Main Report IRBM Sg. Selangor, 2015-2020

KERAJAAN NEGERI SELANGOR
LEMBAGA URUS AIR SELANGOR
SUNGAI SELANGOR BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN 2015 - 2020
Main Report
Sungai Selangor Basin Management Plan 2015 – 2020
2014
Hak Cipta Lembaga Urus Air Selangor (LUAS)
Copyrights: Selangor aters Management Authority (SWMA)
Hak Cipta terpelihara. Tidak dibenarkan mengeluar, mengulang mana-mana bahagian atau jadual
daripada kandungan buku ini dalam apa jua bentuk dengan apa cara pun sama ada secara
eletronik, fotokopi, mekanikal, rakaman atau lain-lain sebelum mendapat kebenaran bertulis
daripada Pengarah, Lembaga Urus Air Selangor (LUAS).
All rights reserved. Prohibited to produce, repeat any parts or schedules of this publication in any form
and in anyway wether electronically, photocopy, mechanical or tape without the written approval of the
Director of Selangor Waters Management Authority (SWMA).
Disediakan oleh:
SMHB SDN BHD
Pelan Pengurusan Lembangan Sungai Bersepadu (IRBM)
Lembangan Sungai Selangor (2015-2020)
Main Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1-1
2.0 SG. SELANGOR BASIN .............................................................................................. 2-1

2.1 Land Use of the Sg. Selangor Basin ................................................................... 2-2
2.2 Summary of Relevant Policies ........................................................................... 2-4
3.0 REVIEW OF THE 2005-2006 DRAWDOWN IN THE DAMS ................................ 3-1

3.1 Enso Phenomenon .............................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Sg Selangor Basin: Reservoir Releases during 2005-2006 ................................ 3-2
3.3 Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 3-2
4.0 GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................ 4-1

4.1 Groundwater development monitored by LUAS ............................................... 4-3
4.2 Groundwater development and findings by JMG .............................................. 4-3
4.3 HORAS at Kg. Sg. Darah................................................................................... 4-5
4.4 HORAS scheme at Bestari Jaya ......................................................................... 4-7
4.5 Preliminary comments on proposed HORAS schemes ...................................... 4-9
4.5.1 Surface Water Off River Storage Conceptualization ......................................... 4-9
4.5.2 Yield Estimate For ORS Scheme ..................................................................... 4-11
4.5.3 Results and Discussions ................................................................................... 4-12
4.6 Risks ................................................................................................................. 4-15
4.7 Proposed Action Plan for Groundwater Development Within the Sg. Selangor
Basin. ................................................................................................................ 4-16
5.0 ENSURE CLEAN WATER .......................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 5-1
5.2 Water Quality Classifications and Standards ..................................................... 5-1
5.3 Water Quality Trends ......................................................................................... 5-1
5.4 Water Quality in the Firefly Habitat................................................................... 5-5
5.5 Identified Polluted Rivers in the Sg. Selangor Basin ......................................... 5-6
5.6 Pressures on Water Quality ................................................................................ 5-8
5.6.1 Pollution Sources................................................................................................ 5-8
5.6.2 Domestic Wastewater ......................................................................................... 5-8
5.6.3 Industrial Wastewater ....................................................................................... 5-11
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc i
Main Report
5.6.4 Solid waste ....................................................................................................... 5-13

5.6.5 Sand mining...................................................................................................... 5-14
5.6.6 Animal Husbandry ........................................................................................... 5-15
5.6.7 Freshwater Aquaculture ................................................................................... 5-17
5.7 Clean Water Strategies for Sg. Selangor .......................................................... 5-20
5.7.1 Reduce pollution from industrial wastewater ................................................... 5-21
5.7.2 Upgrade sewerage system and sewage treatment ............................................. 5-24
5.7.3 Reduce pollution from other point sources ...................................................... 5-27
5.7.4 Reduce pollution from freshwater aquaculture ................................................ 5-29
5.7.5 Reduce pollution from animal husbandry ........................................................ 5-32
5.7.6 Reduce sedimentation and suspended solids .................................................... 5-35
5.7.7 Reduce pollution from landfills ........................................................................ 5-36
5.7.8 Strengthen protection of reservoirs .................................................................. 5-39
5.8 Risk register and action plan for Ensuring Clean Water .................................. 5-39
6.0 FLOOD MANAGEMENT............................................................................................ 6-1

6.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 6-1
6.2 Floods in the basin.............................................................................................. 6-1
6.3 Terminology ....................................................................................................... 6-2
6.4 Policy and objectives for floods ......................................................................... 6-2
6.5 Master Plan Study Review ................................................................................. 6-4
6.5.1 Socio-economic impact of floods ....................................................................... 6-4
6.5.2 Impact of urbanisation for floods ....................................................................... 6-5
6.5.3 Flood mitigation measures ................................................................................. 6-6
6.5.4 Kuala Kubu sub-basin ........................................................................................ 6-7
6.5.5 Kerling sub-basin ............................................................................................... 6-7
6.5.6 Batang Kali sub-basin ........................................................................................ 6-7
6.5.7 Rawang sub-basin .............................................................................................. 6-9
6.5.8 Sg. Tinggi sub-basin ......................................................................................... 6-11
6.5.9 Rantau Panjang sub-basin ................................................................................ 6-11
6.5.10 Kuala Selangor sub-basin ................................................................................. 6-11
6.5.11 Berjuntai Bestari ............................................................................................... 6-12
6.6 Flood Hazard map study................................................................................... 6-13
6.7 Strategies in Sg. Selangor IRBM plan (2007-2012) ......................................... 6-15
6.7.1 Implement MSMA ........................................................................................... 6-15
6.7.2 Examine local drainage problems .................................................................... 6-15
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc ii
Main Report
6.7.3 Improve river corridor management ................................................................. 6-16

6.7.4 Carry out river works at problem sites ............................................................. 6-18
6.8 Need for GIS based basin wide information management system ................... 6-18
6.9 Risk register and action plan for 2015 – 2020 IRBM for Flood Management . 6-19
7.0 CONSERVE FIREFLIES AND ECOSYSTEMS ....................................................... 7-1

7.1 Background to the Raja Musa Forest Reserve ................................................... 7-1
7.2 Issues confronting the Raja Musa Forest Reserve (Peat Swamp Forest) ........... 7-3
7.3 Gazette the Peat Swamp Forests as Designated Areas ....................................... 7-6
7.4 (1) Develop a Prioritised Plan for Filling up the Logging Channels ................. 7-7
(2) Blocking Logging Canals and Ditches ........................................................ 7-7
7.5 Proposed Additional Measures in the Restoration of the Wetlands ................... 7-8
7.6 Background to the Firefly Protection Zone ...................................................... 7-10
7.7 Establishment of a Firefly Park ........................................................................ 7-12
7.8 Improve conditions for firefly tourism ............................................................. 7-13
7.9 Continue monitoring and research related to fireflies ...................................... 7-14
7.10 Additional Strategies for Firefly Conservation ................................................ 7-15
7.11 Coastal Mangrove Forest.................................................................................. 7-15
7.12 Risks associated with Conservation of the Raja Musa Wetlands and Firefly
Sanctuary .......................................................................................................... 7-16
7.12 Proposed Action Plan for Conserve Fireflies and Ecosystems......................... 7-18
8.0 REVIEW OF IRBM PLANS IN OTHER COUNTRIES .......................................... 8-1

8.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 8-1
8.2 Danube River Basin Management Plan.............................................................. 8-2
8.2.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 8-2
8.2.2 Objectives and Policies ...................................................................................... 8-4
8.2.3 Characterisation and Risk Assessments ............................................................. 8-5
8.2.4 Priority Substances ........................................................................................... 8-10
8.2.5 Protected Areas ................................................................................................ 8-10
8.2.6 Monitoring programmes ................................................................................... 8-11
8.2.7 Programme of Measures and Economic Analysis ............................................ 8-12
8.2.8 River Basin Management System .................................................................... 8-14
8.2.9 Public Consultation .......................................................................................... 8-14
8.2.10 Awareness ........................................................................................................ 8-14
8.2.11 Issues Dealt at with at National Levels ............................................................ 8-15
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc iii

Main Report
8.2.12 Lessons to be Learnt from Review of Danube Basin Plan and WFD for
Selangor and Sg. Selangor................................................................................ 8-15
8.3 Brantas Integrated River Basin Management (Indonesia) ................................ 8-21
8.4 Murray Darling Basin....................................................................................... 8-25
8.4.1 Key points of observation................................................................................. 8-28
8.4.2 Water for the environment ............................................................................... 8-29
8.4.3 Demand management ....................................................................................... 8-30
8.4.4 Public consultation for finalisation of the basin plan ....................................... 8-30
8.4.5 Cost benefit analysis......................................................................................... 8-31
8.5 General Areas for Improvement ....................................................................... 8-31
8.5.1 Implementation of a comprehensive river basin information or management
system. .............................................................................................................. 8-31
8.5.2 Improving monitoring facilities........................................................................ 8-32
8.5.3 Improve economic and financial analysis ........................................................ 8-33
8.5.4 Review of institutional setup and weaknesses.................................................. 8-33
8.5.5 Review of policies and objectives .................................................................... 8-34
8.5.6 Awareness ........................................................................................................ 8-34
8.5.7 Public consultation of the plan ......................................................................... 8-35
8.5.8 Flood forecasting and warning systems ........................................................... 8-35
8.5.9 Water pollution early warning system. ............................................................. 8-35
8.5.10 Progressive upgrading of standards to incorporate ecological status of the
river. ................................................................................................................. 8-35
8.6 Action Plan ....................................................................................................... 8-36
9. GRAND SUMMARY OF POLICIES AND STRATEGIES ..................................... 9-1
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc iv
Main Report
TABLES
Table 2.1 Existing water treatment plant and storage reservoirs in Sg. Selangor
Table 2.2: Land Use Distribution in the Sg. Selangor River Basin, 2012
Table 2.3: Demand for Industrial Land in the Sg. Selangor Basin, 2015 – 2035
Table 3.1 Optimize water resource utilization and reduce risk of wastage
Table 4.1 Locations of Exploration Wells for 2000 JMG Study

Table 4.2 Water Quality Results of Groundwater Analysis from Exploration Wells
Table 4.3 Locations of Tube Wells
Table 4.4 Water Quality Analysis from Groundwater Wells by JMG
Table 4.5 Water Quality for Groundwater Analysis of Test Wells
Table 4.6 Yield Storage Relationship of ORS Scheme
Table 4.7 Preliminary Assessment of Risk for Groundwater Development
Table 4.8 Likelihood Scale
Table 4.9 Severity Scale
Table 4.10 Risk Assessment Matrix (5*5)
Table 4.11 Proposed Action Plan for Groundwater
Table 5.1 Water Quality Sampling Stations Monitored by DOE within Sg. Selangor
Basin
Table 5.2 Overview on Standards, Classifications and Indices for Water Quality
Table 5.3 Average Records of Water Parameters and the Mean Firefly Population Index
of Abundance between April 2012 and January 2014
Table 5.4 Population Equivalent (PE) served by different Sewage Systems
Table 5.5 The numbers of public STPs in the three districts based on sizes (IWK, June
2014 data)
Table 5.6 Age of public STPs in three districts based on categories (IWK, June 2014
data)
Table 5.7 Pollution loads from public STPs (IWK, June 2014 data)
Table 5.8 Pollution loads from public STPs on Mukim basis
Table 5.9 Locations and Status of Landfills within Selangor River Basin
Table 5.10 Surface Water Quality at Bukit Tagar Landfill (Environmental Monitoring
Report) (UKM Pakarunding)
Table 5.11 Ruminants Reared in the Sg. Selangor Basin
Table 5.12 Distribution of Ruminant Farms by Districts
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc v
Main Report
Table 5.13 Number of Poultry Farms within the Sg. Selangor Basin (2010-2013)
Table 5.14 Birds Reared by Type and District
Table 5.15 Area under Freshwater Aquaculture Production
Table 5.16 Freshwater Aquaculture Production
Table 5.17 Number of Freshwater Aquaculture Farms by Districts
Table 5.18 Annual Freshwater Fish Production by Culture Type (tones/year)
Table 5.19 Freshwater Aquaculture Production by Species, 2013 (MT)
Table 5.20 Preliminary Assessment of Risks for Ensuring Clean Water
Table 5.24 Proposed Action Plan for Ensuring Clean Water at Sg. Selangor Basin
Table 6.1 Summary of flood impact based on flood hazard map study
Table 6.2 Economic analysis of structural flood mitigation measures
Table 6.3 Preliminary Assessment of Risk for Flood Management
Table 6.7 Proposed Action Plan for Flood Management
Table 7.1 Preliminary Assessment of Risk for Conserve Fireflies and Ecosystems
Table 7.2 Proposed Action Plan for Conserve Fireflies and Ecosystems
Table 8.1 Timetable of Directive Implementation

Table 8.2 Illustrates the major sub elements of the risk assessment for surface waters
Table 8.3 Key Basic Directives
Table 8.4 Roles of the 11 Basic Directives
Table 8.5 Action Plan – General Considerations
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc vi
Main Report
FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Schematic Representative of IRBM and IWRM

Figure 1.2 River Basins and Dams in Selangor
Figure 1.3 Trend of Water Audit Index of Selected Rivers
Figure 2.1 Sub-basins and Water Intake Points within Sg. Selangor basin
Figure 2.2 View of Sg. Selangor Dam
Figure 2.3 Schematic Diagram of Major Storage Reservoir and Supply Network
Figure 2.4 Future Land Use Map for Sg. Selangor Basin (2035)
Figure 3.1 Reservoir Water Level 2005-2006: Selangor and Tinggi Dams
Figure 4.1 Freshwater, Brackish Water and Saline Water Zonation for Northern
Selangor
Figure 4.2 Locations of JMG Groundwater Wells
Figure 4.3 Locations of the Wells in Sg. Selangor Basin (JMG 2004)
Figure 4.4 Hydrogeology Maps of Sg. Selangor Basin
Figure 4.5 Location Plan of HORAS Scheme at Kg. Sg. Darah
Figure 4.6 Contour of Head Elevation in the Aquifer due to Pumping of 750 MLD from
Pond
Figure 4.7 Contour of Head Elevation in the Aquifer due to Pumping of 1000 MLD
from Pond
Figure 4.8 Contour of Head Elevation in the Aquifer due to Pumping of 500 MLD from
Pond
Figure 4.9 Project Site Plan Layout and Surrounding Area
Figure 4.10 Detail Layout of the Proposed Pond
Figure 4.11 Residual Flow at Bestari Jaya Barrage (2002-2012)
Figure 4.12 Flood from River Inflows to Ponds and Groundwater Recharger from Flood
Water to Aquifer During flood Season
Figure 4.13 Groundwater flows from Aquifer to Pond during Dry Season
Figure 4.14 Location of Study for HORAS Scheme at Bestari Jaya
Figure 4.15 Location of Proposed HORAS Scheme at Bestari Jaya
Figure 4.16 Close up view of river model with proposed pond system
Figure 4.17 Project Site Plan Layout Surrounding Area
Figure 4.18 Layout of Proposed HORAS Scheme at Bestari Jaya
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc vii

Main Report
Figure 4.19 ORS System: 17 MCM capacity pond at Bestari Jaya Township
Figure 4.20 ORS System: 560 MCM capacity pond at downstream of Bestari Jaya Intake
Figure 4.21 Yield Storage Curve of ORS system
Figure 4.22 Seepometer or Seepage Measurement Meter: A Sketch
Figure 5.1 DOE/ASMA Monitoring Stations and the River Classification

Figure 5.2 The Water Quality Index along Sg. Selangor
Figure 5.3 Percentage of Sewage Treatment Systems in Sg. Selangor River
Figure 5.4 Locations of Public and Private Sewage Treatment Plants within Sg. Selangor
Basin
Figure 5.5 Percentage of Effluent Discharging Factories in Sg. Selangor Basin
Figure 5.6 Effluent Discharging Factories within Sg. Selangor Basin
Figure 5.7 Location of Landfill Sites within Sg. Selangor Basin
Figure 5.8 Pollution Sources within Sg. Selangor Basin recorded by Task Force, LUAS
2007 – 2014
Figure 5.9 Sand Mining and Quarry Areas within Sg. Selangor Basin
Figure 5.10a Number of Records showing TSS Concentration in Accordance to the River
Classifications at the Upstream of Sand Mining Sites, Hulu Selangor
Figure 5.10b Number of Records showing TSS Concentration in Accordance to the River
Classifications at the Downstream of Sand Mining Sites, Hulu Selangor
Figure 5.11 Ruminants Production within Sg. Selangor Basin (2010-2013)
Figure 5.12 Poultry Production within Sg. Selangor Basin (2010-2013)
Figure 5.13 Freshwater Fish Production by Land Area
Figure 5.14 Annual Freshwater Fish Production by Tonnage
Figure 5.15 Annual Freshwater Fish Production by Culture Type (tones/year)
Figure 6.1 Flood Prone Areas

Figure 6.2 Flood Mitigation Measures in Sg. Selangor Basin
Figure 6.3 Existing Land Use for Sg. Selangor Basin (2012)
Figure 6.4 Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari with Proposed Flood Mitigation
Measures and Existing Land Use
Figure 6.5 Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari of Existing River Condition with
Future Land Use
Figure 6.6 Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari of Existing River Condition with
Existing Land Use
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc viii

Main Report
Figure 6.7 Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari with Proposed Flood Mitigation
Measures and Future Land Use
Figure 7.1 Fire Potential of RMFR

Figure 7.2 Illegal Encroachment into the RMFR
Figure 7.3 Vegetation Fire Fuel Map of RMFR
Figure 7.4 Network of Logging Canals and Ditches
Figure 7.5 Action taken (and still ongoing) to block canals and ditches in RMFR
Figure 8.1 Deviation from reference condition

Figure 8.2 The Quality elements for the classification of ecological and chemical status
Figure 8.3 Derivation of Status
Figure 8.4 Danube River Basin District: Urban Wastewater Discharges – Baseline
Scenario
Figure 8.5 Generalised components of a risk assessment based on predicting impacts
Figure 8.6 Approach for Measures Selection
APPENDICES
Appendix 3.1 SOI Index 2000 to 2007
Appendix 3.2 SOI Index 2004 to 2006
Appendix 5.1 Acceptable Limit for Water Quality Standards
Appendix 5.2 Water Quality Trends
Appendix 5.3 Water Quality Index, Salinity and Main Population Index of Firefly
Appendix 5.4 Acceptable Conditions of Sewage Discharge of Standards A and B
Appendix 5.5 Lembangan Sg. Selangor (Kilang menghasilkan effluent)
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc ix
Main Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The State of Selangor, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya

encompasses a total area of approximately 8396 sq km with an estimated population
of 7.5 million as of 2013.
The recent water rationing exercises have highlighted the vulnerability of our water
supply and resource systems. Despite substantial efforts by the Government to date,
there is a clear need to manage our water resources better to safeguard ourselves from
such risks in the future.
Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) has been defined by the Global
Water Partnership as “a process which promotes the coordinated development and
management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant
economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the
sustainability of vital ecosystems.”
While other definitions may exist, it is important to note that IWRM places emphasis
of management of water, land and related resources. Hence care must be taken not to
exclude considerations of land and environmental resources. IWRM also emphasizes
sustainability of ecosystems.
IWRM is a cross sectoral policy approach intended to replace the traditional

fragmented sectoral and often piece meal or adhoc approaches to water resources
management. IWRM was mooted as an alternative and more balanced approach to
water management taking the needs of various sectors into account.
The developments in the Murray Darling basin in Australia are worthy of note where
abstractions from the basin were allowed to progress at the expense of the ecosystems
and this eventually resulted in water failing to reach the sea and other related issues.
A critical review of the basin was undertaken and eventually capping of abstractions
was introduced to restore the basin to much healthier levels. In Malaysia, a common
perception is that environmental requirements can be sacrificed if it means that
human needs are met. This perception, while valid in the case of extreme droughts,
needs to be discouraged as a more permanent practice to avoid treading the path of
the Murray Darling experience.
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc 1-1

Main Report
Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM) is a subset of IWRM and is similar to

IWRM with the focus on management based on natural geographical boundaries
rather than administrative boundaries.
Figure 1.1 illustrates IRBM and IWRM as a schematic.
IWRM is a wider and more encompassing issue than IRBM. Hence some
considerations such as demand management and ensuring adequate water supply are
more appropriate within the context of IWRM rather than IRBM. This is especially so
since water demand management is not a basin specific goal. It is a goal that applies
to the entire area. If it is to be applied to a basin, it would be more appropriate in a
basin that has deficit of water supply. This is clearly not the case with the Sg.
Selangor basin.
Water is a key driver for development, both economic and social, but it is important
to emphasise that water is only one of a number of vital resources and issues that are
important and should not be considered in isolation. As an example, solid waste
disposal can be viewed in terms of its impact on water bodies but remains an
important issue in itself. With limited land available and threats posed by landfills,
the trend is to consider incineration as an alternative. Hence the decision to migrate
towards incineration may be driven by other considerations than potential pollution
caused by landfills and debris trapped at intakes.
Action plans, particularly those involving substantial capital expenditures need to be

justified on an economic basis. For instance, it is a known fact that the water industry
in Malaysia is generally heavily subsidized by the Government. The sewerage sector
is similarly also heavily subsidized and to a larger extent. Actions involving capital,
operational and maintenance expenditures must be therefore economically justified if
the efforts of the Government to move in the direction of better or full recovery of
costs are not to be jeopardized.
The issues facing all relevant basins in Selangor needs to be addressed on a common
framework to facilitate decision making and allocation of resources, financial and non
financial.

Main Report
There are a total of 7 basins in Selangor as shown in Figure 1.2. LUAS has only
recently finalized an IRBM plan for the Langat basin. There appears to be no progress
so far on development of similar plans for the remaining basins.
The Sg. Selangor basin was selected as the first basin for the development of an
IRBM plan on the basis of its relative importance as it supplies approximately 60 %
of the total water supply within the state. However, the catchment within the basin is
relatively well protected and not heavily developed. Hence water quality is generally
within healthy levels.
Figure 1.3 shows the Water Quality Index (WQI) for the three major basins in
Selangor. It is evident that water quality is a more serious issue in the Langat basin
and the Klang basin. In the case of the Klang basin, the poor river quality is
‘accepted’ as it does not impact existing water treatment plants and the quantity of
water that can be abstracted if the water quality is improved is limited, due to lack of
adequate storage sites within the basin. Some efforts have been made and are being
made to remedy the water quality situation with the River of Life programme but
these efforts are focused on the portions of the basin within Kuala Lumpur only. In
the case of the Langat basin, water quality has been known to affect the Langat plant
in particular. Although the contribution of this plant to total supply is relatively small
compared to the large plants within the Sg Selangor system, the need for action on
water quality is more critical for Langat because of the disruptions than in Sg.
Selangor basin, ceteris paribus.
This illustrates the fact that while the standards for water quality are clear, the
emphasis seems to be inconsistent with the actual situation within the basins. A total
of ten strategies have been identified for the Sg. Selangor basin for improving water
quality, where the water quality at the intakes for the key plants are generally good
and acceptable while actions for the Langat have only recently been investigated. The
water quality within Klang basin remains polluted and is likely to remain that way
until the River of Life programme is completed.
Assessments of risks for the various aspects of the IRBM plan have been carried out
and action plans have been formulated to a large extent, based on the risk
assessments.

Main Report
Figure 1.1: Schematic Representative of IRBM and IWRM
IWRM builds on river basin management
IWRM
IRBM
- from a water quantity and water quality perspective
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc

Main Report
Figure 1.2: River Basins and Dams in Selangor

Main Report
Figure 1.3: Trend of Water Quality Index of Selected Rivers
120
100
Water Quality Index
80
60
40
20
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Sg. Langat Sg. Selangor Sg. Klang Clean (81-100) Slightly Polluted (60-80) Polluted (0-59)

Main Report
2.0 SG. SELANGOR BASIN
The Sg. Selangor basin has been adequately described in many previous studies and
there is therefore no further need to describe the characteristics of the basin.
The basin plays a very important role in water supply, accounting for about 60% of
the total water supply for Selangor, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur and
Putrajaya. It is set to play a increasing role, with the development of two hybrid off
river storage schemes which have been identified as having potential of as much as
6000 Mld.
The basin covers an area of approximately 1554 square kilometres at Bestari Jaya
which is approximately 19% of the total area within Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and
Putrajaya (8396 sq.km). It is one of the seven basins within the State. The other major
basins are Sg. Klang and Sg. Langat.
The Sg. Selangor basin is made up of ten sub basins as shown in Figure 2.1. The
figure shows the proportionate areas of each sub-basins. The key water treatment
plants within the basin are the Sg. Selangor Phase 1, 2 and 3 plants at Bestari Jaya
and the Rasa plant.
The water quality within the sub-basin is generally dependent on the rainfall within
the sub-basin and the land use within these sub-basins.
The annual variation in rainfall in the basin ranges between 1792 to 2757 mm (1950 -
1990) with an annual average of 2250 mm/yr which is equivalent to 4361 MCM/yr or
11,497 Mld. In contrast, the capacity of all existing water treatment plants within the
basin is about 3,016.50 Mld as summarised in Table 2.1 which is well below the
average annual rainfall levels, as can be expected.
The yield in the basin at Bestari Jaya is enhanced by the introduction of the Sg.
Tinggi and Sg. Selangor dams. The storage of the Sg. Tinggi dam is larger than that
which can be supported hydrologically by its catchment. This is by design to tap
water resources from other catchments. A pumping system on Sg. Selangor
downstream of the dam was introduced to tap excess water during wet weather and
transfer this water to the Sg. Tinggi dam.

Main Report
Figure 2.2 shows the existing Sg. Selangor dam and reservoir while Figure 2.3
shows a schematic of the Sg. Selangor system.
In order to further enhance the yield within the system from surface water resources,
it is necessary to identify potential storage locations.
The water quality within the basin is generally satisfactory (Level II) with some sub
basins recording lower standards. Efforts will need to be continued to address the
threats to water quality.
Flood management issues are included in the IRBM plan although the impacts are
relatively minor in comparison to floods in other areas.
Lastly, the IRBM plan is aimed at addressing issues related to conservation of

econsystems.
2.1 Land Use of the Sg. Selangor Basin
The Sg. Selangor IRBM 2007 reported that about 57% of the Sg. Selangor river basin
was forested and 22% used for agricultural activities in 2002, based on information
from the Selangor Structure Plan (2002). “Agriculture” in the Structure Plan (2002)
report included the areas under oil palm and rubber cultivation, animal husbandry and
aquaculture. About 17% of the Sg. Selangor river basin was regarded as built-up. By
definition, built-up are areas used for residential, commercial, industrial, mixed
development, institutions, mining, sand mining, quarries, as well as reserves for
utilities and infrastructure (Selangor State Planning Department). The remaining 4%
comprise rivers, lakes and ponds.
The main built-up areas are concentrated mainly in Daerah Gombak, particularly in
the township of Rawang, the urbanised areas surrounding it and following the road
infrastructure network. In Daerah Hulu Selangor, developments are focused along the
Hulu Selangor-Tanjung Malim - Slim River development corridor where industrial
activities are centred at Bukit Beruntung, Sg. Buaya and Serendah. In Daerah Kuala
Selangor, development areas follow closely the Kuala Selangor-Assam Jawa corridor
and towards Klang following the Sg. Buloh-Kapar development corridor.

Main Report
Significant in the Structure Plan for Selangor (2002) and the Local Plan for Daerah
Kuala Selangor (2007) was their designation of the ex-mining ponds and wetland
areas at Batang Berjuntai (now called Bestari Jaya) for the development of a new
township and mixed development with an eco-resort cum golf course (Figure 2.4).
The new development was to extend to the southern boundary of the Raja Muda
Musa Forest Reserve.
The Selangor State Planning Department is currently reviewing the Selangor

Structure Plan (2002), where state development policies, strategies and land demand
projections are being reassessed for a longer planning horizon, i.e., up to 2035. The
reassessment of the plan is also to ensure that the state’s development policies and
strategies are consistent with the federal government’s current emphasis towards
sustainable natural resource management and building an environment that enhances
quality of life.
Unpublished land use distribution data for 2012 (Table 2.2) provided recently by the
Selangor State Planning Department for the purpose of the Sg. Selangor IRBM Study
Review indicate an increase in agricultural activities in the Sg. Selangor river basin.
Over the past decade, the area taken up for agriculture has increased from 22% in
2002 to 35% in 2012, whilst the forest cover has been reduced from 57% in 2002 to
45% in 2012. It is evident from the data that the increase in agricultural land usage
has been at the expense of forested areas. The built-up areas, however, continue to
occupy about 17% of the overall river basin.
Continuing urban and industrial development, coupled with issues of land availability
and land cost in the Klang Valley have resulted in a spill an over of development to
the other parts of Selangor. In regards to the Sg. Selangor river basin, the Selangor
Structure Plan Review 2012 (RSN 2035) has identified parts of Daerah Gombak and
Daerah Hulu Selangor with access to transportation routes as potential growth areas,
in particular for industries.
As part of its industrial strategy, the Selangor State Planning Department, in RSN
2035, has projected that by 2020, the land required for industrial activities in Selangor
state is likely to increase to 23,200 hectares by 2020 and 30,880 hectares by 2035. Of
the additional industrial land required by 2020, about 5,300 hectares of land would be
located in the districts of Gombak, Hulu Selangor and Kuala Selangor (Table 2.3).

Main Report
By 2035, at least 7,160 hectares of the land required to accommodate industrial

growth in Selangor state would be located within the Sg. Selangor river basin,
especially along the Serendah-Sg. Choh-Bukit Beruntung Corridor to reinforce the
automotive industrial hub and along the Rawang-Bandar Baru Kundang Corridor to
transform it into a major service and SME industrial hub.
The challenge ahead for the management of the Sg. Selangor river basin is to balance
land development in the future with protection and better management of the
environment and the natural resources. RSN 2035 has taken cognizance of the strong
emphasis to maintain and sustain the environment required to safeguard water
sufficiency, water quality and water security, to address flooding as well as to
preserve the ecological habitats and forests within the Sg. Selangor river basin.
Although it is inevitable that agriculture land will gradually be converted for housing,
industry and other forms of development, the rate of land conversion is not expected
to be as rampant or fast as in the other districts in Selangor. Agriculture will remain
one of the largest land use sectors in the basin. It is evident from the RSN
development strategies and the long-term land use plan that the state government
recognizes the environmental value of the firefly sanctuary at Kg. Kuantan and Kg.
Beluntas, the peat forest at the Raja Muda Musa Forest Reserve, the wetlands and the
ex-mining ponds in lower Sg. Selangor and their relevance to long-term water
resource management (Figure 2.4). This is in sharp contrast to the earlier
recommendations of the Selangor State Structure Plan and the Local Plan for Daerah
Kuala Selangor where the ex-mining ponds and wetlands and the riparian corridor
were identified and earmarked for eco-tourism, township and mixed development.
2.2 Summary of Relevant Policies
Water is an essential asset for the basic needs of the people and for economic growth.
However, as the economy and population grow, the country needs to keep a more
efficient and prudent eye on its water resources and its supply management.
Essentially, it means a reassessment of the management of the country’s resources
across the entire water cycle – from where the water is drawn, to how water is treated
and supplied to users and how wastewater is returned to the environment.

Main Report
There are a number of national policies that provide the framework and guidelines
pertaining to the conservation, protection and management of the country’s
environment and water resources. Notably, these include the country’s 8 th, 9th and
10th Malaysia Plans, the National Climate Change Policy (2009) and the 2nd National
Physical Plan.
Roadmap for Water Resources Management in the Malaysia Plans
Restructuring of the water services industry towards improving efficiency in

operations and management began during the 8th Malaysia Plan (2001-2005), firstly,
with the drafting of the National Water Resources Policy to provide a framework for
the conservation and management of water; secondly, the adoption of the Integrated
Water Resources Management (IWRM) to optimise water resource management; and
thirdly, the privatisation and corporatisation of state water authorities.
During the 9th Malaysia Plan (2006-2010), the water services industry was
consolidated with the operationalisation of the National Water Services Commission
(SPAN), enforcement of the Water Services Industry Act (WSIA) 2006, take-over of
water assets from the states by Pengurusan Aset Air Berhad (PAAB) at negotiated
values and implementation of programmes towards river ecosystem restoration and
maintenance through wetlands, river and riparian mitigation.
Restructuring of the water services industry enters its final phase during the 10 th
Malaysia Plan (2011-2015) or 10MP, with a focus on the following strategies:
Strategy 1: Developing a long-term strategy for water resource management to

achieve water security;
Strategy 2: Continuing efforts to restructure the water services industry; and
Strategy 3: Protecting the rivers from pollution.
Under the 10MP, demand for water, excluding the agriculture sector, is expected to
increase from 8,550 MLD in 2009 to 10,520 MLD by 2015. In ensuring a long-term
supply-demand profile, the 10MP recognises the challenge of water resource
management lies in continuing the implementation of the IWRM and IRBM
approaches in planning, managing, protecting and rehabilitating water resources. The
government has allocated a budget of RM5 billion for flood mitigation programmes

Main Report
as well as for the intensification of research and development in the area of water
resources conservation to support efforts to develop a sustainable water sector for the
national economy.
In efforts to restructure the water services industry, the 10MP places focus on the
following:
1) Completing the migration of state water operators or authorities to PAAB and to

place water supply under the regulation of SPAN;
2) Driving efficiency in operation and capital expansion to enable planning for long-
term capital expenditure funding;
3) Improving water services infrastructure and increasing water supply coverage to

enable more households to be served and to implement non-revenue water
programmes. The 10MP has budgeted an allocation of RM1.1 billion to improve
the quality of water and reduce losses in water supply; and
4) Integrating water and sewerage services to initiate the migration towards an

integrated tariff for both water and sewerage services.
Since more than 90% of the country’s water supply comes from rivers and streams,
efforts to tackle pollution continue to be given emphasis in the 10MP. Major sources
of pollution include improper discharge from sewerage treatment plants, agro-based
factories, livestock farming, land clearing activities and domestic discharge. During
the 10MP period, measures to improve pollution control targeting these sources will
be implemented through:
 Strengthening the enforcement on industrial effluents and sewerage discharges in

line with the revisions to the legislations under the Environmental quality Act
1974.
 Assessing the Maximum Daily Load and carrying capacity of rivers to determine
allowable discharge loads for both point and non-point sources of pollution.

Main Report
 Revising current Water Quality Index to incorporate additional parameters, such

as biological parameters, for more accurate river water classification.
 Developing the National Marine Water Quality Index to replace the current
Marine Water Quality Criteria and Standard which was developed in 2008.
 Expanding awareness and outreach programmes targeting various segments of

the community.
Climate Change on Water Resources Management
As a Non-Annex 1 Party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change (UNFCCC), the country is committed to implement measures to mitigate
climate change impacts, promote sustainable management and conservation of carbon
sinks and take pre-emptive measures to limit damage and economic costs of these
impacts. The National Climate Change Policy (2012) provides the national
framework for combating climate change. In respect to water resources, warm spells
may cause increased water demand, water stress, and change to the hydrologic
regimes. Saline intrusion into surface and groundwater is another likely impact,
where the consequent is reduced freshwater availability especially in regions that are
dependent on groundwater. Large storm events arising from climate change may
increase the rate of sedimentation of rivers and reservoirs, loss of soil nutrients and
risk of slope failures of riverbanks and hills.
The 2nd National Physical Plan and its Stand on Water Resources Management
The 2nd National Physical Plan (NPP-2) sets out the national strategic spatial planning
policies and measures pertaining to the general direction of the land use and physical
development and conservation of the country. The NPP-2 is one of the development
policy tools used by the government to strategise and to channel resources to key
projects to ensure continuous national growth.
Apart from conserving water resources, the development strategy for water supply
involves increasing supply and distribution systems to meet projected demands. New
dams, water intakes, water treatment plants and distribution systems will need to be
constructed to meet future demands.

Main Report
To ensure an efficient water supply distribution system, NPP-2 has identified

measures that include reducing non-revenue water, enforcement against water thefts,
pipe and meter replacements, the use of GIS for distribution systems, rehabilitation,
upgrading and monitoring of the distribution systems and water treatment plants.
To address anticipated water shortage and uneven distribution, NPP-2 proposes inter-
basin and interstate water transfers to be implemented. Meanwhile, interim measures
to address water shortages includes rain water harvesting, the use of storm water in
ponds for non-potable use and groundwater development. Non-structural measures
such as water conservation and the use of water saving devices are encouraged. NPP-
2 also proposes for surface and ground water resources to be safeguarded and
managed sustainably.
Apart from the water transfer programmes, other specific proposals for water
management in NPP-2 include the designation of thirty eight (38) dam sites and the
protection and rehabilitation of existing rivers and water bodies through the use of
buffer zones and conservation of wetlands, peat areas and lakes (inclusive of ex-
mining ponds).

Main Report
Table 2.1: Existing water treatment plant and storage reservoirs in Sg. Selangor
Water Treatment Plant (WTP)
Design Capacity
No. Water Treatment Plant (WTP)
(Mld)
1 Sg. Tengi 1.30
2 Kuala Kubu Bharu 6.70
3 Rantau Panjang 31.50
4 Sg Selangor (F1) 950.00
5 Sg Selangor (F3) Sg Rasa 250.00
6 Sg Selangor (F3) Badong 800.00
7 Sg Sireh 27.00
8 Sg Selangor (F2 - P1 & P2) 950.00
Total 3,016.50
Table 2.2: Land Use Distribution in the Sg. Selangor River Basin, 2012
Kuala Selangor Hulu Selangor Gombak Sg. Selangor Basin
Land Use
Hectare % Hectare % Hectare % Hectare %
Built-up area 18,828 15.8 18,282 10.4 22,868 36.4 59,978 16.8
Agriculture 57,554 48.2 58652 33.4 11,783 18.8 127,989 35.8
Forest 40,125 33.5 93,998 53.5 27,018 43.0 161,140 45.0
Water bodies 2,945 2.5 4,698 2.7 1,150 1.8 8,793 2.4
Total 119,452 100 175,630 100 62,819 100 357,900 100
Source: Selangor Structure Plan Review, 2012 (RSN 2035) - ongoing. Selangor State Planning Department
Table 2.3: Demand for Industrial Land in the Sg. Selangor Basin, 2015 – 2035
Daerah 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total
Kuala Selangor 470 570 690 820 990 3,540
Hulu Selangor 1,680 2,200 2,240 2,660 2,800 11,580
Gombak 2,070 2,530 2,630 2,740 3,370 13,340
Total for Basin 4,220 5,300 5,560 6,220 7,160 28,460
Land area in hectares
Source: Selangor Structure Plan Review, 2012 (RSN 2035) - ongoing. Selangor State Planning Department

Main Report
Figure 2.2: View of Sg. Selangor Dam
Source: HORAS Study at Bestari Jaya

Main Report
Figure 2.3: Schematic Diagram of Major Storage Reservoir and Supply Network

Main Report
3.0 REVIEW OF THE 2005-2006 DRAWDOWN IN THE DAMS
This segment of the report addresses the issue of reservoir level depletion for both
Selangor (CA= 197 km2) and Tinggi (CA= 40 km2) dams during 2005-2006. At the
beginning of 2005, both dams were at their full supply levels, +220 m MSL (Mean
Sea Level) and +59.5 m MSL for Selangor and Tinggi dam respectively.
It is postulated that in general, the drawdown event of both reservoirs was due
primarily to global weather anomaly, El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) event in
the Pacific Ocean. The phenomenon was due to the ocean or sea surface warming
near the coast of Peru. The abnormal warming event in the eastern Pacific creates a
pressure imbalance in the western Pacific with higher atmospheric pressure that
drives most of the moisture toward the eastern end of the Pacific Ocean.
Correspondingly the difference between the long-term statistical variations in

pressure between these two extreme ends can be expressed quantitatively as Southern
Oscillation Index (SOI).
The low flow at the Bestari Jaya Intake (CA= 1554 km2) during 2005-2006 was
evidenced in the residual flow measurement at the barrage.
3.1 Enso Phenomenon
The global circulation of heat and mass balance affects the flood and drought events
worldwide. On occasions, the regular and normal circulation is interrupted by the
abnormality of the natural forcing function or event. One of these anomalies is the El
Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) that occurs 2-6 years, on average.
This abnormal and fluctuating climate event affects the hydrological regime in
Malaysia as well. An El Nino event is generally associated with drought with
prevailing low flows in the river basins. The most severe events of the last century
were 1982-1983 and 1997-1998 that affects majority of Asia Pacific nations.
The natural phenomenon can now be explained with in depth understanding of its
mechanism and evolutions and at the same times, it can be quantitatively measured by
the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI). This is carried out by measuring the

Main Report
statistically pressure deviation between Darwin and Tahiti. These two locations
represent the western and eastern Pacific Ocean respectively. The index is
characterized by negative, positive, and neutral position.
The more negative SOI signifies a serious and prolonged drought event. Conversely,
the positive position indicates the wetter phase of climate fluctuation or La Nina
event which may leads to regional flooding. A neutral position sometimes but rarely
occurs with more or less equal magnitude of sea surface pressure at both western and
eastern Pacific.
3.2 Sg. Selangor Basin: Reservoir Releases during 2005-2006
Both Selangor and Tinggi reservoirs were full to their full supply levels (FSLs) and
ready in operation in late 2004 (see Figure 3.1). During the first eight (8) to nine (9)
months of 2005, both reservoir released to augment low flows at the Bestari Jaya
Intake (CA= 1554 km2).
The average of releases for a continuous period of 9 months was 15.6 m3/s (1349
Mld) with the highest months of releases, February and August 2005 were 19.57 m3/s
(1691 Mld) and 21.44 m3/s (1852 Mld) respectively.
The recent El Nino events occurred on 1991-1993, 1997-1998, 2002-2003, 2005-

2006, and 2012-2013 with an on-going forecast by MMS to be continuously extended
into 2014. These events were correlated to the low flow regime in the Sg. Selangor
basin.
3.3 Conclusion
The reason for continuous reservoir releases by both Selangor and Tinggi dams are
primarily due to prevailing low flow regime induced by a mild El Nino event starting
from January 2005 until September 2006.
The drawdown continues for about nine (9) months to reach +190.41 m and +51.64 m
MSL for Selangor and Tinggi dam respectively. This corresponded to some 11.5 m
and 8.0 meter drops in water level from their respective FSL (Full Supply Level).
The refilling of the reservoir commenced then hence until full at late 2006.

Main Report
The naturalized flow at the Bestari Jaya intake (CA= 1554 km2) was correlated to the
negative SOI index for 2005-2006 (see Appendix 3).
In order to optimize operations of the existing water resource facilities, it has been
recommended that efforts be made to augment existing hydrological and rainfall
monitoring stations. LUAS is in the process of implementing these stations and the
information available from these new stations should preferably be integrated with
the IWRIMS system and the proposed River Basin Management System (RBMS) or
Sg. Selangor Decision Support System (DSS).
LUAS is also in the process of carrying out detailed survey of the existing dams as a
validation exercise. On completion of the survey it will be necessary to revaluate the
surface water system yield, operational rules and rule curves.
Table 3.1 summarises the proposed action plans for optimizing operation of existing
water resource facilities.

Main Report
Table 3.1: Optimize water resource utilization and reduce risk of wastage
No. Measure Action Indicator Responsible Agency S M L Comment
3.1 Improve monitoring LUAS is currently in the process of Implementation & LUAS / JPS / JMM √ The 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor
facilities to facilitate better implementing additional monitoring monitoring report basin plan recommended
operation of dams stations as part of the DSS for Sg. additional monitoring
Selangor basin. Information from the stations within the Sg.
new facilities will be preferably Selangor basin for this
incorporated within IWRIMS and the purpose. The proposed
proposed RBMS or Sg. Selangor DSS works have not been
(Decision Support System) to be implemented and are
developed. recommended in the new
plan.
3.2 Reassess Sg. Selangor The system yields need to be reviewed Review report LUAS √ LUAS is in the process of
system yield. as data from the survey become undertaking a detailed
available. Water resource availability survey of the existing dams.
need to be reviewed accordingly.
Note:
S Short
M Medium
L Long

Main Report
Figure 3.1: Reservoir Water Level 2005-2006: Selangor and Tinggi Dams
230 60
225 59
58
220
57
215 56
m 210 55 m
205 54
53
200
52
195 51
190 50
1-Jan-05 1-Jul-05 1-Jan-06 1-Jul-06
dd/mm/yy
Red color: Tinggi dam FSL +59.5 m msl

Blue color: Selangor dam FSL +220.0 m msl

Main Report
Appendix 3.1: Soi Index 2000 to 2007

Main Report
Appendix 3.2: SOI Index 2004 to 2006 (from www.bom.gov.au)
BB Intake
year month SOI MCM/mth
2004 JAN -11.6
FEB 8.6
MAR 0.2
APR -15.4
MAY 13.1
JUN -14.4
JUL -6.9
AUG -7.6
SEP -2.8
OCT -3.7
NOV -9.3
DEC -8.0
2005 JAN 1.8 36
FEB -29.1 22
MAR 0.2 48
APR -11.2 77
MAY -14.5 64
JUN 2.6 43
JUL 0.9 58
AUG -6.9 23
SEP 3.9 27
OCT 10.9 124
NOV -2.7 169
DEC 0.6 163
2006 JAN 12.7 187
FEB 0.1 121
MAR 13.8 136
APR 15.2 203
MAY -9.8 197
JUN -5.5 258
JUL -8.9 81
AUG -15.9 141
SEP -5.1 300
OCT -15.3 346
NOV -1.4 557
DEC -3.0 237

Main Report
4.0 GROUNDWATER
The existing Sg. Selangor IRBM plan made general recommendations pertaining to
the subject of groundwater. The plan proposed that groundwater resources be
investigated, planned for and utilised with appropriate monitoring in place.
The utilization of groundwater as an alternative water resource in Selangor, Wilayah

Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya is relatively limited and this is attributed to
the fact that there has been limited detailed investigations in the past to determine its
potential.
The hydrogeological maps for Selangor as a whole have been available for a long
time and it has been recognised that groundwater occurs in both alluvial and hard
rock aquifers.
A key factor hampering the development of groundwater is the lack of adequate

information to assess the reliable supply or yield that can be obtained. The basis and
approach for assessing reliable supply from groundwater differs significantly from
that used for surface water resources and this therefore creates uncertainty and a lack
of confidence in the yield estimates of groundwater. The approach for surface water
resources is far more stringent based on droughts with a return period of once in fifty
years and substantial related hydrological data. Hence the yield estimates for surface
water resources are more robust.
The uncertainty in groundwater yields is reflected clearly in recent groundwater

studies which studied the potential yield available from groundwater sources, when
used in conjunction with surface water and storage facilities. These studies indicated
potentially very high yields but recommended development of the proposed scheme
with far lower capacities.
A key constraint in previous approaches to development of groundwater was that

groundwater sources were considered in isolation from surface water resources. This
limitation in thinking was eventually surpassed in the proposed Hybrid off River
Storage or HORAS study at Kg. Sg. Darah and Bestari Jaya.

Main Report
The water available within the Sg. Selangor basin for potable water use in an average
year is well in excess of that available during dry spells or droughts used for
hydrological assessments of yield. This excess water generally returns to the sea and
remains unutilised for the most part due to lack of storage to tap and store this excess
water.
It is therefore possible in theory to enhance yield from the basin using a combination
of surface and groundwater resources with suitable storage. The principle behind such
an approach is that excess water available during wet weather or spells is diverted
into a storage pond that is also used to tap groundwater. The pond therefore obtains
water from both sources; groundwater and surface water.
Lastly a key area of concern with the use of groundwater has been that groundwater
resources cannot be considered in isolation from surface water resources. In reality
both sources are interlinked and therefore the development of a groundwater resource
that are linked with surface water resources can adversely affect surface water flow
regimes, if this is not taken into account appropriately.
Notwithstanding these limitations and constraints, the feasibility of increased

groundwater use, by itself or in conjunction with surface water resources needs to be
explored. This is especially important within the Sg. Selangor basin, since all
available surface water has been fully investigated and utilised, largely for potable
water supply. The use of surface water has been constrained by the lack of storage
that can be made available to tap excess water during wet spells. Although, the
existing Sg. Tinggi and Sg. Selangor dams have been developed to provide storage to
improve yields within the basin at Bestari Jaya in particular, additional storage would
further enhance the yield.
Hence the maximum reliable capacity of water resources available within the basin
remains unknown and established since the groundwater potential has not been firmly
established.
Jabatan Mineral Sains dan Geologi (JMG) has been entrusted with the responsibility
pertaining to groundwater development. However, given the indication of potential
for additional groundwater resources and lack of other water resources within

Main Report
Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya, the drive for groundwater development
should be initiated on driven by the State Government of Selangor and LUAS.
4.1 Groundwater development monitored by LUAS
LUAS is responsible for the control of groundwater abstractions and issues licenses to
the relevant parties. The total number of licenses issued and the quantum approved
for the groundwater users is on the rise with 3 licenses in 2005 to 72 licenses in 2008.
The total quantum of groundwater used based on the billing in 2008 is 17104 Ml or
about 47 Mld. This is about 1.2 % of total potable water supply from surface water
resources.
Nevertheless LUAS is keen to develop the use of groundwater further with a goal of
achieving 35 % of total potable water requirement.
4.2 Groundwater development and findings by JMG
In general, the onus of assessment of groundwater potential has been with Jabatan
Mineral Sains dan Geologi (JMG) and there appears to be a lack of systematic studies
to establish groundwater potential.
JMG had previously conducted several studies on groundwater potential as alternative

water supply sources in 2000 and 2004 within the Sg. Selangor basin as shown
below:
(a) Potensi Sumber Air Tanah Kuala Selangor ¨C Batang Berjuntai ¨C Tanjung
Karang, Kuala Selangor, Selangor [Minerals and Geoscience Department
Malaysia (JMG), 2000].
(b) Kajian Sumber Air Tanah di Lembangan Sungai Selangor, Selangor Darul
Ehsan (JMG, 2004).
The studies showed that the freshwater zone was evident from 20 km from the
shoreline changing to brackish water and finally saline near the coast as shown in
Figure 4.1.

Main Report
Sixteen exploration wells and two test wells were identified for the 2000 study. The
condition of the groundwater varied from saline water in areas nearer to the coast,
changing to brackish water and finally into freshwater further inland. The locations of
the wells are as shown in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.2.
Based on the recommended raw water quality criteria by the Ministry of Health
(MOH), 2004, the results from groundwater exploration wells showed that several
parameters exceeded the MOH recommended limits. The results as summarised in
Table 4.2 shows that the test wells were within the recommended limits with the
exception of iron at KSTW2.
In a later study by JMG in 2004, an additional five jet wells and four exploration
wells were dug within the Bestari Jaya area. The locations and details of these wells
are shown in Table 4.3 and Figure 4.3.
The water quality analysis of the groundwater from the 2004 Study indicated that
freshwater was obtained at the wells within Taman Pertanian Agroteknologi, while
brackish water was obtain from the wells in Kg. Raja Muda Musa.
The water quality assessments of these wells are shown in Table 4.4 and Table 4.5.
Figure 4.4 shows the hydrogeologcial map for the Sg. Selangor basin indicating the
groundwater potential as well as the existing wells in the area and the surroundings.
In general, the capacity of the wells installed by JMG is limited in comparison to the
total potable water demand from surface water resources for Selangor, Kuala Lumpur
and Putrajaya.
The data and results of JMG's exploration to date appear to indicate limited potential
for groundwater use. Nevertheless, it is envisaged that JMG will continue to explore
the possibility of installing more wells within Selangor in general including within the
Sg. Selangor basin.
The general findings of JMG to date indicate relatively low potential for groundwater
resources which contrasts with the findings of studies done by others which indicate

Main Report
schemes, involving a combination of surface and groundwater, with a capacity of as

much as 6000 Mld being feasible.
4.3 HORAS at Kg. Sg. Darah
A study entitled " Hybrid off River Augmentation Storage (HORAS) at Kg. Sg.
Darah, Bestari Jaya as a water resource for purpose of water supply" was undertaken
for Unit Perancang Ekonomi Negeri Selangor (UPEN Selangor) by Jurutera
Perunding Zaaba (JPZ) and finalised in late 2013.
The study was initiated on the basis of the following observations:-
(i) The residual flow at Bestari Jaya between November 2008 and September
2009 was an average of about 4700 Mld which is well in excess of the
minimum requirement of 300 Mld residual flow requirements. This suggests
that there is excess water that can be diverted to a suitable storage pond for
later use during a dry spell. However it is also important to assess if part of
the excess was contributed by excessive releases from the Sg. Tinggi and Sg.
Selangor dams. This would suggest that there are wasteful releases from the
dam. If this is true, then there is reason to believe that there is room for
improvement in the control of the dams. If the operation of the dams is
optimised then some of the water released during this period could have been
retained in the dams for use at a later stage
(ii) The existing abandoned or unutilised mining pond at Kg. Sg. Darah was
initially identified as a flood mitigation pond. It could also be utilised during
crisis periods to support the existing plants at Bestari jaya. Hence the pond
could serve dual purposes of flood control and water supply.
(iii) Serious turbidity problems had occurred in December 2011 with landslides
and excessive erosion in Sg. Kerling causing the Rantau Panjang and SSP3
plant to shut down for four hours and the SSP1 and SSP2 plants operating at
40% capacity. The proposed pond could therefore also be utilised as a pre-
sedimentation facility in cases of high turbidity.

Main Report
Hence the study was aimed at tapping the excess water available during wet spells
and utilising the existing mining pond to store the water. The pond would also
facilitate settling of sediments and this will improve raw water quality supplied from
the pond.
Lastly it was also recognized that the pond was overlaying a potential groundwater
aquifer and hence the pond could be used to tap excess surface water as well as
existing groundwater resources within the aquifer.
The scheme was called a hybrid off river storage (HORAS) scheme as it utilises both,
groundwater and surface water.
The location of the pond is shown in Figure 4.5 and this is downstream of the
existing intakes for the Sg. Selangor plants at Bestari Jaya.
Water quality analysis indicates that the water from the pond, at the time of sampling
was within Class II and III based on Water Quality Index and is therefore considered
treatable for water supply.
JPZ carried out analyses for three different scenarios viz a viz abstractions of 500
Mld, 750 Mld and 1000 Mld. The water contours for these scenarios are as shown in
Figures 4.6 to Figure 4.8 which show progressively deeper water levels with
increased abstractions as expected. However the drops in levels were generally within
reasonable limits making the concept of higher abstractions more attractive. JPZ also
carried out simulations of the potential interaction between the surface and
groundwater resources for the three scenarios. The results of the analyses show that
the water levels remain relatively stable for the three scenarios.
The construction costs for the scheme are estimated at about RM 98.9 million based
on the assumption that dredging and excavation will be done by a third party to be
appointed by the State Government of Selangor.
The project area is about 166 hectares and the storage capacity of the pond is 17
MCM with a maximum depth of 24 m.

Main Report
It was concluded that it was feasible to abstract 1000 Mld without any difficulty but it
was recommended that the scheme be developed with a capacity of 750 Mld. The
State Government of Selangor is currently developing the scheme with a capacity of
600 Mld.
The analysis of yields from the scheme shows that an abstraction of 1000 Mld was
generally feasible. The study did not extend the analysis to higher abstractions to
establish the point at which further abstractions would be not feasible or acceptable.
Hence the upper limit or potential of the scheme is not known.
Despite the apparent feasibility of the 1000 Mld abstraction, the study recommended
an abstraction of 750 Mld only and this has been further reduced to 600 Mld now for
implementation.
Figure 4.9 and Figure 4.10 shows the layout of the proposed scheme.
This illustrates the low level of confidence and uncertainty in assessing estimates of
groundwater yield and potential.
For the purpose of establishing groundwater potential within the basin and within
Selangor in general, it is important that some efforts be made to find ways to increase
reliability, consistency and confidence levels of such assessments.
4.4 HORAS scheme at Bestari Jaya
Based on the positive findings of the HORAS study at Kg. Sg. Darah, a second study
was initiated by Lembaga Urus Air Selangor and carried out by JPZ with the intention
of using the existing mining ponds at Bestari Jaya with a similar function. (i.e. water
supply using surface and groundwater) and based on the same observations.
A key observation was the relatively high residual flows recorded at the barrage as
shown in Figure 4.11 for the period between 2002 to 2012. As highlighted earlier, it
is vital that the apparent high residual flows observed at the barrage be examined to
ascertain if it was contributed by larger than necessary releases from the existing Sg.
Tinggi and Sg. Selangor dams. Data on the releases from the dams and other relevant
data have not been made available for this purpose, as yet.

Main Report
The basic premise of the proposed scheme is that during wet spells or flood season,
the water from the river flows into the pond and recharges the groundwater. During
dry spells, water from the groundwater aquifer flows into the pond. This is illustrated
in Figure 4.12 and Figure 4.13.
The location of the study area is shown in Figure 4.14 and Figure 4.15.
The proposed scheme involves the use of five existing ponds which are to be
interlinked to act as an integrated unit. Figure 4.16 shows a depiction of the model of
the scheme while Figure 4.17 and Figure 4.18 show the layout of the scheme.
The analysis was carried out for three scenarios viz a viz abstraction rates of 2000
Mld, 3000 Mld and 5000 Mld. JPZ also carried out simulations of the potential
interaction between the surface and groundwater resources for the three scenarios.
The results of the analyses show that the water levels remain relatively stable for the
three scenarios.
Water quality analysis indicates that the water from the pond, at the time of sampling
was within Class II and III based on Water Quality Index and is therefore considered
treatable for water supply.
The construction costs for the scheme is estimated at about RM 654.7 million with
construction carried out over four phases. The costs are based on the assumption that
dredging and excavation will be done by a third party to be appointed by the State
Government of Selangor.
The project area is about 2660 hectares and the total storage capacity of the scheme is
558.8 MCM with a maximum depth of 14 meters.
It was concluded that it was feasible to abstract 5000 Mld without any difficulty but it
was recommended that the scheme be developed with a capacity of 3000 Mld. The
analysis of yields from the scheme show that an abstraction of 5000 Mld was
generally feasible. The study did not extend the analysis to higher abstractions to
establish the point at which further abstractions would be not feasible or acceptable.
Hence the upper limit or potential of the scheme is not known.

Main Report
Despite the apparent feasibility of the 5000 Mld abstraction, the study recommended
an abstraction of 3000 Mld only. Hence the issues of uncertainty in the analysis and
recommendations are similar to that of the proposed HORAS scheme at Kg. Sg.
Darah
4.5 Preliminary comments on proposed HORAS schemes
Two (2) proposed HORAS schemes are based on their respective ultimate pond sizes,
i.e. 17 and 560 MCM. Both proposed schemes could harness a large quantity of yield
based on the hybrid components of groundwater and surface water sources interaction
via a simulation study using MIKE SHE (DHI, 2014).
The modelling results indicate mainly insignificant amount of water exchange

between the groundwater and pond system. As such, the pond water level under the
simulation run, is not affected by the proposed pumping scheme of various capacities.
In other words, the groundwater resources are unlimited in the fullest sense of the
word.
If assuming that, this hybridity could be conveniently partitioned into two, i.e. (1)
surface (ORS), and (2) groundwater component (HORAS), a simple surface water
balance calculation can be used as a stand-alone module to estimate the respective
constribution of excess surface water component in ORS and groundwater
contribution separately. In this case, the difference between groundwater and surface
water component could be clearly demarcated for better.
4.5.1 Surface Water Off River Storage Conceptualization
The utilization of existing pond storage system for dual flood retention and domestic
water supply purpose is not a new concept per se. It has been practiced worldwide as
well as in Malaysia. The conceptual set up is akin to the conventional type of pump
storage scheme of both water supply and peaking power hydropower schemes.
Nevertheless, some different names and terms, such as off-river storage (ORS) or
bunded storage (BS) scheme or in the flood mitigation measures, detention or
retention pond are also being interchangeably adopted to describe this similar concept
and set up.

Main Report
The modus operandi of an ORS scheme is to capture or intercept or attenuate the

higher flows during wet seasons, or else they will be discharged to the seas, or is
considered as wastage in the context of water resources planning. This is carried out
by diverting the excess flows for storage and subsequently is to be utilized during
drier seasons.
This conceptualization at strategic layout of the pond system dictates that the storage
could be put into beneficial use rather than evacuating the stored flood waters later in
anticipation of the excess flow during the next storm event, in the case of a flood
detention pond.
This ample storage if can be found in the vicinity of the river course, can be
effectively utilized as raw source water for water treatment plants nearby in the
capacity of long term yield or for mostly short term emergency purpose. All in all,
similar successful pump storage ORS schemes currently under operation are:
 KIPC pump storage system in Sg. Dungun, Terengganu;

 Sg. Tuaran bunded storage in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah;
 KLIA/Sg. Labu ORS in Salak Tinggi, Selangor;
 Milau dam in Kudat, Sabah;
 Sg. Muda-Mengkuang dam in Seberang Prai, Penang;
 Selangor-Tinggi pump refill scheme, Selangor;
 Melaka bunded storage in Durian Tunggal, Melaka; and
 Semenyih rubber dam augmentation scheme in Langat, Selangor, to mention
a few.
Other than providing additional yield to the existing water supply system, one of the
major and obvious advantages of ORS is perhaps due to its extended hydraulic
detention time, other than flood storage and attenuation mechanism that can be
readily evidenced, this longer detention time also offers an opportunity to “polish” the
inflows to a certain acceptable water quality standard similarly to attenuation
mechanism in wetland concept for wastewater treatment.
Internal biochemical cycles as well as physical processes of combined forms of

volatilization/degradation, tissue assimilation, uptake by algae community, physical

Main Report
sedimentation within the enclosed water body can be readily evidenced from the past
experiences of the consultant.
Some chemicals and nutrients are evidently degraded to acceptable water quality
standards, such as ammonia (NH3/NH4), that is oxidized, volatized, settled, and
uptake in the pond/aquatic phase. In addition, if an anoxic and anaerobic condition
can be maintained, the fully ionized form of nitrogen, i.e. nitrate (NO3) can also be
effectively reduced via denitrification mechanism.
A prelimary review of the extended streamflow records of Sg. Selangor @ Rantau

Panjang streamflow station shows a sharp depletion in the annual average flow (AAF)
vis-a-vis observed and augmented records used in the SMHB design study (1999).
4.5.2 Yield Estimate For ORS Scheme
The yield estimate for ORS scheme is set up based on the residual flow at the Bestari
Jaya intake (CA= 1554 km2). The residual flow is estimated by deducting the flow by
3300 Mld to account for SSP scheme abstraction and environmental flow. long term
time series from 1948 to 2002 was adopted.
The operator at the Bestari Jaya barrage (CA= 1554 km2) has measured the residual
flow over flow the weir at the intake. However this data from 2002 to present was
not available during the preparation of this report. Therefore, the assessment was only
continued up to 2002 prior to the joint operation of Tinggi-Selangor reservoir system.
The residual flow is estimated by deducting the total abstraction (3000 Mld) and
environmental flow requirement (300 Mld) from the the long term time series. The
surpluses are then diverted to the pond system. Depend on the size of the pond,
occasionally there is some additional residual to be routed to the seas.
The water balance equation was set up to estimate the drawdown of the pond system
by substracting the evaporation losses, i.e. 4 mm/day at the FSL of the pond on
exercising conservatism. It is assumed that the seepage into the adjacent groundwater
aquifer is negligible.
A 98% reliability and a 36-month critical period criteria is adopted in the ORS
calculation.

Main Report
4.5.3 Results and Discussions
The result of ORS without the groundwater contribution shows a nonlinear

relationship between the net yield and the pond live storage. For ORS to operate
according to the conventional yield definition, the reliable net yield that can be
realized are much lower than the combined groundwater-surface water interation of
HORAS.
Table 4.6 shows a summary of yield-storage relationship for pond size starting from
17 to ultimate 560 MCM (also see Figures 4.19 and Figure 4.20).
For the surface water reservoir yield estimation, a regulatory or hydrological limit is
normally reached with a nonlinear behavior between the estimated yield and storage
requirement. Essentially, a nonlinear bahavior exhibits the marginal and diminishing
return could be achieved. The yield-storage relationship is shown in Figure 4.21.
The following observations were made:
A HORAS system potentially results in much higher yields if compared to the

conventional ORS system that excludes the contribution of the ample groundwater
component. The estimated reliable yields under ORS alone, are substantially lower
vis-a-vis HORAS. As such, the relative contribution of groundwater zone is therefore
deemed extremely important for the HORAS system and this contribution makes up
the difference in low ORS yield. For both HORAS pond system as reported in the
study, 750 and 5000 Mld could be harnessed confidently by the ultimate 17 and 560
MCM storage development in the lower Sg. Selangor basin.
It must be cautioned that the reliability yield criteria commonly used in the
conventional water supply scheme is absent or not explicitly reported in the proposed
HORAS scheme. Therefore this could not be comparable vis-a-vis conventional water
supply design criteria.
The conventional definition of safe yield of groundwater development is defined as “

the maximum quantity of water that can be guaranteed during a critical dry period and
the draft from the groundwater zone ehich can continued indefinitely”. It is assumed

Main Report
that this would be the case for potential groundwater development plan under
HORAS.
Alternatively to the other end of the extreme, at best, the storage of the proposed pond
system could only be used as a supplementary or ad hoc basic for raw water
augmentation to the existing SSP scheme at Bestari Jaya intake (2700 Mld)
especially during periods of shortfall and exceptional prolonged dry spell but cannot
be continued indefinitely or in perpetuaty.
The simulation run only for one (1) year on 2009 appears inadequate, as carried out
by MIKE SHE (DHI, 2014) water balance model. The results for both pond systems
showed a very minor impact on the surrounding groundwater level by groundwater-
surface interfacial water exchange. It is believed that the groundwater inflows by the
deep aquifer (> 20 m deep) into the proposed ponds by gravity are in large and
unlimited quantity based on a simple flux estimate or calculation by multiplying the
perimetered area with assumed conductiviries of 1.0 m/day and 5.0 m/day.
The boundary condition imposed by the HORAS MIKE SHE (DHI, 2014) model is
also believed to be a Diriclet or 1st type as mentioned briefly in the report.
Neverthess, this has to be confirmed at the next stage of the Study. If this is truly the
case, the lowering of the water level in the pond would create a substantial head
potential toward the pond as the pond water level drops. Most importantly, by
calculation, this enormous head/gradient in turn induces massive inflows from
groundwater to surface water zone. Actual measurement in the form of long term
seepage instrumentation perhaps can be used to answer most of the problem on the
reliability of the groundwater influx to the proposed pond.
Groundwater sustainability issue in the HORAS scheme remains to be doubtful

perhaps it could be explained by a water balance rationale. If the groundwater
recharge of the entire Sg. Selangor basin (strictly based on surface or river watershed
and excluding the interbasin groundwater movement) can be estimated by a back-of-
envelop calculation, as it is based optimistically on about 5 to 7% of the mean annual
rainfall (MAR, 2400 mm/year), the groundwater recharge is only equivalent to about
120 to 168 mm/year. Assuming an optimistical 100% recharge rate could be possibly
achieved at the downstream in the vicinity of HORAS ponds, this translates into some
186 to 261 MCM/year (or 509 to 715 Mld). This indicates by the fundamental

Main Report
principle of mass balance, the groundwater aquifer, apparently with its vast fossil
water reserve from the regional groundwater aquifer (which have to be verified by
field testing and investigation) will then be able to contribute to a larger HORAS’s
reliable yield regardless of the annual precipitation recharge.
It is recommended that further work on verification by a much longer simulation

period vis-a-vis one-year water balance might be warranted. In addition, with these
longer monitoring records and evidences, plenty of grounwater inflow into the pond
could be confidently established. One of this field techniques to estimate the inflow
and outflow of the surface-subsurface interface is the installation of a simple form of
seepometer or some high tech type of electronic self extracting seepage measuring
devices, where the groundwater balance can be estimated for a given time interval.
Figure 4.22 shows a conceptualization of a half-barrel tank seepometer with plastic
collection bag attached.
For brevity, table below shows the relative contributions of separate groundwater and
surface water component of the HORAS scheme. The contribution of the
groundwater component is highly significant and almost unlimited as vividly shown
in the last column of the table below.
HORAS and ORS Scheme

Incremental From
Recommended
Yield Mld groundwater
HORAS Incremental Yield incremental
This Study only component
scheme Mld yield HORAS
based on ORS Mld
Mld
only Col 3 – col 4
17 MCM 500 to 1000 750 125 625
560 MCM 3000 to 7000 5000 1367 3633

Main Report
4.6 Risks
The development of groundwater is not without risks. The risks of groundwater

development associated with existing and proposed groundwater resources has not
been examined or addressed explicitly in any study to date.
Table 4.7 summaries the risks identified in this Study pertaining to groundwater use.
The risks are assessed with regard to probability or likelihood of the risk and severity
of impact. The relevant matrices are as shown in Table 4.8 to Table 4.10. These
risks are both, general to groundwater development and specific to proposed
groundwater schemes within the Sg. Selangor basin.
The major categories of risks are:-
i) Reliability of yield assessments

ii) Saline intrusion
iii) Subsidence
iv) Pollution of groundwater resources
v) Exhaustion of supply
vi) Impact on surface water sources and supply
vii) Potential under utilisation of groundwater resources
The proposed mitigative measures are summarised in Table 4.7.
In general, there is a need to streamline the approach to groundwater potential

assessments and for more rigorous analyses to ascertain the extent to which issues
such as saline intrusion, subsidence and pollution from surface water resources pose a
risk.
There is a need to scale down development of large schemes and implement these
schemes in a staged manner to ascertain impact at lower levels of abstraction.
Better long term monitoring facilities are also required, especially for larger schemes
in combination with a comprehensive model of the resources (surface and
groundwater) within the basin.

Main Report
Development within the groundwater catchments needs to be also controlled to limit

pollution and subsidence risks.
Lastly the groundwater schemes are assessed independently of each other although
the abstractions are from the same aquifer. In the case of large schemes such as that
proposed for HORAS, the impact of simultaneous abstractions may need to be
evaluated.
4.7 Proposed Action Plan for Groundwater Development within the Sg. Selangor
Basin.
The proposed action plan for groundwater development within the Sg. Selangor basin
is generally based on the mitigative measures identified in the risk assessments.
The plan is summarised in Table 4.11.

Main Report
Table 4.1: Locations of Exploration Wells for 2000 JMG Study

Well No Location Coordinates Depth of well Water Quality
(m)
KSE01 Kg Kuantan 367500 - -
372150
KSE02 Bt Rotan - Ijok 373400 33 Salt water
365900
KSE03 Kg Parit Mahang 376200 29.5 Fresh water
365900
KSE04 Kg Baru Ijok 379500 - -
366700
KSE05 Kg Hang Tuah 37900 - -
374450
KSE06 Kg Lubuk Jaya 368600 33 Brackish water
374450
KSE07 Kg Baharu Pasangan 373900 36 Brackish water
373450
KSE08 Kg Raja Musa (1) 368500 32 Fresh water
377500
KSE09 Kg Raja Musa 372500 35 Fresh water
377100
KSE10 Kg Seri Makmur 377300 29 Fresh water
377400
KSE11 Kawasan Lombong 380300 31 Fresh water
Berjuntai 377500
KSE12 Kawasan Lombong 380300 15 Fresh water
Berjuntai 380150
KSE13 Jalan ke Tg Karang 377300 34 Salt water
364600
KSE14 Kg Seri Tiram Jaya 362700 45 -
382450
KSE15 Ladang Sg Selangor 370250 36 Brackish water
37000
KSE16 Ladang Sg Rambai 374450 31 Brackish water
369850
Note: Units are in mg/L unless otherwise stated.
Source: Potensi Sumber Air Tanah Kuala Selangor – Batang Berjuntai – Tanjung Karang, Kuala Selangor, JMG, 2000.

Main Report
Table 4.2: Water Quality Results of Groundwater Analysis from Exploration Wells
Chemical
Exploration Wells
Analysis
Parameter KSE3 KSE 6 KSE 7 KSE 8 KSE 9 KSE 10 KSE 11 KSE 12 KSE 13
Ca l ci um 97.0 164.0 111.0 1.8 1.1 4.7 22.0 0.9 35.0
Sodi um 18.0 46.0 24.0 3.3 2.4 15.0 7.8 1.0 58.0
Pota s s i um 253.0 990.0 148.0 143.0 35.0 9.9 6.1 9.8 890.0
Bi ca rbona te 16.0 24.0 12.0 6.7 8.5 7.7 2.9 1.7 27.0
Chl ori de 203.0 1,844.0 399.0 147.0 1.0 2.0 14.0 2.0 1,445.0
Sul pha te 3.0 62.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Ni tra te 7.7 0.6 0.9 0.6 6.6 7.3 8.0 37.0 1.3
Ammoni a 1.3 2.6 1.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 2.5
Iron 4.1 4.8 0.2 2.4 0.2 51.0 14.0 7.3 18.0
Ma nga nes e 0.3 2.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.9
Copper 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Lea d 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Zi nc 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Al umi ni um 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Ni ckel 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Stronti um 0.08 0.4 0.66 0.02 0.1 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.3
Ba ri um 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
pH 7.7 6.9 7.5 7.6 8.2 7.1 7.2 6.8 7.6
Conducti vi ty 1,453.0 6,260.0 1,610.0 715.0 358.0 208.0 170.0 45.0 5,040.0
(цmhos /cm)
Si l i cone 56.0 14.0 17.0 24.0 17.0 31.0 33.0 17.0 14.0
Tota l Sol i ds 1,260.0 3,668.0 1,032.0 704.0 250.0 430.0 314.0 240.0 2,996.0
Di s s ol ved 840.0 3,436.0 932.0 412.0 198.0 148.0 122.0 62.0 2,696.0
Sol i d
Col our 100.0 5.0 10.0 80.0 30.0 100.0 50.0 40.0 10.0
Turbi di ty 561.0 103.0 7.0 302.0 13.0 253.0 110.0 83.0 121.0
(NTU)
Ni tri te 7.557 0.015 1.075 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.013 0.190
Ha rdnes s 98.0 599.0 376.0 18.0 13.0 74.0 87.0 6.0 326.0

Main Report
Table 4.3: Locations of Tube Wells
Depth of
Well No Location Coordinates Water Quality
well (m)
SPZ5 Taman Pertanian 377400 16 Freshwater
Agroteknologi 374000
SPZ6 Taman Pertanian 377800 19.5 Freshwater
BKSPZ7 Taman Pertanian 377600 19.5 Freshwater
BKSPZ8 Kg Berjuntai Tin 377400 - -
374000
BKSPZ9 Kg Berjuntai Tin 377800 - -
374000
BKZTW3 Taman Pertanian 375500 30.0 Freshwater
BKSTW4 Kg Raja Muda Musa 379300 34.0 Freshwater
367600
Source: Adapted from Kajian Sumber Air Tanah di Lembangan Sungai Selangor, Selangor Darul Ehsan, JMG,2004.

Main Report
Table 4.4: Water Quality Analysis from Groundwater Wells by JMG

WHO/MOH
Parameter BKSTW3 BKSTW4 BKSPZ6 BKSPZ7
Standard
Turbidity (NTU) 5 - 156 - -
Colour (Hazen) 15 - 250 - -
pH 6.5 – 8.5 7.8 8.0 6.6 6.6
Conductivity (uS/cm) - - 1,615 - -
Total Suspended Solids - 204 1,104 258 258
Total Dissolved Solids 1,000 160 948 136 136
Alkalinity - 228 - 17 17
Hardness, CaCO3 500 46 - 33 33
Potassium, K - 9.6 47 9 9
Sodium, Na 200 36 303 27 27
Magnesium, Mg 150 8.6 - - -
Calcium, Ca - 4.3 12 2.6 2.6
Chloride, CI 250 20 361 14 14
Sulphate, SO4 250 <3 <3 <3 <3
Carbonate, CO3 - <1 <1 <1 <1
Bicarbonate HCO3 - 139 305 108 108
Iron, Fe 0.3 - 6 - -
Fluoride, F 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Nitrate, NO3 10 - <0.5 - -
Ammonia, NH4 - 2.2 <0.5 2.9 2.9
Silica, SiO2 - - 20 - -
Phosphorus, P - <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2
Nitrite, NO2 - - 0.03 - -
Barium, Ba - <0.1 - <0.1 <0.1
Copper, Cu 1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Arsenic, As 0.05 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Manganese, Mn 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.1 1.1
Zinc, Zn 3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Aluminium, Al 0.2 <0.1 0.7 <0.1 <0.1
Lead, Pb 0.05 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Cadmium, Cd 0.003 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Silver, Ag - <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Selenium, Se 0.01 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Strontium, Sr - <0.01 - <0.01 <0.01
Chronium, Cr 0.05 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Main Report
Table 4.5: Water Quality for Groundwater Analysis of Test Wells

Test Well No Recommended Raw Water Quality
Parameter
KSTW 1 KSTW2 Criteria, MOH, 2004
Ca l ci um (Ca ) 1.0 12.7 -
Sodi um (Na ) 2.3 4.8 200
Potta s s i um (K) 68.0 3.1 -
Bi ca rbona te (HCO3) 8.0 2.6 -
Chl ori de (CI) 147.0 70.2 250
Sul pha te (SO4) 43.0 1.0 250
Ni tra te (NO3) 0.8 4.5 10
Ammoni a (NH 4) 1.2 1.1 1.5
Iron (Fe) 0.14 17.80 1.0
Ma nga nes e (Mn) 0.1 0.2 0.2
Copper (Cu) 0.1 0.1 1.0
Lea d (Pb) 0.0 0.0 0.05
Zi nc (Zn) 0.1 0.2 3
Al umi ni um (Al ) 0.1 0.1 -
Ni ckel (Ni ) 0.1 0.1 -
Stronti um (Sr) 0.01 0.05 -
Ba ri um (Ba ) 0.1 0.1 -
Aci di ty (pH)
Conducti vi ty 7.1 6.98 5.5 - 9.0
(цmhos /cm) 372.6 94.2 -
Si l i ca (Si O2) 17.0 29.0 -
Tota l Sol i ds 215.7 124.4 -
Tota l Di s s ol ved Sol i ds 189.0 77.2 -
Col our 40.0 20.0 -
Turbi di ty (NTU) 1.0 24.4 -
Ni tri te (NO2) 0.006 0.075 -
Ha rdnes s 12.0 52.0 500

Main Report
Table 4.6 Yield Storage Relationship of ORS Scheme
HORAS scheme Max critical

Net yield Mld
live storage MCM period month
17 125 10
50 187 14
100 426 16
150 600 22
200 744 23
400 1118 33
560 1367 103
Existing combined Tinggi Net yield Mld Max critical
Selangor scheme period month
Live storage MCM
345 (115+230) 3000 36

Main Report
Table 4.7: Preliminary Assessment of Risk for Groundwater Development
Inherent Ranking Residual Ranking

Activity Hazard & Status Causes Comments/ Constraints Control Measures
L S Risk L S Risk
Development Reliability of yields Proposals based on Surface water resources 3 4 H Carry out separate review before 2 2 L
of New major estimated in study done by a analysed based on more implementation
groundwater explorations and single consultant stringent standards such as 1
schemes studies in 50 year return periods for
droughts
No independent peer Scale down proposed

review development
Flaws in approach. Development to be phased out to

Analysis and ascertain performance of early
assumptions phases before proceeding with
subsequent phases
Field work relatively Streamline approach to

limited in scope, groundwater assessments
extent and duration
Develop comprehensive
groundwater model of basin.
Use model to assess
groundwater potential and
evaluate impact of simultaneous
abstractions within the same
aquifer. Model to also include
surface pollution sources,
surface water etc.
Install more groundwater

monitoring points for larger
schemes

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Pollution of Uncontrolled point If left unchecked, can cause 3 3 M Identify areas to be protected 2 2 L
groundwater source and non point source existing wells to be shut
pollution leading to down, in particular the
pollution of smaller wells/aquifers and
groundwater source those exposed to higher
extent of pollution eg in the
vicinity of areas without
domestic sewage facilities
Gazette areas for larger

groundwater sources or schemes
Tighten control or monitoring of

pollution within groundwater
catchments
Saline intrusion Prolonged and/or 2 3 M Monitor groundwater sources 2 2 L

excessive abstraction and surrounds for early signs of
of groundwater saline intrusion, if any
without adequate
recharge or
supplementation
from surface water
Overestimation of Carry out rigorous analysis

groundwater recharge supported by longer term field
work to establish risks of saline
intrusion and revise
groundwater potential
assessments accordingly
Scale down proposed

development

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk

schemes
Development to be phased out to

ascertain performance of early
phases before proceeding with
subsequent phases
Subsidence Prolonged Can cause damage to 3 3 M Monitor groundwater sources 2 2 L

groundwater buildings within zone of and surrounds for early signs of
abstraction causing influence, if any. settlement, if any
lowering of water
table leading to soil
consolidation and
settlement
Can damage infrastructure Carry out rigorous analysis

such as roads and drainage supported by longer term field
facilities work to establish risks of
subsidence and revise
groundwater potential
May affect irrigation Identify built up facilities that

may be affected and monitor for
any impact
May alter flood plain limits, Avoid or limit development in

if settlement is substantial zones prone to settlement

schemes

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Scale down proposed

development

subsequent phases
Impact on surface Link between 3 4 H Carry out rigorous analysis 3 2 M

water sources worse groundwater and supported by longer term field
than anticipated surface water sources work to establish risks of saline
not established or intrusion and revise
known clearly groundwater potential

schemes
Scale down proposed

development

subsequent phases
Underutilization of HORAS and 3 2 M Streamline approach to 3 1 L

groundwater subsequent study groundwater assessments
indicate yields of as
much as 6000 Mld
but proposed
development scaled
down arbitrarily

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Modelling of options
not expended to
failure case to
ascertain maximum
theoretical yield.
Exhaustion of supply Extreme weather 3 4 H Supplementation with potable 2 2 L

supply from surface water
sources where feasible for small
sources
Over abstraction Carry out rigorous analysis

supported by longer term field
work to establish risks of climate
change and revise groundwater
potential assessments
accordingly

Lembangan Sungai Selangor (2015 – 2020)
Main Report
Table 4.8: Likelihood Scale

Likelihood Score Probability of One-off event
Improbable 1 1 in 1,000 (0.1%)
Unlikely 2 1 in 100 (1%)
Possible 3 1 in 10 (10%)
Likely 4 More likely than not
Most Likely 5 Almost certain
Table 4.9: Severity Scale

Severity Score
Minor 1
Moderate 2
Significant 3
Substantial 4
Catastrophic 5
Table 4.10: Risk Assessment Matrix (5*5)

Severity Score
1 2 3 4 5
Likelihood 1 L L L M M
Score 2 L L M M H
3 L M M H H
4 M M H H H
5 M H H H H
L = Low
M = Medium
H = High

Main Report
Table 4.11: Proposed Action Plan for Groundwater
4.1 Investigate groundwater LUAS to cooperate with JMG and any Guidelines LUAS / JMG √ There is an urgent need to
resources within the basin other relevant authority to develop streamline approach to
criteria and approach to assessments of assessments of groundwater
groundwater potential. potential to ensure consistency in
recommendations.
LUAS is currently undertaking a

comprehensive groundwater study
for Selangor to assess supply
potential of groundwater.
Independent peer review of HORAS Review report LUAS √ There is also an equally urgent
schemes before implementation. need to carry out more rigorous
and comprehensive analysis of
groundwater to ascertain extent of
risks associated with issues such
as saline intrusion, subsidence and
impact on surface water resources.
Carry out study to assess suitable Study report LUAS / JMG √ Fieldwork and monitoring of
permanent and long term groundwater groundwater resources, in
monitoring points and parameters to be particular for the larger schemes
monitored. should be reinforced and
expanded, where necessary to
Install proposed monitoring points and Monitoring report LUAS / JMG √ facilitate decision making.
monitor groundwater resources.
Develop comprehensive computer model Database LUAS / JMG √

of basin complete with groundwater and
surface water data for longer term
monitoring and decision making.

Main Report
4.2 Implement groundwater Develop HORAS schemes in stages and Implementation and UPEN / LUAS √ √ √ 
schemes identified as monitor performance and impact before monitoring report
having substantial potential proceeding with subsequent stages.
and established to be
feasible
4.3 Protect groundwater Gazette groundwater catchments as Gazettment of LUAS √

catchments protected areas groundwater
catchments as
protected areas
Monitor Groundwater/HORAS resources Monitoring report LUAS / JMG / KKM / √ √ √ 

(water quantity and quality) Jabatan Kimia
4.4 Continue exploration of Efforts need to be taken to explore other Study report LUAS / JMG √ √ √ The maximum limit is not known.
additional resources within potential sources.
river basin
Note:
S Short
M Medium
L Long

Main Report
Figure 4.1: Freshwater, Brackish Water and Saline Water Zonation for Northern
Selangor
Sekinchan
inchan
Tanjung Karang
Kuala Selangor
Source: Kajian Sumber Air Tanah di Lembangan Sg. Selangor, Selangor Darul Ehsan, JMG, 2004.

Main Report
Figure 4.2: Locations of JMG Groundwater Wells

Main Report
Figure 4.3: Locations of the Wells in Sg. Selangor Basin (JMG 2004)

Main Report
Figure 4.4: Hydrogeology Maps of Sg. Selangor Basin

Main Report
Figure 4.5: Location Plan of HORAS Scheme at Kg. Sg. Darah
Source : HORAS Study at Kg. Sg. Darah

Main Report
Figure 4.6: Contour of Head Elevation in the Aquifer due to Pumping of 750 MLD from
Pond
Figure 4.7: Contour of Head Elevation in the Aquifer due to Pumping of 1000 MLD
from Pond

Main Report
Figure 4.8: Contour of Head Elevation in the Aquifer due to Pumping of 500 MLD from
Pond
Figure 4.9: Project Site Plan Layout and Surrounding Area

Main Report
Figure 4.10: Detail Layout of the Proposed Pond

Main Report
Figure 4.11: Residual Flow at Bestari Jaya Barrage (2002-2012)

Main Report
Figure 4.12: Flood From River Inflows to Ponds and Groundwater Recharger from Flood Water to Aquifer during flood Season

Main Report
Figure 4.13: Groundwater flows from Aquifer to Pond during Dry Season

Main Report
Figure 4.14: Location of Study for HORAS Scheme at Bestari Jaya

Main Report
Figure 4.15: Location of Proposed HORAS Scheme at Bestari Jaya

Main Report
Figure 4.16: Close up view of river model with proposed pond system

Main Report
Figure 4.17: Project Site Plan Layout Surrounding Area

Main Report
Figure 4.18: Layout of Proposed HORAS Scheme at Bestari Jaya

Main Report
Figure 4.19: ORS System: 17 MCM capacity pond at Bestari Jaya Township
20.0
18.0
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
Jan-48 Jan-58 Jan-68 Jan-78 Jan-88 Jan-98
17 MCM: 125 Mld : 10 month critical period
This is the case due to limitation in pond size: the pond recharges itself fairly quickly
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 4.doc 4-i

Main Report
Figure 4.20: ORS System: 560 MCM capacity pond at downstream of Bestari Jaya
Intake
120 400
350
100
300
80
250
MCM 60 200 MCM/mth
150
40
100
20
50
0 0
mm/yy
100 MCM: 426 Mld: 16 month critical period
600 350
500 300
250
400
200
MCM 300 MCM/mth
150
200
100
100 50
0 0
mm/yy
560 MCM: 1367 Mld : 103 month critical period
The reservoir fails to recover within a reasonable time period, critical period of 36 month; the
critical period of stretching the full limit of the pond system, is fairly wrong, assuming a 12
month drawdown period from full to the MOL, the recovering period for reservoir to refill, 91
month or 7.5 years. This is unacceptable as longer refilling periods creates anxiety to
uncertainty in this inefficient and ineffective water resources management.
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 4.doc 4-ii

Main Report
RED COLOR: Excess flows/runoffs of the pond system; the flows are effectively run to the
Straits of Malacca.
Figure 4.21: Yield Storage Curve of ORS system
1600
1400 Y = -0.003S2 + 4.102S + 23.25

1200
R² = 0.994
1000
Mld 800
600
400
200
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
storage MCM
Non linearity in yield-storage relationship
Design Criteria by MWA: 1:50-year returns period: 36 month duration
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 4.doc 4-iii

Main Report
Figure 4.22: Seepometer or Seepage Measurement Meter: A Sketch
Lee and Cherry, 1978
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 4.doc 4-iv

Main Report
5.0 ENSURE CLEAN WATER
5.1 Introduction
The Department of Environment (DOE) is responsible for implementing the river water
quality monitoring programme to establish the baselines and to detect water quality changes
in the rivers across the country. Within the Sg. Selangor river basin, there are nine (9) DOE
monitoring stations along the major rivers and tributaries for water quality.
Each station monitors 29 parameters in total which include the six key parameters used for the
general classification of rivers (see Table 5.2), namely, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3-N), pH, dissolved oxygen (DO),
and suspended solids (TSS). Figure 5.1 presents the locations of the DOE/ASMA water
quality monitoring stations in the Sg. Selangor Basin and Table 5.1 lists the water quality
sampling stations monitored by DOE along Sg. Selangor.
5.2 Water Quality Classifications and Standards
A number of methods are used to evaluate and classify the water quality status of the rivers in
Malaysia. The Department of Environment and the Ministry of Health have developed
standards for water quality generally based on the beneficial use of the water.
Table 5.2 gives an overview on the standards, classification and indices used for water quality
in Malaysia.
5.3 Water Quality Trends
The water quality trend for Sg. Selangor is assessed based on the data obtained from
DOE/ASMA for the period between years 2007 to 2013, which are limited to the six key
parameters of the Water Quality Index, total coliform and heavy metals. As a gauge on the
overall water quality status of the river, the first level of assessment is based on the general
Water Quality Index (WQI). This is followed by an assessment of the trends in the six key
parameters, namely DO, BOD, COD, NH3-N, TSS and pH, total coliform and heavy metals
using their respective indexes as the means of assessment. The lower the parameter index, the
worse the pollution status in terms of that parameter.

Main Report
On the overall, the water quality at most of the monitoring stations along the mainstream of
Sg. Selangor is within the Class II limit, although some of the tributaries are of poorer quality.
The status of the water quality along Sg. Selangor and the main tributaries are described
below. A separate section has been dedicated for discussion of the polluted rivers (see Section
5.5).
Sg. Selangor
There are five (5) DOE/ASMA water quality monitoring stations along the main river of Sg.
Selangor (i.e. 1Sr01, 1Sr04, 1Sr05, 1Sr10 and 1Sr11). The average water quality at all these
stations reflected by the overall WQI is generally within Class I and Class II, except for the
most downstream station 1Sr01 which is consistently within Class III (see Figure 5.2). In
terms of pollution status, the categories of Class I, Class II and Class III place the river
generally within clean to slightly polluted status. Based on the limited data available for
assessment, the main parameters of concern along Sg. Selangor are BOD, NH3-N, TSS, Total
Coliform and Iron; these parameters are observed to have low index values or high
concentrations at a number of the monitoring stations.
Most stations along Sg. Selangor showed BOD and NH3-N Indexes that are within the slightly
polluted status except at three stations (1Sr01, 1Sr10 and 1Sr11) where the BOD Index falls
into polluted status on several occasions (see Appendix 5.2). High concentrations of BOD
and NH3-N in Sg. Selangor are attributed mainly to the direct wastewater discharges from the
sewage treatment plants in the residential/township areas and wastewater from the industrial
areas. Pollution loads are also received through surface run-off from the plantation areas as
well as wastewater from the numerous poultry farms spread over the basin area that are
indirectly discharged into the rivers via the myriad of storm drains.
The TSS Index along Sg. Selangor is also relatively low and falls into polluted status (see
Appendix 5.2). High concentrations of TSS are mainly due to the sand mining and earthwork
activities carried out along Sg. Selangor.
Total coliform counts are high along Sg. Selangor and places the river system consistently
within Class IV and Class V limits with respect to this parameter (see Appendix 5.2). The Sg.
Sembah tributary has the highest coliform counts and correspondingly the station 1Sr10
which monitors Sg. Selangor at a point just downstream of the Sg. Sembah confluence, also

Main Report
has high levels of coliform. High coliform counts are typically derived from sewage
discharges from the residential/township areas, wastewater discharge from animal farms as
well as the microbiological substances in soil. The Sg. Sembah sub-basin contains the
townships/residential areas of Rawang, Puteri Heights, Bestari Jaya, Bandar Country Homes,
etc and there also many farming activities scattered within the sub-basin; these would be the
sources contributing to microbiological contamination of the river.
The concentrations of heavy metals (As, Hg and Cd) in the river system are within the Class
II limits except for the concentration of iron which slightly exceeds the Class II limit of 1
mg/L on a few occasions (see Appendix 5.2). Most Malaysian rivers have fairly high
concentrations of iron because of the nature of the soils; hence this parameter is not of major
concern other than that the water treatment plants will need to provide for adequate treatment
to remove iron from the water supplied to consumers to avoid staining issues.
Sg. Batang Kali
Sg. Batang Kali is the main tributary of Sg. Selangor. There is one (1) DOE/ASMA
monitoring station along this river (1Sr03). The records indicate that the water quality of this
river is within Class II limit which is in the clean water category (see Appendix 5.2). There
are however, four parameters which exceeded the Class II limits i.e. BOD, NH3-N, Total
Coliform and Mercury.
The recorded BOD and NH3-N Indexes have decreased from the clean status to slightly
polluted status (see Appendix 5.2). The possible sources of BOD and NH3-N are from the
domestic wastewaters discharged from the residential/township areas of Batang Kali Town,
Kg. Sentosa, Taman Bunga Raya, Kg. Rantau Panjang and Kg. Sekolah, industrial wastewater
discharges from the Miel Industrial area as well as surface run-off from the plantation areas
such as Ladang Batang Kali and Ladang Sg. Tamu.
The total coliform counts in Sg. Batang Kali is within the Class V limit on most occasions
(see Appendix 5.2). The major contributors of this pollutant are the domestic wastewater
discharged from the residential/township areas nearby including Batang Kali Town, Kg.
Sentosa, Taman Bunga Raya, Kg. Rantau Panjang and Kg. Sekolah, and the wastewater from
the poultry farms located within this sub-basin.

Main Report
Heavy metals (As, Cd and Fe) concentrations in Sg. Batang Kali are generally found to be
within the Class II limits; Mercury levels exceeded the limit between 2009 to 2010 but
dropped back to Class II levels in subsequent years (see Appendix 5.2). The Miel Industrial
area is located upstream of this station; this is a relatively small industrial site with only few
factories. Based on the records of heavy metals and oil & grease, it would appear that this
industrial site has not contributed significant pollution loads to the river system.
Sg. Kerling
Sg. Kerling is a tributary of Sg. Selangor located at the upstream section of the main river.
There is only one DOE/ASMA water quality monitoring station along this river i.e. 1Sr06.
The water quality at station 1Sr06 is observed to be fairly good between Class I and Class II
and within clean status on most occasions (see Appendix 5.2). There is only one parameter
that had exceeded the stipulated limit i.e. total coliform.
The total coliform counts at this station is consistently above the Class V limit of 50000
counts/100ml although there has been a slight drop in the counts in the more recent years (see
Appendix 5.2). The high concentrations of total coliform are likely to be from the domestic
wastewater discharges from Kerling Town and possibly wastewater from the poultry farms.
Sg. Kanching
Sg. Kanching is a third order tributary of Sg. Selangor. There is one (1) number of
DOE/ASMA monitoring station along this river i.e. station 1Sr07. The water quality of this
station is observed to be within Class I and Class II which falls into the clean water category
(see Appendix 5.2). The main parameters that have exceeded the Class II limits are BOD,
NH3-N and Total Coliform.
There has been a significant drop in the BOD Index in recent years, decreasing from the clean
status to slightly polluted status (see Appendix 5.2). Correspondingly, the total coliform
counts have increased. The major contributors of BOD and total coliform are likely to be from
the domestic wastewaters discharged from the residential areas of Taman Tun Teja and Kg.
Melayu Batu 16, with some contribution from the surface run-off from the plantation areas
such as Ladang Chin Nam.

Main Report
Sg. Serendah
Sg. Serendah is also a third order tributary of Sg. Selangor. There is only one (1) DOE/ASMA
monitoring station i.e. 1Sr08. The water quality at this station fluctuates between Class I and
Class II (see Appendix 5.2). In terms of pollution status, this stretch of river is within clean
water status. However, similar to all the other rivers, the same four parameters namely BOD,
NH3-N and Total Coliform have exceeded the Class II limits.
The BOD and NH3-N Indexes show decreasing trends in the recent years, although they
remain within the Class II category (see Appendix 5.2). The contribution towards the BOD
and NH3-N loads are mainly derived from the domestic wastewater discharges from the
residential areas of Kg. Seri Serendah, Desa Melor and Kg. Orang Asli. There are also
poultry farms within the sub-basin which could also contribute to these pollutant loads, as
well as surface run-off from the plantation areas of Serendah Estate and Tempayan Estate.
Similar to other monitoring stations within the Sg. Selangor basin, the total coliform counts at
this station are within the Class V limit of 50000 counts/100ml (see Appendix 5.2). This
could also be attributed to the wastewater discharged from the residential areas and the
poultry farms.
5.4 Water Quality in the Firefly Habitat
Firefly population along the Sg. Selangor is being monitored by FRIM for LUAS. A total of
seven (7) sites are being monitored for population abundance (counts). Other factors such as
rainfall (mm), temperature (oC), relative humidity (%), water quality index (WQI) and salinity
(ppt) were also monitored to study its relativity towards the abundance of the firefly
population at the project site. Salinity is an important ecological factor for the firefly habitat.
The Berembang trees which support the firefly community thrive in waters with very low
salinity and the firefly larvae also requires water that receives fresh water from upstream. The
monitoring was performed to evaluate the status of the water quality upstream and
downstream of the firefly areas during high and low tides. Based on the monitoring
conducted, FRIM concluded that the salinity range between 0.1 and 5.70 ppt appear to have
no effect on the firefly population at the project site. It is also noticed that the water quality
index (WQI) recorded upstream and downstream during high and low tide are fairly constant
between 72 and 75. Table 5.3 presents the average records of the salinity and WQI and the

Main Report
mean firefly population index of abundance between April 2012 and January 2014. The WQI
and salinity for the upstream and downstream of the firefly habitat and the mean firefly
population index of abundance are shown in Appendix 5.3. As indicated by the WQI values
in the table, the water quality has remained fairly constant and therefore any issues on the
firefly community are not likely to be related to water quality but may be caused by other
pressures such as increasing development within the estuary areas.
5.5 Identified Polluted Rivers in the Sg. Selangor Basin
There are two (2) sub-basins i.e. Rawang sub-basin and Kuala Selangor sub-basin which
comprises four (4) rivers that are identified to be slightly polluted rivers (Sg. Rawang, Sg.
Kundang, Sg. Sembah and Sg. Air Hitam). Sg. Rawang and Sg. Kundang are located in the
Rawang sub-basin, whereas Sg. Sembah and Sg. Air Hitam are located in Kuala Selangor
sub-basin.
Sg. Air Hitam
Sg. Air Hitam is a first order tributary of Sg. Selangor which has been identified to be one of
the more polluted rivers within the Sg. Selangor basin. There is one (1) DOE/ASMA
monitoring station along Sg. Air Hitam (1Sr02). The water quality of this river deteriorated
from Class II to Class III from 2007 to 2009; in 2010 there was a slight improvement in the
WQI value although still within the Class III limit (see Appendix 5.2). In terms of the
pollution status, this river is found to be within the slightly polluted category. The main
parameters at this station with indexes that are within the polluted status or have high
concentrations are BOD, NH3-N, TSS and Total Coliform. All of these parameters show
worsening conditions in the most recent available data of 2010.
The main contributors of BOD, NH3-N and Total Coliform are the domestic wastewater
discharges from residential areas such as Kg. Jaya Setia as well as wastewater discharged
from poultry farms found within the sub-basin area.
High concentrations of TSS are mainly due to the sand mining and earthwork activities
carried out along Sg. Air Hitam.

Main Report
Sg. Sembah and its tributaries Sg. Kundang and Sg. Rawang
Sg. Sembah, together with its second order tributaries of Sg. Kundang and Sg. Rawang, are
also identified as rivers within the Sg. Selangor basin that are polluted. There is one (1)
DOE/ASMA monitoring station each along Sg. Sembah (1Sr09), Sg. Kundang (1Sr12) and
Sg. Rawang (1Sr13).
The water quality of these rivers has deteriorated from Class II to Class III (see Appendix
5.2) which classifies the river within the slightly polluted status. The same four main
parameters namely BOD, NH3-N, TSS and Total Coliform are found to contribute towards the
polluted conditions of the river at levels which are the worst among all the tributaries as well
as the main stream of Sg. Selangor.
The main pollution sources that contribute to the high concentrations of BOD, NH3-N and
Total Coliform in Sg. Sembah and its tributaries are the domestic wastewater discharged from
residential/township areas such as Rawang Town, Bandar Country Homes, Puteri Heights
etc., and wastewater discharges from the industrial areas i.e. Rawang Integrated Industrial
Park, Bukit Beruntung Industrial Park, Belmas and Taman Perindustrian Belmas Johan. There
are also plantation areas i.e. Bukit Rawang Estate, Malayan American Plantation, Bristol
Estate, Bintang Rubber Estate, Hong Bee Estate, Lim Kak Estate, Puchong Estate, Ladang
Getah Kundang and K. Garing Estate that can contribute to these pollutant loads.
High concentrations of TSS are also observed and these are attributed to the sand mining,
earthwork and quarry activities that are carried out along Sg. Sembah and its tributaries.
Apart from the parameters BOD, NH3-N, TSS and Total Coliform, the water quality of Sg.
Rawang is also high in Mercury content. The concentrations of Mercury in Sg. Rawang are
noted to be above the Class II limit of 0.001 mg/L (see Appendix 5.2). The main contributor
of Mercury is likely to be from the industrial areas of Rawang Integrated Industrial Park,
Bukit Beruntung Industrial Park and Taman Perindustrian Belmas Johan.

Main Report
5.6 Pressures on Water Quality
5.6.1 Pollution Sources
From the assessment of the available water quality data along various sections of Sg.
Selangor, it would appear that the overall condition of the river is relatively clean. However,
there are pockets along the river and in particular certain tributaries of the main river where
human activities taking place within the river basin are contributing significant pollution
loads to the rivers. The following sections provide the updates on the pollution sources
identified in the IRBM of Sg. Selangor (2007-2012) and includes the findings of the
assessment carried out in this study.
5.6.2 Domestic Wastewater
In 2006, the population within the Sg. Selangor Basin was reported to be about 406,000
persons (Sg. Selangor IRBM Plan, 2007). The recently published 2010 census data for
mukims located inside the river basin (excluding the mukims of Batu, Setapak, Ulu Kelang,
Ijok, Jeram, Tanjong Karang, Kalumpang, and Ulu Bernam which are outside the Sg.
Selangor basin) indicate a population of about 435,924 persons (2010 Census). This is an
increase of about 8% in the total number of people residing within the Sg. Selangor basin
which also indirectly indicates an increase in the amount of domestic wastewater generated.
There are various types of sewage systems being employed within the Sg. Selangor Basin.
They include onsite systems comprising individual septic tanks with some pour flush systems
in some of the rural areas and communal multi-point systems utilizing different sewage
treatment technologies such as oxidation pond, aerated lagoon and extended aeration systems.
Public Sewage Treatment Plants (Public STP)
The majority of the domestic wastewaters produced within the Sg. Selangor Basin are treated
at the public sewage treatment plants operated by Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) who are
responsible for ensuring the final water quality discharged to the water bodies meets the
effluent standards stipulated under the Environmental Quality (Sewage) Regulations 2009.

Main Report
Table 5.4 presents the population equivalent (PE) served by the different sewage treatment
systems.
Data for the STPs are from IWK (May 2014). Data on individual septic tanks and direct
discharge are estimated based on the proportion of the population living in the basin; i.e. 84%
of Hulu Selangor, 26% of Gombak and 44% of Kuala Selangor.
For the Sg. Selangor basin as a whole, it is estimated that about 85.2% of the sewage
discharges are treated by IWK compared to 81% as reported in the IRBM of Sg. Selangor
2007-2012. The direct discharges are also reduced from 3% to 2.2% as illustrated in the
Figure 5.3. These show an improvement in the provision of proper sewage treatment services
to a greater number of households within the Basin. Figure 5.4 presents the locations of the
public STPs maintained by IWK in the Sg. Selangor basin.
The numbers of the public sewage treatment plants have increased compared to the number
reported in the IRBM of Sg. Selangor 2007-2012 especially in the number of medium-sized
and large mechanical plants used in treating the sewage. A majority of the plants utilise
mechanical and primary settlement types of treatment systems and only a few are using the
oxidation pond/aerated lagoon type. Table 5.5 presents the comparison between the numbers
and types of STPs recorded in the IRBM of Sg. Selangor 2007-2012 and the updated statistics
as of May 2014. The numbers show that the design capacity and the actual load differs as
some of the plants have yet to be constructed or are in the implementation stage and some are
operating below design capacity.
Effective from 20th April 2007, the Sewage Effluent Regulation was amended to include three
(3) categories of sewage treatment plant classifications:-
 Category 1 refers to all STPs which are approved after the gazette date of the new
effluent discharge limit.
 Category 2 is specified for all the STPs which were approved after the Guidelines for
Developers, Sewage Treatment Vol. 4 (GDV), 2nd Edition was enforced by the
Department of Sewerage Services in January 1999.
 Category 3 is for all the STPs that were approved before the enforcement of GDV.

Main Report
It is observed that most of the existing sewage treatment plants (203 out of 278) within the
Sg. Selangor Basin are classified under Category 3. This is seen as an issue because the
discharge limits are not as stringent as those imposed on sewage treatment plants operating
under the Category 1 and Category 2. Table 5.6 presents the numbers of the public STPs
operating in accordance to the categories. Appendix 5.4 presents the acceptable conditions of
sewage discharge of Standards A and B as per the Environmental Quality (Sewage)
Regulations 2009.
There are several parameters of major concern in domestic wastewaters. These are BOD 5,
suspended solids and ammoniacal nitrogen. A comparison was made between the types of
sewage treatment systems and their ability to treat wastewater before final discharge. Out of
all the five types of sewage treatment systems used, only the plants operating using
mechanical systems are capable of removing the majority of pollution loads to their
acceptable discharge limits. The comparison among the various types of sewage treatment
systems and their corresponding capability to treat the key parameters is shown in the Table
5.7.
The pollution loads from public STPs on Mukim basis is shown in Table 5.8. It is reported
that the STPs at Rawang has the highest pollution loads (BOD and NH3N) and the least
pollution loads produced is from the STPs at Rasa
Status of upgrading of sewerage systems and sewage treatment
JPP and IWK have ongoing plans and strategies to upgrade the sewerage systems and the
sewage treatment plants in the country. A rationalisation programme has been established for
the Gombak Sewerage Catchment targeting ninety nine (99) STPs. Two (2) of the STPs are
located within the Sg. Selangor Basin and the details are as follows:
1. GBK098 : Upgrade from 2200 PE to 2500 PE

Status: Under Construction : 01 March 13 – 28 February 2016
2. GBK149 : Upgrade from 9900 PE to 15 000 PE

Status: Under Construction : 31 July 13 – 30 July 15
A comprehensive catchment study has yet to be developed for the Kuala Selangor District.
However, decision has been made to establish a long term sewerage infrastructure plan for the

Main Report
district. This catchment strategy is to cater for domestic sewage only and due to insufficient
funding and low population density, the sub-catchments are proposed to be regionalised after
the year 2035. Currently there is only one regional plant in operation, i.e. the Bandar Puncak
Alam Development (Phase 2) sewage treatment plant catering for 300,000 PE.
Future planning and catchment strategy for the Hulu Selangor District is based on the
sewerage master plans by the local authority and IWK. The upgrading, rationalization and
consolidation of sewage treatment plants started in 2006. The main focus is to upgrade or
rationalise the existing plants in line with the target of all plants to achieve Category 1
effluent discharge standards by the year 2017 and 2019 for Standard B and Standard A
respectively.
Under the Majlis Perbandaran Selayang, the sub catchments of Templer Park and Rawang
Country Homes are within the Sg. Selangor Basin. A centralized sewage treatment plant
(CSTP) is being constructed at Rawang and it is designed to serve 96,000 PE and is expected
to commence operation after January 2016.
5.6.3 Industrial Wastewater
The Sg. Selangor basin houses a number of industrial estates and based on the Structure Plan
(2012-2035), the growth in industries is likely to continue. The Structure Plan projected an
increase in demand for industrial land of 25% by 2020 and about 70% by 2035. In line with
this is an expected increase in the contribution of pollution loads to the rivers within Sg.
Selangor Basin. Based on the information obtained from the DOE, there are a total of fifty
four (54) effluent discharging factories operating within the Sg. Selangor basin (refer
Appendix 5.5). Majority of the factories are located at Rawang followed by Batang Kali,
Serendah and Rasa. Figure 5.5 presents the percentage of effluent discharging factories
situated at various locations within the basin and Figure 5.6 presents the map showing the
approximate locations of the factories. Most of the industries are concentrated around Sg.
Rawang and others are scattered around Sg Serendah and Sg. Batang Kali. Sg. Rawang and
Sg. Serendah are the tributaries of Sg. Sembah and Sg. Batang Kali is one of the main
tributaries of Sg. Selangor.
Industry types are typically rubber and palm oil-based industries, cement and cement-products
production, glove manufacturing, steel manufacturing, furniture, packaging and paper,

Main Report
chemical, food processing, automobile, textile, pharmaceuticals, plastics, electronics, paper

recycling and waste recovery (refer Appendix 5.5). Because of the concentration of factories
at Rawang, effluent discharges from the factories into Sg. Rawang are a major concern.
The water quality assessment discussed earlier in section 9.3 indicates that Sg. Rawang falls
into Class III which means the river is slightly polluted. The river water quality at Sg.
Serendah and Sg. Batang Kali is classified at Class II which indicates the river water is clean.
Notwithstanding the general classification of the rivers, it is important to identify the key
parameters of water quality that are of concern and to determine the source(s) of the problem
in order that actions can be taken to improve the status.
The presence of metals in the river water quality indicates possibility of pollution from
industrial wastes. The river water quality at Sg. Rawang and Sg. Batang Kali shows presence
of Hg (mg/l) at higher concentrations than typically found in rivers. It can be surmised that
industrial wastewater is contributing to the river water pollution at Sg. Rawang and Sg.
Batang Kali. On the other hand, the water quality data from Sg. Serendah shows presence of
heavy metals at much lower concentrations which indicates that the pollution loads from the
industries within the sub-basin of Sg Serendah is much lower.
Information on the level of compliance of industrial effluent discharges meeting the regulated
standards are not readily available. Notwithstanding this, it is likely that the heavy metal
pollution loads at Sg. Rawang and Sg. Sembah are the result of discharges of industrial
effluents that do not meet the standards imposed. Industrial effluent continues to be a
recurring issue in the water quality of Sg Selangor and it may be due to a number of factors:
 Poor management practice

 Absence or inadequate treatment facilities
 Non-compliance or lack of understanding of the regulations pertaining to treatment and
discharge standards
 Large numbers of small industries that do not fall under the Regulations
 Illegal/unregulated industrial premises
Generally, the non-metalic and automotive industries have the highest compliance rate, either
due to the nature of the industry or the management protocol required of the industry.
However, industries related to cement and cement-products, metal finishing, rubber

Main Report
processing, wood-based, packaging and paper, chemical, agro-based, textile, plastic, sealants
and adhesives, fertiliers and detergent products have lower compliance.
5.6.4 Solid waste
There are eight (8) landfills located within the Sg. Selangor Basin. The landfill sites are at
Kundang, Sg. Sabai, Kalumpang, Hulu Yam, Bukit Beruntung, Kubang Badak, Sri Gombak
and Bukit Tagar. Out of the 8 landfills, only 3 are still in operations i.e. Bukit Beruntung,
Bukit Tagar and Sg. Sabai and the rest (Kalumpang, Hulu Yam, Kubang Badak, Kundang and
Sri Gombak) are now closed. Of the 3 landfills which are in operations, only the Bukit Tagar
landfill is an engineered sanitary landfill. The status and locations of the landfills with
coordinates are shown in Table 5.9.
Figure 5.7 presents the locations of landfills within the Sg. Selangor Basin.
Leachate from the landfills can contribute to surface and ground water quality pollution if no
proper collection and treatment systems are in place. Seepage of leachate into the
groundwater may also occur if the landfills are not properly equipped with compacted clay
and geomembrane liner. Even at the closed landfills, seepage of leachate can still continue to
occur for many years. The overflow of leachate could also drain out directly into the river
through the drainage system at the landfill site affecting the quality of the surface water.
In 2009, the National Hydraulic Research Institute of Malaysia (NAHRIM) engaged UKM
Pakarunding to carry out a study on groundwater contamination at landfill sites in Selangor.
According to the study, the surface and ground water quality nearby the various landfills
show signs of contamination. The exception was the Bukit Tagar landfill where the
groundwater was tested to be free of contamination, albeit the surface water quality data
nearest to the Bukit Tagar Landfill categorized the river within Class III which is slightly
polluted (see Table 5.10). The Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfill is the only landfill in Selangor
that has adopted a zero discharge target. There is insufficient data available to assess the
changes in the surface water quality of the monitored river before and after the operations of
Bukit Tagar Landfill.

Main Report
5.6.5 Sand mining
LUAS has recorded the number of pollution incidents reported and actions taken by the Task
Force to resolve the issues relating to water quality from the year 2007-2013. Sand mining is
recorded as the main source of pollution in the Sg. Selangor Basin. Figure 5.8 presents the
types of pollution incidents reported, whilst Figure 5.9 presents the locations of the sand
mining activities within the Sg. Selangor Basin. The sand mining activities are spread over a
fairly wide area within the local authorities of Kuala Selangor and Hulu Selangor. Records of
illegal sand mining within the Sg. Selangor Basin is not available.
At present any contractors who are interested in sand mining activity will have to apply for
license from Kumpulan Semesta Sdn Bhd (KSSB). KSSB is a GLC which is responsible for
distributing the permits to contractors for sand mining operations. Apart from permit
distribution, KSSB is also responsible to ensure the contractors are abiding to the guidelines
and rules pertaining the sand mining operations. They are also expected to closely monitor all
the sand mining activities and report the river water quality status at the sand mining site to
LUAS on a monthly basis.
Based on the water quality self assessment report submitted by KSSB to LUAS, it appears
that the total suspended solids (TSS) concentration (mg/L) at stations downstream of the sand
mining activities are of the same order of magnitude with the TSS concentration at the
upstream stations. Most of the TSS concentration recorded at both the upstream and
downstream stations fall within the Class I limits (< 25 mg/l). Based on the KSSB report, it
would appear that the sand mining activities are not major contributors of TSS loading to the
river. Nevertheless, as discussed in Section 5.3 of this Chapter, the TSS concentration is
generally high along Sg. Selangor and its tributaries Sg. Ayer Hitam, Sg. Sembah, Sg.
Rawang and Sg. Kundang. These are also the rivers where the sand mining activities are
actively taking place as shown in Figure 5.9.
Apart from sand mining, earthworks could be the other contributing factor for the high
concentration of TSS along the listed rivers. Figure 5.10a and Figure 5.10b presents the
number of samples which show high TSS concentrations at the upstream and downstream
stations based on the DOE Water Quality Index classification.

Main Report
5.6.6 Animal Husbandry
Cattle, Goat, Sheep and Buffalo Farming
Most animal farming in the Sg. Selangor river basin is conducted as smallholding activities
for the production of meat and milk. Data received from the Department of Veterinary
Science (DVS) show that animal husbandry is not a significant activity, compared to other
parts of the country. Goats, beef cattle, and rabbits are the main ruminants that are bred in the
basin for their meat (see Table 5.11), undertaken mainly in Daerah Hulu Selangor and Kuala
Selangor (see Table 5.12).
Figure 5.11 shows the ruminants production within Sg. Selangor basin (2010-2013).
With the exception of some animals that are kept in feedlots prior to slaughter or in more
intensive form of production like the dairy cattle, most of the other farms are located on
public land or in oil palm estates where open grazing is practiced. Animal density is generally
low and proper waste management is usually lacking. Animal waste or manure has always
been regarded as a source of nutrients and is typically used for soil improvement and as
fertilizer for the vegetation. Liquid waste from the cattle farms are mainly channeled directly
into the river system or seep into the ground. Based on feedback from DVS, most feedlots are
equipped with some form of waste management, typically the waste is channeled into unlined
earth ponds and some are pressed into pellets to be used as fertilisers.
Poultry
Poultry is one of the most important livestock industries in the Sg. Selangor basin. This
activity is found in 7 sub-basins: the upper sub-basins that include Kerling, Kuala Kubu,
Batang Kali and Sg. Rinting sub-basins; the Rawang sub-basin which straddles Daerah
Gombak and Daerah Hulu Selangor; and the lower sub-basins comprising of Tanjung Karang
and Kuala Selangor. However, data on poultry farms obtained from the Department of
Veterinary Science (DVS) Selangor for this Review study has been collected on district basis,
with no reference being made to specific sub-basins within which individual farms are
located. The discussion in this section, therefore, is based entirely on overall trends in the
three districts within whose boundaries the Sg. Selangor river basin is located.

Main Report
Data from the DVS Selangor show that Daerah Hulu Selangor has the most number of poultry
farms in comparison with Daerah Gombak and Kuala Selangor. The data also indicate a drop
in the numbers of smaller farms (<20 000) in 2013 as compared with the earlier years.
Table 5.13 presents the number of poultry farms at each district within the Sg. Selangor
basin. Table 5.14 presents the types and number of birds reared in each district within the
year 2010 and 2013.
Figure 5.12 shows the poultry production within Sg. Selangor basin (2010-2013).
Poultry farming generates solid waste and wastewater as by-product. The solid wastes
produced are in the form of chicken dung and dead chickens. Most of the big farms collect the
chicken dung and process it into fertilizer and sells it for agricultural purposes. The smaller
scale farms often opt to either give away the chicken dung or just leave it as it is. Dead
carcasses of chickens are normally disposed at approved landfills; the bigger poultry farms
have their own landfill (approved by the appropriate authority/agency) for this purpose.
Poultry farming does not contribute a significant amount of wastewater which is generated
from the cleaning of cages, sheds and floors that may take place four to six times per year.
The wastewater produced contains suspended particles, organics and microorganisms that are
channeled into streams or seeps into the ground and may pollute the receiving water bodies.
The larger farms typically have some form of wastewater collection and treatment, whereas in
the open poultry farms, wastewater and other pollutants are discharged into the river due to
surface runoff that washes or flushes the chicken manure from the pens or sheds into the
water body. However, there is insufficient information available to quantify the extent of
pollution arising from the discharge of wastewater from poultry farms.
LUAS has shown a proactive approach by including poultry farming as one of the activities
under the Regulation “Peraturan Kemasukan atau Pelepasan Bahan Pencemaran (Negeri
Selangor) 2012”. With this regulation in place, poultry farms which rear 20,000 birds and
more are subject to wastewater discharge limits and obliged to have a license to discharge
wastewaters from the farms. They are also obliged to submit self-assessment report on the
wastewater quality being discharged on quarterly basis to LUAS before their licence to
discharge can be renewed. This serves as a mechanism for LUAS to monitor water quality

Main Report
and also to take action against those who contravene the regulations and discharge limits
imposed on poultry farming.
5.6.7 Freshwater Aquaculture
Freshwater aquaculture is a significant activity in the Sg. Selangor river basin. Its activities
are located within 6 sub-basins: the upper sub-basins that include Rantau Panjang, Kuala
Kubu and Kerling sub-basins; the Rawang sub-basin which straddles Daerah Gombak and
Daerah Hulu Selangor; and the lower sub-basins comprising of Tanjung Karang and Kuala
Selangor. However, data on aquaculture obtained from Jabatan Perikanan Selangor for this
Review study has been collected on district basis, with no reference being made to specific
sub-basins within which individual farms are located. The discussion in this section,
therefore, is based entirely on overall trends in the three districts within whose boundaries the
Sg. Selangor river basin is located.
The IRBM Plan 2007 reported that about 449 hectares of land were used for inland
aquaculture in 2005 in the production of over a dozen species of fish. Between 2008 and
2013, data obtained from Jabatan Perikanan Selangor for this Review study showed a marked
increase in land involved in freshwater fish production, doubling from 266 hectares in 2008 to
close to 533.5 hectares by 2013 (see Table 5.15 and Figure 5.13).
Although the land area involved in freshwater aquaculture doubled between 2008 and 2013,
the annual increase in fish production over that period was modest, i.e., ranging from about
14,000 tonnes per year in 2008 to about 16,400 tonnes per year in 2013 (see Table 5.16 and
Figure 5.14). Between the three district, the lower sub-basins of Kuala Selangor and Tanjung
Karang in Daerah Kuala Selangor have the lowest land area under production but produce as
much as the Rawang sub-basin annually.
Most of the freshwater aquaculture farms are located in Daerah Hulu Selangor, followed by
Daerah Gombak and Daerah Kuala Selangor. This appears to indicate that the aquaculture
activities rely on good quality water which is found upstream of the river basin.
Most inland aquaculture projects in Sg. Selangor basin focus on rearing freshwater fish using
excavated ponds, ex-mining ponds and cement tanks. The IRBM Plan 2007 reported a total of
227 inland aquaculture fish farms, though most of the production was conducted on a small

Main Report
number of commercial farms. The number of fish farms recorded by Jabatan Perikanan
Selangor increased 25% from 245 farms in 2008 to 304 by 2013. Table 5.17 presents the
number of freshwater fish farms by districts, whilst Table 5.18 indicates the annual fish
production according to types of culture by districts (see Figure 5.15).
Many of these farms source water from Sg. Selangor and its tributaries although a small
number obtain their supply from ex-mining ponds, groundwater, rainwater and surface runoff.
Although a large number of fish species are reared in the Sg. Selangor Basin, the catfish (keli)
accounts for about 70% of the total tonnage and the red tilapia almost 25% (see Table 5.19).
The IRBM Plan 2007 reported that the Rawang sub-basin had a higher production area for
catfish and tilapia compared to the other sub-basins. By 2013, however, the sub-basins in
Daerah Hulu Selangor had overtaken Rawang and are currently responsible for more than
90% of the catfish and 72% of the red tilapia produced in the Sg. Selangor river basin.
Freshwater aquaculture in the three districts over the last 7-years from 2008 to 2013 shows a
marked increase in terms of the land area under culture, where it has been significant in
Daerah Hulu Selangor. The decline in Daerah Gombak is probably due to the closure and
redevelopment of large tracts of ex-mining ponds in and around Rawang town for housing
and industry.

Main Report
Impact of Freshwater Aquaculture in River Water Quality
Generally, the majority of the farms in the basin practice minimal discharge. Used water from
the farms is discharged into large ex-mining ponds with abundant water plants which help to
remove nutrients from the water, as observed at Daerah Hulu Langat. The water is then re-
used in the nurseries and grow-out ponds. Water is pumped from the river only occasionally
to compensate for evaporative and manipulative losses. This recycling strategy is adopted not
so much to protect river water quality, but rather, to insulate the farms from the poor water
quality that often prevails in the river. However, during the raining season or heavy
downpours, overflows will occur into the nearest river system. The extent and duration of
this outflow is variable depending on the amount of precipitation, the storage capacity of the
culture ponds and the duration of the rainfall period.
In terms of the actual impact of the discharge during cleaning of the ponds, it does not appear
to be of major significance. Most of the farms only clean the ponds infrequently, whilst
others do not discharge at all or do so incidentally when there is heavy rain.
In respect to concern about the discharge of nutrient and BOD loadings by aquaculture farms
and their impact on water quality, the wide variation of effluent quality that is discharged into
the river and the lack of a structured means by which this can be allocated to specific farms or
farming type make any assessment of discharge impact on the river rather difficult.
Notwithstanding this, in the interest of sustainable farming, some measure of mitigation

against nutrient and BOD discharge should be promoted or encouraged among farmers. This
would include them employing water re-use as well as having infrastructure such as waste
stabilization ponds to reduce nutrient and BOD loads in the discharge water.
The present trend in freshwater aquaculture has shifted to large scale capital intensive
operations supported by a significant level of professional expertise. Based on ground
observation of some of these farms, the bigger farms appear to have undertaken pollution
abatement measures. Concurrent with its commercial dimension is an intensification of
production using newer husbandry and production techniques including feeds, water
management and improved pond design. This trend mirrors the overall growth of aquaculture
in the country and represents a more positive development for the environment.

Main Report
Zoning for freshwater activities is currently being looked into by Jabatan Perikanan Selangor
whereby future farm development would be channeled into designated zones within the basin.
This would enable better control over location such that proximity to incompatible activities
or upstream of water intake points are avoided.
5.7 Clean Water Strategies for Sg Selangor
The policy on Clean Water was established in the earlier IRBM Plan 2007 to ensure supply of
clean water for Selangor and the environment, and to achieve this through a comprehensive
and systematic approach to reduce pollution from existing sources and prevent pollution from
new sources. The target set in the earlier plan for river water quality is based on the Selangor
State Structure Plan 2020 which is to achieve Water Quality Index (WQI) of 70-100, i.e.
above Class II or generally to achieve the status of “clean” rivers in accordance with DOE’s
classification. It is assumed that this applies to the entire stretch of the river. In this current
IRBM Plan, the same overall policy and target have been adopted.
To achieve the vision and target, eight (8) Strategies were established in the IRBM Plan 2007;
these strategies have been assessed to determine their adequacy and effectiveness. There have
been limitations in the assessment arising from a lack of available information, nevertheless
certain assumptions have been made in order to carry out the assessment and to formulate the
strategies for this current IRBM Plan as discussed below.
From the assessment of the water quality along the Sg. Selangor main stream and its tributaries, it
appears that the overall water quality classification of the river is generally within Class II,
however there are certain stretches along the river basin, particularly along the tributaries of Sg.
Air Hitam and Sg. Sembah (including the sub-tributaries of Sg. Kundang and Sg. Rawang) that
fall within Class III. The main parameters that contribute to pollution throughout the entire Sg.
Selangor basin are BOD, NH3-N, TSS and Total Coliform, with some heavy metals detected
along Sg. Rawang. Because the pollution sources and the issues of water quality are essentially the
same throughout the basin, it has not been necessary to have separate sub-basin plans for the more
polluted rivers. Instead, the strategies and measures that have been established are able to
encompass all the rivers within the Sg. Selangor basin.
An issue which is common throughout the river basin relates to the existing regulations where the
onus of monitoring effluent discharge is on the “polluter” and they are expected to submit records

Main Report
of monitoring on a regular basis to either the DOE or LUAS. This relies heavily on the “polluter”
actually submitting their reports and also presenting accurate reports to the relevant authority. It is
recommended that this method of enforcement be supplemented with regular spot checks and
collection of samples to confirm the reports submitted by the “polluter”.
5.7.1 Reduce pollution from industrial wastewater
1) Improve monitoring and enforcement of wastewater producing industries
It was concluded in the IRBM Plan 2007 that industries are discharging effluent which
significantly exceeds the stipulated discharge limits (in this case Standard A1). Two
industrial estates were identified as contributing >70% of the BOD loading and nearly all
metals detected in the river. These are namely, the Rawang Integrated Industrial Estate
and Kawasan Industri Bukit Beruntung. From the available water quality data obtained
during this study, there are indications that the industries are still discharging effluent
which contribute to the pollution loads in the Sg. Selangor river system. The industrial
areas are concentrated within the Sg. Rawang (a sub-tributary of Sg. Sembah) and Sg.
Batang Kali sub-basins, and their contribution to pollution is reflected by the levels of
BOD and heavy metals (particularly Mercury) concentrations in these rivers (refer
Section 5.6.3).
Monitoring and enforcement of wastewater from industries is under the jurisdiction of the
DOE. The current Environmental Quality Act, Regulation 7(3) Industrial Effluent
Regulations 2009 for discharge of Industrial Effluents or Mixed Effluents applies to
industries producing wastewaters of 60 m3/day or more and/or total load of BOD or
Suspended Solids or both of 6 kg/day (concentration of 100 mg/l). The onus of
monitoring the effluent discharge is on the industry operators and they are expected to
submit records of monitoring on a monthly basis to the DOE. This process of control is
deemed to be adequate; however, it can only be successful if the monitoring is done
consistently and accurately by all industrial premises that fall within the Regulation. It is
also dependent on the DOE to review the EQA Regulation to make it mandatory for the
industrial operator to be responsible for wastewater treatment and compliance with the
effluent quality standards and carry out strict enforcement of the penalties allowed for
1
Environmental Quality Act, 1974, Regulation 7(3) Industrial Effluent Regulations 2009. Standard A limits applies since
there are water supply intakes located downstream of the discharge points.

Main Report
under the Regulations on those recalcitrant industries. LUAS can play a role by initiating
the formation of an Integrated River Patrol Squad to conduct scheduled and more
frequent patrolling of the river and increase the frequency of spot checks through the
Integrated River Patrol Squad.
Apart from the large industries that fall within the Regulation, there are also potential
issues with water quality pollution from the many numbers of smaller industries which do
not fall under the Regulation (i.e. < 60 m3/day or generating pollution loads lower than
stipulated), in terms of cumulative pollution loadings being received by the river.
The sub-basin having the most problems with water quality appears to be Sg. Sembah
which is mostly within Class III and its sub-tributaries Sg. Rawang and to a lesser extent
Sg. Serendah. This is an indication that the current monitoring and enforcement system
will need to be stepped up for better control on the quality of the industrial effluents being
discharged into the river.
Priority in enforcement of industrial effluent discharges was previously targeted at the

Rawang Integrated Industrial Estate and this should be continued in view that this is still
the largest industrial estate within the sub-basin of Sg. Sembah. With the stepping up of
enforcement, this should see an improvement in the river water quality of Sg. Sembah in
terms of metals content and other industry related pollutants.
2) Review existing contravention licences
There are particular industries such as the Palm Oil and Rubber industries etc which are
currently excluded from the Industrial Effluent Regulation; the list of excluded industries
is provided under the First Schedule (Regulation 3). These industries have separate
contravention legislations. The contravention licences have been established due to
reasons of national economy. These type of licences and regulations should be reviewed
since there have been improvement in terms of technology and the overall national
economy. Improved economy supports the usage of technologies which are far more
advance and capable of producing industrial effluent meeting the standards as stipulated
in the Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009.

Main Report
3) Locate future risk industries downstream of water intakes
The zoning of industries is one of the key factors in reducing the risks of pollution from
industries affecting water intakes. The prevailing Selangor State Structure Plan and Local
Plans for Daerah Hulu Selangor, Kuala Selangor and Gombak provide for zoning of
future industrial areas, however, these plans need to be more definitive on the type and
class of industries to be allowed within the industrial zones that have been demarcated for
development.
Industrial zoning should be based on locating polluting industries within downstream

areas of a river basin. In this way, the upper reaches of the river system will be protected
from major industrial pollution; within the lower reaches of the river system, particularly
where there are tidal effects, the marine waters are able to provide additional buffer to
dilute and dissipate the effluent received from the industries. However, controls on
effluent quality will still be necessary to protect the rivers at the downstream stretches and
also the marine waters at the river mouth.
The strategy of industrial zoning will be effective in ensuring potable supply water
intakes will have lower risk of pollution issues. For the Sg Selangor basin, it is
recommended that polluting industries should be located downstream of the lowest intake
along the river, which is presently the intake at Bestari Jaya (formerly Batang Berjuntai).
This needs to be addressed in the Selangor Structure Plan (2012- 2035) and also in the
Local District Plans. Relevant authorities are also to work in consultation and
collaboration to ascertain the type of industries permissible within each zone.
4) Implementation of Best Available Techniques (BAT)
Implementation of Best Available Techniques (BAT) is an additional measure to further

improve wastewater treatment efficiency and treatment level.
Best management practice for industrial effluent is provided for under the Environmental
Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009, Regulation 14 whereby it specifies a list
of parameters for which BMPs are expected to be adopted. However, this regulation is
rather loose and there are no limits set for the parameters which can be used for
enforcement.

Main Report
This measure could be improved by making changes to the permits for installations of a
specified size to include obligations for operators of facilities to ensure BAT are applied.
Because the strategy will likely incur significant cost to the industries as it may require
technological changes in the production process, substitution of specific substances or the
use of end of pipe technologies, therefore this should be targeted at large-scale industrial
activities. The additional measure is “good-to-have” and is being put into practice in some
countries in Europe, but need not be placed on high priority for Sg. Selangor unless at
some point industrial pollution increases to a large extent and more hazardous substances
are discharged into the river. In order for this strategy to be workable, some form of
incentive could be given to industrial players to implement BAT for their industry.
5) Implementation of measures to prevent accidental pollution
This strategy was introduced and is being implemented in the Danube River Basin
Management Plan. This measure is targeted at preventing the occurrence of accidents and
ensuring effective contingency planning in the event of an incident taking place. An
inventory of potential static and mobile accident risk spots will need to be identified and
an Accident Emergency Warning System must be established that will send out
immediate warning messages to downstream areas, particularly the water intakes which
will be directly impacted by such incidents. This can be tied in with the Environmental
Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009, Regulation 20 which regulates the
response in the event of occurrence of an accidental discharge or leakage of industrial or
mixed effluent. This measure is deemed to be of benefit to Sg. Selangor since there
having been cases when accidental pollution has occurred in the past. LUAS is also
responsible for implementing procedures according to the Manual for Handling Oil Spill
and Polluting Substances.
5.7.2 Upgrade sewerage system and sewage treatment
The IRBM Plan 2007 recommended the following four measures for the control of pollution from
sewage treatment plants:-
1) Develop strategies and plans for sewage treatment

2) Establish centralized sewage treatment plant
3) Upgrade existing sewage treatment plants

Main Report
4) Improve sewage treatment outside serviced areas
It is proposed to combine the above measures into one that is all encompassing, which is as
follows:-
1) Develop strategies and plans for sewage treatment
The establishment of centralized sewage treatment plants, the upgrading of plants and
increasing coverage of service areas are all part of the strategies for sewage treatment that
are being developed by IWK. The detailed measures and the targets for achieving this
objective should be based on IWK’s planning.
This measure needs to be maintained for the Sg. Selangor basin since pollution from
domestic wastewater is still significant. Based on information from IWK, about 94% of
the population are served by sewage treatment plants (STP) operated by IWK, 5% uses
individual septic tanks (IST) and 1% practice direct discharge. Despite having a large
percentage served by public STPs, the pollution loads are still relatively high largely due
to inadequate treatment at the STPs resulting from aging plants utilizing old technologies.
There are also sewage treatment plants that are operated and maintained by private
owners, particularly within housing estates. Many of these plants are also not functioning
well and the effluent discharges are likely not meeting the stipulated standards.
Another issue with the privately owned plants and ISTs is related to desludging of the
plants. The Water Services Act (2006) has removed the responsibility of IWK for
providing regular service to desludge individual septic tanks as was practiced in the past.
Without proper desludging or removal of accumulated sludge, the treatment of sewage in
these ISTs or for that matter any other types of treatment systems, will not be as effective
resulting in inadequately treated effluent being discharged into the receiving streams.
The water quality parameters most affected by inadequate treatment of domestic

wastewaters are Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Ammoniacal Nitrogen (AN) and
Phosphates (P). By improving the level of treatment at the STPs and including nutrient
removal technologies in the treatment process, there will be improvement to river water
quality, particularly in relation to the above parameters. P removal is presently not a
requirement in the discharge standards and since eutrophication does not appear to be a

Main Report
major issue along Sg. Selangor, P removal need not be considered at this stage. However,
reduction in BOD and AN should be given high priority particularly since incidences in
high AN loads have been known to cause water treatment plant shutdown.
The main sub-basin area that houses the most number of IWK STPs is the Sg. Sembah
basin. To tackle the issues faced here, IWK has already initiated the construction of a
centralised STP in Rawang. This central STP is intended to replace 40 small STPs and
some privately operated plants, as well as increase the sewer connection to households
that are currently still utilizing septic tank systems. Once the central STP is in operations,
it can be expected that there will be improvements to the water quality of Sg. Rawang and
Sg. Sembah.
To cater to the future growth in population and urbanization within the Sg. Selangor basin
area, IWK will need to continue its planning to provide the required numbers of sewerage
systems and sewage treatment plants in tandem with the growth. It will also be necessary
to continue the upgrading of older plants to ensure that the treatment capabilities of these
plants can be improved to meet the desired effluent standards
2) Ensure treatment of grey water from residential areas
No specific plans were proposed in the previous IRBM Plan in relation to this strategy of
pollution control, and from general observations, there has not been any progress on the
proposed measure. Grey water or sullage from residential areas is wastewater from
household kitchens and bath areas which are not connected to the sewers and are
discharged directly into storm drains, ultimately finding its way into the rivers. In newer
residences, connections of grey water into the sewers are already in place. Older
residences, particularly those built before the Malaysian Guidelines for Developers were
adopted, do not have connections of grey water to the sewers and therefore these houses
still discharge their grey waters into storm drains.
Within the Sg. Selangor basin, although a large percentage of the catchment are served by
sewage treatment plants, many of these plants are under Category I (refer Section 5.6.2).
This is an indication that a large section of the population, about 79% of the PE, are likely
to be living in houses that are yet to have connections of grey water to the sewerage
system.

Main Report
Ensuring treatment of grey water in older residences would mean having to change the
piping systems in existing old houses and connecting them to a sewerage system. This is
very difficult to achieve and is not a practical measure. One possible method to capture
grey waters is to have interceptor drains and/or sewer systems that can channel the grey
waters into sewage treatment plants for treatment.
5.7.3 Reduce pollution from other point sources
1) Reduce pollution from wet markets
The discharges from wet markets are small; however, the pollution loads from these
sources can be very high, particularly in BOD (total load from the existing wet markets
estimated in the 2007 IRBM Plan is about 130kg/day from total wastewater flow of about
178 m3 /day). The wastewaters from these sources are typically discharged into drains
untreated and ultimately end up in the rivers.
In the 2007 IRBM Plan, three options were identified: (i) remove chicken slaughtering
from the markets; (ii) treat the wastewater at or nearby the market; and (iii) treat the
wastewater at a sewage treatment plant. The proposed measure was for LUAS to work
with local authorities in identifying the options to deal with wastewaters from individual
wet markets. There have been no measures implemented as yet as currently observed.
There are also smaller markets that are in operations as well as night markets which also
contribute pollution loads. These are more difficult to quantify since there can be
numerous such activities spread over the river basin area. The pollution impacts from the
smaller markets would be more widespread but of significantly smaller loading.
The key water quality parameter that indicates the level of pollution derived from wet
markets is BOD. At present, the BOD index appears to be generally within Class II (see
Section 5.3) and it is more likely that the contribution towards BOD is mainly from
inadequately treated sewage and industrial wastewaters rather than from wet markets
which are sporadically located and contribute smaller loading of pollutants. As such,
whilst this it is still necessary to have control measures to reduce pollution from wet

Main Report
markets, the priority is deemed lower than the pollution from industrial wastewaters and
domestic sewage.
The previously proposed measures for reducing pollution from wet markets are proposed
to be revised slightly to the following measures:-
 To remove slaughtering of poultry from the markets to approved slaughterhouses that

are provided with wastewater collection and treatment systems;
 To move all markets including night markets and “pasar tani” into centralised areas
that are provided with wastewater collection and treatment systems;
 To have drainage collection systems at appropriate locations that can channel
wastewaters to a central sewage treatment plant; and
 To review LUAS’s Legislation for enforcement to include pollution control from
markets etc.
2) Reduce pollution from restaurants and food stalls
Similar to wet markets, restaurants and food stalls contribute organic pollution loads to
the rivers through discharges of food waste and oil and grease into storm drains. The 2007
IRBM Plan proposed for LUAS to work with local authorities on this matter which
involve: (i) introduction of new regulations if necessary; (ii) establish disposal systems for
oil and grease; (iii) develop information materials; (iv) establish phased implementation
plans; and (v) improving enforcement.
Pollution loads from proper restaurants have better potential to be reduced since these
premises would be within a commercial building or a house where the wastewaters would
be discharged into the sewerage systems and be treated at a sewage treatment plant
(unless it is an old building which has yet to be connected to a sewerage system). The
more difficult issues relate to wastewaters from food stalls and illegal hawker stalls that
are set up in larger numbers throughout the river basin area, particularly within residential
and commercial areas. The wastes from these stalls are generally thrown indiscriminately
into storm drains which ultimately get discharged into the river.

Main Report
The proposed measures to reduce pollution from food stalls are as follows:-
 To gradually phase out illegal food/hawker stalls and for the local council to
provide properly designed hawker centres where the stalls could be set up for
operations and where wastewater collection and treatment facilities are provided.
Alternatively the local authorities could encourage privately run complexes to be
established which also provides such treatment facilities.
 To increase the level of enforcement in shutting down illegal food stalls.
 Enhance the awareness of the pollution caused by indiscriminate disposal of
rubbish and wastewaters from the operations of illegal food stalls and encourage
the move of the food stalls from illegal premises to proper hawker centres.
5.7.4 Reduce pollution from freshwater aquaculture
1) Improve regulatory framework relating to discharges from aquaculture
Aquaculture farming activities contribute high BOD loads, although the amounts may
not be large depending on the mode of operation. The LUAS Regulation “Peraturan
Kemasukan atau Pelepasan Bahan Pencemar (Negeri Selangor) 2012” was gazetted
on 20 April 2012 for 7 activities, of which two of the activities relate to aquaculture.
For each type of activity, there are a set of effluent discharge limits applicable for
farms >50 hectares for freshwater aquaculture and >10 hectares for marine prawn
aquaculture. Failure to comply could result in a penalty of RM10, 000 or 6 months
imprisonment or both. The rules established for the activities also require that the
farm operators:
 To obtain a license for discharge of effluent to the environment;

 To confirm the discharge point for the effluent;
 To submit effluent analysis reports from an accredited laboratory every 3
months; and
 To ensure that the effluent discharge meets the stipulated limits.
From the findings of this study, it appears that the submission of effluent analysis
reports to LUAS is not forthcoming and as such, there is no information available to
determine the extent of compliance or non-compliance of the aquaculture activities

Main Report
that have been given licences. Nevertheless, it is essential that LUAS maintains an
inventory of commercial aquaculture farms so that the department can coordinate the
issuance of licences for discharge and provide better enforcement of the discharge
requirements.
In view that the effluent discharge regulations have already been established, there is
no further need to improve the regulatory framework. More focus should be placed on
improvements on the monitoring of effluent and enforcement of the regulation on
discharges from the aquaculture farms.
Big aquaculture farms are registered with Department of Environment (DOE) and
they are issued with MyGAP certificate if the production is aimed at exporting
market. Through MyGAP, DOF is able to monitor, audit and check on waste
treatment, etc. However, small farms are not licensed or registered with DOF and
thus DOF have no control over them.
The role of the Fisheries Department is currently an advisory one and mainly on the
aspects of the health of the fishery resources. Because the licensing and enforcement
of pollution control does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Fisheries Department,
the department currently cannot impose regulatory conditions in these matters.
Feedback from the Selangor Fisheries Department indicates that the Regulation for
Land Fisheries / Aquaculture in Selangor is currently being drafted by the Federal
Department of Fisheries and to be approved by the Selangor state government. The
enactment will enable the agency to monitor and administer on the aspect of pollution
control, establish guidance documents on the design of farms and impose a Code of
Practice (Sijil Akuakultur Amalan Baik or SAAB) that requires farms to have
sedimentation pond/s with effluent discharge that must constitute 10% of the overall
farming area and the use of ‘good bacteria’ or EM at the sedimentation pond.
Like most other pollution control regulations, the emphasis is on larger

establishments where limits are set on the effluent discharges. Smaller set-ups, in this
case freshwater aquaculture farms of less than 10 hectares, do not fall within the
discharge standards and if there are many such premises, the cumulative pollution
loads could also be high. Therefore, LUAS needs to review its existing Enactment to

Main Report
regulate the smaller farms. The review should cover size of the farms, relevant
parameters and their discharge limits.
The strategies previously identified in the IRBM 2007, have been re-visited and the
comments and recommendations on the strategies are as follows:-
2) Implement new regulation and develop guidelines for design of appropriate

aquaculture systems
The regulations pertaining to aquaculture farming operations are in the process of

being finalized. LUAS/DOF needs to establish guidance documents on the design of
the farms. They can impose a Code of Practice (Sijil Akuakultur Amalan Baik or
SAAB) that requires farms to sedimentation pond/s with effluent discharge that must
constitute 10% of the overall farming area. If intensive farming or high stocking
density is implemented, the aquaculture farms should required installing the RAS
(Recycle Aquaculture System). Apart from that, promoting use of ‘good bacteria’ or
Enhanced Microorganism (mud ball) at the sedimentation pond is also recommended.
3) Establish aquaculture development zones
The previous 2007 IRBM Plan had identified aquaculture development zones where
there can be common wastewater treatment facilities established. The Selangor
Fisheries Department has identified special zones for aquaculture within the Sg
Selangor basin. Although the plan for these zones could not be implemented due to
the absence of an enabling regulation or enactment at the state level, these special
zones can be incorporated into the Selangor Structure Plan that is currently being
reviewed by Jabatan Perancangan Bandar dan Desa Negeri Selangor or incorporated
into the Local Plans for Daerah Hulu Selangor, Kuala Selangor and Gombak when
these plans come up for review.
The measures proposed in the 2007 IRBM Plan involving:
 Treatment of wastewater;
 Two-stage discharge treatment for hatcheries;
 Improve management of pond sediments; and

Main Report
 Double screening of discharge outlets.
The above measures could be implementable for the larger farms, whereas the cost
impact of providing wastewater treatment may not be as feasible for small farms.
It is recommended that the strategy to establish aquaculture zones be maintained

whereby individual farms can be clustered together. In this way, centralised
wastewater treatment facilities can be provided that encompasses the treatment
measures identified in the 2007 IRBM. The wastewaters from the individual
aquaculture farms could then be channeled to these treatment facilities and the farms
are charged for treatment of the wastewaters with a formula derived either based on
the flow rate or pollution loadings or a combination of both.
5.7.5 Reduce pollution from animal husbandry
1) Improve regulatory framework relating to animal waste
The two main types of animal husbandry within the Sg. Selangor basin are poultry
and cattle farming. Waste from animal husbandry is mainly in the form of solids;
liquid waste is generated intermittently in relatively small quantities and mainly
derived from the cleaning of cages and animal shelters and from run-off during rains.
According to the 2007 IRBM Plan, solid waste from poultry farms are sold as
fertilizer for vegetable farming whereas cattle manure from the larger farms are
pelletized, also for use as fertilizer. The liquid wastewaters from the farms are mainly
channeled into streams or seeps into the ground, possibly polluting the groundwater.
Poultry farming and animal husbandry in Selangor falls under the same LUAS
Regulation “Peraturan Kemasukan atau Pelepasan Bahan Pencemar (Negeri Selangor)
2012” as that for aquaculture, but with a different set of criteria for the effluent
discharge quality. A similar set of problems are encountered for animal farming as
that for aquaculture in terms of effluent quality reports not being submitted as per the
requirements in the regulation. As a result, it is difficult to assess the level of
pollution caused by animal husbandry. Apart from that, the effluent quality report are
only required for farms with more than 250 ruminants, which means the smaller
population farms are not within the control of LUAS enactment. Therefore, it is

Main Report
suggested for LUAS to review the current regulation for effluent control requirements
for smaller population farms so that the overall effluent waste discharge for any size
of animal husbandry will fall under the LUAS enactment.
There is also the Poultry Farming (State of Selangor) Enactment 2007 and the Animal
Act 1953 (amended in 2006). However, both enactments do not contain regulations
for effluent control discharge. The emphasis of these Acts are more for the control
diseases of animals; movement of animals into, within and from Peninsular Malaysia;
control of the slaughter of animals; prevention of cruelty to animals; and measures
pertaining to the general welfare, conservation and improvement of animals in
Peninsular Malaysia.
Currently, the DVS is also advocating good animal husbandry practices but these
have not been made mandatory. It is recommended for DVS to establish Codes of
Good Farming Practices where introduction of Best Agriculture Practice (BAP) can
be encouraged with appropriate policy instruments to provide some form of
incentives for farmers to adopt the often more costly pollution control practices. To
be effective, BAPs must be technically and economically feasible, and also socially
acceptable to the farming community. It is important to promote environmentally
friendly farming methods but these must be linked to economic benefits such as
improvements in yield or cost savings in the farming practice.
2) Reduce pollution from poultry, cattle, buffalo, sheep and goat farming
The measures proposed in the 2007 IRBM Plan for the reduction of pollution from
poultry farming involves:
 Manage wash water and treat to Standard A or B, or spread on agricultural

crops as fertilizer; and
 Improve storm water management to ensure that rain does not mix with
manure.
Both measures are implementable for larger closed farms where solid waste and wash
water collection systems could be provided. It is not as easy to implement the same

Main Report
measures for smaller farms which do not fall under the LUAS Regulation (i.e.
<20,000 population) and also for free range poultry farms.
The effluent discharge from poultry farms do not fall under the Standard A or B
which is applicable for industrial or mixed effluents, but falls under the LUAS
Regulation 2012. In addition to the LUAS Regulation 2012 and the Animal Act 1953
(amended in 2006), there is also a Poultry Farming (State of Selangor) Enactment
2007 which regulates the licensing of poultry farming including the discharge of
poultry waste and wastewaters. The agency charged with the responsibility of this
enactment is the Department of Veterinary Services (DVS). Although there is
mention of discharge standards for poultry wastewaters, there is no effluent limits
specified in the regulation.
The majority of the poultry farms within the Sg. Selangor basin are <20,000
population and therefore they do not fall under the LUAS regulation. Although the
amount of wastewaters generated from each farm is small, the cumulative impact of
the many farms may still have potential to cause issues on the water quality of the
receiving streams. Hence, there may be a need to review the regulation for effluent
control requirements to be necessary for smaller population farms.
Animal husbandry is not practiced in a large way within the Sg. Selangor basin. The
measures proposed in the earlier IRBM 2007 to control pollution from cattle and
buffalo farming involve:
 Collection of all wastes from cattle and buffalo stables and feedlots;
 Manage collected waste;
 Plan location of new cattle farms; and
 Study proper waste management for integrated feedlots and slaughtering
facilities.
Since most of the farming in the Sg. Selangor are smallholder activities, the proposed
measures for waste and wastewater management will be difficult to implement in
these farms. It is recommended to establish requirements for large farms, integrated
feedlots and slaughter houses to have proper solid waste and wash water collection
and treatments systems. There should also be proper identification and dedicate new

Main Report
animal farms (poultry and animal husbandry) and this can be addressed in the
Structure Plan. With proper planning, there can be better control of the potential
amounts of wastewater generated from the farms and enforcement on the compliance
of effluent quality to the required standards.
3) Reduce pollution from sheep and goat farming
Sheep and goat farming are carried out on small scale in the Sg. Selangor basin and
the pollution issues are not significant in comparison with other pollution sources.
Hence, it is proposed to remove this as a separate measure, and combine this with the
measure for cattle and buffalo farming since the pollution control methods would be
similar in any case.
5.7.6 Reduce sedimentation and suspended solids
1) Reduce sedimentation and suspended solids from earthworks
Under the current legislations, most major projects are required to undergo the
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. Within the process, there is a
requirement for the project proponent to prepare an Erosion and Sediment Control
Plan (ESCP). The ESCP must be prepared by a certified engineer and shall be
submitted to the Department of Irrigation and Drainage (DID) for approval. During
the project construction phase, enforcement comes under the jurisdiction of the State
DOE. Presently, DOE has placed greater emphasis on the issues related to soil
erosion and enforcement has been more stringent. However, the attention is mostly on
large projects. There are also major issues of soil erosion caused by smaller
development projects which are not required to undergo the EIA process and hence
erosion control facilities are not necessarily provided.
The LUAS Enactment “Peraturan Kemasukan atau Pelepasan Bahan Pencemar

(Negeri Selangor) 2012” includes land development/earthworks activities for areas
<50 hectares, requiring project developers to submit for license approvals and thereby
are subject to the effluent limits set for Total Suspended Solids and Oil & Grease.

Main Report
In addition to the LUAS Enactment, there could be further improvements in the

regulatory framework to make it mandatory for all development projects regardless of
size and type, to be required to prepare and implement ESCPs at the project sites and
to enhance monitoring and enforcement efforts. This would be a more pro-active
approach to prevent erosion rather than to use the end of pipe effluent quality as a
check on the pollution controls.
2) Improve monitoring and enforcement of pollution controls for sand mining activities
Sand mining is still a major source of pollution and damage to the river environment
as indicated by the high suspended solids concentrations in the rivers where sand
mining activities are actively taking place. Sand mining activities which carries out
sand washing fall within the LUAS Enactment “Peraturan Kemasukan atau Pelepasan
Bahan Pencemar (Negeri Selangor) 2012” and there are effluent quality limits set for
such activities. Sand washing scheme is required to adopt water recycling method.
Although there are reports stating that these activities are complying with the effluent
limits, the river water quality status appears to contradict these reports. As such, it is
proposed that there be further monitoring of the sand mining activities by the relevant
authorities to ensure that they are fully in compliance.
5.7.7 Reduce pollution from landfills
1) Implement solid waste policy, regulations and strategic plans
The Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 Bill was gazetted to
regulate the management of solid waste. However, the Act does not regulate matters
relating to pollution from landfills.
The state government has initiated its own framework to manage the solid wastes in
Selangor. It is called the “Enakmen Pemungutan, Pembuangan dan Pelupusan Sisa
Pepejal dan Pembersihan Awam Negeri Selangor, Siri 2 Bil 1/2014”. This enactment
is still at draft stage and the elements discussed are not known at this stage. However,
it is expected to include provisions for approval of waste facilities and prevention of
pollution from the waste disposal sites as discussed in the previous 2007 IRBM Plan.

Main Report
The enactment is also expected to establish the institutional structure to implement

policies, regulations and strategic plans.
2) Improve information on waste disposal sites
There have been a few studies carried out by the relevant authorities to provide
information pertaining to the landfills/ dump sites located within the Sg. Selangor
basin. The studies provide information such as the locations, operations status, its
distance from the river/stream, acreage, average amounts of domestic waste received
daily and the locations of water intakes in relation to the landfill. Such information is
very useful for future planning and management of the existing and future landfill
sites and a proper database should be established by the local government agencies
including the Planning departments, DOE and LUAS who are the enforcing
authorities.
3) Improvement of sanitary level of waste disposal sites
Many of the existing solid waste disposal sites are in fact open dump sites which are
not engineered sanitary sites. To improve the sanitary levels of such sites would mean
removal of the waste from the site in order to provide suitably designed landfills with
liner systems of impermeable material which could be natural clay or artificial liners
as well as leachate collection and treatment systems. This is a costly and elaborate
exercise and would also require another site to be identified for the solid waste to be
disposed. The easier option is to locate suitable areas to design and construct a
properly engineered sanitary landfill and close the existing dump sites.
Presently there is only one proper sanitary landfill within the Sg. Selangor basin
which is the Bukit Tagar Landfill. The effluent from the landfill is regulated under the
Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009. Monitoring of the
effluent is under the jurisdiction of DOE. The Bukit Tagar landfill is supposedly
designed to cater for municipal solid wastes generated within Selangor and the
Federal Territories up to the year 2065. Hence, there would be no further need for
new landfills particularly within the region of the Sg. Selangor basin.

Main Report
4) Reduce illegal dumping of solid waste
This strategy is targeted mainly at construction, demolition and commercial waste.

The issue arises because there are many small recycling operators (likely unlicensed)
who collect these wastes to recover usable materials and discard those that are of little
or no value. The proposed measures to establish receiving stations, increase
awareness may not be targeting the source of the problem. The proposed action is to
provide additional waste recovery centres and allow the operators to move their
operations to the centralised facilities. Guidelines will need to be established for the
operations within the centralised facilities to ensure that the possibility of pollution
will not arise from these facilities. Having centralised facilities will also allow for
easier control and enforcement of solid waste disposal.
5) Divert waste from landfills
Implementation of the 3-R strategy is slow in Malaysia. Further steps need to be

taken by the policy makers and relevant Government authorities if this is to be really
enforced. Some of the general strategies to improve 3-R include:
 Raising public awareness through information, education and demonstration

projects.
 Engaging an affordable and appropriate technical option (e.g. incinerator) to
reduce, reuse and recycle the waste.
 Implement a national 3R focal point.
 Investigate the feasibility of upgrading existing landfill to incorporate
leachate treatment.
6) Reduce water content in solid waste
This strategy is partly related to Strategy 5 above. If organic wastes can be reduced at
source through recycling or reuse then it is likely that the water content in the solid
waste that reaches the landfill will already be reduced. A proposal such as household
composting is ideal but difficult to achieve.

Main Report
5.7.8 Strengthen protection of reservoirs
In 2009, the National Land Council set a policy that all Permanent Reserved Forests identified
as water catchments are not to be compromised by activities upstream of the water catchments
as that may damage the forest ecosystem (such as deforestation and encroachment) and main
source of water in the country. The National Land Council also agreed that state governments
adopt the Water Catchment Forest Rules to coordinate the management and control of water
catchment forests within the Permanent Reserve Forests, and to resolve issues relating to
inconsistency in zoning the water catchments by the various state departments, i.e. the
Department of Forestry, Department of Water Supply, and the State Town and Country
Planning Department.
The Forest Management Plan 2011-2020 (FMP) prepared by Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor has
designated 250,128 hectares of land in Selangor State as Permanent Reserve Forest (PRF).
About 104,000 hectares of the PRF are designated as ‘Heritage Park’ (Taman Negeri
Warisan) under the State Park Corporation Enactment, 2004 (Enakmen Perbadanan Taman
Negeri 2004), and as a ‘Heritage Park’, logging is totally prohibited. Part of the ‘Heritage
Park’, the catchments of the Selangor Dam and Sg Tinggi Dam were gazetted as protection
zones in December 2011 (Warta No. 3959).
Regular monitoring and good forest management practices are necessary to protect and
conserve the forest and its biological diversity, increase its capacity as a water source as well
as to ensure encroachment does not happen.
5.8 Risk Register and Action Plan for Ensuring Clean Water
The assessment of risks related to clean water and the control measures are summarised in
Table 5.20 to Table 5.23.
Table 5.24 summarises the proposed action plan for ensuring clean water within the Sg.
Selangor basin.

Main Report
Table 5.1: Water Quality Sampling Stations Monitored by DOE/ASMA within Sg.
Selangor Basin
River Station No. Latitude Longitude General Location
Sg. Selangor 1Sr01 N 03 24 107 E 101 26 494 At the bridge of Sg. Selangor
Sg. Air Hitam 1Sr02 N 03 24 298 E 101 25 544 At the bridge of Batang Berjuntai
Sg. Batang Kali 1Sr03 N 03 28 198 E 101 38 385 At the bridge in Batang Kali
Sg. Selangor 1Sr04 N 03 30 403 E 101 38 018 Rasa town
Sg. Selangor 1Sr05 N 03 35 294 E 101 36 399 Bt 7, Jalan Bukit Fraser
Sg. Kerling 1Sr06 N 03 34 326 E 101 41 720 Kerling Town
Sg. Kanching 1Sr07 N 03 17 919 E 101 37 137 At the bridge after the Serendah town
(near to the railway track)
Sg. Serendah 1Sr08 N 03 22 099 E 101 36 405 At the bridge entrance to Hutan Lipur
Kanching
Sg. Sembah 1Sr09 N 03 32 678 E 101 28 712 At the bridge along Jalan Kundang-
Batang Berjuntai (near the abandoned
tin mining area)
Sg. Selangor 1Sr10 N 03 24 107 E 101 26 494 At the bridge near Kg. Rantau Panjang
Sg. Selangor 1Sr11 N 03 23 881 E 101 28 059 Tanjong Keledek
Sg. Kundang 1Sr12 N 03 19 151 E 101 30 883 At the bridge near Puchong Estate
Sg. Rawang 1Sr13 N 03 19 472 E 101 33 958 Rawang Town

Main Report
Table 5.2: Overview on Standards, Classifications and Indices for Water Quality
Standards Description
Classification of river  Provides the information on the status of the river water quality and its
water suitability for various uses.
 Developed based on water quality index (WQI).
 Ranging from Class 1 to Class V.
 Appendix 5.1: River Classification According to WQI (Table 5.1a).
National Water Quality  Developed by Department of Environment, Malaysia (DOE).

Standards  The standard builds on Class I-V, but for each class it specifies the limits
for 17 common parameters and 55 other substances.
 The key parameters are given in Appendix 5.1: National Water Quality
Standards for Malaysia (Table 5.1b).
Water Quality Index  Provides an indication of the general status of the river water quality.
(WQI)  WQI is a composite index based on six parameters: dissolved oxygen,
BOD, COD, ammoniacal nitrogen, suspended solids and pH.
 Calculation of the WQI is described in Appendix 5.1, Table 5.1c.
Recommended Raw  Guidelines established by Ministry of Health to indicate the general limits
Water Quality Criteria acceptable for raw water intended for treatment to meet drinking water
standards.
 The raw water quality criteria are provided in Appendix 5.1, Table 5.1d.
National Drinking Water  Drinking water standards, NDWQS, established by the Ministry of Health
Quality Standards based on WHO Guidelines.
 Includes physical, chemical, microbiological and radiological parameters.
 Compliance with these limits is mandatory for all water intended for human
consumption.
 Sampling and monitoring is mostly done by Public Health Inspectors, who
also measure the physical parameters, while analysis of the samples is
carried out by the Department of Chemistry.
 The NDWQS is provided in Appendix 5.1, Table 5.1d.
Effluent Standards  Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluents) Regulations 2009.

 Environmental Quality (Sewage) Regulations 2009.
 Environmental Quality (Sewage and Industrial Effluents) Regulations 1979.
 Standard A applies to water discharged upstream of water intakes, while
Standard B applies to discharges downstream.

Main Report
Table 5.3: Average Records of Water Parameters and the Mean Firefly Population Index of Abundance between April 2012 and January 2014
Year 2012 Year 2013 2014

Water Parameters Jan
Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan
(2)
WQI ( Downstream
* * 74 72 73 75 73 72 72 * * * * * * 75 76 75.8 -
- High Tide
WQI ( Downstream
* * 73 74 74 73 76 75 72 * * * * * * 74 75 74.8 -
- Low Tide
WQI ( Upstream -
* * 75 74 75 74 72 73 73 * * * * * * 74 74 74.1 -
High Tide
WQI ( Upstream -
* * 76 76 74 73 74 74 73 * * * * * * 75 76 74.6 -
Low Tide
Salinity
(Downstream - * * 4.6 5.7 4.6 4.9 5 4.8 4.8 * * * * * * 5 4.9 4.56 -
High Tide)(ppt)
Salinity
(Downstream - Low * * 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 * * * * * * 0.4 0.5 0.41 -
Tide)(ppt)
Salinity (Upstream -
* * 3.7 4.4 3.6 4 4.3 3.8 3.9 * * * * * * 3.9 3.8 3.99 -
High Tide)(ppt)
Salinity (Upstream -
* * 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.2 * * * * * * 0.2 0.1 0.17 -
Low Tide)(ppt)
Mean firefly population index of abundance
Overall (7 Sites) 936 638 1094 1349 1404 1986 1814 1889 787 1136 941 1224 1475 1461 1293 992 1898 1422 2164
*Data is unavailable due to instrument malfunction.
Source: Sixth Progress Report: Monitoring of the Firefly Population along the Selangor River, Kuala Selangor (Phase 2) by Forest Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM) for
Lembaga Urus Air Selangor.
Index Range
Water Quality Index
Clean Slightly Polluted Polluted
(WQI)
81 – 100 60 – 80 0 – 59
Source: Water quality classification based on WQI, DOE Selangor
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 5.Doc

Main Report
Table 5.4: Population Equivalent (PE) served by different Sewage Systems.

IWK Septic Tanks Pour- Flush Total
(IST) (Direct)
District
Population Equivalent (PE)
Hulu Selangor- entire district 56,945 10,000
Gombak- entire district 89,780 5,000
Kuala Selangor- entire district 50,095 15,000
District Total 196,820 30,000
Hulu Selangor- basin only 299,950 47,834 8,400 356,184
Gombak- basin only 276,298 23,343 1,300 300,941
Upstream Total 576,248 71,268 9,700 657,216
Kuala Selangor- basin only 50,922 21,047 6,600 78,569
Basin Total 627,170 92,315 16,300 735,785
Source: IWK; May 2014

Main Report
Table 5.5: The numbers of public STPs in the three districts based on sizes (IWK, June 2014 data)
0 - 200 201 – 1,000 1,001 – 10,000 10,001 – 50,000 Total
STP
Classification
IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current
No PE No PE No PE No PE No PE No PE No PE No PE No PE No PE
Mechanical 9 913 9 1,005 22 13,344 42 22,387 53 205,077 64 229,887 9 213,644 15 304,121 93 432,978 130 557,400
Oxidation
Pond/Aerated - - - - 1 490 - - 19 53,969 20 56,745 - - - - 20 54,459 20 56,745
Lagoon
Primary
Settlement 126 7,055 118 8,230 10 3,520 9 3,295 1 1,500 1 1,500 - - - - 137 12,075 128 13,025
(CST/IT)
Grand Total 135 7,968 127 9,235 33 17,354 51 25,682 73 260,546 85 288,132 9 213,644 15 340,121 250 499,512 278 627,170
 IRBM 1 - IRBM for Sg. Selangor 2007-2012

 Current- IWK , May 2014
Table 5.6: Age of public STPs in three districts based on categories (IWK, June 2014 data)
Local Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Total Category 1 Plants built after date of gazettement
Authorities
No PE No PE No PE No PE Tertiary Treatment of new standards
(LA)
MD Hulu
1 415 15 87,353 80 212,182 96 299,950 Category 2 Plants built after 1January 1999 to
Selangor
Secondary date of gazettement of new
MD Kuala Treatment standards
1 379 27 28,944 66 21,599 94 50,922
Selangor
MP Selayang 1 2,765 30 110,648 57 162,885 88 276,298 Category 3
Partly Secondary&
Plants built before 1January 1999
Grand Total 3 3,559 72 226,945 203 396,666 278 627,170 Primary
Treatment
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 5.Doc 5-44

Main Report
Table 5.7: Pollution loads from public STPs (IWK, June 2014 data)
PE BOD (kg/day) BOD (g/PE) NH3-N (kg/day)

Type
IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current IRBM 1 Current
Mechanical 432,978 557,400 1,188 1,603.7 2.7 2.9 1,180 1,627.2
Oxidation
pond/Aerated 54,459 56,745 316 224.8 5.8 4.0 188 147.4
Lagoon
Primary
Settlement 12,075 13,025 170 405.2 3.4 31.1 81 210.7
(CST/IT)
Grand Total 499,512 627,170 1,675 2,233.8 3.4 3.6 1,448 1,985.2
 IRBM 1 - IRBM for Sg. Selangor 2007-2012
 Current- IWK , May 2014
Table 5.8: Pollution loads from public STPs on Mukim basis

BOD NH3N
Mukim PE BOD (g/PE)
(kg/day) (kg/day)
Ampang Pecah 6,080 17.4 2.9 14.5
Api-Api 22,596 182.2 8.1 115.0
Batang Berjuntai 12,444 174.4 14.0 92.8
Batang Kali 41,363 254.4 5.9 186.5
Gombak 95 4.3 45.0 2.1
Hujong Permatang 525 5.4 10.4 5.7
Hulu Bernam 8,384 3.8 0.5 1.9
Hulu Yam 25,949 39.8 1.5 47.2
Ijok 3,067 74.5 24.3 38.6
Kerling 1,324 4.5 3.4 2.3
Kuala Kubu Baru 945 42.5 45.0 21.3
Kuala Selangor 8,662 43.9 5.1 26.3
Pasangan 2,591 44.0 17.0 20.9
Pekan Bukit Belimbing 30 1.4 45.0 0.7
Rasa 403 0.3 0.7 0.1
Rawang 276,203 1,097.2 4.0 969.7
Serendah 215,502 251.6 1.2 439.439.20
Tanjong Karang 1,007 1.2 1.2 0.6
Grand Total 627,170 2,233.8 3.6 1,985.2

Main Report
Table 5.9: Locations and Status of Landfills within Selangor River Basin
Average of
Distance to
Local Landfill Area Operations Domestic Location of
No Site Name Location Status river/stream
Authorities Liner (acre) level Waste water intake
(m)
(tone/day)
N 3°36’21” Operating
1 Sg. Sabai None 2 km 20 None Sanitary 50 - 100 None
E 101°32’25.8” till 2021
Bukit N 3°25’32.14” Operating

2 E 101°32’56.6” None 5 km 8 None Sanitary 150 None
Beruntung till 2021
MD Hulu N 3°29’46.64” Operating
3 Selangor Bukit Tagar Various 4 km 700 Sanitary 1950 Downstream
E 101°28’50.35” till 2045
Hulu Yam N 3°25’48.7” Closed in No river
4 None 8 None Sanitary 20 None
Bharu E 101°39’14.71” 2006 nearby
N 3°34’07.8” Not No river
5 Kalumpang Closed 2 None Sanitary - None
E 101°34’20.6” known nearby
N 3°15’07.72” No river
6 Sri Gombak Closed None - - - None
E 101°42”26.08” nearby
MP Selayang
N 3°18’43.91” Closed in
7 Kundang None 10 8.1 None Sanitary 400 None
E 101°30’24.48” 2006
MD Kuala Kubang N 3°22’59.59” Closed in Natural
8 20 8 None Sanitary 60 None
Selangor Badak E 101°24’52.38” 2008 clay
Source: 1. Impact of Landfills on Groundwater in Selangor, Malaysia, S. Suratman, I. Tawnie & A. Sefei, ASM Sci. J., 5(2), 101-107
2. Jabatan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal Negara, 2014.

Main Report
Table 5.10: Surface Water Quality at Bukit Tagar Landfill (Environmental Monitoring Report) (UKM Pakarunding)
Parameter Units W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 Class III
pH 5.74 6.69 6.3 6.26 6.45 4.35 6.03 5.7 ND ND 5.0 – 9.0
Temperature °C 28.9 29.3 29.2 28.6 29.2 29.1 28.9 29.1 ND ND 26 – 31
DO mg/l 5.34 5.66 5.82 4.54 5.5 4.54 4.59 3.47 ND ND 3.0 – 5.0
Turbidity NTU 19 10 20 21 18 25 20 39 ND ND NA
BOD mg/l 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 13 ND ND 6
COD mg/l 8 4 6 10 7 16 14 74 59 120 50
Conductivity mg/l 21.4 23 27.8 10.1 22.6 64.3 64.1 61 ND ND NA
TDS mg/l 18 15 23 8 18 32 42 43 ND ND NA
TSS mg/l 10 2 2 13 5 21 25 22 ND ND 150
Arsenic, As mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND ND 0.04
Cyanide mg/l 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 ND ND 0.06
Cadmium, Cd mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 ND ND 0.01
Chromium hexavalent mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND ND 1.4
Chromium trivalent mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND ND 2.5
Copper, Cu mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND ND NA
Lead, Pb mg/l 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 ND ND 0.02
Iron, Fe mg/l 1.49 0.53 1.72 1.28 1.22 0.95 1.06 4.01 ND ND 1
Manganese, Mn mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.05 ND ND 0.1
Mercury, Hg mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 ND ND 0.004

Main Report
Table 5.10 (cont’)
Parameter Units W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 Class III

Nickel, Ni mg/l 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 ND ND 0.9
Tin, Sn mg/l 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 ND ND 0.004
Zinc, Zn mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 ND ND 0.4
Boron, B mg/l 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 ND ND NA
Phenol mg/l 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 ND ND NA
Oil and grease mg/l ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NA
Ammonia nitrogen mg/l 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.7 1 0.9 0.8 ND ND 0.9
Chloride mg/l 2.4 2 2.7 1.9 2.3 5 5 10.9 ND ND NA
Phosphorus, P mg/l 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 NA
Sulphate mg/l 2 1 3 9 3 10 8 10 ND ND NA
Nitrate mg/l 1.3 3.1 0.9 0.4 1.8 5.3 6.2 0.1 ND ND NA
Flouride mg/l 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 ND ND 10
TOC mg/l 3.62 1.4 3.71 4.4 3.6 6.12 6.75 26 ND ND NA
Total Petroleum
mg/l 0.05 0.05 0.05 ND ND NA
Hydrocarbons
Count/
Faecal Coliform 20 10 10 20 10 20 20 380 ND ND 5000
100
Flow rate m3h 2918.3 915.5 310.7 408.3 1445 28734 33975 172 ND ND NA
Notes: NA = Not Available
ND = Not Detected
Source: Desktop Study on Groundwater Contamination at Landfill Sites in Selangor, UKM Pakarunding, 2009

Main Report
Table 5.11: Ruminants Reared in the Sg. Selangor Basin

2010 2011 2012 2013
Beef cattle 6,219 5,644 3,262 4,346
Dairy cattle 1,259 1,020 1,389 186
Feedlot cattle 685 668 NA 615
Buffalo 75 62 9 NA
Goat 9,277 11,425 6,876 5,414
Goat (for milk) 382 376 286 515
Sheep 603 766 156 74
Horse NA 82 NA NA
Deer NA 1,022 130 350
Rabbit NA 3,000 3,700 3,800
Source: Department of Veterinary Science (November 2014)
Table 5.12: Distribution of Ruminant Farms by Districts

2010 2011 2012 2013
Beef cattle
Gombak 827 1,286 591 455
Hulu Selangor 2,454 1,614 NA 2,298
Kuala Selangor 2,884 2,744 2,671 1,593
Sheep
Gombak 93 126 156 NA
Hulu Selangor 250 250 NA 74
Kuala Selangor 260 390 NA NA
Dairy cattle
Gombak 615 441 809 NA
Hulu Selangor 307 199 297 NA
Kuala Selangor 283 283 283 186
Goat (for meat)
Gombak 1,206 50 1,766 740
Hulu Selangor 3,812 4,549 1,720 2,797
Kuala Selangor 4,259 5,269 3,390 1,877
Source: Department of Veterinary Science (November 2014)

Main Report
Table 5.13: Number of Poultry Farms within the Sg. Selangor Basin (2010-2013)
Year Number of Farms
Gombak Kuala Selangor Hulu Selangor
TOTAL
No. of <20 000 ≥20 000 <20 000 ≥20 000 <20 000 ≥20 000
Birds
2010 4 9 13 7 10 11 54
2011 12 8 4 9 14 11 58
2012 14 8 7 8 14 11 62
2013 3 8 3 7 12 15 48
Note: 20,000 birds is adopted as cut-off for farms exceeding that requires a licence from
LUAS to discharge wastewater.
Source: DVS, 2014

Main Report
Table 5.14: Birds Reared by Type and District

Gombak Kuala Selangor Hulu Selangor
Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013 2010 2011 2012 2013
Layers 434,400 434,400 434,400 434,400 2,260,000 2,000,000 300,000 62,000
Bak a 66,000 38,000 66,000 248,000 19,000 19,000 2
Chick en Broilers 85,000 81,000 71,260 71,900 328,000 709,000 469,100 248,000 535,360 362,360 365,000 1,524,600
Layers 5,300
Bak a 536
Ayam
Kampung Broilers 5,300 400 1,950 2,050 1,000 2,596 2,070 8,050 1778
Layers 300 300 300 1,350 1,350 2,000 3,000
Duck Meat breeds 1,500 1,760 6 6 1,500 600
Layers 3,400 3,400
Quail Meat 550
Turk ey Meat 10
TOTAL 519,700 525,900 516,820 506,300 397,300 750,400 537,100 500,000 2,816,962 2,383,982 674,550 1,589,530
Source: DVS, 2014

Main Report
Table 5.15: Area under Freshwater Aquaculture Production

Area (ha)
District
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Hulu Selangor 70.57 310.82 342.71 316.98 311.81 320.3
Gombak 166.95 191.38 164.75 187.72 187.72 179.26
Kuala Selangor 28.38 31.26 31.55 29.58 34.52 33.9
Total 265.9 533.46 539.01 534.28 534.05 533.46
Source: Jabatan Perikanan Selangor (July 2014)
Table 5.16: Freshwater Aquaculture Production

Production (tonnes/year)
District
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Hulu Selangor 7,605.07 8,369.86 8,758.85 9,527.59 11,265.13 13,941.14
Gombak 2,462.71 3,022.67 2,625.12 1,526.23 1,448.16 1,128.86
Kuala Selangor 4,032.23 1,581.84 2,616.75 2,371.51 1,776.13 1,306.95
Total 14,100.01 12,974.37 14,000.72 13425.33 14,489.42 16,376.95

Main Report
Table 5.17: Number of Freshwater Aquaculture Farms by Districts

2008 2010 2012 2013
Daerah Hulu Selangor
Ponds 88 103 91 91
Cages 2 2 2 2
Ex-mining Ponds 5 4 5 5
Tanks 4 21 24 24
Ornamental Fish 1 1 2 2
Sub-total 100 131 124 124
Daerah Gombak
Ponds 55 46 46 46
Cages 0 0 0 0
Tanks 12 7 12 12
Sub-total 86 67 72 72
Daerah Kuala Selangor
Ponds 48 60 62 62
Cages 0 15 2 2
Tanks 8 24 41 41
Sub-total 59 102 108 108
Total for Sg. 245 300 304 304
Selangor Basin

Main Report
Table 5.18: Annual Freshwater Fish Production by Culture Type (tonnes/year)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Daerah HuluSelangor
Excavated Ponds 7,397.35 8,170.62 8,552.51 8,767.8 10,062.59 11,639.64
Cages 0.39 6.10 2.50 5.65 13.38 0
Ex-mining Ponds 195.75 123.30 1340 25.78 120.55 316.7
Cement Tanks 11.58 69.84 69.84 728.36 1068.6 1984.8
Total 7,605.07 8,369.86 8,758.85 9,527.59 11,265.12 13,941.14
Daerah Gombak
Excavated Ponds 1,381.5 2,170.41 1,776.0853 886.08 886.03 666.69
Cages 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ex-mining Ponds 27.58 21.44 18.21 108.62 30.6 0.29
Cement Tanks 1,053.63 830.82 830.82 531.54 531.54 461.88
Total 2,462.714 3,022.67 2,625.1213 1,526.24 1,448.17 1,128.86
Daerah Kuala
Selangor
Excavated Ponds 3,839.19 1,310.57 2,342.72 2,265.77 1,709.02 1,239.89
Cages 0 0 2.26 1.86 0 0
Ex-mining Ponds 0.62 0.93 1.43 0.92 1.27 1.05
Cement Tanks 192.42 270.34 270.34 102.96 65.84 66.01
Total 4,032.23 1,581.84 2,616.75 2,371.51 1,776.13 1,306.95
Table 5.19: Freshwater Aquaculture Production by Species, 2013 (MT)
Species Hulu Selangor Gombak Kuala Selangor Sg Selangor Basin
Red Tilapia 2,924.22 558.34 559.30 4,041.86

Tilapia 68.40 1.42 0.31 70.13
Keli 9,813.08 300.35 613.69 10,727.12
Patin 682.40 266.56 72.22 1,021.18
Haruan 30.95 30.95
Baung 266.18 61.22 327.40
Puyu 116.97 116.97
Kap Makan Rumput 15.28 0.12 15.40
Lampam Jawa 0.52 0.21 0.73
Sepat Siam -
Kap Kepala Besar -
Jelawat -
Others 23.66 1.55 25.21
Total 13,941.14 1,128.86 1,306.95 16,376.95

Main Report
Table 5.20: Preliminary Assessment of Risks for Ensuring Clean Water

L S Risk L S Risk
Discharge of Higher pollutant Effluent not About 71% of the STPs 4 3 H Include nutrient removal 3 1 L
treated loads in the meeting the are still under Category 3 technologies in the treatment
domestic receiving water required standards and the discharge limits process and upgrading all the
wastewater bodies (BOD and at all times. are not as stringent as STPs from Category 3 to
effluent into NH3N). those imposed on STPs Category 1& 2
the receiving Inadequate operating under Category
water bodies. treatment of 2 and Category 1. Individual septic tank (IST)
domestic and pour flush systems to be
wastewater Not enough budget abolished and all of these
resulting from allocation for upgrading need to be connected to a
aging plants of STPs. centralised treatment plant for
utilizing old better treatment.
technologies. Water Services Act (2006)
has removed the Conduct periodic
STPs that are responsibility of IWK for maintenance and replacing
operated and providing regular service aging equipment in timely
maintained by to desludge individual manner to ensure the
private owners, not septic tanks as was treatment is at its optimum.
functioning well and practiced in the past.
the effluent Frequent monitoring and
discharges are likely reporting of the effluent
not meeting the water quality for STP record
stipulated standards. and also reporting to DOE.

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Discharge of Higher pollution Wastewater from Older residences do not 4 2 M Interceptor drains and/or 3 1 L
greywater loads in the household kitchens have connections of grey sewer systems that can
from receiving water and bath areas water to the sewers and channel the grey waters into
residential bodies (BOD, COD discharged directly therefore these houses sewage treatment plants for
& NH3N). into storm drains,
still discharge their grey treatment.
and ultimately into
the rivers. waters into storm drains.
Discharges Pollution loads from Wastewaters Discharges from wet 4 2 M Remove slaughtering of 2 1 L
from wet these sources can be typically discharged markets are in small poultry from the markets to
markets very high, into drains quantity. approved slaughter houses
particularly in BOD untreated. with wastewater collection and
Discharges from smaller treatment systems.
The pollution
impacts from the markets as well as night
smaller markets markets also contribute Move all markets including
would be more pollution loads but are night markets and “pasar tani”
widespread but of more sporadic and of into centralised areas with
significantly smaller lesser impact. wastewater collection and
loading. treatment systems.
Drainage collection systems

that can channel wastewaters
to a central sewage treatment
plant

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Discharge of Organic pollution The wastes from Food/hawker stalls are 4 2 M Phase out illegal food/hawker 3 1 L
food waste loads to the river food stalls and generally spread out stalls and for the local council
and oil and system. illegal hawker stalls within to provide properly designed
grease into are generally residential/commercial hawker centres where
storm drains
thrown areas. It is difficult to wastewater collection and
from food
stalls indiscriminately provide treatment systems treatment facilities are
into storm drains such as oil & grease traps provided.
which ultimately to cover the areas
get discharged into occupied by these stalls. Increase the level of
the river. enforcement in shutting down
illegal food stalls.
Enhance the awareness and

encourage the move of the
food stalls from illegal
premises to proper hawker
centres.

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Aquaculture Contribute high Discharge of the Submission of effluent 4 2 M Improvements on the 2 1 L

farming BOD loads into the effluent not analysis reports to monitoring of effluent and
activities river system. meeting the LUAS is not enforcement of the
stipulated forthcoming. regulation.
standards.
Combined Extent of compliance or Establish aquaculture zones

pollution loads non-compliance of the where individual farms can
from many smaller aquaculture activities be clustered and centralised
farms could be that have been given wastewater treatment
high. licences is unknown. facilities can be provided.
Effluent discharge limits Provide guidelines

are set on the larger incorporating suitable design
establishments but of aquaculture systems which
smaller set-ups do not should incorporate some form
fall within the discharge of wastewater treatment for
standards. pollution control.
Poultry and Increase organic Liquid wastewaters Majority of the poultry 4 2 M Farmers to adopt pollution 3 1 L
cattle pollution loads in from the farms are farms within the Sg. control practices.
farming the river. mainly channeled Selangor basin are
into streams or <20,000 population and Review the regulation for
seeps into the therefore they do not fall effluent control requirements
ground, possibly under the LUAS for smaller population farms.
polluting the regulation.

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
groundwater. Increase enforcement on the

compliance of effluent
quality to the required
standards is necessary.
Discharge of Higher pollution Industrial effluent Current monitoring and 4 3 H Consistent and accurate 3 1 L
treated loads in the discharges not enforcement system is not monitoring by all industrial
industrial receiving water meeting the sufficient enough to premises that fall within the
wastewater bodies (metals, required standards control the quality of the Regulation.
into the NH3N & COD). at all times.
industrial effluents being
receiving DOE to check on the effluent
water bodies. Direct discharges discharged into the river. quality and carry out strict
without prior enforcement of the penalties
treatment from Combines pollution allowed for under the
small scale loadings from small scale Regulations.
industries which do industries may have
not fall under the significant impact on the Priority on enforcement of
Regulation. river water quality. industrial effluent discharges
from the Rawang Integrated
Industries having Palm Oil and Rubber Industrial Estate.
contravention industries, sand mining,
licenses. etc which are currently Contravention licences should
excluded from the be amended or revoked.
Industrial Effluent
Regulation. Industrial zoning should be
based on locating polluting
industries within downstream

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
areas of a river basin.
Implementation of Best
Available Techniques (BAT)
as a measure to improve
wastewater treatment
efficiency and treatment
level.
Earthwork Increase of TSS Soil erosion during Smaller development 4 3 H Improve regulatory 2 2 L
and sand content in the river major/minor projects are not required framework on erosion
mining water quality. earthwork activities to undergo the EIA controls for smaller
activities. due to improper or process and hence development projects.
inadequate erosion
erosion control facilities
controls. Better monitoring and
are not necessarily
enforcement of the
provided.
regulations for sand mining.
LUAS Enactment
“Peraturan Kemasukan
atau Pelepasan Bahan
Pencemar (Negeri
Selangor) 2012” sets the
effluent quality limits for
sand mining and
earthworks activities for
areas < 50 ha.

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Implementation of
pollution controls is still
lacking.
Solid waste Surface and ground Leachate from Many of the existing 4 3 H Locate suitable areas to 2 1 L
disposal. water pollution. landfills seeping solid waste disposal sites design and construct a
through to ground are open dump sites properly engineered sanitary
water and surface which are not engineered landfill and close the
water. sanitary sites. existing dump sites.
Landfills not Seepage of leachate from To provide centralised waste

properly equipped closed landfill can still recovery centres.
with compacted continue to occur for
clay many years. Engaging an affordable
orgeomembrane and appropriate technical
liner. option to reduce, reuse and
recycle solid wastes.
Overflow of
leachate.
Establish a National 3R focal
point.

Main Report


Severity Score
Minor 1
Moderate 2
Significant 3
Substantial 4
Catastrophic 5

Severity Score
1 2 3 4 5
Score 2 L L M M H
3 L M M H H
4 M M H H H
5 M H H H H
L = Low
M= Medium
H = High

Main Report
Table 5.24: Proposed Action Plan for Ensuring Clean Water at Sg. Selangor Basin
No. Measure Action Indicator Responsible Agency S M L Comments
5.1 Reduce pollution from industrial wastewater
5.1.1 Improve monitoring and Review the EQA Regulation to make it mandatory EQA Regulation review DOE / LUAS / Water √ √ √ Industrial premises that fall within
enforcement of wastewater for the industrial operator to engage a competent operators the EQA Regulation must submit
producing industries person to be responsible for wastewater treatment accurate records of monitoring on
and compliance with effluent quality standards. a monthly basis to the DOE.
LUAS to initiate formation of an Integrated River Integrated river patrol Potential issues with water quality
Patrol Squad to conduct scheduled and more pollution from the many numbers
frequent patrolling of the river. of smaller industries which do not
fall under the Regulation.
Carry out strict enforcement of the penalties Scheduled enforcement
allowed for under the Regulations on those reports Sg. Sembah sub-basin and its
recalcitrant industries. sub-tributaries Sg. Rawang have
the most problems with water
Increase frequency of spot checks through the Scheduled monitoring quality and to a lesser extent Sg.
Integrated River Patrol Squad. reports Serendah.
Priority in enforcement to be placed on the Scheduled enforcement

industries within the Rawang Integrated reports
Industrial Estate.
5.1.2 Review existing To review existing contravention licenses and EQA Regulations Federal Govt / DOE √ √ There are particular industries
contravention licences regulations with the aim of improving waste review such as the Palm Oil and Rubber
management and compliance monitoring. industries, etc which are currently
excluded from the Industrial
Effluent Regulation; the list of
excluded industries is provided
under the First Schedule
(Regulation 3).

Main Report
5.1.3 Locate future risk industries Zoning of future industrial areas in Structure Plan Structural Plan and Local JPBD / PBT / DOE √ √ √ Industrial zoning should be based
downstream of water intakes. and Local Plans to be more definitive on the type Plan review on locating polluting industries
and class of industries to be allowed within the within downstream areas of a
industrial zones. river basin.
Locate polluting industries in the lower river basin Structural Plan and Local Controls on effluent quality will
areas, downstream of the water supply intake at Plan review still be necessary to protect the
Bestari Jaya. Relevant authorities are to work in rivers at the downstream stretches
consultation and collaboration to ascertain the and also the marine waters at the
type of industries permissible within each zone. river mouth.
5.1.4 Implementation of Best Make changes to the permits/licences for Enforcement DOE √ √ √ Existing regulation specifies list
Available Techniques industries of a specified size to include obligations parameters of parameters for which BMPs are
(BAT) for operators of facilities to ensure BAT are expected to be adopted but there
applied. are no limits set for the parameters
which can be used for
enforcement.
5.1.5 Implementation of measures LUAS is responsible for implementing Implementation LUAS / PBT / Water √ Targeted at preventing the
to prevent accidental procedures according to the Manual for Handling Operators / Highway occurrence of accidents that can
pollution Oil Spill and Polluting Substances. Authority result in pollution of rivers and
ensuring effective contingency
Identify and inventorize potential static and Guidance document planning in the event of an
mobile accident risk spots. incident taking place.
Introduce preventive measures to reduce risk of Guidance document

accidents.
Establish an Accident Emergency Warning Guidance document

System.

Main Report
5.2 Upgrade sewerage system and sewage treatment
5.2.1 Develop strategies and Plans for sewage treatment to be in tandem with Sewage treatment SPAN / JPP / IWK / √ √ Pollution from domestic
plans for sewage treatment the population growth and urbanization within the master plan DOE wastewater is significant within
Sg. Selangor basin. Sg. Selangor basin.
Include nutrient removal technologies in the Sewage treatment

treatment process and upgrade all the current master plan
STPs from Category 3 to Category 1& 2.
Increase the sewer connection to households that Sewage treatment

are currently still utilizing septic tank systems. master plan
5.2.2 Ensure treatment of grey To study feasibility of having interceptor drains Feasibility study SPAN / JPP / IWK / √ √ A large section of the population,
water from residential areas and/or sewer systems that can channel the grey PBT about 79% of the PE, are likely to
waters into sewage treatment plants for treatment. be living in houses that are yet to
have connections of grey water to
the sewerage system.
5.3 Reduce pollution from other point sources
5.3.1 Reduce pollution from wet Remove slaughtering of poultry from the markets Implementation plan and LUAS / PBT / JPS / JPP √ √ The discharges from wet markets
markets to approved slaughter houses with wastewater program are small; however, the pollution
collection and treatment systems. loads from these sources can be
very high, particularly in BOD.
Move all markets including night markets and Implementation plan and
“pasar tani” into centralised areas that are program
provided with wastewater collection and
treatment systems.
Have drainage collection systems at appropriate Implementation plan and

locations that can channel wastewaters to a central program
sewage treatment plant.

Main Report
Strengthen enforcement. Review LUAS’s LUAS Regulation

Legislation for enforcement to include pollution review
control from markets, etc.
5.3.2 Reduce pollution from Increase the level of enforcement in shutting Implementation plan and PBT √ Restaurants and food stalls
restaurants and food stalls down illegal food stalls. program contribute organic pollution loads
to the rivers through discharges of
Phase out illegal food/hawker stalls and provide Implementation plan and food waste and oil and grease into
proper designed hawker centres where wastewater program storm drains.
collection and treatment facilities are provided.
Enhance awareness and encourage the move of Implementation plan and

the illegal food stalls from illegal premises to profram
proper hawker centres.
5.4 Reduce pollution from freshwater aquaculture
5.4.1 Improve regulatory To improve monitoring of effluent and Scheduled monitoring LUAS / DOF √ √ √ LUAS Regulation “Peraturan
framework relating to enforcement of the regulation on discharges reports Kemasukan atau Pelepasan
discharges from aquaculture. from aquaculture farms. Bahan Pencemar (Negeri
Selangor) 2012” was gazetted
LUAS needs to review its existing Enactment LUAS Enactment review on 20 April 2012 for 7
to regulate the smaller farms. The review activities, of which two of the
should cover size of the farms, relevant activities relate to aquaculture.
parameters and their discharge limits.
Big farms are registered with
DOE and issued with MyGAP
certificate if production is
aimed at the export market.
Through MyGAP, DOF is able
to monitor, audit and check on
waste treatment, etc. However,
small farms are not licensed or

Main Report
registered with DOF, and thus

have no control over them.
Fisheries Department is
currently an advisory agency.
Regulation for Land Fisheries /
Aquaculture in Selangor is
currently being drafted by the
Federal Department of
Fisheries.
5.4.2 Implement new regulation Establish guidance documents on the design of Guidance report / LUAS / DOF √ √ √ Regulations pertaining to
and develop guidelines for farms. documents aquaculture farming operations
design of appropriate are in the process of being
aquaculture systems Impose a Code of Practice (Sijil Akuakultur Guidance report / finalized.
Amalan Baik or SAAB) that requires farms to documents
have sedimentation pond/s with effluent
discharge that must constitute 10% of the
overall farming area. If intensive farming or
high stocking density is implemented, farms
should be required to install the RAS (Recycle
Aquaculture System).
Promote use of ‘good bacteria’ or Enhance Guidance report /

Microorganism (mud ball) at the sedimentation documents
pond.
5.4.3 Establish aquaculture Incorporate aquaculture development zones Structural Plan and PBT / JPBD √ √ Absence of an enabling
development zones where there can be common wastewater Local Plan review regulation or enactment at the
treatment facilities established into the state level.
Selangor Structure Plan.

Main Report
5.5 Reduce pollution from poultry farming and animal husbandry
5.5.1 Improve regulatory Review LUAS current Regulation for effluent LUAS Regulation LUAS / DVS √ √ Poultry farming and animal
framework relating to control requirements for smaller population review husbandry in Selangor comes
animal waste farms. under LUAS Regulation
“Peraturan Kemasukan atau
Pelepasan Bahan Penceman
(Negeri Selangor) 2012”.
There is also the Poultry

Farming (State of Selangor)
Enactment 2007 and the Animal
Act 1953 (amended in 2006).
However, both enactments do
not contain regulations for
effluent control discharge.
5.5.2 Reduce pollution from Establish requirements for large farms, Guidance document LUAS / DVS / Pejabat √ √ √ Poultry farming is widely
poultry, cattle, buffalo, integrated feedlots and slaughter houses to Tanah / PBT practiced in the Sg. Selangor
sheep and goat farming. have proper solid waste and wash water basin; there is less focus on
collection and treatment systems. animal husbandry.
Identify and dedicate zoning area for the Structural Plan and
poultry and animal husbandry. Local Plan review
Establish guidance documents on the design of Guidance document

farms and best management practice in respect
to pollution control.
Improve enforcement on the compliance of Scheduled monitoring

effluent quality to the required standards. and enforcement
reports

Main Report
5.6 Reduce sedimentation and suspended solids
5.6.1 Reduce sedimentation and Improve regulatory framework relating to LUAS Regulation LUAS √ √ √ Major projects required to
suspended solids from smaller development projects to require review undergo the EIA process and to
earthworks preparation and implementation of ESCP, and prepare an Erosion and
to enhance monitoring and enforcement efforts. Sediment Control Plan (ESCP).
There are also major issues of
soil erosion caused by smaller
development projects which are
not required to undergo the EIA
process. These smaller projects
(< 50 hectares) come under the
ambit of LUAS ‘Peraturan
Kemasukan atau Pelepasan
Bahan Pencemaran 2012’.
5.6.2 Improve monitoring and Further monitoring of the sand mining Scheduled monitoring LUAS √ √ Sand mining is still a major
enforcement of pollution activities by the relevant authorities to ensure and enforcement reports source of pollution in the Sg.
controls for sand mining that they are fully in compliance. Selangor basin.
activities
Sand mining activity is subject
to “Peraturan-peraturan Aktiviti
Pengubahan Sumber LUAS”
which require approval from the
Director of LUAS.
In addition to this, each sand

mining site which carries out
sand washing also requires
“Lesen Kemasukan atau
Pelepasan Bahan Pencemar”.
Sand washing scheme is

required to adopt water

Main Report
recycling method.
5.7 Reduce pollution from landfills
5.7.1 Implement solid waste To include provisions for approval of waste Draft Solid Waste UPEN / PBT / Landfill √ √ The state government has
policy, regulations and facilities and prevention of pollution from the Enactment review operators drafted a new enactment on
strategic plans waste disposal sites. solid waste: “Enakmen
Pemungutan, Pembuangan dan
To establish the institutional structure to Draft Solid Waste Pelupusan Sisa Pepejal dan
implement policies, regulations and strategic Enactment review Pembersihan Awam Negeri
plans. Selangor, Siri 2 Bil 1/2014”.
5.7.2 Improve information on To establish a proper database for landfill sites. Database PBT / JPSPN / UPEN / √ Information on waste disposal
waste disposal sites DOE / Landfill operators sites is useful for future
planning and management of the
landfill sites.
5.7.3 Reduce illegal dumping of Provide additional waste recovery centres/inert Scheduled monitoring JPSPN / PTD / PBT / √ √ Targeted mainly at construction,
solid waste waste landfill. and enforcement reports LUAS demolition and commercial
waste.
Strengthen enforcement of the solid waste Scheduled monitoring
disposal and enforcement reports
5.7.4 Divert waste from landfills Implement National 3R policy and waste Implementation plan JPSPN / UPEN / PBT / √ √ √ Implementation of the 3-R
& reduce water content in segregation. and program Landfill operators strategy is slow in Malaysia.
solid waste Policy makers and relevant
Raise public awareness through information, Implementation plan Government authorities to
education and demonstration projects and program implement and enforce the 3-R
strategies in Malaysia.
Establish affordable and appropriate technical Implementation plan
options (e.g. incinerator) to reduce, reuse and and program
recycle the waste.

Main Report
Investigate the feasibility of upgrading existing Feasibility study

landfill to incorporate leachate treatment.
5.8 Strengthen protection of reservoirs
5.8.1 Strengthen protection of Conduct regular monitoring and encourage Scheduled monitoring LUAS / Jabatan Hutan / √ √ √ Both dam catchments have been
reservoirs good forest management practices to protect and enforcement report PTD gazetted as protection zone in
and conserve the forest and its biological accordance with Section 48 of
diversity, increase its capacity as a water LUAS Enactment.
source and prevent encroachment of
development within reservoir catchments. Written permission is required
from the Director of LUAS for
Increase enforcement in strengthen the Scheduled monitoring activity carried out within the
protection of the reservoirs. and enforcement report dam catchments and
compliances with the
established guidelines is
required.
Dam catchment has also been

gazetted as Forest Reserve
Catchment Area.

Main Report
5.9 Enhance enforcement of effluent discharge
5.9.1 Enhance method of Conduct regular spot checks and collection of Scheduled monitoring LUAS / DOE / DVS / √ √ Onus of monitoring effluent
enforcement of effluent samples to confirm the reports submitted by the and enforcement report DOF / PBT discharge is on the “polluter” who
discharge “polluter”. are expected to submit records of
monitoring. Such records are not
Implement scheduled integrated enforcement Scheduled monitoring forthcoming and may not be
involving the related agencies. and enforcement report accurate.
Note:
S Short
M Medium
L Long

Main Report
Figure 5.2: The Water Quality Index along Sg. Selangor
Water Quality Index - Sg. Selangor

95
90
Class II
Water Quality Index
85
80
75
Class III
70
65
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
DOE/ASMA Monitoring Station : 1Sr01 1Sr04 1Sr05 1Sr10 1Sr11
Figure 5.3: Percentage of Sewage Treatment Systems in Sg. Selangor Basin
2.2%
12.5%
IWK
ISTs
Direct Discharge
85.2%
Source: IWK, May 2014

Main Report
Figure 5.5: Percentage of Effluent Discharging Factories in Sg. Selangor Basin
2% 11%
19%
Serendah
Rawang
Batang Kali
Rasa
68%
Source: DOE Selangor, 2014

Main Report
Figure 5.8: Pollution Sources within Sg. Selangor Basin recorded by Task Force,
LUAS 2007 – 2014
Wet Market (1. 2%)

Industry (3. 5%)
Landfill (6. 10%) Quarry (1. 1%)
Poultry (4. 7%)

Sand mining (21.
35%)
Pig Farming (5. 8%)
Earthworks (9. 15%)
Sewage (10. 17%)
Source: Task Force LUAS, 2014

Main Report
Figure 5.10a: Number of Records showing TSS Concentration in Accordance to the River
Classifications at the Upstream of Sand Mining Sites, Hulu Selangor
Number of Records showing TSS Concentration in Accordance to the River Classifications at the Upstream
of Sand Mining Sites, Hulu Selangor
9
8 8 8
8
7 7 7
7
6 6 6 6 6 6
6
5 Class I
Numbers
5
Class II
4 4
4 Class III
3 3 3 Class IV
3
2 2 2 2 2
Class V
2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
0
Jan 2013
Oct 2013
Jan 2014
July 2013
Apr 2011
Apr 2013
Feb 2011
Feb 2013
June 2013
Mar 2011
Mar 2013
May 2013
Date
Source: Monitoring Report from Kumpulan SEMESTA Sdn Bhd
Figure 5.10b: Number of Records showing TSS Concentration in Accordance to the River
Classifications at the Downstream of Sand Mining Sites, Hulu Selangor
Number of Records showing TSS Concentration in Accordance to the River Classifications at the
Downstream of Sand Mining Sites, Hulu Selangor
7 7 7
7
6 6 6 6
6
5 5 5
Class I
5
Number
Class II
4 4 4
4 Class III
3 3 3 3 3 Class IV
3
Class V
22 2 2 2 2 222
2
1 1 111 1 111 1 11
1
0
Apr 2011
Apr 2013
July 2013
Oct 2013
Mar 2011
Jan 2013
Mar 2013
June 2013
Jan 2014
Feb 2011
Feb 2013
May 2013
Date
Source: Monitoring Report from Kumpulan SEMESTA Sdn Bhd

Main Report
Figure 5.11: Ruminants production within Sg. Selangor Basin (2010 – 2013)
Ruminants Production within Sg. Selangor Basin

(No. of ruminants)
14000
12000
Number of Ruminants
10000
8000
Gombak
6000
Hulu Selangor
4000 Kuala Selangor
2000
0
2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Figure 5.12: Poultry production within Sg. Selangor Basin (2010 – 2013)
Poultry Production within Sg. Selangor Basin (No. of birds)

3000000
2500000
Number of Birds
2000000
1500000 Gombak
Hulu Selangor
1000000
Kuala Selangor
500000
0
2010 2011 2012 2013
Year

Main Report
Figure 5.13: Freshwater Fish Production by Land Area
Figure 5.14: Annual Freshwater Fish Production by Tonnage

Main Report
Figure 5.15: Annual Freshwater Fish Production by Culture Type (tonnes/year)
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 5.Doc 5-i

Main Report
6.0 FLOOD MANAGEMENT
6.1 Background
A natural river forms its own river channel, which is "designed" by nature to take
normal flows, so when the run-off is very high, the river over-flows. The sediments
transported by the over-flowing river gradually build a floodplain. Flood plains are
usually fertile and have been centres of agriculture and later urban development. This
change in land use makes the damages caused by flooding more severe. To protect
against this, urban areas are often protected by bunds, river channels are deepened
and reservoirs may be created upstream.
The floodplain of the Sg. Selangor basin is relatively sparsely populated, since the
area until relatively recently was dominated by peat swamp. Other stretches along the
river are infertile lands affected by former tin mining. The impact of flooding along
this river is therefore relatively mild compared to other river basins. Nevertheless
flooding does occur in various parts of the basin and can have severe consequences
for those affected.
Jabatan Pengaliran dan Saliran (JPS) initiated a comprehensive study entitled “Master
plan Study on Flood Mitigation & River Management for Sg. Selangor River Basin in
2002 (hereinafter referred to as the Master plan Study).
This was followed up in 2012 with another study entitled "Generation of flood hazard
maps for Sg Selangor basin" (hereinafter referred to as the Flood Hazard map study).
6.2 Floods in the basin
Three types of floods occur in the basin:
• Local floods are caused by high intensity rainfalls of relatively short duration. They
affect small catchments and drainage systems of towns and villages and sometimes
also cause moderate floods in the main catchments.
• General floods affect wider areas. They are caused by rainfall of longer duration.
Here continuous rain of lower intensity for several days produces flood on the main
streams, but this may not be a problem for smaller catchments.

Main Report
• Tidal floods affect a number of villages in the lower reaches of Sg. Selangor.
It is important to make a distinction between the types of floods in general

discussions and planning of appropriate control and mitigation measures.
6.3 Terminology
The term river corridor has no legal status, but is useful when discussing the areas
near the river. The Master plan study uses the "river corridor" to describe the area
where special restrictions are recommended. The term river reserve is often used to
refer to an area of state land gazetted as such and reserved for this purpose. Only few
river reserves have been gazetted.
The LUAS Enactment defines river reserves as any land within 50 m of the river
bank, or such other distance as prescribed by LUAS, and any designated river
reserve. This implies that all land, including alienated land within 50 metres of the
river bank is a river reserve and that the distance can be changed by regulation or
gazetting. Any construction of walls and buildings within the river reserve requires
permission from LUAS. The LUAS Enactment can also be used to declare specific
areas, including private land, to be zones of protection. The enactment also has
provisions for declaring designated areas. These sections could be used to give
further protection.
In the following sections, the term "river corridor" will be used when referring to the
Master plan study, while "river reserve" will be used in the legal context of the LUAS
Enactment.
6.4 Policy and objectives for floods
The National Physical Plan 2 indicates that land utilised for main drains, streams and
rivers shall be designated as drainage and river reserves. This shall be done in
structure and local plans. It adds that the urban storm water management manual
(MSMA) shall be applied in all urban areas.
Designations of specific areas as reserves do not by it resolve or aid the issue of flood
management significantly. The more critical issue is the control of activity or
development within the river reserve that results in restrictions to the carrying

Main Report
capacity of the river or stream and damage to property and/or lives affected by floods
within such reserves and within the flood plains or zone.
In this regard, the existing Sg. Selangor basin management plan suffers the same fate
as the other aspects of the basin viz a viz the overarching problem of a poor basin
information management system. It is not possible to assess the extent of houses or
other development and agricultural land that are clearly within river reserves or
protection zones and within flood plains. The flood hazard maps indicate the depth
and extent of floods but in the absence of a proper GIS system, the flood limits cannot
be easily superimposed on existing land use maps to gauge affected properties,
houses and the like. The existing information system does not facilitate the capturing
of information to establish baselines and indications of progress or regress. It is
strongly recommended that LUAS embark on a comprehensive revamp of the
existing information system using GIS tools and the like to facilitate the
implementation and monitoring of the basin management plan.
Much has been written in the previous basin management plan about the river reserve,
river corridor and flood prone areas but this has not been captured in a suitable
information system to capture status at 2007 and since then. Hence it is difficult to
ascertain if development within the river reserve or protection zone and between the
bund and the river has been limited to that prevailing at 2007 (at the inception of the
first basin management plan) or if there has been reduction or increase in
development since then.
Similarly it is difficult to ascertain extent and details of development since 2007

within flood zone.
Hence the repetition of this action item in this plan and subsequent plans would not
be very beneficial as it is an ongoing activity that is expected to continue indefinitely
into the future and is required by existing laws.
Nevertheless the establishment of baseline status with a GIS and subsequent site
audits by LUAS on a periodic basis is expected. The information from such audits
would then be used to update the basin information status as necessary. This would be
a much more effective way of tracking progress or regress on this and other similar
issues.

Main Report
The Selangor Structure Plan 2020 indicates the number of areas with 'critical' flood
occurrence shall be reduced from 163 in 2002 to 80 in 2005 and 0 in 2020. The
definition of a critical flood is not given in the plan and the number of 'critical' flood
occurrences within the Sg. Selangor basin is not known. However the flood hazard
map study identified the flood prone areas within the Sg Selangor basin based on the
study is shown in Figure 6.1. The study recommended "all flood mitigation works (as
shown in Figure 6.2) proposed by the previous studies are to be adopted". This
contrasts with the Master Plan Study which concluded that the proposed works were
generally not viable and need to be carried out based on social considerations.
In comparison to controlling river water quality, the issue of flood control, in

particular for the Sg Selangor basin is relatively easier to manage. This is attributed to
the fact that floods, in general are not a major issue in the basin with the areas
affected largely limited in extent and largely to agricultural land. The control
measures for managing floods are not unique to the Sg Selangor basin. The proposed
works in the master plan study have found to be not viable and hence the issue is only
whether the works are to be implemented for social considerations. The decision lies
with JPS and State Government of Selangor. If status quo is preferred or unavoidable
due to constraints in funds then floods are expected to continue to affect the relevant
areas.
6.5 Master Plan Study Review
JPS initiated a master plan study for flood mitigation in the basin. It was completed in
2002 and the information on flood and flood mitigation in this plan is largely
extracted from that study.
6.5.1 Socio-economic impact of floods
The Master plan study made a socio-economic analysis based on interviews with
residents in areas affected by floods. The most frequent floods were experienced in
the Batang Kali area, where some villagers near the river were affected twice a year.
47% of the respondents experienced flooding for 1-2 days, 31% more than 2 days.
Their loss of property ranged from less than RM500 (48%) to more than RM1,000
(28%). The relatively modest losses reflect that the flood prone areas near the river
are little developed.

Main Report
6.5.2 Impact of urbanisation for floods
Urbanisation has major impacts on the floods due to:
 increased run-off (less infiltration of the ground)

 faster run-off (hard surfaces)
 river flows blocked by structures, including bridges which are no longer
 sufficiently wide since the peak flow increased
 filling of low-lying areas means less retention
 higher costs of damages
First of all development means that land areas become covered with hard, impervious
surfaces and efficient drainage systems. Less water seeps into the ground and the
runoff is fast. A study in the neighbouring Sg. Bernam basin thus showed that in the
period 1989-1995 the urban area increased from 3.3% to 4.8% (i.e. 45%) and as a
result the peak discharge increased 42%. The Master plan study used a model to
estimate the increase in peak discharge due to future developments. For Rantau
Panjang the 5-year peak discharge will increase 37%. For smaller catchments, the
increase would be more dramatic and often over 100%.
The expected future increase in peak discharge exceeds 100% in some smaller
catchments, but is less dramatic in larger catchments. Infrastructure such as roads
and construction in the river reserve frequently impede the flow of water, not only in
the normal river transect, but also in the wide area the river occupies during flood. If
development projects are badly planned or implemented, there may also be effects

Main Report
such as blockage of flow, inadequate culverts or filling of waterways with sediments

due to erosion in connection with earthworks.
Construction in low-lying areas implies that the volume that the river can fill as is
reduced and as these "natural detention basins" are diminished, flooding elsewhere
increases. Finally, development in flood prone areas greatly increases the damages
caused by floods. In the longer term this may also translate into costs for the
government as the demand for bunds and pumping schemes increases.
6.5.3 Flood mitigation measures
Flood mitigation measures are often divided into structural and non-structural
measures. The traditional engineering approach relies largely on structural measures
such as bunds, reservoirs, concrete lining of urban drains, and widening and
deepening of the river channel.
Non-structural measures emphasise adapting to the river and recognise that floods
will occur. Such measures including planning and development controls and storm
water management at source. Based on hydrological modelling and hydrological
studies, the master plan study includes concrete proposals for 17 areas and it assesses
the costs as well as the benefits of each of these proposals.
Establishment of river corridor is among the main recommendations of the master

plan study. This can be implemented in various forms. The most costly would be to
relocate all residents living in the affected areas and acquire part of the land for public
purpose. This may also give socioeconomic problems as some residents are attached
to their property and some would find it difficult to purchase suitable property
elsewhere for the compensation they would receive as the value of their property is
low.
Less drastic would be to enforce the river reserve restrictions under the LUAS
Enactment and avoid any new construction in the affected area that could affect the
river flow and constitute a risk for the residents. This could either apply to the river
corridor delineated in the master plan study or a more flexible approach could be
taken that follow the 100-year flood zone more closely. This will be taken into
account in the local and structure planning for the affected areas.

Main Report
The specific proposals of the Master Plan Study are summarised below, beginning
with the upstream sub-basins.
6.5.4 Kuala Kubu sub-basin
The sub-basin is situated in a mountainous area just below the Sg. Selangor Dam.
There are three short, steep rivers: Sg. Kumbang, Sg. Kubu and Sg. Kelumpang in the
sub-basin, all passing Kuala Kubu Baharu. Flooding is widespread and frequent in
Kuala Kubu Baharu town and the surrounding villages as increased development
means that the internal drainage is no longer adequate and this affects the town
centre. The master plan study found that the river itself does not require any works,
but several bridges within the town will be submerged during floods and require
upgrading. A 90-metre corridor is proposed. This will affect some premises in Kg.
Sg. Damar and Taman Pesara.
6.5.5 Kerling sub-basin
Kerling town is the only major settlement in this hilly and rural sub-basin. The two
rivers are Sg. Kerling and Sg. Beletak. Hydraulic modelling showed that Sg. Kerling
would not overflow, except for a low-lying area in Kg. Kerling near the confluence
with Sg. Selangor. Sg. Beletak has a gentler slope, but the extent of flooding is
limited to an area from the Sg. Kerling confluence and 5 km upstream. It was
estimated that 24 households in Kg. Pasir and Kg. Jawa are affected by floods. At
present the effects are not serious, but with further development upstream the
problems would increase. For both rivers a 90-metre corridor was recommended. This
would affect some houses and shops in Kerling and houses in Kg. Jawa, Kg. Pair, Kg.
Air Panas, Taman Lembah Damai and Taman Kolam Air Panas.
6.5.6 Batang Kali sub-basin
The Batang Kali sub-basin is predominantly covered with forest or plantations. There
are some abandoned mining areas near Hulu Yam Baharu and the area near the Sg.
Selangor confluence. The main settlements are Hulu Yam Baharu at the upper
reaches of Sg. Liam and Batang Kali at the lower floodplain of Sg. Liam and Sg.
Batang Kali. There are villages near the rivers. Several development projects are
committed along Sg. Batang Kali.

Main Report
The villages near the river are subject to flooding. Sg. Batang Kali floods affect about
60 houses and Sg. Liam about 350 houses including 100 houses and shop houses in
Hulu Yam Baru town. Another 16 houses are affected by drainage problems in Kg.
Sekolah.
Sg. Liam
Hydraulic modelling showed that the river will not flood except for the area near the
confluence with Sg. Batang Kali, primarily due to backflow, and the Hulu Yam
Baharu town area. On higher ground floods are mainly due to inadequate internal
drainage, e.g. in Kg. Padang.
The proposed flood mitigation options for Sg. Liam were:
 Using former tin mining areas as retention ponds

 Widening and deepening of the river near Hulu Yam Baharu town
 Rebuilding the bridge JBK 25 that connects Hulu Yam Baharu to Kg. Pasir.
The downstream area of Sg. Liam until the Sg. Batang Kali is rural and the master
plan study proposed a 90-metre corridor here.
Sg. Batang Kali
The master plan study found that future flood levels are generally below the river
banks, apart from the confluence areas where there is backflow from Sg. Selangor. To
mitigate potential problems the study proposed to lower the floodwater level profiles
in the confluences with Sg. Liam and with Sg. Selangor and having upstream
retention ponds along Sg. Liam.
Socio-economic impact of the proposals for Batang Kali sub-basin
The proposed intervention is expected to solve the problems and will also have a
positive impact on the future development of the area including the townships Ulu
Kali, Sg. Remok Development and Hulu Yam Perdana. The proposed designation of
the river corridor will include many houses.

Main Report
6.5.7 Rawang sub-basin
The rivers in the Rawang sub-basin originate in the hills bordering the Sg. Klang
basin and the first parts are rather steep. The eastern part is still a green reserve
including Templer's Park, Kanching Forest Reserve and Commonwealth Forest Park.
Most of the sub-basin is still rural, but the urban development is very rapid. Remnants
of tin mining are found in the low-lying areas.
Sg. Sembah - Sg. Rawang - Sg. Garing
Sg. Rawang is rather steep, but the KTMB bridge is imposing severe restriction to
flood flows and causes extensive flooding as happened during 7-8 March 2001 after
two days of heavy rain.
Further downstream localised floods occur along low-lying areas such as on a stretch
of about 3 km in the vicinity of the Sg. Rawang - Sg. Serendah confluence. The
master plan study proposed the following river works:
 Widening of the river section at the KTMB bridge

 Widening and deepening of the river channel over a 3.5 km stretch from the
KTMB bridge to the North South Expressway bridge.
 River works for about 4 km of Sg. Garing to protect left bank.
The master plan study also recommends conserving a 200 metres wide floodplain on
state land along Sg. Garing.
The last stretch of Sg. Sembah passes through flood prone ex-mining land. The
master plan proposes a 90-metres river corridor and that any development must be
raised above the 100-year flood level, but seems better not to allow development here
and thus preserve the retention function of the ex-mining land.
Sg. Kuang - Sg. Kundang
The existing river capacity is sufficient except for localised areas. The bridge JSM3
connecting Kg. Kuang and Kg. Gombak is a constriction and it is proposed to widen

Main Report
the river here. There are good opportunities in this area to utilise ex-mining ponds for
flood detention and the study proposes a 90- metres corridor.
Sg. Gong
There is no flood problem in this area, except for some backflow from Sg. Kundang
which only affects undeveloped ex-mining land.
Sg. Serendah
This area is still relatively undeveloped, but it is expected to be urbanised in the

future similarly to the Rawang area. The upper reaches are able to cope with floods,
but there is a need to improve the internal drainage systems in Kg. Tok Pinang and
Pekan Lama Serendah. Localised flooding can occur in the lower reaches, mainly due
to backflow from Sg. Rawang and Sg. Garing, and new developments in these areas
must respect the 100-year flood level or, better, keep the necessary distance from the
river. Respecting a 90- metres corridor will avoid most problems.
Sg. Guntong
The Sg. Guntong catchment is a rural area northwest of Rawang. The only settlement
in the area is Kg. (FELDA) Sg. Buaya which is flood prone. There are several
development projects committed in the area. The study recommended a 90-metre
corridor combined with filling, but filling can, and should, be avoided or minimised
with proper planning.
Socio-economic impact of the proposals for the Rawang sub-basin
The implementation of the proposals will reduce the flood risk for a number of
settlements. The bridge improvements will benefit Kg. Sri Kundang and Kg. Baru Sri
Kundang, and the proposed improvements of the internal drainage systems will
benefit the residents of those towns.
Some houses are located in the area that the master plan study proposed to be
designated as river corridor. This includes some houses along Sg. Serendah, and Kg.

Main Report
Dato Lee Kim Sai, Kg. Garing and Taman Garing as well as some premises in Pekan
Kuang and Kg. Gombak.
6.5.8 Sg. Tinggi sub-basin
The Sg. Tinggi (Sg. Buloh) catchment is dominated by forest reserves and
agriculture. There are some low-lying areas along the river, and these areas should
not be developed.
6.5.9 Rantau Panjang sub-basin
Sg. Darah
Sg. Darah is a small rural catchment north of Sg. Sembah. The catchment is hilly and
only the lowest part near the confluence with Sg. Selangor is flood prone. This should
not be developed.
Sg. Selangor from Batang Kali until Batang Berjuntai
During a 5-year storm floods occur at the middle part of Sg. Selangor near the
confluence with Sg. Tinggi. The barrage at Batang Berjuntai reduces the tidal
influence upstream and it was found not to restrict the flow during a 100-year flood.
The master plan study emphasised the importance of preserving the immediate flood
plain areas, which are largely undeveloped, including the ex-mining land along the
middle and upper reaches. It proposed to establish a 200-metre corridor from the
confluence with Sg. Kerling to Rantau Panjang, which would more or less include the
100-year flood zone, and a 90-metre corridor further upstream.
6.5.10 Kuala Selangor sub-basin
Sg. Selangor from Batang Berjuntai to the coast
The lower reaches are affected by tides and floods can occur when high river flows
coincide with spring tides. A number of villages near the river are affected by floods,
including Kg. Asahan, Kg. Sepakat, Kg. Siak and Kg. Sg. Darah. Floods also affect
some 50 houses in Ladang Sg. Selangor. The damages caused by such floods will
increase with future urban development in the area.

Main Report
Preserving ex-mining ponds and undeveloped land upstream can reduce the impact of
floods, but much of this land has been committed for development, including the
University Industri Selangor, JVP Housing Development and the Berjuntai Bistari
project. The development will remove a previous flood prone area from flooding
through bunding and filling, but this will increase the flood levels in other areas.
From the river mouth to Kg. Siak the existing bund along both banks afford flood
protection for 100-year floods during mean high water at spring tide. From Kg. Siak
upstream to Batang Berjuntai town, the bund on the left bank only provides protection
for about 20-year flood level. The master plan study found that increasing the existing
bund level and road from Kg. Kuantan to Batang Berjuntai with 2 metres would
provide 100-year protection for the areas behind the bund. The many villages located
between the bund and the river would not be helped. The construction costs would be
around RM30 million and about 20 ha of land would need to be required.
The master plan study emphasised the importance of preserving the immediate flood
plain areas and the river corridor now demarcated by the bund.
6.5.11 Berjuntai Bestari
The Berjuntai Bestari project will develop a large new township north of Batang
Berjuntai using the polder concept, i.e. the entire area will be enclosed by perimeter
bunds. The area is now agricultural land or former tin mining land with large ponds.
The polder area will be 5,200 ha and the perimeter bund on the northern side of the
river will 35 km long, 1.5-4 m high and 52 m wide as there will be a road on top.
Along the southern bank there will be an 18 km long, 10 m wide bund to protect the
existing settlements. The distance between the bunds will be about 600 m.
This project will lead to a significant reduction in the flood plain and increase flood
levels outside the polder area unless mitigating measures are taken. It is estimated that
during a 100-yr flood the polder will increase the flood level by 1 m just after the
Batang Berjuntai barrage. Near the coast, the increase will be insignificant as the
flood plain here is very wide and the main problem there is tidal flooding. In addition
to the perimeter bunds, the river will be widened and deepened over a stretch of 20
km as a mitigation measure.

Main Report
The polder will have an internal drainage system and many lakes and ponds. Rainfall
within the area will be discharged through three drainage control structures in the
perimeter drain and, when the river level outside is high, through pumps.
It is envisaged that JPS in particular will review the proposed development to ensure
that impacts on floods, if any, are mitigated accordingly.
6.6 Flood Hazard map study
As mentioned earlier, JPS initiated a separate study in 2012 to prepare flood hazard
maps for the Sg Selangor basin.
Figure 6.1 shows the flood prone areas within the Sg Selangor basin based on the
Study while Appendix 6A provides details of the historical floods within the various
areas.
The proposed flood mitigations works for the Sg. Selangor basin is shown in Figure
6.2.
Figure 6.3 shows the land use within the basin as of 2010 while Figure 6.4 to Figure
6.7 shows the flood hazard maps for the 100 year ARI under different scenarios.
The Flood hazard map study found the extent of flooding within the basin as
summarised in Table 6.1.
Based on the 100 years ARI, the flood zone is therefore approximately 6.6 % of the
total area within the basin. The extent of inundation above 0.5 m is about 100.7 km2
which is approximately 5.1 % of the basin. As can be expected the larger part of the
flood zone is in the lower reaches of the river and in the low lying areas.
Land alienated or earmarked for development including existing developed areas

within the flood zone is about 13 to 14 % of the total flood plain or about 0.9 % of the
total basin area. This is minimal and is therefore not a major cause for concern.

Main Report
In general a large part of the limits of the floods are well confined to relatively narrow
strips along the main river (Sg. Selangor) downstream of the confluence with Sg.
Sembah.
Development is expected on either side of the river along Sg. Selangor and this means
that there appears to be allowance for some development within the flood zone or
plain.
It is likely that the areas to be developed that are at risk will be built on higher
platforms or with bunds surrounding these areas to protect them from floods. This
will essentially cause the flood waters to rise higher within the remaining areas of the
flood plain or spill over to new areas. The effects and mitigative measures would
presumably be evaluated during implementation of the development within these
flood prone areas or flood risk areas.
Hence the strategy to limit development within flood zone is permissible if measures
can be taken to overcome the flood impact and if measures are also taken to avoid or
minimise impact on other areas.
In the case of the Sg. Selangor basin, the extent of the floods is relatively limited in
area and the need to control development within the zone is not as critical compared
to other basins where the flood zone is larger.
Hence it is recommended that the strategy to limit development be dropped to a lower

priority in the case of the Sg. Selangor basin in view of the fact that the problem can
be dealt with relative ease. The fact that the revised Structure Plan allows for
development within the flood zone indicates that JBPD is also of the opinion that
development can be carried out with appropriate mitigative measures without any or
minimal adverse impact.
Hence the problem with floods within the Sg. Selangor basin remains an issue only
for the areas identified in the Master Plan Study.

Main Report
6.7 Strategies in Sg. Selangor IRBM plan (2007-2012)
The existing Sg. Selangor IRBM plan proposed the following strategies:-
(i) Improve storm water management by implementing MSMA and examining

local drainage problems
(ii) Improve river corridor management by enforcing building restrictions in the
existing 50 m river reserve, avoiding construction between the bunds and the
river and restricting development within flood prone areas.
(iii) Carry out river works at problem sites.
6.7.1 Implement MSMA
As the costs of flooding and physical flood mitigation works is high, it is important to
ensure that future development projects do not increase the peak discharge. Such
increases results in losses for downstream residents and costs to the government.
Increased peak discharge can be avoided through appropriate on-site measures as

described in the urban storm water management manual (MSMA), including retention
ponds, swales, storage tanks etc. These on-site measures will be combined with off-
site measures where feasible.
On 1 January 2001 the Cabinet decided that MSMA would be the basis for setting
approval conditions for development projects and full enforcement of this
requirement will go a long way in limiting peak discharges from new developments.
The LUAS Enactment Section 66 restricts peak discharge from all developments, but
at present it only applies to designated areas.
6.7.2 Examine local drainage problems
The Masterplan study identified some internal drainage problems in Kuala Kubu
Baharu and recommended that these be studied. It also highlighted local drainage
problems in Kg. Sekolah, Kg. Melayu Seri Kundang, Kg. Tok Pinang, Pekan Lama
Serendah, Kg. Padang and Kg. Genting Malek and recommended that these be looked
into.

Main Report
6.7.3 Improve river corridor management
(a) Enforce building restrictions in the existing 50-metre river reserve
Construction of buildings and structures near the river will not be permitted
where such activities can cause flooding, entail significant risks or obstruct
work on and along the river. The LUAS Enactment’s sections on river
reserves will continue to be enforced and the DID Guidelines on River Front
Development will be used in development planning.
(b) Avoid construction between the bunds and the river
Construction activities between the bunds and the river need to be avoided in
order to ensure the free flow of flood waters. This involves:
(i) restrictions on future development and filling

(ii) declaration of the areas as extended river reserve
The first measure is to be implemented by JPBD and the local authority, i.e.
MDKS, while the second falls under the LUAS Enactment (zones of
protection).
(c) Restrict development in flood prone areas
The Master plan study delineates the 100-year flood plain, i.e. the areas
where the risk of flood in a given year exceeds 1%. It should be noted that the
risk is likely to increase as the basin is being further developed. Two
approaches can be used to mitigate the risk:
 preventing flooding by bunding or raising the land level or

 accepting occasional flooding
Some areas are now protected by bunds, and this type of flood defence is
necessary. However, bunding as well as raising of land levels above the flood
level prevents the river from flooding areas that otherwise would be flooded

Main Report
during high flows. This will in effect increase flood levels elsewhere and
push the burden to others.
Where feasible it is therefore preferable to work with the river rather than
against it. Many of the flood prone areas are presently undeveloped and it is
cost-effective to keep them that way or only use them for activities where
occasional flooding is acceptable such as for plantations or recreation areas.
This can be done through planning restrictions using the usual physical
planning system or the LUAS Enactment's sections on zones of protection.
The purpose of the declaration would be "to preserve the area as a part of the
flood plain and to minimise the risk from floods to persons and property".
The restriction to be gazetted on the property would be that "any

development activity, including construction or earthworks requires the prior
written approval of the Director of LUAS". Approval would only be given
where the activity would not interfere with the free flow of flood waters;
would not cause any danger to persons, property or environment; and would
only involve minimal changes to the retention capacity of the concerned
property.
LUAS is in the process of progressively declaring most flood prone areas to

be zones of protection in order to minimise future damages and maintain
flood retention capacity through restrictions on building and filling.
This covers, in particular the following areas:
(a) Sg. Guntong, Sg. Garing, Sg. Sembah, Sg. Kundang, Sg. Rawang
(b) Sg. Liam, Sg. Batang Kali
(c) Middle part of Sg. Selangor, Sg. Tinggi, Sg. Darah
Delineation of the areas can be based on river corridors proposed in the

master plan study, but will be modified to follow 100-yr flood limit more
closely and, especially for inhabited areas, to make restrictions easier to
implement.

Main Report
6.7.4 Carry out river works at problem sites
A number of proposals for structural works have been briefly described earlier. An
economic cost-benefit analysis of the proposed works was carried out by the master
plan study. It showed that for all the analysed projects the costs were high compared
to the economic benefits and this resulted in negative net present values and negative
or low internal rates of return. The projects were thus not viable from an economic
perspective.
However, the projects might still be undertaken for socio-economic reasons or in

connection with other works. The economic analysis is summarised in the Table 6.2.
In general, all the proposed measures in the 2007-2012 plan are sound in principle
and should be retained. Some of the items are retained because they are a permanent
measure.
6.8 Need for GIS based basin wide information management system
Surveillance and monitoring of activities by LUAS and/or JPS to ensure compliance

is important in the management of floods within the basin. Such activities are
expected under the law and existing institutional setup and will continue into the
future indefinitely and hence are not unique or special and will be repeated in all
plans without much value. Similarly, implementation of MSMA cannot be a key part
of the plan as this is already in place and the issue is of compliance and monitoring.
The real issue is if there are non compliances with the law or regulation and how
these are resolved, if at all. Without stringent enforcement the extent of encroachment
will increase and damages caused by floods will increase accordingly. In the absence
of a proper basin information system, it will not be possible to gauge extent of
progress or regress in this and other similar matters.
With a proper GIS based information system, it will be possible to track new
development and ascertain easily if MSMA is or has been incorporated and if the
development is within the river reserve or flood prone areas. The GIS system will
also facilitate the tracking of development in general within the basin and show the
changes in land use progressively. This information, in turn, can be used to gauge

Main Report
impact on the catchment as a whole in terms of water quality, hydrology and other
relevant aspects.
JPS has already carried out studies for the implementation of River Basin Information
management system for Malaysia. Sample systems have been developed for Sg.
Kuantan and Sg. Muar rivers. If these systems are found to be practical and cost
effective, the efforts should be made to develop a similar system for Sg. Selangor as
soon as possible.
6.9 Risk register and action plan for 2015 – 2020 IRBM for Flood Management
The assessment of risks related to floods and the control measures are summarised in
Table 6.3 to Table 6.6.
Table 6.7 summarises the proposed action plan for flood control within the Sg.
Selangor basin.
In addition to similar action items from the 2007-2012 plans, the following measures
are recommended and included:-
(i) Ensure project integration among agencies related to drainage infrastructure

and
(ii) Investigate the feasibility of introducing a suitable flood forecasting and

warning system.

Main Report
Table 6.1 Summary of flood impact based on flood hazard map study
Area inundated
No Flood frequency
(km2)
1 10 years ARI 90.8
2 50 years ARI 110.8
3 100 years ARI 129.4
4 200 years ARI 142.3
Table 6.2: Economic analysis of structural flood mitigation measures
Costs NPV IRR

(million RM) (million RM)
Batang Kali: River works (RM5m) and 6 -3.1 -1%
JSK2 bridge (RM1m)
Sg. Selangor: Raising the bund from Kg. 30 -8.8 2.3%
Kuantan to Batang Berjuntai with 2
metres
Rawang: River works from KTM bridge 16 total benefits over 25
to NSE bridge (RM15m) and rebuilding years only RM2.9m
JSM3 bridge (RM 1m)
Sg. Kubu: Improving JSK2 bridge 1 economic benefits
insignificant

Main Report
Table 6.3: Preliminary Assessment of Risk for Flood Management

L S Risk L S Risk
Floods Damage to land, Prolonged heavy JPBD has planned and 3 2 M Limit development within 3 1 L
property and lives rainfall resulting in identified future land use flood plain/zone to that in
within flood flow within main for Selangor as a whole. approved Structure and Local
plain/zones. drain/stream/rivers Some portions of land plans
exceeding carrying earmarked for future
capacity of these development lies within For approved development
drainage facilities flood plains/zones within flood plain/zone,
appropriate flood mitigation
measures such as raising of
platform, pumping systems to
drain off water and provision
of bunds or polders must be
provided to the satisfaction of
JPS.
For such developments,

mitigative measures should
also include those aimed at
minimising impact on other
existing developments or
facilities within the flood
plain/zone.

Main Report

L S Risk L S Risk
Continued Damage to land, Encroachment of Need GIS based 2 1 L LUAS to carry out regular 2 1 2
activity and property and lives illegal development information system to audits on site to establish and
development within river reserve and lack of keep track of baseline control new development
within river and between river enforcement status as of 2014/5 and within river reserve and
reserve and and bunds subsequent progress or between river and bunds.
between river regress. In cases of violation, LUAS
and bunds. is expected to take
appropriate corrective action.
Climate More intense Changes in Existing flood hazard 3 3 M Need to initiate 3 2 M

change floods weather patterns maps and flood investigations on climate
management protocols change for Selangor as a
based on historical flood whole and establish impact
analysis and is therefore on floods within the key
not likely to be adequate basins, including Sg.
to deal with future floods. Selangor. Adjust flood
boundaries and flood
mitigation measures
accordingly.
MSMA Non compliance Negligence 2 1 L PBT and JPS to ensure full 2 1 L

with MSMA compliance without
leading to larger exception.
than preferred
runoffs from new
developments

Main Report


Severity Score
Minor 1
Moderate 2
Significant 3
Substantial 4
Catastrophic 5

Severity Score
1 2 3 4 5
Score 2 L L M M H
3 L M M H H
4 M M H H H
5 M H H H H
L = Low
M = Medium
H = High

Main Report
Table 6.7: Proposed Action Plan for Flood Management
6.1 Review impact of climate Need to initiate investigations on Study report LUAS / NAHRIM  Existing flood hazard maps and flood
change on floods climate change for Selangor as a management protocols based on
whole and establish impact on historical flood analysis and is
floods within the key basins, therefore not likely to be adequate to
including Sg. Selangor. Adjust deal with future floods.
flood boundaries and flood
mitigation measures accordingly.
6.2 Control of new development Limit development within flood Amendments of PBT / JPS / JPBD /    JPBD has planned and identified
within flood plains/zone plain/zone to that in approved monitoring report future land use for Selangor as a
LUAS
control of new development Structure and Local plans. whole. Some portions of land
within river the river basin earmarked for future development
For development within basin Monitoring report lies within flood plains/zones
ensure appropriate flood mitigtaion
measures such as raising of
platform, pumping systems to drain
off water and provision of bunds or
polders must be provided to the
satisfaction of JPS.
For such developments, mitigative Monitoring report

measures should also include those
aimed at minimising impact, if any,
on other existing developments or
facilities within the basin.
Enforcement of existing regulations Monitoring report

pertaining to control of new
development within river reserve
and between river and bund.
6.3 Improve flood protection for Implement flood mitigation works Implementation of JPS    Although the proposed works in the
selected areas within the basin. proposed in Masterplan Study: proposed flood Masterplan Study appear to be not
mitigation works cost effective or viable, it is
(i) Raise the bund from Kg. recommended that the works be

Main Report
Kuantan to Batang Berjuntai implemented based on social

with 2 metres; and considerations especially since costs
(ii) River works (RM5m) and of works are relatively low.
JSK2 brdige (RM1m)
6.4 Project integration among Carried out coordination meeting Review report JPS / KSSB / JKR /    Cooperation between agencies to
agencies related to drainage for projects involving drainage LUAS / PBT resolve flood issue.
infrastructure. infrastructure.
6.5 Investigate the feasibility of JPS/LUAS to review the need for Flood Forecasting and LUAS / JPS    
introducing a suitable flood the system and implement, if found Warning System Report
forecasting and warning feasible and necessary.
system
Note:
S Short
M Medium
L Long

Main Report
Figure 6.1: Flood Prone Areas
Source: Flood Hazard Study

Main Report
Figure 6.2:: Flood Mitigation Measures in Sg. Selangor Basin

Main Report
Figure 6.4: Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari with Proposed Flood Mitigation Measures and Existing Landuse

Main Report
Figure 6.5: Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari of Existing River Condition with Future Landuse

Main Report
Figure 6.6: Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari of Existing River Condition with Existing Landuse

Main Report
Figure 6.7: Flood Hazard Maps for 100 Years Ari with Proposed Flood Mitigation Measures and Future Landuse

Main Report
7.0 CONSERVE FIREFLIES AND ECOSYSTEMS
Conservation and management of freshwater ecosystems at the basin scale is

recognized as one of the principles of integrated river basin management. Besides
being a water source, rivers also provide important habitats and services as feeding
and breeding grounds for a wide range of biodiversity that live in the river as well as
in the river-fringing vegetation. However, in the course of urbanization and
development within the river basin, great pressure is placed upon the natural
ecosystems including rivers. Invariably over time, land clearing and human activities
result in deterioration of fresh water habitats and their ecological processes.
The peat swamp forest at the Raja Musa Forest Reserve, the riverine mangrove forest
that supports a firefly colony along lower Sg Selangor and the coastal swamp forest
near the river mouth are three ecosystems within the Sg Selangor river basin that
support distinct habitats and provide ecosystem services. At the same time, however,
they have been threatened from increasing interactions with the human environment
The ensuing sections provide background to the issues faced at the Raja Musa Forest
Reserve, the firefly habitat along lower Sg Selangor and the coastal swamp forest;
action taken by LUAS and its partner agencies in respect to the strategies and
measures of the IRBM 2007 Plan towards protection and rehabilitation of these
ecosystems. As a review study, this chapter will also address the likely risks and
threats that could thwart the protection and rehabilitation efforts as well as further
strategies and actions that could be considered to strengthen or reinforce the strategies
of the IRBM 2007 Plan.
7.1 Background to the Raja Musa Forest Reserve
Generally, peat swamps are regarded as bio-indicators of the environment. The

forests function as wetland reservoirs that stabilize the flow of water. They store
water during the wet months and release it during the dry season. The hydrology of
the peat swamp forest is essential to its ecology as the forest is greatly impacted by
changes in water levels.
The role that peat swamp forests play in climate change is equally crucial. The forest
acts as a carbon sink, trapping carbon dioxide and storing the carbon in the form of

Main Report
peat. Draining peat swamp forest gives rise to a number of other issues: release of
carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as the organic matter degrades; increased
susceptibility to combustion and peat fires; soil subsidence, a phenomenon whereby
peat soils loose height due to drainage and resulting peat oxidation, shrinkage and
compaction. Subsidence leads to increasing costs of drainage, increased vulnerability
to flooding and salt intrusion, and often results in significant land loss.
Peat forest drainage also results in habitat destruction with significant implications for
local biodiversity, productivity and ecosystem services. The occurrence of peat fires,
resulting from increased susceptibility to fire due to drainage, not only lead to losses
of timber and other natural resources, but has also affect regional public health and
may cause economic losses in tourism, due to transboundary haze pollution.
The Raja Musa Forest Reserve (RMFR) is one of the largest remaining peat swamp
forest in Selangor. Part of the forest is located in the Sg. Selangor river basin, whilst
the other part drains into Sg. Bernam and Sg. Tengi, north of the basin. The part of
the peat swamp forest located inside the Sg. Selangor basin drains partly into Sg. Air
Air Hitam and thus into Sg. Selangor upstream of the water intake plant. The RMFR
generally acts like a storage reservoir providing water especially during the dry
periods. It was reported in the Sg. Selangor IRBM 2007 that this sub-basin area
forms about 19% of the Sg. Selangor catchment and is estimated that the peat swamp
contributes about 10% - 20% of the river flow at Batang Berjuntai.
RMFR was gazetted in 1990 as a forest reserve. Prior to its gazettement, the area was
part of State land forest and was intensively subjected to logging since the 1950s with
very little control and supervision from the Forestry Department. As a consequence,
the condition of the forest is heavily disturbed and the forest stand is only of medium
to low density. Under the "Integrated Management Plan of the North Selangor Peat
Swamp Forest (2001 - 2010)", 70% of RMFR is classified as production forest, 27%
as forest sanctuary for wildlife and the remaining 3% as research forest. Forest
harvesting in RMFR continued until 2007 within the production forest.
RMFR support tree species with small to medium sized crowns, typically reaching 30
metres in height. Emergent trees are scattered throughout the area. Kempas
(Koompassia malaccensis), Kedondong (Santiria spp.), Kelat (Syzgium spp.) and
Durian (Durio carinatus) are the dominant tree species within the forest. Ramin

Main Report
(Gonystylus bancanus) which was a common species in the peat swamp forest is now
very rare1. Part of the north-east corner of RMFR are known for its high water table
and dominated by palms and pandanus.
The main values and functions of the RMFR can be summarized as follows:
Hydrology
 Hydrological regulation
 Supplement water supply especially during the dry periods
 Flood mitigation
Forestry
 Site for research into peat forest management
 Site for research into silviculture/agroforestry on peat soils
Conservation and Ecosystem Services

 Biodiversity
 Carbon sink
7.2 Issues confronting the Raja Musa Forest Reserve (Peat Swamp Forest)
(a) Water Outflow through Logging Extraction Canals and Drainage Ditches
Since the 1950s, logging activities have affected the RMFR in its ability and
function as a storage reservoir providing water especially during the dry
periods as well as in flood mitigation during periods of high rainfall. An
important consequence of the logging system used then is the effect of canal
digging on the hydrological characteristics of the peat swamp forest. It was
observed that there was gradual seepage and surface runoff of swamp water
from the adjacent forest into the canals. This led to progressive drying up of
the forest which was beneficial to the loggers in that working conditions
became more conducive.
1
P. Ismail[1], I. Shamsudin, N. M. Nik Muhamad and I.Faridah Hanum (2003). Rehabilitation of
Degraded Peat Swamp Forests in Raja Musa Forest Reserve, Selangor, Peninsular Malaysia. Forest
Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM).

Main Report
However, draining of the forest through an extensive network of canals and

ditches led to the water table inside the peat swamp forest to be considerably
reduced. Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor estimated that these canals and ditches
cover a length of at least 500 km, and a substantial amount of water flows out
of the swamp from these channels and ditches.
Generally, part of the annual rainfall is stored within the peat swamp forest,
whilst the balance leaves the swamp forest as surface or sub-surface runoff.
This storage function enhances the hydrological value of RMFR. However,
over the years, hydrological interference from logging operations through the
draining and lowering of the water table has drastically reduced the storage
function and consequently reduced the value of the forest in the water supply,
especially in the dry season.
(b) Forest Fires
Loss of the storage function of the peat forest was reported in the Sg.
Selangor IRBM 2007 Plan as one of the concerns affecting water sufficiency
in the basin. However, overlooked (unintentional, perhaps) in the Plan is the
issue of forest fire. In addition to interfering with the hydrological function,
logging activities within the RMFR have damaged large tracts of the forest;
affected the regeneration of some tree species; led to soil decomposition;
subsequent subsidence as well as generation of large quantities of dry organic
materials. About 6,500 hectares bordering the southern part of the RMFR are
directly affected by logging and drainage, and since then have been subjected to
repeated incidence of forest fires. These areas have been severely degraded and
replaced by open grassland.
There is a positive correlation between the heavily drained and degraded forest
areas and the incidence of fires in RMFR especially during prolonged dry spells
in months of February to March and from June to August every year2. The area
south-west of RMFR is a fire prone area, including the land adjoining the forest
reserve boundary. In addition to the heavily drained and degraded forest, the
2
Badrol Hisam Abd Rahman, et al. Rehabilitation of Peat Swamp Forest – Selangor Experience. Jabatan
Perhutanan Selangor. Paper presented at the ASEAN Peatland Forests Project and Sustainable Management
of Peatland Forests in South-east Asia. Bogor, June 2012.

Main Report
problem is exacerbated by the burning of agricultural waste outside RMFR,

illegal clearing of the forest for settlement and agriculture activities, slash and
burn agriculture practice and other encroachment activities. Forest fires between
1997 and 1998 destroyed almost 630 hectares within the RMFR and an equally-
sized area outside it.
A map of potential forest fire in Selangor was prepared by the Center for
Social, Development and Environmental Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia using remote sensing, satellite imagery and GIS. Part of the map is
reproduced as Figure 7.1 to illustrate the fire potential of RMFR ranging
from High to Extreme.
(c) Encroachment
The period between 1990 and 2000 encountered problems with the
demarcation of the forest reserve boundary and clearance of the fringe areas
of the peat forest by the local communities for agriculture. However,
between 2001 and 2010, illegal occupation of the previously burnt area was
noticeably more widespread. It was estimated that the forest fires between
1997 and 1998 that destroyed almost 630 hectares within the RMFR and an
equally-sized area outside it provided an excuse for illegal settlers to
encroach further into the forest reserve for settlement and agriculture. As a
result, areas bordering the RMFR were severely degraded by extensive use of
slash and burn and other inappropriate agricultural practices by local farmers
(Figure 7.2).
Although a substantial part of RMFR is characterized by close forest cover, the south-
eastern corner of RMFR is an area of open grassland and slash and burn – both signs
of a disturbed and degraded forest (Figure 7.3).
Following a series of actions by the Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor, the Selangor State
Government acknowledged the severity of damage and negative impact to the state. This
resulted in the forceful removal or eviction of 470 individuals from the affected sites in
December 2008. These areas are now subjected to forest rehabilitation activities initiated
by the Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor.

Main Report
One of the strategies in the Sg. Selangor IRBM 2007 Plan is to restore the wetlands, or
more specifically, the Raja Musa peat swamp forest, in order to protect its role in water
storage, biodiversity and contribution to climate change. Under this strategy, three action
plans were recommended in the IRBM 2007 Plan:
(1) Gazette the peat forest as a “designated area” under LUAS Enactment;
(2) Develope a prioritised plan for filling the logging channels; and
(3) Implement the plan for filling the logging channels.
A review was made of the follow-up action/s taken by the relevant stakeholder agencies,
e.g. LUAS, Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor and Jabatan Perancangan Bandar dan Desa
Negeri Selangor between 2007 and 2012. This was conducted through an interview with
an officer from Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor as well as through a review of published and
unpublished studies and reports provided by the stakeholder agencies, research papers
from universities and sighted from the internet.
The status and effectiveness of the action plans by the stakeholder agencies to restore the
wetlands are discussed below based on preliminary information gathered so far.
7.3 Gazette the Peat Swamp Forests as Designated Areas
The IRBM 2007 Plan recommended the gazettement of RMFR as a “designated area”
for conservation for its role as a carbon sink, water supply and ecosystem
conservation. Recently, Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor drafted the Forest Management
Plan 2011-2020 (FMP) whereby 250,128 hectares of land in Selangor State are
classified as Permanent Reserved Forest, of which 148,240 hectares (59%) are inland
dry forests, 82,890 hectares (33%) are peat forests and the remaining 18,998 hectares
(8%) are mangrove forests. Compartment 22 in the Raja Musa Forest Reserve,
specifically, is earmarked for conservation.
To reinforce the State’s position to safeguard the integrity of RMFR and the
remaining stands of peat swamp forest in Selangor, the State government has issued a
moratorium on logging in peat swamp forests whereby no logging or harvesting
licences will be issued for a period of 25 years.

Main Report
Jabatan Perancangan Bandar dan Desa Negeri Selangor, in its on-going review of the
Selangor State Structure Plan (2012-2035), has also strengthened the State
government’s stand on protection and conservation of the peat forest. The on-going
review of the Structure Plan for Selangor (2012-2035) has designated RMFR as a
permanent forest reserve in the document’s “Future Land Use Zoning Plan for
Selangor”, thereby reinforcing the State’s gazettement of 2010 and the
recommendation of the Forest Management Plan 2011-2020.
7.4 (1) Develop a Prioritised Plan for Filling up the Logging Channels
(2) Blocking Logging Canals and Ditches
A prioritized plan for filling up the logging channels and blocking the logging canals
and ditches form part of the forest management plan to rehabilitate, protect and
manage the forest. It is proposed that these two measures be combined as they
address the same matter and are inter-related.
Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor has initiated the drafting of the Integrated North
Selangor Peat Forest Management Plan 2014-2023 – a study that is currently on-
going, and which will serve as a guidance document on the management, protection
and rehabilitation of the forest. Comments on the effectiveness of the implementation
strategies and programme of this plan on the RMFR can only be made when the
document is made available.
Generally, to restore the hydrology of peat land ecosystems requires a systematic

blocking of ditches and canals. Prior to blocking or filling up, it is necessary to draw
up a priority plan, mapping the location, the bio-physical conditions and status of the
canals. For the priority plan to be useful and effective, it also needs to include a
review of existing blocking techniques used and practical canal blocking experiences
recorded in the country and in other (external) deep peat areas with similar
conditions. Additionally, a monitoring plan (of hydrology/water level, water quality,
biodiversity, peat subsidence, etc.), including a protocol for reporting and
disseminating canal blocking results are also useful.
The logging canals inside RMFR cover an estimated length of 500 km (Figure 7.4).
Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor reported that by 2012, a total of 850 canals and ditches

Main Report
had been blocked3. However, covering up or blocking the canals may not be the most
effective option to raise the groundwater level and to rehabilitate the peat areas
(Figure 7.5). It could impede natural flow or cause back-flooding of the forest such
that the water level to rise above the peat surface – both of which could kill the peat
swamp forest4. Thus, avoiding water levels that are too high are as important as
avoiding water levels that are too low.
For canals that are already blocked, the task ahead is to ensure proper and systematic
inspection and maintenance of the canals to prevent water leakage and subsequent
drying of the peat swamp forest or elevated water levels that could inundate the roots
of the tree roots. It is necessary to conduct regular patrolling and enforcement, on the
ground and through aerial surveillance, at least once a month to monitor the physical
condition of the blocked canals and repair damaged or leaking blocks.
Concomitantly, it is also useful for the relevant stakeholder agencies to pursue further
technical details/studies and guidelines on designing blocking strategies and
structures as well as implementation.
7.5 Proposed Additional Measures in the Restoration of the Wetlands
(a) Monitor Encroachment into RMFR
In 2008, Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor, with authority given by the State

government, evicted 430 illegal settlers and farmers, dismantled structures
and destroyed agriculture crops and farms located in the south-east corner of
the RMFR. Village committee members at Kampung Johan Setia were
mobilised to patrol the 1,183 hectares of degraded peat land from further
illegal activities.
Encroachment is a seemingly a never-ending plight of the peat swamp forests in

Selangor, where rapid development comes with the pressure to venture into areas
that are highly sensitive to human disturbance. It is necessary for Jabatan
3
Badrol Hisam Abd Rahman, et al.
4
Badrol Hisam Abd Rahman, et al.

Main Report
Perhutanan Selangor to closely and routinely monitor encroachment of new areas

and re-encroachment of existing areas. Enforcement efforts need to be increased,
external boundaries markings installed and signages prominently displayed.
To regulate and better control the farmers, the State government needs to map
the boundaries of the Temporary Occupancy Land to identify the title holders
so as to hold them accountable for their respective plots.
(b) Rehabilitation of Degraded areas
Many degraded areas in the RMFR have been left to recover naturally after
undergoing major hydrological restoration that includes:
 Planting of fast growing tree species in grassland/scrubland areas
 Enrichment planting and/or thinning and removal of non-timber species
in heavily degraded areas
Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor’s tree planting programme has focused on

heavily burned and degraded forest compartments with a history of human
encroachment. A series of tree planting programmes have been carried out in
smart partnerships with NGOs, local interest groups, other government
agencies, private sector, students and the local communities from nearby
villages surrounding the RMFR.
By 2012, a total about 60 hectares of degraded peat swamp forest has been
planted with 80,000 tree seedlings. However, the overall area to be rehabilitated
is quite extensive, that is around 864 hectares. Current supply for seedlings for
the tree planting activities comes from a community nursery based in Sungai
Buloh. Getting adequate supply of large numbers of suitable seedlings is
necessary to sustain the current planting activities for the rehabilitation of RMFR.

Main Report
(c) Establishment of a Buffer Zone
To further safeguard the integrity of RMFR, a buffer zone is required

between the forest and the areas peripheral to it. This would protect the forest
from further encroachment by settlers, livestock and cash crop and other
activities that are incompatible with the function of the RMFR. For the buffer
to be effective, a buffer zone management plan is required to control human
and economic activities that are not sustainable or compatible as well as
implement measures to enhance the conservation value of the protected area.
7.6 Background to the Firefly Protection Zone
Approximately 20 km upstream from the mouth of Sg Selangor is an area that

represents the remnants of a once large area of mangrove forest before it was
converted to agriculture and settlements. This riverine mangrove forest is home to
colonies of fireflies that are found aggregated near Kg. Kuantan, located
approximately 20 km upstream of the river mouth.
The river banks and the intertidal zone along lower Sg Selangor support tree species
that are crucial to the fireflies and their life cycle. Over the years, however, the fireflies
have been under constant threat from farmers and private landowners who have been
carrying out activities along the river banks that include illegal clearing and burning of
land for cash crop cultivation, namely, oil palm and banana trees. Large tracts of
riparian vegetation consisting of nibong, rumbia, nipah and fig trees between Kg
Belimbing and Kg Beluntas have been stripped, leaving a narrow strip of berembang
trees lining the bank. In some parts, the clearing is right up to the river’s edge.
The fireflies in Sg Selangor are associated with one type of mangrove tree - the
Sonneratia caseolaris or berembang tree which plays a vital role in the population
dynamics of the fireflies. The berembang trees grow right at the edge of the river and
fireflies aggregate on the young trees due to the higher content of nectar on their
leaves5. The sago, nibong, nipah, figs and other riverine palms and tree species along
Sg Selangor grow behind the layer of berembang trees, and are equally essential to
5
Nada, L.G. et. al. Monitoring the Fireflies of the Selangor River. Forest Research Institute
Malaysia and Insitute of Biological Sciences, University of Malaya.

Main Report
the life cycle of the firefly as the survival of the firefly larvae and their host snails is
dependent on these trees species. Therefore, loss of the habitat that supports the sago,
nibong, nipah, figs and other riverine palms to oil palm cultivation could be the single
most significant factor threatening the firefly population along Sg Selangor. The
problem is further exacerbated by reduced water quality due to increasing run-off,
erosion, sedimentation and pollution from fertilisers and pesticides from land
clearance and agriculture activities.
Monitoring of the firefly population by the Forest Research Institute Malaysia

(FRIM) began in 2006 and continued for a period of 7 years with funding from
Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran and LUAS under the 2007 IRBM Plan. The FRIM
firefly monitoring programme focused on seven sites covering 1.6 kilometres along
the Selangor River, from Bukit Belimbing to beyond Kampung Kuantan. The project
was considered essential both as an indicator of the health of Sg Selangor, and
because the local community in Kampong Kuantan depended on the fireflies for
ecotourism revenue.
The monitoring progamme was able to analyse the natural fluctuations in firefly
population due to changing weather patterns from one year to another; and
established that there would always be a dip in the population in October, probably
due to the drier months during the mid-year and the population would increase again
by December and peak between May to August.
The final project report for LUAS reported a clear decrease in firefly population by as
much as 48% over the monitoring period6, but the final monitoring report was
inconclusive that the environment parameters such as rainfall, water quality and
salinity were responsible for the decrease in firefly population. However, the report
inferred that the reduction in numbers was most likely caused by increased land
clearing for oil palm cultivation along the river banks that consequently destroyed the
tree species and degraded the habitat that support the fireflies’ lifecycle.
6
Khoo, V., Kirton, L.G. and Nada, B. 2012. Monitoring of the Firefly Population along the Selangor
River. Final Project Report for LUAS for the period of September 2010 to January 2012. Forest
Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM).

Main Report
7.7 Establishment of a Firefly Park
Establishing a protection zone to safeguard the remaining habitat for the survival of
the fireflies was a recommendation in the 2007 IRBM Plan. In 2009, the Selangor
Government initiated positive steps to identify and demarcate the boundary of the
area to be protected. In April 2012, LUAS gazetted an area covering about 2,706
hectares of land (Warta No. 1188) as the ‘Zone of Protection (Declared Area and
Restriction)’ for firefly conservation under Section 48 of the Lembaga Urus Air
Selangor (LUAS) Enactment 1999. The protection zone is a restricted area that
extends from Kg Kuantan to Kg Belimbing in Mukim Pasangan, covering the river
banks and river reserves. The protection zone that was gazetted cover an area
extending up to 100 metres from the river bank.
At the same time, the government also initiated the acquisition of private land along
the river bank in Kg Beluntas and three other villages. The acquisition exercise was
undertaken by Pejabat Tanah Daerah Kuala Selangor, and is an appropriate approach
towards protecting the remaining stands of natural habitats that are crucial to the
survival of the fireflies and their larvae. As State land, the stakeholder agencies
would be better able to carry out enforcement, management and rehabilitation of the
degraded habitat areas as well as to monitor and control illegal farming and burning
activities that have been going on along the river banks.
The next task ahead in reinforcing the conservation of the firefly protection zone is to
incorporate it into the Selangor Structure Plan 2012- 2035 that is currently being
reviewed by Jabatan Perancangan Bandar dan Desa Negeri Selangor. It is necessary
for the Structure Plan document to reiterate the policy and strategies for firefly
conservation and protection of the zone earmarked for the purpose. Equally
important is for the Selangor Structure Plan 2012 -2035 to identify and demarcate the
primary buffer zone for vegetation protection, conservation and enrichment
planting/rehabilitation. To be useful to the stakeholder agencies that are responsible
for enforcement and management of the firefly park, demarcation of the secondary
buffer zone within the park is equally relevant. Preferably, it should be augmented
with a list of activities and land uses that are regarded as being compatible and may
be permitted inside the secondary zone subject to compliance with certain conditions.
It would also be useful for enforcement purpose in include a list of activities and land

Main Report
uses that are to be totally excluded or prohibited for its potential deleterious impact on
the firefly habitat and population.
The minutes of IRBM meetings between LUAS and stakeholder agencies held in June
2012 reported that LUAS has a set of draft guidelines and preliminary management
plan to regulate activities inside the firefly protection zone and any activity within the
zone needs written approval LUAS.
By having a management plan for the firefly park or protection zone, LUAS is
consistent with the general practice undertaken in most protected areas where
management plans are prepared to ensure that the natural values of the protected areas
are carefully managed. Essentially, a management plan for fireflies needs to take into
consideration significant threats to their conservation and their habitat, and the nature
and management of any proposed commercial or recreational uses of the area. In
addition, the plan needs to specify use for the area and the policies, guidelines and
actions required to achieve the outcomes.
7.8 Improve conditions for firefly tourism
1) Removal of debris and floating solid waste

2) Train tourist guides in firefly biology
Maintenance of the river and managing debris and floating waste is part of a wider
river management regime. Regular surveillance and maintenance is one of the tasks
of Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran Selangor, particularly the removal of debris that has
accumulated under bridges and culverts that could potentially result in localised
flooding.
A bigger issue pertaining to improving the conditions for firefly tourism is public
awareness and education of the local communities. Sometimes, delivering low-
quality ecotourism services at protected areas may actually cause more problems for
the natural resources7. To develop sustainable tourism, the European Centre for Eco
Agro Tourism believes that it is necessary to educate and create awareness among the
7
Jacobson, S. and Robles, R. Ecotourism, sustainable Development and Conservation
Education: Development of a Tour Guide Training Program in Costa Rica. Environmental
Management Vol. 16, No.6, pp. 701-713.

Main Report
local communities8. Without community acceptance and equity in resource sharing,

management strategies and plans for ecologically protected areas are rarely
successful. It is, therefore, necessary to obtain the cooperation of the villagers, and
encourage the local communities to be involved and to take ‘ownership’ of the firefly
park and its natural assets. This is best done through education, dialogue and
incentives. Providing environmental information or training to a segment of the local
community addresses three primary areas: (i) participation of local people more fully
in the firefly tourism business; (ii) information needs of the local guides, and (iii)
long term sustainability and improved management of the protected area. Garnering
the assistance of local research institutions and NGOs is one of the best ways to
develop local community awareness and education.
7.9 Continue monitoring and research related to fireflies
1) Continue monitoring of the firefly population

2) Monitor berembang trees
3) Monitor water quality and relate this to fresh water discharge
Comprehensive information about the fireflies and their habitats must be developed
for better management and protection of the fireflies. Therefore, extension of the
monitoring project is a pertinent strategy as it will lead to consolidation of ecological
information and knowledge gaps about the fireflies and their habitat, the riverine
vegetation and tree species (e.g. berembang, nipah and sago), as well as the
environment parameters (e.g. water quality, salinity and water flow) which are crucial
to the fireflies’ lifecycle.
The challenge ahead is funding. Lack of continuity in funding will jeopardise the
monitoring programme, consolidation of information already obtained and closing the
knowledge gaps about the fireflies and their habitat.
8
European Centre for Eco Agro Tourism. Training for Sustainable tourism. Retrieved 13 July 2014,
from http://www.eceat-projects.org/html/training.html

Main Report
7.10 Additional Strategies for Firefly Conservation
(1) Setting up a plant nursery for tree species that support the life cycle of
the firefly
To save the diminishing population of fireflies, LUAS may need to consider setting
up a breeding nursery along Sg Selangor. The natural spawning grounds for the
fireflies have been disturbed due to plantations and other developments along the
river. Apart from the removal of vegetation that supports the life cycle of the firefly,
the cleared areas where the ground are located have become hot and dry and lacks
organic materials. Indigenous tree species like the sago palm have to be planted and
artificial shade set up. Sago palm is the natural habitat for firefly larvae as the plant
provides sufficient moisture and shade. If successful, the project can be replicated in
other areas.
(2) Gazetting the Firefly Protection Zone as a State Park or Forest Reserve
While the protection zone has been established and land acquired to protect for the
firefly park, the cooperation of the local villagers and landowners have been difficult
to obtain or sustain. Since the gazetting of the protection zone under LUAS
Enactment, agricultural activities and land clearing are still ongoing, especially
at/near Kampong Beluntas. More dialogues may have to be held and the granting of
incentives considered so that a mutually agreeable solution that can lead to long term
protection of the firefly habitat can be achieved.
Whilst LUAS plays a crucial role in safeguarding the integrity of the firefly
protection zone, enforcement needs to be entrusted with a department or agency that
is adequately equipped to carry out the function. One solution could lie in creating a
formally gazetted State Park or Forest Reserve that can be patrolled by state forest or
wildlife officers.
7.11 Coastal Mangrove Forest
Situated near the mouth of Sg Selangor, and covering approximately 800 acres of
coastal mangroves and mudflats is the home to various wildlife such as otters,
monkeys, birds, mud skippers, mud lobsters and crabs. It has since become a

Main Report
sanctuary to many species of flora and fauna such as the endangered Silvered Leaf
Monkey. This park has 3 distinctive habitats, these being the brackish water lake
system, secondary forest and also mangrove forest. The brackish lake system was
created for birds to roost and feed. The secondary forest region covers an area of
approximately 450 acres and is poor in tree species. The forest cover is predominantly
a mixture of strangling figs, coastal trees, climbers and mangrove fern.
The coastal mangrove forest represents part of a complex coastal wetland system,
which provides an extremely important intermediate stage between the land and
aquatic environment. Mangrove trees are generally fast growing and colonization is
easy. Mangrove trees like Rhizophora apiculata, Rhizophora mucronata,
Sonneratia and Bruguiera species dominate.
7.12 Risks associated with Conservation of the Raja Musa Wetlands and Firefly
Sanctuary
A qualitative risk assessment is used to assess the likely occurrence of risks with
respect to the efforts that have been undertaken at the Raja Musa peat forest and the
mangrove riparian zone to rehabilitate and re-establish the vegetation of both
ecosystems. Table 7.1 summarises the risks identified, the probability or likelihood
of the risk occurring, the severity of impact and measures to mitigate the impact.
The major risks are:

(i) Continuing habitat loss through encroachment and illegal land clearing
(ii) Sustaining public involvement in conservation efforts
Habitat loss:
Drastic depletion or changes to vegetation along the river can result in decline of
firefly and snail populations because the firefly larvae and their prey snails depend on
natural riverine vegetation for survival. The monitoring studies conducted by FRIM
over the 7-year period between 2006 and 2011 warned that increased land clearing
and utilisation of riparian land for agriculture poses a threat to the firefly population
as the tree species that supports the fireflies’ life cycle are destroyed or depleted. In
addition, pesticide usage in plantations and orchards could harm the fireflies.

Main Report
When the Selangor Dam was built, it was also feared that the project would reduce
freshwater flow downstream and cause reduced water quality as well as salt water
intrusion upstream, thus adversely affecting the downstream ecosystem. However,
the monitoring studies conducted by FRIM and the environmental study conducted by
the Malaysian Nature Society indicated it was inconclusive that the reduction in
firefly population was the consequence of either reduced freshwater flow, reduced
water quality or saline intrusion. Both studies, however, recommended continuous
monitoring of the water level downstream, especially during dry periods and the
establishment of a buffer zone along the river. While the impact from reduced
freshwater flow and saline intrusion has yet to be fully ascertained, it appears from
the conclusion of both studies that indiscriminate land clearing currently poses the
primary threat to the firefly colony of Sg Selangor.
Rehabilitation programme of the Raja Musa peat forest was initiated by Jabatan
Perhutanan Selangor and an NGO (i.e. GEC) with local community in 2008. Since
then, it has been reported that groups of volunteers have continued to participate in
the re-vegetation programme through Monthly Tree Planting Program & Friends of
North Selangor Peat Swamp Forest (Sahabat Hutan Gambut Selangor Utara). Natural
regeneration is taking place in areas where hydrological restoration was conducted, as
a result of which there is an increase of above ground carbon content. Although no
new cases of encroachment and illegal burning and clearing of land were detected
along the forest reserve boundary, Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor needs to maintain
regular monitoring to deter future encroachment.
Sustaining public involvement in conservation efforts:
Raising awareness, education, cooperation and engagement of the local communities

in local planning decisions is crucial in the management of ecologically protected
areas. Without local community acceptance, management strategies and plans for
ecologically protected areas can be difficult to implement. The likely risk lies in the
local community’s waning commitment in conserving and defending the peat forest
and firefly habitats in favour of economic and financial gains that can be derived from
land clearing and cash crop cultivation.
Continuing engagement and forming effective partnerships with the NGOs, corporate
donors, schools as well as research and academic institutions is crucial as these

Main Report
stakeholders provide financial support, research initiatives and capability as well as

man-power support when projects need to be undertaken to enhance or maintain the
firefly protected zone. Generally, working with partners broadens the scope of what
the firefly sanctuary can achieve. At this point, it is crucial not to lose the effective
partnerships or the “background leadership” role that some of these stakeholder
partners have provided.
7.13 Proposed Action Plan for Conserve Fireflies and Ecosystems
Generally, biodiversity and conservation is unlikely to be at the forefront of concerns

of many stakeholders in river basin management, in contrast to the social and
economic benefits that can be derived from the river. Hence, integrating wetland
rehabilitation and firefly habitat protection requires the necessary buy-in from all
sectors of the government, industry, agriculture and communities. It means it is
necessary to work simultaneously at multiple levels with the local communities, the
river basin authority, the local and state level implementing agencies and policy
drivers.
Rehabilitation of the Raja Musa Forest Reserve and protection of the firefly habitat
along lower Sg Selangor face almost similar threats which can be identified as:
 Loss of biodiversity and the ecosystem services that the wetlands and riparian
mangrove provide to these habitats;
 Sustaining commitment and effective long-term partnerships with the local
communities and other stakeholders.
The proposed action plan for conserve fireflies and ecosystems addresses measures
that can be used to mitigate the likely risks identified in the risk assessment. The plan
is summarised in Table 7.2.
7.14 Action Plan for Conservation of the Coastal Mangrove Forest
About 240 hectares of the coastal mangrove forest has been given protection status by
the Selangor state government and assigned as a nature park. With most coastal
mangrove swamps in the country under threat, the 240-hectare nature located at the
mouth of Sg Selangor, on the other hand, fulfils an important role in the conservation

Main Report
of this valuable ecosystem. Managed by the Malaysian Nature Society since 1987 as
Taman Alam Kuala Selangor, this strip of coastal mangrove now serves as a nature
education center and has attracted bird watchers whereby 156 species of birds
(resident and migratory) have been documented seen here so far.
It appears the integrity of the nature park will be safeguarded so long as the
Malaysian Nature Society continues to provides the background leadership, with
support from Majlis Daerah Kuala Selangor and the Selangor Tourism Department.

Main Report
Table 7.1: Preliminary Assessment of Risk for Conservation of the Wetlands and Fireflies
Inherent Residual
Ranking Ranking
Activity Hazard & Status Causes Comments/ Constraints (see Notes) Control Measures (see Notes)
L S Risk L S Risk
Degradation Removal of tree Encroachment and land Existing monitoring and 4 3 M Putting up notice boards at strategic 3 1 L
and loss of species pertinent for clearing in riparian enforcement on violation spots to warn the public against
wetlands and the firefly’s life cycle zone for cultivation of on land clearing and being involved in illegal activities in
riparian bananas, oil palm & burning may be the protected zone.
ecosystems Pesticides getting into other cash crops. inadequate.
the river could affect Land clearing and Jabatan Perhutanan to continue
water quality burning on private land regular checks and give extra
at the boundary of the attention to enforcement on violation
wetlands to create more in the wetlands; and LUAS on any
land for cash crop violation in the firefly protected area.
cultivation. In cases of violation, the relevant
agencies are expected to take
Inadequate enforcement appropriate corrective actions.
Sustaining Local communities Economic and financial 2 1 L Garnering the assistance of local 2 1 L
engagement losing commitment in gains that can be research institutions and NGOs is
with local the conservation derived from land one of the best ways to raise local
residents in programmes of the clearing for cultivation community awareness and
conservation peat forest and firefly of cash crops acceptance, as well as to sustain
efforts habitat. interest and commitment to
conservation projects

Main Report
Notes:
Likelihood Scale Severity Scale
Likelihood Score Probability of One-off event Severity Score
Improbable 1 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) Minor 1
Unlikely 2 1 in 100 (1%) Moderate 2
Possible 3 1 in 10 (10%) Significant 3
Likely 4 More likely than not Substantial 4
Most Likely 5 Almost certain Catastrophic 5
Risk Assessment Matrix (5*5)

Severity Score
1 2 3 4 5
Score 2 L L M M H
3 L M M H H
4 M M H H H
5 M H H H H
L = Low
M = Medium
H = High

Main Report
Table 7.2: Proposed Action Plan for Wetlands and Firefly Sanctuary Conservation
7.1 Sustain efforts to raise Strategic use of the media is an essential Media LUAS / PBT / FRIM /   It is important to register in the
public awareness and part of getting the IRBM message across Forestry Department / minds of the public that ecosystem
education to gain the to local stakeholders. It may play a key PTD conservation is one of the key
support and ‘buy-in’ of role in getting their ‘buy-in’. principles of Integrated River
the local communities Basin Management, and that the
Garner assistance of local research Institutional capacity LUAS / PBT / FRIM /    Raka Musa wetlands, the Sg.
institutions and NGOs to asssist in building Forestry Department / Selangor firefly protection zone
building the capacity of local residents PTD and coastal mangrove forest at the
and local community-based interest estuary of Sg. Selangor are part of
groups a more extensive ecosystem that
was once supported by Sg.
Involve senior community figures, Public outreach LUAS / PBT / FRIM /   Selangor.
religious leaders and other opinion programs; Forestry Department /
formers to ‘champion’ the conservation Appointment of local PTD Providing environmental
programme. It may help to engender “champions” information or training to a
public understanding, acceptance and segment of the local communities
implementation of ecosystems addresses three primary areas:
conservation projects.
(i) participation of local people
Establish a recognizable identity or Public awareness and LUAS / PBT / FRIM /  more fully in conservation
‘sense of place’ for the Raja Musa and education programmes Forestry Department / programmes;
Kg Kuantan-Kg Belimbing sub-regions PTD / Tourism (ii) improving information needs
and develop key messages about the Selangor Sdn Bhd of the local guides, and
ecosystems to serve as rallying point for (iii) long term sustainability and
the local communities. improved management of the
protected area.
Participation of local research

institutions and NGOs is one of the
best ways to develop local
community awareness and
education.

Main Report
7.2 Sustain existing and Readiness to engage in partnerships with Partnership LUAS / Tourism    Effective partnership building is an
build new effective & ‘non-conservation’ and ‘non-traditional’ engagement Selangor Sdn Bhd essential ingredient of IRBM. It
long-term partnerships partners and stakeholders. enables far more to be
accomplished than by working
Readiness to circulate information and Publication and LUAS / DOE / FRIM /    alone.
reports among project partners and river circulation of Jabatan Meteorologi /
basin stakeholders to generate information and JPS
cooperation. reports
7.3 Invest in building a Maintain a research fund and forge long- Information database LUAS / Jabatan    It is necessary to build a strong
strong informational term partnership with local research Perhutanan Selangor / informational base before planning
and science base institutions. FRIM and implementing. This means
forging or maintaining
Continue research and monitoring partnerships with the scientific and
studies. research community.
7.4 Review the existing Implement the management plan and Management Plan LUAS    LUAS has drafted guidelines and a
management enforce the plan’s guidelines and preliminary management plan to
programmes for the regulation. regulate activities inside the firefly
three ecosystems that protection zone and any activity
have been identified to Increase enforcement of existing laws Enforcement within the zone needs written
safeguard the integrity and enactment within the gazette approval from LUAS. This is
and function of the protection zones. consistent with the general practice
ecosystems in the undertaken in most protected areas
longer term Incentives for reporting of pollution Incentive programme where management plans are
cases. prepared to ensure that the natural
values of the protected areas are
carefully managed.
Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor has

initiated the drafting of the
Integrated North Selangor Peat
Forest Management Plan 2014-
2023 – a study that is currently on-

Main Report
Gazette the North Selangor Peat Forest Gazettement of Jabatan Perhutanan   going and which will serve as a
Management Plan (2014-2023) and the management plans Selangor / JPBD guidance document on the
Forest Management Plan (2011-2020) so Selangor / Majlis management, protection and
that implementation and enforcement of Daerah Kuala Selangor rehabilitation of the forest.
the rules and regulations can be initiated.
The department has also drafted
Incorporate both parks into the Selangor Gazette under the JPBD Selangor / Majlis the Forest Management Plan 2011-
Structure Plan 2012 (Review) Plan and Structure Plan and Daerah Kuala Selangor 2020 (FMP), whereby one of the
Local Plan for Daerah Kuala Selangor Local Plan recommendations is the
(pending review) for gazetting under the gazettement of Compartment 22 in
Town and Country Planning Act, Act the Raja Musa Forest Reserve for
176. conservation.
7.5 Restoration of Strengthen collaboration with existing Stakeholder LUAS / Jabatan    Jabatan Perhutanan and LUAS
degraded habitats partner stakeholders who have provided collaboration Perhutanan Selangor / have implemented a number of
through rehabilitation effective partnerships or “background Pejabat Daerah Kuala rehabilitation & re-vegetation
and re-vegetation leadership” role for the replanting and Selangor projects in collaboration with
programmes rehabilitation projects. NGOs, corporate bodies,
community groups, schools and
It is also necessary to widen smart New smart partnership research institutions.
partnership with other stakeholders,
including the ‘non-conservation’ or ‘non- This includes the Tg. Beluntas area
traditional’ stakeholders. where land reclamation works
have been carried out.

embarked on a similar exercise of
tree planting programme on
heavily burnt and degraded forest
compartments with a history of
human encroachment. A series of
tree planting programmes have
been carried out in partnerships
with NGOs, local interest groups,

Main Report
other government agencies, private

sector, students and the local
communities from nearby villages
surrounding the Raja Musa Forest
Reserve.

also initiated action, e.g. removal,
against illegal settlers who pose a
threat to the integrity of the peat
forest. 
7.6 Monitor and arrest Continue regular checks and give extra Scheduled LUAS / Jabatan    Notice boards at strategic spots to
encroachment and attention to enforcement on violation. monitoring and Perhutanan Selangor / warn the public against being
illegal clearing of land Take appropriate corrective actions. checks PTD Kuala Selangor / involved in illegal activities in the
at the wetland and Majlis Daerah Kuala protected zone have been installed.
riparian areas LUAS may need to consider working in Integrated task force Selangor
collaboration with or entrusting to conduct
enforcement to a department or agency monitoring and
that is adequately equipped to carry out enforcement
the function.
7.7 Gazette the Firefly Integrate the Firefly Protection Zone as a Gazette under the LUAS / JPBD Selangor /    Additional land required to protect
Protection Zone as a State Park/Forest Reserve or Structure Plan and Majlis Daerah Kuala the firefly sanctuary have been
State Park or Forest Environmentally Sensitive Area in the Local Plan Selangor / Jabatan acquired. The Firefly Protection
Reserve Selangor Structure Plan 2012 (Review) Perhutanan Selangor Zone was gazettes in July 2009
and the Local Plan for Daerah Kuala under Section 48 of the Lembaga
Selangor (pending review) and gazette it Urus Air Selangor (LUAS)
under the Town & Country Plan Act, Act Enactment 1999.
176.

Main Report
7.8 Establish a Buffer Identify an appropriate buffer zone Establish buffer zone Jabatan Perhutanan   A buffer zone between the forest
Zone around the boundary where buffer distance between Selangor / JPBD / and the areas peripheral to it would
RMFR the peripheral areas may range between Pejabat Daerah Kuala safeguard the integrity of the peat
500m to 1000m, depending on factors Selangor / Majlis Daerah forest and protect the forest from
such as terrain, settlements, existing land Kuala Selangor further encroachment by activities
use activities, etc. that are incompatible with the
function of the RMFR.
Integrate buffer zone in the Selangor Gazette under the JPBD / Majlis Daerah
Structure Plan 2012 (Review) and the Structure Plan and Kuala Selangor
Local Plan for Daerah Kuala Selangor Local Plan
(pending review) and gazette it under the
Town & Country Plan Act, Act 176.
Draft a buffer zone management plan Buffer zone Jabatan Perhutanan

with measures to enhance the management plan Selangor / JPBD /
conservation value of the protected area Pejabat Daerah Kuala
and to control unsustainable or Selangor / Majlis Daerah
incompatible human and economic Kuala Selangor
activities.

Main Report
Figure 7.1 : Fire Potential of RMFR
Source: M D H Suliman, M Mahmud and M N M Reba. Mapping and Analysis of Forest

and Land Fire Forest Potential using Geospatial Technology and Mathematical Modeling.
Pusat Pengajian Sosial, Pembangunan dan Persekitran, Fakulti Sains Sosial dan
Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Figure 7.2: Illegal Encroachment into the RMFR
New land clearing inside RMFR (2008) Slash and burn agriculture the RMFR
Source: Badrol Hisam Abd Rahman, et al. Rehabilitation of Peat Swamp Forest – Selangor
Experience. Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor. Paper presented at the ASEAN Peatland Forests Project
and Sustainable Management of Peatland Forests in South-east Asia. Bogor, June 2012.

Main Report
Figure 7.3: Vegetation Fire Fuel Map of RMFR
Source: M D H Suliman, M Mahmud and M N M Reba. Mapping and Analysis of

Forest and Land Fire Forest Potential using Geospatial Technology and
Mathematical Modelling. Pusat Pengajian Sosial, Pembangunan dan Persekitran,
Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Figure 7.4: Network of Logging Canals and Ditches

Main Report
Figure 7.5: Action taken (and still ongoing) to block canals and ditches in RMFR

Main Report
8.0 REVIEW OF IRBM PLANS IN OTHER COUNTRIES
8.1 INTRODUCTION
The Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Study require taking into account water
resource management plans developed in Sabah, Singapore, Indonesia and other
states/countries of equal standing, presumably in water resource management. The
TOR requires a review of the policies, strategies, implementation periods and
responsible agencies in the existing plan by comparing them with similar plans in the
selected state and countries.
For the purpose of the Study, the review of the water resource or basin management
plan has been confined to the following areas:-
i) Europe- Danube River Basin (Water Framework Directive-WFD)

ii) Brantas- Indonesia
iii) Murray Darling-Australia
The WFD in Europe was selected in preference over Sabah and Singapore as it is an
effort involving largely developed nations on a very large basin. The Danube basin
spans 19 countries with a catchment of about 807,827 sq km which is approximately
400 times the size of the Sg Selangor basin. The Danube basin management plan and
the WFD are more worthy of a review than Singapore as it encompasses a much
larger area and hence presents challenges on a much broader and larger scale than
those present in Singapore.
The Brantas river basin model in Indonesia was similarly selected as a relevant case
study as it is in a developing country and at the early stages of water resource
management despite efforts since 1961. The success of the model has apparently led
the Government to extend the model to other basins.
Lastly the Murray Darling basin in Australia was selected to highlight the problems
faced in the basin in terms of over abstraction and how there has been a struggle to
balance human and eco system needs and demands. This basin was selected to
highlight that even in developed countries issues such as over abstraction have
become a problem when one would be forgiven to think that this could have been

Main Report
avoided in the first place. It highlights the need for us to be cautious in our approach
to water resource management in Selangor especially in light of recent constraints in
supply that forced the Government to implement rationing for Selangor, Kuala
Lumpur and Putrajaya for unprecedented long periods.
It is important to note that in the Study and comparison of basin plans or models in
other countries, the issues that are critical in each basin will vary in content and
relative importance for the respective countries. Some issues are common with the
Sg. Selangor basin. Hence this Study is more focused on how similar issues are dealt
with in other countries, if substantially different, and how the approach can be
adopted in Selangor, in general.
The Study is also focused on identifying elements and standards in these basin
management plans or models that are relevant that are either currently weakly
addressed in the Sg. Selangor basin or not at all.
The review of the basins and basin plans are summarised in the following sections
and this is followed by recommendations for action in the Sg. Selangor basin plan
pertaining to features and practices in these plans. In addition to lessons learnt from
the review of these plans and basins, there are a number of concerns and potential for
improvement of the 2007 -2012 Sg. Selangor basin management plan that are
addressed in the final portion of this chapter.
8.2 DANUBE RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.2.1 Background
The Danube River Basin was selected to represent the practice of river basin
management in Europe. The Danube River Basin Management (DRBM) Plan is
rather complex because of the extensiveness of the river basin. The river is 2,857 km
in length with a catchment size of about 807,827 km2; it flows across international
boundaries of 19 countries. The river basin management policies are subject to the
European Union regulations and guidelines which are among the most stringent in the
world.

Main Report
In comparison, the Sg. Selangor basin has a catchment of 2000 km2 and is entirely
within the State of Selangor and with only a handful of agencies playing a significant
role in the management of the basin. The WFD is enforced legally in the participating
countries. The key take away from the review of the Danube basin model and plan
would be that if it is possible for 19 countries to work together, albeit progressively
over many years, to manage the water resources in a structured manner, it would be
far easier for water resources for the Sg. Selangor basin to be similarly or better
managed. This is especially so since Selangor is also keen on achieving industrialised
status and be a benchmark for other states in Malaysia and Sg. Selangor lies entirely
within Selangor. The Danube basin model serves as an exemplary model for Selangor
to aspire to in its efforts to be the leader in the country with regards to water resource
and supply management.
The institutional set-up for coordination of the Plan is at three levels: the “Roof level”
which is at international, basin-wide level; the National level which is managed
through the country authorities; and the Sub-Unit level which encompasses the
management units within the national territory. The information required at each of
the three levels increases in detail from the “Roof level”.
Because the Danube River traverses across 19 countries, the River Basin
Management Plan is much more complex in its implementation than most others.
The WFD is phased out over a period of 16 years as summarised in Table 8.1.
The plan recognises that vast majority of water bodies are only expected to attain
good status in the subsequent planning cycles when the measures have been fully
tested and evaluated. Moreover time is required for the slow pace of recovery of soils,
sediment, and groundwater.
For each sub catchments or water body a comprehensive process is followed which
reflects the overall structure of the Directive, understanding the pressures affecting
the waters, evaluating the importance, identifying the measures that will address the
specific problems, and assessing the cost and effectiveness of each measure. In this
way, a detailed plan for each of the water bodies is developed.

Main Report
The general approach of the WFD can be summarised in the following key steps:-
i) Setting clear policies objectives and timeframes;

ii) Characterisation of the river basins and water bodies;
iii) Measures for Protected Areas;
iv) Risk assessments to determine water bodies which fail to meet the required
status and need to be restored to the targeted "good' status and those at risk of
failing to meet the 'good' status by 2015. These assessments includes a risk
analysis of pressures within the basins and related impacts;
v) Monitoring programmes;
vi) Generation of a set of measures called the programme of measures that are
targeted at achieving the goals and objectives of the WFD;
vii) Economic analysis especially of the proposed measures to determine its
feasibility and viability;
viii) The setting up of a river basin management system with access to public;
ix) Public consultation of the proposed plan;
x) Finalisation of the plan; and
xi) Implementation of the plan.
8.2.2 Objectives and Policies
The EU water framework directive (WFD) has been established for the protection,
improvement and sustainable use of inland surface waters, transitional waters, coastal
waters and groundwater. Its purpose is to establish an integrated approach and
framework which:
i) Prevents further deterioration and protects and enhances the status of aquatic
ecosystems and environments;
ii) Promotes sustainable water use based on long term protection of available
water resources;
iii) Ensures progressive reduction of pollution of groundwater and prevents
further pollution; and
iv) Contributes to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts.
A second key aspect of the WFD is the introduction of a structured river basin
management planning system. This system is intended to provide a decision making

Main Report
framework within which costs and benefits can be properly taken into account when
setting environmental objectives.
The environmental objectives for surface waters are as follows:-
i) Protecting, enhancing and restoring all non artificial surface water bodies
with the aim of achieving good ecological and good surface water chemical
status by 22nd December 2015;
ii) Protecting and enhancing all artificial surface water bodies with the aim of
achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status
by 22nd December 2015;
iii) Preventing deterioration of all surface water bodies from one status class to
another; and
iv) Achieving compliance with any water related standards and objectives for
protected areas by 22nd December 2015.
The focus or policy and objectives are much clearer here, than in Malaysia, with the
emphasis on preventing deterioration, improving quality of rivers to a specific status
and promoting sustainability of the existing water resources by safeguarding water
quality.
Waters are classified within a fivefold scheme in the range high, good, moderate,
poor, bad and the goal of the WFD is to ensure that the majority of the water bodies
reach good status by 2015.
Waters of good status have an objective of non deterioration although some will
improve to high status.
Water bodies are required to have good ecological and good chemical status by 2015.
This is significantly different from standards and approach in Selangor and Malaysia
where emphasis is still only on chemical status.
8.2.3 Characterisation and Risk Assessments
The first initiative of the WFD lies in the characterisation of the basin. This
essentially involves classifying the rivers, lakes, other water bodies and groundwater

Main Report
on a consistent basis to facilitate meaningful comparison of risk class or quality status

between similar water bodies. It is also aimed at enabling ecologically meaningful
quality targets to be set for each type of water body which may have entirely different
characteristics.
The five water body types are rivers, lakes, transitional waters or estuaries, coastal
waters and groundwater.
The purpose of characterisation is to identify the various types of water bodies and
the characteristics of each water body and classify them accordingly as units of
reporting for management purposes.
The characterisation process reveals gaps in data and data shortages and limitations
both spatially and in terms of parameters measured which then drives the appropriate
monitoring programmes.
Each river basin district is divided into hydrometric areas which are essentially a
large river basin or a group of smaller river basins and neighboring coastal waters.
The characterisation also requires type specific reference conditions to be established

for all surface water types. These reference conditions should reflect the natural state
of a water body if the impact of human activity on it was nonexistent or negligible.
Where such water bodies cannot be found, historical data or expert judgment may be
used to generate the surface water reference conditions. The status of each surface
water body will later be measured against these reference conditions. This is very
different from our approach here in Malaysia as no attempt is made to determine
similar reference or benchmark conditions for our water bodies under 'ideal'
circumstances. In the absence of such as reference, there is a lack of a clear goal or
target to aspire towards. Moreover, the reference conditions included ecological
assessments of the water and not just the chemical status as is the case here in
Selangor and Malaysia.
Existing data only shows current level compared to benchmark level. The
characterisation exercise is therefore aimed at setting the baseline. It helps provide a
better understanding of the current and predicted future state of all aquatic
environments and the ecology associated with them. It helps to determine the future

Main Report
monitoring strategy and also provides a starting point for the design of the
programme of measures.
The surface water ecological classification combines three factors biology, supporting
water quality conditions (general conditions and specific pollutants) and supporting
hydrology and morphology (physical condition) (see Table 8.2). Figures 8.1 to 8.3
provide a schematic representation for the classification of the status of the water
bodies.
To facilitate the status and risk assessment, monitoring programmes are implemented
to assess the ecological status and risk for each of the water bodies.
Diffuse tests, point source tests, hydrology test and morphology tests are carried out
together with the impact data assessment.
The status and assessment evaluates water bodies on the basis of ecological,
morphological, and physio chemical criteria. A failure to meet objectives in any one
of these criteria results in water bodies being considered at risk of failing to achieve
the environmental objectives.
Having determined the ecological status of the water bodies, the next step involves
undertaking a risk analysis to assess pressures and impacts within these bodies. The
outcome of the risk assessments would be to then classify each water body in any one
of the following categories:-
 1a at risk
 1b probably at risk
 2a probably not at risk
 2b not at risk
A significant pressure is a pressure that on its own or in combination with other

pressures and in the absence of suitable measures including existing controls is liable
to cause a failure to achieve one or more of the environmental objectives.
Pressures are defined as any proximate cause of any human induced alterations to the
hydro morphological or physio chemical conditions or biological quality elements

Main Report
Impacts are adverse effects of pressures on characteristics of the water environment

that may be important to the achievement of one or more of the directives
environmental objectives.
In most waters there are several different pressures which detrimentally affect the
quality of the waters and the diversity of the ecology.
Examples of pressures include wastewater and industrial discharges, landfills and

physical modifications. The impacts of these pressures can be direct, such as a
physical change to the water body or over abstraction which can impact natural
habitats. It can be indirect such as increased sedimentation run off which can reduce
sunlight and cause oxygen deficiencies. In order to improve conditions, and achieve
good status, all of the pressures will have to be addressed to a degree where no single
pressures or any combination of pressures remain a problem.
An example of map of pressures is shown in Figure 8.4. In this and other similar
maps each pressure is assigned a level of importance (in terms of a percentage) for
each river.
The pressures and impacts analysis or risk assessment that forms a major part of the
efforts is to first assess the pressures that were manifesting on the water bodies and
then to assess the likelihood that these pressures might lead to non achievements of
the Good Ecological status in 2015.
Figure 8.5 shows a flowchart summarising the process for analysing pressures and
impacts.
In summary, the characterisation process first involves delineating the basin into the
various types of water bodies and this is then followed by classifying each of these
bodies in terms of selected physical characteristics. The next step involves
determining the reference condition or the ideal condition for each of these water
bodies which reflects the condition or status of the water body in the absence of
human intervention or impact. This is followed by determining the current ecological
and chemical status of these water bodies based on considerations of a wide variety of
factors such as biology, chemicals and morphology.

Main Report
Having determined the current status, the next step entails the identification of
pressures and impacts for each of these bodies and carrying out risk assessments to
determine the level of risk of each of these bodies in terms of meeting the
environmental objectives. Water bodies which are high or good with no risk for
deterioration require no action. Water bodies which are good but at risk of
deterioration require action to retain good status or improve to high status and water
bodies which are less than good require action to improve status to good by 2015.
From the characterisation of the Danube River basin, four Significant Water
Management Issues were identified in the DRBM Plan:-
 Pollution by organic substances

 Pollution by nutrients
 Pollution by hazardous substances
 Hydro morphological alterations
The analysis was able to identify an increase of water bodies at risk due to higher
organic emissions; the major cause being insufficient wastewater treatment in the
middle and lower basin areas. The main sources of pollution are industry (largest
contribution of organics is the pulp and paper industry) and agriculture (animal
breeding and manure disposal).
In terms of nutrients, the analyses showed that the loads had decreased over the past
20 years, but are still well above levels in early years. The decrease is due to political
and economic changes in the middle and lower basin countries resulting in closure of
nutrient discharging industries decrease in application of mineral based fertilisers, and
closure of large animal farms. Improvements were also due to economic mechanisms
in water management (polluter pay principle) and improvements in wastewater
treatment.
Hazardous substances were predominantly affecting the middle and lower Danube
River. The main sources are industrial emissions and pesticides used in agriculture.
The control that has been put in place is through the EU Water Framework Directive
where a list of 33 priority pollutants (of which 11 are hazardous substances) have
been identified and which are subject to cessation or phasing out from discharges and
emissions over a time period not exceeding 20 years. In recent years, endocrine

Main Report
substances and pharmaceuticals are being given more attention due to the increased
use and disposal of such substances. The main issue with regards to hazardous
substances is the lack of data and this has been identified as an area of improvement
required for the basin management.
Hydro morphological alterations can cause river habitat continuity interruptions

affecting migration routes of fish and other aquatic species, destruction of wetlands
and flood plains and the associated ecosystems. The main hydro morphological
alterations for the Danube River were caused by impoundments for hydropower and
flood protection projects, navigation, water abstractions and hydropeaking.
Apart from the above issues which are related to surface waters, groundwater is also
important for the Danube countries since 60% of water supply is from groundwater.
Pollution of groundwater has been identified to be from insufficient municipal
wastewater collection and treatment, insufficient industrial wastewater treatment,
intensive agriculture and livestock breeding, and inappropriate waste disposal sites.
8.2.4 Priority Substances
Priority substances are chemical pollutants (including metals, pesticides,

hydrocarbons, volatiles and hormone disrupting compounds) that are of widespread
concern. The levels or concentrations of these priority substances are compared to
European environmental quality standards set to protect the health of the aquatic
plants and animals in compliance with the proposed priority substance directive. This
is substantially different from situations in Malaysia where raw water standards are
assessed in relation to treatability for drinking water.
8.2.5 Protected Areas
As part of the characterisation process, water related protected areas are also
identified. These include areas for abstraction of drinking waters, economically
significant aquatic species, nutrient sensitive waters, recreational waters and habitat
or species habitat.
Examples of protected areas include natural heritage areas, nutrient sensitive waters,
bathing waters, protected drinking water areas.

Main Report
The appropriate waters to be considered protected are either nominated in the WFD
or identified by expert groups. The protected areas and habitats are afforded some
degree of protection and/or control by the appropriate legislation.
8.2.6 Monitoring programmes
The next phase of the WFD is to put in place improved monitoring programmes to
overcome gaps as well as verify assumptions made during risk assessments.
The monitoring programmes are divided into three categories as follows:-

i) surveillance
ii) operational and
iii) investigative
Monitoring is seen to reduce misclassification of water bodies and this in turn will
affect the programme of measures or action plans the implementation of which may
be considerably more expensive.
The objective of surveillance monitoring is to supplement and validate risk

assessments and provided overall surface status in each catchment and sub catchment.
Surveillance monitoring covers:
Biological, hydro morphological (hydrology - flows, morphology - eg flood defense

works), physio chemical and priority substances discharged in the catchment.
Surveillance monitoring is also required to detect the effects of long term changes in
natural conditions as well as long term changes in the water body from anthropogenic
activity. Information from surveillance programmes can be used to help decide if
operational and investigative monitoring is required.
Surveillance monitoring is intended to be a permanent set of monitoring stations at

which all specified ecological and chemical quality elements are examined. It is
intended to show long term changes in water quality.

Main Report
In comparison there is very limited permanent surveillance monitoring in the Sg.

Selangor basin. Although the 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor plan recommended additional
monitoring points to enhance operation of dams, this has yet to be implemented.
There is also no explanation on the delay in implementing this recommendation.
Hence if the Selangor Government is desirous of aspiring towards a higher standard
in water resources management, surveillance monitoring should be given emphasis
and implementation of facilities should be expedited. This is especially so since the
costs for surveillance monitoring facilities are relatively low in comparison to the
more capital intensive measures such as upgrading of wastewater treatment plants.
The surface water operational monitoring program is targeted at establishing the

status of those water bodies which have been identified in the risk assessment process
and surveillance monitoring as being at risk to meet the objectives of the WFD. The
extent of each monitoring station will be less than that for surveillance monitoring
since it is more focused on parameters which are sensitive to the particular pressures
that the water body is subjected to.
Investigative monitoring is initiated when surveillance monitoring or some other

source of information indicates that a surface body is at risk of failing to meet the
objectives of the WFD but the cause is unclear. Investigative monitoring is also used
to ascertain the magnitude and impacts of accidents.
8.2.7 Programme of Measures and Economic Analysis
The prime mechanisms through which the objectives of the WFD will be achieved are
the Programme of measures or action plan for each basin and sub basin. These
measures will be designed to improve water status or maintain good status as
appropriate.
The protection and improvements to the water bodies will require specific measures
(or action plans) the collection of necessary measures of each water body is termed
the programme of measures.
The measures can be covered by existing law or additional actions deemed necessary
at a particular site.

Main Report
The programme of measures includes basic and supplementary measures. The basic
measures are those required by various pieces of existing legislation i.e. required by
law and not optional in water body. There are eleven key European directives as
summarised in Table 8.3 while Table 8.4 shows the roles of these directives.
Action items required to comply with the existing key legislations or supplementary
measures are then subjected to economic analysis (cost benefit or cost effectiveness)
for consideration and approval.
Estimates of cost effectiveness are developed for each of the individual measures,
where necessary and the proposed measures are subjected to a rigorous process of
cost benefit or cost effectiveness analysis before inclusion in the plan.
Figure 8.6 provides a summary of this process.
Economic analysis is also carried out for the river basin. Its purpose is to provide an
initial overview of the economic benefits associated with the utilisation of water
resources, water services costs and cost recovery, environmental /resource costs and
projections of demand, supply and costs of water services. It will also be integral in
the decision making process when it comes to deciding on the most cost effective
combination of measures under the programme of measures.
The Programme of Measures is structured based on the four Significant Water

Management Issues of the river basin. From these issues, the following Visions were
established:-
1. Organic pollution – zero emission of untreated wastewaters into the waters of

the Danube River Basin District.
2. Nutrient pollution – balanced management of nutrient emissions via point and
diffuse sources in the entire river basin such that the waters of the Danube
River and the Black Sea are not threatened or impacted by eutrophication.
3. Hazardous substances pollution – no risk or threat to human health and the
aquatic ecosystem in the waters of the Danube River and the Black Sea from
the discharges into the river.

Main Report
4. Hydro morphological alterations – balanced management of past, ongoing and

future structural changes to the riverine environment such that the aquatic
ecosystem functions in a holistic way and is represented with all native species.
8.2.8 River Basin Management System
The WFD requires an active public information program.
An environmental management system is also generally implemented in accordance

with ISO 14001 requirements.
A river basin management system (RBMS) is also developed that will facilitate the
selection and implementation of the measures and to empower various stakeholders to
contribute in an active way, to the process of measures selection. The RBMS is
constructed as a suite of tools, procedures and information aimed at identifying and
refining the programme of measures that will constitute the WFD implementation
through the river basin district. The development of the RBMS will provide a
consistent and transparent approach to the selection of measures and allow the
investigation of alternatives based on stakeholder views.
The RBMS generally comprises of the following typical elements:
Database, GIS, river basin management system website, program of measures

selection tool, numerical basin models (hydraulics, water quality, etc) and economic
models.
8.2.9 Public Consultation
The draft version of the plan is opened for public consultation and the comments
received were incorporated into the final plan, where feasible and necessary.
8.2.10 Awareness
The DBMP recognises that there are also supplementary measures such as the need to
improve awareness for selected stakeholders. A programme of education and
awareness and information and advice campaign are also included in the plan.

Main Report
8.2.11 Issues Dealt At With At National Levels
One of the key points to note issues that are applicable to all waters are considered
best addressed at a higher level than the basin level. These issues include:-
i) Hydrological issues - in particular risks of over abstraction and need for water
demand management
ii) National Action Plan for Sustainable Use of Pesticides
iii) Public Awareness Campaigns and Schemes
iv) Climate Change
v) Invasive or Alien Species
This issue has also been the contention in this Study in the case of the Sg. Selangor
River Basin Management Plan. It is felt that issues highlighted in the basin plan
should be relevant to the basin and that there are some issues such as water demand
management that need to be dealt at the State level.
8.2.12 Lessons to Be Learnt From Review of Danube Basin Plan and WFD for Selangor
and Sg Selangor
(1) The Danube Basin Plan covers an area approximately 400 times that of the
Sg Selangor and spans across 19 countries. The initiative began in 2001 and
the first cycle is expected to end in 2015.
As a state aspiring to reach developed status and set benchmarks in water

resource management in Malaysia, the State of Selangor should experience
little difficulty in cooperating the good features in the WFD and the Danube
Basin Plan. This is primarily because the Sg. Selangor basin is so much
smaller and within the State of Selangor and the river is generally healthy in
terms of water quality.
The key issue lies in the extent to which the State is willing to undertake what
is needed to raise the standards in water resource management in Selangor in
general as opposed to an alternative stance where the leads are provided by
the National Water Resources Council.

Main Report
(2) Policy and objectives
The policy and objectives are spelt out clearly, at least much more clearly in
the WFD than in Malaysia.
The general policy is to prevent deterioration of the good rivers and enhance
the quality within other rivers or water bodies to ensure sustainability of
water resources.
The status is measured in clear terms and is far more comprehensive its scope
than the water quality index which entails six parameters and only involves a
chemical assessment. There is a need to review existing policies and
objectives related to water resources and define then more clearly.
(3) Higher standards
The status is measures with regard to ecological as well as chemical status. It

is time that Selangor embark on gauging the rivers and other water bodies
based on ecological parameters including morphological assessments.
In the Danube basin, the ideal standard or reference condition is ascertained

for each water body and this status is that which would have prevailed in the
body without human intervention. The existing status of the river is the
compared to this ideal state in terms of extent of deviation from this state or
status.
In Selangor and in Malaysia, the upper limit of the WQI is 100 and the WQI
is based on assessment of only six chemical parameters.
(4) Structured approach
The WFD provides the frameworks for the river basin plan and a well
structured approach to carrying out all the necessary activities. It a top down
type of approach where else the existing Sg Selangor basin plan is based on a
bottoms up type of approach where issues within the basin are identified,
highlighted together with recommended actions to the next level for action.

Main Report
There are significant disadvantages with the bottoms up model as follows:-
i) all issues are highlighted without context or without priority

ii) no uniform standard to gauge level of problem as in the case of floods
iii) the approach for river basin management planning is not structured or
uniform because it depends on the consultant appointed for the plan
iv) the State has no way of gauging which basin or sub basin is the most
important basin for a particular issue or in general as a whole
v) similarly the State has no way of gauging which issues are important in each
plan
(5) Wider scope of basin plan
The scope for the basin plan in Europe is much wider with it being extended
to cover the river all the way to its mouth and coastal estuaries.
In the case of Sg. Selangor the focus is only on the river until the intakes at
Bestari Jaya for the Sg. Selangor water treatment plants and groundwater.
The existing mining ponds within the basin are not included as are the
transitional waters or estuaries and coastal waters.
Water bodies form the basic units of water management. In the case of the
Sg. Selangor basin, the basin is further divided into sub basins.
It is recommended that due consideration be given to the inclusion of the

existing mining ponds within the Sg. Selangor basin into the Sg. Selangor
plan for greater completeness and especially in view that some of these ponds
have been and are being used for supporting water supply needs to cope with
the water crisis. LUAS has informed that water from the ponds will not be
used permanently as a source of supply and will only be used for emergency
purposes. The ponds are also to be developed as hybrid off river storage
systems integrating use of surface and ground water resources and hence
should be included in the plan especially in terms of capturing all relevant
characteristics in a suitable river basin information management system.

Main Report
The relevant data for these ponds should be captured in a suitable river basin
information management system.
Relative impact of pressures quantified through map of pressures.
In the case of the basin plans for Danube, maps of pressures are prepared
showing the relative impact of the pressures on the various parts of the
basins.
Similar maps can be prepared for Sg. Selangor to gauge the impact of various
pressures within the sub basins. This can be facilitated by the development of
a suitable model of the basin linked with appropriate data as part of a river
basin management system.
(6) Monitoring
It is evident that the extent of monitoring in Europe is much more extensive

than here in Selangor.
However the fact that the additional stations proposed to improve operations
of the dams for Sg Selangor in the 2007-2012 plan have not been
implemented is a cause for concern. This is especially so when it is critical to
ensure that the dams are operated in an efficient manner.
Permanent monitoring stations especially for groundwater which is faced

with substantial uncertainty needs to be considered. It is recommended that
the relevant agencies review and recommend appropriate permanent
surveillance monitoring stations, where necessary.
(7) River Basin Management System (RBMS)
An overarching problem with the existing system is the lack of a proper river
basin information/ management system.

Main Report
The extent to which information can be made accessible to the public can be
reviewed and finalised but there is an urgent need for a system to be
developed and put in place for Sg Selangor as soon as possible.
(8) Economic analysis
A lot of emphasis is given in the Danube Basin plan and WFD for cost or
economic analysis. In the case of works proposed for the Sg. Selangor basin
involving substantial capital expenditure, there is no similar analysis for
inclusion of such items in the river basin plan.
However some of these works are being proposed by the respective agencies
based on other considerations or policies and may have gone through separate
cost or economic analysis. For example, the proposal to have a new sewerage
plant in Rawang is part of IWK's plan to improve sewerage services in the
area and may not be driven by need to improve the raw water quality of Sg.
Selangor. Hence the plant is justified in other forums and implemented
accordingly.
In addition to this, there is a need for projects funded by the Federal

Government exceeding RM 50 million to go through value management and
value engineering exercises.
Nevertheless, it is recommended that efforts be made in future plans to

incorporate some form of economic analysis to justify and priorities the
proposed works.
(9) Issues at National or State levels
It is recognised that some issues are common to all basins and needs to be
looked at a different level for better planning purposes and this includes
awareness programmes, water demand management and climate change
impact.

Main Report
Care has been taken to ensure that water demand management and awareness
programmes are excluded from the Sg. Selangor basin plan as this is best
dealt at a broader level encompassing Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya.
In the case of climate change, it is still recommended that efforts be made to

study this for Selangor or for Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya. This is
especially critical in light of the recent droughts in Selangor that has caused
the Sg. Selangor dam to reach near critical levels.
(10) Public participation
Public participation especially in reviewing and providing feedback on the

draft basin plans is a key feature in the Danube basin water resource
management strategy. One of the reasons for may be attributed to the fact that
the cost recovery is better in Europe than in Malaysia and therefore
consumers are given the opportunity to voice their concerns. This is
especially since consumers are eventually expected to pay for costs incurred
in implementing the proposed measures, partially of fully. This contrasts
sharply with the case in Malaysia and Selangor where costs are heavily
subsidised and cost recovery especially in the sewerage sector is very poor.
The model in Selangor for water resource management is with LUAS taking
the lead and aided by a committee comprising of representatives from the
various Government and private agencies. This setup is seen to adequately
represent the majority, if not all, of the stakeholders and therefore public
consultation and review of the basin plan, especially at this early stage of
planning and development is not recommended.
Moreover public consultation will result in much longer times to finalise the
plan than may be necessary and is therefore best excluded in Selangor.

Main Report
8.3 BRANTAS INTEGRATED RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT (INDONESIA)
The Brantas River was selected to represent the Indonesian strategy for river basin
management as proposed under the TOR of this study. Many of the issues and
challenges faced are similar to that in Selangor and Malaysia.
The Brantas River is situated in East Java Province. The river basin is one of the most
productive agricultural areas in Indonesia with ample water resources. The river
length is about 320 km with a catchment area of about 11,800 km2. The main river
traverses 9 regencies and 5 municipalities. The basin is therefore substantially larger
than the Sg. Selangor basin.
The Brantas river basin master plan was developed in 4 stages: the plan was initially
developed in 1961 in line with the Indonesian Government’s national development
policy to develop irrigation in order to increase food production and hydropower to
accelerate industrialisation. The Brantas river basin was selected as one of the
strategic basins for the development of a water resources master plan under the
philosophy of “One River, One Plan, One Management” or in today’s terminology an
Integrated Water Resources Plan. The first master plan was therefore focused on
development of the river resources with priorities given to irrigation, flood control,
hydropower and bulk water supply. The second and third master plans were
essentially a review and update of the initial plan. The latest master plan developed in
1998 changed its focus towards conservation and effective water resources
management to tackle the environmental problems and challenges.
During the early years of implementation of the master plans, the focus was on
realizing the physical infrastructure to achieve the intended objectives. After the
construction phase came a period of operation and maintenance and management of
the resources within the basin.
Some of the key issues faced in the earlier years of the water resources management
of Brantas River included the following:-
 Management of the river basin involved many agencies and institutions with
sectoral responsibilities each with its own plans, strategies and objectives;
coordination was a challenge.

Main Report
 There was a shortage of water supply due to population growth and general
economic development, and deteriorating river water quality.
 The cost for new infrastructure and O&M was not able to be covered within the
limited budget allocated by the Government; problems were encountered in
obtaining funding.
Arising from the problems faced, the Indonesian government decided to develop a
pilot scheme for water resources management through a corporatisation approach.
Jasa Tirta Public Corporation (PJT) was therefore incorporated in 1990 to manage the
operation and maintenance of the facilities in the Brantas river basin. In 1999, Jasa
Tirta I Public Corporation (PJT-I) was formed with extended jurisdiction from the
Government to manage other river basins. The objective of setting up PJT-I is to
establish a permanent, neutral, professional and accountable institution for water
resources management.
The roles and responsibilities of PJT-I are:
 to undertake water supply services such as provision of bulk water supply for
domestic use, industry, agriculture, etc.;
 operation and maintenance of the water resources infrastructure (including

rehabilitation as necessary) in the river basin;
 management of the river basin including water resources conservation,

development and utilisation; and
 maintain a data centre for related agencies and the communities concerned.
The main issues faced by PJT-I include the following:-
1. Water resources development in the river basin is limited and may not meet the
expected future increase in water demand.
2. Water quality degradation has worsened especially in the downstream reaches;

major pollution contributors are domestic and industrial wastewaters, as well as
increase in erosion and sedimentation problems caused by increased development
within the basin.

Main Report
3. PJT-I applies a “user pays” principle provided for by law; the Water Service Fee
is applied to commercial water users i.e. domestic and industry bulk water supply
and hydroelectric power generation. Licences for water utilisation are issued by
the Local Government supported by technical recommendation from PJT-I; the
tariff is determined by the Ministry of Public Works. Farmers do not have to pay
fees. The funding for operations and maintenance of the river basin infrastructure
derived from contributions from the beneficiaries does not fully cover the cost.
The Government provides funding for activities related only to public welfare and
safety.
Some of the lessons that can be learnt from the Brantas basin management are as
follows:-
i) Despite considerable efforts to date by PJT I and the Government, the

existing water resources within the basin are inadequate to meet the water
demand during dry periods and further augmentation is required.
ii) The capital investments in water resource augmentation are not recovered
through tariffs for domestic and industrial water users as the bulk of the new
works are funded by the Government.
iii) The largest user of water is the agriculture sector, estimated of 80 % of water
availability during dry periods and the farmers do not pay for the water used.
This has led to waste and inefficiency resulting in users located downstream
suffering from shortages. The Government and PJT I is cognizant of the fact
that there is a need to progressively move towards cost recovery based on the
user pay and polluter pay principle. This illustrates the downside of subsidies
in encouraging inefficiency and wastage.
iv) Despite the large size of the basin, PJT I has recognised the need for flood
forecasting and warning system. To monitor rainfall intensity in the basin and
along the Brantas River, a telemetry flood forecasting and warning system
has been installed.
v) Similarly, in order to facilitate water quality management, water quality

monitoring is done at 50 sensing points and 41 sources of industrial pollution.

Main Report
vi) PJT I also embarked on a clean river programme campaign to raise the
awareness of the users to encourage water conservation etc.
vii) The development of infrastructure for water resources was initially enabled
with foreign expertise and with progressive transfer of technology more of
the work is now done by local expertise.
viii) Water demands are expected to grow rapidly while water quality degradation
and watershed degradation are expected to pose significant problems. PJT I
will need to continue to find appropriate measures to deal with these issues.
ix) Recycling" of water is carried out to a small extent with aquaculture in the
lower reached of the basin in meeting part of its needs from return flow from
irrigation.
The unique feature of the Brantas basin model lies in its one river, one plan, one
management model with PJT 1 playing the role of the corporatised entity in charge of
the management of the water resources and operation and management of all related
facilities including the hydropower facilities.
The Indonesian Government has apparently been pleased with the results of PJT I and
is now considering extending the role of PJT I to other basins.
In the case of Selangor, the model is based on LUAS taking the lead with the help of
other relevant Government agencies and private companies. The model in Selangor is
based on the setting up of a river basin management committee. This approach has
worked generally well and is expected to be in place indefinitely as it does not require
any or significant legal changes. Moreover even with a so called single agency such
as PJT I, cooperation of other agencies is required through other mechanisms such as
sub committees, task forces or one to one dealing with the respective stakeholders.
Hence the Brantas model of a single agency offers no significant advantage for
adoption in Selangor especially considering that the Sg. Selangor basin is so much
smaller in area and therefore much easier to manage and focus.

Main Report
8.4 MURRAY DARLING BASIN
The Murray darling basin is defined by the catchment areas of the Murray and
Darling rivers comprising 23 main river valleys extending over 1 million km2 of
south eastern Australia. It covers more than 77 000 km of rivers, creeks and
watercourses and an estimated 30 000 wetlands.
The size of the basin is even larger than that of the Danube basin in Europe.
The average rainfall over the basin is about 530618 GL (Gigalitres) per year with an
estimated 94 % of this amount lost to evaporation and transpiration. Average inflows
into the basin are about 32500 GL per year and the capacity of major water storages
in the basin is about 34500 Gl. It is estimated that the basin has a groundwater
potential of 10.13 million GL but only a small percentage is accessible and water
quality is poor.
The basin experiences considerable variation in annual inflow to its rivers with a low
of 6740 GL in 2006 and a high of 117907 GL in 1956 based on analysis of flows over
a 114 year period. There appears to be evidence that climate change is a contributory
factor for this variability.
The water resources of the Murray darling basin are used in agriculture, non
agriculture based industry, meeting critical human water needs and normal domestic
requirements, for recreational and cultural purposes and in maintaining freshwater
ecosystems.
The Murray darling basin is home to over 2 million people who rely directly or
indirectly on its water resources. There are also over 1.3 million people living outside
the basin who rely on it.
Under the National Water Initiative (NWI), the basin states (Australian Capital
Territory, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and Victoria) have in place
detailed arrangements to manage water resources for communities, industries and the
environment. The water plans prepared and managed by these states are required
under the NWI to:-

Main Report
i) identify environmental objectives and the water regime required to deliver

results; and
ii) identify over allocated and overused systems and fully implement measures
to move them to sustainable levels of extraction.
Under the NWI there is to be statutory recognition of the environments requirement

for water.
Need for reform
There was a threefold or 300 % increase in surface water diversions and a seven fold
or 700 % increase in water storage capacity between the mid 1950 s and 2000. this
has resulted in the total flow at the Murray mouth to be reduced by 61 per cent with
the river now ceasing to flow through the mouth 40 percent of the time compared
with 1 % of the time in the absence of water resource development.
The ecological status of the river basin has also declined considerably over this
period.
In recognition of this and the need for reform, the basin plan was prepared to provide
for:
i) establishment and enforcement of environmentally sustainable limits on the

quantities of surface water and groundwater that may be taken from the
basin water resources
ii) environmental objectives for water dependent ecosystems and water quality
and salinity objectives
iii) use and management of basin water resources in a way that optimises social,
economic and environmental outcomes
iv) water to meet its most productive use through the development of an efficient
water trading regime across the Murray darling basin
v) requirements that must be met by water resource plans and
vi) improved water security for all uses of basin water resources

Main Report
The basin plan provides an integrated and strategic framework for water management
in the basin by:
i) defining basin wide environmental water quality and salinity outcomes

ii) ensuring that sufficient water is allocated to the environment
iii) defining a basin wide consistent water framework for water trading
iv) providing for continuous improvement in the management of basin water
resources through monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of the Plan
During the millennium drought, towns and cities experienced harsh water restrictions.
A key element in the basin plan is the concept of SDL or sustainable diversion limits.
Detailed analysis was carried out to determine the optimum level of SDL to be
achieved by 2019 and it was found that with an SDL of 2750 Gl per year, the best
results are expected.
The scale of water recovery is relative to a June 2009 baseline.
The basin plan covers the following key elements:
i) description of the basin water resources and the context in which the water
resources are used
ii) identification of risks to the condition or continued availability of basin water
resources and the strategies to be adopted to manage or address those risks
iii) defining basin wide management objectives and outcomes
iv) describing long term average sustainable diversion limits (SDLs) for
consumptive use and a mechanism to adjust these limits as necessary
v) identifying water resource plan areas and water accounting periods and
setting of requirements for water resource planning
vi) describing environmental objectives for management of water dependent
ecosystems targets by which to measure progress towards achieving thus
objectives and a framework, methods and principles for applying
environmental water.
vii) defining a basin wide water quality and salinity management plan and
associated water quality objectives and targets

Main Report
viii) taking into account critical human water needs that is water required for core
human needs for essential community services and for commercial and
industrial purposes
ix) setting out rules for the trading of water rights in relation to basin water
resources
x) setting out framework for basin plan monitoring and evaluation.
The Authority's hydrological modeling took into account the wide variation in water
availability experienced over the last 114 years from 1895 to 2009. The historic
climate sequence includes extremes of climate, including the millennium drought
when inflows were 40 percent below the long term average.
8.4.1 Key points of observation
Climate change and water restrictions
The water demands within the basin have grown substantially and reached a point
where it has been at the expense of environmental requirements. The Authority has
now recognised the damage caused to the environment and has implemented
measures to reduce consumptive use and divert surpluses achieved by these measures
to the environment. Some of these measures include capping consumption within the
basin, placing harsh restrictions during droughts and facilitating water trading in such
a way as to ensure that it is valued appropriately economically.
In the case of Sg. Selangor, there appears to be more than enough water to meet the
potable water demands and demands of the environment. However the ecological
status of the river has not been assessed in detail to conclude that there has been
adequate water allocated for the environment.
The current drought in Selangor has caused the water levels within the Sg. Selangor
dam, in particular, to near critical levels. The Selangor Government is now
augmenting supply from existing mining ponds and the extent to which the current
drought will persist before recovery of the system as a whole is uncertain. As with
the millennium drought in the Murray Darling basin, the current drought in Selangor
is unprecedented and thus increases the emphasis for a climate change analysis and
associated planning for Selangor as a whole and for the major basins.

Main Report
While in Australia, it has been possible to impose strict restrictions in use of water
during extreme droughts, there is has been no similar mechanism imposed here in
Selangor. It is recommended that due considerations be given to such mechanisms to
be imposed by law during extreme droughts.
8.4.2 Water for the environment
It is clear from the review of the Murray Darling and Danube basin that substantial
emphasis is given to the environment and its requirements. In the case of the Murray
Darling basin, the neglect of these requirements has caused problems that have now
resulted in efforts to curb consumptive use to restore the environment.
In the case of Sg. Selangor, the only issue highlighted pertaining to the environment
has been the preservation of the firefly community. It is not clear if the ecological
status of Sg. Selangor can be considered good by the standards of the Danube basin
management plan or the Water Framework Directive. Nevertheless, given that the
developed countries have progressed to the point that the requirements of the
environment has been given equal emphasis as requirements for potable water and
irrigation, it is also appropriate for some efforts in Selangor in a similar direction.
This is especially so in recognition of the need and aspirations of Selangor to achieve
industrialised status.
This is also relevant in recognition of the fact that Selangor aspires to set the
benchmark for water resource planning and management.
It is therefore recommended that efforts be made to gauge, monitor and improve,

where necessary, the ecological status of Sg. Selangor.

Main Report
8.4.3 Demand management
Although the water situation in Selangor, prior to the current drought, has been
generally perceived as being healthy with adequate water supply, the experience in
the Murray darling basin should encourage us in Selangor to pursue water demand
management as soon as possible. The twin threats of high demand growth (coupled
with high inefficiency reflected by high Non revenue water levels) and climate
change need to be dealt with as soon as possible.
Much has been said about water demand management but little has been done to
achieve any significant and sustainable result. This needs to change, especially
considering that Selangor (together with Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya) will become
dependent on supply from Pahang on completion of the Langat 2 works, sometime in
2017.
8.4.4 Public consultation for finalization of the basin plan
As in the case of the Danube basin plans, the Murray Darling basin plans is also
finalised after public consultation. In the case of the Sg. Selangor basin plans, similar
efforts may be made but are not recommended. This is because the issues generally
identified in the plan are broad based and do not include the interests of minority
groups such as those who use the water from the river for bathing and those who rely
on it for fishing. The preparation of a basin plan that covers all minority interest
groups will also require more resources and time. Additional time will also be
required for finalization of the plan after public consultation.
The issues which need to be dealt with in Sg Selangor on a priority basis such as
improving river water quality and resolving flood problems will generally also benefit
the minority groups as well. In any case the Sg. Selangor basin plan is also finalised
by a committee comprising representatives from many different Government and
private agencies. Hence the plan is reviewed by many parties before finalization and
the addition of public consultation appears to provide no significant additional
benefit.

Main Report
8.4.5 Cost benefit analysis
The Murray Darling basin plan also employs rigorous cost benefit analysis of the
proposed strategies and measures.
This coupled with the observation of similar efforts for the Danube basin and the
practice in the UK suggests that similar efforts be made in future basin plans to
incorporate some financial analysis of the cost benefit or cost effectiveness of the
proposed measures, where feasible. This will also strengthen the case for the
proposed measures and help in facilitating decision making when funds need to be
allocated.
8.5 GENERAL AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
On completion of the review of the basin plans and models in other countries and a
study of deficiencies and weaknesses in the 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor river basin
management plan, the following areas for improvement are recommended:-
8.5.1 Implementation of a comprehensive river basin information or management

system.
One of the key drawbacks in the existing system is that information is still managed
very poorly and not in an integrated manner that facilitates decision making,
monitoring and implementation.
It is strongly recommended that LUAS embark on overcoming this state of affairs

with the caveat that such efforts are synchronised with efforts at the national level.
JPS has been reported to have carried out its own efforts to develop a system that can
be utilised nationwide. A study was carried out by JPS regarding this matter and four
rivers were selected for the development of prototype systems. Two rivers in
Peninsula Malaysia were selected for this purpose.
The intention was to eventually pan out the efforts to other rivers but there appears to
be no progress to date insofar as Sg. Selangor is concerned.

Main Report
Although this study is carried out for LUAS for the Sg. Selangor basin, it is important
to ensure that efforts for IRBM at the State level need to be in line with similar efforts
at the national level. While Selangor may be keen to develop a system that is superior
to that used in other states, it is important that the basic elements of the system are
recognised and incorporated adequately into the River Bain Management System
(RBMS).
With a well structured and efficient river basin management system in place, LUAS
will be well placed to focus its efforts on the more critical issues rather than in
collecting and compiling information. The efforts expended in this Study to collect
relevant information bear adequate testimony on the overall weakness of the existing
information system.
8.5.2 Improving monitoring facilities
The 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor River Basin Management Plan recommended that
additional stations be installed within Sg. Selangor to improve the operations of the
Sg. Tinggi and Sg. Selangor dams.
There has been no progress with regard to this although the costs for these stations are
expected to be relatively low.
All basins require monitoring of certain aspects of the basin such as water levels,
flows, changes in water quality and river morphology. There is a need to implement
permanent monitoring systems which are wider in scope and content than that
available currently within the Sg. Selangor basin.
The needs for monitoring can be finalised on completion of construction of

appropriate basin models (hydraulic, hydrology, water quality etc). The monitoring
stations can be used to calibrate these models and track any unusual events or trends.
It is recommended that efforts be made to initiate climate change analysis at State

Level under IWRM and refine Sg. Selangor basin plan accordingly especially with
regard to safe yield and flood impact.

Main Report
Climate change and its potential impacts have been discussed at many forums and
this is an issue that will also need to be dealt with in Selangor. It is recommended
that the impact of climate change for Selangor as a whole and for each major basin be
studied as soon as practicable. The findings of the study would then have to be
factored into the water resources and supply planning as well as for flood mitigation
purposes.
8.5.3 Improve economic and financial analysis
The development of river basin management plans is weakened by the fact that
proposed capital intensive works have not been justified by an appropriate cost
benefit or cost effectiveness analysis. In reality projects funded by the Federal
Government exceeding RM 50 million is subject to value management and value
engineering analyses. There appears to be no equivalent for State funded projects.
There is therefore some efforts at economic analysis which are in place but this needs
to be further improved in subsequent plans for all projects proposed in the plan. It is
important to note that with the Danube basin and with Ofwat and other similar
models, all proposed measures, which are cost intensive, are subjected to economic
analysis BEFORE inclusion in the final plan. This is not the case in Malaysia and
needs to be reviewed.
8.5.4 Review of institutional setup and weaknesses
The study of existing institutional set up and weaknesses is not within the scope of
this study and hence needs to be undertaken separately. Issues such as uncertainty in
responsibilities, overlapping or conflicting responsibilities and laws or regulations
needs to addressed and resolved by appropriate changes in the law. Another subject of
interest would be the extent to which existing penalties are adequate and effective in
deterring non compliance with the law.
It is recommended that a study be undertaken pertaining to institutional structure and

weakness with a view to putting in place appropriate laws to support and facilitate
water resource development in the Sg Selangor and other major basins.

Main Report
8.5.5 Review of policies and objectives
It is evident from this study, that policies and objectives appear to be generally quite
vague especially in comparison with similar policies in other developed countries. As
an example the environmental objectives for the WFD are very clear in terms of
content and scope. The intent is to ensure that as a minimum, existing status with
regards to river water quality are preserved but the goal is to ensure that majority of
the water bodies, including rivers, will reach "good " status by December 2015. There
are no similar policies on water quality for Sg. Selangor or for rivers in Selangor.
In the case of river water quality, the Structure plan for Selangor states that the target
or objective is for all rivers to reach the status of 'clean", as defined by the Water
Quality Index developed by the Department of Environment, by 2020. The key issue
is that this implies that all rivers at which sampling is carried out need to achieve
clean status. In cases where there are more than one sampling point in the river, the
most downstream point is presumably taken to be indicative of the river status.
However in such cases upstream portions of the river may not qualify as clean and yet
the river as a whole may be classified as clean due to dilution of pollutants. In such
situations, it would seem that the objective for the State is met and this is misleading.
The target set by the State also presumably also applies to the rivers all the time and
not evaluated on a yearly basis.
The target also places equal emphasis on all rivers, big and small and this needs to be
reviewed as in reality lower levels of quality, especially on a sporadic basis, may be
acceptable in view of limited impact on eco system and potable water supply.
8.5.6 Awareness
The subject of awareness has been addressed in the 2007-2012 Sg Selangor Integrated
river basin management plan. It has also been addressed in other countries but is more
appropriate on a state level initiative rather than on a basin level.
A key issue with awareness campaigns lies in determining if such efforts actually
produce meaningful, substantial and sustainable changes in the masses to achieve the
desired results. Nevertheless it is recommended that some efforts be made pertaining
to this to area to support the proposed IRBM.

Main Report
8.5.7 Public consultation of the plan
In the case of the Danube basin WFD, IRBM plans are opened to public scrutiny
before the plan is finalised. Currently, this practice is carried out for Structure Plans
and EIAs. LUAS will need to review if this practice needs to be extended to the river
basin plans as a matter of policy.
In the case of Selangor and Sg. Selangor, the water resource management is lead by
LUAS with assistance from other agencies in a committee and therefore there is
substantial representation of the key stakeholders within the basin. Extending the plan
for public consultation is therefore considered not necessary.
8.5.8 Flood forecasting and warning systems
It is recommended that efforts be made by LUAS in cooperation with JPS and any
other relevant authorities to develop an appropriate flood forecasting and flood
warning system for the Sg. Selangor basin.
8.5.9 Water pollution early warning system
The existing Sg. Selangor water treatment plants at Bestari Jaya in particular have
suffered from shutdowns due to unexpected pollution incidents. The pollutants were
reported to have entered the plants and caused the shutdown to be longer than if the
intake plant had been shutdown in time. Hence it is recommended that due
consideration be given to the implementation of early warning system for pollution
detection to protect the existing plants at Bestari Jaya.
8.5.10 Progressive upgrading of standards to incorporate ecological status of the river
It is inevitable that if the State Government of Selangor is truly committed to ensuring

that water resource management within Selangor is of the highest standard, efforts
will need to be made to provide measurements of river water quality based on
ecological standards.
This can be done progressively and can be spearheaded by DOE/JAS. It is clear that
developed countries have realised the importance of ensuring that due emphasis be

Main Report
given to the need to ensure good water quality from a chemical and ecological
viewpoint. Hence it is best that Selangor embark on its path towards better water
resource management by progressively incorporating ecological measurements and
assessments.
8.6 ACTION PLAN
The Table 8.5 summaries the proposed action plan on completion of the review of the
basin plans in other countries and the 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor IRBM plan.

Main Report
Table 8.1: Timetable of Directive Implementation
Deadline
Action Required
(December)
2000 Directive enters into force.
Directive to be transposed into national law.
International River Basin Districts and River Basin Districts to be
2003
identified.
Competent authorities to be identified.
Characterisation of surface and groundwaters to be completed.
Impacts of human activity (industry, farming etc) to be identified.
Economic analysis of water use to be completed.
2004
Location and boundaries of water bodies to be identified.
Reference conditions for water status to be defined.
Register of protected areas to be established.
Environmental monitoring to be established and operational to ensure
comprehensive view of water quality in each River Basin District.
2006
Work programme for production of River Basin Management Plans
for each River Basin District to be published.
Interim overview the significant water management issues for each
2007
River Basin District to be published.
Draft River Basin Management Plans to be published for
2008 consultation.
Draft programmes of measures to be established in each RBD.
River Basin Management Plans to be finalized and published.
2009 Programmes of measures to be established in each RBD to meet
environmental objectives.
2010 Water pricing policies to be in place.
Programmes of measures to be fully operational.
2012 Interim progress reports to be prepared on implementation of planned
programmes of measures.
Main environmental objectives to be met.
2015 River Basin Management Plans to be reviewed and updated every six
years thereafter.

Main Report
Table 8.2: Illustrates the major sub elements of the risk assessment for surface waters
Point source Diffuse source Hydrology Morphology

WWTP (wastewater Grassland, Abstractions Impoundments,
treatment plants), Section 4 Arable, Urban, (public and channelisation, dredging,
IPPC (Integrated Pollution Road drainage, group supplies, water regulation, flood
Prevention Control), CSO rail drainage, industrial protection and
(Combined sewer rural sewage, abstractions) embankments , intensive
overflow), WTP (Water forestry, priority Flow regulation land use, built structures
treatment plants), Mines, substances structures (dams, (marine)
Quarries and landfills weirs, pumping
stations)

Main Report
Table 8.3: Key Basic Directives
EU Directive Purpose Responsible

Organisations
The Bathing Water Directive Bathing waters for human health Local Authorities EPA,
(2006/7/EC) (76/160/EEC DEHLG
repealed)
The Birds Directive Bird and habitat conservation DEHLG, NPWS, Local
(79/409/EEC) Authorities. An Bord
Pleanala, All Public
Authorities
The Drinking Water Directive Quality of drinking water for EPA, HSE, Local
(98/83/EC)(80/778/EEC human health Authorities, DEHLG
repealed 25/12/2003)
The Major Accidents (Seveso) Major hazards and risks Manufacturers, Local
Directive (96/82/EC) extended Authorities, DETE
by Directive 2003/105/EC
The Environmental Impact Environmental consequences of EPA, Local Authorities
Assessment Directive individual projects
(85/337/EEC) as amended by
Directive 97/11/EC.
The Sewage Sludge Directive Human, animal, soil and Local Authorities,
(86/278/EEC) vegetation protection DEHLG
The Urban Wastewater Collection, treatment and Local Authorities
Treatment Directive discharge of domestic and certain
(91/27/EEC) industrial waste waters
The Plant Protection Products Protection of human and animal Pesticide Control
Directive (91/414/EEC) health Service, DEHLG,
Relevant persons
The Nitrate Directive Protect surface and groundwater DEHLG, DAFF, EPA,
(91/676/EEC) from agricultural pollution Local Authorities
The Habitats Directive Habitats conservation and species DEHLG, NPWS, Local
(92/43/EEC) protection Authorities An Bord
Pleanala All Public
authorities
The Integrated Pollution Minimise pollution from industrial EPA, DEHLG, Local
Prevention Control Directive sources Authorities
(96/61/EC)

Main Report
Table 8.4: Roles of the 11 Basic Directives
Modifications
Abstractions
Industrial &
Wastewater
Other Point
Agriculture
Unsewered
Dangerous
Properties
Substances
Quaries &
Landfills,
Forestry
Physical
Sources
Mines
Basic Measure
Bathing Waters √ √ √ √ √
Birds √ √ √ √ √ √
Habitats √ √ √ √ √ √
Drinking Waters √ √ √
Major Accidents √
Environmental Impact Assessment √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Sewage Sludge √
Urban Wastewater Treatment √
Plant Protection Products √ √ √
Nitrates √
√
Integrated Pollution Prevention Control √ √ √

Main Report
Table 8.5: Action Plan – General Considerations
1 Implement, maintain and A RBMS for the basin should be RBMS LUAS    Existing information system
improve a river basin developed and implemented. This    is outdated and needs to be
information management system will also need to be in line with improved to facilitate
system. efforts taken to develop similar systems tracking/monitoring of basin.
at the National level.
2 Improve monitoring LUAS is currently in the process of Implementation & LUAS / JPS / JMM √ The 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor
operation of dams stations as part of the DSS for Sg. additional monitoring stations
Selangor basin. Information from the within the Sg. Selangor basin
new facilities will be preferably for this purpose. The
incorporated within IWRIMS and the proposed works have not
proposed RBMS or Sg. Selangor DSS been implemented and are
(Decision Support System) to be recommended in the new
developed. plan.
3 Investigate climate change The study on climate change will need Study report LUAS    
impacts on low flows and to address the impacts on low flows,   
yield for the State of droughts and floods for the State as a
Selangor, in general, and whole. The impacts on yield in
for the Sg. Selangor basin particular is a cause for concern and
in particular water resources planning for the future
will need to address the impacts.
4 Incorporate economic and The proposed works are to be included Economic and financial LUAS    For capital intensive items, it
financial analysis for in the plan if preliminary analysis analysis report   is recommended that some
proposed action plans indicates that it is economic and viable. initial or preliminary
involving capital economic and financial
expenditure analysis be carried out to
confirm the overall benefits
and viability of the proposed
works.

Main Report
5 Review of existing Weaknesses in the system should be Report and amendment LUAS    In order to improve the
institutional set up and rectified, where possible, with suitable to laws, where necessary   implementation of the
weaknesses (IWRM) amendments to the law and organisation IRBM, it is recommended
structure. that a study of the existing
institutional setup and
relevant weaknesses in
relation to water resource
management be carried out.
6 Review of policies and If necessary, Selangor can take the lead Review report LUAS / DOE / JPS    The Danube river basin plan
objectives related to water in defining clear policies and objectives   clearly illustrates the use of
resources, floods and that can be used to drive the water clear policies and objectives.
water supply (IWRM) resources management initiative. Existing policies and
objectives for water resource
management are generally
vague and not
comprehensive.
7 Introduce awareness Awareness records LUAS    This is a IWRM initiative.

campaign on a state wide   
basis to encourage the need
to conserve and protect
water resources (IWRM)
8 Investigate the feasibility JPS/LUAS to review the need for the Flood Forecasting and LUAS / JPS    
of introducing a suitable system and implement, if found feasible Warning System Report 
flood forecasting and and necessary.
warning system
9 Investigate the feasibility The feasibility of the system and related Feasibility study LUAS   Disruption of supply due to
of introducing an early works needs to be investigated.   pollution appears to have
warning system to detect increased in recent times. An
extreme pollution. early warning system will
limit damage to plants and
reduce recovery times.

Main Report
10 Investigate the feasibility LUAS/DOE will need to review the Regulation & standards LUAS / DOE    This requires a major shift in
of upgrading the existing issue and identify appropriate measures    policy towards higher
raw water quality standards for the shift in standards standards. It requires
to incorporate appropriate consensus at the National
ecological assessments and level unless Selangor intends
status to set the pace by adopting
higher standards and become
the benchmark.
11 Investigate the feasibility There appears to be great potential for Study report LUAS    This is also an IWRM
of water demand significant reduction in consumption    initiative.
management and especially in the domestic sector. Hence
appropriate action plans to efforts are required to identify concrete
reduce usage and waste in steps to implement water demand
the system management.

Main Report
Figure 8.1: Deviation from reference condition
Figure 8.2: The Quality elements for the classification of ecological and
chemical status

Main Report
Figure 8.3: Derivation of Status

Main Report
Figure 8.4: Danube River Basin District: Urban Wastewater Discharges – Baseline Scenario

Main Report
Figure 8.5: Generalised components of a risk assessment based on predicting impacts
Identify potential sources

of pressures
Characterise any likely affects

of the pathways between the
sources of pressures and the
pressures to which the water
body is exposed
Identify pressures
Assess sensitivity to the effects

Characteristics of water bodies of pressures
that determine their sensitivity
(e.g. dilution available for
discharges)
Identify likely impacts of
pressures
Environmental Decide on the likelihood of falling to

conditions required to achieve the Directive’s
achieve objectives environmental objectives

Main Report
Figure 8.6: Approach for Measures Selection

Main Report
9.0 GRAND SUMMARY OF POLICIES AND STRATEGIES
The key policies for the Sg. Selangor Integrated River Basin Management Plan (2015
-2020) are as follows:-
i) Ensure Sufficient Water
The issue of improving operations of existing water resource facilities has

been highlighted in the Sg. Selangor IRBM plan (2007-2012) and it was
recommended that online hydrological and rainfall monitoring be increased
to facilitate operation of the Sg. Selangor and Sg. Tinggi dams.
The recommendation is retained for this Plan as the proposed strategy is valid
and has not been completed yet.
The maximum yield of the Sg. Selangor basin remains uncertain at this stage
in view of recent developments related to the Hybrid off River Storage
(HORAS) schemes. These schemes indicate substantial potential of as much
as 6000 Mld additional yield available with the combined use of surface
water and groundwater.
There is therefore an urgent need to firm up the numbers related to these

schemes and ensure that water resources within the Sg. Selangor basin are
utilised effectively without over reliance on external sources of supply such
as Pahang and Perak.
The findings of the HORAS study indicate that the potential upper limit of
yield of the basin is uncertain.
Hence efforts need to be continued to explore additional water resources

within the basin.

Main Report
ii) Ensure Clean Water
It is evident that there is a need to conserve existing water resources and

ensure sustainability and this is not possible without a policy (and related
strategies) to ensure clean water.
iii) Protect Against Floods
Although the issue of floods is not a major concern for the Sg. Selangor
basin, it is important to ensure adequate emphasis on ensuring adequate flood
protection measures are put in place, especially for existing flood prone areas.
iv) Conserve Firefly and Ecosystems
The preservation of fireflies and the wetlands and forests is a key initiative in
ensuring that environmental resources within the basin are protected
adequately. Hence this forms the final part of the Sg. Selangor IRBM plan.
In addition to these policies and related strategies, there are also other areas
such as creating awareness which are more appropriately dealt with at the
IWRM level for the whole State. These include:-
a) Setting up a river basin information management systems

b) Investigate potential climate change impacts
c) Incorporate some measure of economic and financial analysis for
proposed action plan items involving substantial capital expenditures in
future river basin management plans
d) Review of existing institutional set up and remedy weaknesses, if any.
e) Review policies and objectives for water resource management
f) Introduce awareness campaigns to encourage river protection and water
conservation
g) Investigate feasibility of upgrading raw water quality standards to
include ecological assessments
h) Investigate feasibility of water demand management and identify
appropriate policies and strategies.

Main Report
The following tables summarise the policies and strategies for the Sg.
Selangor IRBM plan (2015 -2020).

Main Report
Policy 1: Ensure Sufficient Water
1.1 Improve monitoring LUAS is currently in the process of Implementation & LUAS / JPS / JMM √ The 2007-2012 Sg. Selangor
operation of dams stations as part of the DSS for Sg. additional monitoring stations
Selangor basin. Information from the within the Sg. Selangor basin
new facilities will be preferably for this purpose. The proposed
incorporated within IWRIMS and the works have not been
proposed RBMS or Sg. Selangor DSS implemented and are
(Decision Support System) to be recommended in the new plan.
developed.
1.2 Reassess Sg. Selangor The system yields need to be reviewed Review report LUAS √ LUAS is in the process of
system yield. as data from the survey become undertaking a detailed survey
available. Water resource availability of the existing dams.
need to be reviewed accordingly.
1.3 Investigate groundwater LUAS to cooperate with JMG and any Guidelines LUAS / JMG √ There is an urgent need to
resources within the basin other relevant authority to develop streamline approach to
criteria and approach to assessments of assessments of groundwater
groundwater potential. potential to ensure consistency
in recommendations.
LUAS is currently undertaking

a comprehensive groundwater
study for Selangor to assess
supply potential of
groundwater.
Independent peer review of HORAS Review report LUAS √ There is also an equally urgent
schemes before implementation. need to carry out more
rigorous and comprehensive
analysis of groundwater to
ascertain extent of risks
associated with issues such as
saline intrusion, subsidence

Main Report
and impact on surface water

resources.
Carry out study to assess suitable Study report LUAS / JMG √ Fieldwork and monitoring of
permanent and long term groundwater groundwater resources, in
monitoring points and parameters to be particular for the larger
monitored. schemes should be reinforced
and expanded, where
Install proposed monitoring points and Monitoring report LUAS / JMG √ necessary to facilitate decision
monitor groundwater resources. making.
Develop comprehensive computer Database LUAS / JMG √

model of basin complete with
groundwater and surface water data for
longer term monitoring and decision
making.
1.4 Implement groundwater Develop HORAS schemes in stages and Implementation and UPEN / LUAS √ √ √
schemes identified as monitor performance and impact before monitoring report
having substantial potential proceeding with subsequent stages.
and established to be
feasible
1.5 Protect groundwater Gazette groundwater catchments as Gazettment of LUAS √

catchments protected areas groundwater catchments
as protected areas
Monitor Groundwater/HORAS Monitoring report LUAS / JMG / KKM / √ √ √

resources (water quantity and quality) Jabatan Kimia

Main Report
1.6 Continue exploration of Efforts need to be taken to explore other Study report LUAS/ JMG √ √ √ The maximum limit is not
additional resources within potential sources. known.
river basin

Main Report
Policy No. 2: Ensure Clean Water
2.1 Reduce pollution from industrial wastewater
2.1.1 Improve monitoring and Review the EQA Regulation to make it EQA Regulation review DOE / LUAS / Water √ √ √ Industrial premises that fall
enforcement of wastewater mandatory for the industrial operator to operators within the EQA Regulation
producing industries engage a competent person to be must submit accurate records of
responsible for wastewater treatment and monitoring on a monthly basis
compliance with effluent quality standards. to the DOE.
LUAS to initiate formation of an Potential issues with water

Integrated River Patrol Squad to conduct Integrated river patrol quality pollution from the many
scheduled and more frequent patrolling of numbers of smaller industries
the river. which do not fall under the
Regulation.
Carry out strict enforcement of the
penalties allowed for under the Scheduled enforcement Sg. Sembah sub-basin and its
Regulations on those recalcitrant reports sub-tributaries Sg. Rawang
industries. have the most problems with
water quality and to a lesser
Increase frequency of spot checks through extent Sg. Serendah.
the Integrated River Patrol Squad. Scheduled monitoring
reports
Priority in enforcement to be placed on
the industries within the Rawang
Integrated Industrial Estate. Scheduled enforcement
reports

Main Report
2.1.2 Review existing To review existing contravention licenses EQA Regulations review Federal Govt / DOE √ √ There are particular industries
contravention licences and regulations with the aim of improving such as the Palm Oil and
waste management and compliance Rubber industries, etc which
monitoring. are currently excluded from the
Industrial Effluent Regulation;
the list of excluded industries is
provided under the First
Schedule (Regulation 3).
2.1.3 Locate future risk industries Zoning of future industrial areas in Structural Plan and Local JPBD / PBT / DOE √ √ √ Industrial zoning should be
downstream of water intakes. Structure Plan and Local Plans to be more Plan review based on locating polluting
definitive on the type and class of industries within downstream
industries to be allowed within the areas of a river basin.
industrial zones.
Controls on effluent quality
Locate polluting industries in the lower Structural Plan and Local will still be necessary to protect
river basin areas, downstream of the water Plan review the rivers at the downstream
supply intake at Bestari Jaya. Relevant stretches and also the marine
authorities are to work in consultation and waters at the river mouth.
collaboration to ascertain the type of
industries permissible within each zone.
2.1.4 Implementation of Best Make changes to the permits/licences for Enforcement parameters DOE √ √ √ Existing regulation specifies list
Available Techniques industries of a specified size to include of parameters for which BMPs
(BAT) obligations for operators of facilities to are expected to be adopted but
ensure BAT are applied. there are no limits set for the
parameters which can be used
for enforcement.
2.1.5 Implementation of measures LUAS is responsible for implementing Implementation LUAS / PBT / Water √ Targeted at preventing the
to prevent accidental procedures according to the Manual for Operators / Highway occurrence of accidents that
pollution Handling Oil Spill and Polluting Authority can result in pollution of rivers
Substances. and ensuring effective
contingency planning in the
Identify and inventorize potential static Guidance document event of an incident taking

Main Report
and mobile accident risk spots. place.
Introduce preventive measures to reduce Guidance document

risk of accidents.
Establish an Accident Emergency Guidance document

Warning System.
2.2 Upgrade sewerage system and sewage treatment
2.2.1 Develop strategies and Plans for sewage treatment to be in Sewage treatment master SPAN / JPP / IWK / √ √ Pollution from domestic
plans for sewage tandem with the population growth and plan DOE wastewater is significant within
treatment urbanization within the Sg. Selangor Sg. Selangor basin.
basin.
Include nutrient removal technologies in Sewage treatment master

the treatment process and upgrade all plan
the current STPs from Category 3 to
Category 1& 2.
Increase the sewer connection to

households that are currently still utilizing Sewage treatment master
septic tank systems. plan
2.2.2 Ensure treatment of grey To study feasibility of having interceptor Feasibility study SPAN / JPP / IWK / √ √ A large section of the
water from residential areas drains and/or sewer systems that can PBT population, about 79% of the
channel the grey waters into sewage PE, are likely to be living in
treatment plants for treatment. houses that are yet to have
connections of grey water to
the sewerage system.

Main Report
2.3 Reduce pollution from other point sources
2.3.1 Reduce pollution from wet Remove slaughtering of poultry from the Implementation plan and LUAS / PBT / JPS / √ √ The discharges from wet
markets markets to approved slaughter houses with program JPP markets are small; however,
wastewater collection and treatment the pollution loads from these
systems. sources can be very high,
particularly in BOD.
Move all markets including night markets Implementation plan and
and “pasar tani” into centralised areas that program
are provided with wastewater collection
and treatment systems.
Have drainage collection systems at

appropriate locations that can channel Implementation plan and
wastewaters to a central sewage treatment program
plant.
Strengthen enforcement. Review LUAS’s

Legislation for enforcement to include LUAS Regulation review
pollution control from markets, etc.
2.3.2 Reduce pollution from Increase the level of enforcement in Implementation plan and PBT √ Restaurants and food stalls
restaurants and food stalls shutting down illegal food stalls. program contribute organic pollution
loads to the rivers through
Phase out illegal food/hawker stalls and Implementation plan and discharges of food waste and
provide proper designed hawker centres program oil and grease into storm drains.
where wastewater collection and treatment
facilities are provided.
Enhance awareness and encourage the Implementation plan and

move of the illegal food stalls from illegal profram
premises to proper hawker centres.

Main Report
2.4 Reduce pollution from freshwater aquaculture
2.4.1 Improve regulatory To improve monitoring of effluent and Scheduled monitoring LUAS / DOF √ √ √ LUAS Regulation “Peraturan
framework relating to enforcement of the regulation on reports Kemasukan atau Pelepasan
discharges from aquaculture. discharges from aquaculture farms. Bahan Pencemar (Negeri
Selangor) 2012” was gazetted
LUAS needs to review its existing LUAS Enactment review on 20 April 2012 for 7
Enactment to regulate the smaller farms. activities, of which two of the
The review should cover size of the activities relate to
farms, relevant parameters and their aquaculture.
discharge limits.
Big farms are registered with
DOE and issued with MyGAP
certificate if production is
aimed at the export market.
Through MyGAP, DOF is
able to monitor, audit and
check on waste treatment, etc.
However, small farms are not
licensed or registered with
DOF, and thus have no
control over them.
Fisheries Department is
currently an advisory agency.
Regulation for Land Fisheries
/ Aquaculture in Selangor is
currently being drafted by the
Federal Department of
Fisheries.
2.4.2 Implement new regulation Establish guidance documents on the Guidance report / LUAS / DOF √ √ √ Regulations pertaining to
and develop guidelines for design of farms. documents aquaculture farming
design of appropriate operations are in the process
aquaculture systems Impose a Code of Practice (Sijil Guidance report / of being finalized.
Akuakultur Amalan Baik or SAAB) that documents

Main Report
requires farms to have sedimentation

pond/s with effluent discharge that must
constitute 10% of the overall farming
area. If intensive farming or high
stocking density is implemented, farms
should be required to install the RAS
(Recycle Aquaculture System).
Promote use of ‘good bacteria’ or Guidance report /

Enhance Microorganism (mud ball) at documents
the sedimentation pond.
2.4.3 Establish aquaculture Incorporate aquaculture development Structural Plan and Local PBT / JPBD √ √ Absence of an enabling
development zones zones where there can be common Plan review regulation or enactment at the
wastewater treatment facilities state level.
established into the Selangor Structure
Plan.
2.5 Reduce pollution from poultry farming and animal husbandry
2.5.1 Improve regulatory Review LUAS current Regulation for LUAS Regulation review LUAS / DVS √ √ Poultry farming and animal
framework relating to effluent control requirements for smaller husbandry in Selangor comes
animal waste population farms. under LUAS Regulation
“Peraturan Kemasukan atau
Pelepasan Bahan Penceman
(Negeri Selangor) 2012”.
There is also the Poultry

Farming (State of Selangor)
Enactment 2007 and the
Animal Act 1953 (amended in
2006). However, both
enactments do not contain
regulations for effluent
control discharge.

Main Report
2.5.2 Reduce pollution from Establish requirements for large farms, Guidance document LUAS / DVS / Pejabat √ √ √ Poultry farming is widely
poultry, cattle, buffalo, integrated feedlots and slaughter houses Tanah / PBT practiced in the Sg. Selangor
sheep and goat farming. to have proper solid waste and wash basin; there is less focus on
water collection and treatment systems. animal husbandry.
Identify and dedicate zoning area for the Structural Plan and
poultry and animal husbandry. Local Plan review
Establish guidance documents on the Guidance document

design of farms and best management
practice in respect to pollution control.
Improve enforcement on the compliance Scheduled monitoring

of effluent quality to the required and enforcement reports
standards.
2.6 Reduce sedimentation and suspended solids
2.6.1 Reduce sedimentation and Improve regulatory framework relating LUAS Regulation review LUAS √ √ √ Major projects required to
suspended solids from to smaller development projects to undergo the EIA process and
earthworks require preparation and implementation to prepare an Erosion and
of ESCP, and to enhance monitoring and Sediment Control Plan
enforcement efforts. (ESCP). There are also major
issues of soil erosion caused
by smaller development
projects which are not
required to undergo the EIA
process. These smaller
projects (< 50 hectares) come
under the ambit of LUAS
‘Peraturan Kemasukan atau
Pelepasan Bahan Pencemaran
2012’.

Main Report
2.6.2 Improve monitoring and Further monitoring of the sand mining Scheduled monitoring and LUAS √ √ Sand mining is still a major
enforcement of pollution activities by the relevant authorities to enforcement reports source of pollution in the Sg.
controls for sand mining ensure that they are fully in compliance. Selangor basin.
activities
Sand mining activity is
subject to “Peraturan-
peraturan Aktiviti
Pengubahan Sumber LUAS”
which require approval from
the Director of LUAS.
In addition to this, each sand

mining site which carries out
sand washing also requires
“Lesen Kemasukan atau
Pelepasan Bahan Pencemar”.
Sand washing scheme is

required to adopt water
recycling method.
2.7 Reduce pollution from landfills
2.7.1 Implement solid waste To include provisions for approval of Draft Solid Waste UPEN / PBT / √ √ The state government has
policy, regulations and waste facilities and prevention of Enactment review Landfill operators drafted a new enactment on
strategic plans pollution from the waste disposal sites. solid waste: “Enakmen
Pemungutan, Pembuangan
To establish the institutional structure to Draft Solid Waste dan Pelupusan Sisa Pepejal
implement policies, regulations and Enactment review dan Pembersihan Awam
strategic plans. Negeri Selangor, Siri 2 Bil
1/2014”.
2.7.2 Improve information on To establish a proper database for landfill Database PBT / JPSPN / UPEN √ Information on waste disposal
waste disposal sites sites. / DOE / Landfill sites is useful for future
operators planning and management of
the landfill sites.

Main Report
2.7.3 Reduce illegal dumping of Provide additional waste recovery Scheduled monitoring and JPSPN / PTD / PBT / √ √ Targeted mainly at
solid waste centres/inert waste landfill. enforcement reports LUAS construction, demolition and
commercial waste.
Strengthen enforcement of the solid Scheduled monitoring and

waste disposal enforcement reports
2.7.4 Divert waste from landfills Implement National 3R policy and Implementation plan and JPSPN / UPEN / PBT √ √ √ Implementation of the 3-R
& reduce water content in waste segregation. program / Landfill operators strategy is slow in Malaysia.
solid waste Policy makers and relevant
Raise public awareness through Implementation plan and Government authorities to
information, education and program implement and enforce the 3-
demonstration projects R strategies in Malaysia.
Establish affordable and appropriate Implementation plan and

technical options (e.g. incinerator) to program
reduce, reuse and recycle the waste.
Investigate the feasibility of upgrading Feasibility study

existing landfill to incorporate leachate
treatment.
2.8 Strengthen protection of reservoirs
2.8.1 Strengthen protection of Conduct regular monitoring and Scheduled monitoring LUAS / Jabatan Hutan √ √ √ Both dam catchments have
reservoirs encourage good forest management and enforcement report / PTD been gazetted as protection
practices to protect and conserve the zone in accordance with
forest and its biological diversity, Section 48 of LUAS
increase its capacity as a water source Enactment.
and prevent encroachment of
development within reservoir Written permission is
catchments. required from the Director of
LUAS for activity carried out

Main Report
Increase enforcement in strengthen the Scheduled monitoring within the dam catchments
protection of the reservoirs. and enforcement report and compliances with the
established guidelines is
required.
Dam catchment has also been

gazetted as Forest Reserve
Catchment Area.
2.9 Enhance enforcement of effluent discharge
2.9.1 Enhance method of Conduct regular spot checks and Scheduled monitoring LUAS / DOE / DVS / √ √ Onus of monitoring effluent
enforcement of effluent collection of samples to confirm the and enforcement report DOF / PBT discharge is on the “polluter”
discharge reports submitted by the “polluter”. who are expected to submit
records of monitoring. Such
Implement scheduled integrated Scheduled monitoring records are not forthcoming and
enforcement involving the related and enforcement report may not be accurate.
agencies.
2.10 Early warning system
2.10.1 Investigate the feasibility The feasibility of the system and related Feasibility study LUAS   Disruption of supply due to
of introducing an early works needs to be investigated.   pollution appears to have
warning system to detect increased in recent times. An
extreme pollution. early warning system will
limit damage to plants and
reduce recovery times.

Main Report
Policy No 3: Protect Against Floods
3.1 Review impact of climate Need to initiate investigations on Study report LUAS / NAHRIM  Existing flood hazard maps
change on floods climate change for Selangor as a whole  and flood management
and establish impact on floods within protocols based on historical
the key basins, including Sg. Selangor. flood analysis and is
Adjust flood boundaries and flood therefore not likely to be
mitigation measures accordingly. adequate to deal with future
floods.
3.2 Control of new Limit development within flood Amendments of PBT / JPS / JPBD /    JPBD has planned and
development within flood plain/zone to that in approved Structure monitoring report
LUAS  identified future land use for
plains/zone control of new and Local plans. Selangor as a whole. Some
development within river portions of land earmarked
the river basin For development within basin ensure Monitoring report for future development lies
appropriate flood mitigtaion measures within flood plains/zones
such as raising of platform, pumping
systems to drain off water and provision
of bunds or polders must be provided to
the satisfaction of LUAS and JPS.
For such developments, mitigative Monitoring report

measures should also include those
aimed at minimising impact, if any, on
other existing developments or facilities
within the basin.
Enforcement of existing regulations Monitoring report

pertaining to control of new
development within river reserve and
between river and bund.
3.3 Improve flood protection Implement flood mitigation works Implementation of JPS    Although the proposed
for selected areas within proposed in Masterplan Study: proposed flood    works in the Masterplan
the basin. mitigation works Study appear to be not cost
(i) Raise the bund from Kg. Kuantan to effective or viable, it is
Batang Berjuntai with 2 metres; and recommended that the works

Main Report
(ii) River works (RM5m) and JSK2 be implemented based on

brdige (RM1m) social considerations
especially since costs of
works are relatively low.
3.4 Project integration among Carried out coordination meeting for Review report JPS / KSSB / JKR /    Cooperation between
agencies related to projects involving drainage LUAS / PBT  agencies to resolve flood
drainage infrastructure. infrastructure. issue.
3.5 Investigate the feasibility JPS/LUAS to review the need for the Flood Forecasting and LUAS / JPS    
of introducing a suitable system and implement, if found feasible Warning System Report 
flood forecasting and and necessary.
warning system

Main Report
Policy 4: Conserve Fireflies and Ecosystems
4.1 Sustain efforts to raise Strategic use of the media is an essential Media LUAS / PBT / FRIM /   It is important to register in
public awareness and part of getting the IRBM message Forestry Department /   the minds of the public that
education to gain the across to local stakeholders. It may play PTD ecosystem conservation is
support and ‘buy-in’ of the a key role in getting their ‘buy-in’. one of the key principles of
local communities Integrated River Basin
Garner assistance of local research Institutional capacity LUAS / PBT / FRIM /    management, and that the
institutions and NGOs to assist in building Forestry Department /    Raja Musa wetlands, the Sg.
building the capacity of local residents PTD Selangor firefly protection
and local community-based interest zone and coastal mangrove
groups forest at the estuary of Sg.
Selangor are part of a more
Involve senior community figures, Public outreach LUAS / PBT / FRIM /   extensive ecosystem that was
religious leaders and other opinion programmes; Forestry Department /   once supported by Sg.
formers to ‘champion’ the conservation Appointment of local PTD Selangor.
programme. It may help to engender “champions”
public understanding, acceptance and Providing environmental
implementation of ecosystems information or training to a
conservation projects. segment of the local
communities addresses three
Establish a recognizable identity or Public awareness and LUAS / PBT / FRIM /  primary areas:
‘sense of place’ for the Raja Musa education programmes Forestry Department / 
wetlands, Sg. Selangor firefly sanctuary PTD / Tourism (i) participation of local
and Kuala Selangor coastal mangrove Selangor Sdn Bhd people more fully in
forest sub-regions and develop key conservation
messages about the ecosystems to serve programmes;
as rallying point for the local (ii) improving information
communities. needs of the local guides,
and
(iii) long term sustainability
and improved
management of the
protected area.

Main Report
 Participation of local research

institutions and NGOs is one
of the best ways to develop
local community awareness
and education.
4.2 Sustain existing and build Readiness to engage in partnerships Partnership engagement LUAS / Tourism    Effective partnership building
new effective & long-term with ‘non-conservation’ and ‘non- Selangor Sdn Bhd    is an essential ingredient of
partnerships traditional’ partners and stakeholders. IRBM. It enables far more to
be accomplished than by
Readiness to circulate information and Publication and LUAS / DOE / FRIM /    working alone.
reports among project partners and river circulation of Jabatan Meteorologi /    
basin stakeholders to generate information and reports JPS
cooperation.
4.3 Invest in building a strong Maintain a research fund and forge Information database. LUAS / Jabatan    It is necessary to build a
informational and science long-term partnership with local Perhutanan Selangor /    strong informational base
base research institutions. FRIM before planning and
implementing. This means
Continue research and monitoring forging or maintaining
studies. partnerships with the
scientific and research
community.
4.4 Review the existing Implement the management plan and Implementation & LUAS    LUAS has drafted guidelines
management programmes enforce the plan’s guidelines and enforcement    and a preliminary
for the three ecosystems regulation. management plan to regulate
that have been identified to activities inside the firefly
safeguard the integrity and Increase enforcement of existing laws Enforcement protection zone and any
function of the ecosystems and enactment within the gazetted activity within the zone needs
in the longer term protection zones. written approval from LUAS.
This is consistent with the
Incentives for reporting of pollution Incentive programme general practice undertaken
cases. in most protected areas where
management plans are
prepared to ensure that the

Main Report
Gazette the North Selangor Peat Forest Gazettment of Jabatan Perhutanan    natural values of the
Management Plan (2014-2023) and the Management Plans Selangor / JPBD   protected areas are carefully
Forest Management Plan (2011-2020) Selangor / Majlis managed.
so that implementation and enforcement Daerah Kuala
of the rules and regulations can be Selangor Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor
initiated. has initiated the drafting of
the Integrated North Selangor
Incorporate both parks into the Selangor Gazette under the JPBD Selangor / Peat Forest Management Plan
Structure Plan 2012 (Review) Plan and Structure Plan and Local Majlis Daerah Kuala 2014-2023 – a study that is
Local Plan for Daerah Kuala Selangor Plan Selangor currently on-going, and
(pending review) for gazetting under the which will serve as a
Town and Country Planning Act, Act guidance document on the
176. management, protection and
rehabilitation of the forest.
The department has also

drafted the Forest
Management Plan 2011-2020
(FMP), whereby one of the
recommendations is the
gazettement of Compartment
22 in the Raja Musa Forest
Reserve for conservation.

Main Report
4.5 Restoration of degraded Strengthen collaboration with existing Stakeholder LUAS / Jabatan    Jabatan Perhutanan and
habitats through partner stakeholders who have provided collaboration Perhutanan Selangor /    LUAS have implemented a
rehabilitation and re- effective partnerships or “background Pejabat Daerah Kuala number of rehabilitation &
vegetation programmes leadership” role for the replanting and Selangor re-vegetation projects in
rehabilitation projects. collaboration with NGOs,
corporate bodies, community
It is also necessary to widen smart New smart partnership. groups, schools and research
partnership with other stakeholders, institutions.
including the ‘non-conservation’ or
‘non-traditional’ stakeholders. This includes the Tg.
Beluntas area where land
reclamation works have been
carried out.
Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor

has embarked on a similar
exercise of tree planting
programme on heavily burnt
and degraded forest
compartments with a history
of human encroachment. A
series of tree planting
programmes have been
carried out in partnerships
with NGOs, local interest
groups, other government
agencies, private sector,
students and the local
communities from nearby
villages surrounding the Raja
Musa Forest Reserve.

Main Report
   Jabatan Perhutanan Selangor

has also initiated action, e.g.
removal, against illegal
settlers who pose a threat to
the integrity of the peat
forest.
4.6 Monitor and arrest Continue regular checks and give extra Scheduled monitoring LUAS / Jabatan    Notice boards at strategic
encroachment and illegal attention to enforcement on violation. and checks Perhutanan Selangor /    spots to warn the public
clearing of land at the Take appropriate corrective actions. PTD Kuala Selangor / against being involved in
wetland and riparian areas Majlis Daerah Kuala illegal activities in the
LUAS may need to continue working in Integrated task force to Selangor protected zone have been
collaboration with or entrusting conduct monitoring and installed.
enforcement to a department or agency enforcement
that is adequately equipped to carry out
the function.
4.7 Gazette the three Integrate the Firefly Protection Zone as Gazette under the LUAS / JPBD   Additional land required to
ecosystems zones as State a State Park/Forest Reserve or Structure Plan and Local Selangor / Majlis   protect the firefly sanctuary
Park or Forest Reserve Environmentally Sensitive Area in the Plan Daerah Kuala have been acquired. The
Selangor Structure Plan 2012 (Review) Selangor / Jabatan Firefly Protection Zone was
and the Local Plan for Daerah Kuala Perhutanan Negeri gazettes in July 2009 under
Selangor (pending review) and gazette it Selangor Section 48 of the Lembaga
under the Town & Country Plan Act, Urus Air Selangor (LUAS)
Act 176. Enactment 1999.

Main Report
4.8 Establish a Buffer Zone Identify an appropriate buffer zone Establish buffer zone Jabatan Perhutanan   A buffer zone between the
around the RMFR boundary where buffer distance between Selangor / JPBD /   forest and the areas peripheral
the peripheral areas may range between Pejabat Daerah / to it would safeguard the
500m to 1000m, depending on factors Majlis Daerah Kuala integrity of the peat forest
such as terrain, settlements, existing Selangor and protect the forest from
land use activities, etc. further encroachment by
activities that are
Integrate buffer zone in the Selangor Gazette under the JPBD / Majlis Daerah incompatible with the
Structure Plan 2012 (Review) and the Structure Plan and Local Kuala Selangor function of the RMFR.
Local Plan for Daerah Kuala Selangor Plan
(pending review) and gazette it under
the Town & Country Plan Act, Act 176.
Draft a buffer zone management plan Buffer zone management Jabatan Perhutanan
with measures to enhance the plan Selangor / JPBD /
conservation value of the protected area Pejabat Daerah /
and to control unsustainable or Majlis Daerah Kuala
incompatible human and economic Selangor
activities.

Main Report
General Recommendations for IWRM for Selangor
IWRM Implement, maintain and A RBMS for the basin should be RBMS LUAS    Existing information system
1 improve a river basin developed and implemented. This    is outdated and needs to be
information management system will also need to be in line with improved to facilitate
system. efforts taken to develop similar systems tracking/monitoring of basin.
at the National level.
IWRM Investigate climate change The study on climate change will need Study report LUAS    
2 impacts on low flows and to address the impacts on low flows,   
yield for the State of droughts and floods for the State as a
Selangor, in general, and whole. The impacts on yield in
for the Sg. Selangor basin particular is a cause for concern and
in particular water resources planning for the future
will need to address the impacts.
IWRM Incorporate economic and The proposed works are to be included Economic and financial LUAS    For capital intensive items, it
3 financial analysis for in the plan if preliminary analysis analysis report   is recommended that some
proposed action plans indicates that it is economic and viable. initial or preliminary
involving capital economic and financial
expenditure analysis be carried out to
confirm the overall benefits
and viability of the proposed
works.
IWRM Review of existing Weaknesses in the system should be Report and amendment LUAS    In order to improve the
4 institutional set up and rectified, where possible, with suitable to laws, where necessary   implementation of the
weaknesses (IWRM) amendments to the law and organisation IRBM, it is recommended
structure. that a study of the existing
institutional setup and
relevant weaknesses in
relation to water resource
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 9.doc 9-i

Main Report
management be carried out.
IWRM Review of policies and If necessary, Selangor can take the lead Review report LUAS / DOE / JPS    The Danube river basin plan
5 objectives related to water in defining clear policies and objectives   clearly illustrates the use of
resources, floods and that can be used to drive the water clear policies and objectives.
water supply (IWRM) resources management initiative. Existing policies and
objectives for water resource
management are generally
vague and not
comprehensive.
IWRM Introduce awareness Awareness records LUAS    This is a IWRM initiative.

6 campaign on a state wide   
basis to encourage the need
to conserve and protect
water resources (IWRM)
IWRM Investigate the feasibility LUAS/DOE will need to review the Regulation & standards LUAS / DOE    This requires a major shift in
7 of upgrading the existing issue and identify appropriate measures    policy towards higher
raw water quality standards for the shift in standards standards. It requires
to incorporate appropriate consensus at the National
ecological assessments and level unless Selangor intends
status to set the pace by adopting
higher standards and become
the benchmark.
IWRM Investigate the feasibility There appears to be great potential for Study report LUAS    This is also an IWRM
8 of water demand significant reduction in consumption    initiative.
management and especially in the domestic sector. Hence
appropriate action plans to efforts are required to identify concrete
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 9.doc 9-ii

Main Report
reduce usage and waste in steps to implement water demand

the system management.
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 9.doc 9-iii

Main Report
APPENDIX 5.1
Table 5.1a: DOE Water Quality Index Classification
Class
Parameter Unit
I II III IV V
Ammoniacal
mg/l < 0.1 0.1 – 0.3 0.3 – 0.9 0.9 – 2.7 > 2.7
Nitrogen
Biochemical
mg/l <1 1–3 3–6 6 – 12 > 12
Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen
mg/l < 10 10 – 25 25 – 50 50 – 100 > 100
Demand
Dissolved Oxygen mg/l >7 5–7 3–5 1–3 <1
pH >7 6–7 5–6 <5 >5
Total Suspended
mg/l < 25 25 – 50 50 – 150 150 – 300 > 300
Solid
Water Quality
< 92.7 76.5 – 92.7 51.9 – 76.5 31.0 – 51.9 < 31.0
Index (WQI)
L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\Appendix 5.1 - 5.5.Doc 1

Main Report
Table 5.1b: National Water Quality Standards for Malaysia (NWQS)
Class
Parameter Unit
I IIA IIB III IV V
Ammoniacal
mg/l 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.9 2.7 > 2.7
Nitrogen
Biochemical
Oxygen mg/l 1 3 3 6 12 > 12
Demand
Chemical
Oxygen mg/l 10 25 25 50 100 > 100
Demand
Dissolved
mg/l 7 5–7 5–7 3–5 <3 <1
Oxygen
pH - 6.5 – 8.5 6–9 6–9 5–9 5–9 -
Colour TCU 15 150 150 - - -
Electrical
µS/cm 1000 1000 - - 6000 -
Conductivity*
Floatables - N N N - - -
Odour - N N N - - -
Salinity % 0.5 1 - - 2 -
Taste - N N 50 - - -
Total
Dissolved mg/l 500 1000 - - 4000 -
Solid
Total
Suspended mg/l 25 50 50 150 300 300
Solid
Normal + Normal +
Temperature °C - - - -
2°C 2°C
Turbidity NTU 5 50 50 - - -
count/
Faecal 5000(200 5000(200
100 10 100 400 -
Coliform** 00)a 00)a
ml
count/
Total Coliform 100 100 5000 5000 50000 50000 > 50000
ml
Notes:
N = No visible floatable materials or debris, no objectional odour or no objectional taste
* = Related parameters, only one recommended for use
** = Geometric mean
A = Maximum not to be exceeded

Main Report
Table 5.1b (cont’)
Class
Parameter Unit
I IIA/IIB III’ IV V
Al mg/l - (0.06) 0.5
As mg/l 0.05 0.4(0.05) 0.1
Ba mg/l 1 - -
Cd mg/l 0.01 0.01*(0.001) 0.01
Cr (IV) mg/l 0.05 1.4(0.05) 0.1
Cr (III) mg/l - 205 -
Cu mg/l 0.02 - 0.2
Hardness mg/l 250 - -
Ca mg/l - - -
Mg mg/l - - -
Na mg/l - - 3 SAR
K mg/l - - -
Fe mg/l 1 1 1 (Leaf) 5
(Others)
NATURAL LEVELS OR ABSENT
Pb mg/l 0.05 0.02*(0.01) 5
LEVEL ABOVE IV
Mn mg/l 0.1 0.1 0.2
Hg mg/l 0.001 0.004(0.0001) 0.002
Ni mg/l 0.05 0.9* 0.2
Se mg/l 0.01 0.25(0.04) 0.02
Ag mg/l 0.05 0.0002 -
Sn mg/l - 0.004 -
U mg/l - - -
Zn mg/l 5 0.4* 2
B mg/l 1 (3.4) 0.8
Cl mg/l 200 - 80
Cl2 mg/l - (0.02) -
CN mg/l 0.02 0.06(0.02) -
F mg/l 1.5 10 1
NO2 mg/l 0.4 0.4(0.03) -
NO3 mg/l 7 - 5
P mg/l 0.2 0.1 -

Main Report
Class
Parameter Unit
I IIA/IIB III’ IV V
Silica mg/l 50 - -
SO4 mg/l 250 - -
S mg/l 0.05 (0.001) -
CO2 mg/l - - -
Gross-α Bq/l 0.1 - -
Gross-β Bq/l 1 - -
Ra-226 Bq/l <0.1 - -
Sr-90 Bq/l <1 - -
CCE µg/l 500 - - -
MBAS/BAS µg/l 500 5000(200) - -
O & G (Mineral) µg/l 40:N N - -
O & G (Emulsified µg/l 7000;N N - -
Edible)
PCB µg/l 0.1 6 (0.05) - -
Phenol µg/l 10 - - -
Aldrin/Dieldrin µg/l 0.02 0.2 (0.01) - -
BHC µg/l 2 9 (0.1) - -
Chlordane µg/l 0.08 2 (0.02) - -
t-DDT µg/l 0.1 (1) - -
Endosulfan µg/l 10 - - -
Heptachlor/Epoxide µg/l 0.05 0.9 (0.06) - -
Lindane µg/l 2 3 (0.4) - -
2,4-D µg/l 70 450 - -
2,4,5-T µg/l 10 160 - -
2,4,5-TP µg/l 4 850 - -
Paraquat µg/l 10 1800 - -
Notes:
* = At hardness 50 mg/l CaCO3
# = Maximum (un-bracketed) and 24-hour average (bracketed) concentrations
N = Free from visible film sheen, discolouration and deposits

Main Report
Table 5.1c: Classification According to Water Quality Index
Index Range
Parameter Slightly
Clean Polluted
Polluted
WQI 81 – 100 60 – 80 0 – 59
BOD 91 - 100 80 - 90 0 – 79
NH3-N 92 - 100 71 - 91 0 – 70
TSS 76 - 100 70 - 75 0 - 69
Water Quality Index Calculation
WQI = 0.22 x SIDO + 0.19 x SIBOD + 0.16 x SICOD + 0.15 x SIAN + 0.16 x SISS +
0.12 x SIpH
Where,
SIDO : Sub-Index DO ( in % saturation)
SIBOD : Sub-Index BOD
SICOD : Sub-Index COD
SIAN : Sub-Index NH3-N
SISS : Sub-Index SS
SIpH : Sub-Index pH

Main Report
Table 5.1d: MOH Recommended Raw Water Quality Criteria
Acceptable Value, mg/l (unless

No. Parameter
otherwise stated
GROUP I
1 TOTAL COLIFORM 5,000 MPN/100ml
or cfu/100ml
2 TURBIDITY 1,000 NTU
3 COLOUR 300 TCU
4 pH 5.5 – 9.0
GROUP II
1 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 1,500
2 BIOLOGICAL OXYGEN DEMAND 6
3 CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND 10
4 CHLORIDE 250
5 ANIONIC DETERGENT MBAS 1.0
6 AMMONIA (as N) 1.5
7 NITRATE (as N) 10
8 IRON (as Fe) 1.0
9 FLOURIDE 1.5
10 HARDNESS 500
11 MANGANESE 0.2
GROUP III
1 MERCURY 0.001
2 CADMIUM 0.003
3 SELENIUM 0.01
4 ARSENIC 0.01
5 CYANIDE 0.07
6 LEAD 0.05
7 CHROMIUM 0.05
8 SILVER 0.05
9 COPPER 1.0
10 MAGNESIUM 150
11 SODIUM 200
12 ZINC 3
13 SULPHATE 250
14 MINERAL OIL 0.3
15 PHENOL 0.002

Main Report
Table 5.1d (cont’)
Acceptable Value, mg/l (unless

No. Parameter
otherwise stated
GROUP IV
ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES:
1 ALDRIN/DIELDRIN 0.00003
2 DDT 0.002
3 HEPTACHLOR & HEPTACHLOR 0.00003
EPOXIDE
4 METHOXYCHLOR 0.02
NON-ORGANOCHLORINE
PESTICIDES:
5 HEXACHLOROBENZE 0.001
6 LINDANE 0.002
7 CHLORDANE 0.0002
HERBICIDES:
8 2,4-D 0.03
(DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC
ACID)
GROUP V
RADIOACTIVITY:
1 GROSS α 0.1 Bq/l
2 GROSS β 1.0 Bq/l
TOTAL 40 PARAMETERS
W : Indicates parameters to be monitored at least once a week.

M : Indicates parameters to be monitored at least once a month.
Y/4 : Indicates parameters to be monitored at least once in 3 months.
Y : Indicates parameters to be monitored at least once a year.
WHO1 : Refers to WHO International Standards for Drinking Water 1963.
WHO2 : Refers to WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality Vol. 1 & 2 1984.
MAL : Refers to values adapted for Malaysian conditions.
Notes:
Collection of samples of both raw and treated water for examination for toxic
substances should be carried out more frequently if values above the acceptable values
are known to be present in the source of supply, or where such potential pollution
exists.

Main Report
APPENDIX 5.2
Figure 1: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Selangor (2007 – 2013)
Water Quality Index - Sg. Selangor BOD Index - Sg. Selangor

95 100
Clean
95
90
90
Class II
Water Quality Index
85
85
BOD Index
Slightly Polluted
80 80
75
75
Class III 70
Polluted
70
65
65 60
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
DOE/ASMA Monitoring Station : 1Sr01 1Sr04 1Sr05 1Sr10 1Sr11 DOE/ASMA Monitoring Station : 1Sr01 1Sr04 1Sr05 1Sr10 1Sr11
NH3 -N Index - Sg. Selangor TSS Index - Sg. Selangor

100 100
Clean Clean
95
90
90
85
80
Slightly Polluted
NH3 -N Index
80
TSS Index
Slightly Polluted
75 70
70
60
65
Polluted Polluted
60
50
55
50 40
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 1 (cont’d)
Total Coliform - Sg. Selangor Arsenic, As - Sg. Selangor

(18,021,417) (18,021,417)
400000 0.06
350000
0.05
Total Coliform (count/100ml)
Concentration of As (mg/L)
300000
0.04
250000
Class V Class II
200000 0.03
150000
0.02
100000
0.01
50000
Class IV
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Mercury, Hg - Sg. Selangor Cadmium, Cd - Sg. Selangor

0.0012 0.012
0.0010 0.010
Concentration of Cd (mg/L)
Concentration of Hg (mg/L)
0.0008 0.008
Class II Class II
0.0006 0.006
0.0004 0.004
0.0002 0.002
0.0000 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 1 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe - Sg. Selangor Oil & Grease, O&G - Sg. Selangor

1.6 7
1.4 6
Concentration of O&G (mg/L)

Concentration of Fe (mg/L)
1.2
5
1.0
4
0.8
3
0.6
2
0.4
Class II
0.2 1
0.0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 2: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Batang Kali (2007 – 2013)
Water Quality Index - Sg. Batang Kali BOD Index - Sg. Batang Kali
93 96
Class I
92 94
Clean
91 92
Class II
Water Quality Index
90 90
BOD Index
89 88
88 86
87 84
Slightly Polluted
86 82
85 80
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
NH3 -N Index - Sg. Batang Kali TSS Index - Sg. Batang Kali
105 95
100
90
Clean
95
85
NH3 -N Index
Clean
TSS Index
90
Slightly Polluted 80
85
75
80
Slightly Polluted
70
75
70 65
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 2 (cont’d)
Total Coliform - Sg. Batang Kali Arsenic, As - Sg. Batang Kali
200000 0.06
180000
0.05
160000
140000
Class V 0.04
120000 Class II
100000 0.03
80000
0.02
60000
40000
0.01
Class IV
20000
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Mercury, Hg - Sg. Batang Kali Cadmium, Cd - Sg. Batang Kali

0.006 0.012
0.005 0.010
0.004 0.008
Class II
0.003 0.006
0.002 0.004
0.001 0.002
Class II
0 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 2 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe - Sg. Batang Kali Oil and Grease, O&G - Sg. Batang Kali
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8
Class II
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 3: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Kerling (2007 – 2013)
Water Quality Index - Sg. Kerling BOD Index - Sg. Kerling

95 100
Clean
94
95
94
Class I
93 90
Water Quality Index
BOD Index
93 Slightly Polluted
85
92
92 80
91 Polluted
Class II 75
91
90 70
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
NH3 -N Index - Sg. Kerling TSS Index - Sg. Kerling

100 100
98
95
Clean
96
90
NH3 -N Index
Clean
TSS Index
94
85
92
80
90
Slightly Polluted
75
88
Slightly Polluted
86 70
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 3 (cont’d)
Total Coliform - Sg. Kerling Arsenic, As - Sg. Kerling

140000 0.06
120000
0.05
Class V
100000
0.04
80000 Class II
0.03
60000
0.02
40000
Class IV
0.01
20000
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Mercury, Hg - Sg. Kerling Cadmium, Cd - Sg. Kerling

0.0012 0.012
0.0010 0.010
0.0008 0.008
Class II Class II
0.0006 0.006
0.0004 0.004
0.0002 0.002
0.0000 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 3 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe - Sg. Kerling Oil and Grease, O&G - Sg. Kerling

1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8
Class II
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 4: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Kanching (2007 – 2013)
Water Quality Index - Sg. Kanching BOD Index - Sg. Kanching

93 96
Class I
92 94
Clean
91 92
Class II
Water Quality Index
90 90
BOD Index
89 88
88 86
Slightly Polluted
87 84
86 82
85 80
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
NH3 -N Index - Sg. Kanching TSS Index - Sg. Kanching

100 100
Clean
95
95
90
90
85
NH3 -N Index
TSS Index
Slightly Polluted
80 85
Clean
75
80
70
Polluted
75
65
Slightly Polluted
60 70
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 4 (cont’d)
Total Coliform - Sg. Kanching Arsenic, As - Sg. Kanching

140000 0.06
120000
0.05
Class II
100000
0.04
Class V
80000
0.03
60000
0.02
40000
Class IV
0.01
20000
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Mercury, Hg - Sg. Kanching Cadmium, Cd - Sg. Kanching

0.0012 0.012
0.0010 0.010
Class II
0.0008 0.008
Class II
0.0006 0.006
0.0004 0.004
0.0002 0.002
0.0000 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 4 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe - Sg. Kanching Oil and Grease, O&G - Sg. Kanching

1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
Concentration og O&G (mg/L)

0.8 0.8
Class II
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 5: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Serendah (2007 – 2013)
Water Quality Index - Sg. Serendah BOD Index - Sg. Serendah

93 94
91
92
89
Clean
90
87
Water Quality Index
Class II
BOD Index
85 88
Slightly Polluted
83
86
81
84
79
82
77
75 80
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
NH3 -N Index - Sg. Serendah TSS Index - Sg. Serendah

95 95
90 90
85
NH3 -N Index
85
TSS Index
Slightly Polluted Clean
80 80
75 75
Slightly Polluted
70 70
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 5 (cont’d)
Total Coliform - Sg. Serendah Arsenic, As - Sg. Serendah

700000 0.06
600000
0.05
500000
0.04
Class V
Class II
400000
0.03
300000
0.02
200000
0.01
100000
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Mercury, Hg - Sg. Serendah Cadmium, Cd - Sg. Serendah

0.0012 0.012
0.0010 0.010
Class II
0.0008 0.008
Class II
0.0006 0.006
0.0004 0.004
0.0002 0.002
0.0000 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 5 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe - Sg. Serendah Oil and Grease, O&G - Sg. serendah

1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8
Class II
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 6: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Air Hitam (2007 – 2010)
Water Quality Index - Sg. Air Hitam BOD Index - Sg. Air Hitam
81 95
Clean
79
90
Class II
Slightly Polluted
77
85
Water Quality Index
75
BOD Index
Class III 80
73
75
71
70
69
Polluted
65
67
65 60
2007 2008 2009 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year Year
NH3 -N Index - Sg. Air Hitam TSS Index - Sg. Air Hitam
95 72
90 70
85 68
Slightly Polluted Polluted
80 66
NH3 -N Index
TSS Index
75 64
70 62
65 60
Polluted
60 58
55 56
50 54
2007 2008 2009 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 6 (cont’d)
Total Coliform - Sg. Air Hitam Arsenic, As - Sg. Air Hitam

90000 0.06
80000
0.05
70000
Class V
60000 0.04
Class II
50000
0.03
40000
Class IV
30000 0.02
20000
0.01
10000
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year Year
Mercury, Hg - Sg. Air Hitam Cadmium, Cd - Sg. Air Hitam

0.0045 0.012
0.0040
0.010
0.0035
0.0030 0.008
Class II
0.0025
0.006
0.0020
0.0015 0.004
0.0010
Class II 0.002
0.0005
0.0000 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 6 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe - Sg. Air Hitam Oil and Grease, O&G - Sg. Air Hitam
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0

Class II
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 7: Water Quality Trends along Sg. Sembah and Its Tributaries (2007 – 2013)
Water Quality Index BOD Index

85 95
Class II Clean
80 90
Slightly Polluted
Water Quality Index, WQI
75 85
BOD Index
70 80
65 75
Class III Polluted
60 70
55 65
50 60
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Sg. Sembah Sg. Kundang Sg. Rawang Sg. Sembah Sg. Kundang Sg. Rawang
NH3 -N Index TSS Index

80 75
Slightly Polluted
75 70
70
65
65 Polluted
60
Polluted
NH3 -N Index
60
TSS Index
55
55
50
50
45
45
40 40
35 35
30 30
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 7 (cont’d)
Total Coliform Arsenic, As

(26, 661, 083)
20000000 0.06
18000000
0.05
16000000
14000000
0.04
12000000
Class II
Class IV
10000000 0.03
8000000
0.02
6000000
4000000
0.01
2000000
0 0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year
Mercury, Hg Cadmium, Cd
0.020 0.012
0.018
0.010
0.016
0.014
0.008
0.012 Class II
0.010 0.006
0.008
0.004
0.006
0.004
0.002
0.002
0.000
Class II 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
Figure 7 (cont’d)
Iron, Fe Oil and Grease, O&G

1.2 3.5
3.0
1.0
Concentartion of O&G (mg/L)

Class II
2.5
0.8
2.0
0.6
1.5
0.4
1.0
0.2
0.5
0.0 0.0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year Year

Main Report
APPENDIX 5.3
Figure 1a: WQI, Upstream of Firefly Habitat
Water Quality Index , Upstream of Firefly Habitats
77
76
75
74
WQI
Low tide
High tide
73
72
71
70
Oct 2012 Nov 2012 Dec 2012 Jan 2013 Feb 2013 Mar 2013 Apr 2013 Nov 2013 Dec 2013 Jan 2014
Date
Source: Monitoring of the Firefly Population along the Selangor River by FRIM for LUAS
Figure 1b: WQI, Downstream of Firefly Habitat
Water Quality Index, Downstream of Firefly Habitats

77
76
75
74
WQI
Low tide
73 High tide
72
71
70
Date

Main Report
Figure 2a: Salinity, Upstream of Firefly Habitat
Salinity, Upstream of Firefly Habitats
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
Salinity, ppt
2.5 Low tide

High tide
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Date
Figure 2b: Salinity, Downstream of Firefly Habitat
Salinity, Downstream of Firefly Habitats

6
4
Salinity, ppt
3 Low tide
High tide
0
Date

Main Report
Figure 3: Mean Firefly Population Index of Abundance
Mean Firefly Population Index of Abundance

2500
Index of Abundance (counts)
2000
1500
1000
500
Date
Source: Monitoring of the Firefly Population along the Selangor River by FRIM for
LUAS

Main Report
APPENDIX 5.4
SECOND SCHEDULE
(Regulation 7)
ACCEPTABLE CONDITIONS OF SEWAGE DISCHARGE OF

STANDARDS A AND B
(i) New sewage treatment system

Parameter Unit Standard
A B
(1) (2) (3) (4)
(a) Temperature °C 40 40
(b) pH Value – 6.0-9.0 5.5-9.0
(c) BOD5 at 20°C mg/L 20 50
(d) COD mg/L 120 200
(e) Suspended Solids mg/L 50 100
(f) Oil and Grease mg/L 5.0 10.0
(g) Ammoniacal Nitrogen (enclosed water mg/L 5.0 5.0
body)
(h) Ammoniacal Nitrogen (river) mg/L 10.0 20.0
(i) Nitrate – Nitrogen (river) mg/L 20.0 50.0
(j) Nitrate – Nitrogen (enclosed water mg/L 10.0 10.0
body)
(k) Phosphorous (enclosed water body) mg/L 5.0 10.0
(ii) Existing sewage treatment system (approved before January 1999)*
This category refers to all sewerage treatment systems which were approved before
the Guidelines for Developers: Sewage Treatment Vol.IV, 2nd edition and were
enforced by the Department of Sewerage Services, Ministry of Housing and Local
Government, beginning January 1999. Below are the acceptable conditions for
sewage discharge according to type of sewage treatment systems:
Type of Sewage Treatment System

Communal Aerated Oxidation Mechanical
Imhoff Tank
Septic Tank Lagoon Pond System
Parameter Unit A B A B A B A B A B
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)
(a) BOD5 at 20°C mg/L 200 200 175 175 100 100 120 120 60 60
(b) COD mg/L – – – –
Suspended
(c) mg/L 180 180 150 150 120 120 150 150 100 120
Solids
(d) Oil and Grease mg/L – – – – – – – – 20 20
Ammonical
(e) mg/L – – 100 100 80 80 70 70 60 60
Nitrogen
(iii) Existing sewage treatment system (approved after January 1999)

Main Report
All sewerage treatment system which were approved after the Guidelines for
Developers: Sewerage Treatment Vol.IV, 2nd edition and were enforced by the
Department of Sewerage Services, Ministry of Housing and Local Government,
beginning January 1999 and up to the date of coming into operation of these
Regulations.
Standard
Parameter Unit A B
(a) BOD5 at 20°C mg/L 20 20
(b) COD mg/L 120 200
(c) Suspended Solids mg/L 50 100
(d) Oil and Grease mg/L 20 20
(e) Ammonical Nitrogen mg/L 50 50
Note:
1. Standard A is applicable to discharges into any inland waters within catchment areas
listed in the Third Schedule, while Standard B is applicable to any other inland
waters or Malaysian waters.
2. *These standards are applicable to the sewerage treatment systems that may have
been constructed prior to 1999 based upon approval given by other agency, other
than the Department of Sewerage Services, Ministry of Housing and Local
Government.

Main Report
APPENDIX 5.5
LEMBANGAN SG. SELANGOR (KILANG MENGHASILKAN EFLUEN)
BIL NAMA PREMIS ALAMAT PREMIS BANDAR LONGITUD LATITUD
PERODUA GLOBAL MANUFACTURING SDN

1 NO. 4444, LOT 6343, SEKSYEN 20, SERENDAH 101.578097 3.370306
BHD
LOT 47 NO.13, JALAN JASMIN 2, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN BUKIT

2 RIVERSTONE RESOURCES SDN BHD SERENDAH 101.549861 3.40775
BERUNTUNG
LOT 9374, JALAN JASMIN 4, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN BUKIT

3 SKI ED COATING SDN BHD SERENDAH 101.551847 3.411389
BERUNTUNG, 48300 RAWANG
LOT 9106 & 9469, JALAN JASMINE 6,KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN

4 AIDIL COLOUR SDN BHD SERENDAH 101.5503 3.4073
BUKIT BERUNTUNG
5 AUTOAIR INDUSTRIES SDN BHD LOT 1735 & 1736 BT. 29, JALAN KL-IPOH BATANG KALI 101.625497 3.428192
6 JOREX FIBRES SDN BHD LOT 1363 KAWASAN PERUSAHAAN RINGAN ULU YAM LAMA BATANG KALI 101.64387 3.45305
7 WESCHEM TECHNOLOGIES SDN BHD LOT 1, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN ULU YAM LAMA BATANG KALI 101.643114 3.453967
8 FABER MEDI-SERVE SDN BHD No. 21, Jalan Kemunting 2 Kawasan Perindustrian Jalan Kemunting RAWANG 101.564128 3.415214
THEEN SENG PAPER MANUFACTURING SDN

9 BATU 32 JALAN IPOH RASA 101.640675 3.49898
BHD
L & S COSMETICS AND TOILETRIES (M) SDN

10 NO.6 & 8, JALAN JASMIN 5, BUKIT BERUNTUNG INDUSTRIAL PARK, RAWANG 101.551856 3.412597
BHD
11 MILLEON EXTRUDER SDN BHD LOT 946 JALAN SUNGAI BUAYA OFF JALAN SUNGAI CHOH RAWANG 101.576758 3.349831

Main Report
12 CHIAP HONG CANNERY SDN BHD NO. 12, JALAN KENANGAN 7, SEKSYEN BB11, BUKIT BERUNTUNG SERENDAH 101.550769 3.40316
13 HEVEAFIL SDN BHD BATU 31, JALAN IPOH BATANG KALI 101.638111 3.478892
14 CLEAN Q GRIP (M) SDN BHD 5B, 7A & 8A, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN MIEL BATANG KALI BATANG KALI 101.63694 3.48285
PRUDENTIAL AMPRI CLEANROOM SERVICES

15 UNIT TYPE A, LOT 10, KAWASAN MIEL BATANG KALI PHASE II BATANG KALI 101.637347 3.48226
SDN BHD
LOT NO. B5 & B6, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN MIEL, BATANG KALI

16 MOLNLYCKE HEALTH CARE SDN BHD BATANG KALI 101.635139 3.480686
PHASE II
NO 7, JALAN KAMUNTING 3, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN BUKIT

17 YAKIN SEDAP SDN BHD SERENDAH 101.55905 3.41553
BERUNTUNG
18 KAMI FOOD SERVICES SDN BHD LOT 8 KG PERABUT JALAN SG TUA HULU YAM BHARU BATANG KALI 101.670042 3.39858
19 TAN CHONG & SONS MOTORS CO. SDN BHD LOT PT 15014, MUKIM SERENDAH RAWANG 101.55818 3.355
20 PEPS JV (M) SDN BHD LOT 1403, 1406 & 1409 JALAN IPOH BATANG KALI 101.624833 3.431158
21 MILEON EXTRUDER SDN BHD LOT 946, JALAN SUNGAI BUAYA OFF JALAN SUNGAI CHOH RAWANG 101.5786 3.349756
22 RIVERSTONE RESOURCES SDN BHD LOT 54, 55, & 56, NO. 14, JALAN JASMIN 2 RAWANG 101.549531 3.549531
23 PERODUA MANUFACTURING SDN BHD LOT 1896, SG. CHOH. LOCKED BAG 226, 48000 RAWANG RAWANG 101.577981 3.367492
24 BONRIC SDN BHD LOT 25A & 26A KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN MIEL BATANG KALI 101.63569 3.48084

Main Report
25 SP DYEING SDN BHD LOT 14 RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIAL PARK RAWANG 101.559419 3.307628
LOT 86, RAWANG INTEGRATED PARK, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/4, 48000

26 AL KHADRA PLASTIC SDN BHD RAWANG 101.564261 3.30489
RAWANG , SELANGOR
27 SME ORDNANCE SDN BHD LOT 5065, BATU ARANG,48000 RAWANG RAWANG 101.469294 3.329864
28 COCOALAND INDUSTRY SDN BHD LOT 5 RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIAL PARK RAWANG 101.565347 3.308333
29 KSP MANUFACTURING SDN BHD LOT 1245 KUNDANG INDUSTRIAL ESTATE RAWANG 101.521 3.281518
30 EURO SPACE INDUSTRIES (M) SDN BHD EURO 11, LOT 25, RAWANG INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, RAWANG 101.590989 3.312714
31 SUMBEREMAS FOOD PROCESSORS SDN BHD NO 31 & 33 JALAN BJ 7 TAMAN PERINDUSTRIAN BELMAS JOHAN RAWANG 101.555 3.30689
32 PONG CODAN RUBBER (M) SDN BHD LOT 7, RAWANG INDUSTRIAL ESTATE RAWANG 101.590292 3.320849
NO. 176 (LOT 19702), JALAN KPK 1/3, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN

33 QUBE MEDICAL PRODUCTS SDN BHD RAWANG 101.52095 3.290756
KUNDANG
34 RAWANG GARMENTS 730-B KAMPUNG SUNGAI TERENTANG RAWANG 101.589264 3.307783
LOT 88, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/3 RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIES

35 COCOALAND INDUSTRY SDN BHD RAWANG 101.561572 3.305511
PARK
36 WASHERDOFF (M) SDN BHD LOT 1469 JALAN GARING UTAMA RAWANG 101.5606 3.33924
LOT 153, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/5A, TAMAN INDUSTRI INTEGRASI

37 MAY CHEMICAL SDN BHD RAWANG 101.561983 3.300889
RAWANG

Main Report
LOT 175 & 176, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/6, TAMAN INDUSTRI

38 AQUASPERSIONS (M) SDN BHD RAWANG 101.567125 3.303972
INTERGRASI RAWANG
LOT 90, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/5 TAMAN INDUSTRI INTEGRASI

39 SUPER GALVANISING (M) SDN BHD RAWANG 101.563695 3.302619
RAWANG
40 CAREFEEL COTTON INDUSTRIES SDN BHD LOT 5406 BT. 22, JALAN KUNDANG RAWANG 101.526489 3.321533
LOT 968, JALAN MERANTI TAMAN PERINDUSTRIAN TEKNOLOGI

41 SWEET HOME CANDIED PRODUCTS SDN BHD RAWANG 101.529517 3.315119
RAWANG
LOT 7 & 9, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/4 TAMAN INDUSTRI INTEGRASI

42 ENKEI (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD RAWANG 101.565147 3.307139
RAWANG
LOT 159, JALAN INDUSTRI 2/2, KAWASAN PERINDUSTRIAN

43 ROTIBOY BAKESHOPPE SDN BHD RAWANG 101.554039 3.302508
INTEGRASI RAWANG
SHENG BAN LEONG FOOD INDSUTRIES SDN

44 LOT NO. 16, KAWASAN INDUSTRI RUMAH PANJANG APMC RAWANG 101.573514 3.295139
BHD
LOT 911A, JALAN INDUSTRI 3/4 RAWANG INTEGRATED

45 MONIN ASIA KL SDN BHD RAWANG 101.56661 3.30778
INDUSTRIAL PARK
46 UNILEVER FOODS (M) SDN BHD LOT 23, RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIAL PARK, RAWANG 101.559078 3.30385
47 COCOALAND INDUSTRY SDN BHD LOT 100 RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIAL PARK RAWANG 101.566219 3.306966
48 TENAGA KIMIA SDN BHD LOT 5065 BATU ARANG RAWANG RAWANG 101.466036 3.327319
49 CS PROGYMS PHARMACEUTICAL SDN BHD LOT 23, RAWANG INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, JALAN RP3, 17 MILES RAWANG 101.590203 3.312822
50 KILANG BIHUN SEMAJU SDN BHD J17 JLN.DATO LEE KIM SAI RAWANG 101.575474 3.311865

Main Report
LOT 151, RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIAL PARK JALAN BATU

51 THERMADYNE ASIA SDN BHD RAWANG 101.563161 3.300883
ARANG
52 ADABI CONSUMER INDUSTRIES SDN BHD LOT 136 RAWANG INTEGRATED INDUSTRIAL PARK RAWANG 101.559403 3.300403
LOT 48, JALAN INDUSTRI 2/1, RAWANG INTEGRARATED

53 KG POWER SDN BHD RAWANG 101.555903 3.304047
INDUSTRIAL PARK, RAWANG
54 PALM-OLEO SDN BHD LOT 1245 KUNDANG INDUSTRIAL ESTATE RAWANG 101.518547 3.28245
Source: DOE Selangor 2014

Main Report IRBM Sg. Selangor, 2015-2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Main Report IRBM Sg. Selangor, 2015-2020

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Main Report IRBM Sg. Selangor, 2015-2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KERAJAAN NEGERI SELANGOR

LEMBAGA URUS AIR SELANGOR

SUNGAI SELANGOR BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN 2015 - 2020

Hak Cipta Lembaga Urus Air Selangor (LUAS)

Copyrights: Selangor aters Management Authority (SWMA)

1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1-1

2.0 SG. SELANGOR BASIN .............................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 REVIEW OF THE 2005-2006 DRAWDOWN IN THE DAMS ................................ 3-1

4.0 GROUNDWATER ........................................................................................................ 4-1

5.0 ENSURE CLEAN WATER .......................................................................................... 5-1

5.6.4 Solid waste ....................................................................................................... 5-13

6.0 FLOOD MANAGEMENT............................................................................................ 6-1

6.7.3 Improve river corridor management ................................................................. 6-16

7.0 CONSERVE FIREFLIES AND ECOSYSTEMS ....................................................... 7-1

8.0 REVIEW OF IRBM PLANS IN OTHER COUNTRIES .......................................... 8-1

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc iii

9. GRAND SUMMARY OF POLICIES AND STRATEGIES ..................................... 9-1

Table 4.1 Locations of Exploration Wells for 2000 JMG Study

Table 8.1 Timetable of Directive Implementation

Figure 1.1 Schematic Representative of IRBM and IWRM

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc vii

Figure 5.1 DOE/ASMA Monitoring Stations and the River Classification

Figure 6.1 Flood Prone Areas

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\TOC.doc viii

Figure 7.1 Fire Potential of RMFR

Figure 8.1 Deviation from reference condition

The State of Selangor, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya

IWRM is a cross sectoral policy approach intended to replace the traditional

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc 1-1

Integrated River Basin Management (IRBM) is a subset of IWRM and is similar to

Figure 1.1 illustrates IRBM and IWRM as a schematic.

Action plans, particularly those involving substantial capital expenditures need to be

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc 1-2

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc 1-3

Figure 1.1: Schematic Representative of IRBM and IWRM

IWRM builds on river basin management

- from a water quantity and water quality perspective

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc

Figure 1.2: River Basins and Dams in Selangor

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc

Figure 1.3: Trend of Water Quality Index of Selected Rivers

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 1.doc

2.0 SG. SELANGOR BASIN

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 2.doc 2-1

Lastly, the IRBM plan is aimed at addressing issues related to conservation of

2.1 Land Use of the Sg. Selangor Basin

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 2.doc 2-2

The Selangor State Planning Department is currently reviewing the Selangor

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 2.doc 2-3

By 2035, at least 7,160 hectares of the land required to accommodate industrial

2.2 Summary of Relevant Policies

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 2.doc 2-4

Roadmap for Water Resources Management in the Malaysia Plans

Restructuring of the water services industry towards improving efficiency in

Strategy 1: Developing a long-term strategy for water resource management to

L:\985\DOC-FINAL\Reports\F1\Main Report\CHAPTER 2.doc 2-5

1) Completing the migration of state water operators or authorities to PAAB and to

3) Improving water services infrastructure and increasing water supply coverage to

4) Integrating water and sewerage services to initiate the migration towards an

 Strengthening the enforcement on industrial effluents and sewerage discharges in