in renewable
growth strategy energy (RE)
Reduce Malaysia’s Carbon • Promote energy efficiency to encourage productive use of
Value the Footprint (Climate energy;
nation’s Mitigation) • Improve solid waste management;
environmental • Conserve forests
endowments • Reduce emissions to improve air quality.
(Environment) • Implement the Central Forest Spine of 4.32 million hectars in
Peninsular Malaysia
• Enhance regulations governing the trade of endangered
Enhance Enhance forest and wildlife fauna and flora
conservation of conservation efforts • Link or integrate existing biodiversity inventory and
the nation’s databases.
ecological assets • Co-opting local communities in conservation efforts
• Introduce the Access and Benefit Sharing framework
Ensuring sustainable and safe • Co-opting local communities in conservation efforts
utilisation of resources • Establish a legal framework on access and benefit sharing

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-29

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(2) National Structural Plan (NPP)

National Physical Plan (NPP) is a written statement of strategic policies on the physical development
and conservation throughout the peninsular of Malaysia. The plan was approved by the National
Physical Plan Council on April 26, 2006. The approval means, the plan needs to be a guideline for the
physical planning and should be implemented at federal and states level throughout Peninsular
Malaysia.

The NPP has a goal “The establishment of an efficient, equitable and sustainable national spatial
framework to guide the overall development of the country towards achieving developed nation status
by 2020” with following four objectives:

• To rationalise national spatial planning for economic efficiency and global

competitiveness,

• To optimise utilisation of land and natural resources for sustainable development,

• To promote balanced regional development for national unity, and

• To secure spatial and environmental quality and diversity for a high quality of life.

The NPP contains a set of 36 policies. Out of them the following nine policies are related to IRBM:

Table 5.4.3 NPP Policies related to IRBM

Number Policies
• Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) shall be integrated in the planning and management of land
NPP 18
use and natural resources to ensure sustainable development.
• A Central Forest Spine (CFS) shall be established to form the backbone of the Environmentally
NPP 19
Sensitive Area network.
• Land development in the highlands shall be strictly controlled to safeguard human safety and
NPP 21
environmental quality.
NPP 22 • All surface and ground water resources are strategic assets to be safeguarded and used optimally.
• The supply and projected demand for water by quantity and location should guide the planning of
NPP 30
water resource areas.
• Ground water resources and recharge areas shall be identified and protected from activities that cause
NPP 31
pollution and reduce yield.
NPP 32 • All urban settlements shall be serviced by a centralised sewerage treatment system.
• All urban settlements shall be serviced by an integrated network of solid waste disposal and/or
NPP 33
recovery facilities.
NPP 34 • Land utilised for main drains, streams and rivers shall be designated as drainage or river reserves.

5.4.2 State Structural Plan 2020

The Structure Plan 2020 consists of written statement formulation of a State’s policy and general
proposals for the development and use of land in the State up to 2020. These policies are set within
current state and national policies concerning the social and economic planning and development.

The Pahang State Structural Plan 2020 includes 13 Development Location Policies (Policies LP), 6
Environmental Policies (Policies AS) and 10 Infrastructure and Social Facility Policies (Policies IKS).
Among them following policies are highlighted as those related to IRBM.

5-30 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 5.4.4 Policies related to IRBM for Pahang State

Type of Policy Code Policies
LP 2 Development and growth of the centre will be implemented in accordance with the hierarchy and functions
Development Second priority for the urban development especially to urban Temerloh - Mentakab for creating a more
LP 4
Location Policy conurbation town in the state of Pahang
LP 7 Agriculture area development pursuant to state agriculture zoning plan
LP 8 Industrial development will concentrated in the conurbation Kuantan and conurbation Temerloh - Mentakab
AS 1 Environmental quality will be further improved for creating the sustainable development
Creating the sustainable development through the preparation of management plan environmentally sensitive
AS 2
areas states based on the integrated management concepts and criteria national physical plan
Preserving and using diversified biology in the state for sustainable development and local socio economic
AS 3
development
Environmental
Policy All region permanent reserved forest areas and water catchment area that have been enacted to be managed in
AS 4
a sustainable manner
Environmental quality in the area of settlement should always be maintained for creating the environment is
AS 5
suitable for urban residents
Preservation of business and management forest area in need implemented together among the states
AS 6
contiguous to ensure that the main range to realize development
Increasing distribution and quality of water supply, electricity, gas and telecommunication in urban and rural
IKS 2
areas
Centralized sewerage system, will be available in the high density domestic area, commercial area, industrial
IKS 3
area and tourism area
Social Facility
Policy Preparing the centralized solid waste disposal site (centralized / regional dumping site) with the modern
IKS 4
disposal method and recycling
Provision of structure and flood control system and application of MASMA in any development to reduce risk
IKS 5
of flood
IKS 9 Recreation facilities should be provided sufficiently to meet the demand of residents

With respect to the social facility policies, their implementation methodologies and implementation
measurement indicators are also summarized in Table 5.4.5.

Table 5.4.5 Implementation Methodologies and Indicators for Social Facility Policies
Implementation Measurement
Number Policy Methodology for Implementation
Indicator (target by 2020)
• Replacing old pipes and improve capacity of
WTPs.
Increasing distribution and • Ensure all gazetted forests and water • Water supply of 1,050 mld
Policy IKS 2
quality of water supply catchment fully restored. • NRW of 20%
• Enforcement to solve the encroachment into
water catchment and theft of water meter.
Centralized sewerage system, • Sewerage Services Department provides
will be available in the high “sewerage catchment strategy to all local • All local authorities are equipped
Policy IKS 3 density domestic area, authority to identify a site for sewage with a sludge treatment plant.
commercial area, industrial area treatment plant or sludge treatment plant.
and tourism area
• Providing of high technology solid
waste disposal site,
• The percentage of recycling is based
Preparing the centralized solid on a set of guidelines,
• Local authorities and agencies involved
waste disposal site (centralized / • The use of " transfer station ' and '
develops a centralized waste disposal site.
Policy IKS 4 regional dumping site) with the incinerator,
• The selection of solid waste disposal site is
modern disposal method and • Transfer station to be provided to
done by local authorities.
recycling every district which do not have
waste disposal site based on zone
• The site selection does not cause
environmental pollution.
• The developer needs to use MASMA,
Provision of structure and flood • Minimizations of forest clearing to other • Use of MASMA in every land
control system and application land use and manage forest sustainably to development application;
of “Urban Storm water reduce river sedimentation, • Implementation of drainage / river
Policy IKS 5 Management Manual for • Gazette the river reserve as buffer zones and improvement projects; and
Malaysia (MASMA) in any preserve the natural vegetation in the river • All river reserves have been
development to reduce risk of reserve to reduce flood risk, and gazetted.
flood. • Installation of flood warning siren system
• Councils should provide open space
inventory,
• Each housing development should provide
Recreation facilities should be • Provision of open space areas, city
open space of 10% of the development area,
Policy IKS 9 provided sufficiently to meet the park and Regional Parks are
• Open space is to be gazetted by the local
demand of residents sufficient.
authority.
• Recreational areas such as City Park and
Regional Park are developed.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-31

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

5.5 Proposed Policies, Strategies, Measures and Projects/Actions

5.5.1 Proposed Policies

Proposed policies can be obtained by transforming each of the four core issues into a positive statement.
Moreover, special attention is paid to the wording of the policies, so that broad implications covering
almost all the significant issues discussed in Section 5.2 could be included in the policies. The core issues
and their corresponding policies are presented in Table 5.5.1. All the policies are in line with the federal
and state policies.

Table 5.5.1 Core Issues and Proposed Policies

No. Core Issue Proposed Policies
1 Weak institutional framework Strengthen Institutional Setup
2 Insufficient Water Utilization Ensure Sustainable Water Utilization
3 Deterioration of water Quality Create a Sustainable and Pleasant River Environment
4 Flood damage. Build a Resilient Society to Floods

5.5.2 Strengthen Institutional Setup

Based on the above problems analysis, the strategy and measures for strengthening the institutional setup
are proposed as shown in Table 5.5.2.

Table 5.5.2 Proposed Strategies and Measures for Strengthen Institutional Setup
Policy Strategies Measures Project/Action Lead Institution Remarks
I-1 Establish I-1.1 Enhance RBC - Enhance RBC RBC RBC was
Coordination - Determinate mandate, established in JICA
Framework member & activities preparatory survey
I-1.2 Formulate National - EPU, DID, Study is under
Water Policy & Nation State Authority progress
Water Resources Law
I-2 Implement I-2.1 Authorize River I-2.1.1: Establish Water DID, BKSA,
Proper River Management Agency Resources Department Land Office
Strengthen Management (WRD)
Institutional I-2.1.2: Establish River
Setup Basin Management
Office (RBMO)

I-2.2 Determinate River - Proceed gazetting of Land Office, DID

Management Area River Reserve
I-3 Integrate River I-3.1 Establish Integrated - Coordinate among All Relevant
Basin Information Information System for Stakeholders on Data Agencies
River Basin Management Sharing DID, MaCGDI DID: RBIS
- Integrate River Basin MaCGDI: MyGDI
Database

In order to achieve the above policy, the following strategies are recommended:
Strategy I-1: Establishment of Coordination Framework
Strategy I-2: Implementation of Proper River Management
Strategy I-3: Integration of River Basin Information
As for the Strategy I-1 and I-2, three types of institutional arrangements are proposed. The proposed
institutions are summarized in Table 5.5.3.

5-32 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Summary of Proposed Institutional Arrangements

Table 5.5.3

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-33

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(1) STRATEGY I-1: Establishment of Coordination Framework

To achieve the implementation of IRBM in Malaysia, it is necessary to establish the institutional

coordination framework with involvement of all relevant stakeholders in both federal and state
agencies.

(a) Measure I-1.1: Enhancement of River Basin Committee in Pahang River Basin

Current measures being implemented:

• National Water Resources Council (NWRC) was established in 1998 as a platform to discuss
on the water resources management matters among federal and state water-related government
agencies.
• In July 2003, NWRC accepted to implement Integrated River Basin Management in Malaysia
and realized the necessity to prepare river basin management plans for all 189 river basins in
the country.
• In Pahang State, the State River Management Committee was established as an inter-agency
coordination body with several sub-committees as working units.
• For the targeted river basins in the Preparatory Survey, River Basin Committee (RBC) was
formulated to be composed of Management Committee and Technical Committee of the
federal level and Task Forces and Working Groups of the state level.
Lead implementing agency:

• River Basin Committee (RBC)

Proposed action:

Various agencies have been involved in the river and water management, and these existing
agencies have specified mandates in water resources and river management. Therefore, iIn order to
optimize their expertise and to minimize the overlap and duplication of their mandates, the
establishment of coordination scheme is proposed for the full utilization of their expertise. As for
the coordination in the river basin, the River Basin Committee (RBC) has been established. Since
the river basin is shared by more than two states, the Federal government can intervene in
accordance with the Federal Constitution. However, Pahang River Basin is mainly dominated by
Pahang State, thus, RBC will be composed of Pahang state agencies. Based on the structure of
current RBC, the following structure of RBC is proposed (see in Figure 5.5.1).

Coordinate Management Committee

NWRC (Chaired by KSU of NRE)

Technical Committee
(Chaired by DG-DID)
Federal Level

<Pahang State> State Level

Pahang State River Coordinate Task Force

Management Committee (Head by UPEN & State DID)

Water Utilization G Environment G Flood Mitigation G

(Chair: BKSA) (Chair: DOE) (Chair: DID)

Figure 5.5.1 Proposed Structure of RBC in Pahang River Basin

5-34 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Under this scheme, the Management Committee will coordinate with NWRC and the Task Force
will coordinate with and report to State River Management Committee in Pahang state. The
members of Managemnet Committee, Technical Committee and Task Force are almost same as the
present member structure. However, several underlined agencies are proposed to be added.

Table 5.5.4 Proposed Members of RBC

Member
Management Committee Federal Level: NRE (Chairman), DID (Secretariat), MOF, EPU, NSC,
KeTTHA, MAAI, MHLG, MOW, MOH, DOE, HAHRIM, MMD, FD
State: State Secretaries in Pahang and Negeri Sembilan
Technical Committee Federal Level: DID (Chairman), River Division, DID (Secretariat), NRE,
MAAI, NAHRIM, MaCGDI, DSP, EPU
State Level: UPEN (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Melaka), NSC (Pahang, Negeri
Sembilan), DID (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DOE (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan),
FD (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), PERHILITAN (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan),
DLM (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DMG (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), TCPD
(Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DOA (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DOFi (Pahang,
Negeri Sembilan), DOH (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), MD (Pahang), SSD
(south & central branch), BKSA (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Melaka), SPAN
(south & central branch)
Task Force State Level: UEPN (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DID (Pahang, Negeri
Sembilan), DOE (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), FD (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan),
DLM (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DMG (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), TCPD
(Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DOE (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), DOFi (Pahang,
Negeri Sembilan), DOH (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), MD (Pahang), SSD
(south & central branch), BKSA (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Melaka), SPAN
(south & central branch)
District Level: District Officer (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), District Council
(Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), District NSC (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan), District
Land Office (Pahang, Negeri Sembilan)
Note: MOW: Ministry of Works, DSP: Department of Survey and Mapping, PERHILITAN:
Department of Wildlife and National Parks, MD: Marine Department

In accordance with flood management, NSC in federal, state and district levels are proposed to be
participated. Other members are also primary agencies for IRBM in Pahang River Basin.

In considering the necessary functions of RBC based on the review of the existing water
management frameworks in Malaysia shown in Box 1 below. It is identified that they carry out the
following functions.
• Advisory Function: to advise the State Authority on the management and use of water
resources
• Coordination Function: to conduct inter-agency coordination in the state for the management
and utilization of water resources
• Planning Function: to formulate and develop the policy, guideline, standard and procedure
pertaining to the management, utilization and conservation of water resources
• Regulatory Function: to regulate and control the water use for the sustainable water
management and protection of river environment in an integrated manner
• Investigation and Implementation Function: to undertake the research activities and to
implement the IRBM projects for the effective management and use of water resources
Based on the review of the existing river basin organizations in Malaysia and the discussions with
the officials concerned of federal and state government, the following functions will be required as a
coordination scheme. In principle, the Management Committee has an approval and coordination
function, the Technical Committee executes the coordination and planning functions, and the Task
Force carries out the regulatory and investigation and implementation functions.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-35

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 5.5.5 Proposed Main Functions of RBC

RBC Proposed Main Function
Management Committee - To act as a discussion platform on the implementation of IRBM in the river basin
- To approve IRBM plans and the implementation of the proposed projects in IRBM
plans for the effective and sustainable river basin management
- To approve the policies on water use priorities and allocation, flood mitigation
measures and river environment management
- To approve the river basin information management plan, standard and guideline
Technical Committee - To monitor and promote the implementation of IRBM projects pertaining the
management, utilization of water resources and the conservation of river
environment
- To formulate the policies on water use priorities and allocation, flood mitigation
measures and river environment management for the approval by the Management
Committee
- To establish the river basin information management plan, standard and guideline
for the approval by the Management Committee
Task Force - To report issues and projects discussed and conducted in RBC to State River
Management Committee in Pahang state
- To collect the required data for the river basin information database
- To monitor all the activities with negative impacts on the river basin management
and submit the monitoring reports to the Technical Committee
- To adopt and implement the policies on water use priorities and allocation, flood
mitigation measures and river environment management for the approval by
Management Committee formulated by the Technical Committee
- To submit the proposals on issues and solution methods for the implementation of
IRBM to the Technical Committee
- To draft the river basin information management plan, standard and guideline to be
submitted to the Technical Committee
- To enforce the relevant legislatives for the regulation of water management and use
and the protection of river environment

BOX 1: Review of Existing River Basin Organizations in Malaysia

(1) Selangor Water Management Authority (LUAS)

Selangor Water Management Authority (LUAS) was established in 1999 under the Selangor Water
Management Authority Enactment No. 2 in 1999 as a statutory body to ensure the water resources, river
basin, coastal waters and environment in manageable and sustainable condition for the socio-economic
development in the state. The main mandates of LUAS stipulated the Enactment are:
• To provide advice to the State Authority as to the policies, methods and measures
• To formulate, approval and implement management and development plans for water sources
• To regulate the issue of licenses and permits
• To coordinate multi agency relationship in the State and promote cooperation and coordination
for multi functional uses of water sources
Several Technical Committees were set up in accordance with concerned issues such as River Basin
Management Committee, Water Resources Emergency Committee, and so on. Moreover, under the
Committee, three task forces in Selangor, Langat and Klang rivers were established consisting of
relevant state agencies, local authorities, district land offices, and so on. The task forces play roles on
monitoring of water quality, law enforcement, data development, etc.

(2) Kedah Water Resources Board (LUAN)

Kedah Water Resources Enactment became effective in 2008 and Kedah Water Resources Board
(LUAN) is under the preparation of the establishment for the achievement of integrated management of
water use, development and protection of water resources in Kedah state. LUAN is supposed to be
chaired by Chief Minister with secretariat of Water Resources Director which consists of relevant state

5-36 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

departments. The Board will have the following functions.

• To ensure, maintain and facilitate the integrated and sustainable management of water resources
and the water environment of the State
• To promote and facilitate cooperation and coordination between different agencies for multi
functional uses of water resources
• To divide the State into river basin districts, designate and determine their boundaries for proper
management by River Basin Committees
Moreover, the Board will appoint the Water Resources Director as a main water regulator with the
following funcions.
• To prepare river basin plans
• To ensure the flow and exchange of information on projects, plans and activities which has a
bearing on integrated water resources management between the Board, relevant agencies and the
private sector, and between the Board and Federal government
The Board will divide the state into the river basin districts and set up the River Basin Committee
involving the District Officer. The main functions of River Basin Committee are:
• To investigate related matters affecting the management of river basin
• To assist the Water Resources Director in the preparation of a draft river basin plan and any other
reports
River basins are hydrological units, so the boarder of the basins shall be determined based on the
hydrological boundary, not on the administrative boundary. River basins are hydrological units, so
LUAN intends to manage the river and water resources in the river basin unit.

(3) Sabah State Water Resources Council and State DID

As required in Sabah Water Resources Enactment No. 6 in 1998, Sabah State Water Resources Council
was formulated in February 2006 consisting of major state departments. The main function stipulated in
the Enactment are:
• To advise the Minister on the management and use of water resources
• To set priorities for, ensure the development of, recommend for approval and review catchment
management plans developed for the improvement of the management of water resources
For the proper management of state’s water resources, Director of Water Resources shall be appointed
by the Minister to undertake the following functions.
• To manage the State’s water resources
• To control issuance of license for water activities
• To protect river and shore reserve
• To coordinate administrative action for water resources management
• To be responsible for the establishment of water resources database
In Sabah state, the State Director of DID was appointed as Director of Water Resources to carry out the
above functions for the management of the state’s water resources.

Currently, Technical Committee has been established, but Management Committee and Task Force
have not been formulated. Therefore, their establishment needs to be accelerated.

On the other hand, Pahang State River Management Committee (JKPS: Jawatankuasa Pengurusan
Sungai) acts as an inter-agency coordination body in Pahang state and organizes several
sub-committees as working unit for the integrated management of river basin in Pahang state such
as legal enforcement, environment, river management and development regulation. The Task Force
and the Committee have similar functions for the river management. Thus, the proposed Task Force
can be considered to be replaced by the State River Management Committee.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-37

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

The advantages and disadvantages for the establishment of RBC are summarized in Table 5.5.6.

Table 5.5.6 Advantage and Disadvantage of RBC

Description
- To establish RBC based on concensus among relevant agencies without
amendment of existing legislatives
- To provide opportunity for the coordination among relevant agencies
Advantage
- To accelerate the integration of policies and projects targeting the
implementation of IRBM in the river basin
- To promote the enforcement of legislatives
- To decline the activity gradually and to be dormant
Disadvantage - To be stymied by the lack of ownership
- To cause the slow decision making

Coordination scheme in the form of the RBC has various advantages. Based on the agreement
among the relevant agencies without any amendment of existing laws, the RBC can be established.
The RBC can provide a plenty of opportunities to the relevant agencies to discuss on, coordinate and
integrate their policies and projects for the implementation of IRBM. On the other hand, it may
decline its activities since, even though it is initially active, the members will be busy to take priority
on their own tasks and become dormant. Moreover, RBC may be hampered by the lack of
ownership on the RBC, and each member has the limited authority to make any decision.

IRBM is generally defined as a continuous process promoting the coordination of the development
and management of water, land and related resources for the optimization of economic and social
welfare. Thus, it is necessary to consider the ways to maximize the advantages and to minimize the
disadvantages. In order to ensure and develop the functions of RBC and the implementation of
IRBM in Pahang River Basin sustainably, the following consideration shall be initiated by the RBC.

• Regular Coordination Meetings: regular coordination meetings shall be held in order to

minimize the overlapping of the functions and projects of each agency and improve their
efforts, to encourage the collection of the related data and dissemination and integration of
these data efficiently, and to monitor activity for the identification of negative impacts and the
enforcement of legal requirement.

• Acceleration of Stakeholder Participation: Stakeholders such as water users, government

institutions and affected community residents shall be participated in IRBM process.
However, none of the laws describes the necessity of the stakeholders’ participation.
Therefore, it needs to be stipulated in the water related legislatives to ensure the participation
of the stakeholders.

Malaysia has a variety of experiences to formulate a committee as an inter-agency coordination

mechanism. Therefore, in the context of the current legislative framework in Malaysia, a committee
in the river basin is more recommendable and implementable scheme in Pahang River Basin.

(b) Measure I-1.2: Formulation of National Water Policy and National Water Resources
Law

Current measures being implemented:

• DID has conducted the comprehensive study on “Review Study of the National Water
Resources Study (2000-2050) and Formulation of National Water Resources Policy” from
October 2009 up to October 2010. The objectives of the Study are to review the National
Water Resources Study (2000-2050) and to formulate a National Water Resources Policy and
a National Water Resources Model Law. The Study mainly focuses on the arrangement of

5-38 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Federal and State Water Governance for the efficient and effective water resources
management in Malaysia through the formulation of National Water Resources Policy, and on
reconciliation of sectoral laws and regulations for the water resources development,
management and regulation.

• In the water service sector, the regulatory scheme on water supply services and sewerage
services has been drastically reformed by establishment of NWSC and acceleration of
privatization of water operators. On the other hand, the integrated management for water
resources and river basin such as river water, ground water, coastal water, etc. has not been
achieved yet. This is partly due to the absence of national water resource management policy
for the effective management of water resources.

Lead implementing agency:

• DID
• EPU
• State Authority
Proposed action:
• National Water Resources Policy shall consist of integrated water resources management and
river basin management policies, strategies and measures in consideration with existing
sectoral policies including land use plans, agricultural development plans, forest management
plans, infrastructure development plans, and so on.
• The existing institutions shall be reviewed and the improvement of institutional arrangement
and task demarcation shall be recommended.
• The existing sectoral laws and regulations shall be reviewed and improved, if necessary,
especially Waters Act 1920 to ensure the promotion of IRBM implementation
• Because the water is a property of the State, it is important to involve the relevant state
agencies to acknowledge the prepared National Water Resources Policy with approval of
NWRC.
The above study will be completed in October 2010, so the detail recommendation will not be
included in this report.

(2) STRATEGY I-2: Implementation of Proper River Management

For the proper river management in terms of water quantity and quality control and flood management,
the river system shall be managed and regulated in the river basin unit.

(a) Measure I-2.1: Authorization of River Management Agency

Current measures being implemented:

• Currently, the sector-based approach is adopted for river management.

• Since the land and river are properties of the state government within the state, Land Office is
a main agency to regulate the use, development and management of land. Moreover, BKSA is
responsible for the regulation of water abstraction in the state. However, especially for the
river management, both Land Office and BKSA do not have sufficient technical capability. On
the other hand, DID is not ensured to be an agency for river management with legal
jurisdiction even though DID provides the technical services for the river management.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-39

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

• River management is carried out based on the administrative boundary, not hydrological
boundary. It means that no agency manages and regulates the river system from the upstream
up to the downstream.

Lead implementing agency:

• Land Office
• DID
• BKSA
• State Authority
Proposed action:

The Pahang River Basin is shared by more than two states and there is no agreement among the
concerned states, so that the Federal Government can intervene in accordance with the Constitution
and it is legally possible to set up an Act to enable the Federal Government to manage and control
the targeted river basin under the federal jurisdiction. Moreover, as DID defines, IRBM is a
sustainable management of land and water based on natural geographical boundaries, rather than
administrative units. Therefore, the land and water resources need to be managed based on the unit
of the river basin in the integrated manner. In order to manage the river basin appropriately for
protecting flood disaster and securing the social welfare, all the authorities regarding the regulation
of river and water become integrated into solo apex institution. For the formulation of a solo apex
authority in Pahang River Basin, the following alternatives can be proposed.

(i) I-2.1.1: Establishment of Federal and State Water Resources Department

DID can be considered as a candidated body of Water Resources Department (WRD). The
necessary actions for the establishment of WRD will be:
• To define DID as a river management agency in the water related legislatives
• To define the mandates of WRD
• To amend the relevant laws to integrate and transfer the jurisdictions on river and water
management
Regarding the Ministers of the Federal Government Order 2009 under the Ministerial Functions
Act 1969 (Act 2), the following functions are ensured to implement IRBM.
• Development of planning and management of river basins
• Development of planning and management of flood mitigation programmes
Based on the above Act, the authority of DID for the river management has been already
endorsed. Moreover, since Federal DID is made up of the operational divisions with the proper
mandates for the implementation of river and water resources management, the organization
structure shall not be modified drastically to be Federal WRD.

On the other hand, State DID structure will be drastically changed. As pointed out, river
management consists of physical control and administrative control. In line with the physical
control, State DID has carried out traditionally, but administrative control, especially
designation of river administrative area and permission of water use is under the jurisdiction of
other agencies such as Land Office and State Water Regulatory Body (BKSA). In order to act as
a river management agency, these jurisdictions shall be taken over by State DID. The proposed
WRD framework is shown in Figure 5.5.2.

5-40 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Federal Government

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment National Water Resources Council

member
coordination
reform member
Federal DID Federal Water Resources Department River Basin Committee

Management
Committee
State Government

State DID consolicate

member Technical
transferring State Water Resources Department Committee
authority

State Land Office consolicate

Task Force
BKSA

reform coordination
District DID District Water Resources Department
member Pahang State River
transferring
authority Management Committee

District Land Office

Figure 5.5.2 Proposed Framework of Water Resources Department

Federal WRD is mainly responsible for the policy formulation for IRBM, and State and District
WRDs have operational functions to implement IRBM in the state, and the Director of State
WRD shall be appointed as Water Resources Director both in Pahang and Negeri Sembilan
states stipulated in each waters enactment.

LUAS and LUAN have a coordination function among the relevant agencies in the states, but
since they do not conduct the river works, WRD has different characteristics with them. On the
other hand, this scheme is similar with one in Sabah state. The Director of Sabah State DID is
appointed as the Director of Water Resources having the authorization on controlling licensing,
implementation of river management works, and being responsible for water resources database
establishment.

(ii) I-2.1.2: Establishment of River Basin Management Office

The establishment of River Basin Management Office (RBMO) as another alternative is

proposed to formulate a solo apex river basin authority by restructuring the State DID into river
basin level. Similar with State WRD, State DID can be a main body with the consolidation of
BKSA and the transfer of authority on designation of river reserve to RBMO. State DID in each
state in the river basin will be separated and integrated with other State DID into one RBMO.
Moreover, District DID offices also need to be restructured and integrated into Sub-Basin
Management Office (SBMO). RBMO and SBMO are a type of branch office directly
administrated and controlled by Federal WRD. The proposed RBMO and SBMO framework is
shown in Figure 5.5.3

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-41

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Federal Government

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment National Water Resources Council

Federal Government coordination
reform
Federal DID Federal Water Resources Department Federal Agencies (e.g. DOE, DOA, etc.)

coordination
State Government
consolicate coordination
State DIDs
transferring River Basin Management Office State Agencies (e.g. DOE, DOA, etc.)
authority
Pahang State River Management Committee
State Land Offices consolicate

BKSAs
coordination
reform
District DIDs Sub-Basin Management Office District Agencies (e.g. Land Office, etc.), LA
transferring
authority
District Land Offices

Figure 5.5.3 Proposed Framework of River Basin Management Office

Federal WRD is mainly responsible for the policy formulation for IRBM, and RBMO and
SBMO have operational functions to implement IRBM in the river basin level. In this scheme,
RBMO and SBMO are no more state agencies and will be federal agencies under the federal
jurisdiction.

This framework is a quite new challenge in Malaysia since the institutional structure in Malaysia
is organized based on the fedral system, and jurisdiction of each institution is determined by the
administrative unit. LUAS, LUAN and Sata State DID can exercise their jurisdiction in their
own state territories in principle. However, in this framework, federal institutions consisting of
Federal WRD, RBMO and SBMO plan, develop, conduct and supervise the IRBM
implementation.

The advantages and disadvantages for the establishment of RBC are summarized in Table 5.5.7.

Table 5.5.7 Advantages and Disadvantages of New Organizations

Description
Advantages
1) WRD - To integrate the authorities for river management into solo apex agency for the
smooth implementation of IRBM
- No need to amend the Federal Constitution
2) RBMO - To regulate river basin based on the hydrological boundary
- To authorize the apex agency initiating the IRBM
- To optimize the effectiveness, efficiency, fairness and neutrality on river basin
management
- To accelerate the implementation of IRBM
Disadvantages
1) WRD - To regulate river basin based on the state administrative boundary
- To be concerned that Land Office has hesitation to transfer its authorities and EPU
and/or BKSA objects to be consolidated with State DID
2) RBMO - To modify budget allocation procedures
- To be concerned that Land Office has hesitation to transfer their authorities and EPU
and/or BKSA objects to be consolidated with State DID
- -To amend the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution and relevant laws

For the establishment of WRD, the existing legislatives do not need to be amended and the
authority for river management can be clearly defined. The most remarkable feature of RBMO
scheme is to achieve the river basin management based on the river hydrological boundary, not
on the administrative boundary, which is a fundamental principle of IRBM. Through the

5-42 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

implementation of this alternative, the authority on river and water management will be secured
enabling to optimize the effectiveness, efficiency, fairness and neutrality on river basin
management. Therefore, RBMO can drive the implementation of IRBM in Pahang River Basin
in cooperation and coordination with other relevant agencies.

However, WRD in the state will manage and regulate the river and water resources, so its
jurisdiction will be constrained within the state boundary. On the other hand, RBMO scheme
will enable to realize the integrated management of the river basin ideally. Furthermore, the
process of the establishment of these schemes will stir up an argument between the Federal and
State Government affecting the Federal-State relationship. In addition, for the establishment of
RBMO as a federal agency, the amendment of Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution will
be inevitably required to transfer the authority on rivers from the State Government to the
Federal Government.

Thus, the achievement of this scheme will take time and further discussion will be necessary.

(b) Measure I-1.2: Determination of River Administration Area

Current measures being implemented:

• According to the Waters Act 1920 and other relevant legislatives, the river management area is
not clearly determined.

• As a river administrative area, the river corridor including the river reserve can be considered.
If the land is gazetted as river reserve, DID has legal jurisdiction on the usage of land within
the river reserve for public purposes such as flood mitigation, river channel improvement, etc.
However, the gazetting of river reserve is not sufficiently progressed.

• According to DID, river reserves have been gazetted only for three states of Pahang, Johor and
Selangor (Klang River only) in accordance with Subsection 13 of the National Land Code (Act
56). However, the regulators of activities in the river reserve areas based on this subsection are
not legally clear, and its enforcement is far from an effective level.

• In order to have required river bank widths effectively reserved, therefore, DID is about to
start in the 10th Malaysia Plan gazetting of river reserve areas in accordance with Subsection
62 of the Land Code, while promoting immediate gazetting in the states that have no river
reserve.

• In case of the gazetting by Subsection 62, the gazzeting notification is required to describe the
reserved land and purposes for reserving, to designate the officer having the control of the
land, and to be conclusive evidence that the land is reserved for a public purpose. DID could be
the officer to control of the river reserve. As soon as next year DID will start land-surveying as
a first step of this gazetting procedure.

Lead implementing agency:

• Land Office
• DID
Proposed action:

In order to implement the proper river management, river management area shall be designated in
the legal jurisdiction and the defined river management area shall be administrated appropriately.
For the achievement of river management, the following actions will be proposed.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-43

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(i) Defining River Management Area in the Legal Context

According to the section 62 of the National Land Code 1965 (Act 56), the reserved land is
defined as a land for the time being reserved for a public purpose. This reserved land will be read
in the context of river management, it is called river reserve, which can be gazetted as for the
flood mitigation and other public purposes for the implementation of IRBM.

The considerable width of river corridor and river reserve is mentioned in the manual issued by
DID and the establishment of river reserve is recommended to the State Authority. However, the
legal jurisdiction on the establishment of river reserve is not under the DID, but the Land Office
is a main regulatory body in the State Authority. Therefore, the river reserve shall be defined in
the relevant laws as a river management area and the gazetting of river reserves shall be
promoted.

(ii) Joint Monitoring for Enforcement

As mentioned above, the river corridor and the river reserve will be used not only for flood
mitigation and river improvement but also for the other public purposes such as environmental
protection, securing water quality and quantity, recreational purposes and so on. Regarding
these issues, various agencies have legal jurisdiction and responsibilities. Therefore, based on
the coordination by RBC, all the relevant agencies can jointly accelerate the gazetting of river
reserve and monitor the condition of river reserve. Moreover, after the establishment of SWRD
or RBMO, they will take initiatives to encourage the other agencies to conduct these proposed
activities.

(iii) Improvement of Public Awareness for River Management

Since the river shall be administrated for the public purposes, it is necessary to accelerate the
stakeholders’ participation by raising their awareness. Public awareness improvement programs
shall be considered, planned and developed carefully based on the characteristics of the
stakeholders. For agricultural farmers, for example, the program needs to include the
information not only on the agricultural policy and activities but also on the other relevant issues
such as water pollution, river erosion, water use balance, flood mitigation effects, etc. Therefore,
the public awareness improvement programs shall be planned, developed and conducted jointly
with other agencies through RBC.

(3) STRATEGY I-1.3: Integration of River Basin Information

For the implementation of IRBM, the development and sharing of accurate information among all the
relevant agencies is significant.

(a) Measure I-3.1: Establishment of Integrated Information System for River Basin
Management

Current measures being implemented:

• The National Register of River Basins Study proposed to establish a National River Basin
Decision Support System (RB-DSS) to facilitate the integrated management of all river basins
in the country. RB-DSS consists of River Basin Information Management System (RB-IMS),
River Basin Geographical Information System (RB-GIS), and River Basin Simulation
Modeling System (RB-SMS).

• DID acts as a secretariat to develop, maintain and update the river basin database to provide
the water-related data to all the agencies involving in the river basin management.

5-44 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

• A web-based RB-IMS called “River Basin Information System (RBIS)” has been developed
as for the intranet network of DID as trial.

• The development of Geospatial Data Infrastructure (MyGDI) was initiated by the government
and Malaysian Center for Geospatial Data Infrastructure (MaCGDI) under NRE is responsible
for the coordination, development and implementation of MyGDI as the clearinghouse of GIS
database to the various agencies.

Lead implementing agency:

• DID
• MaCGDI
• All Relevant Agencies
Proposed action:

The objective of information management is to ensure that essential information is appropriately

managed and disseminated to the stakeholders to support the transparent decision-making and to
gain commitment and support for the decision made. The procedure for the river basin information
management is summarized below:
Information Capture

Information Storage

Information Processing

Information Retrieval

Information Updating

Information Security

Information Sharing & Dissemination

Source: UNDP, Integrated Water Resources Management for River Basin Organizations: Training Manual, June 2008

Figure 5.5.4 Information Management Process

The contained data and data storage method shall be determined based on the necessity and issues
for IRBM. The proposed captured data are listed in Table 5.5.8.

Table 5.5.8 Component of River Basin Information

Type Component Lead Agency
- Administrative Boundary (state, district, - TCPD, Local Authority
sub-district, village)
Administrative Data - Institution (relevant organization, legislative, - DID, Department of Local Authority,
guideline, manual, etc. related to river basin Local Authority
management)
- Land Use (Current and Future) - TCPD, Land Office, Local Authority
- Water Resource (surface, groundwater) - BSKA, KeTTHA, DID, JBM
- Water facilities - JBA, SAINS, DID
Social & Economic - Agriculture - DOA
Data - Fishery/Aquaculture - DOFi
- Livestock - DVS
- River Sand Dredging - Land Office, DID
- Flood/Drought Disaster Record - DID, NSC

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-45

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Type Component Lead Agency

- River Course - DID
- Hydrologic Data - DID
- Meteorological Data - MMD
Environmental Data - Topographic Data - Dept. of Survey and Mapping, DID
- Biodiversity - DOE
- Forest - FD
- Water Quality Monitoring Data - DOE, MOH

As for the information storage, two major database so called “MyGDI and RBIS have been
established by MaCGDI and DID respectively. However, the data contained in both databases are
mutually related. Therefore, both database can be supportive tools each other and be considered to
be integrated.

The stored information need to be processed from raw data for the dissemination to the
stakeholders. In each database namely MyGDI and RBIS, these data will be retrieved and updated
by MaCGDI and DID under the monitoring of the Technical Committee and Task Force regularly.
The confidential data might be included, so the security of database shall be ensured.

It is necessary what information will be shared among the stakeholder and how to disseminate these
shared information. In principle, these data are supportive for the decision-making and attractive for
the acceleration of the stakeholders. Therefore, the contents and methods for the sharing and
dissemination of the stored information shall be discussed and decided in the RBC.

The establishment of systematic river basin information management will enable the RBC to
regulate and manage the water use, flood mitigation and river environment through the utilization of
the database. However, in reality, due to constraints of human resources and financial resources, the
development of information management will proceed gradually. Moreover, the quality, format,
procedure, etc. shall be standardized for the effective dissemination of the river basin information
among the stakeholders.

In order to achieve the well-organized system on the river basin information management, the river
basin information management plan, standard and guideline shall be established and approved by
the Management Committee.

5.5.3 Ensure Sustainable Water Utilization

The policy of water utilization sector is to ensure sustainable water utilization. As repeated in the previous
sections, the Pahang River Basin is blessed with abundant water. There seems to be no issue on the
surface. If closely examined, however, there are anticipated to appear very soon or already have appeared
some negative issues such as impacts of Climate Change, imbalance of demand and supply capacity,
negligence of environmental flow, Non Revenue Water (NRW), etc. The proposed policy aims to have
the abundant water continuously and effectively utilized by the succeeding generations.

In order to achieve the above policy, three strategies are recommended:

Strategy W-1: Ensure Sufficient Water Resources

Strategy W-2: Ensure Sustainable Water Services Industry

Strategy W-3: Ensure Sufficient Irrigation Water

Under the three strategies, eight measures and their relevant proposed projects/actions are also proposed
as shown in Table 5.5.9. Details of these measures and proposed projects/actions are described as below:

5-46 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 5.5.9 Proposed Policy, Strategies and Measures

Responsible
Policy Strategies Measures Proposed Project/Action Remarks
Agencies
W-1.1: Monitor impact of W-1-1: Monitor impacts of
BKSA
Climate Change Climate Change
W-1.2: BKSA, JBA,
Study is going
Review water resources SAINS, SPAN,
on.
development plan PAAB, DID
W-1.3:
W-1.3.1:
Incorporate environmental BKSA, DID,
W-1: Study on environmental
Ensure sufficient flow with water resources DOE,
flow
water resources development plan
W-1.4:
Ensure Establish response and BKSA, DID Mechanism is
sustainable coordination mechanism to etc. available.
water droughts
utilization W-1.5: W-1.3.2:
Explore alternative water Study on groundwater BKSA, JMG
resources potential
W-2.1:
W-2: JBA, SAINS, Restructuring
Complete restructuring of
Ensure SPAN, PAAB is going on.
water services industry
sustainable water
W-2.2 Reduce Non JBA, SAINS,
services industry W-2.2.1: Reduce NRW
Revenue Water (NRW) SPAN, PAAB
W-3: Efforts should
W-3.1 Manage irrigation
Ensure sufficient DID be continuously
facilities properly
irrigation water made.

(1) Strategy W-1: Ensure Sufficient Water Resources

(a) Measure W-1.1: Monitor Impact of Climate Change

Current measures being implemented:

• NAHRIM conducted a study on river flows of the Pahang River in the “Study of the Impact of
Climate Change on the Hydrologic Regime and Water Resources of Peninsular Malaysia”,
Final Report, September 2006, NAHRIM.

• There is no specific monitoring on impacts of Climate Change in the Pahang River Basin after
the above-said study.

Lead implementing agency:

• BKSA

Proposed Project/ActionW-1.1.1: Monitoring Impact of Climate Change

According to the NAHRIM Study and the results of the long-term runoff analysis in this Preparatory
Survey, the water-rich Pahang River Basin will possibly fall into water-short condition in future,
depending upon the evolution of Climate Change. Sea water intrusion by the sea water rise is also a
concern. Therefore, it is proposed to monitor of the impacts of climate change, as follows:

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-47

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(i) Review of IPCC

The Intergovernmental Plan on Climate Change Monitoring Impacts of Climate Change

Carry out by : BKSA
(IPCC) is a scientific intergovernmental body Duration : Every 5 years
tasked with evaluating the risk of climate change, Cost estimate : No significant additional cost
and the panel was established in 1988 by the Coverage : Pahang River Basin
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and Main scope :
the United Nations Environmental Programme „ Review of IPCC
(UNEP). IPCC publishes as assessment report „ Examination of Trend of Observed Rainfall
Data
every 4 or 5 years. The next 5th report is
„ Estimation of Impacts
scheduled to be released in September 2013. The
IPCC assessment report should be studied.

(ii) Examination of Trends of Observed Rainfall Data

It is required to examine the trends of observed rainfall data of rainfall and river flow data in the
Pahang River Basin.

(iii) Estimation of Impacts

Furthermore, it is also important to estimate the long-term runoff discharge in the Pahang River
Basin based on projection data by institutes worldwide with reference to Section 4.6.

(iv) Monitoring of Sea Water Intrusion

There are many intake facilities along the tidal stretch of the Pahang River. It is required to
monitor the sea water intrusion by measuring salinity regularly during high tides.

(b) Measure W-1.2: Review Water Resources Development Plan

Current measures being implemented:

• The Government of Malaysia made a decision to review “the National Water Resources Study
2000 – 2050” and DID is entrusted with the responsibility to carry out a study entitled “Review
of the National Water Resources Study (2000 – 2050) and Formulation of National Water
Resources Policy”

Lead implementing agency:

• BKSA, JBA, SAINS, SPAN, PAAB, DID

General Recommendations:

• The development of water supply investments has been carried out by Pahang State and N.
Sembilan State respectively in line with “the National Water Resources Study 2000 – 2050”
that was published in 2000. As discussed in Section 5.2, it deemed that the actual consumption
has already reached the water supply capacity for districts of Temerloh and Raub, and that
there are big differences between demand projection and actual consumption.

• Fortunately, now the Review of the National Water Resources Study (2000 – 2050) is going
on. The JICA Study Team hopes that the water resources development plan will be closely
reviewed in due consideration of the above-said district-level issues.

5-48 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(c) Measure W-1.3: Incorporate Environmental Flow with Water Resources Development
Plan

Current measures being implemented:

• According to ‘DID Manual Volume 2 River Management’, the objective of environmental

flow is to provide a flow regime that adequate in terms of quantity, quality and timing for
sustaining the health of the rivers and other aquatic ecosystems. The environmental flow
management strategies are also directed at two main types of management responses to the
potential and extent of altered flow regimes as below:
• A proactive response, intended to maintain the hydrological regimes of undeveloped
rivers as close as possible to the unregulated condition, or at least to offer some level of
protection of natural river flows and ecosystem characteristics.
• A reactive response, intended to restore certain characteristics of the pre-regulation
flow regime and ecosystem in developed rivers with modified/regulated flow regimes.
• For the Pahang River no environmental flow has not been officially determined yet at present.
According to personnel concerned, however, recently constructed dams are required to release
a sort of compensation flow, although no water release as compensation flow during normal
times have not been considered for old dams at all. This compensation flow seems to be
dependent on each dam’s judgment and condition, and it also seems to be unclear how to set up
the flow amount.

Lead implementing agency:

• BKSA, DID, DOE

Proposed Project/ActionW-1.3.1: Study on Environmental Flow

Environmental flow is the amount of water needed in rivers to maintain healthy ecosystems. It is
recommended to determine the environmental flow at several reference points in the Pahang River
Basin. Then the environmental flow should be incorporated into the water resources development
plan, as flows:

(i) Site Survey

To grasp the situation in the Pahang River, site survey is required focusing on river use, aquatic
fauna and flora, water quality, river flow, and river works, etc. Several reference sites for
environmental flow will be selected through this site survey.

(ii) Data Collection Study on Environmental Flow

Carry out by : BKSA, DID, DOE
Duration : 2 years
Data collection of river flow data, river cross Cost estimate : RM 1-2 million
sections, width of water surface, etc., needs to be Coverage : Pahang River Basin
carried out. Main scope :
„ Site Survey
(iii) Literature Study on Methodologies „ Data Collection
„ Literature Study on Methodologies
„ Determination of Environmental Flow at
Literature study on methodologies for
several reference points
determining environmental flow will be carried
out to select a suitable method for the Pahang River Basin. According to the DID Manual, many
methods are introduced as shown in Table 5.5.10. And, “Review of the National Water
Resources Study (2000 – 2050) and Formulation of National Water Resources Policy” is also

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-49

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

dealing with environmental flow. Therefore, results of this study will be informative in the
method selection.

Table 5.5.10 Summary of Environmental Flow Methods

Categorization of
Organization Sub-category Example
Methods
Hydrological (e.g. Q95 Index)
Methods
Ecological (e.g. Tennant Method)
Hydrological (e.g. Richter Method)
Hydraulic (e.g. Wetted Perimeter
Desk-top Analysis
Method)
IUCN(Dyson et al. Ecological
2003) BBM, Expert Panel Assessment
Functional Analysis
Method, Benchmarking Methodology
Habitat Modelling PHABSIM
Expert Team Approach, Stakeholder
Approaches
Approach (expert and non expert)
Frameworks IFIM, DRIFT
Hydrological Index
Tennant Method
Methods
Prescriptive Hydraulic Rating
Wetted Perimeter Method
World Bank (Brown & approaches Methods
King, 2003) Expert Panels
Holistic Approach BBM
Interactive
IFIM DRIFT
approaches
Hydrological Index Methods Tennant Method
Hydraulic Rating Methods Wetted Perimeter Method
Habitat Simulation Methodologies IFIM
IWMI (Tarme, 2003) BBM
DRIFT
Holistic Methodologies
Expert Panel
Benchmarking Methodology
Source: DID Manual

(iv) Determination of Environmental Flow at several Reference Points

The environmental flow will be determined using by the suitable method at the abovementioned
reference points in the Pahang River Basin. It is recommended to determine the environmental
flow with careful consideration, and to make effort to ensure it for fish and functions of the river
channels in the Pahang River Basin. Moreover, it is strongly required to eliminate non-flow
areas, which can be seen downstream of old dams.

(d) Measure W-1.4: Establish Response and Coordination Mechanism to Drought

Current measures being implemented:

• Mainly due to impacts of Climate Change, the risk of droughts is expected to increase.
However, the Pahang River Basin has no experience to response to droughts.

• Half of the Malaysian territory was affected during droughts in 1982-1983 and 1997-1998.
After these severe droughts, ‘Drought Disaster Administration Operation Regulations’ were
drawn up with some countermeasures.

• According to the Drought Disaster Administration Operation Regulations , Department of

Meteorology, DID and JMG are the main agencies that have the authority to determine and
release the warning regarding drought. Table 5.5.11 explains about the warning stages for
drought. These departments are also responsible to release and provide information regarding
the drought to water users in accordance with the Information Release System shown below.
All management agencies gather to ‘Disaster Operation Control Center’ to decide regarding
the response to drought effects.

5-50 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 5.5.11 Warning Stage for Drought in Malaysia

Stage Remarks
Alert A condition where weather activity change from normal to no rainfall and can cause difference in river
water level. At this stage, final preparations are made.
Warning A condition where continuous decrement of rainfall rate that caused decrement in main rivers water
level. At this stage, preparations are done and ready to take action immediately.
Emergency Start action

• JMG and DID announce early warning to National Safety Council and other agencies related
when the situation reach alert level continuously until the termination level.

• Immediately after the announcement, National Safety Council activates the Management and
Disaster Assistance Committee based on the drought level Stage 1 (district level), Stage 2
(state level) or Stage 3 (federal level), of which details are described in Table 5.5.12.

Table 5.5.12 Drought Levels

Level Contents
1 Drought occurred in 1 or more area in a district . So, the rescue mission will be executed by the district
(District) management.
Drought occurred in 2 or more districts in a state. So, the rescue mission will be executed by the state
2
management. Federal management team that is participated by the skeletal staff will be activated as well
(State)
to observe the development and are preparing to help whenever needed.
3 Drought occurred in 1 state or more, depending on the drought level. So, the federal management will be
(federal) in action to give assistance.

Lead implementing agency:

• BKSA, JBA, SAINS, DID, Department of Meteorology, JMG

General Recommendations:

• There has ever been not reported any serious drought in the Pahang River basin.
Consequently, the Pahang River Basin fortunately has not made use of the above-said
response and coordination mechanism during droughts, namely the Pahang River Basin has no
experience. Any special project or any special action is not proposed here, however, it is
strongly required to execute a kind of simulation every year before dry season for the emergent
response and the coordination procedures during droughts.

(e) Measure W-1.5: Explore Alternative Water Resources

Current measures being implemented:

• Currently, there are no specific designated alternative water resources to river water in the
Pahang River Basin because of ample river water.

Lead implementing agency:

• BKSA, JMG

Proposed Project/ActionW-1.5.1: Study on Groundwater Potential

Groundwater potential in the Pahang River Basin is nearly undeveloped natural resources, although
officials concerned recognize its high potential. It is recommended that the groundwater be explored
as an alternative water resource to prepare for any contingency. Thus, the following study is
proposed for this purpose, as follows:

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-51

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(i) Literature Study

All available information and various types of maps, such as topographic maps, geologic maps,
aerial photographs, study reports, and data of water use and hydro-geology concerning the
Pahang River basin are collected and analyzed. Based on the literature study, target study areas
are determined.

(ii) Field Reconnaissance

Field Reconnaissance is carried out to complement the Literature Study at the target areas. A
fact-finding survey is also carried out to grasp the situation of water use from residents.

(iii) Observation

Observation is carried out collate qualitative and quantitative information of the hydrological
conditions. It entails rainfall data, evaporation dada, river flows, well water level and water
quality.

Understanding of groundwater and surface water conditions and the interaction based on
existing data can help guide hydrogeologic modeling and aspects of the more detailed
investigations to follow.

(iv) Drilling and Pumping Test

Exploration drilling and pumping test is conducted to provide detailed information on

groundwater conditions. Understanding of groundwater and surface water conditions and their
interaction based on the test data help hydro-geological modeling.

(v) Analysis

Groundwater availability is analyzed by using the hydro-geological simulation model.

(vi) Selection of Groundwater Development Areas

Groundwater development areas are selected Study on Groundwater Potential

based on the above analysis. Carry out by : BKSA, JMG
Duration : 2 years
(vii) Settlement on Groundwater Cost estimate : RM 3-4 million
Development Plan Coverage : Pahang River Basin
Main scope :
„ Literature Study
The main goal with this groundwater
„ Field Reconnaissance
development is to supply water of a good quality „ Observation
certainly at least cost in case of a contingency. „ Detailed Survey
Consequently, it is required that groundwater „ Analysis of Study Results
development plan, including abstraction points, „ Selection of Groundwater Development Areas
the number of wells, distribution of water pipes „ Settlement of Groundwater Development
etc., is settled. Plan

5-52 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(2) Strategy W-2: Ensure Sustainable Water Services Industry

(a) Measure W-2.1: Complete Restructuring of Water Services Industry

Current measures being implemented:

• Water Services reform requires a new industry model that can transform the industry to a
long-term sustainable operating model. With an amendment of the Federal Constitution and
creation of two acts, the Federal Government became to regulate the water and sewerage
services industries in terms of licensing regulating services operators, while state governments
retain the power to regulate water resources, water catchment areas and river basins. The water
services industry will be privatized and integrated with the sewerage industry.

• Restructuring of the water service industry, covering water supply and sewage services, began
during 8th Malaysian Plan period with the objective of creating and efficient and sustainable
water services industry.

• Currently, JBA, Pahang State-owned water supply department, is still operating as domestic
industrial water supply operator. Pahang State is scheduled to migrate into the new regime in
2011. Negeri Sembilan State has migrated into the new regime in 2008, and SAINS, the
semi-governmental corporation plays as a water supply operator.

Lead implementing agency:

• JBA, SAINS

General Recommendations:

During the 10th Malaysian Plan period, restructuring efforts will enter into its final phase as shown
in Table 5.5.13. Any special project or any special action is not necessary to propose, however,
both Pahang State and N. Sembilan State are being expected to complete the restructuring shown
below within 10th Malaysian Plan period to ensure sufficient water use in the Pahang River Basin.

(i) Completing Migration of Water Operators

Full migration will be completed during the 10th Malaysian Plan period. Upon migration, the
water operators will have to comply with the provisions of the Water Services Industry Act,
2006 and will be regulated by the National Water Services Commission or Suruhanjaya
Perkhidmatan Air Negara (SPAN).

(ii) Moving towards full cost recovery

Tariffs in 2009 covered only 78% of operating expenditure in Malaysia. To address this
problem, the Government will phase in a tariff-setting mechanism that allows full recovery of
costs to encourage sustained investments in upgrading and rehabilitating water treatment plants
and distribution systems. It is essential that Pahang State and N. Sembilan State act promptly
according to this movement respectively, however, it is necessary to protect the poor.

(iii) Driving efficiency in operations and capital expansion

Water operators will be required to provide detailed 30-year business plans and 3-year
operational plans. These plans will be the basis for a roadmap towards full cost recovery and
will allow Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad (PAAB) to plan long term capital expenditure funding.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-53

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

SPAN will regulate and monitor the performance of water operators based on the plans, linking
tariff increases to efficiency gains in operations and capital expenditure.

(iv) Integrating water and sewerage services

Restructuring of sewerage services will be implemented by parcelling out the operations of

centralised sewerage services to the respective state water operating companies.

When completed, the industry will move towards implementing an integrated tariff for both water
and sewerage services. Both Pahang State and N. Sembilan State are required to follow this
movement.

Table 5.5.13 Restructuring Schedule of Water Services Industry

Malaysian
Contents
Plan
Stabilization
8th
• Privatisation and corporatisation of state water authorities
2001-05
• Planning for restructuring of water services industry
Consolidation
• Operationalisation of National Water Services Commission (SPAN)
9th • Enforcement of Water Services Industry Act (WSIA), 2006
2006-10 • Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad (PAAB) takes over existing water assets from state at negotiated
values and is responsible for implementing water infrastructure development
• State water operators are asset-light and focus on service provision
Moving towards efficiency in operations and management
10th • Tariff-setting mechanism to allow full cost recovery to be completely phased in by 2013
2011-15 • Integration of water supply and sewerage services
• Initial efforts towards the introduction of integrated water and sewerage tariffs
Source: 10th Malaysian Plan

(b) Measure W-2.2: Reduce Non-Revenue Water

Current measures being implemented:

• NRW is a significant issue for the water industry for Pahang and Negeri Sembilan States. The
NRW rates of Pahang State and Negeri Sembilan State are 52.8 % and 53.1% respectively,
about 15% higher than the national average of 37%. Both JBA and SAINS have been making
efforts to reduce NRW, but no significant effect has been reported.

Lead implementing agency:

• JBA, SAINS, SPAN, PAAB

Proposed Project/ActionW-2.2.1: Reduction of NRW

The current NRW rate in the Pahang River

basin is assumed at about 50 %, and this
prominent NRW rate brings unreasonable
water abstraction and water treatment plant
capacities and increase in the financial
expenditure. According to a book entitled
‘THE WATER TABLET; MALAYSIAN
WATER REFORMS’ the economical
breakeven point is around 20 % as shown in
Figure 5.5.5. Therefore, a project to
reduce NRW is proposed as follows:
Figure 5.5.5 Economical Breakeven Point
for NRW

5-54 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(i) Analysis of Main Cause of NRW

Figure 5.5.6 shows the cause of NRW in N. Sembilan State. It can be seen from this figure
that pipe leakage and meter troubles are the main causes of NRW. This seems to be a common
consensus to all water operators in the world. Thus, it is required to analyze the main causes of
NRW in the Pahang River Basin firstly, and to grasp points/areas of outbreaks.

Source; SAINS

Figure 5.5.6 Cause of NRW

(ii) Pipe Repair/Replacement

As the abovementioned, the pipe leakage is Reduce NRW

supposed to be one of the main causes of NRW Carry out by : JBA, SAINS, SPAN, PAAB
commonly. The length of leakage time has a big Duration : Every year
influence on the leakage volume, so repairs or Cost estimate : No significant additional cost
replacement should be conducted as soon as Coverage : Pahang River Basin
possible. The pipe leakage is generally classified Main scope :
„ Analysis of Main Cause of NRW
into two types by its form as ‘Surface Leakage’ „ Pipe Repair/Replacement
flows out on the ground and ‘Underground „ Meter Repair/Replacement
Leakage’ leaks out underground without appearing
on the surface. ‘Surface Leakage’ is quite easy to
find out, however, ‘Underground Leakage’ is not so easy to identify the source of leak because
of its form. Tokyo Metropolitan Government, Japan has achieved the low leakage rate of 3.1 %
in 2008. The Leakage investigation methods or special equipment being used in the ‘Bureau of
Waterworks, Tokyo Metropolitan Government’ are mainly four methods and 2 special
equipment. They are introduced in the following box as a good practice:

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-55

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Box-1; Leakage Investigation Methods/Equipments

I. Minimum Night Flow Measurement Method
The minimum night flow measurement is a method that pays attention to the time period when there is no water
usage in a block (Unoccupied hour), as shown in Figure-1. First, gate valves surrounding the block to be
investigated are closed and the water from other blocks is shut down. Then the water is sent into the block
through minimum flow measuring equipment set in the block water meter and the flow rate is measured. The
minimum flow rate measured during the vacant period is considered to be the leakage. High precision portable
minimum flow measuring equipment* as shown in Photo-1 is used in the measurement.
* ; This equipment was developed jointly by the Bureau and private industry.

Figure-1 Theory of Minimum Night Flow Measurement Method

Photo-1 Portable Minimum Flow Meter

II. Acoustic Method
In the acoustic method, the leak sound is detected by an acoustic rod or an electronic leakage detector. The
metal tip of the acoustic rod is pressed against the water meter, gate valve of fire hydrant. Acoustic Rods
and an Electronic Leakage Detector are shown in Photo-2. An inspector then presses an ear against a
vibration diaphragm set at the other end of the rod, and listens for transmitted sound of the leakage as shown
in Figure-2. The acoustic rod can only tell whether the leakage is occurring in the neighborhood, but it is

5-56 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

difficult to detect the position of leakage. Using an electronic leakage detector, a pickup to convert the leak
sound into an electrical signal is placed on the ground, and the sound transmitted through the ground is
amplified and heard through headphones. As the pickup is moved in order, the leak sound is heard most
strongly directly above the point of leakage and thus the position of leakage can be detected.

Photo-2 Acoustic Rod Photo-3 Electric Leakage Detector

Acoustic Rod Electric Leakage Detector

Figure-2 Acoustic Method

III. Correlation Method
In the correlation method, the position of leakage is detected by using a correlation type leakage detector (a
combination of correlation analyzer, sensor, amplifier, wireless transmitter, etc. as shown in Photo-3).
First the sensor is placed on either side of the expected point of leakage in the pipeline and the time lag of
leakage sound reaching the two sensors is obtained by the correlation analyzer. The position of leakage is
calculated by the time lag, distance between sensors, and velocity of leaking sound transmitting through the
pipe as shown in Figure-3. The correlation type leakage detector* has the excellent characteristic of being
largely unaffected by traffic noise or laying depth of the pipe.
* This detector was developed jointly by the Bureau and private industry.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-57

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure-3 Theory of the Correlation Method

Photo-4 Correlation Type Leakage Detector

IV. Time Interval Type Leakage Detector
The time integral type leakage detector detects a leakage by utilizing the character that leaking sound
persists. In this detector, sensor is pressed against the exposed part of the service pipe in the water meter
box and the leakage is detected by an automatic leakage detector, measuring transmitted sound through the
pipeline for certain time period (10 seconds to 3 minutes). The time integral type leakage detector*
shown in Figure-4 has excellent characteristics such as being largely unaffected by intermittent usage sound
of the waterworks or traffic noise transmitted through the ground, and not requiring skill to operate.
* This detector was developed jointly by the Bureau and private industry.

Figure-4 Time Integral Type Leakage Detector

5-58 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

V. Transmission-type Leakage Detector

The transmission-type leakage detector* is used for a leakage investigation in a pipe, where Chemically
inert helium gas mixed with water or air is injected into, by detecting the helium gas leaked from the pipe
and seeped through the ground as shown in Figure-5. This type of method allows to detect very small
amount of leakage or leakage in bigger pipes such as main distribution pipes buried deep underground since
it is not based on the leak sound as the acoustic leakage sound detection method or the correlative leak
detection method.
* This detector was developed jointly by the Bureau and private industry.

Figure-5 Transmission-Type Leakage Detector

VI. Other Methods
Leakage investigation requires not only the technology to identify the leakage but also those to detect the
position of laid or to test water quality to determine whether leaking water is tap water. Metal Pipe
Detector, Nonmetal Pipe Detector and Water Hammer Generator are used to detect the pipe location.
Metal Pipe Detector and Water Hammer Generator are shown in Photo-4. To test whether it is the tap water
or not, simple methods using a thermometer, residual chlorine meter, pH meter and electrical conductivity
measuring equipment, or more precise methods of detecting trihalomethane and others are applied.

Photo-5 Metal Pipe Detector (left) and Water Hammer Generator (right)
Source: Bureau of Waterworks, Tokyo Metropolitan Government

(iii) Meter Repair/Replacement

Meter troubles are also one of the main causes of NRW. Generally, the meter troubles are
classified into 2 types, inaccuracy of meters and reading error. It is required that defective meters
should be repaired or replaced.

There are 400,000 and 217,000 meters in Pahang and Negeri Sembilan States respectively as of
2008. Out of them, 264,000 (66%) and 74,000 (34%) meters are 8 years or older respectively.
The percentage of the old meters of Pahang is much higher than the national average of 35 %.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-59

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

It is essential to maintain properly meters and renew them periodically because aged meters are
apt to get into trouble. Moreover, on the occasion of renewal, the new model of meter should
be carried out taking the accuracy of meters by type into consideration. Table 5.5.14 shows the
meter accuracy for reference.

Table 5.5.14 Indicative Examples of Meter Accuracy

Equipment/Method Approximate Accuracy range
Electromagnetic Flow Measures <0.15- 0.5 %
Ultrasonic Flow Meters 0.5 - 1 %
Insertion Meters <2 %
Mechanical Meters 1.0 - 2 %
Venturi Meter 0.5 - 3 %
Meas. Weirs in open channels 10 - 50 %
Volume calculated with pump curves 10 - 50 %
Note: Actual meter accuracy will depend on many factors (like flow profile, calibration, meter
installation, maintenance) and has to be verified case by case.
Source: World Bank Institute, 2007

(iv) Reading Error

Meter Readers are required to make accurate reading. Especially simple errors such as
misreading of decimal positions should be avoided. Therefore, it is important to train the meter
readers and to keep them motivated. For this purpose, awareness program for education and
training is necessary to develop and maintain capacities of them.

(3) Strategy W-3: Ensure Sufficient Irrigation Water

(a) Measure W-3.1: Manage Irrigation Facilities Properly

Current measures being implemented:

• Water Supply for irrigation is being carried out by DID in the Pahang River Basin. Irrigation
Water is taken at intakes and is led into paddy fields through canals.

Lead implementing agency:

• DID

General Recommendations:

• As the above-mentioned, DID is maintaining the irrigation water supply facilities to ensure the
irrigation water. Therefore, any special project or any special action is not proposed in this
study. However, it is necessary that DID should continuously manage the irrigation water
supply facilities properly so as not to interfere with irrigation. Moreover, it is required to
make further efforts to ensure the irrigation water taking the climate change into consideration
in the future.

5.5.4 Create a Sustainable and Pleasant River Environment

The policy of environment sector is to create a sustainable and pleasant river environment. ‘River
environment’ here refers to the natural environment of the whole river basin that includes river channel
itself as well as the catchment area. ‘Sustainable’ means that it is necessary to protect the natural
biodiversity, water catchment capacity as well as the cultural heritage of the river basin while
appropriately making use of the natural resources for economic purposes such as timber extraction,
eco-tourism development, mining, plantation, etc. ‘Pleasant river environment’ means that it is necessary
to create a scenic river view and riverfront that harmonize with the urban development, townscape as well

5-60 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

as local culture and history. On a whole, the policy aims to promote the protection of natural environment
of the river basin, with sustainable exploration of natural resources and appropriate landscaping of
riverfront at selected locations of urban centers.

In order to achieve the above policy, the following strategies are recommended:

Strategy E-1: Reduce Pollution Load to Ensure Achievement of at Least NWQS Class II
River Water Quality

Strategy E-2: Maintain the natural biodiversity of the river basin

Strategy E-3: Protect the catchment areas for water intake to avoid contamination and
depletion of water resource

Strategy E-4: Make use of river as an asset for townscape and recreational activities

The above strategies and the respective measures and their components are discussed in this subsection,
and are summarized in Table 5.5.15. Further to the proposed strategies, measures, and general
recommendations, this section presents proposed projects/actions that deemed to be important and urgent
to be implemented. When reading this section, it is recommended that it should be read together with the
same section of the Part 2 Muar River Basin. This is because there are a lot of common issues between
these two river basins. Also, when the proposed project is similar in both river basins, the implementing
agency may choose to pilot at one of the river basins or one of the three States involved. So, when
implementing the below projects, close coordination among the related agencies at Federal level and
State level agencies in Pahang, Negeri Sembilan and Johor is needed, so as to avoid any duplication of
work.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-61

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 5.5.15 Proposed IRBM Strategies and Measures towards Creating a Sustainable and
Pleasant River Environment
Proposed Responsible
Policy Strategies Measures Components of Measures Remarks
projects/actions Agencies
Provision of sewerage
Being
services for treatment of SPAN, IWK
implemented
domestic wastewater.
E-1.1.1: Capacity
development for
establishment of a
Strict control of industrial
mechanism for developing The issue of
effluent to ensure compliance
and maintaining pollution water treatment
with the Environmental DOE
load inventory. sludge needs to
Quality (Industrial Effluent)
be solved.
Regulations 2009.
E-1.1.2: Study on drinking
water treatment sludge in
E-1.1
Malaysia
Reduce wastewater
discharge Control of wastewater
Being
discharge from livestock - DVS
implemented.
farms (particularly pig farms).
Control of wastewater from E-1.1.3: Feasibility study
Measure on wet
commercial activities such as and pilot project for
LA market is still
wet-markets, restaurants and wastewater treatment
inadequate.
food stalls. system for wet-markets
E-1:
Collection and treatment of all
Reduce pollution Being
used oil and grease from - DOE, LA
load to ensure implemented.
vehicle workshops.
achievement of at
SWM (N.S.),
Creating a Sustainable and Pleasant River Environment

least NWQS Treatment of leachate from Being

Class II water - Alam Flora
dumpsites/landfills. implemented.
quality. (Pahang)
E-1.2: Implement
integrated waste
management by Prohibit indiscriminate
LA, SWM
reducing waste as disposal of solid waste Being
- (N.S.), Alam
source, increasing (including construction implemented.
Flora (Pahang)
recycling rate and wastes).
ensuring efficient and
clean disposal.
Control siltation by Being
- LA, DOE
E-1.3: Minimize construction activities. implemented.
siltation of river by Control siltation by logging Forestry Dept, Being
-
reducing erosion at activities. DOE implemented.
source and Control siltation by Being
controlling runoff of - DOE
agricultural activities. implemented.
eroded soil particles Further
into rivers. Control siltation by sand E-1.3.1 Monitoring of PTG, DID,
improvement is
dredging activities. sand dredging activities DOE
necessary
Further
E-1.4-1 Monitoring of DOA, LA,
E-1.4: Minimize runoff of agrochemicals into rivers. improvement is
agrochemicals DOE
necessary
Being
E-2.1: Control large scale agricultural development - JPBD, DOE
E-2: implemented.
Maintain the Forestry Dept., Being
E-2.2: Control logging activities -
natural DOE implemented.
biodiversity of E-2.3: Proper planning and management of
Basin. Environmental Sensitive Areas.

E-3: JPBD, LA,

Protect the E-2.3.1 Study on DOE, Further
catchment areas integrated ESA PERHILITAN, improvement is
for water intake E-3.1: Proper management of all catchment areas for management plan Forestry Dept., necessary
to avoid water intake. BKSA
contamination
and reduction of
water resource.
E-4:
Make use of river
as an asset for E-4.1 Integrate rivers into the townscape and Being
- JPBD, LA
townscape and recreational facilities. implemented
recreational
activities.

(1) Strategy E-1: Reduce Pollution Load to Ensure Achievement of at least NWQS Class II
River Water Quality

In order to create a sustainable and pleasant river environment, firstly it is necessary to ensure clean
water. This strategy aims to control pollution at source by reducing pollution load from various
sources of pollution.

5-62 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(a) Measure E-1.1: Reduce Pollution Load from Wastewater Discharge

(i) Provision of Sewerage Services for Treatment of Domestic Wastewater

Sewage generally refers to any liquid waste or wastewater discharge containing human, animal,
domestic or putrescible matter in suspension or solution (Environmental Quality (Sewage)
Regulations 2009). It is one of the main pollution loads from urban activities. Generally,
organic loading from raw sewage is around 250 mg/l BOD per population equivalent per day
(Malaysian Sewerage Industry Guidelines, 2009). As one of the measures to reduce wastewater
discharge, it is necessary to provide sewerage services for collection and treatment of all
domestic wastewater (mainly from dwelling houses) before discharging into waterways.

Current measures being implemented:

• Indah Water Konsortium Sdn Bhd (IWK), a wholly-owned company of the Minister of
Finance Incorporated, is responsible (since 1994) for operating and maintaining the
public sewage treatment plants and network of underground sewerage pipelines. The
main scope of service of IWK includes:

• Operation and maintenance of public sewage treatment plants that built by developers and
handed over to the Government (SPAN):
− Refurbishing and upgrading of existing sewage treatment plants; and
− Planning and building new sewerage infrastructure.
• In order to ensure systematic implementation of sewerage services, IWK has prepared (or
in the progress of preparing) Sewerage Catchment Strategies (which means the sewerage
service master plans) for all Districts.

• On the other hand, for premises with individual septic tanks (ISTs), under the Water
Services Industry Act 2006, premise owner is responsible for the maintenance of the
septic tank. In this respect, it is under the National Water Service Commission (SPAN)
requirement that all premise owners with ISTs must desludge their ISTs at least once in
every two years. The desludging work must be done by licensed contractors such as
IWK.

Lead implementing agency:

SPAN, IWK

General Recommendations:

• The present effort of IWK in providing, maintaining and refurbishing sewerage services
should be continued.

• As all the individual houses (including village houses) and housing schemes less than 30
units are still using ISTs, it is important to ensure that all houses with ISTs are
maintaining their ISTs properly based on SPAN’s requirement of desludging at least once
in every two years. Also, it is also vital to ensure that all the individual houses and village
houses are provided with ISTs that compliance with the design requirements of SPAN as
per the Malaysian Sewerage Industry Guidelines: Septic Tanks.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-63

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Proposed Project/ActionE-1.1.1: Capacity Development for Pollution Load Inventory

One of the prerequisites of effective water quality management it to ensure comprehensive

management of pollution sources. Pollution sources can generally be divided into point sources
such as industrial discharges and non-point sources like runoff of agrochemicals. As part of
pollution source management, it is necessary to understand the pollution load from each
pollution source into the rivers.

As elaborated in Subsection 5.2.2, DOE is the lead agency in water quality management in
Malaysia (besides Sabah and Sarawak). DOE has three main roles in this respect, i.e.
safeguarding the river water quality (the environment), monitoring of the water quality status
and environmental education. Despite that DOE has the function of safeguarding the river water
quality, the mandate of DOE is very limited. Although the control of point sources such as
industrial effluents and sewage is under the jurisdiction of DOE, the Department does not have
authority in regulating pollution loads from non-point sources such as agricultural activities,
aquaculture, small-scale construction activities, mining and quarrying, as well as a number of
point sources, such as the pollution loads from wet-markets, food stalls and individual septic
tanks. Furthermore, although DOE is undertaking monitoring of river water quality, the
Department does not have any authority in controlling of river water quality for example setting
target water quality according to its intended uses, and direct control and enforcement on all
pollution loads into the rivers.

In view of the above, in order to promote Capacity Development for Establishment of a

integrated water quality management, it is Mechanism for Developing and Maintaining
deemed necessary for DOE to compile a Pollution Load Inventory
pollution load inventory. It must be Carry out by : Department of Environment,
emphasized that the inventory should not static Pahang
Duration : 2 years
information, but more importantly, it should be Cost estimate : RM 2-4 million
a database that will be updated on a regular Coverage : Pahang River Basin
basis, and be used as a tool in water quality Main scope :
management, including the routine monitoring „ Analysis of the existing situation of pollution
and enforcement as well as a tool to support load information management system.
decision making in development planning. „ Establishment of a framework for pollution load
inventory database.
Hence, instead of an integrated water
„ Establishment a mechanism for data collection
management plan study that DOE has carried and maintenance.
out for several river basins throughout the
country, including the Kuantan River Basin that was ongoing during the present study, a
capacity development project is recommended here. As the problem of unavailability of a
centralized database for pollution load is not only happened in the Pahang River Basin, but all
the river basins throughout the country, it is deemed that by merely conducting a study to
establish an inventory is not a long-term solution to the problem. Instead, it is necessary to
strengthen the capacity of DOE as a one-stop agency responsible to establish and maintain a
centralized pollution load database for each river basin.

The outline of the abovementioned capacity development project is presented in the box on the
right. The gist of this proposed project is not on the database itself but the ‘mechanism’ to
establish the inventory database, to maintain it and to use it as a tool to support decision making
in development planning. So the main component of the project would be to establish a new
function or task within the existing organization setup of DOE. The project should deal with the
DOE Pahang as a whole, and the project may use the Pahang River Basin as a case study. It must
be highlighted here that same recommendation has been made for the Muar River Basin (see
Part 2 of this report), so as mentioned above, coordination among DOE Negeri Sembilan, Johor
and Pahang is necessary in the implementation of the action plan. These State DOEs may either

5-64 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

pilot the project at one of the three State DOEs or may also undertake the project concurrently at
all the three States.

It is expected that about two years would be needed to complete this project and accomplish the
goal of helping DOE to act as a centralized agency in water quality management. The proposed
scopes of the project are as follows:

• The first task is to understand the existing situation of pollution load information
management. Basically it is to answer the question of ‘who has what?’. This will firstly
necessary to identify all the pollution sources then to find out the agency responsible for
each pollution source, and whether a complete database is available.

• After understanding the existing situation, next step would be to work out a complete
framework of a centralized pollution load inventory database. This framework will serve
the basis for the subsequent work to establish a mechanism for data collection and
database maintenance by DOE.

• The third component would need to work very closely with the DOE Pahang, to
understand the existing organization setup of the Department and its strengths and
weaknesses in setting up of a centralized database for pollution load inventory. Close
coordination with the DOE is necessary to make use of the existing resources to take a
new task as the centralized agency to keep and maintain the pollution load inventory
database.

(This is a common recommendation for both the Pahang and Muar River Basins. Close
coordination between the implementing agencies of these two river basins is necessary)

Proposed Project/ActionE-1.1.2: Detailed study on drinking water treatment sludge in

Malaysia

Environment Quality (Scheduled Waste) One of the by-products of water treatment

Regulations 2005: process is the water treatment sludge (residue).
It is normally from the sludge drawn from
Schedule Waste SW204 refers to sludge sedimentation tanks, wash water from filter
containing one or several metals including backwash, and tank drainage. As Alum and
chromium, copper, nickel, zinc, lead, cadmium,
aluminium, tin, vanadium and beryllium’
polyaluminium chloride (PACI) are commonly
used as coagulants in drinking water treatment,
Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) aluminium content in the water treatment sludge
Regulations 2009: is generally high. Presently, old plants are
discharging the water treatment sludge directly
Industrial effluent refers to any waste in the form into the rivers, while some new plants are using
of liquid or wastewater generated from
manufacturing process including the treatment of
mechanical dewatering machines to dewater the
water for water supply or any activity occurring sludge then disposing the dewatered sludge
at any industrial processes. within the plant sites or landfills.

Water treatment sludge is categorized as a ‘Scheduled Waste’ under the Environment Quality
(Scheduled Waste) Regulations 2005. Also, the discharge of wastewater from water treatment
process, that containing also the water treatment sludge, can also be subject to the requirements
of the Environment Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009.

So far the Department of Environment has not fully enforced the Scheduled Waste requirements
on the drinking water sludge. If the Regulation were fully enforced, all water treatment plant
operators will not be allowed to discharge the sludge directly into rivers, and the dewatered
residues will have to be sent to Schedule Waste treatment facilities at Bukit Nenas, Negeri

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-65

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Sembilan. The issue is that it will entail in requirement for retrofitting of all old plants for sludge
treatment. This will not only significantly increase the water treatment cost but will very soon
fill up the Scheduled Waste treatment facilities at Bukit Nenas. The increased cost will
eventually transferred to all users. Considering Study on Drinking Water Treatment Sludge in
this problem, the Malaysian Water Association Malaysia
(MWA) initiated a preliminary study that Carry out by : Water Supply Division, KeTTHA
entitles Study on Characteristic, Treatment and Duration : 1-2 years
Disposal of Drinking Water Treatment Plant Cost estimate : RM 2-4 million
Coverage : Drinking water treatment plants in
Residue. The said study recommended the
Malaysia
exclusion the water treatment sludge from the Main scope :
Schedule Waste category and to allow landfill or „ Existing condition of treatment plants
land application of dewatered residues. „ Sludge characteristics and environmental
However, the study stressed that direct discharge impacts
shall not be permissible. „ Treatment and disposal technologies and options
„ International practice
„ Cost and socio-economic impacts of Scheduled
Considering the above issue, it is recommended Waste requirement
a detailed study on the characteristics, treatment „ Necessity to revise the Schedule Waste
and disposal of water treatment sludge should be requirement
carried out. Since this is a national issue, it is „ Proposed solution
deemed that the said study should be undertaken
by the Water Supply Division, KeTTHA. As this issue is not only occurring in the Pahang River
Basin, the study should cover all the major river basins and States in Malaysia. It is expected
that the study will take about one to two years to complete. The proposed scopes of study are as
follows:
• An inventory of all drinking water treatment plants in Malaysia, including their exact
location (e.g. water intake river), water treatment capacity, sludge volume, treatment and
disposal methods, and land availability.

• Sludge characteristics and the potential environmental impacts. Sampling of water

treatment sludge for laboratory analysis is necessary so as to ascertain its potential
environmental impacts. Although it is not necessary to take samples from all treatment
plants, it is recommended that all States should be covered, and sampling should be made
for all types of treatment methodologies.

• A desk review of existing available sludge treatment and disposal technologies, options
and their costs should be done.
• A desk review of international practice in water treatment sludge treatment and disposal
should be carried out.
• Based on the above, an evaluation should be done to reconsider the necessity of
Scheduled Waste requirement on water treatment sludge. It is also important to assess the
impacts on both the water treatment operators and the public is the Scheduled Waste
requirement is fully enforced or otherwise.
• The study should come out with solutions for the issue mentioned above.

It must be noted that this water treatment sludge issue is a common issue throughout the country,
it is thus recommended that the above study should be a nationwide study. In this report,
although this recommendation is presented in both the Pahang and Muar River Basins, it is
recommended the study should be carried by the Federal Government agency so as to cover both
river basins.
(This is a common recommendation for both the Pahang and Muar River Basins. Close
coordination between the implementing agencies of these two river basins is necessary)

5-66 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(ii) Strict Control of Industrial Effluent to Ensure Compliance with the

Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009

Industrial effluent means liquid water or wastewater produced by reasons of the production
processes taking place at any industrial premises (Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent)
Regulations 2009). The control of industrial effluent is mainly governed by the Environmental
Quality Act 1974, specifically the Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluents) Regulations
2009. The agency in regulating industrial effluent is the Department of Environment (DOE).

The Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluents) Regulations 2009 stipulates that construction
of any premises that may result in a new or altered source of discharge of industrial effluent or
mixed effluent must notify the Director General of DOE in writing. It is also stipulated that
discharge must comply with either Standard A or Standard B of effluent conditions as specified
under the Fifth Schedule of the abovementioned Regulations.

Current measures being implemented:

• DOE is strictly enforcing the abovementioned Environmental Quality (Industrial

Effluents) Regulations 2009. Due to some changes in this new Regulation, such as
notification to DOE for new source or alteration of discharge, self monitoring and
requirement on competent person, DOE is initiating various workshops and training
courses to the industries to ensure fulfillment of the said Regulation.

• Besides the abovementioned Regulation, there are a number of other Regulations, Rules
and Orders that strictly enforced by DOE to prevent pollution of inland waters.

Lead implementing agency:

DOE

General Recommendations:

• Drinking water treatment sludge, which is categorized as ‘Scheduled Waste’ under the
Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes) Regulations 2005, is being
discharged/disposed directly into the rivers without any treatment (except the new
treatment plants with sludge treatment facilities). According to the officials of DOE, so
far the Department has not made any strict enforcement on this matter, but the issue
should be solved as soon as possible. It is thus deemed that a detailed study on the
impacts, treatments and disposal of drinking water treatment sludge is necessary.

• DOE shall continue to carry out strict enforcement on discharge of industrial effluent as
mentioned above.

(iii) Control of Wastewater Discharge from Livestock Farms

Wastewater discharge from livestock farms, particularly pig farms, is another potential source of
river water pollution. Hence, it is important to control the discharge of wastewaters from these
livestock farms. This strategy thus aims to promote proper control and proper treatment of
wastewater from livestock farms, particularly pig farms.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-67

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Current measures being implemented:

• For the State of Pahang, according to the Pahang Department of Veterinary Services
(DVS), the State Government intends to stop all pig farming in the State. Presently the
State Government has stopped the issuance of pig farming licenses in the State and in the
progress of eliminating all the existing pig farms.

• In Negeri Sembilan, the State Government is in the progress of relocating all the
individual pig farms to the centralized pig farm area (PFA) at Bukit Pelanduk, Port
Dickson. According to DVS Negeri Sembilan, so far only one pig farm in Tampin yet to
be relocated to the PFA. The PFA at Bukit Pelanduk is equipped with proper wastewater
treatment facilities.

Lead implementing agency:

Department of Veterinary Services

General Recommendations:

• Regular enforcement to avoid any illegal operation of pig farming.

(iv) Control of Wastewater from Commercial Activities such as Wet-Markets,

Restaurants and Food Stalls

Discharges from commercial activities such as wet-markets, restaurants and food stalls are also
among the significant sources of pollution load to the Pahang and Muar River Basins.
Wet-market is the place where chicken slaughtering and fish preparation works are being carried
out. Normally wastewater mixed with chicken bloods and debris of intestines and feathers are
being discharged into the adjacent drains or rivers without any treatment. Wastewater from
restaurants and food stalls also contains high organic pollutants with food and oil debris.
Without proper measure, it may result in pollution of rivers and waterways. Hence, this strategy
promotes proper control and treatment of wastewaters from commercial activities, particularly
wet-markets, restaurants and food stalls.

Current measures being implemented:

• For the control of wastewater discharge from restaurants and food stalls, Local
Authorities have imposed strict conditions to all licensed restaurants and hawker centers
to install individual FOG traps (fat, oil and grease traps) at all discharge points. Although
there may be some none-compliances and inappropriate maintenance of the FOG traps
(information from Working Group Meeting), the Local Authorities are in the progress of
addressing this wastewater issue.

• Concerning wet-market, discussion during Working Group Meeting found that most of
the wet-markets are discharging wastewater into the adjacent waterways without any
treatment. However, certain Local Authorities have taken measures to address the issue.
For example, it is found that the Temerloh Market is equipped with wastewater treatment
plant that operated by IWK. On a whole, due to budget constraints, there is no immediate
plan to install wastewater treatment plants to all wet-markets.

• DID is taking the lead in undertaking studies and implementing wastewater treatment
pilot projects. In conjunction with the studies for the Sungai Kedah and Sungai Selangor
River Basin Management Plans in 2007, DID has implemented several demo projects for

5-68 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

wastewater treatments systems for wet-markets, slaughter house and restaurants in both
river basins, in collaboration with DANIDA, as shown in Table 5.5.16 and Table 5.5.17.
Table 5.5.16 An Overview of the Existing Wastewater Treatment Pilot Projects by DID
Biological and ecological treatment of wastewater from wet-market at
Pasar Besar Alor Star, Kedah
Design capacity:
39 kgBOD/day (1600
chicken slaughtered/day)

Design efficiency:
>95% BOD removal

Actual efficiency:
≈ 98% BOD removal
Discharge BOD = 16 mg/l
(based on sampling on 7 Dec
2009)

Filter media:
Plastic pieces with open
media

Fulltime worker: 1

Design concept Construction duration:

≈ One year

Construction cost:
≈ RM400,000

Maintenance cost:
≈ RM40,000/year
External view Ecological trickling filter Screen chamber
Biological treatment of wastewater from wet-market at Pasar Pokok
Sena, Kedah
Design capacity:
39 kgBOD/day (1600
chicken slaughtered/day)

Design efficiency:
>95% BOD removal

Actual efficiency:
≈ 98% BOD removal
Discharge BOD = 45 mg/l
(based on sampling on 8 Dec
2009)

Filter media:
Plastic pieces with open
media

Fulltime worker: 1

Construction duration:
≈ One year

Construction cost:
Design concept
≈ RM330,000

Maintenance cost:
≈ RM30,000/year

External view Screen chamber Chicken slaughtering activity

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-69

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Ecological treatment of polluted storm water from wet-market and

restaurants at Bukit Sentosa, Hulu Selangor, Selangor
Design capacity:
12.7 kgBOD/day (650
chicken slaughtered/day + 3
restaurants)

Design efficiency:
>83% BOD removal

Actual efficiency:
≈ Yet to monitor

Filter media:
Gravel

Fulltime worker: 1

Construction duration:
≈ One year

Construction cost:
Design concept ≈ RM800,000

Maintenance cost:
≈ Still not known

Gravel filter Dosing chamber Distribution pipe

Source: Saving Water, Cleaning Water: Eight Demonstration Projects (2007) and discussions with DID officials in May 2010.

Table 5.5.17 DID’s Pilit Project for FOG Trap at the Medan Selara Teratai Food-Court in
Alor Star, Kedah
FOG trap for the Medan Selara Teratai food-court in Alor Star,
Kedah
Inner diameter: 1.8 m

Water depth: 0.6 m

Total depth: 2.0-2.6 m

Trap volume: 1450 liters

Capacity: 6.9 m3/day (≈ 435

seats)

Construction cost:
≈ RM40,000

Maintenance cost:
≈ RM2,400/year

Design concept

External view Internal view Discharge outlet

Source: Saving Water, Cleaning Water: Eight Demonstration Projects (2007) and discussions with DID officials in May 2010.

5-70 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Lead implementing agency:

Local Authorities

General Recommendations:

• There are two issues concerning wastewater from restaurants and food stalls. Firstly, in
the original design of all shophouses and restaurants, wastewater from sinks is discharged
into sewer pipes that connected to sewage treatment plant. However, when the restaurant
operators renovate the shophouses into restaurants, all the additional sinks for individual
food stalls within the shophouses are discharging wastewater directly into the roadside
drains. Secondly, for those restaurants that discharging wastewater from sinks into sewer
lines, the main problem is the high oil content in the wastewater that can clog the sewer
lines.

• In order to overcome the above issues, firstly, the Local Authorities need to carry out
strict enforcement to prohibit direct disposal of wastewater from restaurants and food
stalls into the drains, but into sewer pipes. Secondly, as wastewater from restaurants and
food stalls contain oil and grease that may clog the sewer pipes, Local Authorities need to
carry out strict enforcement on installation of FOG traps for all discharge outlets of
restaurants and food stalls. The design guideline for FOG trap is contained in the
Malaysian Sewerage Industry Guidelines published by SPAN. Thirdly, it is extremely
important that all FOG traps should be regularly maintained so as to ensure its
effectiveness in screening oil and grease.

• For the wastewater from wet markets, since its treatment is not within the scope of service
of IWK, all Local Authorities should be responsible to built wastewater treatment plants
for all wet-markets to ensure discharge water quality in compliance with Standard A or
Standard B.
Feasibility study and pilot project for
Proposed Project/Action E-1.1.3: Feasibility wastewater treatment system for small scale
study and pilot project for wastewater wet-markets
treatment system for wet-markets Carry out by : Department of Local Government
Duration : 1-1.5 years
Cost estimate : RM 1-2 million
It is recommended that a feasibility study to Target area : Any small scale rural wet-market
improve the above wastewater treatment Technology : DEWATS or any other similar
systems for small scale wet markets. It should system
also be considered to have further pilot test for Main scope :
the improved system in the Pahang River Basin. „ Selection of a target wet-market.
„ Review of available low cost technologies.
If eventually the above systems proven to be
„ Feasibility study.
effective, the same systems may be „ Pilot project.
implemented at the existing and future
wet-markets in the Pahang River Basin. Please refer to http://www.borda-net.org for
further information on DEWATS.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-71

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

‘Decentralized Wastewater Treatment System (DEWATS)’

As an alternative, DID or Local Authorities in the Pahang River Basin may also consider to pilot test some other
possible technology options. One of the technology options would be the ‘Decentralized Wastewater Treatment
System’, or DEWATS, developed by the Bremen Overseas Research and Development Association (BORDA),
Germany. DEWATS is a low cost and low maintenance wastewater treatment system that designed to eliminate
grease, solids, organic pollutants, etc. It is
suitable for treatment of wastewater from
wet-markets where chicken slaughtering
activities are being carried out, with discharge of
diluted blood, fat and suspended solids. The
system is suitable for organic wastewater flows of
1-1,000 m3 per day. Its low initial and
maintenance costs have made it a competitive
option for many developing countries. Presently Digester, anaerobic baffled
there are more than 250 DEWATS plants being reactor (ABR) and anaerobic
constructed and under operation in several
developing countries, including the Philippines
and Lao DPR. It is reported that in 2006, a
DEWATS treatment plant was constructed for a
slaughtering house in the Valenzuela City of the
Phillippines, with treatment capacity of 10
m3/day. The construction cost was only about
PhP500,000 (±RM36,000) with monthly Planted gravel filter (PFG)
operation cost of about PhP2,000 (±RM140). It is
reported also that the system is able to reduce
BOD/COD up to 90%. (BORDA) Source: BORDA

(v) Collection and Treatment of All Used Oil Grease from Vehicle Workshop

Vehicle workshop is one of the main commercial activities in all sizes of towns. It is operating at
various places, including the conventional shophouses, light industrial estates or at individual
premises (including some dwelling houses). There are various environmental issues concerning
these vehicle workshops, such as noise, solid wastes and used oil and grease. From the
perspective of IRBM, the disposal of used oil and grease is deemed to be the main issue. Direct
disposal of these used oil and grease will pose serious pollution to both surface and ground
water. Hence, this strategy aims to promote proper storage, treatment and disposal, or reuse of
used oil and grease from vehicle workshops.

Current measures being implemented:

• The Local Authorities as well as DOE are taking strict enforcement measure to prevent
any indiscriminate disposal of used oil and grease by the vehicle workshop operators. On
the other hand, it is understand that the used oil and grease are being sold for recycling.
The recycling companies are periodically collecting the used oil and grease from vehicle
workshops.

Lead implementing agency:

Local Authorities

General Recommendations:

• The Local Authorities/DOE should carry out enforcement to ensure that used oil and
grease are proper stored within the licensed vehicle workshop premises. The method of
storage should comply with Section 9 of the Environmental Quality (Scheduled Wastes)
Regulations 2005. Among the important points are that the used oil and grease should be

5-72 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

stored in durable containers to prevent spillage or leakage, the containers should always
be closed during storage, and the area of storage should be adequately built to prevent any
possible spillage. Concerning this, when issuing business licenses, the Local Authorities
may need to provide guidelines on storage and disposal of used oil and grease to all
vehicle workshop operators. The Local Authority should consult with DOE for any
technical requirements on handling of used oil and grease.

• DOE needs to carry out necessary enforcement to ensure that the contractors collecting
used oil and greased are licensed under the Subsection 18(1A) of the Environmental
Quality Act 1974, and processing of used oil and grease for recycling purpose must be
carried out at ‘prescribed premises’ under the Environmental Quality (Prescribed
Premises) (Scheduled Wastes Treatment and Disposal Facilities) Order 1989.

(vi) Control of Leachate from Dumpsites/Landfills

‘Leachate’ means liquid that has percolated through solid waste and has been extracted or
dissolved, or suspended materials from the solid waste, or liquid discharged or released from a
solid waste transfer station or landfill (Environmental Quality (Control of Pollution from Solid
Waste Transfer Station and Landfill) Regulations 2009). Seepage of leachate will cause
pollution to both surface and ground water. As not all the solid waste disposal sites in the
Pahang and Muar River Basins are properly built sanitary landfill, but still in the form of
‘dumpsite’, it is necessary to take action to stop and prevent pollution by leachate.

Current measures being implemented:

• The Government has realised the problems concerning solid waste management in
Malaysia. In 2007, the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 was
passed by the Government, and the Department of National Solid Waste Management
(under the Ministry of Housing and Local Government) was established to address the
solid waste management issues in Peninsular Malaysia.

• In order to improve the solid waste management, the solid waste management function of
the Local Authorities has been privatised. In Pahang, solid waste management service
has been privatised to Alam Flora Sdn Bhd (‘Alam Flora’), whereas SWM Environment
Sdn Bhd (‘SWM’) is responsible for the solid waste management in Negeri Sembilan and
Johor. Both Alam Flora and SWM have taken necessary measures not only on the
collection of garbage, but also transportation, transfer and disposal. Hence, these
companies are presently in the progress of improving the solid waste disposal facilities in
the Pahang and Muar River Basins, including addressing issues concerning leachate as
mentioned above.

Lead implementing agency:

Alam Flora (Pahang), SWM (Negeri Sembilan)

General Recommendations:

• All the existing open dumpsites should be closed as soon as possible, and replaced with
environmentally friendly methods such as sanitary landfills and incinerators (subject to
feasibility studies).

• All sanitary landfills should not be overloaded and should be properly maintained.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-73

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(b) Measure E-1.2: Implement Integrated Waste Management by Reducing Waste at Source,
Increasing Recycling Rate and Ensuring Efficient and Clean Disposal

Solid waste is another potential source of river water pollution. It is related to Measure E-1.1(vi)
above. Improper solid waste management and enforcement may result in indiscriminate disposal of
solid wastes, which eventually may result in deterioration of surface and groundwater quality. This
measure thus promotes the implementation of integrated waste management by reducing waste
generation at source, reducing the volume of solid wastes through recycling of wastes, and ensuring
efficient and clean disposal such as sanitary landfills and incinerators (subject to feasibility studies).

Current measures being implemented:

• As mentioned above (see Measure E-1.1(vi)), the Government has passed the Solid Waste and
Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 and has established the Department of National Solid
Waste Management to address the solid waste management issues in Peninsular Malaysia. In
the Pahang and Muar River Basins, it has been privatised to Alam Flora (for the State of
Pahang) and SWM (for the States of Negeri Sembilan and Johor) to improve the solid waste
management.

Lead implementing agency:

Alam Flora (Pahang), SWM (Negeri Sembilan) and Local Authorities (during transition period, as
well as for enforcement and awareness programs)

General Recommendations:

• The first step of good waste management practice is to reduce waste generation at source. For
this purpose, it is necessary to inculcate environmental awareness of the general public so as to
reduce wastage, increase reuse and recycling.

• In order to reduce the volume of solid wastes, measures should be taken to recycle as much as
possible. This will not only require the necessary recycling facilities but also proper waste
separation. Hence, it requires involvement and commitments from all parties, i.e. the public,
waste management companies (Alam Flora and SWM) and recycling companies.

• Illegal waste dumping, particularly the disposal of construction wastes, is another issue that
must be addressed. Site visit revealed that there are some spots of illegal dumping
(construction wastes and domestic wastes). In order to address this issue, it is deemed strict
enforcement by the Local Authorities is extremely important. Besides, the public should be
cooperative in reporting the incidence of illegal dumping. This, again, relies on public
awareness education.

• Improper disposal of solid wastes at markets (particularly wet-markets) also poses threat to the
river water quality. Despite that solid waste collection centers are available at all the markets,
indiscriminate disposal of solid wastes into the drains and around the solid waste collection
centers is commonly seen at most of the markets. Besides, leakage of leachate from the
organic wastes at the waste collection center also may result in pollution of both surface and
ground water. Hence, garbage traps should be installed at all drainage outlets of markets and
regular maintenance should be carried out. Besides, all markets should be provided with
enclosed solid waste collection centers to avoid spillage of solid wastes and seepage of
leachate into the ground.

• From the above recommendations, it can be seen that in order to improve the solid waste
management, it requires not only commitments from the waste management concessionaires

5-74 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

and the Local Authorities, but also cooperation from the public. Hence, environmental
awareness of the general public should be heightened. For this purpose, close cooperation
among the Local Authorities, Alam Flora, SWM, DOE and other agencies is extremely
important, in conducting various environmental awareness program through various social
activities, schools, medias and so on.

(c) Measure E-1.3: Minimize Siltation of River by Reducing Erosion at Source and
Controlling Runoff of Eroded Soil Particles into Rivers

There are many causes of high TSS content in river water. Site observation and discussion with
Working Group members found that the main potential contributing activities are large scale
construction (earthwork) activities, large scale agricultural developments, sand dredging activities
as well as logging activities. The following sub-sections address these issues.

(i) Control Siltation from Construction Activities

Large scale construction works, particularly earthworks, are inevitably resulting in soil erosion.
The eroded soil particles flow into the adjacent waterways and eventually discharge into the
rivers. This will increase the TSS and turbidity of the river water. Water quality monitoring
from DOE showed that TSS is one of the main water quality issues for the Pahang and Muar
River Basins. This measure thus promotes control of erosion at construction site (preventive
measure) and control of runoff of eroded soil particles from construction site into waterways
(curative measure).

Current measures being implemented:

• DID has developed the Urban Stormwater Management Manual (MASMA) to serve as a
guideline to the contractors in various aspects of construction works, including erosion
control.

• Approval from the Local Authorities is required for all construction works. The Local
Authorities are regulating various soil erosion control requirements, including the
implementation of MASMA.

• All large scale construction works, such as housing development covering an area of 50
hectares or more, construction of expressways, national highways, new townships, etc.
(see Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment)
Order 1987) are subject to EIA approval by DOE. With this, the contractors will need to
comply with all the recommendations contained in the approved EIA reports, including
various erosion control measures. Also, the project proponents are normally required to
submit periodic environmental monitoring reports to DOE.

Lead implementing agency:

• Local Authorities (approval of construction works and its subsequent enforcement)

• Department of Environment (EIA requirements on large scale projects)

• DID (technical aspects of soil erosion control)

General Recommendations:

• Present efforts by the above agencies should be continued.

• Monitoring and enforcement by the Local Authorities and DOE should be strengthened.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-75

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(ii) Control Siltation from Logging Activities

Some parts of the Pahang River Basin are under logging activities. Similar to construction
works mentioned above, logging activities will, to some extent, result in soil erosion and
siltation of rivers. This measure aims to promote control of siltation caused by logging
activities.

Current measures being implemented:

• Logging activities are strictly controlled by the Forestry Department. Generally the
controls are on two aspects, firstly through the limitation of logging activities by
controlling the logging licenses, and secondly through the control of logging operations
by enforcing strict logging operation rules including measures on erosion control.

• All the large scale logging operations (≥500 ha.), logging within water catchment areas or
adjacent to state or national parks are subject to EIA approval by DOE (see
Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment)
Order 1987 for full detail). With this, the logging companies will need to comply with all
the recommendations contained in the approved EIA reports, which includes various
erosion control measures. Also, the logging companies are normally required to submit
periodic environmental monitoring reports to DOE.

Lead implementing agency:

• Forestry Department (licensing and enforcement)
• Department of Environment (EIA requirements on large scale projects)
General Recommendations:

• Monitoring and enforcement by the Forestry Department and DOE should be

strengthened to regulate the licensed logging operation and to stop/prevent illegal logging
operations. During the Stakeholders Meeting, it was reported that there are some illegal
logging activities at some parts of the Basin. However, official of the Forestry
Department highlighted that actions have been taken to address this issue.

(iii) Control Siltation from Agricultural Activities

About 28% (over 8,000 km2) of the total area of the Pahang River Basin and 64% (close to 4,000
km2) is under agricultural use. Due to removal of natural forest cover, these agricultural
activities accelerate the erosion rate, particularly during earthwork phase of the development.
Although erosion rate will be reduced after stabilization of the plantation, the erosion rate is still
very high compared to the natural forest area. Past study (Sg. Langat IRBM Plan) revealed that
the erosion rate of agricultural land is as much as 20 times of forest area. This measure aims to
promote control of siltation caused from agricultural activities.

Current measures being implemented:

• The National Physical Plan, Pahang, Negeri Sembilan and Johor Structure Plans and all
relevant Local Plans are providing land use zone plans to guide the land developments,
including agricultural developments, within the Pahang and Muar River Basins.

• All the large scale agricultural developments ( 500 ha.) are subject to EIA approval by
DOE (see Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact
Assessment) Order 1987 for full detail). With this, the planters will need to comply with

5-76 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

all the recommendations contained in the approved EIA reports, which includes various
erosion control measures. Also, the logging companies are normally required to submit
periodic environmental monitoring reports to DOE.

Lead implementing agency:

• JPBD and Local Authorities (on land use planning and control)
• UPEN and PTG (on approval of agricultural developments)
• Department of Environment (EIA requirements on large scale plantations)
• DOA (on agricultural practice)
General Recommendations:

• For those plantations subject to EIA requirements, DOE should implement strict
enforcement to ensure that all recommendations in the EIA reports are fulfilled.

• For smallholders agriculture activities, DOA should implement more training and
awareness programs to improve the farming practice, including erosion control.

• Land Offices should strengthen the enforcement on agricultural activities within river
reserves.

(iv) Control Siltation from Sand Dredging Activities

Sand dredging is another activity that causes river siltation. Although sand dredging is
important in maintaining or increasing the flow capacity of rivers, improper environmental
management during dredging and washing operations may result in siltation of river. It is thus
vital to control the sand dredging activities so as to minimize siltation of river water.

Current measures being implemented:

• The control of sand dredging operation is implemented mainly through the licensing
method. All sand dredging operations require licenses from the District Land Office
(approval by EXCO).

• With respect to concerns on potential siltation of river water and riverbank erosion, DID
is responsible to provide technical advice to the Land Office during the evaluation of sand
dredging license application.

• Besides, all large scale sand dredging projects involving an area of 50 hectares or more
are subject to EIA requirements (see Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities)
(Environmental Impact Assessment) Order 1987 for full detail). The operators are
required to comply with all the recommendations contained in the approved EIA reports,
which includes various erosion control measures. Also, the operators are normally
required to submit periodic environmental monitoring reports to DOE.

Lead implementing agency:

• State EXCO (approval of sand dredging license application)
• District Land Office (issuance of licenses and enforcement)
• DID (technical advice)
• Department of Environment (EIA requirements on large scale projects)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-77

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

General Recommendations:

• Land Offices should strengthen the enforcement on sand dredging activities to ensure that
the terms and conditions set in the licenses are strictly adhered to.

• For those projects subject to EIA requirements, DOE should implement strict
enforcement to ensure that all recommendations in the EIA reports are fulfilled.

Proposed Project/Action E-1.3.1: Monitoring of sand dredging activities

In order to effectively control sand dredging Monitoring of sand dredging activities

activities, it is necessary to closely monitor the Carry out by : DID Pahang
licensed sand dredging operations, and to Duration : Continuous
stop/prevent illegal sand dredging operations. Target area : All licensed operations
Main scope :
For the monitoring of licensed sand dredging
„ Site monitoring at the frequency of once a month
operations, as stated in the sand dredging or once every two months.
application guidelines, it is the responsibility of „ River cross section survey every five years
DID to undertake the monitoring. Hence, it is „ Heavy punishments should be imposed on
vital that District level DID should carry out non-compliance operators.
more intensive site monitoring against all the licensed operations in each respective District to
ensure all operators are complying with the license conditions. Site monitoring should be
carried out at least at once every two months to ensure its effectiveness. Heavy punishments
such as revoke of license should be imposed on non-compliance operators.

(d) Measure E-1.4: Minimize Runoff of Agrochemicals into Rivers

One of the main environmental impacts of agricultural activities is the runoff of agrochemicals such
as fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides into waterways. Water quality monitoring by DOE revealed
that Sg. Batu and Anak Sg. Lepar of the Pahang River Basin, and Sg. Serom, Sg. Kelamah, Sg.
Senarut, Sg. Spg. Loi and Sg. P. Menkuang of the Muar River Basin are possibly receiving high
volume of agrochemical runoffs from the adjacent plantations. Also, agrochemical pollution at
Cameron Highlands has drawn concerns from various parties. Hence, it is important to implement
various measures to minimize runoffs of agrochemicals into rivers and other waterways.

Current measures being implemented:

• All the large scale agricultural developments ( ≥ 500 ha.) are subject to EIA approval by DOE
(see Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order
1987 for full detail). With this, the planters will need to comply with all the recommendations
contained in the approved EIA reports, which includes various agrochemical management
measures.

• As application of agrochemicals is inevitable, the Department of Agriculture (DOA) is

carrying out various training courses and awareness programs concerning agriculture
management and agrochemical management as well as environmental awareness.

• DOA is continuously undertaking various researches on agricultural management, which

directly or indirectly will contribute to the control of agrochemical usage in agricultural
activities.

• For areas facing agrochemical pollution problem (e.g. Cameron Highlands), Land Office and
other related authorities are carrying out necessary enforcement on farming within river
reserves, improper storage of agrochemicals, etc.

5-78 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

• As one of the measures to reduce runoff of agrochemicals into rivers, all the plantations are
required to conserve river reserves within the plantation area as per the guideline
recommended in the DID Manual. This requirement is particularly strict for those plantations
subject to EIA requirements.

Lead implementing agency:

• DOA (training and awareness programs and research)
• Department of Environment (EIA requirements on large scale plantation)
• DID (river reserve requirements)
General Recommendations:

• Water quality monitoring and enforcement should be strengthened.

Proposed Project/Action E-1.4.1: Monitoring of agrochemical ‘hotspots’

It is very difficult to control and monitor the Monitoring of agrochemical ‘hotspots’

application of agrochemicals as there is no legal Carry out by : DOE
restriction on this matter. Although the Pesticides Duration : Continuous
Act is in force, the Act gives more provisions on the Target area : Entire Pahang River Basin
sales of pesticides and pesticide content in food, Main scope :
„ Include some common pesticides/herbicides in
rather than its application. Although there is water
the monitoring parameters for locations with
quality standard for rivers (NWQS), there is no legal possible agrochemical pollution (for example
control on agrochemical application. the rivers indicated in figure below).
„ Identify agrochemical ‘hotspots’ by regular
As agrochemicals (pesticides, herbicides and monitoring of water quality monitoring results
fertilizers) application is necessary in agricultural from ASMA.
„ Conduct joint enforcement with the Land Office,
activities, it is impossible to stop its usage. Hence,
Local Authority and other relevant
the only way is to minimize its usage, and to ensure agencies/authorities when high agrochemical
sufficient river reserves to avoid runoff of content is detected.
agrochemicals into rivers. For large scale
plantation, normally it is recommended to adopt Example of common pesticides/herbicides:
integrated pest management concept to reduce Aldrin, alpha-BHC, beta-BHC, delta-BHC,
pesticide usage. For these large scale plantations lindane, 4,4-DDD, 4,4DDE, 4,4DDT, dieldrin,
that subject to EIA requirements (>500 hectares), endosulfan I, endosulfan II, endosulfan sulphate,
endrin aldehyde, heptachlor and heptachlor
they may be periodically monitored by the epoxide.
Department of Environment. However, for
smallholder farms, it is very much depending on the awareness of the farmers. On this matter, the
Department of Agriculture is conducting awareness and education programs for farmers.

Through ASMA, the Department of Sg. Terla

Environment is conducting periodic water
quality monitoring for 143 rivers throughout
the country, including 91 monitoring stations
Sg. Batu
within the Pahang River Basin. There are a
total of 33 monitoring parameters, including Anak Sg. Lepar

NH3-N, NO3 and PO4 that can indicate the

possible fertilizer runoff into the rivers.
However, there is no monitoring of pesticides
and herbicides.
Figure 5.5.7 Potential ‘Hotspots’

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-79

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

In order to ensure more efficient and effective enforcement, it is recommended that the Department
of Environment should regularly monitor the water quality monitoring data to identify the
agrochemical pollution ‘hotspots’. Some commonly used pesticides/herbicides should be included
in the monitoring parameters for the ‘hotspot’ rivers. When extraordinary high nutrient or
pesticide/herbicide were detected, the Department of Environment should carry out joint operation
with the relevant Land Office, Local Authority and other relevant agencies/authorities to identify
any encroachment into river reserves, indiscriminate disposal of pesticide containers, and so on. For
example, from the existing water quality monitoring results as well as discussions with various
stakeholders, it is found that Sg. Batu, Anak Sg. Lepar and Sg. Terla are possible to have more
serious agrochemical pollutions.

(This is a common recommendation for both the Pahang and Muar River Basins. Close
coordination between the implementing agencies of these two river basins is necessary)

(2) STRATEGY E-2: Maintain Natural Biodiversity of Basin

Besides ensuring clean water, it is important to maintain the natural biodiversity of the river basin. For
the case of Pahang River Basin, there are many areas of ecological importance, such as the Taman
Negara, Tasik Bera (a RAMSAR site), Tasik Chini (Biosphere Reserve) and the Krau Wildlife
Reserve. The following subsections present the necessary measures required to protect the natural
biodiversity of the Pahang and Muar River Basins.

(a) Measure E-2.1: Control Large Scale Agricultural Development

Agricultural development, particularly large scale plantations, poses threats to the conservation of
natural biodiversity of both the Pahang and Muar River Basins. As mentioned above, about 28%
(over 8,000 km2) of the total area of the Pahang River Basin and 64% (close to 4,000 km2) is under
agricultural use. Without proper control, these large scale plantations may result in significant loss
of natural biodiversity. As the Pahang River Basin is an ecologically and environmentally very
important region, it is extremely important to maintain the biodiversity of the region. In this respect,
control of large scale agricultural developments is an important measure that must not be
overlooked.
Current measures being implemented:
• The National Physical Plan, Pahang, Negeri Sembilan and Johor Structure Plans and all
relevant Local Plans provide land use zone plans to guide the land developments, including
agricultural developments.
• For the protection of natural environment, various guidelines and master plans are in place.
For example the guidelines for development within Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESAs)
and on highlands, Taman Negara Master Plan and so on. Besides, the Government has also
identified various ecologically, environmentally and culturally important sites for
conservation, for example the Taman Negara, Tasik Bera (a RAMSAR site), Tasik Chini
(Biosphere Reserve), and the Krau Wildlife Reserve.
• All the large scale agricultural developments (≥500 ha.) are subject to EIA approval by DOE
(see Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order
1987 for full detail). In the EIA reports, assessments are made on the potential environmental
impacts of the proposed plantation and mitigating measures are proposed.
Lead implementing agency:
• JPBD and Local Authorities (on land use planning and control)
• UPEN and PTG (on approval of agricultural developments)

5-80 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

• Department of Environment (EIA requirements on large scale plantations)

• Forestry Department (forest conservation and management)
• Department of Wildlife and National Parks (PERHILITAN) (wildlife protection, national park
management, etc.)
General Recommendations:
• Agricultural development should be controlled so as to ensure a balance between
environmental protection and socio-economic development. Hence, when approving
plantation projects, recommendations of the National Physical Plan, Structure Plans, and
Local Plans should be adhered to.
• When preparing new Structure Plans and Local Plans, it is recommended that more
consideration on the impacts of large scale plantations on natural biodiversity should be taken
into account.
(b) Measure E-2.2: Control Logging Activities
Some parts of the Pahang River Basin are under logging activities. Similar to the agricultural
activities mentioned above, uncontrolled logging activities may pose adverse impacts on the natural
biodiversity of the Pahang River Basin. This measure thus promotes sustainable logging to avoid
destroy of natural biodiversity.
Current measures being implemented:
• Refer to Measure E-1.3 (ii) above.
Lead implementing agency:
• Refer to Measure E-1.3 (ii) above.
General Recommendations:
• Refer to Measure E-1.3 (ii) above.
(c) Measure E-2.3: Proper Planning and Management of Environmental Sensitive Area
In the National Physical Plan, all the environmentally and ecologically important and sensitively
areas are being demarcated as Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESAs). This includes areas such as
protected areas, wetlands, water catchment areas, wildlife corridors and so on. In order to
maintain/conserve the national biodiversity of both the Pahang and Muar River Basins, it is
necessary to ensure proper management of these ESAs.
Current measures being implemented:
• Under the National Physical Plan, there are three ranks of ESA. The criteria for demarcation
of ESA and the development control imposed on these areas are shown in Table 1.6.2. Further
details on development control requirements are contained in the ESA development guidelines
published by the Town and Country Planning Department.
Lead implementing agency:
• JPBD (demarcation of ESAs)
• Other agencies involving in environmental protection/management and development control
include the Forestry Department, PERHILITAN, Local Authorities, DOE, District and Land
Office, DID, etc.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-81

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

General Recommendations:
• Measures for protection of ESAs should be clearly reflected in the relevant Structure Plans and
Local Plans.
• The proposed Integrated ESA Management Plan recommended in the Pahang Structure Plan
should be prepared.
Integrated ESA Management Plan for the State
Proposed Project/Action E-2.3.1: Study on of Pahang and the Pahang River Basin
integrated ESA management plan Carry out by : UPEN Pahang
Duration : 1-2 years
Cost estimate : RM 2-4 million
In order to facilitate the management of water Target area : Entire State of Pahang and the
catchment area and Environmental Sensitive Areas, Pahang River Basin (including the
in line with the recommendation of the Pahang part in Negeri Sembilan)
Structure Plan, it is recommended that an ESA Main scope :
Management Plan should be prepared by the „ Environmental, ecological and cultural
Pahang State Economic Planning Unit. This is very protection plans for each ESA zone.
„ Development guidelines for all developments
important as there are many ecologically, culturally
within ESAs and water catchment areas.
and environmentally important areas in the State of
Pahang as well as the Pahang River Basin, such as the National Park, Tasik Bera (a RAMSAR site),
Tasik Cini (Biosphere Reserve), Krau Wildlife Reserve as well as the Orang Asli settlement areas.
It must be noted that although the Pahang River Basin is partially within the State of Negeri
Sembilan, it is thus deemed important that the Plan should cover the whole river basin of the Pahang
River. It is also important to include a development guideline for different ranks of ESA and water
catchment areas. The guideline should be detail and concrete enough to give guidance to the Local
Authorities and other relevant authorities in processing development applications within ESAs.

(3) STRATEGY E-3: Protect the Catchment Areas for Water Intake to Avoid Contamination
and Depletion of Water Resource

(a) Measure E-3.1: Proper Management of All Catchment Areas for Water Intake
A majority part of the Pahang and Muar River Basins is within catchment areas for raw water intake.
In order to protect these water catchment areas from contamination due to pollution and depletion of
water volume due to loss of natural forest, it is necessary to protect these water catchment areas.
Current measures being implemented:
• All the water catchment areas are categorized as ESAs under the National Physical Plan.
Hence, the current measures are similar as mentioned in Measure E1.2.3 above.
• DOE is controlling the pollution load by restricting various sources of wastewater discharge
such as industrial effluent, sewage discharge, etc. Generally, discharges into water catchment
areas must comply with Standard A water quality (please refer to Environmental Quality
(Sewage) Regulations 2009 and Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009
for further details).
• Conservation of protected forests.
Lead implementing agency:
• JPBD (demarcation of ESAs)
• DOE (regulating the wastewater discharge requirements)
• Forestry Department (forest conservation/management)
• Other agencies involving in environmental protection/management and development control
include the PERHILITAN, Local Authorities, District and Land Office, DID, etc.

5-82 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

General Recommendations:
• All water catchment areas should be gazetted.
• A detailed guideline for developments within water catchment area is necessary.
(4) STRATEGY E-4: Make Use of River as an Asset for Townscape and recreational
Activities

River landscaping and riverfront development is part of the river corridor management. It is now
widely recognized that rivers have many other values in addition to drainage and water supply uses.
The DID Manual (March 2009) highlights that one of the objectives of river corridor management is
for enhancement of opportunities for public outdoor recreation, education and scenic enjoyment,
which is deemed very closely related to river landscaping and riverfront development. This strategy
thus emphasizes on making use of river, regardless of its size, as an asset in townscape and
development of recreational facilities.

(a) Measure E-4.1: Integrate rivers into the townscape and recreational facilities

In line with the above strategy, this measure promotes the integration of rivers and streams into the
landscape plans of all urban centers. Rivers and stream should serve as one of the landscape
elements in townscape. This will not only improve the aesthetics of towns but can also inculcate the
awareness among the general public on the importance of rivers and to educate the people to love
the rivers. Current measures being implemented:

Current measures being implemented:

• The general guidelines and concepts of river landscaping and riverfront development are
contained in the Local Plan of each Local Authority area. The existing Local Plans in the
Pahang and Muar River Basins has identified all the major existing riverfront recreational and
landscape areas along the Pahang River and Muar River, and its tributaries, and proposals have
also been made for new riverfront parks and upgrading of existing riverfront recreational
spots.
Lead implementing agency:

Local Authorities

General Recommendations:
• Landscape plans proposed in the Local Plans should be adhered to.
• Landscape design should reflect the local natural environment, culture and history. At the
same time, it should be environmental friendly and people friendly. Meaning that it should
promote conservation of natural environment and biodiversity, and at the same time encourage
people to appreciate the importance of river by providing leisure and recreational facilities
along the riverbanks.
• When development, as far as possible, all streams should be excluded from development and
be converted into landcape area. Anyway, unavoidable conversion of streams to drains should
be carried out in such a way that the design of the drain (e.g. monsoon drain) should be as close
to the natural stream as possible. While the existing conventional monsoon drains should be
improved to include natural landscape as shown in the Supporting Report.
• As part of the efforts to inculcate the public awareness on the importance of keeping the river
clean, social activities such as river cleaning campaign, fishing competition, kayaking, and so

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-83

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 5 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

on should be organized by various organizations. For example, the ‘Love Our Rivers’
campaign of DID should be continued and further promoted.
5.5.5 Build a Resilient Society to Floods

The policy of flood sector is to build a resilient society to floods. This policy was created in accordance
with the IFM concept that aims to make a shift from conventional flood management of ‘controlling’
floods to trying to achieve sustainable development of the basin while maximizing the net benefit from
flood plains by appropriately ‘managing’ floods.

In order to achieve the above policy, three strategies are recommended:

Strategy F-1: Manage Flood Water

Strategy F-2: Create Flood-flexible Land Use

Strategy F-3: Ensure Safe Evacuation

Under the three strategies, eight measures are also proposed as shown in Table 5.5.18. Specific
projects/actions to materialize the structures are proposed as the IFM Plan in Chapter 6.

Table 5.5.18 Proposed Policy, Strategies and Measures

Policy Strategies Measures Responsible Agency Remarks
F-1.1: Implement appropriate structural
DID
measures
F-1.2: Upgrade data management
DID
F-1: procedures
Manage flood F-1.3: Monitor and review impacts of
water DID
climate change
JPBD, LA, DOE,
Build a Common with
F-1.4: Conserve forests PERHILITAN,
resilient Environment sector
Forestry Dept., BKSA
society to
F-2: DID, Local
floods F-2.1: Prepare flood hazard maps
Create government agencies.
flood-flexible Common with
F-2.2: Promote gazetting of river reserve DID, Land Office
land use Institution sector
F-3.1: Upgrade flood forecasting and
F-3: DID
warning system
Ensure safe
F-3.2: Prepare community-based flood DID, Local
evacuation
management plan government agencies

5.6 Roadmap for Implementation of IRBM Plan

Table 5.6.1 summaries a roadmap for the implementation of the projects/actions specially recommended
in the previous section. The table includes responsible agencies, approximate costs and time schedules of
the projects/actions.

5-84 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 5
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 5.6.1 Proposed Roadmap for IRBM for Pahang River Basin
Cost Schedule
Sector Project/Action Agencies (RM 10th MP 11th MP 12th MP
million) 2015 2020 2025
I-1.1: Enhancement of River Basin Committee (RBC) RBC ●
I-2.1.1: Establishment of Federal and State Water
NRE ●
Resources Department (WRD)
I-2.1.2: Establishment of River Basin Management
Institution NRE ●
Office (RBMO)
Setup
I-3.2: Establishment of integrated information system DID, MaCGDI ●●●
I-2.2: Determination of river management area (River
DID, Land Office ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●
Reserve)
Review and Updating of IRBM plan RBC ● ● ●
W-1.1.1: Monitoring of impact of climate change BKSA ● ● ●
W-1.3.1: Study on environmental flow BKSA 1-2 ●●
Water
Utilization W-1.4.1: Study on groundwater potential BKSA, JMG 3-4 ●●
JBA, SAINS,
W-2.2.1: Reduction of Non-revenue Water (NRW) ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●
SPAN, PAAB
E-1.1.1: Capacity development for establishment of a
mechanism for developing and maintaining pollution DOE 2-4 ●●
load inventory
Water Services
E-1.1.2: Study on drinking water treatment sludge 2-4 ●●
Environment Dept.
Management E-1.1.3: Feasibility study and pilot project for Dept. of local
1-2 ●●
wastewater treatment system for wet-markets government
E-1.3.1: Monitoring of sand dredging activities DID ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●

E-1.4.1: Monitoring of agrochemicals DOE ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●

E-2.3.1: Study on integrated ESA management plan UPEN 2-4 ●●

Implementation of structural measures of IFM plan
DID 701 ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●
Flood (Refer to Table 6.5.1)
Management Implementation of non-structural measures of IFM
DID and others 39 ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●● ●●●●●●●●●
plan (Refer to Table 6.5.1)

In preparing the table, followings were specially taken into considerations:

„ I-1.1.1: Enhancement of the River Basin Committee (RBC), which is a coordinating framework for
the implementation of IRBM, is the first thing to do.

„ I-1.2.1: Establishment of Federal and State Water Resources Department (WRD) requires revision of
related laws, and I-1.2.2: Establishment of River Basin Management Office further requires
amendment of the ninth schedule of the federal constitution. To realize them, considerable times need
to be spent for deliberation.

„ Most of the proposed projects should be implemented in the first five years until 2015. Based on the
project results, the IRBM plan should be reviewed and updated at least every five years. Depending
upon the project outputs, if necessary, new projects/actions will be proposed for the next five years.
In this way, as likened to an upward spiral process, the IRBM for the Pahang River Basin will be
continuously improved.

„ Monitoring of impacts of Climate Change should be also made at least every four to five years in
harmony with the release of the IPCC assessment report. The fifth assessment report will be
published in September 2013.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 5-85

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 6 FORMULATION OF IFM PLAN

6.1 Introduction

6.1.1 Policy, Strategies and Measures

In Chapter 5 flood issues in the Pahang River Basin have been identified and analyzed very closely, and
a policy for the flood sector, ‘build a resilient society to floods’ was proposed in conclusion. This policy
implies the IFM concept that aims to make a shift from conventional flood management of ‘controlling’
floods to trying to achieve sustainable development of the basin while maximizing the net benefit from
flood plains by appropriately ‘managing’ floods. The policy is supported by following three strategies:

(1) F-1: Manage Flood Water

This strategy aims to minimize flood inundation mainly in urban areas by appropriate structural
measures associated with non-structural measures. In spite of past repeated flood disasters, the Pahang
River Basin is deemed to have been left out of concern for a long time, and almost no major flood
mitigation structure has been provided. Structural measures are definitely insufficient in the Pahang
River Basin, even to protect important urban areas only. Appropriate structural measures, which
should be planned and designed based on studies using reliable data, should be provided to the river
basin.

Even if magnificent structural measures have been constructed through great efforts, all the efforts
possibly come to nothing by impacts of Climate Change and/or devastation of the river basin.
Adaptation to Climate Change and conservation of forest lands should be considered jointly with the
structural measures.

(2) F-2: Create Flood-flexible Land Use

“People live in flood prone area” is another problem. Disorderly land developments in flood plains
increase flood damage potential as well as flood discharges. It is necessary to create land use that is
flexible to floods.

For this purpose, flood hazard maps might be very effective. They are expected not only to raise
awareness of people about floods, but also to serve as a reference when planning land use zoning. For
more stringent management of river reserves, gazetting based on Sub-section 62 of Land Code should
be promoted.

(3) F-3: Ensure Safe Evacuation

To save human lives is the first priority of the IFM plan. Appropriate response to floods is also
important to minimize flood damages. Flood forecasting and warning system with community-based
flood management is a tool to lead people to safe places during floods.

6.1.2 Objective of IFM Plan

In this chapter, the above-said policy and strategies are integrated into the IFM Plan that includes several
specific projects/actions. The objective of the IFM Plan for the Pahang River Basin is proposed as
follows:

Objective: to provide a road map for building a resilient society to floods in the Pahang River Basin.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

6.2 Past and On-going Flood Mitigation Activities

6.2.1 Structural Measures

Immediately after the 1971 flood, a large-scale study, “Pahang River Basin Study, 1974” was conducted
by Australian consultants, and several flood mitigation measures including protection of urban centers,
and multipurpose dams, etc. were proposed. “National Water Resources Study, JICA, 1982” also
proposed protection of selected urban centers and three flood control dams for the flood mitigation of the
Pahang River Basin. However, almost no major flood mitigation project have been implemented so far
except for the protection of Pekan town near the river mouth, which has been already so devastated that
reconstruction is necessary. The Pahang River is still keeping most of characteristics of an uncontrolled
natural river.

The 2007 flood occurred under these situations, and then flood mitigation for the Pahang River Basin
seems to have been highlighted again among officials concerned. The total budget allocated for flood
mitigation works in the Pahang River Basin is about RM 230 million in the 9th Malaysia Plan period, as
shown below:

Table 6.2.1 Budget Allocation for 9th MP for Pahang River Basin
Project
Project Name ID Number
(‘1000 RM)
Flood mitigation Temerloh district 1,200 16700-009-0007
Flood mitigation plan, Bentong district 4,000 16700-009-0010
Flood mitigation plan, Raub district 7,961 16700-009-0011
Flood mitigation plan Pekan district 8,400 16700-009-0013
Control Program and Flood Warning Signal 5,000 13900-001-0017
Upgrading of bund and structure for coastal erosion 3,365 15100-004-0009
Rehabilitation of rivers 13,500 15200-001-0031
River dredging, Sg. Pahang (Protection and Rehabilitation of Pahang River Mouth) 177,746 15300-001-0018
River dredging, Sg. Bebar 4,237 15300-001-0019
Town drainage, Sg. Pahang 2,494 16700-009-0001
Total 227903
Source: DID HQ

Now four flood mitigation projects are being implemented or nearly ready for implementation if budget is
secured. The location and outlines of the five projects are presented in Figure 6.2.1 and Table 6.2.2
respectively. Each of the projects aims to deal with its peculiar and localized problems to the project area,
not to mitigate the extensive flood inundation along the main rivers.

6-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 6.2.1 Location of On-going Projects

Table 6.2.2 On-going Flood Mitigation Projects for Pahang River Basin (as of Nov. 2009)
Total Cost Tentative Present
Name of Project Objective Components Implementation
(million RM) Status
Period
Protection and • To overcome siltation problems at • Breakwaters
Rehabilitation the river mouth • Navigation channel
Project for Pahang • To provide adequate navigation • Coastal and river
About
2007 -2012
Being
channels 1,000 implemented
River Mouth protection work
Project • To provide shelter against waves • Bypass channel
at LKIM Pier
• Main River Levee
Flood Mitigation • To protect Pekan Town from • Bund strengthening Conceptual
Project for Pekan 280 N/a Design
flood water with 25 year ARI. • Drainage improvement,
Town etc. Completed.
• 2 new detention ponds
Flood Mitigation • To protect the Sungai Bentong • Retrofitting of 2 existing Master
Project for Sungai River Basin from flood water with detention ponds, 250 N/a Plan study
Bentong Basin 100 year ARI. completed
• Drainage improvement
Flood Mitigation • To protect Ringlet Town from • River Improvement Conceptual
Project for flood water. • River Bank Protection 3 N/a Design
Cameron Highland • Replacement of 4 bridges Completed.

(1) Protection and rehabilitation of Pahang River Mouth Project

The protection and rehabilitation of Kuala Pahang River Mouth Project is ongoing under the 9th MP,
comprised of construction of breakwaters, navigation channel, coastal and river protection works, and
bypass channel at Pulau Syed Hassan which is a delta island in the river mouth. The construction work
of breakwaters at Kuala Pahang is progressing about 40 % as of November 2009.

The project’s objectives are:

• To reduce the risk of coastal flooding especially at Pekan;

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

• To overcome the siltation problem at the river mouths in order to provide better flushing;
• To enable safe navigation for fishing vessels to and from the LKIM Complex;
• To provide adequate navigation channels, berthing and mooring areas; and
• To provide shelter against waves at all times.

Pahang River mouth, involves main River protection work of rock groin near
breakwaters at the north channel Kuala Pahang
Figure 6.2.2 Project Site Pictures

(2) Flood Mitigation Project for Pekan Town

For the royal town of Pekan near the Pahang River mouth, a flood mitigation master plan has been
developed to protect the town from flood water from the Pahang River at the level of 25 year ARI.

The flood mitigation work is composed of the following construction works:

• Main River levee (2400 m) :
• River Closure & Control Structure for Sg. Pekan
• South Bund Strengthening & reinstatement (7900m)
• Control Structure at Sg. Mat Dulang (2 set)
• Construction of West Drain (4500m)
• Construction of new East Road (9000 m)
• Drain Improvement (8200 m)
• West Bund Strengthening (3600 m)
• Tributary River Improvement (19350 m)

(3) Flood Mitigation Project for Sg. Bentong Basin

Flooding in the low-lying areas of the Bentong town has been an issue. Major floods are caused mainly
by overspill of the floodwaters from the Bentong River. In this flood mitigation plan, new two (2)
detention ponds and the retrofitting of existing two (2) detention ponds listed in Table 6.2.3 are
proposed, incorporating town drainage improvement.

Table 6.2.3 Reservoir Required for Flood Mitigation

Reservoir Storage for 100-yr Embankment Crest
Name Flood (MCM) Base (m) (m, LSD)
U. Bentong 1.5 165.0 175.0
Sempeli 5 120.0 150.0
Repas 3.8 121.0 145.0
Perting 16 100.0 118.0

6-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Completed widening and bund Widening and deepening work, ongoing at

construction at Kg. Bharu Kawasan Rumah Murah
Figure 6.2.3 Site Pictures of Bentong Project

(4) Flood Mitigation Project for Cameron Highland

The Cameron Highland flood mitigation plan is the protection of Ringlet town for 100 years ARI
protection level and is composed of:
• Construction of a 6m wide and 2.8m deep RC lining channel for the Ringlet River
• Replace existing four (4) river crossings bridges along the upstream of the Ringlet River

6.2.2 Non-Structural Measures

It might be said that in the Pahang River Basin the existing non-structural measures have been more
developed than the structural ones. It is probably because personnel concerned have endeavored to
supplement the insufficient structural measures with less costly non-structural measures. This section
describes following typical non-structural measures introduced in the Pahang River Basin
• Flood Map/Flood Hazard Map
• Land Use Management
• Flood Forecasting and Warning System
• Flood Response
• Adaptation to Climate Change

(1) Flood Map/Flood Hazard Map

Flood maps/hazard maps are useful not only for recoding flood inundation, but also for raising
flood-awareness of people, land use planning and evacuation activities. In 2003, DID completed the
study on National Register of River Basins in Malaysia. This study aimed at updating of information
on flood events from 1981 to 2001, preparation of flood maps and listing up for the flood mitigation
projects for the 8th Malaysia Plan. Through this study, a flood map titled “Flood Map of Pahang” in
scale 1:600,000 and a detailed flood map of river in scale 1:100,000 were prepared. After the study, a
flood map of the December 2007 flood event was also prepared by DID as shown in Figure 6.2.4.
These flood maps are too low in resolution to serve as a reference for the practical planning of land use
zoning and evacuation. The scale of flood maps/hazard maps is recommended to 1/10,000 or larger.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 6.2.4 Flood Map for 2007 Flood Event in Lower Part of Pahang State (DID)

A flood hazard map is defined as a map that graphically provides information on inundation as well as
on evacuation. Flood hazard map is useful to prevent loss of people’s properties, and helps smooth
evacuation from home to relief center before flood coming. DID is responsible for planning, preparing
and dissemination about flood hazard mapping. According to information from DID, action plans for
the formulation of flood hazard map were already made and flood hazard maps has been preparing for
Damansara River located in the west of Kuala Lumpur. In the Pahang River basin, however, no hazard
map has been prepared.

(2) Land Use Management

(a) Land Use Zoning

The National Physical Plan, the State Structural Plans of States of Pahang and Negeri Sembilan, and
all the relevant Local Plans are providing land zone plans to guide the land development. According
to the state structural plans, forest lands that occupy 70.5% (20,000 km2) of the entire river basin at
the year 2000 will decreased by 16.1% (4,600km2), mainly transformed to agricultural lands as
discussed in Section 2.7.2.

6-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

A local plan that is prepared and gazetted by each of the local authorities provides detailed land use
zoning information. The land use zoning usually includes land use categories of industry,
infrastructure & utility, institution & public facility, freeland & recreation, business & services,
agriculture, forest, etc., for each of which guidelines of allowable activities are described in the plan.
Since all development activities are subject to the land use zoning, it is very important how the
zoning is made. The local authorities hardly refer to flood maps/hazard maps when preparing the
local plans at present, according to an interview to an official of a local authority.

(b) Regulation of Development Activities

To prevent disorderly development activities, many regulations are provided in Malaysia. Table
6.2.4 shows how major development activities including construction works, logging activities and
agricultural developments are regulated. Large scale developments such as housing developments
of 50ha or over and agricultural developments of 500ha or over are also subject to EIA.

In addition, all the environmentally and ecologically important and sensitive areas have been
demarcated as Environmental Sensitive Areas (ESAs) in the National Physical Plan, as described in
Section 1.6.1. These includes areas such as protected areas, wetlands, water catchment areas,
wildlife corridors and so on, which are to be protected in accordance with the ESA development
guidelines developed by JPBD.

DID has developed the Urban Stormwater Management Manual for Malaysia (MASMA) in 2000.
MASMA is a comprehensive manual for urban stormwater design, covering processes, control
principles, works design and plan preparation, as well as maintenance requirements. It is noted that
MASMA prescribes a developer installation of a detention pond to compensate the storage capacity
to be lost by his development activity.

Table 6.2.4 Regulation of Development Activities

Activities Regulation
• Approval of the local authority is required.
Construction works • DID and Land Office, etc. participates in evaluation of the construction works as a
(including housing) technical advisor.
• MASMA is enforced.
Logging • Forestry Department regulate logging activities by licensing and enforcing logging rules.
• JPBD and the local authority enforce land use control.
Agricultural
• Approval of UPEN and PTG is necessary for agricultural developments.
Developments
• DOA regulates on agricultural practices.

(c) River Reserve

In Pahang State, 10 to 50m wide river reserve, depending the river width, has been gazetted in
accordance with Subsection 13 of the Land Code, while no river reserve has been gazetted at all in
Negeri Sembilan State.

According to an official of the River Management and Coastal Zone Division, DID, the gazetting by
the Subsection 13 is not so effective because the river reserve areas and the regulators of activities in
the river reserve areas are not legally clear. In order to have required river bank widths effectively
reserved, therefore, DID is about to start in the 10th Malaysia Plan gazetting of river reserve areas in
accordance with Subsection 62 of the Land Code, while promoting immediate gazetting by
Subsection 13 for the states that have no river reserve.

In case of the gazetting by Subsection 62, the gazetting notification is required to describe the
reserved land and purposes for reserving, to designate the officer having the control of the land, and
to be conclusive evidence that the land is reserved for a public purpose. DID could be the officer to
control of the river reserve. As soon as next year DID will start land-surveying as a first step of this
gazetting procedure.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(3) Flood Forecasting and Warning System

(a) Infobanjir (Telemetry Flood Forecasting and Warning System)

Hydrology and Water Resources Division of DID developed a flood warning system or “infobanjir”
on the website in 2005. The hydrometric data is updated at regular intervals (hourly to daily) from
over 300 remote telemetry units located at strategic points in Malaysia.

Once water level of a monitoring station reaches the alert level, DID begins to monitor closely the
flood situation such as rainfall and water level. When it reaches the warning level, DID informs
relevant flood control centers. When the river water level exceeds the critical level, forecast
information is transmitted to the flood operation centers and other relevant agencies.

There are 25 water level monitoring stations and 31 rainfall gauging stations for the telemetry
network in Pahang State. Of these, 23 water level monitoring stations including 1 station located in
Negeri Sembilan State and 25 rainfall gauging stations (1 station in Negeri Sembilan State) are
located in Pahang River Basin.

Table 6.2.5 Telemetry Network for Water Level and Rainfall (Infobanjir, Pahang Basin)
Monitoring No. of Stations Pahang State Negeri Sembilan State
Water level 23 22 1
Rainfall 25 24 1
Source: Inforbajir on-line river level data and rainfall data

(b) Flood Forecasting

Flood forecasting for the Pahang River has been developed and operated by Hydrology and Water
Resources Division (Hydrology Division, Ampang), and the outline of the system described as
follows.

Using three (3) autoregressive coefficients (a, b, c) for each hourly discharge (Q) and four (4)
moving parameters (d, e, f, g) for each hourly rainfall (R), forecasting of discharge Q1 is calculated
by Linear Transfer Function Model. (LTFM) as shown in Figure 6.2.5.
Q1 = aQo + bQ−1 + cQ−2 + dRo + eR1+ fR−2 + gR−3
Q(cms)
HINDCAST FORECAST

Q-2 Q-1 Q0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

R-3 R-2 R-1 R0

TIME PERIOD
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

NOW
Qt = instantaneous discharge at time t (m3/s)
Rt = 6– hourly catchment rainfall at t time period (mm)

Figure 6.2.5 Discharge Forecasting by LTFM

Six rainfall automatic gauging stations and three water level monitoring stations were selected for
developing of the forecasting model in Pahang River. Based on an analysis on relationship between
rainfall and runoff discharge, leading time was set to be six (6) hours. By inputting hourly rainfalls
at the six rainfall stations and hourly water levels at the three stations, water level and discharge of
every six hours within 24 hours from the time of forecasting are outputted for each water level
station.

6-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(c) Atmospheric Model-Based Rainfall & Flood Forecasting (AMRFF) Model

As one of the pilot sites for updating the existing flood forecasting and warning system, DID is now
introducing from USA an atmospheric model-based rainfall and flood forecasting system (AMRFF)
to the Pahang River Basin. The system is composed of atmospheric module, rainfall module and
runoff module as shown in Figure 6.2.6, to estimate rainfall distribution and intensity and to
provide a real time flood warning for emergency response in a convenient lead-time. The system
will be expected to be operational in 2011.

Source: Hydrology Division, DID

Figure 6.2.6 Atmospheric Based Rainfall & Flood Forecasting (AMRFF) Model

(d) Warning System by Siren and Signboard

There are 53 flood waning sirens installed by DID in flash flood areas of the Pahang River Basin.
The sirens ring automatically to warn neighbors of the flood event when water level reaches the
critical levels. In addition to the sirens, there are several signboards in the basin. The signboards
give information on the relationship between water levels in the upstream reference points and those
at the signboard site. The numbers of the sirens and signboards is still insufficient.

Flood Warning Siren at Kg. Chedong, Maran Signboard at Kg. Sekara, Maran

Figure 6.2.7 Photos of Siren and Signboard

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(4) Flood Response

For the disaster management in Malaysia, the Disaster Management and Relief Committee (DMRC) is
set up in federal, state and district levels with secretariat by National Security Council (NSC). DMRC
is a coordination mechanism consisting of relevant government institutions such as DID. For the flood
management, NSC issued guidelines entitled “The Standard Procedures on Flood Relief Mechanism in
2001”. According to the guidelines, main responsibilities of each relevant institution including DID for
flood management are shown in Table 6.2.6.

Table 6.2.6 Responsibility of Relevant Institutions for Flood Management

Item Responsibility Responsible Institution
(1) Preparedness
1) Evacuation Center Identifying evacuation center DSW
2) Storage of Basic Necessities • Storing basic necessities DSW
• Identifying source of food supply
3) Helicopter Landing Spot Ensuring helicopter landing spot MRAF, RMP
4) Rescue Boat • Preparing rescue boats RMP, MRAF, MCDD,
• Preparing safety jackets FRD, DO, LA
5) Clearing of Drainage System Clearing up drainage DID, PWD, LA
6) Flood Warning Providing weather information MMD
Providing flood warning DID, WA, TNB
Setting up flood warning signboard DID, PWD
7) Flood Risk Analysis Examining/analyzing flood risks DID, PWD, MGD,
MACRES
(2) Flood Response
1) Order and Control Coordinating all activities at OSCP RMP (federal), police
officers (state & district)
2) Communication Tool Preparing communication tools (telephone, fax, radio, -
walkie-talkie, etc.)
3) Reporting Reporting current flood conditions NSC
Reporting flood event DID
4) Evacuation of Victims Assisting victims to move to evacuation center police officers (state &
district)
5) Set-up of Evacuation Center Handling evacuation center (confirmation of victims, DSW, MCDD, RMP
supply of food, commodities, medical goods, security
of victims, etc.)
6) Rescue Searching and rescuing victims police officers (state &
district), FRD
7) Media Management Disseminating information and media management DOI
Note:
DSW: Department of Social Welfare, MRAF: Malaysian Royal Armed Forces, RMP: Royal Malaysian Police, MCDD:
Malaysian Civil Defense Department, FRD: Fire and Rescue Department, LA: Local Authority, DO: District Officer, DID:
Department of Irrigation and Drainage, PWD: Public Works Department, MMD: Malaysian Meteorological Department,
WA: Water Authority, TNB: National Electric Company (Tenaga Nasional Berhad), MGD: Mineral and Geoscience
Department, MACRES: Malaysian Center for Remote Censing, OSCP: On-Scene Control Post, DOI: Department of Inform

As community-based activities for the flood management, educational activities have been carried out
in a form of seminar and training for both communities and DID officials. In principle, such seminar
and training have been held once a year and twice a year respectively. Flood information including
flood inundation areas, flood maps, monitoring, forecasting and warning system (equipment,
communication systems, information flow for warning, etc.), and so on is provided to participants of
the seminar and training.

On the other hand, simulation drills including evacuation drills with community participation has not
been implemented in the Pahang River Basin. However, implementation of a simulation drill is
currently discussed between DID and NSC to strengthen flood-awareness among people.

6-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(5) Adaptation to Climate Change

In Malaysia no adaptation measures to Climate Change have been undertaken yet. The 10th MP
committed, for the first time, that Malaysia would adopt a dual strategy in addressing climate change
impacts.

However, climate change projection has been conducted in Malaysia since about 5 years ago. Two
institutes, NAHRIM and Malaysia Meteorological Department (MMD) developed Regional Climate
Models (RCMs) for Peninsular Malaysia and Southeast Asia respectively. NAHRIM, jointly with
University of California, developed Regional Hydroclimate Model of Peninsular Malaysia
(RegHCM-PM) with horizontal resolution of 9km x 9km. MMD has developed a Regional Climate
Model (RCM) as well with horizontal resolution of 50km x 50km, covering Southeast Asia including
whole Malaysia utilizing Providing Regional Climate Impact Studies (PRECIS) model developed by
Hadley Centre, UK.

NAHRIM also predicted change of monthly river runoff discharges of eight major rivers in Peninsular
Malaysia, the Muda, Perak, Selangor, Klang, Johor, Pahang, Terengganu, and Kelantan Rivers. The
result shows that the maximum monthly discharge of the Pahang River at Temerloh will increase and
that the minimum monthly discharge of that will decrease on the other hand. This implies that extreme
hydrologic phenomenon such as floods and droughts will take place more frequently and in an
amplified manner in the future.

6.2.3 Maintenance of River and Drainage Structures

DID and Local governments in the Pahang State undertake the maintenance and rehabilitation works of
river and drainage structures. DID requested the Federal Government a fund of more than RM 225
million for the maintenance works of drainages of towns and cities and the river dredging and
rehabilitation works under the 9th MP. Pahang State DID spent a total amount of RM 12 million for the
repairing of structures damaged by the flood in 2008, as listed in the Table 6.2.7.

Bank erosion seriously, protection work Bank protection work using soft rock in S.
comprised of riprap and gabion box in S. Semantan at Mentakab
Pahang
Figure 6.2.8 Site Pictures of Maintenance Work

Table 6.2.7 Rehabilitation Work and Expenditure in 2008

Cost
No Project Name Location (Million RM)
1 Rehabilitation at Kuala Sg. Kuantan Kuantan 2,2
2 Rehabilitation Sg. Semantan Temerloh 1.6
3 Drainage system rehabilitation Kuantan 2.5
4 Rehabilitation at Sg. Karan Kuantan 3.3
5 Rehabilitation Sg. Pahang at Kg. Temai Pekan 2.4
Total Pahang 12.0
Source: DID Pahang

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-11

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

6.3 Planning of Framework

6.3.1 Target Year of IFM Plan

The planning term of the IFM plan is the same as the IRBM plan. Namely the year, 2025 is the target
completion year, and the IFM plan covers three 5-yearly Malaysia Plan (MP) periods, the 10th, 11th and
12th MP periods.

6.3.2 Setup of Future Conditions

As the IFM plan is completed in 2025, it is elaborated under the physical and social conditions at 2025, of
which population, land use and impact of Climate Change are assumed as presented in Table 6.3.1.

Table 6.3.1 Determination of Future Conditions at 2025

Item Way of Determination Remarks
Population at 2025 is projected under this Basin population increases from 1,190,000 at 2010
Population
Survey. to 1,480,000 at 2025.
Land use zone map of 2020 is substituted for Build-up areas increases by 4.3% from 0.8 % at
Land use
that of 2025. 2000 to 5.1% at 2025.
Impact of Climate Increment of rainfall intensity and sea level rise 100 year ARI 8 day rainfall increases by 10% from
Change is considered as described in Chapter 3. 527.5 mm to 580.3 mm. The sea level rise is 12 cm.

6.3.3 Design Scale of Structural Measures

DID Manual of flood mitigation management (Volume 1: Flood Management, Chapter 6: Flood
Mitigation Guideline) suggests that the protection level of flood mitigation plans be basically at 100 years
and 25 to 50 years of ARI (Average Recurrence Interval) for urban areas and rural areas respectively,
although the definitions of the urban and rural areas are not clear. According to Chapter 10: Design
Criteria and Design Consideration of the same manual, however, the design scale could be lower than the
above-said ideal target levels in consideration of constrains in budget, socioeconomic condition, schedule
and so on. In fact the Flood Mitigation Project for Pekan Town is applying 25 years of ARI for its design
scale. In this Preparatory Survey, therefore, the target protection level is provisionally set as Chapter 6 of
the manual requires, but it could be lowered according to the local situations.

6.3.4 IFM Approach

According to the Volume 1: Flood Mitigation of the DID Manual, IFM (Integrated Flood Management)
includes 7 components, (1) Ensure a participatory approach, (2) Integrate land and water management,
(3) Manage the water cycle as a whole, (4) Adopt a best-mix of strategies, (5) Adopt integrated hazard
management approaches, (6) Adopt environmental enhancement, (7) Introducing national flood
management policy. The IFM plan considers all the components, and makes much of three items, (1)
Ensure a participatory approach, (2) Integrate land and water management and (4) Adopt a best-mix of
strategies in particular.

As a part of the participatory approach, both of the stakeholder meeting and the steering committee
meeting have been held three times respectively in the course of the Preparatory Survey. The JICA Study
Team collected opinions and data regarding flood issues and feedbacks on the planning from the
participants.

The integrated management of land and water is very important for the Pahang River Basin. The IFM
plan should aim to mitigate flood damage for all the flood inundation areas. However, the flood
inundation of the Pahang River is too extensive to manage. Efficiency of large-scale structural measures
that aim to deal with the extensive flood may be very low because the flood inundation areas are less
developed and less populated. It might be avoidable that the IFM plan has to accept inundation in

6-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

agriculture and forest areas, and to concentrate structural measures more in urban areas. Appropriate
flood management made of a best mix of structural and non-structural measures should be applied to
build a resilient society to floods.

6.4 Proposed Measures for IFM Plan

6.4.1 Structural Measures

Based on results of the previous studies, field reconnaissance and hearings to officials concerned,
conceivable structural measures for the Pahang River Basin could be classified into those for reduction of
extensive flood inundation and those for protection of urban centers as presented in Table 6.4.1

Table 6.4.1 Conceivable Structural Measures for Pahang River Basin

Purpose Measure
River improvement (river bunds, excavation and dredging)
Reduction of extensive flood
inundation Dam reservoir
Flood diversion
Protection of urban centers Ring bunds and drainage facilities

The measures for reduction on extensive flood inundation are all large-scale measures. They can reduce
flood inundation very much but require huge financial and environmental costs at the same time.
Considering the less populated flood plains along the Pahang River, their economical justification might
be questionable. As DID is going to implement the protection works for Pekan, Bentong and Cameron
Highlands, localized protection works for urban centers seem more realistic. It deems that the present vast
flood plains should be maintained as natural retarding basins by enforcing land use control without
providing any large-scale protection measures. Each of the conceivable measures is examined in detail
below:

6.4.2 Examination of Structural Measures

(1) River Improvement

River improvement is the most conventional measure to enlarge the river channel capacity by
construction of river bunds on the river bank and/or by deepening or widening of the river channels
through excavation and dredging. However, river improvement seems disadvantageous for the long
Pahang River. Urban centers and villages are scattered along the long stretches of the main rivers and
tributaries. To protect them, the river improvement should be provided to all the stretches continuously
from the river mouth. The total length only for the main river of the Pahang River amounts to as much
as 300 km. Not only its construction cost but also its environmental impacts are inestimable. Therefore,
this measure is discarded.

(2) Dam Reservoir

Three flood control dam reservoirs were proposed by “National Water Resources Study, JICA, 1982”.
Descriptions and location of the three dams are presented in Table 6.4.2 and Figure 6.4.1.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-13

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 6.4.2 Descriptions of Dam and Dam Sites

Name of Dam Description
• The site is located in the upstream of the Jelai River.
• The site is expected that the saddle dam is necessary for along the reservoir rim and deep weathered.
• FELDA oil palm plantation of the Koyan River will be inundated in the reservoir.
Telom / Jelai
• Rock fill dam type is proposed.
Kechil
• Flood mitigation volume: 1,740 MCM
• Dam height 35 m with embankment volume of 1.5 MCM for Main dam and 1.0 MCM for saddle
dams. Diversion tunnel: 250 m with 9 m internal diameter.
• Tembeling upper damsite is located about 0.5 km upstream of the confluence of the Abai River.
• The site is an arrow ridge between deep tributary gullies.
Tembeling • A concrete gravity concrete dam type is proposed.
Upper Dam • Flood mitigation volume: 2,110 MCM
• Dam height 40 m with 162,000 m3, Diversion tunnel: 220 m with 7.5 m internal diameter at the right
abutment. A gated overflow spillway.
• The Tekai Lower damsite is located on S. Tekai about 7 km upstream of its confluence with S.
Tembeling.
• The valley at the damsite is straight，with a base width of about 50m. The abutments rise steeply on
Tekai Lower either side to above the proposed embankment level.
• The reservoir area is in virgin jungle and no resettlement costs are envisaged.
Scheme
• Rockfill dam type is proposed
• Flood Mitigation Volume: 510 MCM
• Dam height with 75 m with the embankment volume of 1.2 MCM
• Diversion tunnel: 270 m with 9 m diameter at the right abutment ridge.

To evaluate the effectiveness of

the three dams, flood simulation Tanah Rata
was conducted for different ARI Ringlet Tembeling
Y
X
rainfalls, and their results were Telom/Jelai Ketil
Padang TengkuTekai Lower

compared to those of the Y

X Kuala Lipis Y
X
Penjum

without-dam cases. Moreover, Jerkoh

Benta
Kuala Tembeling

Jerantut
the benefit that is expressed as CherohDong

reduction of flood damages by Raub

Teras Sungai Ruan
Kuala Kerau
the measures was calculated to Sungai Penjuring
Kerdau Maran
further estimate economic Bentong
Sungai Dua
Lanchang
Temerloh
Chenor Pekan
Karak
indicators, Benefit Cost Ratio Bukit Tinggi
Mentakab
Mengkarak

(B/C), Net Present Value (NPV = Legend Telemong

Manchis
Teriang
Kerayong

B-C) and Economic Internal Rate

Y
X
Kemayan
Sungai Buloh
Flood Control dam Simpang Durian Durian Tipus
of Return (EIRR) under the Petaling
Titi
Pertang
Urban Center Jelebu Estate Serting
condition that the life time is 50 Kuala Klawang

1971 Flood Area Bahau Kilometers

years and the discount rate is 40 20 0

10% , as presented in Table

6.4.3. Figure 6.4.1 Location of Flood Control Dams

As the low B/C values that are much less than 1.0 indicate, the three dams are not economically
effective. There are a large number of houses in each of the reservoir areas, and considerable social
impacts are anticipated as well as environmental impacts. Therefore, the three dams are discarded.

Now Ulu Jelai Hydropower Dam Project and construction of Kelau Dam for the Pahang-Selangor
Water Transfer Project are being implemented on a tributary of the Jelai River and a tributary of the
Semantan River. In addition, several dam reservoirs for hydropower generation and domestic water
supply have been proposed in the Pahang River Basin. If these dams are realized, some contribution on
flood mitigation can be expected from them.

6-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 6.4.3 Effectiveness of Flood Control Dam Reservoirs

Flood Reduction of Maximum Water Level under 100
Catchment
Control Cost year ARI Flood (cm) NPV
Name Area EIRR B/C
Capacity (106 RM) (106 RM)
(km2) Kuala Lipis Temerloh Lubok Paku Pekan
(106 m3)
Telom
2,840 1,740*1 1,311 107 15 9 5 -522 -4.33% 0.08
/Jelai Kecil
Tembeling
2,850 2,110*1 2,153 25 64 35 15 -599 1.47% 0.27
Upper
Tekai *1
1,390 510 490 16 39 21 10 -221 4.12% 0.60
Lower
*1
Data Source: : National Water Resources Study, Malaysia, 1982, JICA
Discount rate for estimation of B/C and NPV: is 10 %

(3) Flood Diversions

There is a relatively low ridge between the Pahang River and the Jengka River in the north of
Temerloh. During large floods natural bypassing from the Pahang River to the Jengka River has been
observed over the low ridge. The Jengka Diversion, which was examined in “Pahang River Basin
Study, 1974” aims to reinforce the existing bypassing by constructing an artificial diversion channel as
shown in Figure 6.4.2.

In the same way as the flood control Kerdau Cut-off

River
dams, the effectiveness of the Improvement
Jengka Diversion is estimated
Pahang River

Sem
through the economic analysis based ant Jengka
an
Riv River
er
on results of the flood simulation.
Mentakab Chenor
The diversion reduces the water
level of Temerloh by as much as 303 Temerloh

cm, but it raises the water levels in

er
Riv
the downstream, for example by 54
g
h an
cm at Lubok and by 23 cm at Pekan
Pa

on the contrary, as shown in Table

6.4.4. In conclusion the damage in Kilometers
Mengkarak 4 2 0 4
the downstream is bigger than the
benefit, and the Jengka Diversion is
discarded.
Figure 6.4.2 Location of Jengka Diversion
Table 6.4.4 Effectiveness of Jengka Diversion
Reduction of Maximum Water Level under 100 year
Cost NPV
Name Channel Length ARI Flood (cm) EIRR B/C
(106 RM) (106 RM)
Kuala Lipis Temerloh Lubok Paku Pekan
Jengka Cut-off: 9.5km,
260 0 303 -54 -23 -193 impossible impossible
Diversion Improvement 10km
Discount rate for estimation of B/C and NPV is 10 %

(4) Protection of Urban Centers

This measure aims to protect relatively populated urban centers only by providing ring bunds, road
raising, drainage facilities, etc. The protected areas are so small that their adverse impacts to the
downstream (increase of discharge and inundation areas) are negligible.

Four candidate urban centers, Temerloh, Mentakab, Kuala Lipis and Teriang were selected, based on
studies on flood damages by the previous floods, consultations with officials concerned and flood
inundation simulation results. Preliminary design of protection works for the four urban centers was
made against the 100-year ARI flood. The proposed protection works for the four urban centers are
summarized in Table 6.4.5.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 6.4.5 Flood Protection Works for Urban Centers

Temerloh Mentakab
Feature: Feature:
Administrative centre for the Temerloh district, located at the Important commercial town bounded by S. Semantan, the
confluence of S. Semantan and S. Pahang, ground levels vary railway line and S. Ketapa. The 2000 population is 14,500
from El. +34 m to EL. +50 m and The economic activities of farming, rubber tapping,
• Bund Government employment, construction, timber industries
Segmented north bund: 1,100 m Kg. Sri Temerloh and Kg. Satu and commercial enterprises. The terrain within the township
Batu. South bund: 210 m long at the bridge of the No. 2 undulates between El. +35 m and 50 m,
National Road passing Kg. Bkt. Kelutu. • Bund
• Drainage Structures and Pumps Western bund: 1400 m
4 sites: Kg. Sri Temerloh, No.87 Road, South bund of No. 2 Eastern bund: 1350 m
Road, Recreational park behind bypass road • Drainage Structures and Pumps
• Road Rising 2 sites: outlets of the Ara River and the Ketapa River to flow
No. 87 road, section between the intersection with No. 98 Road to Semantan
and the north bund: length of 1,800 m with 2 m rising. • Bank Protection Structures
• Bank Protection Structures 4 sites: North bank of the school, 3 stretches of north side in
Right bank of the Semantan River just north of Kg. Seri the town ( Malay New Village). Total length 660 m with the
Temerloh. . Total length 100 m with the height of 7 – 10 m height of 5 – 7 m.

Layout of Protection Work Structure Layout Plan

Legend
Bund
Bank Protection
Road Raising

P Drainage Pump

Kuala Lipis Teriang

Feature: Feature:
Administrative centre of Pahang until 1955, located at the 32 km south of Temerloh bounded on the west by the East
confluence of the Jelai River and the Lipis River. The 2000 Coast railway line, on the south by the Teriang River. The
population 12,200, agricultural workers in rubber estates, town 2000 population 6,750. The main part of the town locates
residents engaged in commerce and Government employees. above 1971 flood level but road access and railway link near
Ground levels within the town vary appreciably, with the lower the Teriang River is subjected to cut.
levels of sports grounds, parks, open space and some needy • Protect area
houses, and the surrounding hilly areas to urban development. The housing area on lower ground at Paya Tatih
• Protect area • Bund
Housing area, commercial area and public space in the Bund construction at the left bank of 1540m and the right
low-lying near the confluence with the Jelai River. bank of 580m, with 5- 6m
• Bund • Drainage Structures and Pumps
Bund construction with 6 m high 1 site: upstream of Railway bridge
• Bank protection
Layout of Protection Work Layout of Protection Work

6-16 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

The economic analysis was also made to estimate NPV, EIRR and B/C. Table 6.4.6 gives results of the
analysis. The B/C of two urban centers, Temerloh and Mentakab is greater than 1, 1.41 and 1.72
respectively. The protection works for the other two urban centers, Kuala Lipis and Teriang are less
economical.

Table 6.4.6 Effectiveness of Protection of Urban Centers

Population Cost NPV
Town Category Main Works EIRR B/C
in 2025 (106 RM) (106 RM)
Bunds, drainage pumps,
Temerloh 6,200 Sub Regional Center road raising, bank 48.8 15 14.08% 1.41
protection
Mentakab 13,800 Sub Regional Center Bunds, pumps 23.4 14 17.65% 1.72
Bunds, drainage pumps,
Kuala Lipis 20,700 Major Local Center 7.3 -3 4.93% 0.56
bank protection
Teriang 3,900 Small Local Center Bunds, drainage pumps 18.9 -2 8.62% 0.87
Discount rate for estimation of B/C and NPV is 10 %

(5) Preliminary Study on Additional Urban Centers

Besides the above-said four urban centers, two more centers of Maran and Jerantut were recommended
as priority areas for at the 2nd Steering Committee Meeting on the Interim Report on February 9, 2010.
The Steering Committee also prioritized all the six urban centers in the sequence of 1) Temerloh &
Mentakab, 2) Maran, 3) Teriang, 4) Jerantut, and 5) Kuala Lipis. Following the above
recommendation, the JICA Study Team conducted a preliminary site reconnaissance at Maran and
Jerantut towns and had discussions with the relevant district DIDs in June 2010.

The main cause of floods at Maran is overflow from the Maran River that flows across the center of
Maran town. To protect Maran town, DID Maran drafted a flood mitigation project and requested RM
50 million for the implementation of the project. As for Jeranut town, it is situated on such a high river
bank that flood water of the Pahang River never reaches. Instead Jeranut suffers from its poor drainage
systems. DID Jerantut proposed a drainage improvement project of RM 20 million. Details of these
projects are presented in Table 6.4.7.

Table 6.4.7 Flood Mitigation Project in Maran and Jerantut Town

Town Objective Contents of Project
Main objective of this project is to reduce flood • Study of detailed plan and design
damage building by improve rivers which flow in • Land Acquisition
Mukim Luit (Maran river, Chedong river, Bintang • Survey works
Maran Town river and Luit river), a retaining structure for bank • Construction works (detention ponds and river
erosion, and creating a beautiful, attractive and improvement for Maran River and tributaries
clean river in accordance with campaign ‘we love • Purchase of Machinery and tools
our river’ • Installation of IT equipment
Main objective is in order to overcome and avoid • Survey works
the occurrence of flash flood. In addition to • Construction works (Improvement of Betong
Jerantut Town
prevent bank erosion by gabion retaining wall, River, installment of L-shape retaining wall, etc.
flexible tubular sand filled mattress, piles • Installation of IT equipment

6.4.3 Non-Structural Measures

As discussed in Section 6.2.2, the existing non-structural measures have been already developed to some
extent. Institutional frameworks for implementing them have been also generally established. Therefore,
the JICA Study Team firstly recommend that efforts should be continued to enforce or operate the
existing non-structural measures. In addition, the Team also specially proposes to implement three
projects in Table 6.4.8 that aim to strengthen the existing non-structural measures. Details of the
proposed projects are described below.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-17

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 6.4.8 Proposed Specific Non-structural Measure Projects

Project Contents
Capacity Development of District DIDs Capacity development of District DIDs and local government agencies
and Local Government agencies for (Flood Management and Disaster Committee for flood) for flood
Flood Management management, especially preparation hazard maps.
Improvement of Flood Forecasting and Strengthening of Flood Forecasting and Warning System with additional
Warning System telemetry stations for Pahang River Basin
Updating of Projection of Impact of Updating of projection of impact of climate change based on IPCC’s
Climate Change assessment reports.

(1) Capacity Development

Local government agencies (members of Disaster Management and Relief Committee for flood) are
responsible for the security of the people at the local level. In fact they shoulder activities of warning,
evacuation, flood fighting and rescue during floods. Moreover, they are involved in land use planning
at the local level. Therefore, to strengthen the capacity of the local government agencies is a key for
building flood-resistible communities. Their DID partner at the level of district, District DIDs should
be also strengthened, especially for the preparation of hazard maps. The capacity development project
may be summarized as shown in Table 6.4.9.

Table 6.4.9 Summary of Capacity Development Project

Item Contents
To build the capacity of District DIDs and local government agencies (members of Disaster
Objective
Management and Relief Committee for flood) in the Muar River Basin for flood management
• District DIDs and the local government agencies can elaborate flood hazard maps.
• District DIDs and Local government agencies can elaborate flood management plans.
Outputs
• The elaborated hazard maps and the flood management plans are published.
• Training, simulation drills are implemented
Cost RM 1 million x 12 districts = RM 12 Million
Implementing
DID and local government agencies
Agency

In order to achieve the objectives and outputs for the capacity development for flood management, the
following activities should be carried out (see Table 6.4.10).

Table 6.4.10 Proposed Programs and Activities for Capacity Development Project
Relevant
Program Activities
Institution
• To collect data/information on flood inundation and damages (flood area, flood level,
etc.) on the past major flood
• To prepare baseline map
• DID
Elaboration of • To confirm evacuation routes and location of evacuation center
• NSC
Flood Hazard • To elaborate flood hazard map
• DO
Map • To make manual for preparation of flood hazard map
• LA
• To hold workshops for explaining prepared flood hazard map to residents and related
agencies and for collecting comments from the participants
• To revise prepared flood hazard map based on the above comments
• To collect data/information on current conditions of flood management facilities (flood
monitoring, forecasting and warning systems, evacuation route, evacuation center,
transportation for evacuation and rescue, etc.)
• To review tasks and responsibility on flood monitoring, forecasting and warning among
Elaboration of relevant institutions • DID
Flood • To elaborate action plan for flood management (plan on installation of flood monitoring, • NSC
Management forecasting and warning systems, establishment and procurement of flood warning • DO
Plan signboard, evacuation center, evacuation transportation (helicopter, boat, car), plan of • LA
educational and training program, etc.)
• To hold workshops for explaining prepared flood management plan to the residents and
for collecting comments from the participants
• To revise prepared flood management plan based on the above comments

6-18 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Relevant
Program Activities
Institution
<Trainings>
• To conduct on-the-job training (OJT) of engineers through the elaboration of flood
hazard map and flood management plan • DID
• To train maintenance staff of flood monitoring, forecasting and warning systems • NSC
(telemetry system, rainfall gauge, etc.) • DSW
• To strengthen the institutions concerning with monitoring and forecasting (definition of • MMD
responsibility) • PWD
Training and
<Simulation Drill> • MRAF
Simulation Drill
• To coordinate among the institutions concerning with simulation drills • RMP
• To prepare evacuation materials (evacuation posters, etc.) • MCDD
• To formulate the program/scenario of simulation drills • FRD
• To implement the simulation drills by using prepared flood hazard map • DO
• To review and evaluate the results of simulation drills • LA
• To strengthen the institutions concerning with simulation drills (definition of
responsibility)
Note:
DID: Department of Irrigation and Drainage, NSC: National Security Council, DSW: Department of Social Welfare, MMD:
Malaysian Meteorological Department, PWD: Public Works Department, MRAF: Malaysian Royal Armed Forces, RMP: Royal
Malaysian Police, MCDD: Malaysian Civil Defense Department, FRD: Fire and Rescue Department, DO: District Officer, LA:
Local Authority

(2) Improvement of Flood Forecasting and Warning System

The Pahang River Basin has been incorporated to the national flood forecasting and warning system
called “Infobanjir”. However, the number of the existing telemetry stations in the river basin (25
rainfall stations and 23 water level stations) is very small compared with the size of the river basin of
28,770 km2. It is proposed to increase the number of the stations as shown in Table 6.4.11 and Figure
6.4.3, referring to the recommendation by WMO that the density of rainfall stations in mountainous
areas be 250 km2/station or less. With this addition, the rainfall station density will become
230km2/station, including those of the rainfall and water level stations.

Table 6.4.11 Proposed Number of Telemetry Stations

Stations Numbers Remarks
Rainfall Stations 96 (25)
Each of the water level stations are
Water level stations 30 (23) proposed to upgrade to rainfall and
water level station.
Total 126 (48)
Numbers in parentheses are ones of existing stations

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-19

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 6.4.3 Proposed Telemetry Stations (Rainfall & Water level)

The project cost is RM 23.5 million, as shown in Table 6.4.12.
Table 6.4.12 Project Cost for Integrated Flood Forecasting and Warning System
Components Qty Cost(1,000 RM) Remarks
1.RTU (Rainfall) 79 units 11,060
2.RTU (RF+WL) 17 3,230 RF:Rainfall,WL:Water level
3.Control Center 1 2,000
4.Hardware Lump sum 320
5.Software Lump sum 1,650
6.Developent system Lump sum 7,250 Including preliminary cot
Total 23,510
Note: Unit price is estimated based on Klang Valley Project

(3) Monitoring of Impacts of Climate Change

Observed temperatures, rainfall and tide levels should be examined at least every five years to assess
check impacts of Climate Change, as described in Section 3.2.

IPCC publishes its assessment report on climate change every 4 or 5 years. It is proposed to update the
projection of the impact of Climate Change for the Pahang River Basin by using the newest projection
results of the GCMs and RCMs that the assessment report is based on. If any RCM projection covering
the Pahang River Basin is available, the projection data also can be used. If significant differences from
the impact projection of this Survey are found, the design of the proposed measures should be
modified.

6-20 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

6.5 Implementation of IFM Plan

6.5.1 Implementation Program

The IFM Plan is formulated as a combination of the proposed structural and non-structural measures, and
a tentative implementation program is proposed in Table 6.5.1. The three projects that were previously
studied and are nearly ready for implementation are also included in the IFM Plan.

Table 6.5.1 Tentative Implementation Program of IFM Plan

Structural/ Cost 10th MP 11th MP 12th MP

Project 6
Nonstructural (10 RM)
2011 2015 2020 2025
Flood Mitigation Project for Pekan
280
Town
Flood Mitigation Project for Sungai
250
Bentong Basin
Flood Mitigation Project for Cameron
3
Highland
Flood Mitigation Project for Temerloh
72
and Mentakab Towns
Structural
Flood Mitigation Project for Maran
50
Town
Flood Mitigation Project for Teriang
19
Town
Flood Mitigation Project for Jerantut
20
Town
Flood Mitigation Project for Kuala Lipis
7
Town
Capacity Development of District DIDs
and Local Government Agencies for 12
Flood Management
Non-
Flood Forecasting and Warning System
structural 26
Project
Updating of Projection of Impact of
1
Climate Change
Total 740 282 302 156

The total cost is RM 740 million, which is allocated over three 5-yearly MP periods. The average cost per
single 5-yearly MP period is about RM 250 million, which is almost equal to RM 230 million of the total
budget in the 9th MP period for flood mitigation works in the Pahang River Basin as shown in Table
6.2.1. Therefore, it can be said that the IFM plan is financially viable.

6.5.2 Organization for Implementation

Figure 6.5.1 is a proposed organization chart for the implementation of the IFM Plan. The federal DID is
the primary implementing agency, supported by the two state DIDs.

Many other related agencies, especially local government agencies will be involved in the
implementation of the IFM Plan. To facilitate the collaboration with these agencies, intervention of the
river basin committees is very important. For the State of Pahang, the task force should make
inter-agency coordination within the state, but for the state of Negeri Sembilan which has no task force
for the Pahang River Basin, UPEN should act for such an task force.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-21

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Pahang River Basin Committees

Management
Implementing Agencies Committee

Federal DID
Interstate Coordination Technical
Committee

State DID State DID Task Force

Pahang N. Sembilan Pahang

UPEN
Coordination within State N. Sembilan

Other Agencies Coordination within State

N. Sembilan
Figure 6.5.1 Organization for Implementation
6.6 Environmental and Social Considerations

In order to predict and evaluate potential environmental impacts of proposed projects, Initial
Environmental Examination (IEE) has been carried out. The target projects for IEE are four projects,
namely flood mitigation projects for Temerloh-Mentakab Towns, Pekan Town, Sungai Benton Basin,
and Cameron Highland as shown in Table 6.6.1.

The IEE was carried out based on the existing data, which are mainly obtained from DID, DOE and other
organizations as well as field reconnaissance. The methodology used is based on the Japan Bank of
International Cooperation Guideline for Environmental and Social Considerations (JBIC guidelines, July
2009).
Table 6.6.1 Proposed Flood Mitigation Project in the Pahang River Basin
No. Name of Project Project Component
I Flood Mitigation Project for Temerloh and Mentakab Towns Construction of Ring Bund
II Flood Mitigation Project for Pekan Towns Construction of Ring Bund
III Flood Mitigation Project for Sungai Benton Basin Construction of Dam
IV Flood Mitigation Project for Cameron Highland River Improvement

6.6.1 Necessity of IEE

It is necessary to carry out IEE in the early stage of a project plan. The main steps of IEE are as follows:
• To classify the project based on the JICA guideline;
• To confirm the necessary EIA procedures based on the above classification,;
• To evaluate the necessary policies to prevent, minimize, mitigate environment impacts.

The following subsections outline the EIA procedures in Malaysia and classification according to the
Japan Bank of International Cooperation Guideline for Environmental and Social Considerations (JBIC
guideline July 2009).

(1) EIA Procedure in Malaysia

(a) Environmental related Law and Regulations

The main environmental law of Malaysia is the Environmental Quality Act 1974 (EQA). The
provisions of EIA requirement is under Section 34A of the said Act and it is further stipulated in the
Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order 1987.
The DOE was established in 1975 as the executing agency of the above Act. Concerning EIA
requirements, the DOE has published a Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines
(DOE, 1987).

6-22 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(b) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

In Malaysia, EIA Screening process is conducted at the very early stage of the proposed project in
order to determine whether the project is subject to the EIA requirements. This process is deemed
similar to the abovementioned project classification .

With respect to EIA requirements, development projects in Malaysia can be classified into three (3)
categories in accordance with Malaysian Environmental Quality Act 1974 (see Table 6.6.2).
Table 6.6.2 Project Classification in Malaysia
Classification Description
EIA is not required Projects categorized in this category are not necessary to conduct EIA Study.
However, depends on the nature of the project, it may me necessary to fullfil the
environmental requirements under the EQA and its Order, Rules and
Regulations.
Preliminary EIA is required Projects that classified as “Prescribed Activities” under the Environmental
Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order
1987.
Detailed EIA is required Projects that classified as “Prescribed Activities” under the Environmental
Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment) Order 1987
and that expected to results in significant impacts to the environment. The DOE
has listed the types of project that require Detailed EIA in the ‘Enviornmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) – Procedure and Requirements in Malaysia’ (DOE,
2007).

For those projects subject to EIA requirements, the project proponents are required to undertake an
EIA or Detailed EIA study. Approval of the EIA/Detailed EIA report from DOE is necessary before
commencement of the project.

(c) Land Acquisition, Resettlement and Compensation

The main legal provisions related to land acquisition, resettlement and compensation in Malaysia
are as follows.
• The Federal Constitution
• The National Land Code 1965 (Act 56) & its Regulations
• Land ordinance (Saba State)
Basically, Land Offices are implementing all necessary procedures for land acquisition,
resettlement and compensation. Although DID is not directly involved in these procedures, Land
Offices submit the resettlement, land acquisition and compensation plans to DID Headquarter for
evaluation and approval.

For the evaluation of asset value and compensation, it is under the jurisdiction of the Valuation and
Property Services Department (JPPH) that operates branch offices in all districts. According to the
interview the officials of DID Segamat, normally stakeholder meetings will be held by the Land
Office as part of the activities in the resettlement, land acquisition and compensation process.

In the case that an EIA/Detailed EIA study is required, the land acquisition, resettlement and
compensation plan should be included in the EIA/Detailed EIA Report.

(d) EIA Procedure of JICA Study

The objective of the JBIC guidelines is to encourage recipient governments to take in account
appropriate and adequate environmental and social considerations before project implementation.

On the other hand, under the JBIC Guideline, classification of projects is should be carried out. The
projects shall be classified according to the level of potential environmental impacts. Depends on

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-23

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

the classification, submission of an environmental review report to the recipient country may be
necessary. Table 6.6.3 shows the project classification under the JBIC Guidelines.
Table 6.6.3 Project Classification and Environmental Review
Category Description Environmental Review
Classification
Category A Projects are classified as Category A if they are EIA report and Environmental approval certification
likely to have significant adverse impacts on the about subjected project by the partner country
environment and society. government. JICA shall carry out environmental
review after submission of EIA report and approval
certificates from the partner country.
Category B Projects are classified as Category B if their EIA report and Environmental approval certification
potential adverse impacts on the environmental about the subject project are not compulsory. An
and society are less significant than those of environmental review shall be carried out based on
Category A projects. Generally, they are the information provided by the partner country.
site-specific and in most cases normal mitigation
measures can be designed more readily.
Category C Projects are classified as Category C if they are The environmental review after screening is omitted.
likely to have minimum or little adverse impacts
on the environmental and society.
Category D A subproject is not specified before loan It is necessary to determine the necessary
determination. The project is expected to have environmental and social considerations for the
some adverse environmental impacts. project.

6.6.2 Scoping (Preliminary Scoping)

(1) Proposed Projects subject to Preliminary Scoping

Table 6.6.1 lists down the proposed projects where a preliminary scoping has been carried out under
this survey.

(2) Project Classification and its Rationales

The results of the preliminary scoping by IEE are shown in Table 6.6.5.

Project classification was carried out based on “The Japan Bank of International Cooperation
Guideline for Environmental and Social Environmental Considerations (July 2009).

Table 6.6.4 shows the classification of each proposed project. According to the Schedule 3: Drainage
and Irrigation of the Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact
Assessment) Order 1987 of DOE Malaysia, dam construction and man-made lakes and artificial
enlargement of lakes with surface area of 200 hectares or more come under “Prescribed Activities” in
the Order. Hence, the Flood Mitigation Project for Sungai Benton Basin that includes detention ponds
may be rated “A” due to a natural environmental impact, and EIA repots and Environmental approval
certification about project are indispensable according to JBIC’s Guidelines for Confirmation of
Environmental and Social Considerations (July 2009). The other proposed projects are rated “B”, and
EIA repots and Environmental approval certification are not required.
Table 6.6.4 Project Classification Results
Environmental Project
No. Name of Project Reason
Category (JBIC) Component
I Flood Mitigation Project for B Construction A small number of involuntary resettlements
Temerloh and Mentakab Towns of Ring Bund and some adverse environmental impacts
are expected.
II Flood Mitigation Project for B Construction Some adverse environmental impacts are
Pekan Town of Ring Bund expected.
III Flood Mitigation Project for A Construction Some involuntary resettlements and adverse
Sungai Bentong Basin of Detention impacts on flora and fauna are expected.
Embankment
IV Flood Mitigation Project for B River A small number of involuntary resettlements
Cameron Highlands Improvement and some adverse environmental impacts
are expected.

6-24 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 6
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 6.6.5 Scoping of Proposed Project in the Pahang River Basin

Project
Impact Overall Pahang a Brief Description
Rating
I II III IV V
Social Environment: *Regarding the impacts on “Gender” and “Children’s Right”, might be related to all criteria of Social Environment.
No commencement of any EIA procedure so far. It is necessary to judge whether implementation
1 Process of EIA and Environmental related approval - - - - - -
of EIA study is necessary or not.
2 Public Announcement - - - - - - No announcement to residents and stakeholders so far.
Project "I ", "III" and "IV" require some number of resettlement thought not so large number of
3 Involuntary Resettlement/Land acquisition B B C B B C
resettlement. II &VII are not sure whether involuntary resettlement is necessary or not.

4 Local economy such as employment and livelihoods, etc. C D D C C C Land acquisition some of farm area may influence local economy and livelihood.

5 Land use and utilization of local resources B B C B B C Accompany with resettlement and land acquisition, impact on existing land use can be considered.

Social institutions such as social infrastructure and local Resettlement due to construction dam may influence social structure. II is an improvement work
6 B C D B C C
decision-making institutions of existing bund.
Dividing into sections of a village due to construction bund and dam will influence social
7 Existing social infrastructure and services B D B B B C
infrastructure and require a relocation of existing infrastructure.

Many Orang Asli live in Benton, Cameron Highland and Kuala Lipis. And some of them may be
8 The poor, indigenous and ethnic people C D C C C C
necessary to relocate by construction bund etc.
9 Misdistribution of benefit and damage B B C B B D Due to resettlement
10 Cultural heritage B D D D D B Sungai Jelai in Kuala Lipis is an archaeological site.
11 Local conflict of interests D D C C C C Resettlement of Orang Asli may trigger a local conflict.
12 Water usage or Water Rights and Rights of Common C D D C C D Construction dam may influence on water usage and water right.

13 Sanitation D D D D D D -

14 Infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS B B B B B B A risk by influx of the construction person concerned can be considered.
15 Gender D D D D D D -
16 Rights of children D D D D D D -
Natural Environment
17 Topography and geographical features B B B B B C Geotopographical alteration can be considered.
It is thought that earthwork for construction may accompany a soil erosion. Soil erosion along the
18 Soil erosion B B B B B B new bypass and bund after construction phase should be avoided by an appropriate surface
protection work.

It is assumed that construction of bypass and reservoir may trigger an groundwater level fall.
19 Groundwater C D D C D D
However, utilization of any wells is not identified vicinity of proposed bypass so far.

20 Hydrological Situation B B B B B B Plus factor: Hydrological change triggers Flood mitigation.

(Mangroves, Coral reefs, Tidal flats, etc.)
21 D D D D D D -
Coastal Zone
Construction detention ponds will impact on flora, fauna and biodiversity. Construction a bypass
22 Flora, Fauna and Biodiversity A B B A B B
and river improvement work may influence flora, fauna and biodiversity.
23 Meteorology D D D D D D -
24 Landscape B B B B B B Construction of bund in town area may influence landscape.
25 Global Warming D D D D D D -
Pollution
It is expected that dust and an exhaust gas increase temporarily by use of the heavy industrial
26 Air Pollution B B B B B B machine under construction.
After construction does not generate the problem of air pollution.
It is expected that the outflow of earth and sand increases temporarily with the digging work under
27 Water Pollution B B B B B B construction.
Moreover, contamination by the outflow of the oil etc. can be thought.

28 Soil Contamination B B B B B B Some contamination can be considered by the outflow of the oil and fat under construction etc.
Problem about disposal of the garbage and filth under construction may occur.
29 Waste C C C C C C
Moreover, the suitable disposal of digging earth and sand is required.
There is a possibility that noise and vibration occur somewhat by heavy industrial machine use
30 Noise and Vibration B B B B B B
under construction.
31 Ground Subsidence D D D D D D -
32 Offensive Odor D D D D D D -

There is a possibility that construction reservoir may trigger a change of bottom materials.
33 Bottom sediment B D D B B D
However, there is no deteriorative factor of the bottom material's quality.

A risk of the traffic accident by the passing vehicle under construction can be considered.
34 Accidents B B B B B B Moreover, it is necessary to perform suitable safety education and measures against accident in the
construction phase.

I: Temerlor & Mentakab Ring Bund, II: Pekan Ring Bund, III: Benton Detension Embankment
IV: Cameron Highland River Improvement
Rating:
A: Serious impact is expected.
B: Some impact is expected.
C: Extent of impact is unknown (Examination is needed. Impacts may become clear as study progresses.)
D: Impact can hardly be considered.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 6-25

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 6 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

6.7 Selection of Project for Feasibility Study

At the 2nd Steering Committee Meeting on February 9, 2010, the Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project was
selected as an objective project for the Feasibility Study, which is scheduled to be carried out in the 2nd
stage of the Preparatory Survey. Components of the projects are presented in Table 6.7.1, and main
reasons for this selection are described as follows:

„ This Temerloh-Mentakab Conurbation that is located halfway between Kuala Lumpur and Kuantan is
expected to grow as the 4th level urban growth centers in the National Physical Plan.

„ These towns have been suffering from severe floods since old times. In December 2007 the two towns
were inundated two weeks by overflow of the Semantan River, and about 5,000 people were forced to
evacuate.

„ The proposed flood mitigation project, of which EIRR is 14 to 18%, is economically effective.

Table 6.7.1 Project for Feasibility Study

Title of Project Component Structural/Non-structural
Protection of Temerloh and Mentakab by ring bunds with
Structural measure
drainage pumps, road raising and bank protection.
Temerloh Flood Non-structural measures to supplement the structural measures,
Mitigation Project including capacity development, flood forecasting and warning Non-structural
system, land use control, community-based flood management, measure
etc.

6-26 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 7 BASIC STUDIES FOR FEASIBILITY STUDY ON TEMERLOH FLOOD

MITIGATION PROJECT

7.1 Introduction

The basic studies in this Chapter aim to 1) define basic conditions to plan and design Temerloh -
Mentakab Flood Mitigation Project, and 2) obtain necessary information and standards to evaluate the
project in terms of technical, economic and environmental aspect. Description of the project is
summarized below:

7.1.1 Project Area

Based on the result of IFM Plan study and the discussion in the Steering Committee held on February
2010, the Temerloh - Mentakab Conurbation in Pahang River Basin was selected as the target area for the
feasibility as shown in Figure 7.1.1. The population, properties and municipal functions are concentrated
on Mentakab and Temerloh Town and its surrounding area is expected the future advancement of
urbanization to form the Conurbation with above-mentioned towns.

Town

Figure 7.1.1 Temerloh-Mentakab Flood Mitigation Project Area

7.1.2 Project Purpose and Project Component

Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project shall consist of structural measures and non-structural measures
including the capacity development for flood management targeting DID Temerloh and other related
local government agencies in Temerloh District. JICA study team will propose (1) structural measures
with an optimum design scale to protect the project area from river-overflow and inland flood, and (2)
non-structural measures to minimize the regional gap inflicted by implementation of structural measures
and to mitigate the damage by floods exceeding the design scale of structural measures.

Table 7.1.1 Project Component

Item Project Component Components Target Area
Ring Bunds, Shortcut of river, Pumping Station, Sluice Gate,
Detention Pond and so on would be designed and combined to Temerloh – Mentakab
Structural Measure
protect the towns with the surrounding area from river overflows Conurbation Area
and inland floods
Capacity Development Projects, Preparation and utilization of
Non-Structural Measure flood hazard maps, Flood forecasting and warning, Land use Temerloh District
management, etc.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

7.2 Description of Project Area

7.2.1 Natural Condition

(1) Climate

According the meteorological data of Temerloh Station, the region experiences maximum rainfalls in
November and December, while the driest months are June and July with the total annual rainfall
depth of 1,966 mm. In addition, mean maximum and minimum daily temperatures are around 32oC
and 23 oC respectively through the year, while mean relative humidity is generally around 80 - 90%
with daily evaporation of about 3 mm. Figure 7.2.1 and Table 7.2.1 summarize the climatic
characteristics at the Temerloh Station.

Table 7.2.1 Climate Characteristics at Temerloh Station

Item Value
Mean maximum temperature 32.9 oC
Mean minimum temperature 23.2 oC
Mean relative Humidity 83.6 %
Mean annual rainfall (mm) 1966 mm
Mean no. of rain days 175 days
Mean yearly evaporation 1204 mm (about 3 mm/day)
Height of Station 39.1 m.a.s.l.
M onthly Rainfall (mm) M onthly Evap oration (mm) M ean Relative Humidity (%)

100 250

90

80 200

70

Rain. & Evapo. Depth (mm)

60 150
Humidity (%)

50

40 100

30

20 50

10

0 0
Jan. Feb. M ar. Apr. M ay Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
M onth

M ean M aximum Temp erature M ean M inimum T emp erature

35

30
Temperature(Celsius)

25

20
Aug.
Jan.

Feb.

Jun.

Jul.

Sep.

Nov.

Dec.
May
Mar.

Apr.

Oct.

M onth

Figure 7.2.1 Climate Characteristics at Temerloh Station

(2) Topography

Temerloh Town and Mentakab Town are the most densely populated area in the Temerloh and
Mentakab Municipalities where the topography is mixture of hilly area and low lying areas with many
uphill and downhill.

Temerloh Town is extended from the low lying area with the 32 m in lowest elevation to more than 50
m at highest. The hilly area increases gradually as the distance from the river increases. As seen from
the satellite image and the topographical map, Temerloh Town widely develops from the low-lying
area to the hilly area.

7-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

In Mentakab Town, the height of area varies from north to south with the range of 33 m in low lying
area to more than 60m in the hilly area. Buildup area is developed in both the hilly area and low-lying
area except for the prominent forest area in the left side of the railway.

Figure 7.2.2 Topographic Map in the Target Area

(3) River Condition

A river flow greatly meanders from the northwest toward the southeast by Temerloh and Mentakab
Towns which have suffered from the inundation by the overflow of Semantan River and the inland
flash flood. At the segment between Temerloh and Mentakab, the water level of Semantan River is
highly affected by the back water of the Pahang River due to its gentle slope. The features of the
Semantan River are summarized in Table 7.2.2.

Table 7.2.2 Feature of Semantan River

Item Characteristics
Catchment Area 2,919 km2
Length 135 km
River Width 50m ～ 100m
Slope 1/4,000 - 1/1,100, 1/4,000 (by town)
River Flow 1,600 m3/s(1/100), 1,000m3/s(1/20)
1.2m/s (during 1/100 flood), 1.1m/s (during 1/20
Flow Velocity 1)
flood)
1) Simulation Result

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

7.2.2 Socio-Economic Condition

(1) Administrative Boundary and Condition of Target Area

Temerloh and Mentakab Town

are located in the middle of
Pahang River basin. The
location of the towns and the
administrative boundaries of
Temerloh and Mentakab are
illustrated in Figure 7.2.3.
According to the National
Structural Plan, the area around
Temerloh and Mentakab Town
is recognized as an intermediate
growth conurbation to support
the development and progress of
Kuantan conurbation which is
expected to work out by year
2020.
Figure 7.2.3 Boundaries of Municipality and Town

(a) Temerloh

Temerloh Municipality, which is the administrative center of Temerloh District, lies around the
confluence of Pahang River and Semantan River and is partially covering 4 Mukims (Perak,
Sanggang, Bangau and Songsang Mukimus) with an area of 27.7 km2 and a population of 44,138.
The population and assets of the Municipality are densely concentrated in the Temerloh town, with
a population of 19,423 as shown in Table 7.2.3 and Table 7.2.3, which is located at the right bank
of Semantan and Pahang River in Mukim Perak. The population and area of District Temerloh,
Municipality Temerloh, Mukim Perak, and Temerloh Town are summarized in Table 7.2.3.

Table 7.2.3 Population and Area of Temerloh

Population in
Item Area (km 2)
2000 year
District Temerloh 136,214*1) 2290.7
Mukim Perak 38,129*1) 209.1
Temerloh Municipality 44,138*2) 27.7
Temerloh Town 19,423*2) 7.9
Source:*1)Department of Statistics, Malaysia,
*2)Temerloh Local Plan 1999-2010 (JPBD): Projected
population based on the population data from 1991 to 1999

(b) Mentakab

Mentakab Town has been a center for commerce in Temerloh District since 1970s and it is the
largest town in Temerloh District on commercial scale. The population and assets of Mentakab
Municipality are densely concentrated in Mentakab Town which is located at the right bank of
Semantan River in Mukim Mentakab with a population of 20,647 as shown in Table 7.2.4.

7-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 7.2.4 Population and Area of Mentakab Town

Item Number of People Area (km 2)
District Temerloh 136,214*1) 2290.7
Mukim Mentakab 42,267*1) 101.7
Mentakab Municipality 32,399*2) 25.2
Mentakab Town 20,647*2) 4.1
Source:*1) Department of Statistics, Malaysia
*2)Temerloh Local Plan 1999-2010 (JPBD): Projected
population based on the population data from 1991 to 1999

(2) Infrastructure (Road and Railway)

The principal road (Route 87), which runs between the capital city Kuala Lumpur and the major city
Kuantan in the east and west direction, passes the center of Temerloh Town and Mentakab Town. In
addition, the Rout 10 is connected with the Route 87 in the east edge of Temerloh Town and runs to
the south direction where the Negeri Sembilan State is located. Moreover, in the south and north of
Temerloh and Mentakab Municipality, Karak highway (Kuala Lumpur – Kuantan) and principal road
(Route 2) runs in the direction of east and west. Those roads shall be recognized as important
infrastructure as much as the railway runs through the center of Mentakab Town for civil life and
socio-economy in Mentakab and Temerloh Town.

The railway runs through the center of Mentakab Town and connects Tumpat at Kota bahru in State
Kelantan and Singer pole, which managed and operated by KTMB (Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad)
that is the government corporation set up in 1992. According to KTMB, they have two major plans for
upgrading of ECER (East Coast Economic Reagion) railway system and now carry out the feasibility
study aiming to examine the possibility of laying the railway (1) from Mentakab to the Paris Mas
through Kuantan and Kuala Terengganu in the east shoreline and (2) from Mentakab to Kuala
Lumpur.

(3) Demographic Trend

(a) Gender and Racial Composition

The gender ratio is expressed by the ratio of number of women to men. Gender ratio is one of the
indicators related to style of economic activities and growth rate. According to Temerloh
Municipality Council, in 1991 year, the gender ratio of Temerloh and Mentakab are 98.4% and
99.5% respectively, which means the number of female and male is almost equal.

The racial composition of target towns in 1991 year is summarized in Table 7.2.6. It could be
found that composition amount of Chinese in the Mentakab town is larger than that of Temerloh
town. The reason of the fact is assumed by Temerloh Municipality Council that the business and
service area such as Mentakab Town attracts Chinese.
Table 7.2.5 Gender Ratio
Area Male Female Ratio (%)
Municipality 16,172 16,311 99.1
Temerloh
Town 7,079 7,197 98.4
Municipality 12,909 12,614 104.3
Mentakab
Town 8,085 8,124 99.5
Source: Temerloh Local Plan 1999-2010 (JPBD)

Table 7.2.6 Racial Composition (%)

Area Malay Chinese Indian Others Total
Municipality 73.93 4.29 4.44 17.34 100
Temerloh
Town 57.26 4.90 5.48 32.36 100
Municipality 33.38 8.33 5.14 53.14 100
Mentakab
Town 31.67 10.95 4.17 53.21 100
Source: Temerloh Local Plan 1999-2010 (JPBD)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(b) Migration Rate and Population Growth Rate

Based on Temerloh Local Plan 1999 – 2010 (JPBD), the migration rate from 1980 to 1991 is -1.7 %
in both Temerloh Town and Mentakab Town. In the Temerloh District, the average migration rate
of municipalities is also - 1.7% between 1980 and 1991, and the Municipality Council is
considering that the District is facing the highest rate of emigration. Based on Temerloh Local Plan
1999 – 2010 (JPBD), the average population growth rate of all municipalities between 1991 and
1999 is 3.14 % and that of the Temerloh Town and Mentakab Town is 3.55 % and 2.80 %
respectively.

7.2.3 Past Flood Event

(1) Historical Flood Record

The historical flood record of target area for recent 26 years is summarized in Table 7.2.7. The
Temerloh and Mentakab Town have been affected by various scales of floods during monsoon season
(mainly November to January). And it can be said that the flood have recently occurred once every
two years (13 times in these 26 years) including flash floods which means over flow from small rivers.
Incidentally, the recorded peak water levels at Temerloh station are 38.31m, 34.53m and 34.02m
which are the three highest water level in the past 40 years.

Table 7.2.7 Historical Flood Record

Flood Occurrence Inundation Level at
Duration Temerloh Evacuees Damages
Year Sub-District Date of Flood Depth
District (day) Flood Warning (People) (RM)
(m)
Temerloh Mentakab Station (m)
1982 Yes n.a. n.a. Dec.(mid) 1.52 n.a. 31.60 n.a. n.a.
n.a.
1983 Yes n.a. n.a. Dec.(early) 1.2 4-5 31.90 (107 n.a.
Family)
Jan.(end) to
n.a.
1984 Yes n.a. n.a. Mar.(early) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
31.02
Dec.(mid-end)
1987 Yes n.a. n.a. Dec.(early-mid) 0.5-1 3 32.25 n.a. n.a.
1-1.5(Tem.), 6 4,987 5.14 mil
1988 Yes yes yes Nov.(end) 34.53
0.7(Men) (Tem.) (Tem.) (Tem.)

332(Men),
1993 Yes yes yes Dec.(mid) n.a. n.a. 33.37 n.a.
212(Tem.)
1994 Yes n.a n.a. Nov.(mid) n.a. n.a. 30.90 n.a. n.a.
1995 Yes n.a. n.a. Dec.(end) n.a. 4 31.74 n.a. n.a.
Dec.(end) to
1998 Yes n.a. n.a. 1.6-1.8 n.a. 32.39 n.a. n.a.
Jan.(early)
528
1999 Yes n.a. yes Jan.(early) n.a. n.a. 32.39 n.a.
(Dis.)
2001 Yes n.a. n.a. Jan.(end) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
2003 Yes no yes Jan.(early-mid.) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
2007 Yes yes yes Dec.(mid.) n.a. n.a. 34.02 4,916 n.a.
Source: RRB (1982-2001), Flood Report (DID, 2002-2009)

(2) Warning Water Level and Safe Level

Back water of Pahang River in major floods affects very much the flood inundation level in Temerloh
and Mentakab Municipality. Considering this characteristic, DID Temerloh officials defines the
warning water level at Temerloh gauging station, which is located in the Pahang River about 2 km
downstream of the confluence point of Semantan River, to determine the status of inundation risk in
the target area.

7-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 7.2.8 Waning Level

Waning Level Normal Alert Danger
Water level 26 m 29 m 33 m
The possibility of the flood occurrence rises in target area when the water level at the station becomes
higher than 34m. According to the Flood Report (DID Temerloh/Bera District, 2007), DID Temerloh
identifies and advice safe level for residential area at Temerloh Municipality including its surrounding
area at the minimum ground level of 35.5m which is approximately the scale of 20 year ARI flood
water level.

(3) Past Flood Events of Temerloh and Mentakab

Summary of the past flood events in Temerloh and Mentakab Town are described as follows:

(a) 1970s Floods

Based on Pahang River Basin Study (1974) and DID Temerloh, built-up areas of the Temerloh
Town were flooded by 2-3m (up to about 38.0 ground level) in depth, in January 1971 flood. The
damages were estimated to be 800,000 USD and the road to Mentakab was shut down for weeks.
The main cause of flood is assumed to be due to high water levels in Pahang River. Furthermore,
the serious flooding also occurred in December 1971, the damages of which are estimated to be
200,000 USD as of 1974. In the December 1972 and December 1973 floods, some parts of the
town were flooded and the road to Mentakab was closed for 3 days.

In January 1971 there was flood water of 5 m in depth in the business section of Mentakab Town,
and this inundation caused losses estimated at 1,200,000 USD. In times of severe flooding, lasting
several weeks, roads within the town were inundated and the only access to Mentakab is by boat or
helicopter. Fortunately, there was sufficient high ground within the town for relief and evacuation
requirement.

(b) November 1988 Flood

As to 1988 flood, the information is insufficient to describe the condition of Temerloh town at that
time. Stakeholders, however, remember the serious damage of 1998 flood. According to Flood
Report (1988, DID Temerloh), the number of evacuees of Temerloh District is 4,987. In addition,
the Maximum 8 days rainfall and Maximum flood water level of Temerloh station were 269.5 mm
and 34.53 m respectively.

(c) December 2007 Flood

According to Flood Report (2007, DID Temerloh), the flood event that occurred in District
Temerloh had continued from 10th December until 23rd December 2007. The office of DID
Temerloh District had operated for 24 hours on the 7th December 2007 when the water level at
Kuala Tahan Station of Tembeling River reached the warning water level. In addition, the third
highest water level in the past 4 decades was recorded at Temerloh Station of Pahang River with
34.02 meter on the 14th December 2007 at 2 p.m.

In the flood, the residential area of Temerloh Town close to Pahang River was inundated and at the
same time, the residential area close to Semantan River in Mentakab Town also suffered from the
inundation by the overflow from Semantan River. The number of evacuees was 4,916 in Temerloh
District and the Maximum 8 days rainfall was 315 mm at Temerloh gauging station. According to
DID Temerloh District, the flood damage in Temerloh and Mentakab Town was not as serious
compared with two floods mentioned above.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

7.3 Preparation of Ortho-map and Cross Section Survey

Survey had been carried out by the local survey company under the supervision of JICA Study Team.
Used map projection is the “Rectified Skew Orthomorphic Natural Origin in Malaysia”, and used vertical
datum is DTGSM (Peninsular Malaysia Geodetic Vertical Datum, determined from Tidal Observation at
Port Kelang, 1984 - 1993). The detail of surveys is described below.

7.3.1 Objectives

The creation of Ortho-map with 1m-interval contour lines was planned in Temerloh and Mentakab town
and its surrounding area. The map is utilized to mainly grasp the ground height and area for designing a
scale and alignment of structural measures and to serve as input data for the hydrological simulation
model as DEM (Digital Elevation Model).

The result of cross section survey of Semantan River, its tributaries and drainages was used for the
hydraulic and hydrological analysis. Mainly, flow capacity, flow velocity, water level, river discharge
and flood inundation area are estimated by the hydraulic and hydrological simulation model which use
cross-sections as its input.

7.3.2 Preparation of Ortho-map

IKONOS color satellite image of 1m resolution taken on May 1st, 2009 was used as basic image to
prepare the ortho-image, and IFSAR (Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar) data of 5m spacing
acquired in December 2008 were mainly used as DEM to create the ortho-image (See Figure 7.3.1).

Figure 7.3.1 IFSAR Data (Left) and Ortho Image (Right)

The ortho-map was prepared based on the ortho-image and 1m-interval contour lines. The 1m-interval
contour lines were created by the IFSAR data and leveling survey results by GPS (Global Positioning
System) of Virtual Reference Station method. Generally, best elevation accuracy of IFSAR data is
thought to be around 0.5m. However, our verification test for the IFSAR data in the two sites setting 167
(Mentakab) and 132 (Temerloh) check points showed +0.65m and -0.17m errors, respectively comparing
with the elevation values by GPS of VRS method (horizontal accuracy: 4cm, vertical accuracy: 6cm by
MyRTK). Therefore, the IFSAR data were corrected by these error values. Moreover, the leveling
survey by GPS of VRS method was carried out in the important area for flood analyses to improve the
1m-interval contour lines. The two test sites and the leveling points are shown in Figure 7.3.2.

The raw 1m-interval contour lines were automatically generated by the DTM (Digital Terrain Model)
created using the IFSAR data and the leveling survey results including the river cross section survey
results, and after manually editing errors, the contour lines were finalized. Finally, the ortho-map was
created overlaying the contour lines on the ortho-image. A sample part of the ortho-map is shown in
Figure 7.3.3.

7-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 7.3.2 Two Test Sites (Green) and Figure 7.3.3 Sample Part of Ortho-map
Leveling Points (Red)
7.3.3 River and Drainage Cross Section Survey

The cross section survey was carried out for Semantan River (26 sections), its tributaries and drainage (32
sections). The locations of cross section measured point are shown in Figure 7.3.4. The methodology of
the cross section survey is summarized in Table 7.3.1. A sample of the cross section result is shown in
Figure 7.3.4.

(Semantan River: yellow, Tributaries & Drainage: red)

Figure 7.3.4 Location of Cross Section Location (Left) and Sample of Cross Section (Right)
Table 7.3.1 Methodology of Cross Section Survey
Item Contents
Setting of Survey Point The coordinates (xyz) of each survey point were determined using DGPS (Differential GPS) with
Starfire correction signal of sub-meter accuracy (RMSE).
Measurement Interval Distance from each survey point was measured by using a leveling instrument and/or measuring tape
of Cross Section at each measuring point where slope changes in degrees take place. Water depth of each point -was
basically measured at 1 m interval. Distance and elevation error were planned with sub-meter
accuracy.
Measurement of Water At each cross section, water level was measured at one selected location along the surveyed line.
Level
Measurement of Land Topographical survey was carried out about 5m outside from the bank on both sides of the river and
Area site scene digital photographs were taken for understanding the land situation on the both sides of the
banks. If there are bridges, pipelines, or the other utilities crossing, their locations and sizes were
measured approximately and digital photographs were taken.
Used Equipment • DGPS system capable of achieving sub-meter accuracy (xyz) at open area
• Measuring tape, staff, EDM (Electronic Distance Meter) and auto-level
• Total Station Surveying System

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

The following results at each cross section site have been prepared: 1) Bathymetric and topographic
profiles at a horizontal scale of 1/500 and a vertical scale of 1/100, and DWG format data, 2) Typical
diagram of the bridge, and DWG format data, and 3)Digital topographic and bathymetric dataset by
ASCII format.

7.4 Geological Survey

7.4.1 Purpose of the Survey

This Geological investigation is composed of core drilling with testing and laboratory tests. They shall be
performed for the purpose to obtain geotechnical data on the soil layer conditions for the feasibility study
on Temerloh area and Mentekab area in Semantan River.

7.4.2 Results of Geological Survey (Temerloh)

(1) Geological Layer

Borehole logs of Temerloh area are shown in Figure 7.4.1. The geolocigal layer of the Semantan
River is compsed of Silty Clay from ground to GL.-13.0m, and Sandy Silt with little gravel under
GL.-13.0 - 15.0m. N value of the Silty Clay varies from 2-20, and that of Sandy Silt is over 50.

(2) Feature of Silty Clay

Laboratory tests were conducted to comprehed feature of silty clay which deposit from surface to
around GL.-12.0m. Feature of Silty Clay is showin in Table 7.4.1.

Table 7.4.1 Feature of the Silty Clay

Item unit TBH1 TBH2 TBH3 TBH4 TBH5
Moisture content % 28-138 25-51 34 - 50 12-24 30-42
Bulk Density kg/m3 1.809 – 1.821 1.557-1.707 1.798 – 1.933 1.731-2.000 1.759-1.971
Specific gravity - 2.61 2.61-2.65 2.61-2.62 2.62-2.64 2.61-2.65
Permeability(K) cm 7.73x10-5 1.03x10-4 1.42x10-4 8.60x10-5 1.27x10-5

TBH-3 Pump Staion-2

River catchment area
Pump Staion-1

River
TBH-2
TBH-1
Planning Bunds

Allowable
flooding area
Ｈilly reaa
(EL.40m) TBH-5

TBH-4

Figure 7.4.1 Boring Location of Temerloh

7-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 TBH 1 TBH 2 TBH 3 TBH 4 TBH 5
SPT Plot SPT Plot SPT Plot SPT Plot SPT Plot
Description of soil N Description of soil N Description of soil N Description of soil N Description of soil N
Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 0 0 0 0
Top soil,pale yellow,clayey top soil,light yellow,silty CLAY top soil,light yellow,mottled
Top Soil, (Rubbish dump) Top soil,light yellow,silty clay
SILT (wet soil) brown clayey SILT

1 1 1 1 1
Very Stiff,yellowwish very soft,pale yellow to pale
Stiff,pale yellow,clayey SILT 11 27 Stiff,light yellow,silty CLAY 12 2 stiff,pale yellow,clayey SILT 11
brown,clayey silt brown,silty CLAY

2 2 2 2 2
top; pale to light brown,silty
Very Stiff,yellowwish Medium stiff,light yellow top;pale to light brown,clayey
22 5 clay with some sand. Bottom-
brown,clayey silt mottled grey.silty CLAY SILT Bottom;Ditto
Ditto-
Stiff,light yellow mottled
8
grey,silty,CLAY 3 3 3 3 3

Very stiff, greyish brown, clayey medium stiff,dark brown,silty

27 Ditto 8 8 very soft,dark grey,clayey SIlT 2
4 SILT 4 4 clay 4 4

Medium stiff,ligth yellow,silty

7
Clay

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.

5 5 5 5 5
very stiff pale to light grey, Top;light yellow dark stiff, pale yellow pale grey, silty very soft,pale grey,clayey SILT
19 10
clayey SILT grey,clayey SILT Bottom;Ditto CLAY with litle very fine sand

Very stiff,dark grey,decayed 6 6 6 6 6

23
wood

Ditto 20 Stiff,pale grey,clayey SILT 4 Ditto 9 loose,pale grey,clayey fine sand 10

7 7 7 7 7

Very soft,pale grey,silty grey 2

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

8 8 8 8 8
very Stiff,pale grey and pale soft,pale grey to light medium dense,light brown,silty
19 4 12
yellow,silty CLAY brown,silty CLAY SAND
Top;pale to light grey,silty CLAY
Ditto 5
Bottom,Dito 9 9 9 9 9

Medium dense,pale to light

yellow and dark grey,silty 16 soft,pale grey sandy CLAY 4 loose, pale brown, silty sand 7
10 10 10 10 10
GRAVEL with some sand
stiff,pale to dark grey ,clayey
Stiff,pale brown,silty CLAY 3 11
SILT with little decayed wood

11 11 11 11 11
Very Stiff,reddish brown mottled
stiff, pale yellow pale grey,
pale grey,silty CLAY with little 24 Ditto 16 very stiff, dark grey sandy grey 28 16
sandy CLAY with a little sand
fine sand
Ditto 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

12 12 12 12 12

Hard,yellowish brown mottled Hard,dark grey mottled

Medium dense,pale grey,silty meduim dense,pale brown,silty
grey,sand clayey SILT with little 50 white,clayey SILT with some 50 16 14
13 13 fine SAND 13 13 fine sand 13
garvel sand
hard,dark grey,silty gravel with a
50
litle sand

14 14 14 14 14
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating

Hard, dark grey clayey SILT

Hard,dark grey,clayey SILT 50 Hard; Ditto 50 50 stiff,pale grey, sandy CLAY 11
with a little of SAND

15 15 15 15 15
hard dark grey,silty gravel with
50
some sand

Hard,-Ditto- 50 Hard, dark grey, silty CLAY 50 Hard, Ditto 50 Ditto 11

16 16 16 16 16
hard dark grey mottled
50
white,clayey silt

17 17 17 17 17
Hard, dark grey, silty CLAY Hard,greenish grey method
Hard,-Ditto- 50 Hard, Ditto 50 Hard Ditto 50 50
with some sand white,silty sand

18 18 18 18 18
End of borehole TBH 3 at depth End of borehole TBH 4 at depth
18.345m 18.21m

Hard;Ditto 50 Hsrd.Ditto 50
19 19 19 19 19

20 20 20 20 20
End of borehole TBH2 at depth
19.765m End of borehole TBH5 at depth
21m

Figure 7.4.2 Borehole log of Temerloh Area

7-11
Chapter 7
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

7.4.3 Results of Geological Survey (Mentakab)

(1) Geological Layer

Five boreholes were tested in Mentakab area are shown in Figure 7.4.3. The geological layer of the
Mentakab River is mainly composed of Sandy silt, Silty clay, and Sand.

(2) Feature of Silty Clay

Laboratory tests were conducted to comprehend feature of silty clay which deposit from surface to
around GL.-12.0m. Feature of Silty Clay is showin in Table 7.4.2.

Table 7.4.2 Feature of the Silty Clay

Item unit MBH1 MBH2 MBH3 MBH4 MBH5
Moisture content % 20–35 16-29 24 – 31 7-33 30-42
Bulk Density kg/m3 1.852 – 2.169 2.014 1.869 – 2.716 1.490-1.670 1.512-1.861
Specific gravity - 2.61-2.65 2.61-2.64 2.61-2.63 2.64-2.65 2.61-2.65
Permeability(K) cm 7.19x10-4 7.80x10-5 1.02x10-6 6.02x10-５ 3.60x10-3
~ ~
5.03x10-6 6.64x10-4

MBH-4
MBH-3

MBH-5
River catchment

River
Planning Bunds
MBH-2 Allowable
flooding area
Ｈ illy
reaa

MBH-1

Figure 7.4.3 Boring Location of Mentakab

7-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 MBH 1 MBH 2 MBH 3 MBH 4 MBH 5
SPT Plot SPT Plot SPT Plot SPT Plot SPT Plot
Description of soil N Description of soil Description of soil Description of soil Description of soil
Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 N Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 N Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 N Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50 N Depth/N 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 0 0 0 0
Top soil,reddish Top soil,pale to light Top soil, pale to light Top soil,pale yellow sandy Top soil,pale to dark
brown,sandy SILT yellow,clayey SILT brown, sandy SILT SILT brown,silty CLAY

1 1 1 1 1
Medium stiff,pale yellow
Very soft,pale brown,silty stiff,pale grey to light Medium stiff,yellowish
2 11 6 Soft,light yellow silty CLAY 4 mottled brown and grey,silty 7
CLAY with little grave yellow,silty CLAY grey,clayey SAND
CLAY

2 2 2 2 2
Stiff, light yellow mottled
stiff,pale to light Loose,pale yellow,silty Loose, pale yellow,silty fine
11 brown,clayey SAND with a 13 5 6
yellow,silty CLAY SAND SAND
trace of gravel
No recovery
3 3 3 3 3

very stiff,light yellow

stiff,yellowish brown Loose,pale brown silty Loose,pale grey,silty fine
15 mottled grey,clayey SAND 19 7 10
4 mottled grey,clayey SILT 4 4 SAND 4 SAND 4
with some gravel

Loose,pale yellow,silty fine

4
to medium SAND

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.

5 5 5 5 5
very stiff,light brown Medium dense,pale grey and
soft,light grey,sandy clay with
Ditto 13 mottled pale yellow,silty 30 dark brown,silty SAND with 22 3
litlle gravel
CLAY some decayed wood

6 6 6 6 6
Ditto 4

very stiff,yellowish Medium dense,light

32 Ditto 35 16 Ditto 2
7 brown,clayey SILT 7 7 grey,gravelly SAND 7 7
Loose,pale brown,silty fine

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

6
to medium SAND

8 8 8 8 8
Medium dense,pale to light very dense, dark grey,silty
Ditto 32 12 50
grey,gravelly SAND SAND with some gravel
Hard,pale to light
Ditto 6 brown,mottled grey and 50
9 9 light yellow sandy silt 9 9 9

very stiff,yellowish Loose.light grey,silty fine to very dense,dark grey,silty sand

26 6 50
10 brown,clayey SILT 10 10 medium SAND 10 with some gravel 10
Medium dense,pale Hard.pale to light brown
grey,silty sand with some 13 mottled grey and light 50
coarse gravel yellow,sandy SILT

11 11 11 11 11
Hard,light grey,clayey Hard,dark grey,sandy SILT Medium stiff,pale to dark Hard,dark grey mottled
Ditto 14 50 50 8 50
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

GRAVEL with little gavel brown, Sandy CLAY brown,sandy SILT

12 12 12 12 12

Medium dense,pale white

and dark grey sandy 17 Ditto 50 Hard;Ditto 50 Ditto 50
13 13 13 13 13
GRAVEL
Hard,pale to dark grey
50
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating

clayey, SILT

14 14 14 14 14
Medium dense,pale Hard,light grey,clayey
13 50 Hard,dark grey,sandy SILT 50 Ditto 50
brown,silty fine SAND SILT

15 15 15 15 15
very dense,light yellow,silty
50
SAND
End of borehole MBH at End of barehole MBH5 at
Ditto 18 Ditto 50
16 16 depth 15.265m 16 16 depth 15.14m 16

Ditto 50

17 17 17 17 17
Very stiff,dark grey striked
white mottled light yellow, 16 Ditto 50 Dito 50
silty CLAY
18 18 18 18 18

Hard,ywllowish
End of borehole MBH2 at
Ditto 18 brown,clayey SILT with 50
19 depth 18.145m 19 19 19 19
some gravel

20 20 20 20 20
End of barehole MBH4 at
depth 19.84m

7-13
Chapter 7
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 7.4.4 Borehole log of Mentakab Area

 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

7.5 Asset Assessment Survey

The Study needs to evaluate economic impact of each alternative flood mitigation proposal. Hence asset
survey was carried out to find out the asset value in the flood prone area. The survey area is the area
inundated by 1970 - 1971 flood in the Temerloh and Mentakab towns. The coverage of this survey is
shown in Figure 7.5.1 and Table 7.5.1.

Figure 7.5.1 The Coverage of Survey Area in Temerloh (Left) and Mentakab (Right)

Table 7.5.1 Survey Area

Basin District FS area Area Remarks
Pahang River Temerloh Temerloh and Under MSL40m Area inundated by 2007 flood
District Mentakab Town

7.5.1 Target Property and Sampling Number

Asset survey was carried on 26 April 2010-30 April 2010. The study area was divided into 11 survey
zones in Temerloh and 7 survey zones in Mentakab. The total number of samples is 117 samples for
Temerloh and 113 samples for Mentakab. The distribution of samples is shown in Figure 7.5.2. In each
survey zones, respondents were selected randomly. The condition of respondents, survey items
summarized in Table 7.5.2

19
1

26
22 13

19

13

Figure 7.5.2 The Number of Samples in Temerloh and Mentakab

Table 7.5.2 Respondents and Survey Items
Target Properties House / Shop
Respondents Over 18 years old
Conditions of House / Shop
Items of Households
Survey Items
Information by 2007 Flood
Damage by 2007 Flood

7-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

7.5.2 Survey Result

Assets in residence include home belongings such as interior equipment, furniture, kitchen equipment,
electric appliances bicycle, automobile and clothes as well as building. Assets in shop include its
inventory if any as well as their home belongings. The main survey results on assets are shown in the
following table.

Table 7.5.3 Main Survey Results on Assets in Semantan

Household
Home Asset Shop Building Shop Asset Shop Stock
Building
Sample Number 70 222 50 105 105
Maximum RM 500,000.00 RM 1,134,500.00 RM 1,200,000.00 RM 900,000.00 RM 800,000.00
Minimum RM 2,000.00 RM 18.00 RM 600.00 RM 0.00 RM 0.00
Mean RM 53,314.29 RM 85,160.17 RM 148,852.00 RM 101,859.05 RM 52,192.38

7.6 Hydrological and Hydraulic Studies

7.6.1 Flood Simulation

Semantan River Basin Model will be developed to conduct detail flood prediction of Temerloh and
Mentakab which are target area of the feasibility study. Basic analysis and calculation conditions for
flood simulation are described in this section.

(1) Rainfall Analysis

Semantan River confluence point in Pahang River was selected as reference point for rainfall analysis.
It is because its water level is the major factor which controls the water level along Temerloh and
Mentakab Town. Thus rainfall probability analysis was conducted with the data of spatial average 8
days rainfall upstream of this point. 40 years (1968-2007) data of gauging stations shown in Figure
7.6.1 were used to obtain rainfall depth for various ARIs.

2
Area(km )
4514032
St. ID Whole Reference
(! 4414036 Basin Point
!( 4419047
!( 2922018 1244 0
2725094 875 0
4227001
4120064 !( 3122142 1430 108
!( 4122067 3325086 1773 0
4019063!(
!( 3421134 1994 1818
3924071
!( 3524080 689 373
3818057
!( 3431099 1784 0
3717052 3533102 406 0
!( 3723077 3726089
!( !( 3717052 1238 1238
3533102 3723077 1062 996
3524080 3431099!(
3421134 !( 3726089 2016 263
!(
!( 3325086 3818057 1166 1166
!( 3924071 1293 1293
Reference point
4019063 1002 1002
3122142
!( 4120064 735 735
4122067 1557 1557
2922018 4419047 3079 3079
!(
4414036 1069 1069
2725094 4514032 357 357
!( 4227001 4002 4002

Figure 7.6.1 Thiessen Distribution and Area Represented by Each Station

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 7.6.1 ARI of Observed 8 days Rainfall

Whole Basin Reference Point Whole Basin Reference Point
Year Maximum Maximum Year Maximum Maximum
ARI ARI ARI ARI
Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall Rainfall
1968 130.6 1.4 147.1 1.8 1988 269.5 9 254.2 10
1969 138.5 1.6 151.6 1.9 1989 125.7 1.4 136.8 1.6
1970 543.8 112 458.6 109 1990 181.1 3 159.0 2
1971 312.2 15 286.8 16 1991 197.2 4 177.5 3
1972 225.6 5 193.2 4 1992 164.6 2 158.9 2
1973 147.5 1.8 145.4 1.8 1993 217.6 5 231.4 7
1974 117.4 1.2 123.6 1.3 1994 193.8 3 177.0 3
1975 201.2 4 160.6 2 1995 216.2 5 204.4 5
1976 108.6 1.2 117.9 1.2 1996 115.1 1.2 117.2 1.2
1977 139.9 1.6 156.1 2.1 1997 102.4 1.1 98.3 1.05
1978 121.8 1.3 130.9 1.4 1998 276.3 10 252.5 10
1979 230.8 6 187.3 4 1999 132.3 1.5 134.3 1.5
1980 118.7 1.3 127.1 1.4 2000 109.3 1.2 105.6 1.09
1981 94.6 1.06 97.9 1.05 2001 220.0 5 196.5 4
1982 102.8 1.1 104.5 1.09 2002 90.2 1.04 97.1 1.04
1983 232.4 6 243.1 9 2003 151.3 1.9 142.8 1.7
1984 179.7 3 160.1 2 2004 133.0 1.5 125.6 1.3
1985 128.2 1.4 141.8 1.7 2005 185.6 3 196.4 4
1986 135.4 1.5 149.2 1.9 2006 129.2 1.4 112.9 1.2
1987 214.1 4 202.7 5 2007 353.4 23 302.7 20
* Hydrological year: July until June next year

8 days rainfalls for various return periods at the reference point are as in Figure 7.6.2.
Upstream of Semantan
River Confluence
Point 8 days
ARI(yrs)
Rainfall (mm)
Nonexceedance probability (%)

200 528.5
150 494.0
100 448.8
ARI (years)

80 425.6
50 380.0
30 335.2
20 302.8
10 252.9
5 208.4
2 153.4

General Extreme Value (GEV) distribution, Plotted on

Log-Normal Probability Paper

Figure 7.6.2 8 days Rainfall for Various Return Periods at the Reference Point

(2) Outline of the Flood Simulation Model

Semantan River Basin Model will be developed in order to conduct detail simulation for Temerloh and
Mentakab, which are the target area for the feasibility study. Basic structure of the model is same with
the one developed in Chapter 4 except it is with higher spatial resolution, and will use results of the
Basin Model for its boundary condition. Detail of the flood simulation model could be found in
Chapter 4. Relationship between Semantan River Model and Pahang River Basin Model are shown
in Figure 7.6.3.

7-16 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Pahang River Basin Model

Semantan River Model

Tanah Rata
!(
Ringlet
!(
Jerantut
!(

Padang Tengku
!( Kuala Lipis
!(
Penjum B.C: Calculated
!( Kuala Tembeling discharge of the
Jerkoh !(
(! Benta
!( Basin model
CherohDong
!( !(

Raub
!(
Hulu Bentong Semantan
!(
Teras Sungai Ruan
Kuala Kerau
!(
Bentong
!(
!(
Sungai Penjuring
!( Kerdau Maran
!(
Bentong !(
!( Lanchang Chenor Pekan B.C: Calculated
Sungai Dua !( !( Temerloh
!( !(
!( Karak Mentakab
!( water level of the
!(
Bukit Tinggi Mengkarak Basin model
!(
Telemong !(
!( Teriang
Manchis !( !( Kerayong
!( !(
Kemayan
Sungai
!(
Buloh
!(
Simpang!( Durian!( !(Durian Tipus
Kampung ChennahTiti
Kuala Klawang!(!( PetalingPertang
!(
Spatial Grid Size: 100m x 100m
!( Jelebu!( Estate
!( Serting
!(
Bahau
!(

Spatial Grid Size: 500m x 500m

Figure 7.6.3 Schematic View of the Basin and River Model

Flood simulation will be conducted under rainfall pattern of 2007 which was the largest flood in the
last 30 years in Pahang River Basin and with sufficient data available.

4514032
!(
4414036
!( 4419047
!(

4227001
!(
4120064
!(
4122067
!(
4019063
!(
3924071
!(
3818057
!(

3717052
!(
3723077 3726089
!(
!(

3533102
3524080 !(
!( 3431099
3421134 !(
!(
3325086
!(

!(
3122142 High : 709.558

2922018
!(

2725094
Low : 90.9369
!(

Figure 7.6.4 Rainfall Distribution of Dec 2007 Flood

Enlargement ratio in Table 7.6.2 will be multiplied to observed temporal rainfall data in order to
adjust the actual 8 days rainfall depth to rainfall depth of targeted ARIs.

Table 7.6.2 Enlargement Ratio for Flood Simulation

Return Period Observed Rainfall
depth upstream of
2 5 10 20 50 100
the reference point
8 days rainfall(mm) 153.4 208.4 252.9 302.8 380.0 448.8 -
Enlargement Ratio 0.51 0.69 0.84 1.00 1.26 1.48 302.7(Dec. 2007)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-17

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 7.6.3 Model Parameters

Runoff Infiltration
Catch- Area
ment (km2) Width Roughness Initial Loss Continuing
Slope Land Use
(km) Coefficient (mm) Loss (mm/hr)
Pervious 96.4 0.1 60.0 0.2
Hulu (%) (96.4)
253 150 0.001
Bentong Impervious 3.6 0.014 - -
Runoff (%) (3.6)
Model Pervious 97.6 0.1 30.0 0.3
Bentong 1705 100 0.001 (%) (99.5)
Impervious 2.4 0.014 - -
(%) (0.5)
Pervious 84.6 0.1 30.0 0.3
Semantan 961 100 0.001 (%) (97.8)
Impervious 15.4 0.014 - -
(%) (2.2)
2D Flood Spatial Resolution
Model 100m x 100m
Numbers in the parenthesis indicate proportion in the current condition

(3) Validation of the Model

The flood simulation model was verified by comparing actual and simulated inundation area and river
water level of December 2007 flood which is the second largest flood in Pahang River Basin in the last
40 years.

Figure 7.6.5 is temporal plot of observed river water level and calculated results. Figure 7.6.6 shows
simulated flood areas and location of inundated houses based on interview survey in Temerloh and
Mentakab Town. It could be seen that inundated area indicated by the simulation result covers the
inundated area identified through interview survey. As indicated by two figures it is appropriate to say
the simulation result agrees well with the observed data.
40 Observed
Water Level(DTGSM m)

Temerloh(3424411)
Simulation result
35
Pa

Se 30
ha

Mentakab m
ng

an
ta
Ri

n
25
v.

Ri
v.

Temerloh 20
Location of Gauging Stations 12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07
45 Observed maximum water level
Water Level(DTGSM m)

Mentakab Simulation result

40

35

30

25
12/01/07 12/06/07 12/11/07 12/16/07 12/21/07 12/26/07

Figure 7.6.5 Observed Water Level and Simulation Result

7-18 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

Meters

: Inundated houses

- 0.5
0.5 - 1
1-2 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Meters

2-3
3-4
4-

Figure 7.6.6 Model Verification: Flood Area (Upper Panel: Inundated houses based on
interview survey in Temerloh and Mentakab Town, Lower Panel: Simulation result)
(4) Simulation Result

(a) Simulation Case

Flood simulation will be conducted under existence of three flood management alternatives,
namely flood bund, downstream short-cut channel, and upstream and downstream short-cut
channel, in addition to simulation without structural measures. Simulated cases are as listed in
Table 7.6.4. Details of structural measures could be found in the next section.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-19

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 7.6.4 Simulation Cases

Land use
Alternatives Description
Condition
0. No structural measure 2025 Without any structural measures
1. Bunds 2025 Existence of flood protection bunds
Structural measure Existence of a short-cut channels in
2. Short-cut channels
2025 Semantan River and flood
and bunds
protection bunds

Alternative1
93

92
6
97
91 94

95 3
52
51
98

23
4 96

21
99

22 13

12

Sub-basin 11
boundary
Proposed bund
River

Alternative2
93

92
6
97
91 94 95

3
52
51
98

23
4 96

21
99

22 13

12
Sub-basin 11
boundary
Proposed bund
Proposed bypass
channel
River

Figure 7.6.7 Location Plan of Structural Measures

7-20 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(b) Result

Table 7.6.5, Figure 7.6.8 and Figure 7.6.9 show the simulation result. The result indicates slight
river water level rise in and upstream of target protection area relative to no measures as a result of
bund construction. This is due to decrease in flooding area which will be partially protected by
bunds. The short-cut channel could reduce the water level in vicinity and upstream of Metakab
Town. No significant negative impact (water level rise) by structural measures to downstream of
the target area was predicted.
Table 7.6.5 River Water Level of Semantan River
Cross ARI: 100years ARI: 50years ARI: 20years
section ID Alt.0* Alt.1* Alt.2* Alt.0* Alt.1* Alt.2* Alt.0* Alt.1* Alt.2*
0.0km 37.70 37.69 37.76 36.57 36.57 36.56 35.07 35.08 35.08
2.0km 37.97 37.88 - 36.74 36.74 - 35.20 35.25 -
4.0km 38.19 37.93 38.21 36.87 36.80 36.95 35.29 35.35 35.50
6.0km 38.24 37.99 - 36.99 36.88 - 35.38 35.45 -
8.0km 38.20 38.04 38.23 37.02 36.94 37.08 35.44 35.51 35.65
10.4km 38.34 38.36 38.52 37.27 37.31 37.45 35.88 35.95 36.07
12.4km 38.82 38.94 39.05 37.85 37.92 38.07 36.57 36.61 36.74
14.4km 39.04 39.13 39.24 38.10 38.14 38.27 36.84 36.87 36.95
16.4km 39.52 39.62 - 38.57 38.61 - 37.40 37.42 -
18.4km 39.90 40.04 - 38.93 39.00 - 37.82 37.85 -
20.7km 40.31 40.45 39.68 39.39 39.45 38.75 38.34 38.37 37.53
22.7km 40.65 40.82 40.16 39.76 39.81 39.21 38.74 38.72 38.01
24.7km 40.94 41.11 40.53 40.05 40.11 39.60 39.05 39.03 38.45
26.7km 41.24 41.39 40.89 40.38 40.42 40.01 39.39 39.38 38.92
28.7km 41.62 41.74 41.33 40.78 40.81 40.49 39.81 39.80 39.46
31.3km 42.39 42.47 42.18 41.56 41.58 41.35 40.56 40.56 40.34
33.8km 43.16 43.22 43.01 42.34 42.36 42.20 41.31 41.31 41.18
36.3km 43.78 43.83 43.70 43.03 43.04 42.93 41.98 41.98 41.89
38.8km 44.51 44.52 44.46 43.75 43.76 43.70 42.69 42.69 42.64
41.8km 45.53 45.54 45.50 44.76 44.77 44.73 43.70 43.69 43.67
* Numbers correspond to those in Table 7.6.4
46
Semantan River water level in 100years ARI flood
Maximum water level(DTGSM m)

44
100 years ARI Flood

K g. Mamban g
Be r u lan g
42 K g. Raja K g. Gan t u k
S o n gsan g K g. S Din gin
K g. P aya
K g. Gaja Mat i
40 Tamban g
K g. K e n alau K g. Lo mpai K g. Bat u K apu r

Me n t akab To wn without measures

38 bund(along river)
short-cut channel
Te me r lo h To wn
36
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Chainage(km)
45
Semantan River water level in 50years ARI flood
Maximum water level(DTGSM m)

43
50 years ARI Flood

K g. Mamban g
Be r u lan g
41 K g. R aja K g. Gan t u k
S o n gsan g K g. S Din gin
K g. P aya
K g. Gaja Mati
39 Tamban g
K g. K e n alau K g. Lo mpai K g. Batu K apu r

Me n takab To wn without measures

37 bund(along river)
short-cut channel
Te me rlo h To wn
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Chainage(km)
Figure 7.6.8 Predicted River Water Level with/without Structural Measures

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-21

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2

50yrs 42.34 42.36 42.20
100yrs 43.16 43.22 43.01
36.3km
33.8km ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2
31.3km 50yrs 40.78 40.81 40.49
38.8km 100yrs 41.62 41.74 41.33
ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2
50yrs 43.75 43.76 43.70 ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2
28.7km
100yrs 44.51 44.52 44.46 50yrs 39.76 39.81 39.21 ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2
100yrs 40.65 40.82 40.16 50yrs 38.10 38.14 38.27
26.7km 100yrs 39.04 39.13 39.24
22.7km 20.7km
ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2
14.4km
50yrs 37.27 37.31 37.45
12.4km 100yrs 38.34 38.36 38.52
18.4km
24.7km
10.4km
ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2
50yrs 36.87 36.80 36.95
100yrs 38.19 37.93 38.21

16.4km 4.0km
8.0km

6.0km
- 0.5 2.0km
0.5 - 1
1-2 0.0km

2-3 ARI Alt0 Alt 1 Alt2

50yrs 36.57 36.57 36.56
3-4
100yrs 37.70 37.69 37.76
4-

Numbers indicate river water level(DTGSM m)

Figure 7.6.9 Inundation Area by 50 years ARI Flood (No structure measures)

7.6.2 Stormwater Runoff Analysis

Stormwater runoff analysis will be conducted to estimate amount of peak discharge and flow volume
from target protection area. The result will serve as basis for drainage system design to be proposed in the
next section.

(1) Design Rainfall

The objective of the analysis is to estimate peak discharge and flow volume of stormwater during
flood when river water is high. Therefore, 10days will be introduced as design rainfall duration which
is actual inundation period of Mentakab Town in 1971 flood according to Pahang River Basin Study,
1974. The ARI of design rainfall is 10years as described in the next section.

IDF curve of Temerloh presented in the MASMA was introduced to obtain design rainfall depth, and
observed rainfall data (1968-2007) of station 3524080 was utilized to extend the curve for rainfall with
duration longer than 1,000minutes (IDF curves presented in MSMA are applicable to rainfall event
with duration within 1,000minutes). Center concentrated rainfall pattern was introduced for design
temporal rainfall pattern. IDF curve and design temporal rainfall are shown in Figure 7.6.10 and
Figure 7.6.11.

7-22 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

1000
ARI: 10yrs

Rainfall Intensity(mm/hr)
100
Kg. Tebing Tinggi
(st. 3524080)
Temerloh (MSMA) (1968-2007)
10

0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Duration(minutes)

Figure 7.6.10 IDF Curve

300
10yrs
250
Rainfall intensity(mm/hr)

200

150

100

50

0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5
days

Figure 7.6.11 Design Temporal Rainfall

(2) Sub-basins and Their Characteristics

Target protection area was divided in to 20 sub-basins as shown in Figure 7.6.7 and Figure 7.6.12,
and their characteristics are tabulated in Table 7.6.6. Flow concentration time of urbanized sub-basins
with proportion of built up area exceeding 40% were obtained by sum of overland flow time and
channel flow time described in the following equations.

Overland flow time (Friend’s formula):

1/ 3
107nLo
t0 =
S 1/ 2

where, to is overland sheet flow travel time(minutes), Lo is over land sheet flow path length(m), n is
surface roughness and S is slope of overland surface(%).

Channel flow time:

L
t ch =
60V
where, tch is travel time in the channel(minutes), L length of reach(m), V is average velocity(m/s).
1.5m/s was applied for channel velocity in the analysis.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-23

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Concentration time for sub-basins with low built up area proportion were estimated by
Bransby-Williams’ Equation expressed as:

FL
tc = c

A S 1/ 5
1 / 10

where, tc is time of concentration(minutes), Fc is conversion factor (58.5), L is length of path from

catchment divide to outlet(km), A is catchment area(km2) and S is slope of stream flow path(m/km).

Figure 7.6.12 Schematic View of the Runoff Model

Table 7.6.6 Basin Characteristics

Overland
Proportion Chanel Overland Channel Time of
Area sheet Roughness
Sub- of built up length Slope flow time flow time Concentration
(km2) flow path coefficient
basin Area(%) (m) (min) (min) (min)
length(m)
A - L Lo S n to tch tc
11 7.38 22 4000 - 0.0075 - - - 128
12 0.75 36 1000 - 0.0050 - - - 44
13 0.94 55 1000 470 0.0050 0.02 24 11 35
21 8.31 14 5500 - 0.0073 - - - 175
22 8.32 9 3000 - 0.0083 - - - 93
23 2.57 17 2000 - 0.0050 - - - 77
3 1.58 6 1500 - 0.0233 - - - 45
4 5.01 18 3000 - 0.0150 - - - 87
51 2.44 55 2200 555 0.0091 0.02 18 24 43
52 0.78 65 1300 300 0.0038 0.02 23 14 38
6 0.86 58 1000 430 0.0150 0.02 13 11 24
91 0.35 26 400 - 0.0375 - - - 13
92 0.10 10 300 - 0.0167 - - - 13
93 0.18 11 300 - 0.0167 - - - 12
94 0.13 46 400 163 0.0250 0.02 7 4 12
0.38 0 600 0.0167 22
95* - - - -
(3.17) (0) (3000) (0.0150) (91)
96 0.42 0 400 - 0.0375 - - - 12
97 0.29 10 500 - 0.0300 - - - 17
97 0.89 34 1000 - 0.0100 - - - 37
0.46 11 600 0.0167 22
99** - - - -
(1.14) (4) (700) (0.0142) (24)
* Numbers in parenthesis are figure of alternative 2

(3) Hydrograph Method

Rational Method Hydrograph Method was applied to develop design hydrographs of each sub-basin.
The formula is:

CI t A
Q=
360

7-24 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

where, Q is discharge(m3/s), C is runoff coefficient, It is rainfall intensity over time of

concentration(tc) (mm/hr) and A is catchment area. Runoff coefficient was assumed to be function of
rainfall intensity as show in Figure 7.6.13 following MSMA.
1.0

0.8

Runoff Coefficient
0.6

0.4
built up area(commercial &city
areas closely built up)
0.2 agrecultural area and
forest(medium soil forest)

0.0
0 50 100 150 200
Rainfall intensity(mm/hr)

Figure 7.6.13 Runoff Coefficient

(4) Result of the Runoff Analysis

Figure 7.6.14 shows example of hydrographs obtained by Rational Method Hydrograph Method, and
peak discharge and total runoff volume of each sub-basin are tabulated in Table 7.6.7.
70 700,000
Basin11+12+13_Semantan
60 600,000

50 500,000

Run-off Volume(m 3 )
Discharge(m3 /s)

40 400,000

30 300,000

20 discharge(m3/s) 200,000
total runoff volume(m3)
10 100,000

0 0
4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 time(day)
140 1,400,000
Basin21+22+23_Semantan
120 1,200,000

100 1,000,000
Run-off Volume(m 3 )
Discharge(m 3 /s)

80 800,000

60 600,000

40 400,000

discharge(m3/s)
20 200,000
total runoff volume(m3)
0 0
4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 time(day)

Figure 7.6.14 Examples of Stormwater Hydrograph

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-25

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 7.6.7 Peak Discharge and Runoff Volume

Peak Runoff Peak Runoff
Sub-basin discharge volume Sub-basin discharge volume
(m3/s) (1000m3) (m3/s) (1000m3)
11 51.7 418.3 6 20.5 63.0
12 12.2 47.3 91 9.4 20.5
13 18.8 67.6 92 2.5 5.1
Total
62.9 533.2 93 4.5 9.3
(11+12+13)
21 41.5 440.4 94 3.8 8.8
8.0 17.7
22 71.1 421.7 95
(27.0)* (147.5)*
23 26.5 139.7 96 10.1 19.5
Total
120.6 1001.8 97 6.4 14.8
(21+22+23)
3 22.3 77.9 98 15.3 55.4
9.1 23.7
4 47.2 274.7 99
(21.9)* (55.2)*
51 43.0 175.4
52 15.2 59.7
Total
56.1 235.1
(51+52)
* Numbers in parenthesis are figure of alternative 2

7.7 Preliminary Design for Structural Measures

As a result of flood inundation simulation and the survey of past flood condition, it was decided that
consideration should be made on protecting the target area, especially its residential areas, which are
scattered along the Semantan River, from flood inundation by flood control facilities.

7.7.1 Design Criteria

Design criteria of flood control facilities are as follows.

(1) Design Flood

Probable design floods for river water and inland water are determined as follows.
- River flood control: Return period 50-year flood
- Inland flood control: Return period 10-year flood
(2) Design Water Level

Design water level at river flood of 50-year return period is analyzed and shown in Table 7.7.1 (refer
to Figure-7.7.1). The water level at the confluence of Semantan River, which is the initial water level
at downstream end for a boundary condition of flood simulation model, is given as EL.36.57m based
on the flood water level of the Pahang River. In the river stretch in Temerloh area, H.W.L varies
approximately from EL.36.57m to 37.40m and in Temerloh area, H.W.L varies approximately from
EL.39.23 to EL.40.07m. Bunds height is set with the 0.6m, as a freeboard, in addition to water level of
50 year flood.

Table 7.7.1 Design Water Level

Location Water Level (1/50) Height of Bunds
Temerloh 36.57 – 37.40 37.27 – 37.99
Mentakab 39.23 – 40.07 39.63 – 40.67

7-26 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

7.7.2 Proposed Flood Control Facilities

Flood control facilities proposed in F/S study are listed in Table 7.7.2. Countermeasures were studied for
both river flood of Semantan River and inland flood. Countermeasures against river flood aim to
preventing inundation from back water of the Semantan River and that against inland flood aim to control
floods in tributaries whose basin will be enclosed after completion of Bunds.

Table 7.7.2 Proposed Flood Control Facilities

Flood Facilities Purpose
River flood Bund To prevent inundation from river flood
Road Upgrade To prevent inundation from river flood
Shortcut Channel To connect meandered river
Inland flood Retarding Basin To store inland flood to prevent inland flood
Flood Regulation Pond To store inland flood and regulate drainage volume of
Pump station
Pump station Forced drainage at river water level of river is high
Sluice Way Natural drainage at river water level is low
River Gate To separate river water level
Average Design
Water Section
Distance Water Level gradient of Height of
ID Level gradient
(km) (1/50) WL Bunds
(1/100) (1/X)
(EL.m) (EL.m) Design Water Level (EL.m)
Smnt0000km 0.00 36.572 37.572 37.17
Smnt0020km 3.00 36.737 37.737 18,127 37.34 60
Smnt0040km 5.20 36.799 37.799 35,484 Temerloh 37.40 50
Smnt0060km 7.30 36.880 37.880 25,926 37.48
E lev a tion (m )

Smnt0080km 9.20 36.933 37.933 35,849 37.53 40

Smnt0104km 10.70 37.394 38.394 3,254 13,009 37.99
30 Water Level
Smnt0124km 13.10 37.996 38.996 3,987 38.60 (1/50)
Smnt0144km 15.20 38.242 39.242 8,537 38.84 20
Smnt0164km 17.40 38.720 39.720 4,603 39.32
10
Smnt0184km 19.30 39.231 40.231 3,718 39.83
Smnt0207km 21.50 39.633 40.633 5,473 Mentakab 40.23 0
Smnt0227km 23.70 40.070 41.070 5,034 40.67 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Smnt0247km 25.80 40.337 41.337 7,865 5,877 40.94 Distance (Km)
Smnt0267km 27.60 40.618 41.618 6,406 41.22

Figure 7.7.1 Design Water Level of Gemas Area

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-27

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(1) Bunds

(a) Shape of Bunds

Considering that flooding of the Semantan River prolonged for 1 to 2 weeks, keeping high water
level, which is expected to rise in the future due to climate change. Bunds should be in robust
structures with gentle slope to resist collapse due to overflow and/or seepage.

The height of the bunds is proposed to be more than 5m and their width 10m in conformity to
Malaysian flood control standard, and as bund slope adopted 1:3 so as to resist seepage failure and
circular slip. Freeboard is proposed to be more than 0.6m in addition to the water level of 50-year
return period flood.
Table 7.7.3 Basic Shape of Bund
Type of Bund Circle levee
Width of Bund 10 m
Slope of Bund River side 1:3.0 inland side 1:3.0
Freeboard 0.6 m

(b) River Reserve Area

Bunds will be located to keep approximately 50m distance from riverbank to secure river reserve
area which is secure safety from river bank erosion and conserve river environment.

According to the DID manual, river reserve area should be kept 50m from river bank to the end of
bund foundation. In the study area, the maximum height of bunds will be approximately 6m and
width of bunds is set at 10m, which makes width of bund foundation approximately 50m. 50m
distance from riverbank to the riverside edge of bund was proposed based on the manual to secure
river reserve. The figure below shows the typical formation of the bund and river reserve.
B>50.0m 50 m 10 m

H.W.L
1：3 Hmax=6.0m

River Reserve Area

Semantan River

Figure 7.7.2 Schematic View of Bund

(2) Shortcut Channel

Shortcut channel is proposed for Alternative plan 2, where bund alignment crosses the meandering
river at two locations in Temerloh area. In Mentakab area, shortcut channel is to be located to bypass
the narrow place where bunds are difficult to construct and resettlement is likely to occur.

The shortcut channel will be designed to have almost the same capacity with the original river. The
figures below show the dimension of shortcut channel.
3.0m 3.0m

H.W.L
5.0m 1:2

10.0m 50.0m 10.0m

80.0m

River Reserve Area

Figure 7.7.3 Schematic View of Shortcut Channel

7-28 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(3) Retarding basin

Retarding basin whose capacity is to store inland flood discharge of 10-year return period is
considered in inland areas. Retarding basin should be designated by the Temerloh Municipality
Council and related agencies as allowable flooding areas and regulated against development which is
likely to reduce storage capacity.

(4) Regulation Pond

Regulation pond is expected to store flood discharge of 10-year return period in drainage basin and is
constructed aiming to reduce pump capacity. Land for regulation pond shall be acquired as flood
control facility.

(5) Pump Station

Pahang River floods prolong for two weeks. On the other hand, duration of local rainfalls last for one
day, but it may occur several times during flood of the Pahang River. Pump station is designed to
drain stored water in the retarding basin and the regulation pond within 24 hours for the preparation to
the next inland flood.

(6) Sluice way

Sluice way is constructed to secure natural drainage function of tributary and to drain flood water in
area surrounded by the bunds. Sluice way will be closed in case water level of Semantan River is
higher than the land elevation of bund surrounded area.

(7) River Gate

River gate is the flood control facility constructed on the bunds which cross the Semantan River to
separate river water level and inland water level to prevent flooding to inland area.

7.7.3 Study Case for Structural Measures

In Semantan and Mentakab areas, ring bunds plan and shortcut channel plan are studied as the alternatives
for flood control measures. Outline of alternative plans studied in this F/S study are shown in 8.1.2.

7.7.4 Alternative 1

(1) Countermeasures against River Flood

(a) Bunds Alignment

Bunds are the core component of the flood control facilities in this study to mitigate flooding from
the Semantan River. As for the type of bund, circle levee is proposed. The areas to be protected are
only the city and residential areas which are located in the right side of the bank. Bunds’ length is
shown in Table 7.7.4. Total 4,884m length of bunds is placed in Temerloh area and 2,658m of
bunds is placed in Mentakab area.

Table 7.7.4 Proposed Bunds on Temerloh-Mentakab Area

Structures Location Length Remarks
Temerloh TB1 1,134m EL.38.0m
TB2 1,751m
TB3 1,629m
TB4 370m
Total 4,884m

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-29

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Structures Location Length Remarks

Mentakab MB1 1,450m EL.40.0m
MB2 92m
MB3 192m
MB4 510m
MB5 194m
MB6 220m EL.41.0m
Total 2,658m
Ground total 7,542m

(b) Road Upgrade

Roads, which cross bunds and its elevation lower than planned bunds and ones, which are planned
to be equipped with bund function are required to be upgraded to meet the design bund elevation.
Two locations are required to be upgraded, one in Temerloh area and the other in Mentakab area.
Dimension is shown in Table 7.7.5.

Table 7.7.5 Road Upgrade

Upgrade Elevation Length of Maximum Upgrade Height
Location
(EL.m) Embankment(m) (m)
Temerloh Area EL.38.5m 255.0m 3.5m
Mentakab Area EL.40.0m 538.0m 4.0m
Total 793.0m

(2) Inland Flood Control Measures

Inland flood control was studied to mitigate flooding from the tributary of the Semantan River. Inland
flood control facilities consist of retarding basin, regulation pond, pump station, sluice way and river
gate. Flood discharge is stored at first retarding basin and regulation pond. When water level of the
Semantan River is lower than inland ground level, drainage could be done by gravity through sluice
way or river gate. When water level of the Semantan River becomes higher than inland ground level,
gates of sluice way are closed to prevent back water intrusion, and then inland drainage will be done
by pumps.

(a) Retarding Basin and Regulation Pond

Table 7.7.6 shows the dimension of retarding basin and regulation pond. Three retarding basin and
two regulation ponds are proposed in Temerloh area and one regulation pond is proposed in
Mentakab Area.

Table 7.7.6 Retarding Basin and regulation pond

Name of Area of Ponds Required High Water Level of
Area Name of ponds
Tributary (ha) Capacity(m3) Pond(EL.m)
Temerloh Rabit River Detention pond 1 5.95 67,557 EL.33.0m
Retarding basin 1 72.62 418,281 EL.33.0m
Segal River Detention pond 2 9.40 139,749 EL.32.0m
Retarding basin 2 52.03 421,716 EL.32.0m
Retarding basin 3 42.08 440,364 EL.33.0m
Mentakab Ara River Detention pond 3 5.25 63,018 EL.34.0m

(b) Sluice way

Location and dimension of the Sluice ways which will be constructed in Temerloh and Mentakab
areas are shown in Table 7.7.7. Sluice ways will be placed on two locations in Temerloh and
Mentakab respectively.

7-30 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 7.7.7 Dimension of Sluice Way

Location River Name Dimension Foundation height
Temerloh SG1(Rabit River) 3nos x H3.0m x B3.0m EL.28.0m
SG2(Chengal River) 3nos x H1.5m x B1.5m EL.28.0m
RG1 (Kepata River) 4nos x H3.5m x B5.0m EL.29.0m
Mentakab
Ara River 3nos x H3.0m x B3.0m EL.31.0m

(c) Pump station

Scale of the pump stations are designed to drain full 10-year flood volume which is stored in
retarding and regulation ponds within 24 hours. Two pump stations in Temerloh and one in
Mentakab are planned to be placed at the outlet of tributaries with regulation pond.

Table 7.7.8 Dimension of Pump Stations

Location River Basin Catchment Length Peak Total Pump Capacity
Name Area (m) Discharge Discharge (m3/s)
(km2) (m3/s) Volume(m3)
Temerloh Rabit 11 7.38 4,000 51.73 418,281 Pump1: 6.17m3/s
12 0.75 1,000 12.16 47,334
13 0.94 1,000 18.84 67,557
533,172
Chengal 22 8.32 3,000 71.78 421,716 Pump2: 11.60m3/s
21 8.31 5,500 41.52 440,364
23 2.57 2,000 26.46 139,749
1,001,829
Mentakab Ara 60 0.86 1,000 20.52 63,018 Pump3: 0.73m3/s

7.7.5 Alternative 2

(1) Countermeasures against River flood

(a) Bunds Alignment and Shortcut Channel

Bunds are located away from residential areas in this plan. Bunds cross the meandering river, so
construction of shortcut channels are required. Dimension of bunds and shortcut channels are
shown in Table 7.7.9. In Temerloh area, total length of bunds is approximate 5,380m and that of
shortcut channel is 1,119m at three locations. In Mentakab area, total length of bunds is
approximate 2,192m and that of shortcut channel is 1,681m.

Table 7.7.9 Proposed Bunds on Temerloh-Mentakab Area

Location Structure Length Remarks
Temerloh
Bunds TB2-1 3,491m EL.38.0m
TB2 255m
TB3 1,634m
Total 5,380m
Shortcut SH-1 635m
SH-2 400m
SH-3 84m
Total 1,119m
Mentakab
Bunds MB2-1 651m EL.40.0m
MB2 92m
MB3 192m
MB4 510m
MB5 194m
MB6 220m
MB7 333m
Total 2,192
Shortcut SH-4 1,681m
Ground total Bunds 7,572m
Shortcut 2,800m

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-31

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(b) Road upgrade

Road upgrade is required only for Temerloh area. Location of road upgrade is the same with
Alternative 1.

Table 7.7.10 Road Upgrade

Location Upgrade Elevation Length of Embankment Maximum Upgrade Height
(EL.m) (m) (m)
Temerloh Area EL.38.5m 255.0m 3.5m

(c) River Gate

In facility layout plan of Alternative 2, river gates that will be placed on the Semantan River at
bunds’ crossing point will be kept open to supply river water to original river channel for
aquiculture and water amenity purposes at normal times. When water level of the river becomes
higher than inland ground level, river gates are closed and all of flood water will be diverted to the
shortcut channel. Dimension of the river gates are shown in Table 7.7.11.

Table 7.7.11 Dimension of River Gate

District Location Dimension
Temeroh Area TRG1 4nos x 3.5m x 5.0m
TRG2 4nos x 3.5m x 5.0m
Mentakab Area MRG1 4nos x 3.5m x 5.0m
MRG2 4nos x 3.5m x 5.0m

(2) Inland Flood Control

Flood control facility consists of retarding basin and pump facility.

(a) Retarding Basin and Regulation pond

Retarding basins are placed on the same locations as Alternative 1. Regulation ponds will not be
placed in this case because the original river channel separated from the river could function as a
regulation pond. Dimension of retarding basins are shown in Table 7.7.12.

Table 7.7.12 Dimension of Retarding Basin

Required High Water Level of
Name of Area of Ponds
District Name of ponds Capacity Pond
Tributary (ha)
(m3) (EL.m)
Temerloh Rabit River Retarding basin 1 72.62 418281 EL.33.0m
Segal River Retarding basin 2 52.03 421,716 EL.32.0m
Retarding basin 3 42.08 440,364 EL.33.0m
Mentakab - - - - -

(b) Sluice Way

In Alternative 2, there is no plan to place sluice way because drainage of all tributaries can be flow
out directly to the original river channel which is preserved in the inland area.

(c) Pump Station

One pump station is placed in Temerloh area and Mentakab area respectively.

7-32 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 7.7.13 Scale of Pump Station

Catchment Peak Total
Length Pump Capacity
Area River Name Basin Area Discharge Discharge
(m) (m3/s)
(km2) (m3/s) Volume(m3)
Temerloh Rabit 11 7.38 4000 51.73 418,281
12 0.75 1000 12.16 47,334
13 0.94 1000 18.84 67,557
Sub total 9.07 533,172
Chengal 22 8.32 3000 71.78 421,716
21 8.31 5500 41.52 440,364
23 2.57 2000 26.46 139,749
Sub total 19.20 1,001,829 Pump-1
Total 1,535,001 17.77
Mentakab Ara 60 0.86 1000 20.52 63,018
Ketapa-upper 51 2.44 2200 42.97 175,749
Ketapa-lower 52 0.78 1300 15.20 59.667
95 0.38 600 8.02 17,682
40 5.01 3000 47.18 274,716
96 0.42 400 10.08 19,548
97 0.29 500 6.38 14,835 Pump-2
Total 10.18 625,215 7.23

7.7.6 Comparison between Alternative 1 and 2

Table below shows the quantity Comparison between Alternatives.

Table 7.7.14 Comparison of River Facility for Temerloh

Alt-1 Alt-2
Facility Location Unit
Circle Levee Shortcut
BUNDS TB1 m 1,134 -
TB2 m 1,751 -
TB3 m 1,629 1,629
TB4 m 370 370
TB1-2 m 3,490
(Total) m 4,884
Road Upgrade RU1 m 542 542
Shortcut Channel TSC1 m - 635
TSC2 m - 400
TSC3 m - 84
(Total) m 1,119
Regulation Pond Pond1 m3 67,557 -
Pond2 m3 139,749 -
Retarding Basin RBasin1 m3 418,218 418,218
RBasin2 m3 421,716 421,716
RBasin3 m3 440,364 440,364
Sluice Gate nos 2 -
River Gate nos 0 2
Pump Station nos 2 1
Rabit P1 6.2m3/s -
Chengal P2 11.6m3/s -
Rabit+Chengal P3 17.8m3/s

Table 7.7.15 Comparison of River Facility for Mentakab

Alt-1 Alt-2
Facility Location Unit
Circle Levee Shortcut
BUNDS MB1 m 1,450 662
MB2 m 92 92
MB3 m 192 192
MB4 m 510 510
MB5 m 194 194
MB6 m 220 220
total m 2,658 1,870
Road Upgrade m 530 530

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-33

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Alt-1 Alt-2
Facility Location Unit
Circle Levee Shortcut
Shortcut Channel MSC4 m - 1,681
Regulation Pond 1 0
Pond3 m3 63,018 -
Sluice Gate nos 1 -
River Gate nos 1 -
Pump Station nos 1 1
Ara m3/s 1.2
Semantan-2 Ara+Kepata+others m3/s 7.3

7.8 Cost Estimate for Structural Alternative Measures

7.8.1 Constitution and Conditions of Project cost

Cost of the proposed flood mitigation project is based on the preliminary designs of project components.

The main items of the project costs are given as below:

- Construction base cost (Direct cost, Indirect cost, contingency)
- Land acquisition Cost
- Administration and Engineering cost
- Tax, etc
Project cost has been estimated under the following conditions:

(1) Condition of Construction Base Cost

Construction base cost is composed of direct cost estimated based on the work quantities multiplied by
unit cost, and indirect cost which is estimated in percentage.

The estimation of the construction cost involves the followings:

- Direct construction
- Miscellaneous Works(indirect cost)
- Contingency
Details of work items considered under each of the above mentioned heads are described below:-

(a) Direct Cost

Cost of all the project works is included under this head. The cost estimate of the works is based on
the approximate bill of quantities and unit rates applied to the respective project work item.

The construction of the proposed alternatives for flood mitigation measures will involve various
components of work such as construction of bunds, pump stations, sluice gates and detention
ponds.

Construction cost for the various components of the proposed measures is estimated as the product
of unit cost and corresponding work quality. Unit cost of a respective work item consists of cost for
material, labor, equipment and contractor indirect costs, overhead and profit.

Direct Cost = ∑ (Unit Cost for a Payment Item x Work Quantity for a Payment Item)

The unit cost can be estimated based on the basic costs such as labor wage, unit prices of materials
and equipment cost.

7-34 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(b) Unit Rate

Unit rates developed/adopted for various items of works were applied to estimated quantities to
derive the cost of works.

Cost estimation for the proposed alternatives for flood mitigation is carried out based on the
preliminary designs, available market prices. Unit rates used in framing the project estimate are
mainly based on those adopted for similar projects elsewhere in the region, keeping in view the site
conditions generally related to availability of construction materials. For some of the items of
works rates are obtained from the supplier/manufacturers. Consideration has been given to keep the
rates to 2009 price level.

Construction costs of the proposed works are derived with reference to the following information
and data:
- Recent DID contract and private sector contracts of relevant works carried out in Selangor;
- Cost structure of the other contract works in Peninsular Malaysia; and
- Labor, materials and equipment costs provided by the local contractors and suppliers.
(c) Indirect cost

The indirect cost on the project is an integral part of each estimate. Temporary works, Site expense
and Mobilization & Demobilization are considered as the indirect cost.

(d) Contingencies

A provision of 5% of direct cost has been provided as contingencies to meet this requirement. The
contingency is provided to cater for the costs involved due to unpredictable physical conditions
during the implementation of urgent and important components of the projects.

(2) Construction Cost

Based on the above assumptions, the overall cost of the project was estimated for the optimum
structural flood mitigation plan as RM 90.08 million which comprises RM 74.00 million as direct
costs, RM 11.79 million as indirect cost and RM 4.29 million as contingencies. Table 7.8.1 shows
summary of construction cost under each of the three heads.

Table 7.8.1 Construction Base Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measures
in Temerloh and Mentakab Area
Cost Cost
Area Item Detail Item
(RM million) (RM million)
Alt-1 Alt-2
Temerloh Construction Base Cost Over all cost 54.12 77.50
Direct cost 44.53 64.18
Indirect cost 7.01 9.63
Contingency 2.58 3.69
Mentakab Construction Base Cost Over all cost 35.96 46.18
Direct cost 29.47 38.24
Indirect cost 4.78 5.74
Contingency 1.71 2.20
Summary of Construction Base Cost Over all cost 90.08 123.67
Direct cost 74.00 102.42
Indirect cost 11.79 15.36
Contingency 4.29 5.89

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-35

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(3) Land Acquisition Cost

These costs are estimated on the basis of actual market value obtained from the interview survey in
Temerloh, Mentakab and Gemas.

The study aimed to locate the proposed measures within the available government land and reserves.
However, for most of the proposed measures, land is to be acquired for the construction and land
owners are to be compensated for the acquisition. Land acquisition costs form a major part of the total
project costs and are notoriously difficult to estimate with accuracy. The price of the land varies
enormously, depending on its location and development trends within the study areas.

The land values used are to represent the best estimated prices of market values RM 30 per m2 at
agricultural land. Total land acquisition cost is given in Table 7.8.2, at RM 5.30 million in Mentakab
and 13.46 million in Temerloh, total RM 18.75 million.

Table 7.8.2 Compensation Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measuresin
Temerloh and Mentakab Area
Area Item Cost Cost
(RM million) (RM million)
Alt-1 Alt-2
Temerloh Compensation Cost 13.46 4.16
Mentakab Compensation Cost 5.30 2.90
Summary of Compensation Cost 18.75 7.06

(4) Administration, Investigation, Design and Construction Supervision Cost

Administration, investigation, designs and construction supervision cost are estimated in proportion to
direct construction cost.

(a) Administration Cost

Administration cost (project owner’s expense for management) of the project is estimated at 7% of
the total sum of construction cost and compensation cost.

(b) Engineering Service Cost

Engineering service cost is prepared for the detailed engineering design and construction
supervision services at 5% and 11% respectively of construction base cost.

Table 7.8.3 Administration, Investigation, Design and Construction Supervision Cost

Cost Cost
Item Item Detail (RM million) (RM million) Remarks
Alt-1 Alt-2
Administration Cost 7.62 9.15 7% of Sum of construction and compensation
Engineering Service Cost Detailed Design 4.50 6.18 5% of construction cost
Supervision 9.91 13.60 11% of construction cost
Total 22.03 28.93

(5) Operation and Maintenance Cost

The operation and maintenance cost mainly consist of costs for patrol/inspection work, maintenance
work and operation work. These costs include facility maintenance cost, cost for the administrative
and logistic support, cost for operation cost in case of flooding, cost for repair of the structures, and
other miscellaneous expenses but exclusive for heavy damage due to calamities, such as huge flood.
Maintenance is mainly for structural and geotechnical health assessment, repairs, rehabilitation,
desilting, lawn moving, rubbish removal, etc. Annual maintenance costs are estimated based on fifty

7-36 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(50) years service life for each structure. The costs vary from 0.5% of the total construction cost for
maintenance. The total maintenance cost for the next fifty (50) years service life is estimated at RM
0.45 million, RM 0.62 million for Alternative 1 and 2 respectively as given in Table 7.8.4.

(6) Summary of Project Cost

Summary of project cost for Temerloh and Mentakab areas is shown in Table 7.8.4.

Table 7.8.4 Project Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measures in
Temerloh and Mentakab Area
Cost Cost
Area Item Detail Item (RM million) (RM million)
Alt-1 Alt-2
Temerloh Construction Base Cost Over all cost 54.12 77.50
Direct cost 44.53 64.18
Indirect cost 7.01 9.63
Contingency 2.58 3.69
Compensation Cost 13.46 4.16
67.58
Mentakab Construction Base Cost Over all cost 35.96 46.18
Direct cost 29.47 38.24
Indirect cost 4.78 5.74
Contingency 1.71 2.20
Compensation Cost 5.30 2.90
41.26 41.26
Total Construction Base Cost Over all cost 90.08 123.67
Direct cost 74.00 102.42
Indirect cost 11.79 15.36
Contingency 4.29 5.89
Total Compensation Cost 18.75 7.06
Construction + Land Acquisition Cost 108.83 130.73
Administration Cost 7.62 9.15
Engineering Cost 14.41 19.78
Summary of the Project Cost 130.86 159.66
O & M Cost / year 0.45 0.62

7.9 Methodologies Economic Evaluation

7.9.1 Objective

A main objective of the economic evaluation here is to examine the efficiency of the project investment in
structural measures from the viewpoint of the national economy, using cost-benefit analysis. Market
prices are converted to economic ones where the influence of market distortion is removed, (so-called
"shadow prices"). Opportunity costs are used for the costs of goods and services whose markets do not
exist. Willingness-to-pay is used for benefits whose markets do not exist. An Internal Rate of Return
(IRR) is used here as the indicator of the efficiency of a project investment. IRR is defined as the discount
rate which makes the present value of the flow of costs incurred in the project the same as that of benefit,
which makes the Net Present Value (NPV) 0 (zero) or makes B/C 1 (one), showing what percentage of
profit the investment will be paid back with. IRR used in economic evaluation is called Economic
Internal Rate of Return (EIRR).

7.9.2 Preconditions

The following preconditions are assumed in the economic evaluation. Additional preconditions will be
clarified as necessary.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-37

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(1) Without-the-project and With-the-project

Without-the-project is the case where the structural measures are not implemented to mitigate the
flood damage. With-the-project is the case where the structural measures are implemented to mitigate
the flood damage. Other conditions which are NOT affected by the project are assumed to be kept as
they are before the project is implemented, which does not mean that other conditions do not change
but that they change as they changed before. By comparing the with-the-project and
without-the-project, the additional costs and benefits incurred can be estimated to calculate an EIRR.

(2) Evaluation Period

The Evaluation period is from 2012 to 2065 (50 years after the completion of the construction). Its
implementation schedule is as follows:

2012 Detailed design, 2013 -2015: Construction, 2016 - 2065: In-service.

(3) Standard Conversion Factor (SCF)

SCF is the ratio of the economic price value of all goods in an economy at their border price equivalent
values to their domestic market price value. Prices of goods and services procured domestically are
converted to economic ones by the SCF. This study employs an SCF of 0.85.

(4) Other Preconditions

Price level: Year of 2009

Social discount rate: 10%

7.9.3 Mesh Data

The flood prone area or the benefit area is divided into meshes (100 m by 100 m). Land use and assets in
each mesh are identified and estimated by examining aerial photo of the area as well as inundation depth
in each mesh is calculated with the simulation model. Future land use was decided by the Land Use Plan.
This mesh data is the basis of the benefit calculation of the project. The mesh data is summarized as
follows:

Table 7.9.1 Summary of Mesh Data of Semantan in 2009

Number of Meshes 4,030
Population 67,000
Number of Houses 15,300
Number of Shops 1,000

7.9.4 Benefits

Benefits are the reduction of flood damages by comparing with-the-project and without-the-project. The
benefits are calculated in the form of cash flow of each year during the evaluation period. This study
includes the benefit of damage mitigation of the following items.

(1) Damage Reduction of Household and Shop Buildings, Assets and Stocks

Damages of household and shop buildings, assets and stocks depend on the inundation depth caused
by the floods. The reduction of inundation depth contributes to the reduction of damages of such
items. The following data is used for the relation between inundation depth and damage rate of items.

7-38 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 7.9.2 Inundation Depth and Damage Rate

Damage Rate
Inundation Depth
Household Shop
(m)
Building Assets Building Assets/Stocks
0.00 - 0.19 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
0.20 - 0.49 0.092 0.145 0.232 0.128
0.50 - 0.99 0.119 0.326 0.453 0.267
1.00 - 1.99 0.266 0.508 0.789 0.586
2.00 - 2.99 0.580 0.928 0.966 0.897
3.00 - 0.834 0.991 0.995 0.982
Source: Economic Study Manual for River Works, 2005. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport
and Tourism, Japan

Average prices of the above items are shown in 7.5 Asset and Flood Damage Survey. As buildings
and assets are depreciated during they are used, their actual values are estimated at a half of their
prices.

(2) Mitigation of Business Suspension

Damages due to business suspension caused by floods are estimated at 6% of the total damages of
household and shop buildings and assets/stocks according to Technical Criteria for River Works,
1997, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, Japan.

(3) Damage Reduction on Public Facilities

Damages on public facilities such as roads, bridges, etc. by floods are estimated at 74.1% of the total
damages of household and shop buildings and assets/stocks according to Economic Study Manual for
River Works, 2005, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, Japan.

Table 7.9.3 Rate of Damages on Public Facilities to Damages on Non-Public

Buildings/Assets
Facility Urban
Roads Bridges Utilities Total
Type Facilities
Rate (%) 61.6 3.7 0.2 8.6 74.1
Source: Economic Study Manual for River Works, 2005. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism, Japan

(4) Damage Reduction on Agricultural Products

Damages of agricultural products depend on the inundation depth and duration caused by the floods.
The reduction of inundation depth and duration contributes to the reduction of damages of agricultural
products. The damage mitigation of agricultural products by the project is very limited. Its value is
around 0.1 percent of those of building, assets and stocks according to a preliminary examination so
they were not in the detailed calculation.

(5) Damage Reduction on Livestock

The number of livestock kept by the households in the target area is very limited according to the asset
survey of JICA Study Team so it is not included in the calculation.

7.9.5 Costs

Additional costs are included in the evaluation by comparing with-the-project and without-the-project.
The costs are calculated in the form of cash flow of each year during the evaluation period. The following
cost items are calculated:

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-39

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Table of Contents The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(1) Construction, Replacement and Salvage Value

Construction cost includes costs of construction of the facilities, and equipment. Economic evaluation
includes physical contingencies but excludes price escalations. Replacement costs of facilities and
equipment are calculated at the end of their effective life-spans. Salvage value of construction, facility
and equipment is added as a negative cost at the last year of the evaluation period.

(2) Operation and Maintenance

Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for each year is included. Price escalation is not included.
The value of O&M costs is usually estimated at a certain percent of the total construction cost. This
study employs 0.5% for each year.

(3) Engineering Services

Engineering services cover that in the detailed design stage and that in the construction supervision
stage. Both of them are usually estimated at certain percents of the total construction cost. This study
employs 5% for the detailed design and 11% for the construction supervision.

(4) Land Acquisition and Local Administration for Construction

Although land acquisition cost and local administration cost for construction are not covered by the
loan offered by Japanese ODA, they are included in the economic evaluation as long as the project
displaces domestic sources to be used for other economic activities or they have opportunity costs.
The value of local administration cost is usually estimated at a certain percent of the total of
construction cost and land acquisition cost. This study employs 7%.

7.9.6 Calculation of Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction

As the flood occurs stochastically, annual flow of benefit should be presented in the form of expected
annual average of damage reduction, which is calculated as follows.

Table 7.9.4 Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction

Damage Value Interval Annual
Occurrence Average of Interval Average
Probability Damage Provability
w/o Project w/ Project Damage Damage
Reduction
Reduction Reduction
1/1 D0=0
d1=(D0+D1)/2
(D0+D1)/2 1-(1/2)=0.500
x 0.67
1/2 L1 L2 D1=L1-L2
(1/2)-(1/5)= d2=(D1+D2)/2
(D1+D2)/2
0.300 x 0.300
1/5 L3 L4 D2=L3-L4
(1/5)-(1/10)= d3=(D2+D3)/2
(D2+D3)/2
0.100 x 0.100
1/10 L5 L6 D3=L5-L6
(1/10)-(1/20)= d4=(D3+D4)/2
(D3+D4)/2
0.050 x 0.050
1/20 L7 L8 D4=L7-L8
(1/20)-(1/30)= d5=(D4+D5)/2
(D4+D5)/2
0.017 x 0.017
1/30 L9 L10 D5=L9-L10
(1/30)-(1/50)= d6=(D5+D6)/2
(D5+D6)/2
0.013 x 0.013
1/50 L11 L12 D6=L11-L12
(1/50)-(1/100) d7=(D6+D7)/2
(D6+D7)/2
=0.010 x 0.010
1/100 L13 L14 D7=L13-L14

Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction d1+d2+d3+d4+d5+d6+d7

7-40 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 7
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

7.9.7 Calculation of EIRR, B/C and NPV

Finally, annual cash flow of costs and benefits (expected annual average of damage reduction, EAADR)
are summarized as follows.

Table 7.9.5 Summary Table Form for Cost and Benefit of the Project
Cost Benefit
Year Net Benefit
Construction ...... Cost Total Total of EAADR
1
2
...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ......
49
50

EIRR, B/C and NPV are calculated based on the summary table mentioned above with using the
following formulas.

EIRR (r) is defined as follows:

n n

∑ (1 + ir)i = ∑ (1 + ir)i
B C
i=1 i=1

B/C is calculated as follows:

n n
B /C = ∑ ∑ (1 + r)
Bi Ci
i=1 (1 + r )
i i
i=1

NPV is calculated as follows:

n n
NPV = ∑ i −∑
Bi Ci
i=1 (1 + r) i=1 (1 + r )
i

where,
Bi: benefit in the ith year
Ci: cost in the ith year
r : EIRR or discount rate
n: number of evaluation years.
The project is considered as feasible or efficient from the viewpoint of the growth of the national
economy when EIRR exceeds the discount rate, B/C exceeds 1 (one) or NPV exceeds 0 (zero).

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 7-41

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

CHAPTER 8 FEASIBILITY STUDY ON TEMERLOH FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT

The feasibility study (hereinafter referred to as F/S) on Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project selected in the
IFM Plan is the main themes to be discussed as priority project in Chapter 8. F/S will be conducted on
projects composed of structural measures and non-structural measures, and are combination of several
components. The detailed objectives of the F/S are enumerated below:
• Objective of the study on the structural components is to define technical, economical and
environmental viability of alternatives with a combination of structural measures such as bunds,
pump stations, detention ponds, allowable flooding areas and so on.
• Objective of the study on the non-structural components basically covers to support legal
arrangement and to complement for existing non-structural measures such as flood forecasting
and warning system, evacuation system, management of land use, etc.
8.1 Proposed Structural Measures
8.1.1 Design Concept
(1) Planning Frameworks
The planning and evaluation of structural measures are carried out in consideration of future
conditions such as population, land use and property value of the target project completion year
(2025). However, the Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project shall be implemented in the RMK-10
(2011-2015) if funds permitted. In the Steering Committee Meeting on Inception Report held on 16th
October 2009 and on Interim Report on 9th February 2010, participants agree that the project will be
considered in the formulation of RMK-10 projects. The evaluation of the project is executed from the
viewpoint as follows: 1) Cost effectiveness, 2) Impact to environment, 3) Extensibility to adapt to
climate change and 4) Sustainability in operation and maintenance.
(2) Basic Design Concept
According to agreed IFM Plan, the selected countermeasure is composed two structural measures,
namely, bunds to protect target area from river flooding and pumping stations associated with
retarding water facilities to prevent flooding from inland water. Target protection area in this study is
around Temerloh and Mentakab towns and its surrounding area where assets and population are
concentrated. The design scale and concept for the structural measures are summarized in Table 8.1.1.
The main design principles adopted are: (1) To protect town areas from river overflow by construction
of bunds and/or bypass/shortcut channel(s) based on 50 years ARI flood design level (refer to
Subsection 8.1.2); and (2) To protect the town areas from inland floods caused by concentrated
downpour by construction of sluice gates, pumping stations, detention ponds and so on based on 10
years ARI flood design level.
Table 8.1.1 Design Concept
Issues Conceivable Countermeasure Design Level
River Overflow Flood Construction of Bunds, Bypass and Road - Probability of Rainfall: 50-years ARI (in
Heightening consideration of the DID manual, past
flood mitigation plans and result of
stakeholder meetings)
Inland Flood A) Installment of Pumping Station and - Probability of Rainfall : 10-year ARI (in
Sluice Gate consideration of the present landuse
B) Designation of Allowable Flooding condition, DID manual, past drainage
Area and/ or Construction of Detention project/Plan and result of stakeholder
Pond for Pomp Operation meetings)

(3) Approach for Integrated Flood Management

As stated in the IFM Planning stage, among the seven components of Flood Mitigation of the DID
Manual on IFM (Integrated Flood Management), the JICA Study Team makes much of the first two
items, (1) Ensure a participatory approach, (2) Integrate land and water management; and (3)Adopt a

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-1

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

best-mix of strategies. As a part of the participatory approach, a stakeholder meetings were held
several times for the Pahang River Basin to present progress and results of feasibility study as tentative
alternative plans for the structural and non-structural measures. In addition, the team will recommend
to integrate land and water management in consideration of the existing local plans and land use
regulations. The team will propose structural and non-structural measures, which mitigate flood
damage with less adverse impact to downstream retaining natural water retarding function.
(4) Adaptation to Climate change
In the feasibility study, our basic position is to design structural measures for flood management based
on result of flood simulation under current climate condition. However, the climate change impact to
flood (increase in water level and rainfall depth) will be assessed as well. In addition, the adaptation
measures will be examined based on the magnitude of the impact and the cost efficiency of
conceivable adaptation measures.

8.1.2 Studies on Alternatives

(1) Definition of Target Area
Temerloh town and Mentakab town, which are densely populated area, are located 9km apart from
each other as shown Figure 8.1.1. Mentakab town is Zone F and Temerloh town is located in the
northern part of Zone A. On the other hand, the population density of other zones are very low
(especially Zone, C, D, E) compared with that of the towns. However, despite low-density in C, D and
E, the areas are also recognized as a part of future conurbation area in “National Structural Plan”.
Under these circumstances, the target area was defined through discussions in the stakeholder
meetings in consideration of the importance of the conurbation area and opinions of stakeholders. The
Study Team tentatively designed to show aliments of bunds and its effective area in two cases to
stakeholders, as shown in Figure 8.1.1. The left figure shows a plan to protect only the town area and
the right one shows a plan to protect the conurbation area as a whole. As a result of the discussion, the
latter plan (protection of the conurbation area) was defined as protection area by the stakeholders.

Zone F Zone F

Zone E Zone C Zone E Zone C

Zone D Zone D

Zone B Zone B

Zone A Zone A

Figure 8.1.1 Selection of Protection Area

(2) Selection of Structural Measures

As explained in IFM Plan in Chapter 6, the efficiency of large-scale structural measures that aim to
protect residential area spreading in the whole basin may be very low in consideration of the condition
of the basin. On the other hand, ring bunds with effective utilization of existing retarding effect of
upper swampy, forest and farm land is considered as best structural measure in the target area because
of less adverse effect to downstream of Pahang River Basin and cost effectiveness.
Incidentally, in case of occurrence of serious flood such as 1971 flood, the flood condition in target
area is strongly affected by back water of the Pahang River. The water level of Temerloh water level

8-2 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

station in the Pahang River is higher than ground level at the residential area of target area according to
the result of Pahang River Basin Study in 1974. Based on the fact and the result of this preparatory
survey, the rise of flood water level in Semantan River was caused by the gentle gradient of riverbed
(1/4000 to 1/5000) from confluence of the Pahang River and the low flow capacity of the Semantan
River. For fundamental measures to mitigate the effect of back water is improvement of main channel
of the Pahang River. However, the measures to reduce flood water level of main channel of the Pahang
River is low in cost-effectiveness.
(3) Setting of Design Scale
As mentioned in IFM Plan in Chapter 6, design scale had been often limited in Malaysia by constrains
such as budgetary, environmental and social conditions. Especially, as for construction of bunds at the
target area, stakeholders mentioned in the stakeholder meetings that the lower height of the bunds is,
the more residents are relieved. The stakeholders preferred the JICA Study Team to design bunds with
less than 4m in height.
Thus, the Study Team analyzed the relationship between design scale and bund height at Temerloh
and Mentakab town as shown Figure 8.1.2. By the figure, it can be seen that height of bunds could not
be reduced to 4m in the target area even if 20 year design scale is adopted. Incidentally, the scale of
last flood in 2006 (3rd largest flood for 40 years) is about 20 year return period, and the flood did not
give significant damage to the target area compared with the largest and the 2nd largest flood.
In addition, the Study Team analyzed the relationship between design scale and protected area as well
as protected houses as shown in Figure 8.1.2. The figure indicates that: 1) protected houses in case of
20 years design scale are only less than 30 % of all houses located at inundation area of 100 year flood;
and 2) if 50 year adopted as design scale, protected house is more than 75%.
Based on the forementioned information and numbers of meetings with stakeholders and related
agencies, the JICA Study Team and DID finally reached conclusion of setting 50 year scale as design
level. DID mentioned that the 50 years are appropriate design scale in consideration of relationship
between bunds height and the area protected by the bunds.

100 10

80 8
Bund Height (m)

60 6
%

40 4

Protected Houses Temerloh

20 2
Protected Area Mentakab

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Design Scale (year) Design Scale (year)

Figure 8.1.2 Relationship Between Design Scale and Characteristics of Target Area

(4) Component of Alternatives

To protect Temerloh and Mentakab areas, two alternatives are proposed as summarized in Table
8.1.2. The basic concept of alternative-1 and alternative-2 is enumerated as follows:
Alternative-1: To protect from Semantan River overflow flood by ring bunds. The runoff discharge
inside the ring bunds is reserved in retarding basin and is forced to drain through the pumping stations
with regulation ponds which are placed at outlet of existing small rivers and channels.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-3

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Alternative-2: To protect the target area from Semantan River overflow flood by ring bunds and
short-cut channel. The runoff discharge inside the ring bunds is forced to drain through the pumping
stations that are placed at outlet of existing small rivers and channels.
In addition, road heightening is implemented by both alternatives to fly over the bunds and to be
utilized as bunds.
Table 8.1.2 Conception for Adaptation to Climate Change
Alternative Alternative-1 Alternative-2
Basic Concept Protect by ring bunds Protect by ring bunds and short-cut channels
Facilities Against • Ring bunds (Length: 7,542m) • Continuous bund (Length: 7,572m)
river • Road heightening (Length: 793m) • Shortcut channels (Length: 2,800m)
flood • Road heightening (length: 255m)
Against • Retarding Basin: • Retarding basin (Area=167 ha)
inland (Area=167 ha) • 2 Pump Stations
• 3 Pump Stations with Regulation ponds (Total pump capacity: 25m3/s)
flood
(Total pump capacity: 18.5m3/s,, • 4 River Gates
Area=21 ha)
• 4 Sluice ways

The plans of facility placement of flood control measures for alternative-1 and 2 are presented in
Figure 8.1.3 to Figure 8.1.4. Orange lines, blue shadow, gray line indicate bunds, retarding basin or
regulation pond, and heightening of road respectively.

8-4 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Plan of Structural Measures for Alternative-1

Figure 8.1.3
Short-cut channel

Retarding basin

Sluice gate
River gate
legend

Bunds

Pump
RG：
SG：

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-5

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Plan of Structural Measures for Alternative-2

Figure 8.1.4
Short-cut channel

Retarding basin

Sluice gate
River gate
legend

Bunds

Pump
RG：
SG：

8-6 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(5) Functions of Alternatives

The functions of the measures which are installed and constructed in the alternatives are summarized
in Table 8.1.3. The main purpose of the alternatives is to prevent flooding by river-overflow from
Semantan River.
Table 8.1.3 Function of Flood Mitigation Measures in Alternatives
Purpose Measures Alternative-1 Alternative-2
Bunds To prevent the overflow from
Same as Alt-1
For flood from Semantan River
Semantan River Short cut To place part of bunds away from the
(against 50 year channel - residential area to secure landscape
flood) and to reduce flood risk
Road To secure lifeline and to be
Same as Alt-1
heightening utilized as a bund
Pump To force to drain the inland water
Station from the area enclosed in the
To force to drain the inland water
constructed ring bunds.
from the area enclosed in the
(The reserved water around cut-off
constructed ring bunds.
lake is drained. Cut-off lake is
(The reserved water in regulation
formed by River Gates and a part of
For inland flood pond is drained.)
Semantan meandering after close of
(against 10 year
the Gates.)
inland flood)
Regulation To store inland flood putting just
-
Pond upstream of pump station
Retarding To store inland flood Same as Alt-1
Basin
Sluice way To prevent inrush of floodwater Same as Alt-1
and River of Semantan River toward the
Gate protected area by ring buns

In addition, major advantages and disadvantages in construction phase and operation phase for both
alternatives are summarized in Table 8.1.4.
Table 8.1.4 Advantage and Disadvantage of Flood Mitigation Measures in Alternatives
Phase Item Alternative-1 Alternative-2
Construction Advantage • To shorten the bund length and to • Materials by excavation will be
Phase reduce construction cost by placing the reused for the bunds
bunds along the Semantan river to construction.
connect to hilly area • Regulation pond will not be
required because of placement
of pump stations away from
residential area
Disadvantage • Materials to built the bunds must be • Construction cost will be high
purchased. priced by install of River gate
• 17 houses should be resettlement and excavation of short-cut
channel.
• Some of aquaculture is affected
• 9 houses should be resettlement
Operation Advantage • The bunds can be utilized as roads • A part of natural river
Phase environment will be conserved.
• The bunds can be utilized as
roads
Disadvantage • Amenity of river environment will be • Amenity of river environment
reduced due to the bunds being will be reduced due to the bunds
constructed near residential area being constructed near
residential area
• The operation of River Gates
might be complex.

(6) Land Acquisition and Regulation of Land Use

Land acquisition will be executed to acquire necessary land for construction of 1) pump station
with regulation pond, 2) bunds and 3) short-cut channel. The areas planned as retarding basin are

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-7

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

expected to be regulated as agricultural, forest and swamp area in the future by the management
under responsibility of Temerloh Municipality Council. Ensure the retarding effect on site will
help reduce the construction cost and the flood damage. The areas for the land acquisition in the
alternatives are summarized in Table 8.1.5.
Table 8.1.5 Area of Land Acquisition
Item Alternative-1 Alternative-2
Mentakab Temerloh Total Mentakab Temerloh Total
Bunds (ha) 12 30 42 11 35 46
Pump station with 5 15 20 - - -
Regulation Pond (ha)
Short-cut channel (ha) - - - 18 7 25
Total (ha) 17 45 62 29 42 71
Total Cost
5,295 13,455 18,750 2,900 4,160 7,060
(RM ‘000)

Incidentally, unit cost of land acquisition in Alternative-1 is higher than that of Alternative-2
because of difference in values between town area and agricultural land.
8.1.3 Selection of Optimum Plan
The alternative plans are evaluated from aspects such as economic, environmental and flexibility to cope
with impact of climate change. The values and degree of criteria to evaluate are summarized in Table
8.1.6.
As a result of the evaluation described below, Alternative-1 is selected as an optimum plan to mitigate
flood damage in the target area because Alternative-1 is superior to Alternative-2 from the economic
point of view though both are at the same level for other criteria.
Table 8.1.6 Criteria for the Selection of Alternatives
Criteria Alternative-1 Alternative-2
Economic Cost
108.8 130.7
Evaluation (including land acquisition)
EIRR (%) 14.7 12.6
B/C 1.6 1.3
NPV (RM ’000) 50,328 31,628
Affected House 17 9
Social Land
Condition Acquisition (ha) 62 ha 71 ha
Environmental
Evaluation Live hood No significant impact Affect aquaculture
Some impact on forest
Natural Condition No significant impact
and nature
Flexibility for Impact of Climate Change Same Condition

(1) Economic Evaluation

Alternative-1 is recommendable to adopt as Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project from an economic
standpoint. According to the economic evaluation in 8.4.4, both of alternatives are feasible in terms of
the investment efficiency and contribution to the national economic growth. However, all economic
indexes of alternative-1 namely, Construction Cost, EIRR, B/C and NPV, indicates better values than
that of Alternative-2.
(2) Environmental Evaluation
It is difficult to judge superiority or inferiority from the environmental viewpoint on these two
alternatives. As for the social and natural conditions, in fact, there is no significant difference between
these two projects when seeing overall though there are some superiorities or inferiorities in each item.
The detailed information on environment is summarized in 8.5.
(3) Flexibility for Impact of Climate Change
It can be said that both projects have same level of flexibility to adapt to impact of climate change
because the bunds system are aligned in the same line except for alignment of shortcut channel. The
alignment of bunds is illustrated in 8.1.2.

8-8 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

8.1.4 River Amenity and Landscaping

Primary role of bunds and ponds proposed in this study are to protect residential areas from flooding.
However, another important function of flood structural measures is that they could also benefit residents
when river water level is at normal condition.
Since slope gradient of bunds proposed in this study is gentle with 3:1 slope, they could be considered as
an asset to landscaping and waterfront development. 3:1 slope is walkable which could provide an access
to river waterside. River reserve could function as an open space for recreations and ponds could provide
new waterfront for relaxation.
Current Semantan River bank, as seen in pictures below, is covered with deep riparian vegetation and
difficult to access.

Figure 8.1.5 Current Landscape of Semantan River Bank near Temarloh (left) and
Mentakab (right)
Preliminary perspective drawings of the possible future riverbank landscaping are shown here. Figures
aim to provide an image how water amenity oriented flood management structure measures could benefit
residents at normal times.

B C

Figure 8.1.6 Locations of the Drawings

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-9

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

A: Bund along Semantan River

B: Bund and River Reserve along Semantan River

C: Access Facility to Water

Figure 8.1.7(1) Preliminary Landscape Drawings

8-10 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

D: Pump Station for Stormwater Drainage

Figure 8.1.7(2) Preliminary Landscape Drawings

8.2 Proposed Non-Structural Plan
8.2.1 Existing Non-structural Measures in Temerloh Area
Non-structural measures such as warning-evacuation system, land use regulation, etc. are necessary to
complement the limitation of implementing and operating structural measures such as bunds system,
water gates, pomp station, etc. Through the data collection, the interview to the officers and residents in
the project area, existing non-structural measures executed in Temerloh and Mentakab town and its
surrounding area are shown as follows:
Table 8.2.1 Existing Non-Structural Measures in Temerloh/Mentakab
No. Existing Non-Structural Measures Relevant Organizations/Agencies
1 Flood forecasting and warning system DID
2 Flood management and operation National Security Council (MKN)
3 Flood maps DID (JPS)
4 Flood proofing -
5 Land use control DTCP (JPBD), Local Authority
6 Others (Donation) Department of Social Welfare (JKM)

(1) Flood Forecasting and Warning System

DID is responsible for the management and operation of flood forecasting and warning system.
Current monitoring and dissemination process of the flood forecasting and warning system by DID is
shown in Figure 8.2.1. Rainfall and water level data are analyzed and are sent to relevant authorities
for flood preparedness and warning to mitigate the flood damage. The flood warning system and
“infobanjir” on the website are in operation by DID and the information on rainfall and water level as
well as the risk are disseminated to the public through the Internet, warning sirens and boards as
shown in Figure 8.2.1.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-11

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Data collection

Flood warning system Data analisys InfoBanjir

Forecasting Warning

Current and forecasting Current water level and  

Public
Flood Flood water level areas to be flooded
Warning Warning
Siren Board

Operation room Operation room

State/Region State/Region

Forecating water level Warning information

Source) DID Hydrology Division

Figure 8.2.1 Monitoring Process and Dissemination of Flood Warning System

A flood warning siren is located at Kg. Batu Kapur in Sub-district (Mukim) Mentakab. This flood
warning siren system is installed in flood prone area where flood forecasting or warning systems are
not applicable due to short forecast lead time or some other reasons. If the water level rises to a
defined water level, the siren will start its function and residents nearby can be alerted even at night.
Two (2) sirens have been set up by DID Temerloh.

Figure 8.2.2 Flood Warning Siren (Kg. B. Kapur) and Flood Warning Board (Kg. B. Pulau)
At the flood prone area, Kg. Butu Pulau, the Flood Warning Board (FWB) is installed for the warning
of water level. In the FWB system, a monitoring station is identified at first and then target FWB sites
are selected. Based on the water level collected among the relative stations, correlation analysis for
water level is done and then correlation of water level with the traveling time is known. When the
water level at the monitoring station located upstream reaches alert level, the water levels for each
FWB station located downstream are sent so that relevant are will be informed. The community
affected by the flood is able to determine the expected flood level by referring the water level at the
monitoring station located upstream.
The FWB is also useful as a guide for the planning of evacuation in local communities. According to
the DID Manual, based on the record of flood level, the historical water levels can be marked on the
FWB shown in Figure 8.2.3.

8-12 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 8.2.3 An Example of Flood Warning Board and Historical Flood Marks (DID
Manual)
The flood forecasting system for Pahang River has been developed by hydrology division of DID and
in operation by State DID Pahang. By inputting hourly rainfall at six (6) rainfall stations and water
level at three stations, rainfall at upstream basin is calculated, and water level and discharge in every
six-hour within 24 hours from the time of forecasting is outputted for each water level station.
The Temerloh monitoring station is one of the stations for forecasting of water level. Hydrology
Division DID gives forecasting results to State DID Pahang on water level every six (6) hours within
24 hours in each station. State DID Pahang also gives forecasting results by phone to District DID
Temerloh.

Figure 8.2.4 Flood Warning System at Hydrology Division and DID Pahang State
In DID’s flood forecasting service, the forecasted information on water level will be disseminated to
State Operation Room of DID Pahang. DID Pahang State, then, will send the information to Temerloh
District DID, State Operation Room (DMRC or JPBB) and contingent control center (Police). District
DID Temerloh will send to Temerloh District Officer and District control center. The communication
and information flow on flood forecasting is shown in Figure 8.2.5.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-13

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(l) District DID Temerloh (l) Temerloh

Telemetric (Flood Operation Room) District Officer
system
Prepare River Level Forecast
(Automatic and
State DID Pahang (State
Schedule) Sg. (l)
Operation Room) State Secretary Office (Chairman (l) Temerloh
Pahang
of Pahang State DMRC(JPBB), District Control
State Operation Room) Centre

(lll)    (l) Contingent Control Centre,

Pahang (Police)
(ll)

Malaysia (lll) (ll)

DID HQ (Flood Operation
Meteorological National Security Council Operation Room
Room)
Services
  (ll)
Malaysia Control Centre (Police)

Notes: (I) river level ＞warning level

(II) river level ＞danger level
(III) Heavy rainfall advisory
DMRC Disaster Management and Relief Center (JPBB)
Information flow is arranged for Temerloh based on the flow in DID Manual

Figure 8.2.5 Communication and Information on Flood Forecasting among Agencies

The water level monitoring stations for the warning in Pahang River and Semantan River operated by
DID Temerloh are shown in Table 8.2.2.
Table 8.2.2 Flood Warning Water Level at the Monitoring Stations
No. Name of Stations River Water Alert Level Warning Level Danger Level
Level(Normal) (Green) (Yellow) (Red)
1 Lengkong Bridge Semantan 46.5 m 50.60 m 52.12 m 53.34 m
2 Lanchang Semantan 44.0 46.33 47.85 49.07
3 Temerloh Bridge Pahang 23.03 29.26 31.39 33.22
Source: Persembahan Taklimat Mengenai Persiapan Menghadapi Banjir (JPS Temerloh, 2009)

When water level of the monitoring station reaches the alert level, DID Temerloh begins to monitor
closely the flood situation such as rainfall and water level. When it reaches warning level, DID
informs the relevant flood operation rooms. When the river water level exceeds danger level, the
forecast shall be transmitted to the flood operation rooms and other relevant agencies.
Communication system using SMS on flood information such as water level among engineers and
technicians has been introduced by DID.
(2) Flood Management and Operation in Temerloh
(a) Guideline and Workshop for Community-based Disaster Management
Guideline for flood management and relief for District Temerloh is prepared under guidance of
National Security Council (NSC, Majilis Keselmatan Negara, MKN) of Pahang State. The
guideline is prepared at State (Negeri) level, District (Daerah) level and Sub-district (Mukim) level
as shown in Figure 8.2.6.

8-14 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Guideline (Pahang State) Guideline (Temerloh District) Guideline (Kerdau Sub-Distict)

Figure 8.2.6 Prepared Guideline for each Administration (State, District, Sub-District)
The composition of a guideline is the same at state, district and sub-district level. The contents of
the Pahang State guideline are:
• List of members for Disaster Management and Relief Committee (JPBB, Negeri);
• Address and phone number for offices of flood management during flood;
• List of evacuation center, forward base, food supply, land transportation;
• Sub-committee for risk management, budget, evacuation center, food supply, medical
transportation and communication for flood monitoring;
• Information flow among Federal, State, District level of DMRC (JPBB);
• List of kinds of foods for supply in evacuation center; and
• Report form for flood management (victims in evacuation center, foods supply).
An annual workshop for disaster management including floods at community level is held under
arrangement of the NSC Pahang State in collaboration with related agencies. This workshop aims
at establishing a community-based disaster management. This workshop in 2010 was opened with
300 participants including 17 villages (Kampung) on July, 2010 in Pekan. The objectives of the
workshop are listed below.
• Identify knowledge of the community about the types of the disasters and risks
• Identify the level of community awareness in the risk areas and prepare the risk maps
• Review the knowledge of the warning level for the local disaster
• Identify the level of community awareness for the safe places and plan for the evacuation
• Analyze community capacity for the disaster management before, during and after the
disaster.

(b) Flood Management and Relief Activities in Temerloh District

Flood management and relief activities in Temerloh District will be done under Disaster
Management and Relief Committee (DMRC, Jawatankuasa Pengurusan dan Bantuan Bencana,
JPBB) chaired by Temerloh District officer. District Police officer chief will be appointed as the
commander and District Fire and Rescue chief will be appointed as the deputy commander.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-15

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

DMRC, Temerloh consists of 60 members from parliament member, state member, police chief,
district officer, head of village, relevant officer from JPS, JKR, JBA. DMRC also consists of eight
(8) sub-committees, such as risk analysis sub-committee, practice and education sub-committee,
and food supply committee as shown in Table 8.2.3.
Table 8.2.3 Organization Configuration for Flood Management in Temerloh District
Items Descriptions Remarks
1) Number of Member for 60 (JPBB, Daerah Temerloh)
DMRC(JPBBD)
2) Sub-Committees and member of A. Risk analysis (11)
committee B. Practice and education (17)
( ): Number of member C. Flood Management (10)
D. Supply (food) (15)
E. Infrastructure services (17)
F. Medical (9)
G. Transportation and logistics
(16)
H. Evacuation (17)
3) Member of agencies for flood 14 agencies Police, Rescue and fire, JPS,
management JKR, Hospital, Social Welfare,
etc.
4) Number of Disaster Operation 1 (PKOB, Daerah Temerloh)
Control Center (DOCC) (at Temerloh District Office)
5) Number of forward base 13 offices (FB,Pangkalan Hadapan)
6) Number of evacuation center, 76 sites
( ):capacity (32,600 people)
7) Number of helicopter landing 20 sites
spots
8) Number of food supplier 25
Source) Guideline for Flood Management and Relief, Daerah Temerloh (2009/2010)

Before flood season coming, DMRC (JPBB) holds meetings for several times. In 2009, these
meetings were held three times on July 27, September 30 and November 23, 2009.
The command and control of the disaster relief operations is the responsibility of the Disaster
Operation Control Center (DOCC, Pusat Kawasan Operasi Bencana, PKOB). This center is
chaired by the district officer and placed in the police headquarters operation room in Temerloh
District. All information related to flooding shall be transferred to DOCC (PKOB). This center
consists of public officer, police and military.
There are 13 forward bases (pangkalan hadapan in Malay) in Temerloh district. The functions of
forward base are summarized as follows:
• Small operation room at the Mukim (sub-district) level
• Report and disseminate information related to flood disaster
• Transfer problems at the evacuation center to the forward base
• Storage of foods
• Vehicle stations during flood
The amount of 76 (Seventy six) evacuation centers for flood is set up by Department of Welfare,
Temerloh. The number of the seating capacities of the sum total of 74 evacuation centers is 32,600.
According to the guideline in District Temerloh, the evacuation centers located in the project area
are listed up as follows.

8-16 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 8.2.4 List of Evacuation Center and its Seating Capacity in the Project Area
No. Name of Center (Total Capacity) Kampung (Village) Capacity Mukim
(person) (Sub-District)
1 Sek. Men. Abu Bakar (300) Kg. Belakang TNB 100 Mukim Perak
Kg. HJ Salleh 200
2 Sek. Men. Al-khairiah (550) Kg. Cengal 80
Kg. Paya Dalam 70
Kg. Pegawan 200
Kg. Paya Kecil Hilir 200
3 Sek. Seri Bahagia (600) Kg. Bukit Kelulut 500
Taman Sri Bahagia 100
4 Sek. Keb. Temerloh Jaya (500) Taman Temerlor Jaya 500
5 Dewan Seri Semantan (800) Batu 3 Jalan Mentakab 400
Kg. Megat Segama 400
Taman Sri Semantan 700
Sub-total (5 Centers) 2,750
6 Balai Raya Kg. Penak (300) Kg. Penak 200 Mukim Mentakab
Kg. Penak Seberang 50
Kg. Tg. Padang 50
7 Sek. Keb.Bukit Cermin (200) Kg. Serdang Bawah 200
8 Sek. Bandar Mentakab (450) Kg. Serfang Atas 200
Kg. Mambang Berulang 200
Kg.Tok Rock 50
9 SRJK(C) Mentakab 1 & 2 (2,000) Kg. Batu Satu Jalan Tloh 2,000
10 SRJK(T) Mentakab (200) Kg. Sg. Ara 200
11 Sek. Men. Bandar Mentakab (500) Mentakab Garden 500
12 Dewan Seri Mentakab (200) Bandar Mentakab 200
Sub-total (7 Centers) 7,000
Total (12 Centers) 9,750 Project Area

Source) Guideline for Flood Management and Relief for Pahang State, MKN Pahang State (2009/2010)

The number of evacuation center is 12 places in total where five are in Perak and are places in
Mentakab. The number of seating capacity of the evacuation centers reaches 9,750 persons.
As shown in Table, each Kampung (Village) has already designated the evacuation center by the
guideline. The largest center is SRJK(C) Mentakab 1 & 2 with seating capacity of 2,000 persons
located in Mentakab.
There are 20 helicopter landing spots selected from such as school grounds, golf courses and
stadiums. Twelve (12) health teams and four (4) medical teams responsible for all victims during
flood event are set up.
Transportation facilities such as vehicles, trucks, buses, tractors and motor boats are prepared for
each governmental office such as Public Work Office (JKR), Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM),
Department of Civil Defense (JPA) and Temerloh Municipal Office.
Food supply will be secured three times a day for 1,300 victims by Department of Welfare. It costs
RM 12.10 for each victim per day. Personal hygiene such as tooth pastes, soaps and towels, and
other requirements such as blankets, mats and batik clothes are also prepared. Twenty five
suppliers are listed up showing with address and types of items for supply.
(c) Communication Flow from State Level to Evacuation Center
There are procedures for information from the State Flood Operation Center to the evacuation
center located in Kampungs (villages). According to the State guideline, communication flow is
summarized as follows.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-17

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Pahang State (Negeri) Flood Operation Center

(Operation Room)
Chairman: Secretary of State Government

State Contingent Control Center

Chief of State Police (Pahang)

Temerloh District (Daerah) Flood Operation Center
(Operation Room)
Chairman: District Officer
Chief of Operation Room: District Land Administrator

District Contingent Control Center

Head of District Police (Temerloh)

Sub-districts(Mukim) Coordination Committee

(JPMM)
Chairman:ADUN (State Member of Congress)
Secretary: Assistant District Officer/Assistant District
Land Administrator

Flood Evacuation Center

Chief: Village Head/Branch Chief
Head Master (Guru Besar)/ Community Leader

Figure 8.2.7 Communication Flow on Flood Management Information among Agencies

(d) Statistics for Flood Preparedness at District (Daerah) Level in Pahang State
Statistics for flood preparedness such as evacuation center, forward base, food supplier, land
transportation for flood preparedness in Pahang State including Temerloh District is shown in
Table 8.2.5.
Temerloh District has 32,600 persons' evacuation center where a seating capacity is the largest, and
has the 2nd scale in the State in the number of evacuation center, the forward base, and the food
supplier.
Table 8.2.5 Statistics for Flood Preparedness in Pahang State
Name of Number of Capacity of Number of Food Helicopter Number of Number of
District Evacuation Evacuation Forward Supplier Landing Land Water
Center Center Base Spot Transportation Transportation
Kuantan 58 18,245 18 15 22 28 23
Pekan 91 9,100 8 4 20 62 11
Rompin 29 3,810 9 4 24 39 6
Maran 65 10,825 10 8 14 39 8
Temerloh 76 32,596 13 25 20 66 19
Bera 37 9,820 18 17 7 42 11
Bentong 29 10,150 3 9 21 56 0
Raub 75 8,032 4 9 20 21 3
Jerantut 41 10,450 7 13 22 35 15
Lipis 58 11,160 4 10 44 36 15
C.Higjlands 29 3,000 0 1 7 15 0
Total 588 127,188 94 115 221 439 111
Note) Land Transportations consists of four wheel vehicles, trucks, buses and heavy machineries.
Source) Guideline for Flood Management and Relief for Pahang State, MKN Pahang State (2009/2010)

(3) Flood Maps

The flood maps of the scale of 10,000 for Pahang River were prepared by AUSTEC in August, 1974.
The flood maps also prepared by DID in 2000 and 2007 at Basin Level. Detailed flood maps of the
scale 10,000 to 25,000 have been not developed in the project area.

8-18 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(4) Flood Proofing (Stilt House/ Raising House)

In order to prevent inundation to the dwelling at the time of a flood, stilt/raising houses are constructed
along Semantan River. By raising a floor, inundation can be prevented and family properties can be
also protected. Figure 8.2.8 shows a typical stilt house in Kg. Kerbau and Kg. Lompat along
Semantan River.

Figure 8.2.8 Stilt Houses along Semantan River(Kg. Pdng. Kerbau, Kg. Lompat)
The water level of the flood has exceeded the floor level of stilt house about 50-70cm in the 2007 flood
event.
(5) Land use
In District Temerloh, zoning plans are done based on the local district plan. The land use zoning plan,
Temerloh Local District Plan, are the guideline of development process that must be followed by land
owners or developers to obtain planning permission or development order approved when submitted
to Temerloh Municipal Council Planning Authority.
There are many swampy areas changed from paddy fields in middle of 1980s in the project area. These
areas locate low land areas and play a role for retention function during flood.
(6) Other Measures (Contributions/ Donations)
As a part of post-flood recovery measures, natural disaster relief fund can assist the victims (RM
500/household), houses (RM 3,000-500/house), paddy filed (RM573/ha, Peninsula), livestock (Cow
700/no.) and aquacultures (RM 1,500/ha) affected by flood. Department of welfare (DOW) manages
the deliver of fund to be given the victims. Application for assistance of the fund will be made at the
district office.
8.2.2 Current Condition of the Project Area
Prior to the review on existing non-structural measures and measures to be adopted in the project area, the
current features on administration, historical flood records and land characteristics are described as
follows.
(1) Current Features of the Project Area
The Project area consists of two administrative areas, which are Mukim (Sub-district) Perak
(Temerloh) and Mukim Mentakab. Two sub-districts have a population of 80,300, consists of Mukim
Perak with population of 38,100 and Mukim Mentakab with population of 42,200. There are 79
Villages (Kampung) in two Sub-Districts (Mukim).
As mentioned before, the guideline for flood management is prepared to the administration unit of a
sub-district (Mukim), and the unit of flood evacuation is divided into community units such as
“Masyarakat” or small groups depending on seating capacity of the evacuation center.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-19

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(2) Historical Flood Water Level in Temerloh and Mentakab

Several large floods have occurred in Pahang River for forty-seven (47) years since 1963 starting year
of monitoring. Based on the flood report for Pahang River, the record of water level at Temerloh is
ranked and shown in Table 8.2.6.
Table 8.2.6 Peak Water Level Ranking at Temerloh Station
Ranking Peak Water Level Year & Date Occurred
1 38.3 January, 1971
2 34.4 24 November, 1988
3 34.0 13 December, 2007
4 33.6 14 March, 1967
5 33.5 26 December, 1993
Sources) 1. Selected flood Levels for December 1926 & January 1971 Floods
(August 1974, Pahang River Basin Study)
2. Ringkasan Laporan Banjir December 2007 (Jan.2008, DID)

Flood occurred in 2007 was the third largest flood with water level 34.0m for 47 years. The other
floods were 1971 flood event with 38.3m in elevation and 1988 flood event with 34.4m in elevation.
The flood water level for Mentakab in 1971 flood event was 41.4m in elevation according to the
Pahang Basin Study Report, Volume 3, Basin Hydrology and River Behavior.
Based on the inundation simulation results by the Study Team, the flood water level at Mentakab in
1988 flood event was estimated as 37.2m in elevation using gradient of water level around 1/8,000 by
taking into the difference of water level 3.2m as well as distance 25,800m between Mentakab and
Temerloh as described in Table 8.2.7.
Table 8.2.7 Estimated Flood Water Level in Mentakab
Water level at Gradient (I) of Water level Distance (L) Defference of Estimated Water
Temerloh between Temerloh and Temerloh and Water Level Level
(Flood Event) Mentakab Mentakab at Mentakab
34.4 m (1988) I = 1/8,000 L= 25,800 m 3.2 m 37.6 m (=38m)
Note) Gradient(I) is calculated from simulation result.

The historical peak water levels at Temerloh and Mentakab in Semantan River are shown in Table
8.2.8.
Table 8.2.8 Peak Water Level at Temerloh Station and Mentakab
Ranking Temerloh Station Mentakab Year Occurred Remarks
1 38.3 41.4 1971
2 34.4 (37.6) 1988 ( ): Estimated from Temerloh
3 34.0 (37.2) 2007 ( ): Estimated from Temerloh
Source) WL (1971) : Pahang Basin Study Report, Volume 3, (August 1974)

(3) Affected Areas and Number of Victims by 2007 Flood Events

(a) Affected Areas by 2007 Flood Event
The flood continued from 10th of December to 23rd of December 2007. DID Temerloh operation
room worked from 7th of December 2007 to 14th of December, 2007. According to the flood report
Year 2007, affected areas by flood are shown in Table 8.2.9.
Table 8.2.9 Affected Areas by 2007 Flood Event in Temerloh/Mentakab

Areas Affected Areas/Towns (Bandar) and Villages (Kampung) by Flood

Temerloh Bangu, Temerloh Town, Lebak, Belenggu, Pangsanam,Kg. Paya Kecil, Kg. Paya Dalam, Kg. Paya Pulai, Kg.
Padanag Lalang, Kg. Sebrang Temerloh, Kg. Bangau Parit, Kg. Padang Tenggala
Mentakab Taman Mentakab Indah, Kg. Batu Kapur, Kg. Sungai Buloh, Kg. Tajung Kerayong, Kg. Chatin, Kg. Gantok

Source: Flood and Drought Report Year 2007 (DID Temerloh District)

8-20 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(b) Number of Victims at Evacuation Center and Casualties

The total number of evacuees during the flood event reached 22,900 persons for 10 days in
Temerloh District as shown in Table 8.2.10.
Table 8.2.10 Number of Victims at Evacuation Center, Temerloh District
Date Dec.12 Dec.13 Dec.14 Dec.15 Dec.16 Dec.17 Dec.18 Dec.19 Dec.20 Dec.21 Total
Victims 409 3,195 4,363 4,553 4,910 4,851 0 0 0 602 22,883

Source) Flood and Drought Report Year 2007 (DID Temerloh District)

According to the flood report Year 2007, there were eight (8) casualties in Pahang State. Of these,
three (3) casualties were in Temerloh District. Information was not acquired on cause of death in
flood, however, certain cases involving drown of a child and accidental slipping to the drain
channel or the rivers can be considered. There are also disease outbreaks of dengue fever, diarrhea,
and malaria after flood.
(4) Historical Flood Level and Land Characteristics in Temerloh and Mentakab
In Temerloh, the highest peak water level due to flood shows about 38m in elevation by 1971 flood
event and follows by about 34m in elevation by 1988 flood event. The two contour lines equivalent to
the water level for 38m and 34m in elevation are shown in Figure 8.2.9.

Figure 8.2.9 Areas and Contour Line Equivalent to the Flood Level in 1971 and
1988 Flood Event (Temerloh)
• According to Figure, the surrounded zones of contour line 34m in elevation spread along
Semantan River and the two tributaries, Rabit River and Cengal River.
• There are many affected areas inundated by flood such as Kg. Paya Dalam, Kg. Tg. Lalang
and Kg. Paya Kecil along Semantan River.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-21

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

• Rabit River flows from south of Temerloh near Kg. Rabit and Kg. Bt. Kemuning, and runs to
north through the town and joins to Semantan River. Cengal River is start from near Kg. Batu
Tiga and runs under Road No.87 near Kg. Carak Paya Dalam, and joins to Semantan River.
• According to the Figure, the low land areas with 34m in elevation are located along Semantan
River, Rabit River and Cengal River.
• The surrounded zones 38m in elevation equivalent to the highest water level are located
existing developed area of the west side near the confluence of Semantan River and Pahang
River and the area between Rabit River and Cengal River near Kg. Tualang.
In Mentakab, the highest peak water level due to flood shows about 41.4m in elevation in 1971 flood
event and follows by about 37.6m in elevation in 1988 flood event. The two contour lines equivalent to
the water level for 40m and 37m in elevation are shown in Figure 8.2.10. Since contour line of 41m in
elevation is limited areas, line of 40m is shown in Figure 8.2.10.

Figure 8.2.10 Areas and Contour Line 40m, 37m and 35m in Elevation
• According to Figure, zones with elevation 35m are located along Semantan River and Ara
River, tributary of Semantan River. The surrounded zones with an elevation of 37m
equivalent to the flood level in 1988 including 2007 flood are located in the north zones of
Road No.87 except the zones thorough which Ara River flows.
• Zones with an elevation of 40m are located between the south zone of Road No.87 and the
north zone of Ketapa River.
From these figures shown above, land characteristics in Temerloh and Mentakab are summarized as
follows.
• In Temerloh, most of the developed areas such as institutions, public services and housing
areas are located with an elevation of 38m or more. These areas were not inundated even in
1971 flood.
• With water level 34m as the flood level of 2007, the areas along Semantan River, Rabit River
and Cengal River are inundated and affected. These areas are Kg. Tg. Lalang (Semantan

8-22 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

River), Kg. Paya Kecil (Semantan River), Kg. Batu Tiga (Cengal River) and Kg. Kempas
(Rabit River)
• In Mentakab, most of the zones with an elevation of 37m equivalent to the flood level in 1988
including 2007 flood are located in the north zones of Road No.87.
• The areas with an elevation of 40m about 1m below to the 1971 flood level are located in the
southern area of Mentakab.
8.2.3 Issues on Non-structural Measures in the Project Area
Taking into consideration the land characteristics, historical floods and the characteristics of the floods,
issues on the existing flood mitigation measures for non-structural measures are summarized as follows.
(1) Flood forecasting and warning systems
• According to residents' interview result, siren was not sounding at the time of a flood, and a
daily check and inspection before monsoon season shall be required.
• The sounding range of siren covers 700m to 1km depending on the wind condition. This range
of siren should be identified in advance to assure that the sirens are useful for evacuation
activities.
• The FWBs are useful for public awareness and preparedness for flood management .These
boards are practical measures to aware the residents directly on changes of water level during
flood as well as historical floods.
• The lead time of a flood forecast for Pahang River is six (6) hours. In terms of the action on
flood management, the more it takes a long lead time, the more it becomes advantageous to
forecast. To improve lead time, data on rainfall should be collected as soon as possible.
(2) Flood management
• In accordance with a guideline, the flood management activities in Temerloh are done by
relevant agencies, villages and local communities.
• In the flood in 2007, 4,910 persons are housed at the maximum per day. It can be judged that it
has sufficient seating capacity since this number is less than the total seating capacity with
9,750 persons of the evacuation centers.
• Three (3) casualties resulting from the 2007 flood are reported in Temerloh District.
Information was not acquired about the dead cause by flood, however, certain cases involving
drown of a child and accidental slipping to the drain channel or the rivers can be considered
the Measures on flood management which minimizes the casualties are required for the
evacuation plan.
• There are also much disease outbreaks of dengue fever, diarrhea, and malaria after flood. The
measures for these diseases are also required.
(3) Flood Maps/Hazard Maps
• The flood maps of the scale of 10,000 for Pahang River were prepared by AUSTEC in August,
1974. The flood maps also prepared by DID in 2000 and 2007 at Basin Level.
• Since it was prepared by the Study of AUSTEC in 1974, the large scaled flood maps such as
10,000 have not been prepared in the project area.
• Preparation of detailed flood map or hazard map is recommended to minimize flood damages
especially to eradicate loss of human lives.
(4) Flood Proofing (Stilt House)
• Many people live along the Semantan River. They inherit their parents’ house from generation
to generation and can not move due to economic circumstances and other reasons such easy
accessibility for fishery.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-23

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

• In inundation areas along the river like Semantan River, the construction of stilt house is
recommendable for the flood mitigation.
(5) Land use
• There are many swampy areas which changed from paddy fields in middle of 1980s in the
project area. These areas locate in low land areas and function as retention area during flood.
8.2.4 Proposed Non-structural Measures
(1) Project Components and Measures in Temerloh
Non-structural measures will be designed to mitigate the flood damage on Temerloh area from floods
larger than the design scale of structural measures. Advantages of the non-structural measures are
summarized as follows.
• To bring about the early effect of flood mitigation with less cost of implementation as
compared with the structural measures
• To contribute to a certain extent at every scales of flood
• To adapt to the uncertain future climate change impact

Non-Structural Measures for Temerloh/Mentakab Area

Capacity Development for flood management among

the relevant agencies and local communities

1) Flood risk management

2) Flood fighting activities

Upgrading flood forecast and warning system

1) Upgrading flood forecasting and warning system

2) Dissemination of monitoring system
3) Installation of warning system outside areas of project area

Preparation of hazard maps and guidelines

1) Preparation of hazard maps

2) Preparation of guidelines/ manuals for flood fighting

Control and management of land use

1) Preservation of low land areas

2) Flood proofing

Figure 8.2.11 Project Components for Non-structural Measures in Temerloh/ Mentakab

8-24 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Flood management with hazard maps, and flood fighting activities will be the key measures, and
through these activities, the capacity development among relevant authorities and communities shall
be improved.
(2) Proposed Measures for the Project Components
Each measure for the component shall be examined in detail shown as follows.
(a) Flood risk management
As mentioned in 8.2.1, the flood management activities in the Temerloh area, since the flood comes
almost every year, are performed quite actively. Before flood season coming, DMRC (JPBB) holds
meetings among relevant agencies on flood management for several times.
In accordance with the guideline, the command and control of the disaster relief operations such as
the DOCC (PKOB) and forward base are prepared and identified. The evacuation centers for each
Kampung (Village) are prepared and their seating capacity is also checked.
For flood risk management, to mitigate human lives and to aware of importance of flood
preparedness, community-based flood management through making and utilizing the flood hazard
map is recommended. The flood hazard map shows flood hazard area, location of evacuation
center, Kampung offices, and helicopter landing sites.
There are also much disease outbreaks of dengue fever, diarrhea, and malaria after the flood. The
counter measures to mitigate or prevent should be carried out by DSW (JKM).
(b) Flood fighting activities
The flood fighting activities are another non-structural measures to be adapted in Temerloh area. In
the proposed project, the bunds are planned along Semantan River.
In connection with the construction of bunds, the inspection and monitoring for them shall be
required and the flood fighting activities shall be done depending on the water level during flood in
Semantan River.
The characteristics of the flood fighting activities are shown as follows.
• As an emergency measure to minimize flooding damage, these activities have positive effect
at small cost.
• The method for bund protection mainly uses soil, trees, and bamboo that are easily obtained
on site.
• The main players in flood fighting activities through bund protection are not only
municipalities and relevant offices but also residents living in the sites.

Source: Flood Fighting in Japan, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan

Figure 8.2.12 Flood Fighting Activities in Japan

In Temerloh area, the flood management activities at kampung level are well organized so these
areas are suitable for activities on flood fighting.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-25

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(c) Upgrading flood forecasting and warning system in Pahang Basin

A new flood forecasting and warning system for Pahang River basin will be developed and
introduced by the monsoon season in 2011.
According to the hydrology division of DID, the objectives of the development of system are
shown as follows.
• To develop real-time flood forecasting based on Atmospheric Model-based Rainfall and
Flood forecasting (AMRRF) system for providing a real time flood warning and emergency.
• To develop radar rainfall analyzer and integrator for Malaysia to estimate rainfall distribution
and the rainfall and rainfall forecast magnitude.
The proposed AMRRF system is shown as shown in the figure below.

Source: Hydrology Division, DID (2009)

Figure 8.2.13 Atmospheric Model-based Rainfall and Flood forecasting (AMRRF)

System
In this system, by using the meso-scale simulation and radar and satellite data, quantitative rainfall
will be forecasted, and discharge and water level at the reference point will be predicted.

8-26 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Source) Hydrology Division, DID (2009)

Figure 8.2.14 System Flow from Rainfall Forecasting to Discharge Prediction

This system will provide a reliable flood-warning system and a viable flood forecasting and
warning systems for communities as forecast tools in Temerloh, Pahang basin.
Cost for the development of AMRFF is shown as follows.
Table 8.2.11 Cost Estimate for the AMRFF System
No. Items Price (RM) Remarks
1 Cross section survey for Pahang River 936,200
2 Hard ware 38,500
2.1 Server for download 10,000
2.2 Server for forecast 25,000
2.3 Work station 3,500
3 Data purchasing 121,770 Jan,2008 - April 2010
3.1 Development 69,970 Kautan, Temerloh, Muadzam Shsh, Batu
Embun, Cameron Highland
3.2 Operation 51,800 (Per year)
4 Consulting Fee 1,260,000
5 Total Cost 2,356,470
Source) Hydrology Division, DID (2009)

(d) Dissemination of flood information by utilization of monitoring system

As part of flood management activities, the monitoring is most important activity before and during
flood. In Pahang River, water level and rainfall at strategic points are on the web site, Inforbanjir,
and updated at regular intervals (hourly to daily). Data is transmitted by various means depending
on the most reliable system of telecommunication such as UHF, VHF, telephone or satellite.
The online rainfall data displayed through this website are useful indicators of potential flooding in
Temerloh. The online river level data at flood monitoring and warning stations provide online
information on flooded areas. DID also provides the public with the most updated data on rainfall
and water level.
This monitoring system shall be used for not only flood operation room, but also community-based
flood activities at public level in monsoon season.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-27

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(e) Installation of warning system outside areas of the project

In Temerloh area, after implementation of the project, there are areas in which bunds are not
constructed, occurrence of the same floods as the present are expected.
The installation of the warning system such as warning siren and warning board are recommended
in these areas located along Semantan River.
These areas such as Kg. Tg. Kerayung, Sg. Dingin, Kg. Raja Songsang and Kg. Tg. Tinggi located
along Semantan River have the first priority to introduce the warning systems. The location of
proposed warning systems is shown in Figure 8.2.15.
(f) Preparation of flood hazard maps
Whereas the structural measures are aimed at preventing and mitigating flooding, the flood hazard
maps are based on the standing point that flooding will occur, and aims to minimize loss of life.
The purpose and benefit for preparing flood hazard maps are summarized below.
• Local residents receive types of information on potential flood damage and become aware of
the importance of flood management
• By using flood maps, when flood occurs, local residents are able to evacuate to the evacuation
center
• Municipal council is able to smoothly accomplish the evacuation of local residents.
• Municipal council is able to serve for regulation of the land use by using flood maps.
The flood hazard maps were prepared for Temerloh/Mentakab Area. In the map, location of the
evacuation center, a total of 12 places consisting of five places in Perak and seven places in
Mentakab, is shown in Figure 8.2.15.
The major offices like community halls and the helicopter landing sites are shown on the map. The
number of seating capacity of the evacuation centers reaches 9,750 persons.
According to the map, hazard areas are located along the Semantan River, Rabit River and Chengal
River.

Figure 8.2.15 Flood Hazard Map in Temerloh and Mentakab (by JICA)

8-28 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Prepared hazard maps shall be shared among the local authorities and communities in Gemas. In
order to make maximum use of the information, following activities should be done.
For the sufficient information transfer, the required number of copies of map should be printed, and
those should be distributed to the relevant agencies for the flood management and residents in the
project area.
• Thorough the regular meetings held by DMRC (JPBB) before the monsoon season, an
explanation for maps with the evacuation drills should be done.
• For upgrading the hazard maps, the study group shall be organized at the community or
Kampung level and mutual identification on hazard areas, routes for evacuation center and
submerged areas and roads shall be identified.
• DID shall need to improve the map based on opinion and the improving point from residents
while performing the dissemination work of hazard maps.
(g) Flood proofing (Stilt houses)
In outside areas of the project, the stilt house is also recommended for the potential areas of
flooding along the Semantan River.
Based on the historical flood level, design level for the construction of stilt house is recommended
at the elevation of 34m in Temerloh and 37m in Mentakab.
(h) Preservation of low land areas for the retention of water
Measures that play the complementary role to the structural ones are also required for the
non-structural measures. For example, as described in 8.2.2, the low land areas spreads out in the
area consisting Rabit River and Chengal River. These areas have achieved water retention function
and detention function at the time of a flood. These areas have retention function and detention
function at the time of a flood. In the future, when developed, there is a concern that these
functions could be lost.

Figure 8.2.16 Low Land Areas (Currently Non-cultivated Area, Swamp Area)
Regarding the town and land use planning, all the planning has to be approved by the Pahang State
Council thorough the municipal council in Temerloh before gazetting. In the project area, paddy
field are abundant since mid 1980s, and currently, these area are swamp areas or non-cultivated
areas and are located in low land areas.
In structural measures, it is proposed to utilize the are as temporary regulating pond during flood.
Therefore, the low land areas consisting of swamp area or non-cultivated areas should be defined
as the agricultural areas or preservation areas in the Temerloh city planning in order to avoid
development. After formulation of city plan with appropriate preserving areas for retention
purpose, it shall be gazetted by Pahang State Council.
The low land areas to be regulated by state council are shown in Figure 8.2.17.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-29

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Figure 8.2.17 Low Land Areas to be regulated by Municipal Council, Temrloh

(i) Preparation of guideline and manual
In the proposed project, with the construction of bunds, the flood fighting activities shall be done
by relevant authorities and local communities.
Referring to the DID manual and other references, the guideline for flood fighting activities shall
be prepared with the following contents.
1) Purposes
2) Outline of the flood fighting system
3) Techniques for the bunds protection
4) Flood fighting drills
5) Organizations
6) Communication and information flow
7) Reports
Furthermore, the flood fighting drills based on these guidelines needs to be carried out in the
sub-district level in Temerloh.

Source: Flood Fighting in Japan, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan

Figure 8.2.18 Flood Fighting Drills and Sandbag Pilling Technique (in Japan)

8-30 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Based on the above mentioned measures, the proposed non-structural measures in

Temerloh/Mentakab are summarized as follows.
From a viewpoint of raising public awareness, the flood management activities including flood
fighting activities and dissemination of flood maps at sub-district level are very important.
Through these activities, the capacity on flood management shall be improved.
Table 8.2.12 Proposed Non-Structural Measures in Temerloh/Mentakab
Project Components No. Non-Structural Measures Organizations/Agencies
I. Capacity Development for flood 1 Flood management with hazard maps National Security Council
management (MKN)
2 Flood fighting activities along the National Security Council
Semantan River (MKN)
II. Upgrading flood forecasting and 3 Upgrading flood forecast and warning DID (JPS)
warning system system by AMRRF system
4 Dissemination of monitoring system DID (JPS)
5 Installation of warning system such as DID (JPS)
warnings siren outside areas of the
project area
III. Preparation of hazard maps and 6 Preparation of hazard maps and share the DID (JPS)
guidelines information among the local authorities
and communities
7 Preparation of guidelines/manuals for DID (JPS)
flood fighting activities
IV. Control and management of land 8 Preservation of low land areas for the DTCP, Local Authority
use retention of water
9 Flood proofing by construction of stilt Local Authority
house

8.3 Adaptation of Climate Change

8.3.1 Concept of Adaptation Measures
Climate Change that accompanies global warning is now becoming a serious concern to be shared by all
people in the world. The 4th Assessment Report that was published in 2007 by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) shows impacts on water availability, flooding, natural resources and
environment, endemic morbidity, etc. As for flooding of Asia region, especially in coastal and low-land
areas, both frequencies and scales of floods are predicted to increase due to sea level rise, frequent heavy
precipitation events.
In Peninsular Malaysia, NAHRIM conducted“Study of the Impact of Climate Change on the Hydrologic
Regime and Water Resources of Peninsular Malaysia” between 2002 and 2006 to build up knowledge on
this and in the area of climate change projection. According to NAHRIM, it is projected that floods will
take place more frequently and in an amplified manner in the future.
To cope with these impacts, the IPCC report suggests that is as important to promote “adaptation” to
climate change as to promote “mitigation” since climate change “mitigation” centered one reduction of
greenhouse gases has limitations, and the climate change would continue over centuries even if
“mitigation” were implemented. Malaysia also committed in the 10th Malaysia Plan to adopt a dual
strategy in addressing climate change impacts: firstly, adaptation strategies to protect economic growth
and development factors from the impact of climate change; and secondly, mitigation strategies to reduce
of green house gases.
8.3.2 Necessity and Point of Adaptation Measures
Adaptation measures would be proposed considering a condition after/before implementation of optimum
plan of structural measures. Before proposing of adaptation measures, flood risk by climate change at the
target area is assessed on the condition without structural flood mitigation measures to reassure necessity
of adaptation measures. To assess the flood risk, flood inundation area and depth at Temerloh and
Mentakab town in 2025 is analyzed by the flood simulation model (established in Chapter 7) based on

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-31

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

the projection results on rainfall (see Chapter 3). The result of risk assessment would be utilized as basis
to propose and to examine adaptation measures.
In addition, adaptation measures would be proposed taking care of uncertainly of impact. When planning
adaptation measures, it is necessary to recognize uncertainty that always accompanies the projection of
climate change impacts. The uncertainty is generally caused by: 1) Limitation of meteorology, 2)
Limitation of projection by GCMs, 3) Uncertainty of future GHG emission and 4) Opacity of effects of
mitigation measures. In consideration of the uncertainly of impact, adaptation measures should be so
flexible as to respond to the uncertainty of impacts of climate change.
Furthermore, based on fundamental direction of adaptation strategy summarized in the Report Volume 1
of this preparatory survey, the adaptation measures would be considered in this subsection.
8.3.3 Flood Risk Assessment
As estimated in Chapter 3, 8days rainfall with ARI of 10-100 years is projected to increase by 10% at
maximum by 2025 due to climate change. With this increase in rainfall, ARI of floods under current
climate condition may decrease and severe rainfall event may occur more frequent. Table 8.3.1 and
Figure 8.3.1 show how ARI may decrease and 8days rainfall increase in the future.
Table 8.3.1 Projected Relationship between ARI and 8days Rainfall Depth in 2025
8 days Rainfall(mm) 448.8 425.6 380.0 335.2 302.8 252.9
Current Climate
Condition 100 80 50 30 20 10
ARI 2025
(years) (Average increase) 67 54 34 24 20 10
2025
(Maximum increase) 67 54 34 20 14 7

ARI (years) 100 80 50 30 20 10

Current Climate
8days Condition 448.8 425.6 380.0 335.2 302.8 252.9
Rainfall 2025 493.7 468.2 418.0 368.7 302.8 252.9
Depth (Average increase) (10%) (10%) (10%) (10%) (0%) (0%)
(mm) 2025 493.7 468.2 418.0 368.7 333.1 278.2
(Maximum increase) (10%) (10%) (10%) (10%) (10%) (10%)
Percentages the parenthesis indicate increase relative to current climate condition
120 Current
2025(ave. increase)
100 2025(max. increase)
In e c r e ase in r ain fall
80
ARI(years)

60

40
De c r e ase in ARI

20

0
200 250 300 350 400 450 500
8days Rainfall Depth(mm)

Figure 8.3.1 Projected Relationship between ARI and 8days Rainfall Depth in 2025
Hereinafter, preliminary flood risk assessment for respective zones in Temerloh-Mentakab conurbation
area as shown in Figure 8.3.2 will be conducted under current and the future climate condition.
Boundaries of 8 zones were identified based on boundary of stormwater catchment and main roads.

8-32 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 8.3.2 Zones for Risk Assessment

Characteristics of each zone are tabulated in Table 8.3.2.
Table 8.3.2 Characteristics of Each Zone
Portion of
Number of
Zone Area(km2) Population** one story
houses* houses***
A1 2.61 1,778 7,717 0.1
A2 7.38 3,139 13,623 0.1
B1 3.35 924 4,010 0.15
B2 16.63 2,536 11,006 0.15
C 2.54 143 621 0.2
D 5.39 2,162 9,383 0.2
E 3.30 4,074 17,681 0.2
F 1.74 1,686 7,317 0.6
Total 42.94 16,446 71,358 -
* Counted from ortho-image
** Population estimated assuming 4.34 person/ household (see section 7.9 for detail)
***Rough estimate based on field survey

(1) Flood Simulation

Flood simulation was conducted under current climate condition and condition under 10% increase in
rainfall. Figure 8.3.3 indicates Semantan River water level of flood with 50years ARI may rise by
50-70cm in 2025 due to increase in rainfall depth.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-33

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

45
Semantan River water level in 50years ARI flood (without measures)
Maximum water level(DTGSM 43
Kg. Mambang
Berulang
41 Kg. Raja Kg. Gantuk
m)

Songsang Kg. S Dingin

Kg. Paya Kg. Gaja Mati
39 Tambang
Kg. Kenalau Kg. Lompai Kg. Batu Kapur

Mentakab Town current condition

37
10% increase in rainfall
Temerloh Town
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Chainage(km)

Water level difference relative to 1990 (50years ARI flood)

2.0
Kg. Paya Kg. Mambang Berulang
1.5 Kg. Raja Songsang Tambang Kg. Gantuk
Kg. S Dingin
Differance(m)

Kg. KenalauKg. Lompai

1.0
0.5
Kg. Gaja Mati
0.0
Temerloh Town Mentakab Town Kg. Batu Kapur
-0.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Chainage(km)
Figure 8.3.3 River Water Level of 50year ARI Flood under Current and 2025 Climate
Condition (Upper Panel: River water level, Lower Panel: Water level difference relative to current
climate condition)
Flooded area by 50years ARI flood is show in Figure 8.3.4.

Figure 8.3.4(1) Flooded Area by 50years ARI Flood (Current Condition)

8-34 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Figure 8.3.4(2) Flooded Area by 50years ARI Flood (10% Increase in Rainfall)
(2) Risk Maps
Risk items which are assessed here are:
- Flooded area;
- Number of houses in flooded area;
- Potential number of people stranded; and
- Potential number of immediate fatalities.
Potential number of people stranded and immediate fatalities were estimated following method
introduced by US Army Corp of Engineers1. Vertical zones are defined as Figure 8.3.5 and the people
in the walk-away zone are those who are able to evacuate without any rescue. It is assumed that all
people exist in the highest habitable level of the building and those under the age of 65 years can climb
to higher level such as roof or attic. Fatality rate of the people in safe, compromised and chance zone
are 0.023%, 12% and 91.75% respectively. Number of stranded people is estimated by subtracting
number of immediate fatalities from number of people who exist in area where water depth exceed
two feet (61cm).

1
“Estimating Loss of Life from Hurricane-Related Flooding in the Greater New Orleans Loss-of- Life Modeling
Report” May 22, 2006

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-35

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

People <65
years
Chance
>6 Zone
Compromised
4-6
Zone
9
Attic/ Roof Safe
0-4 Zone
People >65
years
Chance
>6 Zone
Compromised
4-6
Zone
9
First Floor
Safe
0-4 Zone

2 Walk-away Zone

Figure 8.3.5 Building Submergence Criteria

Flooded area is defined here is area where water depth exceeding two feet (61cm).
Result of risk assessment for 50yeas ARI flood is tabulated in Table 8.3.3 and risk maps are shown in
Figure 8.3.6. It should be noted that “Stranded persons” and “Immediate fatalities” are estimation
under absent of any prior evacuation, and population and household data used here are ones of current
condition.
The table indicates that life of 62 people are potentially at risk by 50years ARI flood under current
climate condition if no structural and non-structural measures are to be put in place. This number
could more than double by aggravated flood due to climate change. Potential number of stranded
people who needs to be rescued is more than 20,000 and this may increase by 23% in the future.
Figures in parenthesis are estimation under existence of prior evacuation at the rate of 80%. From
these figures, it is important to mention that prior evacuation could drastically reduce the number of
people who are at risk. Therefore, non-structural measures must be strengthened and emphasized to
cope with future climate change and flood exceeding design level.
Table 8.3.3 Potential Flood Risk by 50years ARI Flood
Current Climate Condition 10% Increase in Rainfall
Flooded Inundated Stranded Immediate Flooded Inundated Stranded Immediate
Zone
area(km2) houses persons fatalities area(km2) houses persons fatalities
4,067 4 4,745 16
A1 1.42 938 1.61 1,097
(813) (1) (949) (3)
5,008 5 7,247 14
A2 2.63 1,155 3.23 1,673
(1,002) (1) (1,449) (3)
2,258 8 3,059 18
B1 2.53 522 2.74 709
(452) (2) (611) (4)
1,864 6 2,241 24
B2 3.35 431 3.69 522
(372) (1) (448) (5)
149 3 169 5
C 1.18 35 1.25 40
(30) (1) (34) (1)
351 10 339 22
D 0.84 83 0.88 83
(70) (2) (68) (4)
1,567 8 1,792 18
E 0.52 363 0.74 417
(313) (2) (358) (4)
4,484 17 4,805 34
F 1.30 1,041 1.40 1,115
(897) (3) (961) (7)
19,747 61 24,398 149
Total 13.77 4,568 15.54 5,660
(3,949) (13) (4,880) (30)
Numbers in parenthesis are figures estimated assuming 80% for prior evacuation rate

8-36 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Current Condition 10% Increase in Rainfall

Flooded Area Flooded Area

Number of Inundated Houses Number of Inundated Houses

Immediate Fatalities Immediate Fatalities

Number of Stranded Persons Number of Stranded Persons

Figure 8.3.6 Flood Risk Maps of Temerloh and Mentakab Conurbation

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-37

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(3) Impact on Stormwater Runoff

Stormwater Runoff could increase in the future due to climate change. As indicated in the Table
8.3.4, 10year ARI 1day rainfall depth could increase by 20% at maximum by 2025.
Table 8.3.4 Incremental Ratio of 1day Rainfall with ARI of 10years
Proportion of
ARI GCM
Period RegHCM-PM PRECIS Average Maximum models that
(years) Average
show increase
2025 0.89 0.94 1.15 1.0 1.2 73%(11/15)
10 2050 1.30 0.90 1.26 1.2 1.3 80%(12/15)
2090 - 0.97 1.50 1.2 1.5 79%(11/14)
RegHCM-PM, NAHRIM
PRECIS, MMD
BCCR-BCM2.0, Norway
CNRM-CM3, France
CGCM3.1(T63), Canada
CGCM3.1(T47), Canada
GISS-AOM, USA
GFDL-CM2.0, USA
GFDL-CM2.1, USA
INGV-SXG, Italy
MIROC3.2(hires), Japan
MIROC3.2(medres), Japan
ECHO-G, Germany/Korea
ECHAM5/MPI-OM, Germany
IPSL-CM4, France
GCM Average

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Incremental Ratio
Figure 8.3.7 Incremental Ratio of 10years ARI 1 day Rainfall Depth by 2025
Possible increase in stormwater runoff was obtained using the runoff model developed in Chapter7
(See the 7.6 for model detail). Peak discharge and total runoff volume of each sub-basin are tabulated
in Table 8.3.5 and the figures indicate approximately 30% increase in runoff volume.
Table 8.3.5 Peak Discharge and Runoff Volume under Future Climate Condition
Peak Peak
Runoff volume Runoff volume
discharge discharge
Sub-basin (1000m3) Sub-basin (1000m3)
(m3/s) (m3/s)
Current 2025** Current 2025** Current 2025** Current 2025**
11 51.7 68.3 418.3 554.4 6 20.5 25.9 63.0 80.8
12 12.2 15.6 47.3 61.8 91 9.4 12.1 20.5 27.0
13 18.8 23.9 67.6 86.8 92 2.5 3.3 5.1 6.9
Total
62.9 82.1 533.2 703.0 93 4.5 5.9 9.3 12.5
(11+12+13)
21 41.5 55.5 440.4 589.5 94 3.8 4.8 8.8 11.4
8.0 10.6 17.7 24.2
22 71.1 95.0 421.7 568.5 95
(27.0)* (36.3)* (147.5)* (201.7)*
23 26.5 34.8 139.7 186.4 96 10.1 13.4 19.5 26.7
Total
120.6 160.9 1001.8 1344.4 97 6.4 8.3 14.8 20.0
(21+22+23)
3 22.3 29.5 77.9 105.5 98 15.3 19.7 55.4 72.4
9.1 11.9 23.7 31.9
4 47.2 62.3 274.7 365.9 99
(21.9)* (28.7)* (55.2)* (74.9)*
51 43.0 54.5 175.4 225.3
52 15.2 19.1 59.7 76.1
Total
56.1 71.2 235.1 301.5
(51+52)
* Numbers in parenthesis are figure of alternative 2
** 20% increase in rainfall assumed for 2025

Table 8.3.6 shows comparison of proposed retarding area capacity and necessary runoff volume to be
detained in order to avoid inundation in major residential areas. The figures in the table indicate
proposed retarding areas are able to accommodate possible runoff increase as a result of climate
change.

8-38 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 8.3.6 Capacity of Proposed Ponds and Runoff Volume to be Detained

Capacity of Retarding Area Runoff Volume to be Detained(1000m3)
Sub-basin
(1,000m3) Current 20% Increase
Total(11+12+13) 1,326(below EL 33m) 533 703
Total(21+22+23) 3,811(below EL 33m) 1,002 1,344
6 101(below EL 35m) 63 81

8.3.4 Proposed Adaptation Measures

As described in 8.3.3, flood risk in the target area may increase in 2025 by the climate change impact if
without countermeasures. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce adaptation measures to mitigate or
prevent the incensement of flood damage. The conceivable adaptation measures in the target area are
explained as follows:
(1) Adaptation by Structural Measures
In the Semantan River basin, to protect the target area from river-overflow floods, it is necessary to
take note of the condition that there are constrains to limit further installment of structural measures
except construction of ring bunds as described in 8.2.2. In this respect, range of choice in the target
area is narrowed for selection of adaptation measures by structure, namely, enhancement of ring bunds
and construction of on-site flood-retention pond. However, direct heightening of bunds corresponding
to the water level rising by 50cm in 2025 cannot be recognized as the best way, judging from the
stakeholders opinion to keep beautification of landscape and not to increase flood risk in case of
collapse of bunds.
Adaptations for these structural measures are as enumerated hereinafter.
(a) Enhancement of ring bunds
The adaptation by structural measures aims to strengthen the proposed dike body to prevent
seepage failure due to increase of flood duration and to avoid collapse of dike by overtopping
caused by future water level rising of Semantan River. These measures are described in Table
8.3.7.
The selection of those measures should be carried out considering the stakeholders opinion,
condition of river reserve area (woody, flat plain, existing of obstacles), hydrological condition,
cost for construction and other constrains. The result of simple evaluation for these measures are
also summarized in Table 8.3.7.
Table 8.3.7 Conceivable Adaptation Measures in Non-Structural
Category Contents Evaluation Remarks
Control of Gentle slope of bunds* Proposed bunds: 1 to 3
P
seepage to bund slope
body Slope protection works of riverside slope
(considering A
by penetrate poorly material
extension of Enlargement bunds width B
flood duration) Installment of drainage structure at back Proposed bunds
P
slope toe* contains
Blanket works (Covering the high water
B
bed)
Installment of sheet pile screen at riverside
B
slope toe
Securement of river reserve area for future For enlargement of
A
enlargement of bund bunds
Periodic inspection and monitoring A
Prevention of Heightening Dike B
over-flow by Installment of parapet at crown of dike C Not sustainable
water level Securement of river reserve area For enlargement of
rising A
bunds
A: recommendable, B: recommendable but costly, P: including in proposed bunds, C: not recommendable

(b) Placement of Retention ponds

According to 8.3.3, increased runoff volume of inland flood of the target area by the climate change
impact can be absorbed by the proposed retarding basin. However, to keep this condition, the

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-39

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

onsite flood retention pond should be constructed to cover retention capacity of land so as to offset
the increment of inland flood runoff discharge induced by development of the target area and its
surrounding area. As for the retention pond, land developers shall construct them in accordance
with MASMA.
(2) Adaptation by Non-Structural Measures
At present, variety of non-structural measures and activities have been introduced and proposed in the
target area as explained in 8.2. All of those measures and activities have a capacity to be utilized as
adaptation measures to the future climate change impact. Therefore, enhancement and enforcement of
the existing and proposed measures are most effective way to adapt to climate change impact by
non-structural measure. In addition, basin-wide land use control is also necessary to prevent adverse
alternation of discharge and sediment runoff in Semantan River Basin as mentioned in Volume 1 of
this preparatory survey.
Under the circumstance, especially, 1) review of hazard map, 2) upgrading of evacuation system, are
necessary as practical adaptation measures to follow further alteration by the impact in the target area.
Those measures should be reviewed and modified when IPCC issued their assessment report. The
contents of those adaptation measures are explained as follows:
(a) Revision of hazard map
According to the risk assessment, the inundation area in 2025 might increase 24 % compared with
the present condition in the target area. This means that the hazard map, which is proposed in this
study, should include the future condition in prospect of establishment of evacuation system. In
addition, the hazard map should be reviewed and revised in accordance with the improvement of
accuracy in RCM and the Assessment Repot by IPCC whenever it is made public. Responsible
agencies are the designated agencies by the guideline “Standard Procedures on Flood Relief
Mechanism in 2001” such as DID and related agencies.
(b) Upgrading of evacuation system
Based on the result of risk assessment, the immediate fatality in the target area might increase 2.4
times compared with the present condition. In addition, the stranded people in 2025 might increase
about 25%. Thus, the flood evacuation system, which is totally managed by DMRC as a part of the
flood risk management, should be modified whenever the hazard map is revised in consideration of
the impact projection. The hazard map would contain important information for evacuees to grasp
evacuation route, location of evacuation center, means of escape and evacuation time, etc. Those
basic information should be reviewed corresponding to increase of flood area and depth by the
impact.
In addition, to deduce such a flood risk, the responsible institutions identified by the guideline
“Standard Procedures on Flood Relief Mechanism in 2001” should confirm preparedness
conditions such as capacity of evacuation center, storage of basic necessities and facilities to
maintain lifelines (helicopter landing spot, rescue boat and so on) in accordance with the guideline.
(3) Adaptation Measures around Target Area
In the outside of protected area by proposed structural measures, endorsement of land use control and
further expansion of flood warning system is necessary to prevent increase of flood damage by climate
change impact. However, in case of new construction of inhabitant area, the area with surrounding
facilities such as road should be raised up to prevent inundation of the area and to secure lifeline
considering the flood water level.
8.4 Implementation Plan
8.4.1 Project Cost
Summary of Project Cost for Temerloh and Mentakab Area is shown in Table 8.4.1. The methodology to
estimate the project costs are described in Chapter 7.

8-40 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 8.4.1 Project Cost for the Proposed Structural Flood Mitigation Measures in
Temerloh and Mentakab Area
Area Item Detail Item Cost(RM million)
Alt-1 Alt-2
Temerloh Construction Base Cost Over all cost 54.12 77.50
Direct cost 44.53 64.18
Indirect cost 7.01 9.63
Contingency 2.58 3.69
Compensation Cost 13.46 4.16
67.58
Mentakab Construction Base Cost Over all cost 35.96 46.18
Direct cost 29.47 38.24
Indirect cost 4.78 5.74
Contingency 1.71 2.20
Compensation Cost 5.30 2.90
41.26 41.26
Total Construction Base Cost Over all cost 90.08 123.67
Direct cost 74.00 102.42
Indirect cost 11.79 15.36
Contingency 4.29 5.89
Total Compensation Cost 18.75 7.06
Construction + Land Acquisition Cost 108.83 130.73
Administration Cost 7.62 9.15
Engineering Cost 14.41 19.78
Summary of the Projet Cost 130.86 159.66
O & M Cost / year 0.45 0.62

8.4.2 Implementation Schedule

(1) Basic Condition of Construction Schedule
The construction schedules will be prepared based on the working quantities for the each work item
through the feasibility study. Each of the scheduled activities contains labors to be assigned and
equipment resources considered with the most appropriate method to particular site conditions and
requirement of the works.
Unit construction schedules for each work item has been analyzed and fixed in this section hereinafter.
(2) Work Quantity of Major Construction Work Items
The major construction work items are divided into following two main work items: (1) Earth Works
(i.e. Excavation and Embankment) and (2) Concreting Works (Outlet structure and Pump station). The
work items and their work volumes are as listed below:
Table 8.4.2 Major Construction Works for Temerloh and Mentakab Site
Area Item Detail Item Unit Quantity
Temerloh Embankment m3 617,917
Upgrading Existing Road-1 m3 41,544
Regulation Pond-1 Excavation m3 33,900
Outlet structure nos 1
Pump Station nos 1
Regulation Pond-2 Excavation m3 283,200
Outlet structure nos 1
Pump Station nos 1
Mentakab Embankment m3 271,316
Upgrading Existing Road-1 m3 33,920
Regulation Pond-3 Excavation m3 157,500
Outlet structure nos 1
Pump Station nos 1
River Gate nos 1

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-41

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(a) Climate Condition

The characteristic of climate at the project area is dominated by the rainy season from October to
March and dry season for the rest of the months.
(b) Available Working Time
In determining the number of working days available for construction activities, the following
factors are considered:
• Working day per week, Working hours per day
• Public Holiday
• Rainfall
• Type of Construction Activity
(i) Working Day per Week, Working Hours per Day
The normal workweek consisting of six (6) working days is adopted for developing all
calendars in the sure track program. All construction schedules are based on an 8-hour per
working day.
(ii) Public Holiday
The following days are excluded from the working calendars as public holidays:
Table 8.4.3 Public Holiday in 2010
Holiday Date
New Year’s Day January 1
Chinese new year February 14-15
Prophet Muhammad’s Burthday February 26
Labor Day May 1
Wesak Day May 28
Birthday of DYMM SPB Yang Di-Pertuan Agong June5
National Day August 31
Hri Raya Puasa September 2 days
Deepavali November 5
Hari Raya Haji November 17
Awal Muharam December 5
Christmas Day December 25
Sub-total of Public Holiday 14 days

In addition, an allowance is made for four (7) extra days on account of special events. Thus,
total number of non-working days accounts for 21 days in this study.
(iii) Daily Rainfall and Annual Working Day
The time lost due to rainfall was based from the rainfall data and the number of rainy days. It
is recognized that the effect of rain on different types of construction activities will vary.
Table 8.4.4 Average Rainy Days
Month Average rainy days
(2006-2009)
Jan 15
Feb 11
Mar 19
April 16
May 11
Jun 12

8-42 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Month Average rainy days

(2006-2009)
July 11
Aug 14
Sept 15
Oct 20
Nov 22
Dec 19
Total 185

In this Study, half of rainy days are assumed workable, account for 92 days to be non working
days.
Based on the previous construction plans under JICA or JBIC projects, the total number of
working days available annually for different activities is established by incorporating all
assessed time losses into the eight (8) items shown in the following table:
Table 8.4.5 Annual Working Day for Major Work
Non
Public workable Annual
Work Item Sunday
Holiday Rainy at Working day
Weekday
Embankment /Backfill 52 21 92 200
Concrete Work 52 21 92 200
Road Work 52 21 92 200

(c) Works Productivity

(i) Earth Works
The performance of the construction machine is assumed as listed in the following table taking
the most suitable machine combination and the reuse of the excavation soil.
Based on the performance of the construction machine, the construction period of earthwork
was estimated. Due to huge volume of earth work, critical paths are attributed to the
construction schedule of earth work for the project.
Table 8.4.6 Performance of Construction Machines in Earth Work
Performance
Item of Earth Work Major Equipment Remarks
Capacity
Common Excavation Bulldozer (32t) 146 m3/hr
Loading Backhoe (1.0m3) 104 m3/hr
Hauling Dump Track (10t) 30.8 m3/hr Distance: 0.5 km.
Dump Track (10t) 8.0 m3/hr Distance: 8 km.
Dump Track (10t) 6.7 m3/hr Distance: 12 km.
Grading & Compaction Bulldozer (21ft) 100 m3/hr Disposal site, Road work
Compaction of Embankment Tamping Roller 55 m3/hr Road Work

(ii) Concrete Work and Revetment Work

Concrete works are also main construction works other than earthwork. The construction
period of concrete of the small structure are estimated based on of the following assumptions:
Table 8.4.7 Performance of Main Construction Work
Item of Work Daily Capacity Remarks
Concrete Work 60 m3/day/party Depending on Concrete Pump

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-43

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

(3) Construction Schedule

In accordance with the program and strategy mentioned above, the entire construction period for the
major work components of the optimum structural plan was assumed as shown in the following table.
Temerloh & Mentakab
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Working Item unit Qunatity
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60

Mobilization & Preparaory Work L.S

Temerloh
(1)Embankment m3 617,017
(2)Upgrading Exisitng Road m3 41,544
(3)Regulation Pond-1
　　　①Excavation m3 33,900
　　　②Outlet Structure nos 1
　　　③Pump Station nos 1
(4)Regulation Pond-2
　　　①Excavation m3 283,200
　　　②Outlet Structure nos 1
　　　③Pump Station nos 1

Mentakab
(1)Embankment m3 271,316
(2)Upgrading Exisitng Road m3 33,920
(3)Regulation Pond-3
　　　①Excavation m3 157,500
　　　②Outlet Structure nos 1
　　　③Pump Station nos 1
(4)River Gate nos 1

(5)Site Clearance/Cleaning L.S

Demobilization L.S
Completion L.S

Figure 8.4.1 Construction Schedule for Temerloh & Mentakab Flood Mitigation Project
8.4.3 Organization for Project implementation
Many other related agencies, especially state government agencies will be involved in the implementation
of the IFM plan. To facilitate the collaboration with these agencies, intervention of the proposed River
Basin Committees as a coordination framework is very important.
(1) Structural Measure
Figure 8.4.2 is a proposed organization chart for the implementation of the IFM Plan. The Federal
DID is the primary implementing agency, supported by the two State DIDs.
River Basin Committee

Management Committee
Implementation Agencies
Interstate
Federal DID Technical Committee
Coordination

State DID State Task Force

Pahang N. Sembilan Pahang

Coordination within State

Coordination within State UPEN
N. Sembilan
Other Agencies
N. Sembilan Coordination within State

Figure 8.4.2 Organization for Implementation

For the State of Pahang, the Task Force should make inter-agency coordination within the state,
but for the State of Negeri Sembilan which has no Task Force for the Pahang River Basin, UPEN

8-44 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

should act for such a Task Force. In addition, interstate coordination will be conducted between
Technical Committee and Federal DID.
The responsibilities for the implementation of the proposed projects in IFM plan are shown in
Table 8.4.8.
Table 8.4.8 Responsibility on Implementation of Structural Measures
Project Management
Funding Planning & Construction O&M
Design Supervision
MoF ○
Federal DID ○ ○ ○
State DID ○ ○

• Funding Management: project funding is managed by Ministry of Finance and Federal

DID. Ministry of Finance is a primary body to approve and monitor the use of project
budget. As a implementation agency, Federal DID is responsible for the management of
overall project budget during the project implementation.
• Project Management:
- Planning and Design: planning and design of the proposed structural facilities are
carried out under the responsibility of Federal DID based on the design criteria. For
the flood management project, Flood Management Division will be a main
implementation agency for IFM projects.
- Construction Supervision: construction supervision consists of quality assurance and
quality control, construction inspection and supervision, time control, cost control,
health, safety and environmental management, and so on. The federal funded projects
will be supervised by Federal DID, on the other hand, state funded projects will be
supervised by State DID.
• Operation and Maintenance (O&M): the O&M is conducted by State and District DIDs.
According to DID Manual, the planned maintenance works are categorized as follows.
- Preventive maintenance: to carry out at pre-determined intervals or corresponding to
the prescribed criteria, all intended to reduce the probability of failure
- Corrective maintenance: work is done knowing a fault has occurred to restore
mechanically or electrically an installation to normal operation.
- Immediate maintenance: this is necessitated by unforeseen breakdown or damage and
the need to put it right immediately
- Opportunity maintenance: work is done as and when possible within the limits of
operational demand
- Design-out maintenance: this is performed when other forms of maintenance are
inappropriate.
- Condition-based maintenance: this is work initiated by trends highlighted by routine
or continuous monitoring of the condition of the mechanical/electrical installation,
such as general performance of specific parameters.
- Run-to-failure: this requires that the mechanical/electrical installation be safely and
effectively run to destruction without serious loss of their services.
(2) Non-Structural Measure
As for the implementation organization of non-structural measures, the following agencies will
be main implementation agencies.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-45

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 8.4.9 Responsibility on Implementation of Non-Structural Measures

Strategies Measures Implementation Agency
Capacity Development regarding Flood Management District DMRC
Land Use Management Regulation of Land Use for Farmland TCPD (Federal),
and Forest Areas Land Office (State)
Encouraging Construction of Raising Local Authority
Houses
Utilization of Flood Hazard Map on DID (Federal & State)
Regulation of Land Use TCPD (Federal)
Upgrading Flood Forecasting and Upgrading Flood Forecasting &
Warning System Warning System DID (State)
Enhancement of Flood Evacuation
System in Community Level
District DMRC
Flood Fighting District DMRC
Upgrading of Inforbanjir System DID (Federal)
Upgrading of Communication System DID (Federal)
Preparation of Hazard Map and Preparation & Utilization of Flood DID (Federal & State)
Guidelines/Manuals Hazard Maps
Guideline for Monitoring and
Inspection of Bunds
DID (Federal)
Operation Manuals for Flood Control
Facility
DID (Federal)
Guideline for Flood Fighting
Activities, Climate Change, etc. DID (Federal)

• Capacity Development regarding Flood Management:

- Some of the following proposed non-structural measures regarding the flood
management are new challenging activities in Malaysia. Especially, preparation and
utilization of flood hazard maps and implementation of community-based flood
management are currently started, but so far have not been well organized. Therefore,
for the acceleration of these activities, the capacity building programs shall be
planned and conducted by District Disaster Management and Relief Committee
(DMRC) involving the various flood related agencies.
• Upgrading Flood Forecasting and Warning System:
- The existing flood forecasting and warning system shall be upgraded and well
maintained under the jurisdiction of State DID.
- Flood evacuation system contains a wide variety of activities to be carried out by
several related agencies. Therefore, Distric DMRC will be a main body for the
implementation of planned programs.
- Since the flood control facilities including bunds, pump stations, gage, etc. are
proposed to be newly constructed in the targeted areas, the flood fighting activities
shall be planned and conducted.
- Federal DID needs to develop and upgrade the flood information dissemination tool
named “Infobanjir” system.
- In order to ensure the smooth information flow among the responsible agencies on
flood responses, the communication tools shall be upgraded by Federal DID.
• Preparation of Hazard Map and Guidelines/Manuals:
- The preparation of flood hazard maps will be conducted by Federal DID, and the
utilization and dissemination shall be promoted by State DID together with other
relevant state agencies.
- Before, during and after the flood disaster occurrence, the conditions and damages of
bunds shall be inspected to secure the function of the bunds. Therefore, the manuals
on the monitoring and inspection of bunds shall be formulated by Federal DID.

8-46 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

- In order to minimize the flood disaster damages, the flood control facilities need to be
operated based on the defined operational procedures. Thus, the operational manuals
including the operational procedures shall be prepared by Federal DID.
- For the smooth and effective flood fighting activities, guidelines for the planning,
developing and implementing the flood fighting activities shall be formulated by
Federal DID and disseminated to the relevant agencies through DMRCs.
• Land Use Management:
- In accordance with land use regulation, Town and Country Planning Department
(TCPD) has jurisdiction of land use planning in the form of national physical plan,
structure plan and local plan, and Land Office is responsible to regulate the land use in
each district. As proposed in the non-structural measures, land use shall be regulated
in consideration with flood management.
- In order to avoid the inundation of residence houses, it is recommended to raise the
house for the resistance against flood damages. Local authorities has jurisdiction for
the promotion of flood resistant houses.
- The prepared flood hazard maps shall be utilized and disseminated for the effective
land regulation driven by DID in cooperation with TCPD.
8.4.4 Economic Evaluation and Financial Considerations
(1) Economic Evaluation
(a) Projection of Population and Number of Houses/Shops
The population of the target area in 2025 was projected by applying the weighted average of
projected growth rates in Perak Sub-district and Mentakab Sub-district of Pahang State. The
number of houses was estimated applying an average family size of the sub-districts. The number
of shops were estimated using the average number of shops to households in the target area, which
was obtained in the asset survey. Projection results are as follows:
Table 8.4.10 Projection of Population and Number of Houses/Shops of Semantan
2009 2025
Population 67,000 104,000
Houses 15,000 24,000
Shops 1,000 1,500

Increased houses were distributed in the housing areas which was designated by the land use plan
so that the population density does not exceeds the highest figure in 2009 and they were not
allocated where the retarding ponds are planned.
(b) Economic Costs
Economic costs were estimated by applying the standard conversion factor to that in market prices.
They are shown in the following Tables.
Table 8.4.11 Economic Cost (Alternative 1)
(Unit: RM '000)
Item Economic Cost
Construction
(a) Flood Protection Bund at Mentakab 10,579
(b) Flood Protection Bund at Temerloh 23,449
(c) Road 7,727
(d) Ponds 26,756
(e) River Gates 8,057
Total 76,569
Land Acquisition Cost 15,938
Administration Cost 6,475
Engineering Services 12,251
Total Initial Cost 111,233
O&M (yearly) 383

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-47

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 8.4.12 Economic Cost (Alternative 2)

(Unit: RM '000)
Item Economic Cost
Construction
(a) Flood Protection Bund at Mentakab 6,590
(b) Flood Protection Bund at Temerloh 33,756
(c) River Excavation at Mentakab 14,113
(d) River Excavation at Temerloh 11,960
(e) Pumping Stations 8,322
(f) River Gates 30,381
Total 105,122
Land Acquisition Cost 6,001
Administration Cost 7,779
Engineering Services 16,819
Total Initial Cost 135,721
O&M (yearly) 526

(c) Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction

Annual flow of benefit was calculated in the form of expected annual average of damage reduction
(EAADR). EAADRs are calculated for 2009 and 2025. Those between the two years were
estimated by interpolation method and those after 2025 were flattened. Calculation results in
20025 are shown below:
Table 8.4.13 Expected Annual Average of Damage Reduction in 2025 (Altenative 1 & 2)
(Unit: RM)
Flood Damage Average
Return Damage
Without the With the Damage Expectation Benefit
Period Reduction
Project Project Reduction
1 0 0 0
652,635 0.500 326,318
2 2,048,353 743,083 1,305,270
17,320,843 0.300 5,196,253
5 45,065,593 11,729,178 33,336,415
43,513,151 0.100 4,351,315
10 77,046,336 23,356,449 53,689,887
95,137,853 0.050 4,756,893
20 180,093,603 43,507,785 136,585,818
185,017,357 0.017 3,083,623
30 288,772,904 55,324,009 233,448,896
324,352,538 0.013 4,324,701
50 494,299,891 79,043,711 415,256,180
541,822,809 0.010 5,418,228
100 777,971,955 109,582,517 668,389,438
Annual Average Benefit 27,457,329

(d) Summary of Costs and Benefits

Calculated costs and benefits are summarized in the following tables, which are the basis of the
EIRR, NPV and B/C calculation.
Table 8.4.14 Summary of Costs and Benefits in Economic Prices (Alternative 1)
(Unit: RM '000)
Cost Net
Year Benefit
Const. Land E/S Admin. O&M Replace Salvage Total Benefit
2012 3,828 3,828 0 -3,828
2013 25,523 15,938 2,902 2,808 47,170 0 -47,170
2014 25,523 1,787 2,808 30,117 0 -30,117
2015 25,523 1,787 2,808 30,117 0 -30,117
2016 383 383 16,458 16,075
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
2064 383 383 23,339 22,956
2065 383 -8,075 -7,692 23,339 31,031
Total 76,569 15,938 6,475 12,251 19,142 32,300 -8,075 154,600 1,130,755 976,155

8-48 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 8.4.15 Summary of Costs and Benefits in Economic Prices (Alternative 2)

(Unit: RM '000)
Cost Net
Year Benefit
Const. Land E/S Admin. O&M Replace Salvage Total Benefit
2012 5,256 5,256 0 -5,256
2013 35,041 6,001 2,873 3,854 47,769 0 -47,769
2014 35,041 2,453 3,854 41,348 0 -41,348
2015 35,041 2,453 3,854 41,348 0 -41,348
2016 526 526 16,458 15,932
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
2064 526 526 23,339 22,813
2065 526 -7,328 -6,803 23,339 30,141
Total 105,122 6,001 7,779 16,819 26,280 29,313 -7,328 183,986 1,130,755 946,769

(e) EIRR, B/C and NPV of the Project, and their Sensitivity Analysis
Calculation results of EIRR, B/C and NPV of the project are shown below. In addition their
sensitivity was checked either by increasing the costs or by decreasing the benefit from the base
case.
Table 8.4.16 EIRR, B/C and NPV of the Project, and their Sensitivity (Alternative 1)
Base Case Cost 5% Up Cost 10% Up Benefit 5% Down Benefit 10% Down
EIRR (%) 14.68 14,10 13.57 14.08 13.45
B/C 1.56 1.48 1.42 1.48 1.40
NPV (RM '000) 50,328 45,825 41,321 43,308 36,289
Note: 10% discount rate is applied to B/C and NPV calculations.

Table 8.4.17 EIRR, B/C and NPV of the Project, and their Sensitivity (Alternative 2)
Base Case Cost 5% Up Cost 10% Up Benefit 5% Down Benefit 10% Down
EIRR (%) 12.55 12.03 11.55 12.00 11.45
B/C 1.29 1.23 1.17 1.23 1.16
NPV (RM '000) 31,628 26,190 20,751 24.608 17,588
Note: 10% discount rate is applied to B/C and NPV calculations.

(f) Evaluation
For both Alternative 1 and 2, the results of EIRR, B/C and NPV calculation show the proposed
project is feasible from the viewpoint of the investment efficiency or contribution to the growth of
national economy. In addition, following positive effects, which are difficult to quantify in
monetary terms, can be itemized after the project implementation.
• Contribution to the future economic development of the area as the reduction of concern about
business suspension/damage (the area is planned to be a nucleated city in the region in the
future)
• Contribution to the increase of employment for the local people by construction works
• Improvement of sanitary conditions due to the mitigation of inundation which is one of the
major reasons of water borne diseases
• Improvement of landscape, which contributes to the amenity of the area
• Improvement of awareness of the local people about floods and other disasters
(2) Financial Consideration
Here is to be examined the impact of the finance for the project (Alternative 1) on the fiscal conditions
of the Federal and local governments. It is assumed that the investment cost (construction and
engineering, excluding taxes) is financed by a soft loan of Japanese ODA scheme. Cost items of the
project are shown below.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-49

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 8.4.18 Cost Items of Project (Alternative 1)

Value (RM '000) Initial Project Cost Covered by Loan
Construction 90,081 √ √ (Excl. taxes)
Engineering 14,413 √ √ (Excl. taxes)
Land Acquisition 18,750 √
Administration 7,618 √
O&M (yearly) 450

Terms and conditions of the soft loan are assumed as follows.

Table 8.4.19 Assumed Terms and Conditions of Loan
Interest Rate (%) Loan Period (year) Grace Period (year)
Construction 1.70 25 7
Engineering 0.01 25 7
Note: It should be noted that the provision as well as the terms and conditions of loan for the
proposed project have neither been officially decided nor announced by JICA. In addition,
all the project costs of construction and engineering services are not necessarily covered by
the Japanese ODA loan.

Taxes are assumed to be 10% of the price here. Repayment and interest payment of the loan were
calculated as follows:
Table 8.4.20 Repayment and Interest Payment of Loan (Alternative 1)
(Unit: RM '000)
Loan Disburse Repayment Interest Payment Payment
Year
Const. E/S Const. E/S Const. E/S Total
2012 649 0.00
2013 27,024 2,973 0.06 0.06
2014 27,024 2,973 459 0.36 459.78
2015 27,024 2,973 919 0.66 919.49
2016 1,378 0.96 1,379.20
2017 1,378 0.96 1,379.20
2018 1,378 0.96 1,379.20
2019 36 1,378 0.96 1,415.23
2020 1,501 201 1,378 0.95 3,081.72
2021 3,003 366 1,353 0.93 4,722.68
2022 4,504 531 1,302 0.90 6,338.09
2023 4,504 531 1,225 0.84 6,261.47
2024 4,504 531 1,149 0.79 6,184.85
2025 4,504 531 1,072 0.74 6,108.23
2026 4,504 531 995 0.68 6,031.60
2027 4,504 531 919 0.63 5,954.98
2028 4,504 531 842 0.58 5,878.36
2029 4,504 531 766 0.52 5,801.74
2030 4,504 531 689 0.47 5,725.12
2031 4,504 531 613 0.42 5,648.49
2032 4,504 531 536 0.36 5,571.87
2033 4,504 531 459 0.31 5,495.25
2034 4,504 531 383 0.26 5,418.63
2035 4,504 531 306 0.21 5,342.01
2036 4,504 531 230 0.15 5,265.38
2037 4,504 495 153 0.10 5,152.73
2038 3,003 330 77 0.05 3,409.61
2039 1,501 165 26 0.02 1,692.04
Total 81,073 9,567 81,073 9,567 21,363 14.83 112,016.99

The maximum payment for the loan is RM 6.338 million in 2022. On the other hand, development
expenditure for economic services and social services of the Federal Government in last five years are
shown in the table below. Combined population share of Pahang State amounts to 5.5% of Malaysia,
and 5.5% of the average development expenditure for economic services and social services is RM

8-50 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

777 million in a year. Thus, RM 6.338 million is equivalent to only 0.82% of RM 777 million, which
deems to have little impact on the financial condition.
Table 8.4.21 Federal Development Expenditure for Economic Services and Social Services
(Unit: RM Million)
Development
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Average
Expenditure
Economic 2,881 2,482 3,999 3,842 4,184 3,478
Social 10,260 7,450 9,525 12,893 13,717 10,769
Total 13,141 9,932 13,524 16,735 17,901 14,247
Source: National Bank of Malaysia (NBM)

O&M budget of Temerloh District DID is shown in the table below. Yearly O&M cost for the project
amounts to RM 450 thousand, which is equivalent to 2.45 times of the total of the District DID O&M
budget. Federal and State Governments will be required to support the District DID financially if the
project is implemented.
Table 8.4.22 O&M Budget of Temerloh District DID
(Unit: RM '000)
District 2006 2007 2008 2009 Average
Temerloh 137 191 191 219 184
Source: Department of Irrigation and Drainage

8.5 Environmental and Social Consideration

8.5.1 Introduction
Environmental law (Environmental Quality Act 1974) was enacted as an environmental-related law of
Malaysia in 1974. Under this law, the regulation and orders of 33 environmental relations are enacted. Of
these, in the Environmental Quality (Prescribed Activities) (Environmental Impact Assessment ) Order
1987, a project (Activities), of which a duty of enforcement of EIA and preparation of an EIA report is
imposed, is mentioned as "Prescribed Activities".
In accordance with Environmental Quality Act, proposed projects of this study do not come under the
“Prescribed Activities” mentioned above. Therefore, it is not necessary to submit an EIA report for the
projects. However, for the implementation of projects, a duty of planning and implementation of EMP
(Environmental Management Plan) is imposed by DOE.
On the other hand, DID has a manual which consists of 11 volumes. DID stipulates in the volume 11 of
the manual that construction contractors are required an implementation of environmental management,
and occupational safety and health management during construction period in accordance with the
Environmental Quality Act and the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994.
From above situation, JICA Study Team carried out an Initial Environmental Examination (hereinafter
referred to as IEE) in order to predict and evaluate the impact on social and natural environment around
proposed project area caused by the implementation of proposed projects, and to obtain the basic data for
environmental management plan which the Malaysia side will establish for project implementation.
Through this study, three (3) alternatives are proposed as a flood mitigation structural measure. IEE study
for three (3) alternatives shown in the Table 8.5.1 has been carried out.

Table 8.5.1 Alternatives of Structural Measure for the Temerloh Flood Mitigation Project
Project Project Components
I Alternative-1 Bund, Pump Station, Gate
II Alternative-2 Short-cut, Bund, Pump Station, Gate
III Alternative-3 No Measure

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-51

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

8.5.2 Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE)

(1) Objectives of IEE
The IEE study will include the following items of work:
• To identify the environmental elements, which would receive the adverse impacts by the
implementation of the proposed projects;
• To assess the impacts on the environmental elements;
• To identify possible mitigation measures of the impacts where they exceed the allowable limit.
Then, the optimum monitoring plans for the impact are identified; and
• To perform the category classification in accordance with the JICA guideline.
(2) Survey Items/ Contents of IEE Level Study
Survey items or contents of IEE are shown below.
(a) Arrangement of Existing Environmental Conditions of the Project Area.
The existing environmental conditions are adopted as the baseline for the environmental
assessment of the proposed projects. The conditions are finalized by reviewing the other previous
report, collecting data necessary, and interviewing with the concerned people/ organizations.
(b) Identification of Major Environmental items thorough Field Survey
The environmental elements to be assessed are identified by the two-dimensional matrix method.
Those environmental elements cover three categorized elements of social and natural
environments and public hazard, which are further subdivided into several elements, respectively,
as enumerated below. The field survey was conducted to confirm those eenvironmental Elements.
(1) Social Environmental Element includes: (a) involuntary resettlement and land acquisition; (b)
impact on livelihood and local economy; (c) change in land use; (d) social institution; (e) social
service and infrastructure; (f) poverty, indigenous people and ethnic minority; (g) uneven
distributed losses and benefits; (h) historical and archaeological site; (i) regional conflicts of
interests; (j) water use; and (k) fishery.
(2) Natural Environmental Element includes: (a) topography and geology; (b) groundwater; (c) soil
erosion; (d) river flow regime; (e) seashore; (f) fauna, flora and ecological diversity; (g) landscape;
and (h) global warming.
(3) Public Hazardous Element includes: (a) air pollution; (b) water pollution; (c) soil pollution; (d)
solid waste; (e) noise and vibration; (f) ground subsidence; and (j) odor.
The matrix is prepared for both construction and operation phases. The adverse impacts are
evaluated in terms of: (1) magnitude/extent; (2) occurrence probability; and (3) duration. These are
then scored from A to C; namely, (A) stands for large impact, (B) for medium impact, (C) for
uncertain, and No Score for no or negligible impact. In this study, the following criteria are applied
for A and B.
A: Magnitude/extent of the impact is large and it continues for a long time or it will not recover.
B: All impacts other than A. Even if the magnitude/extent of the impact is large, the impact is
categorized as B when it is temporary and recovery is made in the near future.
(3) Result of IEE
(a) Existing Environmental Condition
Existing environmental condition in the project area (around Mentakab and Temerloh towns) is
described in Table 8.5.2 and Table 8.5.3.

8-52 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 8.5.2 Major Environmental Setting in the Project Area (Temerloh)

Items Description
Project Name Flood Mitigation Measure
Social Local Residents Population of the Temerloh area, population of Mukim is 38,216,
Environment population of city area is 6,224 (Population and housing census
of Malaysia 2000)
Ethnic group in the Temerloh are is mainly composed of Malays,
Chinese and Indians. The population of the Malays is the largest.
Land Use - Land use of town area is mainly composed of housing area,
institutions and public services and business and services
area
- Planned short-cut area and bund area are almost composed
of agricultural land where palm tree and rubber tree
plantation, farmland and grass land etc. Very small numbers
of houses are distributed.
Economy - Temerloh town is a central town of the Temerloh area.
/ Transportation - National road No.2 passes through the Temerloh town. In
the area of surrounding planned bund, there are many
commercial establishments and government and other
offices.
- There are many fishery cages in the Semantan rive for
aquaculture. Numbers of cages are around 155 based on the
result of IEE
Natural Topography/ - Topography around the Temerloh Area is composed of
Environment Geology valley and hills.
- A valley consists of swamps in general.
- At the time of flooding, flood water from the Semantan Rive
and Pahang River run into the town area.
- The altitude of hills of a town area is around 40m.
- Geology around Temerloh area is consisted of sedimentary
rocks which were formed in the Triassic period to the
Jurassic period in the Mesozoic era.
Generally, ground surface of hills are weathered and becomes
clayey soil.
Surroundings of the Surroundings of the river around planned bund area generally
River flatlands are distributing.
Valuable fauna and flora There is no protected area, reserved area and national park in and
around the proposed project area. From the result of IEE, there is
no endangered and endemic fauna and flora in and around the
proposed project area.
Pollution Situation of occurrence - There is no source of the outbreak of air pollution.
of - About water pollution, the place drainage of the Semantan
Air pollution, Water river where drained from town area directly can be seen (city
Contamination, Noise drainage network). Moreover, a lot of garbage is flowing
into the Semantan river simultaneously from this drainage
network.
- Main national highways pass through the Temerloh town
area, and it has become a source of the noise of a car etc.
However, there is no source where generates remarkable
loud noise.
Response to above There is no trace currently carried out at all in present condition.
situation
Items deserving In the Temerloh area, it was suffered flood damage for 1971, 2006, and 2007 frequently as the
special mention start. For the stabilized economical activities and development, an immediate countermeasure
against a flood is required.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-53

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 8.5.3 Major Environmental Setting in the Project Area (Mentakab)

Items Description
Project Name Flood Mitigation Measure
Social Local Residents Population of the Mentekab area, population of Mukim is 42,267,
Environment population of city area is 14,442 (as of 2000, Population and
housing census of Malaysia 2000)
Ethnic group in the Mentekab are is mainly composed of Malays,
Chinese and Indians. The population of the Chinese is the largest.
Land Use - Land use of the proposed bund area is mainly composed of
empty land and partially institutions and public services.
However, based on the IEE field survey there are many
houses and farm land.
- On the other hand, planned short-cut area is almost composed
of agricultural land where palm tree and rubber tree
plantation, farmland and grass land etc. Very small numbers
of houses are distributed.
Southern part of the national road is developing as housing area.
Economy Although, Mentekab town is a town which neighboring the
/ Transportation Temerloh town, population is larger than Temerloh town.
The national road No. 2 has divided town area into 2 pieces. The
circumference of the national road No. 2 serves as commerce and
the center of service.
Natural Topography/ - The project area is located in the right side bank of the
Environment Geology Semantan river which is a branch of the Pahang river. Since
Semantan river meanders around the project area,
geographical feature of the project area forms a peninsula
like feature. Geographical feature of hilly land of the project
area is comparatively rich in ups and downs. Lowland areas
are composed of old river channel of the Semantan river and
the geographical feature eroded by the branch of the
Semantan river.
- There are three (3) steps of flat land between river-bed to the
top of hilly land.
- The lowest flatland is used as farmland or a wood land. A
residential area and commercial area distribute on the second
step of flatland.
- The left side bank of the Semantan river is consisted of a hilly
land where altitude of ground surface is higher than the
right-side bank.
- Geology around Temerloh area is consisted of sedimentary
rocks which were formed in the Triassic period to the
Jurassic period in the Mesozoic era.
Generally, ground surface of hills are weathered and becomes
clayey soil.
Surroundings of the River Slopes along the river forms steep slope which was formed by
erosion of the Semantan river.
In the eastern part project area, there is also a place where the
residential area spreads out near the river.
Valuable fauna and flora There is no protected area, reserved area and national park in and
around the proposed project area. From the result of IEE, there is
no endangered and endemic fauna and flora in and around the
proposed project area.
Pollution Situation of occurrence of There is no source of the outbreak of air pollution. A cause of
Air pollution, Water existing water pollution is thought to be a sediment discharge due
Contamination, Noise to soil erosion. Cause of the soil erosion is thought to be a slope
failure along the river. By IEE field survey, some of slopes
failures along the existing river stream were identified. This
situation will impact not only on water pollution but also on land
use.
Response to above On the opposite side of the Semantan river, at the northern part of
situation the project area, DID was carried out a construction work for the
slope protection. Moreover, at the western part of the project area,
slope protection work was carried out but no function due to
further erosion by the river flow.
Items deserving In the Temerloh area, it was suffered flood damage for 1971, 2006, and 2007 frequently as the
special mention start. For the stabilized economical activities and development, an immediate countermeasure
against a flood is required.

8-54 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(b) Scoping Results

Scoping results based on the IEE are shown in Table 8.5.4, which shows almost the same
evaluation levels (Rating) for both Alternative-1 and Alternative-2 in each evaluation element.
However, the impact of Alternatives-2 is considered to be slightly larger compared with
Alternative-1 in terms of social and natural environmental aspect.
Table 8.5.4 Scoping Result
Rating
Impact a Brief Description
Alt-1 Alt-2
S ocial Environment: *Regarding the impacts on “Gender” and “Children’s Right”, might be related to all criteria of Social Environment.
For this project , EIA is not required in accordance with Malaysian Law.
Process of EIA and Environment al related
1 - - However, appropriate Environment al Management Plan will need t o be
approval
conduct ed during const ruction stage.

In order t o disseminate the plan of proposed project a stekeholder meeting was

2 Public Announcement - - held on 25t h August 2010.

T otal number of Houses which are necessary to relocate for Alternative-1 is

3 Involunt ary Resett lement B B larger t han Alternat ive-2.

Local economy such as employment and Impact on aquaculture can be t hought in case of Alt ernative-2.
4 livelihoods, etc. D B

5 Land use and ut ilization of local resources B B Existing roads t hat int ersect the bund shoul be relocat ed.

Social instit utions such as social infrast ructure

6 and local decision-making instit utions D D Impact can hardly be considered.

Near theMentakab, impact on traffic at the t ime of upgrading of existing road

7 Existing social infrast ructure and services B B can be considered.
Existing roads t hat int ersect the bund shoul be relocat ed.
8 T he poor, indigenous and ethnic people D D Impact can hardly be considered.
9 Misdistribution of benefit and damage D D Impact can hardly be considered.
10 Cultural heritage D D Impact can hardly be considered.
11 Local conflict of interests D D Impact can hardly be considered.
Water usage or Water Right s and Rights of
12 Common D B Impact on aquaculture can be t hought in case of Alt ernative-2.

Generat ing of the gabage under construct ion should be cont rolled. It is necessary
13 Sanit at ion D D to perform suitable processing.
14 Infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS B B A risk by inflow of t he const ruction person concerned can be considered.
15 Gender D D Impact can hardly be considered.
16 Rights of children D D Impact can hardly be considered.
Natural Environment
T opographical alt eration is occurred due to const ruction bund, short-cut. Impact
17 T opography and geological features B B of Alt ernative-2 is larger t han Alternative-1.
It is t hought t hat eart hwork for construction of a new bund and short -cut may
18 Soil erosion B B trigger a soil erosion.T herefore, this impact due t o Alternat ive-2 is larger than
alternat ive-1
19 Groundwater D D Impact can hardly be considered.
20 Hydorological Sit uat ion B B Plus impact by flood reduction can be considered..
(Mangroves, Coral reefs, T idal flats, et c.)
21 Coastasl Zone D D Impact can hardly be considered.

Almost all areas are composed of agriculturel land, palm and rubber field.
T herefore, dist ribution of nat ural plant is t hought t o be rare. And t here is no
endangered and endemic species in the project site. T herefore, impact on Flora,
22 Flora, Fauna and Biodivesity B B Fauna and Biodiversity is t hought t o be small.
Impact on t his it rem, Alt ernat ive-2 is larger t han Alternative-1 because of
const ruction short-cut .
23 Meteorology D D Impact can hardly be considered.
Impact on landscape of Alternat ive-2 is larger than Alt ernative-1. Because of
24 Landscape B B const ruction short-cut . Const ruction of Bund 6 t o7m in height may be impact
on landscape.
25 Global Warming D D Impact can hardly be considered.
Pollution
It is expected t hat dust and an exhaust gas increase temporarily by use of the
heavy indust rial machine during construction.
26 Air Pollution B B After const ruction does not generate t he problem of air pollution.
Impact on t his it em, Alternative-2 is larger than Alternat ive-1 because of
const ruction short-cut .
It is expected t hat t he outflow of earth and soil(soil erosion) t emporarily with
the digging work during construct ion. Appropriate soil erosion and sediment
27 Water Pollut ion B B control met hod are necessary. Impact on water pollution of Alt ernative-2 is
larger t han Alternat ive-1.
Some contaminat ion can be considered by t he outflow of t he oil and fat during
28 Soil Contanminat ion B B const ruction etc.
Problem about disposal of the garbage and filth during const ruction may occur.
A suitable disposal of digging eart h and sand is required.
29 Waste B B Bot h of Alternat ive-1 and 2, excavat ed soil generat ed by construct ion short-cut
and pond can utilise for banking materials of the bund.
T here is a possiblity t hat noise and vibrat ion occur somewhat by heavy machine
30 Noise and Vibrat ion B B use during construct ion. Adequate noise and vibrat ion cont rol is necessary t o
conduct .
31 Ground Subsidence D D Impact can hardly be considered.
32 Offensive Odor D D Impact can hardly be considered.
33 Bot tom sediment D D Impact can hardly be considered.
A risk of the t raffic accident by t he passing vehicle under construct ion can be
34 Accidents B B considered.Moreover, it is necessary to perform suitable safet y education and
measures against accident in t he const ruction phase.
Rating:
A: Serious impact is expected.
B: Some impact is expect ed.
C: Extent of impact is unknown (Examinat ion is needed. Impacts may become clear as st udy progresses.)
D: Impact can hardly be considered.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-55

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Bold type in the table indicates larger impact compared to the other alternative for elements
evaluated as B for both Alternative-1 and 2.
(c) Scoping Matrix
Detailed evaluation in each element is described in Table 8.5.5, which shows scoping matrix for
both Alternative-1 and Alternative-2.
Table 8.5.5 Scoping Matrix
Name of Cooperation Project
Planning Phase Construction Operation Phase
Phase

Change of Land use plan, Control of various

activities by regulations for the construction

Detention Lond and other related facilities

Operation of Construction Equipment and

Construction of Bund, Diversion channel,

Transportation of Construction Materials

Alteration to ground by cut land, filling,

Traffic Restriction in construction area

Appearance/ Occupancy of Bund

and related building structures

Increasing influx of settlers

Change of River Flow
Overall Rating

drilling, tunnel, etc.

Land acquisition

and Equipment

Deforestation

Vehicles
No. Likely Impacts
Involuntary Resettlement/ Land
1 B B B
Acquisition
*Regarding the impacts on “Gender” and “Children’s

Local economy such as employment

2 B B B B B
Right”, might be related to all criteria of Social

and livelihood, etc.

Land use and utilization of local
3 B B B B B
resources
Social institutions such as social
4 infrastructure and local D
Social Environment:

decision-making institutions
Environment.

Existing social infrastructures and

5 B B B B
services
6 The poor, indigenous and ethnic people D
7 Misdistribution of benefit and damage D
8 Cultural heritage D
9 Local conflict of interests D
Water Usage or Water Rights and
10 D
Rights of Common
11 Sanitation D
12 Infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS B B
13 Gender D
14 Rights of Children D
15 Topography and Geographical features B B B
Natural Environment

16 Soil Erosion B B B B
17 Groundwater D
18 Hydrological Situation B B+ B+
19 Coastal Zone D
20 Flora, Fauna and Biodiversity B B B B B
21 Meteorology D
22 Landscape B B B
23 Global Warming D
24 Air Pollution B Ｂ B B B
25 Water Pollution B B B B B
26 Soil Contamination B B B B
Pollution

27 Waste B B B B
28 Noise and Vibration B Ｂ B B B
29 Ground Subsidence D
30 Offensive Odor D
31 Bottom sediment D
32 Accidents B B B B

8-56 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Based on the result of scoping, impact of Alternatives-1 and -2 are considered to be almost equal
in terms of social and natural environmental aspect.
(d) Category Classification in accordance with the JICA Guideline
Based on the results of the IEE, proposed Temerloh flood mitigation project is classified as
Category B since potential adverse impacts on the natural and social environment are not
significant. For a project classified Category B, JICA will monitor whether suitable environmental
and social considerations are executed as planned in EMP (Environmental Management Plan)
during the project implementation period if the projects were implemented under the Japanese
ODA loan.
(4) Estimated Environmental and Social Impact
Based on the results of IEE, it is considered that the impact on social and natural environment by
implementation of projects is not significant. However, in this section, the elements which are
considered to have a few impacts are descried.
(a) Impact on Social Environment
Based on the result of IEE, impact on social environment due to implementation of proposed
projects is summarized in Table 8.5.6.
Table 8.5.6 Impact on Social Environment

Description
Items
Alternative-1 Alternative-2 Alternative-3

Involuntary Alternative-1 relocation of 16 Alternative-2 relocation of No structure

Resettlement houses and 1 restaurant is around 8 houses and 1
required. restaurant is required.
Large scale involuntary Large scale involuntary No involuntary
resettlement is not occurred. resettlement is not resettlement
occurred.

Local economy Impact can hardly be In case Alternative-2, No impact

such as employment considered. some of impact on
and livelihoods, etc. aquaculture can be
considered during and
after construction caused
by water flow condition
change.

Land use and A portion of agricultural land A portion of agricultural No impact

utilization f local is necessary to change by land is necessary to change
resources construction bund. by construction bund.
Total area of land acquisition is Total area of land acquisition
62ha.(mainly categorized as is 71ha.(mainly categorized
housing area, but currently forest as housing area, but currently
or agriculture land) forest or agriculture land)

Existing social Impact on traffic at the time Existing road that intersect No impact
infrastructure of upgrading of existing road the bund should be
can be considered. relocated.
Existing road that intersect
the bund should be relocated.

(b) Impact on Natural Environment

Based on the result of IEE, impact on natural environment due to implementation of proposed
projects is summarized in Table 8.5.7.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-57

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Table 8.5.7 Impact on Natural Environment

Items Description
Alternative-1 Alternative-2 Alternative-3
Topography and Topographical alteration can Topographical alteration can No impact
geological features be considered because of be considered because of
construction bund and construction bund and
regulation pond. short-cut.
Soil Erosion Soil erosion can be Soil erosion can be No impact
considered during and after considered during and after
construction regulation pond construction short-cut and
and bund. Area of the bund.
regulation pond is larger than
the area of short- cut of
Alternative-2.
Hydrological Plus impact can be considered because of flood reduction. No impact
Situation
Flora, Fauna and Absence of vegetation covers due to site cleaning activities No impact
Biodiversity prior to earthwork will impact on flora, fauna and
biodiversity. However, existing visitation in the proposed
project area consists of mostly secondary vegetation, and
endangered and endemic species do not distribute in the
proposed area. Impact on flora, fauna and biodiversity is
thought to be small.
Landscape It is considered that construction bund with height 6 to 7m in No impact
Temerloh and Mentakab area may impact landscape.
Short-cut of Alternative-2 will be constructed far from
residential area, on the other hand regulation ponds will be
constructed near residential area.
(c) Pollution
Based on the result of IEE, pollution due to implementation of proposed project is summarized in
Table 8.5.8.
Table 8.5.8 Pollution due to Implementation of Proposed Project
Description
Items
Alternative-1 Alternative-2 Alternative-3
Air Pollution It is considered that dust and exhaust gas increase temporary No impact
by use of the heavy machine and excavation work during
construction phase.
Water Pollution Water pollution due to soil erosion can be considered during No impact
and after construction work bund, regulation pond and
short-cut.
And an outflow of fats and oils during construction work may
trigger water pollution.
Soil contamination Some soil contamination can be considered by an outflow of No impact
fats and oils during construction work.
Waste A problem about A problem about disposal of No impact
disposal of garbage and garbage and filth during
filth during construction construction work can be
work can be considered. considered.
Excavated soil caused by Excavated soil caused by
construction regulation construction short-cut can utilize
pond can utilize for for filling materials of the bund.
filling materials of the
bund.
Noise and Vibration There is a possibility of occurrence of noise and vibration by No impact
heavy machine use during construction work. Especially,
during piling work, generation of loud noise accompany a
construction pump station can be considered.
Accident A risk of the traffic accident by the passing vehicle during No impact
construction work can be considered. It is possible that a
worker causes an accident during construction.

8-58 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

(d) Relation of the Plan for Resettlement of Malaysia and JBIC Guideline
There are following law and regulations related to involuntary resettlement/ land acquisition/
compensation in Malaysia:
- The Federal Constitution;
- The National land Code 1965 (Act 56 of 1965) & Regulations:
- Land Ordinance (Sabah); and
- The Land Acquisition Act 1960, Law of Malaysia Act 486.
In addition, Valuation and Property Services Department (JPPH) will carry out procedure of
resettlement and land acquisition in conformity with The Land Acquisition Act 1960 and other
related regulations.
Figure below shows a general procedure for involuntary resettlement/ land acquisition/
compensation for the existing DID project based on the result of interviews with DID.

(1) Project Plan by Department of Irrigation and Drainage(DID)

(2) Submission of the Project Plan to

District Land Office by District DID

(3) Making of a Report for Assessment of property and land acquisition by the
Resettlement, land Acquisition and compensation Valuation and Property Services Department
by the District Office (Ministry of Finance)

(4) Conference with Residents and Land Stakeholder Meeting

owners by District Land Office If Residents or Land owner has any complaint to the Compensation
, arbitration by Land Court shall be conducted.

(5) Submission of the documents of which

Resetllement, land acquisition and compemsation
to DID Headquater

(6) Approval of resettlement, land acquisition and compensatoin

　　　by DID Headquater

(7) Project implimantation approval by Ministry of Finance

Basically, District Land Office carries out all procedure regarding resettlement, land acquisition
and compensation. Based on the development plan which DID drew up, a District Land Office,
which has jurisdiction over the district, prepares the data and document which will serve as basis
for compensation of a resettlement plan, the number of resettlement and acquired area, etc. and
calculates property by the standard price based on the unit price prepared by JPPH.
Based on the data and documents prepared by a District Land Office, Valuation and Property
Services Department (JPPH) assesses compensation (property) based on the standard price by the
market value.
Unless affected person agree to the compensation plan by JPPH, approval of the project
enforcement by Ministry of Finance is not given.
Moreover, in the case of resettlement, a monitoring will be carried out by the District Land Office
on the affected person after the resettlement.
When affected person have agreed on a resettlement and compensation plan by executing above
mentioned procedure, it is thought that there is almost no gap with the principles of the involuntary

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-59

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

resettlement (the compensation for loss and support for those who receive the loss and influence of
means of living) described in the JBIC Guideline.
On the other hand, in the case of existing development project implemented by DID, generally
information disclosure about a development project to stakeholders or target residents in an early
stage, such as master plan and feasibility study, is not a requirement. This is considered to be a
cause that the procedure concerning resettlement and compensation takes a long period of time for
the existing development project (DID officer said that generally it requires more than two (2)
years).
From this, it is thought be necessary to have a consultation to DID for performing resettlement and
compensation smoothly.
(5) Alternative-3 (Without Countermeasure)
A condition without structural measures can be thought as an alternative for this project. In this case,
there is no impact on social and natural environment. Impact on human life by flood damage cannot
be reduced, furthermore impacts on local economy and social environment due to the occurrence of
flood inundation, sediment intrusion into houses and outflow of crops from a farmland will continue
from now on at the time of flooding.
8.5.3 Discussion on Necessity of EIA with DID
Regarding a necessity of EIA, JICA Study Team had a discussion with DID, which is concluded as
follows:
In accordance with Environmental Quality Act, the proposed projects of this study do not come under the
“Prescribed Activities”. This means that it is not necessary to carry out EIA study for the proposed
projects. In addition, JICA Study Team had a discussion in confirmation of above point at the meeting
that was held on 4th August 2010. As a result of the discussion both Director of Flood Management
Division of DID HQ and Deputy Director of River Basin Management and Coastal Zone Division of DID
HQ concluded that EIA study is not required for the proposed projects. Similar projects has been
implemented without EIA study until now.
8.5.4 Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
(1) Mitigation Plan
Adverse impacts on social environment due to implementation of each alternative were examined as
described 8.5.3. In order to minimize the adverse impact on social environment due to construction of
the bund and shortcut channel, examination was performed in the feasibility study. As a result,
Alternative-1 and 2 were proposed.
Mitigation plan is required to minimize the adverse impact on social and natural environment, and
impact by pollution due to proposed project implementation.
(a) Mitigation Plan for Social Environment
Mitigation measures for adverse impact on social environment are shown in Table 8.5.9.
Table 8.5.9 Mitigation Plan for the Impact on Social Environment
Items Impact Mitigation Plan
Involuntary Alternative-1 relocation of 17 houses and 1 Appropriate compensation for their
Resettlement restaurant is required. property in accordance with the Land
Alternative-2 relocation of around 8 houses Acquisition Act 1960 (Act 486) & Rules
and 1 restaurant is required. and Orders, and land acquisition procedure
Large scale of involuntary resettlement is not by Valuation and Property Services
occurred. Department (JPPH) should be conducted.
The target of compensation is property
including land. JPPH carried out a detailed
study of all losses that can be compensated.
Basically District Land Office carries out all

8-60 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Items Impact Mitigation Plan

procedure/detailed survey regarding
resettlement, land acquisition and
compensation based on the development
plan that drawn by DID. District Land
Office calculates property by the standard
price based on the market value of JPPH.
Then JPPH assesses that.
Local economy In case of Alternative-2, some of impact on For the affected palm and rubber tree
such as agriculture such as palm tree plantation can be plantation industry, appropriate
employment considered to be larger than Alternative-1. compensation for their temporary loss of
and livelihood, Alternative-1, regulation ponds are livelihood in accordance with the
etc constructed. However, land use around compensation procedure by JPPH should be
regulation pond is composed of grass land or conducted.
empty land, therefore impact on livelihood of
local resident is thought to be not serious.
Land use and A portion of agricultural land is necessary to The impact on land use should be reduced
utilization of change by construction bund and detention by consideration of a design. Appropriate
local resources pond. compensation for their loss of livelihood in
accordance with the compensation
procedure by JPPH should be conducted.
Existing social Existing road that intersect the bund and A shifted road should be built.
infrastructure regulation ponds should be relocated. In construction of a shifted road etc., it is
necessary to refer to the Road Traffic
Ordinance 1987.
(b) Mitigation Plan for Natural Environment
Mitigation measures for adverse impact on natural environment are shown in Table 8.5.10.
Table 8.5.10 Mitigation Plan for the Impact on Natural Environment
Items Impact Mitigation Plan
Topography and Topographical alteration can be considered -
geological features because of construction bund and short-cut.
Soil Erosion Soil erosion and water quality deterioration Soil erosion and sediment
due to soil erosion can be considered during discharge should be avoided by
and after construction bund, short-cut and appropriate slope erosion
regulation ponds. protection, silt trap and sediment
basin.
Soil erosion and sediment
discharge protection should be
conducted in accordance with the
Guidelines for the Prevention and
Control Soil Erosion and
Siltation in Malaysia in 1996.
Caused by an implementation of
a mitigation plan, pollution of
river water due to soil erosion
will decrease. As a result,
sediment discharge and
sedimentation at the lower reach
area will reduce.
Flora, Fauna and Absence of vegetation covers due to site Vegetation on the bund slope
Biodiversity cleaning activities prior to earthwork will should be performed after bund
impact on flora, fauna and biodiversity. construction.
However impact on flora, fauna and In order to mitigate the impact on
biodiversity is not thought to be significant. flora, fauna and biodiversity, it is
necessary to refer to following
acts.
- Protection of Wild Life Act
1972 (Act76)
- National Forestry Act 1984
(Act 313)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-61

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Items Impact Mitigation Plan

- Fisheries Act 1985 (Act 317)
and Regulations
Caused by an implementation of
a mitigation plan, sediment
discharge from surface of bund
due to rainfall etc. will decrease.
Vegetation will also mitigate the
impact on landscape.
Landscape It is considered that construction bund with The distance between a bund and
height 6 to 7m, maximum 8m may impact on a house should be kept as much
landscape. as possible. Vegetation (tree etc.)
should be planted between a
house and a bund, on a bund
slope and circumference of
regulation ponds.
An implementation of a
mitigation plan will mitigate a
sense of oppression due to
construction of bund.
Specific regulations and orders
for mitigate the impact on
landscape does not exist.
(c) Mitigation Plan for the Pollution
Mitigation measures for adverse impact by pollution are shown in Table 8.5.11.
Table 8.5.11 Mitigation Plan for the Pollution
Items Impact Mitigation Plan
Air It is considered that dust and an In order to avoid unusual discharge of the exhaust gas from construction
Pollution exhaust gas increase temporary vehicles etc., periodic check and maintenance of vehicles etc. are ensured,
by use of the heavy machine and condition is kept good.
during construction work. In order to mitigate the impact by air pollution, it is necessary to take
following regulations into considerations.
- Environmental Quality (Clean Air) Regulations 1978
- Environmental Quality (Control of Emission from Diesel Engines)
Regulations 1995
- Environmental Quality (Control Emission drom Petrol Engines)
Regulations 1995
- EHS Guideline (Environment, Health and Safety Guildeline, IFC
2007)
Water Water pollution due to soil Soil erosion and sediment discharge should be avoided by appropriate slope
Pollution erosion can be considered during erosion protection, silt trap and sediment basin.
and after construction work bund In order to mitigate the impact by water pollution due to soil erosion and
and short-cut. sediment discharge, it is necessary to conduct a mitigation measure in
And an outflow of fats and oils accordance with the Guidelines for the Prevention and Control Soil Erosion
during construction work may and Siltation in Malaysia , in 1996 and refer to the National Water Quality
trigger water pollution. Standards for Malaysia.
A suitable measure should be taken in order to prevent leakage of the oil and
fat from construction vehicles and a heavy industrial machine. Condition is
kept good.
Specific regulations and orders for prevention of leakage do not exist.
However, it is necessary to refer to the following regulation and guideline
- Environmental Quality (Water Pollution Control) Regulations 1998.
- EHS Guideline (Environment, Health and Safety Guideline, IFC 2007
Soil Some soil contamination can be In order to prevent leakage of the oil and fat from construction vehicles or a
contamin considered by an outflow of fats heavy industrial machine, while performing a suitable measure, periodic
ation and oils during construction check and maintenance are ensured and condition is kept good.
work. Specific regulations and orders for prevention of soil contamination does
not exist.
Waste A problem about disposal of A statute should be observed and it processes appropriately.
garbage and filth during In order to conduct appropriate process, it is necessary to refer to the
construction work can be Environmental Quality (Schedule Wastes) Regulations 2005.
considered.
Excavated soil caused by
construction regulation pond and
short-cut can utilize for filling
materials of the bund.

8-62 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Items Impact Mitigation Plan

Noise and There is a possibility that noise Environmental standards should be observed.
Vibration and vibration occurrence by Construction at night should not be performed.
heavy machine use during Monitoring for the noise and vibration of public places (school etc.), in
construction work. Especially, which people gathered, should be executed in order to identify the influence
during piling work accompany by the construction work. And suitable countermeasures should be taken
with construction pump station, when some of influences are observed.
generating of a loud noise can be In order to mitigate impact due to noise and vibrations, it is necessary to
considered. refer to the following regulations and guide lines.
- The planning guidelines for Environmental Noise Limits and Control
- The planning guidelines for Vibration and Control in the Environment.
- Guidelines for Noise labeling and Emission Limits of Outdoor Sources
- Factory and Machinery (Noise Exposure) Regulations 1970(DOSH)
- Environmental Quality (Motor Vehicles Noise) Regulations 1987
- EHS Guideline (Environment, Health and Safety Guideline, IFC 2007)
Accident A risk of the traffic accident by Safety education is performed to the construction workers concerned and a
the passing vehicle during related vehicles user.
construction work can be A sign, a cautions signboard, etc. are installed in a suitable location,
considered. In order to mitigate accidents, it is necessary to refer to the Occupational
It is possible that a worker causes Safety and Health Act 1994 (Act 514) Regulations and Orders.
an accident during construction.

(2) Monitoring Plan

(a) Outline
It is stipulated in the Environmental law in Malaysia (EQA), and the DID Manual which is
established based on EQA that project proponent and construction contractor shall execute an
occupational safety and health, and environmental monitoring during construction work.
The indicators for the establishment of environmental management plan applied to the proposed
project are the “A Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment Guideline” and the
“Construction Management, DID Manual Volume 11” and other relevant environmental
regulations and orders.
Above mentioned DID Manual (Volume 11) shows planning and implementation method and rule
for establishment and execution of environmental management plan and occupational safety and
health plan in detail in conformity to the Environmental Quality Act, 1974 and Regulation (Act
127) , environmental guideline, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (Act 514)
Regulation and Orders.
State DID supervise federal/public works for the construction of flood mitigation measures.
On the other hand, DOE has governed the environmental administration of Malaysia. DOE give an
approval to the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) which is formulated by construction
contractor based on the DID Manual and other guideline etc. Then construction contractor carry
out environmental monitoring in accordance with the EMP during construction work. DID
supervises construction contractor’s work.
For the environmental management plan, DOE and DID ask the construction contractor for
submission of monitoring result reports to DID and DOE periodically. DOE checks the influence
by a construction work in respect of environmental factor based on the submitted monitoring result.
DOE requests necessary mitigation measure for the adverse influence that arises during
construction work to DID who is project proponent and construction contractor if necessary.
Moreover, DOE has the power to stop any project if they find that the adverse impact on
environmental aspect exceeds an allowable limit or the project development is degrading the
environment.
(b) Environmental Management Plan (EMP)
(i) Outline
The monitoring plan for items which may have impact on environment is formulated in an
environmental management plan, and monitoring based on the plan will be carried out during
a construction period.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-63

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

For the proposed project a construction contractor needs to formulate an environmental

management plan based on a DID Manual. However, even in such a case, unless approved by
DOE, construction work cannot be started.
Moreover, an environmental management plan has the term of validity for two years after the
date of approval of DOE. In case that, a construction work is not started within two years after
approval of DOE, it is necessary to formulate a new environmental management plan and to
get an approval from DOE again.
An environmental management plan consists of following contents.
- Environmental Monitoring Plan: Described are the monitoring method, location of
monitoring and frequency of monitoring etc. for the items, which considered to influence
on environment. It is necessary to carry out a sampling and monitoring of water quality, air
quality and noise in advance in order to obtain the baseline data of present condition for
formulation of the monitoring plan.
- Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP): The concrete plan for the prevention and
mitigation of soil erosion and sediment discharge
- Best Management Practice (BMP): The administrative plans for carrying out the
environmental management plan appropriately (enforcement organization, a budget, etc.)
- Occupational Safety and Health Management Plan: A plan to secure safety and health of
workers during construction
(ii) Submission of monitoring results
The result of monitoring carried out in accordance with the environmental management plan
must be submitted to DID and DOE from a construction contractor in the following frequency.
- Water quality and silt trap discharge monitoring results: to be submitted monthly
- Ambient air quality and Sound (Noise) monitoring results: to be submitted quarterly
- Environmental monitoring report: to be submitted quarterly
In addition, it is required that EIA study including formulation and implementation of EMP
must be conducted by competent individuals who are registered with the DOE under the EIA
Consultant Registration Scheme (Environmental Impact Assessment Procedure and
Requirement in Malaysia; DOE).
(c) Monitoring plan for proposed project
(i) Monitoring Plan
For formulation and implementation of a monitoring plan for the proposed project, it is
important to take following points into consideration.
- Planning and enforcement of an environmental management plan based on the DID
Manual in conformity to environmental law and environmental related guideline in
Malaysia
- Proposed monitoring items
In this section, a monitoring plan for the impact on natural environment and pollution, which
are required of monitoring, and submission of the monitoring results are described.
Monitoring plan for the social environment is described as well.
This monitoring plan is developed based on the result of IEE and DID Manual. Therefore, for
the project implementation, it is necessary to be re-examined based on new social
environment.

8-64 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

Table 8.5.12 to Table 8.5.14 shows the monitoring plan for this proposed project.

Table 8.5.12 Monitoring Plan for Impact on Social Environment

Items Impact Monitoring Plan
Involuntary Alternative-1 relocation of 16 houses and 1 There is no standard in particular that for a
Resettlement restaurant is required. monitoring implementation.
Alternative-2 relocation of around 8 houses and 1 Usually, there are cases that District Land
restaurant is required. Office performs monitoring about the affected
Large scale involuntary resettlement is not person.
occurred.
Local economy In case Alternative-2, some of impact on Ditto
such as aquaculture can be considered during and after
employment and construction caused by water flow condition
livelihood, etc change.

Table 8.5.13 Monitoring Plan for Impact on Natural Environment

Items Impact Monitoring Plan
Soil Erosion Water quality deterioration and siltation due Periodically check the condition of slope
to soil erosion can be considered during and protection, silt trap and sediment basin.
after construction bund and short-cut. It checks by water quality monitoring by
referring to the following standards.
TSS: 100 mg/L
DO: 5.0- 7.0 mg/L

Table 8.5.14 Monitoring Plan for Impact by Pollution

Items Impact Monitoring Plan
Air Pollution It is considered that dust and an exhaust gas It is necessary to carry out the check periodically
increase temporary by use of the heavy whether periodical check and maintenance of vehicle
machine during construction work. etc. are implemented appropriately.
It checks by air quality monitoring by referring to the
following standards.
Malaysian recommended Environmental Air Quality
Limits of 260μ/m3of TSP in 24 hours.
Total Suspended Particulate(TSP): 260μ/m3
Nitrogen Dioxide as NO2 : 320μ/m3
Sulfur Dioxide as SO2 : 105μ/m3
EHS Guideline recommends following standard
values which are based on the WHO Guideline.
・PM2.5:
10μ/m3 annual mean
25μ/m3 24-hours mean
・PM10:
20μ/m3 annual mean
50μ/m3 24-hours mean
・NO2 :
40μ/m3 annual mean
200μ/m3 1 hour mean
・SO2:
20μ/m3 24 hours mean
500μ/m3 10 minutes mean
Water Pollution Water pollution due to soil erosion can be It checks by water quality monitoring by referring to
considered during and after construction work the following standards.
bund and short-cut. pH (On-site) 6.5-9.0
And an outflow of fats and oils during Dissolved Oxygen (On-site) :5.0-7.0 mg/L
construction work may trigger water COD : 25 mg/L
pollution. BOD5 : 3mg/L
Total Suspended Solids : 50 mg/L
Oil and Grease : Not Detected
Ammonical Nitrogen as NH3-N : 0.3 mg/L
E-coli count : 400/ 100mL MPN
EHS Guideline recommends following standard
values (Note: Indicative value for Treated Sanitary
Sewage Discharges)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-65

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Items Impact Monitoring Plan

pH: 6.0-9.0
COD: 125 mg/L
BOD : 30mg/L
TSS: 50 mg/L
Oil and Grease： 10 mg/L
Total Nitrogen：10 mg/L
Total Phosphorus：2 mg/L
Total coliform bacteria: 400/ 100mL MPN
Noise and There is a possibility that noise and vibration It checks by monitoring for noise by referring to the
Vibration occurrence by heavy machine use during following standards.
construction work. Especially, during piling EIA Approval Condition (Noise)
work accompany with construction pump 65 dB(A) for daytime
station, generating of a loud noise can be 55 dB(A) for night-time
considered. EHS Guideline recommends following standard
values for receptor(residential, institutional and
educational )
55 dB(A): Daytime(07:00- 22:00)
45 dB(A): Nighttime(22:00- 07:00)

(ii) Monitoring Points and Frequency of the Monitoring

Figure 8.5.1 shows the monitoring points for Alternative-1 and Figure 8.5.2 shows the
monitoring position for Alternative-2.
Monitoring is divided into two categories. MPW is the monitoring for water quality and soil
erosion, and MPN is the monitoring for noise and vibration. Table 8.5.15 shows monitoring
items of MPW and MPN respectively.
Table 8.5.15 Monitoring Items
Monitoring Monitoring Items
MPW TSS, DO, pH, COD, BOD, NH3-N, E-coliform
(Monitoring for Water Quality and Soil Erosion)
MPN Noise, Vibration and Ambient air quality
(Monitoring for Noise and Vibration)
Monitoring for a river (MPW) is considered to be carried out at following points.
(1) Upper stream and down stream of the construction section
(2) Upper stream of the construction section of a tributary
(3) Lower reach of confluence of a tributary and main river
On the other hand, when the public facility, such as a school, in which people gathers is located
near the construction site, monitoring for noise and vibration is considered to be carried out.
There are a school and a driving license examination center near the construction site.

8-66 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

MPW-1

MPW-2

MPN-1

MPN-2

MPW-3

MPW-1 Upper Stream of Costruction Area

MPW-2 Middle Reach of Construction Area
MPW-3 Lower Reach of Construction Area
MPN-1 School
MPN-2 School (Driving School)

Figure 8.5.1 Proposed Monitoring Points (Alternative-1)

MPW-1

MPW

MPN-1

MPN-2
MPN-3

MPW-1 Upper Stream of Costruction Area MPW-3

MPW-2 Middle Reach of Construction Area
MPW-3 Lower Reach of Construction Area
MPN-1 School
MPN-2 School
MPN-3 Driving License School

Figure 8.5.2 Proposed Monitoring Points (Alternative-2)

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-67

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
 Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

Frequency of monitoring is shown in Table 8.5.16.

In this report, monitoring frequency is set up based on the DID manual.
Table 8.5.16 Proposed Frequency of Monitoring
Monitoring Frequency
MPW (Monitoring for Water Quality and Soil Erosion) Monthly
MPN (Monitoring for Noise and Vibration) Quarterly
In addition, the monitoring plan needs to be established by construction contractor based on
the discussion with DID at the time of establishment of the Environmental Management Plan
in advance to construction work. Moreover, it is necessary obtain get approval from DOE.
8.6 Toward Project Implementation
8.6.1 Operation and Effect Monitoring Indicators
Since this project is a public project, it is very important to monitor the operation and effect of the project
even after the completion of the construction works. Human lives and public and private property are
main things to protect for the flood mitigation project. Therefore, reduction of the damage of the two
items can be regarded as effects of the project, as shown in Table 8.6.1.
Table 8.6.1 Proposed Operation and Effect Monitoring Indicators

Value of indicator
Indicator unit
Present (without
2025 (target)
project)

Annual average flood damage amount caused by floods of

RM/year 10.2 million 0
50-year or shorter ARI in the protected area.

Number of immediate fatalities caused by floods of 50-year

persons 61 0
ARI in the protected area.

The annual average damage amounts are quoted from a result of the economic analysis of Subsection
8.4.4. The number of immediate fatalities at 2010 is quoted from a simulation result of Subsection 8.3.3.
At 2025, the target completion year of the IFM plan, no-damage and no-immediate-fatality should be
accomplished in the event of a flood of 50-year or shorter ARI.
8.6.2 Consulting Services
For the project implementation, consulting services will be necessary. The consulting services are
composed of the following works:
„ Detailed Design
„ Tender assistance
„ Construction Supervision

Followings are detailed consulting services necessary in case the project is implemented under Japan’s
ODA loan:
(1) Detailed Design
• Review the preliminary design conducted by the JICA preparatory study.
• Undertake supplemental topographic surveys and geo-technical investigation.
• Prepare proper project management and construction management plan for quality assurance of
detailed design and construction supervision stages.
• Undertake all necessary engineering works for the detailed design.

8-68 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating Chapter 8
Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change Volume 3. Pahang River Basin

• Prepare prequalification document for each package.

• Prepare drawings, specifications and bidding documents including evaluation criteria for each
package.
• Prepare detailed designs of civi1 and building structures and mechanical and electrical equipment
including structura1, hydraulics, capacity and other engineering computation and analysis
• Prepare construction plan and implementation program of the Project
• Prepare detailed conditions of contract, specifications, schedules and bills of quantities for
carrying out the Project.
• Assist DID in obtaining approvals where necessary from local authorities, utility bodies, and
other approving authorities in connection with the Project.
• Prepare engineering design report containing the description of the Project.
(2) Tender Assistance
• Review of the final design and the bidding documents if necessary, including preparation of final
bidding documents for invitation of Contractors.
• Liaison with JICA for compliance with their requirements in respect of procedural aspects of
bidding and related conditions.
• Invitation of shortlisted Contractors for each package and answering additional questions during
bidding period.
• Evaluation of tender documents received including the evaluation report.
• Assistance during contract negotiations and establishment of Contractors contracts.
• Assistance on right-of-way and land acquisition, if necessary.
(3) Construction Supervision
• Advising the Client on the appointment of the resident site staff of the Contractor in accordance
with the terms and provisions;
• Ensuring all construction and installation works are to the details and required standards as
specified;
• Advising the Client on the necessity for the inspection and testing of materials and plant supplied
under the contract and arranging for these to be carried out on his behalf as approved, where
applicable;
• Implementation of the Action Log;
• Arranging and guiding regular progress meetings with the Contractor;
• Monitoring of progress and total costs with a view to completion within time and budget. The
Client shall be advised, on a regular basis, on these matters. Progress Reports shall be submitted
to the Client on a monthly basis;
• Planning, coordination and liaison as necessary, to minimize the impact of the works on other
parties, such as the Client, nearby property owners, service authorities, the public, etc.;
• Issuing certificates for payment to Contractors with appropriate make-up sheets;
• Preparing reinforcement schedules and any further designs and drawings necessary for the
information of the Contractors to enable them to carry out the works;
• Technical quality assurance should be provided according to ISO 9001 which has to be built in as
general overhead expenditures.
• Advice on amendments/changes to the present construction works to optimize.

CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and 8-69

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.
Chapter 8 The Preparatory Survey for Integrated River Basin Management incorporating
Volume 3. Pahang River Basin Integrated Flood Management with Adaptation of Climate Change

• Commissioning of the works and assisting the Client with respect to acceptance of the works;
• Establishing operating and maintenance procedures, if required.
• Delivering to the Client on completion of the works three sets of such records as are necessary for
operation and maintenance including ''as-built'' drawings (with reinforcement details) and
making arrangements through the Contractors for the supply of the associated documents, such as
manufacturers' manuals, recommended maintenance schedules and list of spares required for
proper maintenance;
• Assisting in settling disputes or differences, which may arise between the Client and Contractor
except litigation and arbitration.
• Ensuring that health and safety procedures are respected by Contractors.
• Evaluation of shop drawing and instruct contractors to modify in case.
• Prepare the O&M manual.

8-70 CTI Engineering International Co., Ltd. and

Yachiyo Engineering Co., Ltd.