PAPER TITLE:

EIA OF A FLOOD PLAIN REGION OF OMUMA LGA OF R/S OF NIGERIA

By Akien Alli I.Job of Atlantic International University, Honolulu
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION2
2.0 GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING EIA....5
3.0 APPROACHES TAKEN BY JOBRIGS ECOTACTIC BIOSAFETY (JEB) TEAM11
.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT..1
5.0 THE DESIGN CONCEPT...1!
!.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY..20
".0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION.2
R#$#%#&'#.2
A((#&)*+, P*'-.%#/.2!
COURSE TITLE: ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENCY AND MODELING
(A CASE STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF A FLOODPLAIN REGION
OF OMUMA LGA OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA)
ABSTRACT
This article provides an overview of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) legal regime for
construction projects in Nigeria. Based on a historical review of the emergence and development of EIA as a
regulatory mechanism !"# the dumping of to$ic wastes at %&%& town (A'u Bala (an. !"") ) to the
promulgation of the more sophisticated Environmental Impact Assessment )aw (EIA )aw) in !!!* the
article critically analy+es statutory gaps and flaws* including the relatively projects su'ject to strict
environmental scrutiny* e$cessive power granted to the ,inistry of Environment authorities in approving
EIAs* limited pu'lic participation and inade-uate disclosure of information* and minimal violation penalties
in contrast to high compliance costs. .ea/ implementation and enforcement further impact the
effectiveness of the EIA mechanism. The -uality of EIA conducted 'y some EIA institutions is worrying0
EIA approval authorities are pressured 'y local protectionism and post1EIA monitoring seldom ta/es place
to ensure compliance. A 2loodplain erosion control EIA case study of a )ocal 3overnment in 4ivers 5tate
of Nigeria was carried out to address the a'ove pro'lems* legal reform* systemic change* and how
institution1'uilding are essential in ma/ing EIA for construction projects and the importance of effective
decision1ma/ing tool that prevents and mitigates potential environmental harm so as to achieve long1term
sustaina'le development. In summary* the 'eauty of EIA and its modeling lies on predicting the anticipated
impacts and the use these chec/list )eopold matri$ impacts for evaluation using Battelle6s method of
multiplying environmental -uality (E7) and environmental parameters importance units (8I9) to provide
environmental score.
Keyword: Sustainable Development; Floodplain Zone; Ecosystem; Mathematical Models; Matrics;
Legislative Development; Drainage System; Scooping; Screening Exercise
:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This paper e$amine the need for environmental impact assessment (EIA) formulating a project in control of
flood plain environment of the affected communities namely 9mu/oyoro* 9muo/o* Amaji* 9mu/iri/po*
9muchere* E'eri* 9munju* 9muo/puru* 9muodu and 9muogu of &muma )3A with a land covering area
of ;< /ilometers s-uare.
The proposed project implement descri'es the conceptual approach to EIA methodology which assisted in
identifying and descri'ing the li/ely environmental impacts in a floodplain region where the case study is
carried out. =owever* EIA as a tool helps in forecasting and assessing these changes 'efore they occur so
that they can 'e 'etter controlled and managed. (>ohn 3lasson* 4i/i Therivel* Andrew ?hadwic/. !!<)
In the specific cases of Nigeria* since !#@* efforts have 'een steadily geared towards achieving the goal of
economic development as can 'e o'served in the trends of growth of the economic indicator particularly in
the industrial sector. The three National (evelopment plans of !#:A#"* !B@AB< and !BCA"@ laid emphasis
on industriali+ation and less sustaina'ility 'ut fortunately enhanced on the increased foreign e$change
earnings from the oil 'oom.
3enerally* the fact that national development programme activities have 'rought a'out physical* ecological
and sociological change in the country6s environment is easily ac/nowledged. These developments 'efore
the inception of EIA in our governmental systems has already influenced the degree of changes that has
affected our environments today and even now these changes are still occurring 'ecause of toothless
regulatory system in the country that is inactive and every environmental impact assessment (EIA) carried
out presently are done to fulfill government re-uirements and not for the purpose of environmental
sustaina'ility* which ordinarily should involved identifying* predicting* evaluating and mitigating the
immediate and remote negative impacts and as the project commences construction* environmental
monitoring and auditing activities at the site of construction must 'e strictly carried out and followed in
accordance of environmental impact assessment decree "# of !!: which further underwent amendment to
;
decree < of !!!. The purpose of the assessment is to ensure that decision ma/ers consider the ensuing
environmental impacts when deciding whether to proceed with a project. EIAs are uni-ue in that they do not
re-uire adherence to a predetermined environmental outcome* 'ut rather they re-uire decision ma/ers to
account for environmental values in their decisions and to justify those decisions in light of detailed
environmental studies and pu'lic comments on the potential environmental impacts of the proposal.( =older*
>.* :@@<)
1.1 DEFINITION AND SIGNIFICANCE OBJECTI0ES FOR THE STUDY.
There is no generally accepted definition of the purpose and nature of EIA. It is a term which has developed
over years in the light of environmental concepts* policy* assessment techni-ues* and practice. In fact*
environmental impact assessment can 'e defined as an assessment of the possi'le positive or negative
impact in a proposed project in relation of the environmental natural* social and economic well'eing.
The need to reduce the 'urden of environmental impacts is the major o'jective and very necessary if
development is to 'ecome sustaina'le. As a result* EIA has 'ecome ever increasing importance as a tool for
developmental decision1 ma/ing process.
International Association for impact Assessment (IAIA) defines an EIA as the process of identifying*
predicting* evaluating and mitigation the 'iophysical* social and other relevant effects of development
proposals prior to major decisions 'eing ta/en and commitments.(IAIA !!! 'ut 8atric/ (uffy (!!!) laid
emphasi+ed on thin/ing process in identifying the impacts and therefore defined EIA as an activity which
predicts the impacts of a proposed project or action on human well 'eing* including well 'eing of
ecosystems on which human survival depend.
EIA is recogni+ed for its potential to promote and deliver sustaina'le development. In practice* EIA is
applied primarily to prevent or minimi+e the adverse effects of major development proposals as the case of
flood control of a 2loodplain +one in &muma local government area of 4ivers 5tate of Nigeria where this
<
study carried out its practical assessment. &muma )3A is an identified area of varying flood ha+ard* a non1
structural floodplain that re-uired management measure. ?onventionally* floodplain +one due to earth crust
is 'ased on hydraulic and hydrological techni-ues process.
The major o'jective of this study is for EIA application in &muma )3A floodplain erosion control. This
paper is developed as a result of applying a suita'le alternative* ecological approach to floodplain +one*
using 'iophysical features as flooding indicators. Three +ones are identifiedD low1ris/ floodplain land* flood1
prone land which includes two su'1categories)and floodway land. )and use policies 'ased on a land use
decree is considered when writing the EIA for erosion control and development of each floodplain +one.
=ence* the o'jectives areD1
i) To focus or concentrate on the possi'le effects on the environmentD1
ii)* Ade-uate response to issue and realities.
iii)* Ensure pu'lic participation in EIA preparation.
iv)* EIA must 'e transparent with ade-uate clear and easily understood.
(v) 4igorously employ 'est practica'le method to mitigate negative measures.
(vi)* 8rofessionalism and o'jectivity must 'e strictly adhered.
(vii) )east cost efficient and 'enefit should 'e imposed on the proponents.
9se of EIA as a principal and philosophy can 'e traced 'ac/ to the !#@s as a rationalistic decision ma/ing
process. It involved a technical evaluation that would lead to o'jective decision ma/ing. EIA was made
legislation in the 95 in the National Environmental 8olicy Act (NE8A) !#!. It has since evolved as it has
'een used increasingly in many countries around the world. EIA as it is practiced today is 'eing used as a
decision aiding tool rather than decision ma/ing tool. There is growing dissent on the use of EIA as its
influence on development decisions is limited and there is a view it is falling short of its full potential. There
is a need for stronger foundation of EIA practice through training for practitioners* guidance on EIA
practice and continuing research.
C
A typical EIA is divided into two different categoriesD the immediate and long term aim and o'jectives. The
immediate aim of EIA is to categories a project for mandatory and decision ma/ing 'ecause of identified
potentially significant environmental impacts and ris/s of development proposal0 while the long term aim of
EIA is to promote sustaina'le development proposals 'y ensuring that development proposal does not
underscore the critical resources and ecological functions of the well 'eing* lifestyle and livelihood of the
communities and peoples who depend on them.
In summary*
A). The immediate o'jectives of EIA are
i). To improved the environmental design of the proposal*
ii) To ensure that resources are used appropriately and efficiently
iii) To identify appropriate measures for mitigating the potential impacts of the proposal* and
iv) The environmental terms and conditions for implementing the proposal.
B)* The long term o'jectives of EIA are
() To maintenance sustaina'ility for protection of human health and safety
(ii) To avoid irreversi'le change and serious damage to the environment.
(iii) To safeguard valued resources* natural areas and ecosystem components* and
(iv)* To enhance the social aspects of the proposal
Evaluating mathematical models help to clear certain dou'ts on decision ma/ing and predicting the remote
events as mandatory projects are identified 'y government environmental regulation and serious irreversi'le
impact of high ris/ are avoided 'y declaring such developments as no action option alternative.
?onsidera'ly* all alternatives measures are usually thoroughly screen in order to protect human and the
safety of the environment when considering (i) the type and nature of impact0(ii) magnitude of the impacts*
(iii)e$tent of the impact the timing of the impact manifestation (iv) duration of the e$posure of the impacts
#
(v)uncertainty of the impacts ris/ to the environment (vi) the reversi'ility of the impacts and (vii)
significance of the potential impacts.
2.0 GENERAL PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING EIA
Two systematic processes were involved such as
* &rgani+ing and ?onducting EIAD1 &rgani+ing process is involved in developmental planning and
technical assessment.
:* Integration of EIA is considered as planning and ,anagement.
1A) In EIA organi+ation* the planning is a very crucial aspect of project description which includes D1
i)* S'%##&*&1D1 5creening is see/ing the regulatory compliance for the project and its specification through
the Agency. In the regulatory process* the project is categori+ed into three head either it is considered as
category which is very sensitive0 or category : which is less or moderately sensitive and the third one is
category ; with no impact effect which commence construction after planning and conflict resolution
phases.
ii) C2/- #$$#'-*3# *& 42.% CBA.
iii) Estimate land re-uirement and site identification.
iv) 5election of potential sites which attract land application A conflict resolution.
Base data collection involves 'aseline study and feasi'ility study (initial environmental evaluation) or
preliminary evaluation for site definition* population and forecasts.
1B) In second EIA organi+ation phase* detailed project description on technical assessment is carried which
involved the following D1
2urther e$pensive site investigation and field testing programs on land use relationship using )eopold
matrics of identification and Battelle6s evaluation method* 'ut for )eopold techni-ue involved matching
project actions and environmental characteristics and conditions for )eopold method.
B
.hile Battelle evaluation on chec/lists of weighing environmental parameters according to their
significance 'y assigning num'ers.
. (evelopment of preliminary design criteria and costs. :* Evaluation of alternatives. ;*?onsideration
of alternative on land application and cost effective. ;*Initiation of identification* prediction* and
treatment or mitigation design.
25 ?onducting EIA for impact assessmentD This process involved the following D1
i) 8ro'a'le impacts of proposed action on the environment such as a) 8ositive and Negative effects
') (irect and Indirect conse-uences c) 5hort and long term conse-uences.
ii) Alternative to the proposed action
. Those that might enhance environmental -uality :* Those that might avoid some or all adverse
effects ;* ?ost 'enefit of alternatives.
iii) 8ro'a'le adverse environmental effects.
. .hich cannot 'e avoided :* Adverse and unavoida'le impacts ;* ,itigative action for avoida'le
adverse impacts
iv) 4elationship 'etween short term uses of environment and long1term productivity* maintenance A
enhancement.D Irreversi'le and irretrieva'le commitments of resources analysis.
3* Integrating EIA for decision ma/ing process.
a) ?onsultation and 8u'lic participation ') 4eviewing for systematic appraisal of the -uality of the EI5.
2.1 DESCRIPTION OF LEGISLATI0E DE0ELOPMENT
The International &rgani+ation for 5tandardi+ation (I5&) 5tandard <@ covers EIA and includes
/ey steps for carrying out the assessment. These steps include the scope of EIA. EIAs have often
'een critici+ed for having too narrow spatial and temporal scope. At present no procedure has 'een
specified for determining a system 'oundary for the assessment. The system 'oundary refers to Ethe
"
spatial and temporal 'oundary of the proposal6s effects6. This 'oundary is determined 'y the
applicant and the lead assessor* 'ut in practice* almost all EIAs address the direct* on1site effects
alone. 8roject planning and decision ma/ing should include the integrated consideration of technical*
economic* environmental* social and other factors. The inventory compiled forms a chec/ list of
descriptors for the physical* 'iological and cultural environment.
The environmental Impact Assessment and its model study address the following environmental effects.
O& 6*2(74/*'89 8&) %#/2.%'#/D1 The 'iophysical environment refers to the relation of flora and fauna of an
area such as species of trees* grasses* fish* and herpes to fauna* 'irds and mammals to physical environment
of geology topography* surface water and ground water resources* water -uality* air -uality and
climatology. 2or overall interest of a ecological system* 'iodiversity factor and any rare or endangered
plants and animals species are considered special reference data.
S2'*89 A&) C.9-.%89 I:(8'-/,1 The social and cultural impacts is the vital factors in Nigeria where most
displaced slavery and vulnera'le towns and ethnic minorities have response to the ill1treatment and non1
pu'lic participation to EIA development. 8ollution climate change* 'iodiversity cons and lac/ of
construction restoration or reha'ilitation are well /nown occurrence due to inade-uate mitigated and poor
environmental regulation enforcement. These lead to major controversies such as vandali+ation of oil
pipelines and youth unrest and militancy.
4o'ert 3oodland* (:@@C) wrote in his state of the Art on social and Environment Impact assessment that the
social and environmental assessments have not yet 'ecome the norm* some assessments are wea/* some
assessment teams try to protect the multinational proponent rather than the impacted people or the
environment* and the mitigation measures provided in the assessments are not always sustaina'ly
implemented.
!
In spite of EIA legislative 'road potential as a influential tool of environment decision ma/ing0 EIA
legislation in Nigeria has primarily 'een implemented in relation to the seating of new projects.
The policy roots in EIA in Nigeria can 'e found to 'e first launched in !"" with (ecree No C" of the
2ederal 3overnmental Agency (2E8A) and was amended 'y (ecree No < of!!!. The decree places on
2E8A the overall responsi'ility for the protection and development of the environment and 'iodiversity
conservation and sustaina'le development of Nigeria6s natural resources in general. The Agency is also
empowered to prepare comprehensive national policy on environment and conservation of natural resources
including procedure for environment impact assessment for all development projects. In fact* in line with
the 3lo'al Agenda :* which Nigeria also attended and in Agenda : summit it identifies major priorities
that alleviate of poverty* promotion of forestation program particularly in the semi1arid +one* and also
suggest mitigation of effects of drought. This is essentially designed to integrate environmental development
which see/s to attain sustaina'le development.
The environmental impact study is only guided 'y the implementation of the terms of 4eference (T&4)
provided 'y the ministry of Environment which 'ased on social* economical* 'iological and physical
criteria.
In decem'er* :@@!* the >o'rigs Ecotactic Biosafety as the consultant firm made in-uiry from the ,inistry of
Environment for detailed term of reference in preparing EIA for flood control in &muma ).3.A of 4ivers
5tate in accordance with EIA decree ;#* !!: of 2ederal Environmental 8rotection Agency (2E8A) and
(ecree ;"* !!: of Nigeria 9r'an and 4egional 8lanning.
The en-uiry ena'le categories the project as EIA mandatory project which referred >EB to the ministry for
specific terms of 4eference (T&4) that is offered according to their various sectors such as energy*
transport* chemical* mining* industry and agriculture.
@
In !!!* Nigeria constitution (Article) enshrines the 'asic right of every Nigeria citi+en to participate*
individually or in a group* in matters which may affect their political* social* cultural and economic life.
There e$ist legislative instruments which endorse and facilitate every Nigerian citi+en the rights to
participate in decision ma/ing that may affect the environment or indigenous peoples rights. =ence of
legislative instruments promulgate the proponent a sound legal framewor/ for involving pu'lic
participation. (espite this* EIA process and procedures still encountered impediment hindering reali+ation
of effective pu'lic participation 'ecause of poor organi+ed and developed institutional framewor/ to
implement the legal re-uirements. There is often a lac/ of resources within government and representing
institutions which tends to limit the amounts of consultation and facilitation. In fact* yet to mature initiated
pu'lic participation is a recent nota'ly legislative EIA process that should have encouraged pu'lic hearing
process.
2.2 THE SE;UENCE OF THE EIA PROCESS
The first step includes an Environmental diagnostic of Alternatives* which 'asically is to guarantee that the
'est place has 'een chosen for developing the project. Normally* the three different options analy+ed are
() Biophysical (:) socio1economic (;) technical these three influence the site* location* process and
(irect and indirect areas of influence were esta'lished. The methodology used to predict impacts was 'ased
upon a matri$ called )eopold0 which associated the activity development and the effect produced on the
environment. The impacts were ran/ed according to the live characteristics.
Type positive or Negative
,agnitudeD high medium and low scale
(urationD short term (less than one month)0 medium term (up to ten months) and long term (life long of the
product
TendencyD Increasing sta'le and decreasing.
Alternative of managementD. 8revent* mitigate* su'stitute* compensate.

Indicators of physical* 'iotic and social components were also used in order to identify impact.
3.0 APPROACHES TAKEN BY JOBRIGS ECOTACTIC BIOSAFETY (JEB) TEAM
In order to alleviate the erosion in their land and soil gullies* soil samples at various location of the entire
site of the project were ta/en and analy+ed as preliminary evaluation or /nown as initial environmental
evaluation (IEE) which help to contri'ute to the effectiveness of EIA process. In addition* different studies
were carried out* starting with analysis of four alternatives for selection of drainage sites.
3.1 CASE STUDY ON RECENT EIA REPORT ON FLOOD AND EROSION CONTROL OF
OMUMA LGA OF RI0ERS STATE
In order to develop and produce EIA* field surveillance wor/ was carried for some days. This phase of EIA
process regarded as initial environmental evaluation (IEE) allowed the EIA team to conduct the following
activities.
?ollection of 'aseline data within a given site which will 'e used to assess the significance of the project
activity on its surrounding environment.*
9nderstanding more a'out the area or region from first hand e$perience
?onducting with those people which may 'e affected 'y the projects development* so as to inform them
a'out the project to see/ their agreement to the project and to feed'ac/ their comments* concerns and fears
so as to mitigate against potential impacts and 'etter understanding of any possi'le conflict management.
In the surveillance visit* the topographical study was carried out with the local government council
personnel. It was understood that the perennial floods in 4ivers* Imo and A'ia 5tates 'oundaries influenced
the direct conse-uence of environmental floodplain of &muma )3A topographic nature. The &muma )ocal
3overnment Area in 4ivers 5tate is a topical case study where flood disaster in particular attri'uted to the
construction of houses within the flood plain region resulting flood and erosion to some part of the
:
communities as the main streams flowing through the communities. In addition* there have 'een e$tensive
deforestation and e$cavation of soil around 9muchere from sand selling 'usiness at stream 'an/s of Imo
4iver.
To consider the EIA as a mandatory one* the term of reference (T&45) offered 'y (ecree ;# of !"# 2E8A
of the ,inistry of Environment is compared with availa'le initial Environmental Evaluation (ata0 which
stimulates the emergence of EIA draft for identifying and predicting along with availa'le alternatives due to
availa'ility of environmental impact characteri+ation on social Biophysical and sustaina'le development
'enefits.
3.2 LOCATION AND SCALE OF THE PROJECT AND HISTORY OF THE SITE
The communities6 site is o'served to have a terrain of floodplain which re-uire effective drainage system
with a structural culverts for flood control. 2looding has caused serious conse-uences of deforestation* gully
erosion and siltation of major streams of the communities resulting to continual shallow of stream 'ed* the
stream only is the source of water for irrigation and other uses. The affected communities areD 9mu/oyoro*
9muo/o* Amaji* 9mu/iri/po* 9muchere* E'eri* 9munju* 9muo/puru* 9muodu and 9muogu of &muma
)3A with a land covering area of ;< /ilometers s-uare
The &muma )3A6s stream is parallel to Imo 4iver at the south pole of the )3A and Northward pole is the
'oundary of A'ia 5tate.
The gully erosion has a history of long time occurrence 'ecause of landscape clearance for road construction
/eeping the e$posed soil for su'se-uent rainy seasons which drastically increase surface run off and
emptied in the stream as catchment +one. 5o the community terrain has a flood plain +one and steep +one of
a'out @ F :@G slope gradient.
And the tar road is a'out :" /ilometers length* while :< /ilometers is without drain culvert for rain water
collection e$cept at the Amaji ?ommunity +one where the culvert stopped without a direction to a
catchment area via slope gradient drain culvert as in picture :.
;
It was o'served that this surface runoff has caused eutrophic sedimentation and siltation with silt si+e of
@.@@: F @.@@#metres as shown in 8icture . This occur 'ecause during the road construction of the &muma
)3A environment without effective Environmental ,anagement 8lan (E,8) which should have predicted
post construction effect resulting to further flood ris/. This called for an ela'orate feasi'ility study and
environmental impact Assessment EIA of this flood prone +one.
The road construction started since !!< and finished in :@@! without considering drainage system for flood
control in &muma )ocal 3overnment Area .estern 4egion.
3.3 SI<E OR MAGNITUDE OF OPERATION
The study area covers 'asically from 9mu/oyoro ?ommunity to 9muogu of ;< /ilometers s-uare of
&muma )3A as shown on ,ap range of geographic locations within &muma )ocal 3overnment Area*
sharing 'orders with A'ia 5tate towards the northern part and Imo 4ivers on the south way. The project area
covered is ;< s-uare /ilometers which is <CG of the surface area of &muma )3A. =owever* the other
related area is also included* if re-uired for the study.

3. PROPOSED PLANNING5 FOR APPRO0AL AND IMPLEMENTATION
:. 4E58&N5IBI)ITIE5 &2 8A4TIE5D The project proponent has commissioned consultants to carry
out the feasi'ility study of the project. The detailed planning and design of the project will 'e performed 'y
the project proponents in house resources. The implementation of the project performed 'y specialist
contractor(s) which is appointed 'y the project proponent as the E$ecutive ?hairman of &muma )3A and
in conjunction with 8hiladelphia Nmatric )imited.
3.5 PRELIMINARY PROJECT TIME TABLE,
The project is scheduled for funding application under the 2ederal 3overnment of Nigeria Ecological 2und.
The tentative programme for planning* design and implementation of the project is as followsD
<
Tas/
No
Tas/ title 5tart date End date (uration (,)
(esign phase (ecemder :@@! ,arch :@@ <
: Tender phase April :@@ >une :@@ ;
; .or/ phase >uly :@@
Total H ,onths
The decommissioning and removal of structure for drainage system which will 'e conducted during the
early stage of the wor/ will last appro$imately # to ! months period.
.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED FLOOD CONTROL DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The project involves construction of (rainages 5ystem that connects tar road drain culvert and a
construction of concreti+ed drain culvert along the slope toward the stream. It is therefore unli/ely that the
project will encounter an interface with any other infrastructural projects. Interaction with other projects is
not considered to 'e a factor for project programming.
.2 O0ER0IE= OF COMMUNITIES TERRAIN FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed flood control F drainage pavement project is to 'e located at .estern region of &muma )ocal
3overnment Area 'etween 9muoyoro to 9muodu ?ommunities. It is )ocated North of Imo 4ivers and
westward towards A'a18= road a'out :C /ilometers s-uare drive from Imo 4iver Bridge. This site is a'out
;< /ilometers of trape+oidal shape for <CG surface area of &muma )ocal 3overnment Area of 4ivers 5tate.
.3 PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND EDAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
The preliminary site studies show more of topographic feature with a slight relief feature of the north part
'oundary of A'ia 5tate* which may cause over flow of rainfall on the communities of flood plain as
indicated in ,ap. The communities housing area is relatively flat with the sandy1clay soil te$ture* which
may result to sheet erosion during flooding era. The average flood depth on the houses is a'out ::cm height.
The nature of the soil was su'jected to soil test for soil moisture* p
=
* and te$ture.
C
5implified map of flood affected communities with measurement of water logging and soil salinity without
the need of 'ore holes. The project area soil is 'asically flood plain transitions landform with a soil phase of
moderate poorly drained alluvial soil* while the properties effective depth (8E8) is greater than @.! meters*
and the soil property surface te$ture is made up of loam soil of "CG and fine sand CG0 with a su'soil of
clay and slight salinity. The topography slope is a'out I :G e$cept downward stream which is I@G.
Analysis of the terrain soil drainage is calculated to 'e soil drainage as moderate0 ground water level as
'etween .@ F .C metres0 the impervious layer is 'etween :.@ to ;.@ metres0 The hydraulic conductivity is
:.@ to ;.@ metres A day0 and natural drainage as in sufficient.
. SITE ANALYSIS
8roject site analysis is carried out to overcome the short comings of flood control. 5uch asD
5ite analysis is to minimi+e distur'ance on the land and disruption of natural water flow which often destroy
wildlife ha'itat.
The analysis also help to reduce regular maintenance which if neglected can have disastrous conse-uences.
The flood protection level to 'e considered must conform to technical measura'le pattern of evacuating rain
water via concreti+ed culverts which cannot e$ceed to form larger floods in the future to cause e$tensive
damage. It is done to promote more intensive land use and development in the flood plain of the project
communities.
The proposed site has a set 'ac/ of :@/m from 8ort =arcourt1 A'a 4oad and this set 'ac/ is given an
ela'orate landscape treatment with a tar road from 8ort =arcourt. FA'a high way. ,inimi+ing soil erosion
during construction activities is duly considered 'ecause of its time consuming process and has more
varia'les which have to 'e ta/en into account. Thus* a tool or support system shall 'e put in place to
withstand the challenge of collection* processing* and transportation of soil waste to dump site. Noise and
gaseous emission will 'e minimal 'ecause of the -uality e$cavators which shall 'e used for e$cavating wor/
whose fuel contaminated fluids are control if availa'le. (ust is to 'e su'jected under control 'y wetting and
evacuation 'y good house /eeping and safety gadget of nose mas/ for the wor/ers.
#
At the period of drainage channel construction at Tar road* precautionary measures 'y Tagout policy shall
'e strictly enforced for easy movement of vessels on the pu'lic road.
B#92> */ -7# /.::8%4 2$ -7# /*-# 8&894/*/.
Area of project site JJJJJ.........J ;<s- /ilometers
)ength for 4oadside drainage channel for construction J :@ /ilometers
.idth of each of the (8

to (8
C
JJJJ.. C@ centimeters
.idth of concreti+ed access wayJ.JJJJ ; meters.
C different drainage pavement ((8) &utlets from the main Tar 4oad
1)ength of outlet (8

from Elder Nwafor compound of 9muchere ?ommunity is.@ /ilometer long.

1)ength of outlet (8
:
from 4oman ?atholic ?hurch close of Amaji ?ommunity is .; /ilometers long.
1)ength of outlet (8
;
from N/wo ,ar/et of 9muo'uo to 9mugwu ?ommunity as .C /ilometers long.
1)ength of outlet (8
<
from E'eri ,ar/et to 9muocham ?ommunity via the 5econdary 5chool is :.:
/ilometers long.
1)ength of outlet (8
C
from 9muodu to 9mua'ali via the 9mugu ?ommunity as < /ilometers long.
vi) Total length covered 'y (rainage 5ystem ?onstruction from 9muchere community to 9muodu*
including the &utlets (8
0
(8
: 0
(8
;0
(8
<
and (8
C
* K ;@ /ilometers long
5.0 THE DESIGN CONCEPT
An analysis of the site plan considered more on sustaina'le development which systems concept has 'een
employed in which different parts are 'rought together to function as a whole. This is unity of purpose and
functionality in the design.
The proposed flood control1damage pavement has 'een designed to allow for proper functioning damage
system as well as provide comfort for the ha'itants. The road pavement which should 'e made up of
B
concrete sla' attached to drainage channel of C@cm divide to accommodate the large volume of flood
during heavy rainfall. These channels are to 'e lin/ed to the main Tar road drainage system which release
its flood to the catchments outlets for Imo 4ivers. Because of the distance covered and flood capacity* five
loctions such asD Elder Nwafor compound of 9muchere ?ommunity ((8

)0 near 4oman ?atholic ?hurch
Amaji Town ((8
:)
0 N/wo ,ar/et of 9muo'uo ?ommunity ((8
;
)0 E'eri ,ar/et ((8
<
)0 9muodu ((8
C
) to
catchment6s +ones of the stream.
The approach to the flood control F drainage culvert concreti+ed access way shall 'e carefully adapted
through landscaping and this shall 'e e$tended to other parts of the proposed site. This will ma/e the natural
landscape elements such as shru's* flowers plants to 'lend with the man1made concrete materials used on
the site. The architectural elements have also 'een properly employed to provide protection against
unpleasant effects of harsh weather.
The design of the flood control drainage culvert concreti+ed access way e-ually addresses sustaina'le
development of vegetation and sustaina'ility of water resources streams as well as o'serving appropriate
distances 'etween flood1water collection and rainwater catchment +ones.
(ue to the flood plain terrain* the construction of drainage system does not warrant any inundation in the
area. The screening chec/list of the potential impacts is presented in Ta'le .
TABLE 1, SCREENING CHECKLIST FOR OMUMA FLOOD SUBPROJECT
EN0IRONMENTAL PROBLEM
5) Impact 4emar/s
Les No
Environment pro'lems due to project location
.

Encroachment into Area of

conservation significance
M The su'project does not fall within any
ecologically sensitive area such as wildlife*
sanctuaries or wetlands.
.
:
Impediments to movements of
wildlife* livestoc/ and people
M Being an e$isting system there won6t 'e any
additional impediments.
.
;
Encroachment on =istorical and
cultural sites
M The area has no significant historical
archaeological* cultural and religions
landmar/s. =owever* there is a distant small
patch of 'urial ground downstream of the
proposed inta/e site.
.
<
.ater resource conflicts M The su'project irrigation system 'eing in
operation for many years system for water
use has 'een esta'lished and no records are
availa'le showing any evidence of
misunderstanding or conflicts among users.
"
.
C
2looding and drainage ha+ards M The su'project intervention will not have
flooding and drainage ha+ard as the
command area is a steep area.
.
#
(isplacement of people and
property
M No land ac-uisition is needed for the
su'projects.
: EN0IRONMENTAL PROBLEMS RELATED TO PROJECT DESIGN
:.

.atershed Erosion (ue to steep hill side* some of parts of the

canal is prone to soil erosion
:.
:
(ownstream water -uality
pro'lem
M The su'project is a reha'ilitation project
therefore no other water sources (e.g.
groundwater) will 'e utili+ed. Therefore
-uality of water supply will not 'e change.
:.
;
5uita'ility of Natural water for
irrigation
M The water sources have 'een used prior to
reha'ilitation wor/s. There will 'e no
changes in water use during the su'project
implementation.
:.
<
&ver pumping of 3rand water M 3roundwater will not 'e used in this
su'project.
:.
C
Ade-uacy of (rainage 8lanning M 8roject area is on flood plain slopping area*
drainage planning may or may not 'e
necessary.
:.# (isruption of E$isting 2armer
?ooperative systems
M There are no e$isting farmers6 co1operatives
within the command area.
:.B )and 9se ?onflicts M The land use within the command area has
'een esta'lished prior to the implementation
of the 5u'project. No records are availa'le
showing misunderstanding or conflicts
among different land uses
:." Inade-uacies in .ater
(istri'ution
M Though command area is proposed to 'e
e$tended* water 'alance study has not shown
water shortage.
:.! ?anal ,anagement M The operation and maintenance (&N,) of
the e$isting irrigation system has 'een in
place prior to implementation of the
5u'project. The (&N,) of the main canal
has to 'e wor/ed out.
:.
@
8assageways M The e$isting passageways are not sufficient
for movement of people and livestoc/. The
5u'project will construct necessary num'er
of crossings and passageways.
:.

5couring =a+ards M 5ome of the canals are su'jected to seasonal

scouring when water flows are high. The
strengthening of the canal walls and
canalling has 'een proposed at different
sections. Identification of critical stretches*
'io1engineering wor/s should 'e identified.
; E&3*%2&:#&-89 P%269#:/ R#98-#) -2 C2&/-%.'-*2& S-81#
;. E$cavation M &nly e$cavation at structure sites. New
e$cavation outside the indicated spots.
;.: ?onstruction materials sites
(7uarry 5ites)
M The construction wor/ will re-uire :B@m
;

sand C#m
;
of aggregates and <!<m
;
'loc/
!
stone which can 'e fulfilled from the -uarry
site for the su'project may not 'e feasi'le.
;.; .or/ camp location and
operation
M The contractor will have to esta'lish wor/
camp for the construction activities.
;.< )a'our ?amp M Total la'our re-uirement will 'e a'out ;*#C"
uns/illed and "< s/illed. Assuming actual
construction wor/ing season of B months*
the average la'our re-uirement per day
would 'e @ uns/illed and some of s/illed
manpower will 'e fulfilled from the local
area. =ence* la'our camp will not 'e
operated. 5ome of the outside la'our will
reside within the wor/ camp itself.
;.C 5toc/piling of materials M The construction material will 'e stored at
the convenient locations for the construction
activities.
;.# &peration of construction
e-uipment and transport
M No heavy construction e-uipments are
needed and only small dewatering pumps*
mi$ers* vi'rators* etc will 'e used which do
not contri'ute major air pollution. Tractors
and truc/s would 'e used for materials
transportation.
;.B &ccupation health and safety M &ccupational health and safety of the
wor/ers will 'e addressed.
;." Temporary ?losure of Irrigation
5ystem
M ?onstruction activities are li/ely to distur'
the supply of irrigation water.
< E&3*%2&:#&-89 P%269#:/ R#/.9-*&1 $%2: P%2?#'- O(#%8-*2&/
<. Effect on downstream water use M There is still plenty of water for the
downstream users after proposed
intervention. =ence effect on downstream
users has not 'een foreseen.
<.: Adverse soil modifications M The proposed su'project is the reha'ilitation
of the e$isting irrigation system* adverse soil
modification will not occur due to the
proposed su'project implementation.
<.; ?hanges in groundwater
hydrology
M The su'project command is 'eing in a
floodplain terrain* groundwater recharge will
'e minimal.
<.< ,os-uito Breeding M The command area 'eing in floodplain
allows for mos-uito 'reeding.
C R#89*@8-*2& 2$ E&78&'#:#&- P2-#&-*89/
C. Employment to the local people M ?onstruction activities will re-uire
construction la'ours. )ocal people will get
opportunity in employment. In addition
farmers have to share the construction cost
which will 'e mostly usually in terms of
la'our force.
C.: ?ommunity water supply in
command area
M The farmers in the command used stream
water. ?anal waters are not used for domestic
purpose and will not 'e used as such after
su'project implementation
:@
C.; A-uaculture in command area M 2armers are not practicing a-uaculture within
the command area. It is unli/ely that this will
changed using su'project implementation
C.< )ivelihood programs for
landless households
M ?onstruction activities will re-uire 'oth s/ill
and uns/illed la'ourers. The su'project will
also provide livelihood trainings to enhance
economic conditions of landless households.
C.C 2easi'ility of cooperatives M The 8roject will implement institutional
development activities to strengthen capacity
of water users associations which could
function as a cooperative to support the
farmers.
In many environmental assessments there are certain effects that* although they will occur during
construction or operation stage* should 'e considered as impacts primarily of the location or design of the
project* as they would not occur if an alternative location or design was chosen.
5.1 ALTERNATI0ES
The consideration of alternatives is one of the more proactive sides of environmental assessment F
enhancing the project design through e$amining options instead of only focusing on the more defensive tas/
of reducing adverse impacts of a single design. This call for systematic comparison of feasi'le alternatives
for the proposed project sites or location* scales* technology or processes* layouts* operational alternative
and the Ono actionP option.
=owever* with regards to the project* no necessary considered alternatives to the project is re-uired 'ecause
it is consistent with 2,.4 for supporting the development of irrigation agriculture and EIA Act "# !!: in
further amended decree < of !!! of 2ederal Environmental 8rotection Agency (2E8A) as listed
mandatory study of drainage and irrigation activity.
!.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Although the main elements of impact assessment involve identification* measurement* interpretation and
communication of impacts in concise and unam'iguous manner* assessment methodologies vary. 8rominent
among the methodologies are chec/list method0 matri$ approach and overlay map.
)eopold matri$ method is considered here while identifying significant impacts of project 'y placing these
anticipated impacts in diagonal line in appropriate cell of the matri$* magnitude and importance of impacts
are evaluated on a 1@ scale and placed on either side of the diagonal. .hereas* Battelle environmental
:
evaluation system is 'ased on the chec/list of B" environmental parameters. The predicted value of each
parameter is converted to a @1 scale of environmental -uality (E7) using value fuction graphs.Each
environmental parameter is assigned a weight out of @@@ parameters importance units (8I9) 'y ran/ed
pairwise comparison. E7 value is multiplied 'y 8I9 to improve environmental score.
2inal score of alternative to difference 'etween sum of scores with and without project.
!.1 THE CHECKLIST METHOD
9sing Batelle Environmental Evaluation system involves the compilation of a comprehensive list of
environmental effect and impact indicators as stated a'ove in the description of the environmental Baseline
study. This is done to stimulate analyst to thin/ 'roadly a'out possi'le conse-uence of contemplated actions
which also allows an e$haustive list of areas to 'e considered in the assessment process.
!.2 THE MATRIA METHOD
By )eopold matri$ incorporated* a list of 8roject actions with a chec/list of environmental condition or
characteristics that might 'e affected. This method is fle$i'le and allows e$pansion of component or
characteristics to 'e affected 'y the environment. It shows an interaction 'etween causes and effects or
actions and impacts relationship.
It ena'led us to ma/e un'iased judgment which depends on e$perience. This method employs the use of
scaling to rate environments -uality that is a scale of to @ is the 'est or highest -uality scale* while one
() is the least scale in -uality. And the scaling is scaled according to the severity of the said project of
havingD1 * No impact* :* ,inimum impact* ;* 5ignificant Impact and <* 4eal severe impact.
In this method* the project associated activities with the techni-ue are identified and place on the hori+ontal
a$is* while the environmental conditions are placed on the vertical a$is.
The use of overlay method is a study of su'1dividing the study area into small units of homogenous
topographic land use as using cluster sampling techni-ue collection of information in this method involves
the use of aerial photography.
Tabe !" ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DATA
::
Flood control
activity
Environmental
components
S
i
t
e

s
u
r
v
e
y
i
n
g

P
r
e

c
u
l
v
e
r
t

r
o
a
d

a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s

!
a
m
p
i
n
g

s
i
t
e

"
u
a
r
r
y

d
e
p
o
t
E
x
c
a
v
a
t
i
n
g

a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
!
o
n
c
r
e
t
e

m
i
x
i
n
g

a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s

E
x
c
a
v
a
t
e
d

s
o
i
l

d
i
s
p
o
s
a
l
S
o
l
i
d

#
a
s
t
e

d
i
s
p
o
s
a
l
$
i
l

s
p
i
l
l
a
g
e
%
r
a
&
&
i
c
$
p
e
r
a
t
i
n
g
'
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

o
&

e
(
u
i
p
m
e
n
t

S
e
#
a
g
e

)
m
p
a
c
t

m
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
%
o
t
a
l

m
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e

*

%
o
t
a
l

i
m
p
a
c
t

S
i
g
n
i
&
i
c
a
n
c
e

D
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

+ir (uality
Particulate ,', -'- ,', ,', .'- ,', ,', -'- -'- ,', /.
00 0.
1aseous emission -', ,', -'- ,', ,- Sig2 S2%2
Soil'sediments
Erosion -'- ,'- .'/ -/
,,/ ,324
Land use'a(uaculture 4'4 -'- ,', ,', ,', ,'- -'- ,', ,', 56
Soil microorganism ,', ,', -'. .'. ,', .'/ 46 Sig2 S2%2
Soil (uality ,', ,', -', -'. .'/ ,', /6
7ater (uality
%DS'%SS -'- .'/ 4'4 ,', 48
306 342-
%urbidity -'- ,', /'4 .'/ -'- 0, Sig2 L2%
%oxicity -'- .'/ ,8
1eology'
hydrogeology
1round #ater (uality .'. .'. .'4 4,
06 420
)ns S2%
9athymetry ,', ,', 5
:egetation ' #ildli&e 4'4 -'- ,'- // // /2- Sig2 S2%
%errestrial ecology ,',
!limate
+nimals -'. ,'- ,', ,,
.6 -25
Plants ,', ,', ,'- ,', 35 )ns S2%
Socioeconomics
Employment ' income ;.'- ;4'0 ;,', ;,', ;5'5 4'5 ;.'/ ;-'
-
;,', ,60 ,60 3828 Sig2 S2%
Settlement ;,', . . 62. )ns L2%
!ommunity health
issues
,', -', ,', ,', -'- -'. .'/ .'- .'. -', ,'- 8- 8- 528 )ns S2%
<oise ,', -'. ,', ,', .'. ,', .. .. .2, )ns S2%
+rchaeology -'. ,'- ,', /'4 ,', ,', /5 /5 /2/ )ns S2%
#$%& 36.-
'(& IMPACT SCORE S)EET
%his stage &orms the central part o& an E)+ having considered the Leopold matrix model &or
predicted impacts= several ma>or options are li?ely to have been proposed either at the scoping or
be&ore2 %here&ore this option #ill give us analysis o& score sheet o& realistic or a&&ordable mitigating
measures2)mpacts are rated &rom 3/2 %his involves assigning #eights ranging &rom 3 to /
environmental &actors2 @3A being very negative impact and @/A being very positive impact2
: A**r+b,*e- Ma.+/,/ Po+0*- Po+0*- ob*a+0ed
32 +ir "uality
Particulate BBBBBBBBB/ BBB22 ,
1aseous EmissionBBB2 / BB2222 -
!( So+/Sed+/e0*
ErosionBBBBBBB2B / BBB2 -
Land use ' +(uacultureBB / BBB /
Soil microorganismBBBBBB/ BBB ,
:;
Soil "ualityBBBBBBB / BBB -
-2 7ater "uality
%DS ' %SSBBBBBBB / BBB ,
%urbidityBBBBBBBB / BBBB -
%oxicityBBBBBBBB2 / BBB ,
.2 1eology ' Cydrogeology
1round #ater (uality BB / BBB2 -
9athymetryBBBBBBB / 22BBB ,
/2 :egetation BBBBBBB / BBB /
42 %ematial Ecology
!limateBBBBBBBB2 /BBBBBB -
+nimalsBBBBBBBB2 /BBBBBB /
PlantsBBBBBBBBBBBB/B2BBBBB /
02 Socioeconomic
Employment')ncome B22 / BBB /
SettlementBBBBBB2B / BBB /
!ommunity Cealth )ssuesBB2 / 22BBB22 .
<oiseBBBBBBBB2B / BBB2 -
+rchaeologyBBBBBB2 / 22BB22 .
#$$ 1!
%he percentage score is derived thus:
* Per&ormance D Point $btained x 366
Points $btainable 3
D 0, x 366
366 3
Per&ormance level D 0,*
%he Scoring 1uide recommendation by the <igeria )nstitute o& to#n planners is given in the table
belo#:
Scoring 1uide Eating
/ F :ery positive impactBBBB366* 43* +cceptable
. F Positive impactBBBBBB2246* .3* critical consideration
- F <eutral impact
, F <egative impact 9elo# .6* <ot +cceptable
3 F :ery negative impact
".0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION,
In order to carry out this study0 >o'rigs Ecotactic Biosafety (>EB) carried out the Batelles ?hec/list
Environmental Evaluation and )eopold matri$ assessment in accordance with the draft of 2E8A* EIA
procedure of !!:.
The scooping and screening e$ercise was carried out 'y the chec/list method to identify the environmental
components that are li/ely to 'e affected 'y the proposed project of 'oth construction and operational
phases. The 'aseline data of the environment for the assessment were collected through use of maps ( not
added in appendi$)* photographs* field sampling* survey* la'oratory analysis* -uestionnaires and interviews.
2rom the data o'tained it was possi'le to /now the state of the e$isting environment and to evaluate the
:<
potential impacts of the project activities on the physical and socio1economic environment using the
)eopold matri$ techni-ue. It was also possi'le to ma/e recommendation for mitigative and ameliorative
measure to 'e ta/en to contain the negative impacts and the >E? to develop ade-uate management system in
its Environmental ,anagement 8lan (E,8) for the project.
=owever* major regulatory policy has 'een the fundamental flaws in the Nigeria environmental
management such as administrative regulatory process which is often vulnera'le to influence special interest
groups as the multinational oil companies that easily triggered pollution. 5econdly* there is often too much
distance 'etween the regulatory 'ody and which the government claimed to protect. The pu'lic has limited
access to the regulatory 'ody6s classified information which separate the pu'lic from the EIA decision
ma/ing0 there'y ma/ing it difficult for effective regulatory supervision of oil industrial facilities in the
mangrove swamp forests and the enforcement of health and safety compliance.
R#$#%#&'#,
Abu, Bala Dan. (1988) "Koko: To Move or Not to Move" Newswatch Nigeria
B78-8 S.C. (2005)* Te$t'oo/ on Environmental 8ollution and ?ontrol in ?hemical 8rocess Industries.
pp.<<! . %hanna 8u'lishers* (elhi @@@#.
4o'ert 3oodland* (:@@C) Editor on 5ocial and Environmental Impact Assessment * &il and 3as 8ipeline F
IAIA :@@C ?onference* Mirginia* 95A
2ederal Environmental 8rotection Agency (2E8A) !"# of (ecree C"* Nigeria
Federal Environental !rotection "genc#$ Nigeria. ""chieving %&staina'le (evelo)ent
in Nigeria". National *e)ort +or the ,nited Nations -on+erence on Environent and
(evelo)ent (*io de .aneiro$ /ra0il$ 1991)$ 1211
H29)#%5 J.5 (200)* Environmental AssessmentD The 4egulation of (ecision ,a/ing* &$ford 9niversity 8ress* New
Lor/0 2or a comparative discussion of the elements of various domestic EIA systems*
International Association for Impact Assessment (IAIA) (!!!) 8rinciple of Environmental Impact
Assessment Best 8ractice.
J27& G98//2&B R*C* T7#%*3#9B A&)%#> C78)>*'C (1DD). Te$t'oo/ on Introduction to Environmental
Impact Assessment* : Edition * 9?) 8ress.pg.;1:C0:<C1:B"
P8-%*'C D.$$4 (1DDD). Environmental Impact Assessment Training for 5ustaina'le Agriculture and 4ural
(evelopmentD )essons and E$perience from ?am'odia.
:C
A((#&)*+ 1 P*'-.%#/ -8C#& ).%*&1 -7# (%#9*:*&8%4 #389.8-*2& >7*'7 /72> S*9-8-*2& 8&) S#)*:#&-8-*2&
*& C2::.&*-4 S-%#8: $%2: G.994 #%2/*2& 2$ O:.:8 LGA 2$ R*3#%/ S-8-#

Eutrophic postStream #ith high turbidity o&
#ater bodies
1radual sedimentation resulting to shallo#
stream bed
Cigh hydraulic &orce gully erosion
Di&&icult %ransportation o& Farm products
:#