JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY

(JICA)

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORT

PHNOM PENH CAPITAL CITY
KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA

THE STUDY ON DRAINAGE AND

SEWERAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
IN PHNOM PENH
METROPOLITAN AREA

FINAL REPORT
VOLUME I
SUMMARY

DECEMBER 2016

CTI ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD.

NIPPON KOEI CO., LTD.
KITAKYUSHU WATER SERVICE CO., LTD.

GE
JR
16-132
 JAPAN INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGENCY
(JICA)

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORT

PHNOM PENH CAPITAL CITY
KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA

THE STUDY ON DRAINAGE AND

SEWERAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
IN PHNOM PENH
METROPOLITAN AREA

FINAL REPORT
VOLUME I
SUMMARY

DECEMBER 2016

CTI ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL CO., LTD.

NIPPON KOEI CO., LTD.
KITAKYUSHU WATER SERVICE CO., LTD.
 COMPOSITION OF FINAL REPORT

VOLUME I: SUMMARY

VOLUME II: MAIN REPORT

VOLUME III: ANNEX

Currency Exchange Rates used in this Report

[Master Plan Stage]

USD 1.00 = Riel 3,988 = JPY 119.64

Riel 1.00 = USD 0.00025 = JPY 0.030
JPY 1.00 = USD 0.0084 = Riel 33.3
(As of 1st April 2015)

[Pre-Feasibility Study Stage]

USD 1.00 = Riel 4,033 = JPY 122.85

Riel 1.00 = USD 0.00025 = JPY 0.030
JPY 1.00 = USD 0.0081 = Riel 33.3
(As of 1st December 2015)
LOCATION MAP
 Cheung Aek Lake Discharged Water from Kop Srov Pumping Station

Trabek Channel Tamok Lake

Wastewater Treatment Facilities in Dye House Wastewater Treatment Facilities in Aeon Mall

Water Quality Monitoring at Prek Thnot River Septic Tank (Under Construction)

Septage Vacuum Truck Candidate Site of Cheung Aek STP

PHOTOGRAPHS (1/2)
 Inundation in Wat Phnom Northern Area Inundation in Trabek Channel

House near Trabek Pumping Station (In inundation) House near Trabek Pumping Station (No Inundation)

Existing Drainage Channel (1/2) Existing Drainage Channel (2/2)

Existing Pumping Station (Kop Srov Pumping Station) Existing Pumping Station
(Tuol Sampeo Pumping Station)

Box Culvert in Development Area (Under Construction) Pipe Cleaning by DSD

PHOTOGRAPHS (2/2)
 Outline of Master Plan and Pre-Feasibility Study
Item Contents
Sewage Management (M/P)
Target year 2035
Planning strategy PPCC is subdivided into three areas (Cheung Aek, Tamok and Other areas) and
applicability of on-site and off-site treatment for the target year 2035, is evaluated.
Planning frame Cheung Aek area: Population of 1,093,155 in the planning area of 4,701.9 ha.
Tamok area: Population of 481,423 in the planning area of 6,019.2 ha.
Other area: Population of 1,292,522 (Total Population of 2,867,100-1,093,155-481,423)
Treatment system Cheung Aek area: Off-site treatment with combined system is applied. A STP is proposed
with capacity of 282,000 m3/day. Conventional Activated Sludge Process (CASP) is
applied for the STP.
Tamok area: On-site treatment (Johkasou) is applied.
Other area: Installation of septic tank, which is most popular sanitary device in PPCC, is
recommended especially in households in which no toilet or pit latrine is equipped.
Legal and Sewerage and Drainage Advancement Office under the director of DPWT/PPCC is
institutional set-up proposed in the M/P, with the approach of “Start small and grow big”. After the
establishment of the Advancement Office, phased implementation plan for establishing
independent sewage implementing body, in parallel with human resource development,
is proposed.
Phased Phased implementation schedule is proposed up to year 2040 to equalize volume of
implementation projects implemented in each period, as follows.
schedule Cheung Aek area: Phased implementation, consisting of (i) Preparatory Project, (II)
Phase 1 Project, (iii) Phase 2 Project and (iv) Phase 3 Project, is proposed.
Tamok area: Installation of Johkasou is commenced in Medium-term and ended in 2040,
the last year of Long-term period, to equalize number of installation of Johkasou.
Project cost and Project cost: 1,025 million USD
O&M cost Breakdown is as follows.
Construction cost in Cheung Aek area : 450.1 million USD
Construction cost in Tamok area : 396.2 million USD
Administration cost and so on : 178.7 million USD
O&M cost: 30.692 million USD/year
Breakdown is as follows.
Cheung Aek area : 14.895 million USD
Tamok area : 15.797 million USD
Financial and Financial evaluation: Sewerage charge, which is equivalent of 75% of water tariff, will
economic evaluation be required in the ultimate stage of implementation of Cheung Aek and Tamok area to
cover O&M cost.
Economic evaluation: EIRR is estimated at 26.31% in the combination of treatment of
Cheung Aek and Tamok area.
Environmental and Significant environmental and social impacts such as resettlement are not anticipated
social because proposed sewerage facilities in the M/P are installed in vacant public land or
considerations under public roads. Negative impacts such as traffic interruption, noise, dust and
vibration would be unavoidable during the construction stage. However, the impacts
could be minimized by introducing counter measures such as setting up diversion road,
sprinkling water and selecting low-noise and/or low-vibration type construction
equipment as far as practicable.
Sewage Management (Pre-F/S)
Pre-F/S Pre-F/S is conducted targeting “Preparatory Project”, consisting of construction of a part
of STP in Cheung Aek treatment area with capacity of 5,000 m3/day and sewer pipe of
about 1,300 m. Project cost of the Project is estimated at 24.05 million USD and O&M
cost is estimated at 0.41 million USD/year.
Item Contents
Drainage Management (MP)
Target year 2035
Planning strategy PPCC is subdivided into 25 catchment areas and structural measures, consisting of
drainage channels, pumping stations and regulation ponds, are proposed considering
topographical conditions as well as availability of existing drainage facilities.
Planning frame Planning area in the M/P is 621.73 km2 in total. Drainage facilities in the M/P are
designed with return period of 5 years. Rainfall intensity of 5-year return period is
63.2 mm/ha or 112.3 mm/day.
Proposed drainage Proposed drainage facilities are construction of (i) Drainage channel of 123 km, (ii)
facilities Pumping stations in 6 locations and (iii) Regulation pond in 5 locations.
Legal and Institutional and implementation framework in drainage management is already
institutional set-up established to some extent through implementation of drainage improvement projects
such as “The Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement Project in Phnom
Penh Capital City (Phase 1, 2 and 3)”. However, strengthening of institutional
framework is proposed because the present framework is insufficient to smoothly
implement a number of drainage projects proposed in the M/P, corresponding to rapid
urbanization.
Phased Based on the EIRR, 25 drainage areas are categorized into 4 groups by priority. Of the 25
implementation drainage areas, improvement works of drainage areas in 1st prioritized group are
schedule implemented in the Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement Project in
Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase 4). Of the 2nd prioritized group, Pochentong East
Drainage Area (No. 9 Drainage Area) is studied in the Pre-F/S. Other drainage areas are
implemented after implementation of Pochentong East Drainage Area.
Project cost and Project cost: 662.2 million USD
O&M cost Breakdown is as follows.
Construction cost : 506.5 million USD
Administration cost and so on: 155.7 million USD
O&M cost: 5.501 million USD/year
Financial and Financial evaluation: Not implemented in the M/P due to the reason that cost for
economic evaluation drainage management should be borne by PPCC.
Economic evaluation: EIRR is estimated at 12.6%.
Environmental and About 900 households are to be resettled in the implementation of the proposed projects
social in the M/P, so detailed survey in the implementation stage will therefore be required to
considerations minimize the resettlement. Negative impacts such as traffic interruption, noise, dust and
vibration would be unavoidable during the construction stage. However, the impacts
could be minimized by introducing countermeasures such as setting up diversion road,
sprinkling water and selecting low-noise and/or low-vibration type construction
equipment as far as practicable.
Drainage Management (Pre-F/S)
Pre-F/S Pre-F/S is conducted targeting “Pochentong East Drainage Area (No. 9 Drainage Area),
consisting of construction of: (i) Box Culvert of 5,220 m, (ii) Inlet channel of 480 m, (iii)
Pumping Station of 1 location (Capacity of 40 m3/s), (iv) Regulation pond of 1 location,
as well as (v) Rehabilitation of drainage channel of 2,660 m. Project cost is estimated at
93.01 million USD and O&M cost is estimated at 1.23 million USD/year. EIRR is
estimated at 12.7%.
Location Map
Photographs
Outline of Master Plan and Pre-Feasibility Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... i

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... ix
Abbreviations ....................................................................................................................... xi

Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Study Objectives................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.3 Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 Study Schedule ................................................................................................................... 1-2

Chapter 2 Basic Study.................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Natural Condition ............................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1.1 Land Use ............................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1.2 Meteorology and Hydrology ............................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.3 Runoff and Inundation Analysis for Drainage Improvement Plan ...................................... 2-3
2.2 Socioeconomic Situation .................................................................................................... 2-5
2.2.1 Socioeconomic Situation..................................................................................................... 2-5
2.2.2 Population Dynamics in PPCC ........................................................................................... 2-6
2.3 National Plans and Relevant Plans ..................................................................................... 2-9
2.3.1 Urban Planning and Development Planning ....................................................................... 2-9
2.3.2 Water Supply Plan ............................................................................................................. 2-10
2.4 Status of Existing Facilities .............................................................................................. 2-11
2.4.1 Sewage Facilities ............................................................................................................... 2-11
2.4.2 Drainage Facilities ............................................................................................................ 2-12
2.4.3 Sludge Management Facilities .......................................................................................... 2-15
2.4.4 Flood Protection ................................................................................................................ 2-15
2.5 Water Quality.................................................................................................................... 2-16
2.5.1 Water Quality and Effluent Standard ................................................................................ 2-16
2.5.2 Water Monitoring and Analysis in the Study .................................................................... 2-18
2.6 Current Status of Organizations and the System .............................................................. 2-21
2.6.1 Related Laws and Regulations .......................................................................................... 2-21
2.6.2 Organizations Concerned .................................................................................................. 2-23

i
 2.6.3 Budget and Financial Situation .......................................................................................... 2-27
2.7 Environmental and Social Consideration .........................................................................2-31
2.7.1 EIA Process in Cambodia .................................................................................................. 2-31
2.7.2 Legislation and Legal Procedures for Resettlement and Land Acquisition for
Development ...................................................................................................................... 2-32

Chapter 3 Strategy for Formulation of Sewage Management Master Plan ..............................3-1

3.1 Summary of Issues ..............................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Planning Frame ...................................................................................................................3-4
3.2.1 Target Year ........................................................................................................................... 3-4
3.2.2 Planning Frame .................................................................................................................... 3-4
3.2.3 Strategy for Phased Schedule .............................................................................................. 3-7
3.3 Planning Conditions for Off-Site Treatment Area ..............................................................3-7
3.3.1 Projection of Water Use ....................................................................................................... 3-7
3.3.2 Water Quality for Designing ................................................................................................ 3-9
3.3.3 Structural Measures ........................................................................................................... 3-10
3.4 Planning Conditions of On-site Treatment .......................................................................3-12
3.4.1 Projection of Water Use ..................................................................................................... 3-12
3.4.2 Pollution Load per Capita .................................................................................................. 3-12
3.4.3 Structural Measures ........................................................................................................... 3-12
3.5 Effects of Environmental Improvement by the Proposed Plan .........................................3-12
3.6 Other Considerations ........................................................................................................3-13
3.6.1 Non-Structural Measures ................................................................................................... 3-13
3.6.2 Land Expropriation ............................................................................................................ 3-13
3.6.3 Environmental and Social Considerations ......................................................................... 3-13

Chapter 4 Sewage Management Master Plan ..............................................................................4-1

4.1 Sewage Management Master Plan ......................................................................................4-1
4.1.1 Cheung Aek Treatment Area ................................................................................................ 4-1
4.1.2 Tamok Treatment Area......................................................................................................... 4-8
4.1.3 Other Area.......................................................................................................................... 4-17
4.1.4 Summary of Application of On-site and Off-site Treatment System ................................. 4-17
4.2 Facilities Plan....................................................................................................................4-19
4.2.1 Sewer Network Plan in Cheung Aek Treatment Area ........................................................ 4-19
4.2.2 Sewage Treatment Plan Facilities Plan in Cheung Aek Treatment Area ........................... 4-22
4.2.3 On-site Treatment Plan in Tamok Area .............................................................................. 4-22
4.2.4 Sludge Disposal Plan ......................................................................................................... 4-24
4.3 Operation and Maintenance Plan ......................................................................................4-25
4.3.1 Sewer Network .................................................................................................................. 4-25
4.3.2 Sewage Treatment Plant and Sludge Disposal Site............................................................ 4-25

ii
 4.3.3 On-site Treatment Facilities .............................................................................................. 4-26
4.4 Review of Organization and Legal Framework of Sewage Management ........................ 4-27
4.4.1 Review for Proposal of a New Organization to Implement the Sewer Network
Service .............................................................................................................................. 4-27
4.4.2 Review of Legal Framework............................................................................................. 4-31
4.4.3 Financial Review .............................................................................................................. 4-34
4.5 Implementation Plan......................................................................................................... 4-35
4.5.1 Short-term ......................................................................................................................... 4-35
4.5.2 Medium-Term and Long-Term ......................................................................................... 4-36
4.6 Cost Estimate .................................................................................................................... 4-40
4.6.1 Construction Cost (Project Cost) ...................................................................................... 4-40
4.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost ...................................................................................... 4-42
4.7 Financial Analysis ............................................................................................................ 4-42
4.7.1 Cheung Aek System .......................................................................................................... 4-42
4.7.2 Tamok System ................................................................................................................... 4-45
4.7.3 Financing of Sewerage Systems ....................................................................................... 4-45
4.8 Economic Analysis ........................................................................................................... 4-48
4.8.1 Preconditions for Economic Analysis ............................................................................... 4-48
4.8.2 Cheung Aek System EIRR ................................................................................................ 4-48
4.8.3 Tamok System EIRR ......................................................................................................... 4-50
4.9 Selection of Priority Projects for Pre-F/S ......................................................................... 4-51

Chapter 5 Strategy for Formulation of Drainage Management Master Plan........................... 5-1

5.1 Summary of Issues ............................................................................................................. 5-1
5.2 Planning Frame................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.2.1 Target Year .......................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.2.2 Planning Scale ..................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.2.3 Drainage Area for Master Plan............................................................................................ 5-2
5.2.4 Drainage Management Plan per Drainage Area .................................................................. 5-3
5.3 Design Criteria ................................................................................................................... 5-4
5.3.1 Rainfall................................................................................................................................ 5-4
5.3.2 Catchment Area, Run-off and Inundation Analysis............................................................. 5-5

Chapter 6 Drainage Management Master Plan ........................................................................... 6-1

6.1 Improvement Plan for Stormwater Drainage Management ................................................ 6-1
6.1.1 Improvement Plan for Each Drainage Area ........................................................................ 6-1
6.1.2 Alternative Study on Cheung Aek Channel Drainage Area (Drainage Area
No.6) and Tuol Pongro Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.8) ........................................... 6-11
6.1.3 Alternative Study on Poung Peay Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.12) and
O'veng Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.13) .................................................................. 6-11

iii
 6.2 Drainage Facilities Plan ....................................................................................................6-12
6.2.1 General Layout of Drainage Management Plan................................................................. 6-12
6.2.2 Run-off Analysis ................................................................................................................ 6-13
6.2.3 Planning of Drainage Channels and Pipes ......................................................................... 6-16
6.2.4 Planning of Pumping Stations............................................................................................ 6-24
6.3 Maintenance Plan..............................................................................................................6-25
6.3.1 Drainage Channels and Pipes ............................................................................................ 6-25
6.3.2 Pumping Station and Regulation Pond .............................................................................. 6-25
6.4 Review of Organization and Legal Framework of Drainage Management ......................6-26
6.4.1 Review of Organization ..................................................................................................... 6-26
6.4.2 Review of Legal Framework ............................................................................................. 6-27
6.5 Phased Implementation Plan.............................................................................................6-27
6.6 Cost Estimate ....................................................................................................................6-30
6.6.1 Construction Cost (Project Cost) ....................................................................................... 6-30
6.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost ....................................................................................... 6-33
6.7 Economic Analysis ...........................................................................................................6-34
6.7.1 Preconditions for Economic Analysis ................................................................................ 6-34
6.7.2 EIRR .................................................................................................................................. 6-35
6.8 Selection of Priority Project for Pre-Feasibility Study .....................................................6-36

Chapter 7 Environmental and Social Consideration of Master Plan ........................................7-1

7.1 Consideration at the Master Plan Formulation ...................................................................7-1
7.2 Alternative Comparison ......................................................................................................7-1

Chapter 8 Pre-Feasibility Study on Priority Project of Sewage Management ..........................8-1

8.1 Components of Priority Project ..........................................................................................8-1
8.2 Preliminary Design of Sewer Line......................................................................................8-1
8.2.1 Design Flow ......................................................................................................................... 8-1
8.2.2 Study on Sewage Interception and Conveyance .................................................................. 8-1
8.3 Preliminary Design of Sewage Treatment Plant .................................................................8-4
8.3.1 Construction Site ................................................................................................................. 8-4
8.3.2 Treatment Facilities ............................................................................................................. 8-4
8.4 Implementation Framework................................................................................................8-9
8.5 Cost Estimate ......................................................................................................................8-9
8.6 Implementation Schedule .................................................................................................8-10
8.7 Financial Analysis .............................................................................................................8-10
8.8 Economic Analysis ...........................................................................................................8-10
8.9 Project Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 8-11

iv
Chapter 9 Pre-Feasibility Study on Priority Project of Drainage Management ...................... 9-1
9.1 Components of Priority Project .......................................................................................... 9-1
9.2 Framework of Implementation ........................................................................................... 9-2
9.3 Cost Estimation .................................................................................................................. 9-2
9.4 Implementation Schedule ................................................................................................... 9-3
9.5 Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................. 9-3
9.6 Project Evaluation .............................................................................................................. 9-4

Chapter 10 Environmental and Social Consideration of Pre-Feasibility Study ..................... 10-1

10.1 Impact Assessment for the Pre-Feasibility Study ............................................................. 10-1
10.1.1 Impact Assessment for Preparatory Project in Sewage Management ............................... 10-1
10.1.2 Impact Assessment for Priority Project in Drainage Management ................................... 10-3

Chapter 11 Conclusion and Recommendation .......................................................................... 11-1

11.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 11-1
11.1.1 Sewage Management ......................................................................................................... 11-1
11.1.2 Drainage Management ....................................................................................................... 11-1
11.2 Recommendation .............................................................................................................. 11-2
11.2.1 Sewage Management ......................................................................................................... 11-2
11.2.2 Drainage Management ....................................................................................................... 11-2

v
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1.1 Probable Rainfall ........................................................................................................... 2-5

Table 2.2.1 National Accounts of Cambodia .................................................................................... 2-5
Table 2.2.2 Household Income Composition, Average per Month in Cambodia ............................. 2-6
Table 2.2.3 Household Income Composition, Average per Month in Phnom Penh ......................... 2-6
Table 2.2.4 Population and Number of Households ......................................................................... 2-7
Table 2.2.5 Population Projection by JICA Project .......................................................................... 2-8
Table 2.3.1 Water Supply of PPWSA ............................................................................................. 2-10
Table 2.4.1 Current Condition of Sewerage Facilities in PPCC ..................................................... 2-11
Table 2.4.2 Total Length of Drainage Pipes and Number of Manholes ......................................... 2-12
Table 2.4.3 Total Length of Open Channels Managed by DPWT .................................................. 2-13
Table 2.4.4 List of Pumping Stations Managed by DPWT ............................................................ 2-14
Table 2.5.1 Water Quality Standard for Bio-Diversity Conservation ............................................. 2-16
Table 2.5.2 Effluent Standard for Public Water Areas or Sewer .................................................... 2-17
Table 2.5.3 Monitoring Points and Parameters in the Study........................................................... 2-18
Table 2.5.4 Minimum, Maximum and Average Values at Monitoring Points in the Study ........... 2-19
Table 2.6.1 Number of DPWT Staff Members ............................................................................... 2-26
Table 2.6.2 Cambodia State Budget Revenue................................................................................. 2-28
Table 2.6.3 Cambodia State Budget Expenditure ........................................................................... 2-28
Table 2.6.4 DPWT’s Budget........................................................................................................... 2-29
Table 2.6.5 Expenditures of DSD ................................................................................................... 2-29
Table 2.6.6 Drainage related Expenditures of PPCC ...................................................................... 2-30
Table 2.6.7 Drainage and Sewerage Cost transferred from PPWSA to PPCC ............................... 2-30
Table 3.1.1 Current Conditions and Issues Related to Sewage Management in PPCC and
Countermeasures (1/2) ................................................................................................... 3-1
Table 3.1.2 Current Conditions and Issues related to Sewage Management in PPCC and
Countermeasures (2/2) ................................................................................................... 3-2
Table 3.2.1 Candidate Sites for Construction of Sewage Treatment Plant ....................................... 3-4
Table 3.2.2 Current Condition of Sewage Management in Large-Scale Development Area ........... 3-7
Table 3.3.1 Ratio of Domestic and Other Usage in Neighbouring Countries ................................... 3-8
Table 3.3.2 Sewage Generation per Capita (Off-Site Treatment Area) ............................................ 3-9
Table 3.3.3 Upper Limits of Design Effluent Water Quality for STP ............................................ 3-10
Table 3.3.4 Off-site Treatment Methods Evaluated ........................................................................ 3-11
Table 3.4.1 Sewage Generation per Capita (On-site Treatment Area) ........................................... 3-12
Table 4.1.1 Outline of Cheung Aek Treatment Area ........................................................................ 4-1
Table 4.1.2 Design Inflow to Cheung Aek STP ............................................................................... 4-2
Table 4.1.3 Design Water Quality of Cheung Aek STP ................................................................... 4-2
Table 4.1.4 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Cheung Aek STP
(1/2) ............................................................................................................................... 4-4
Table 4.1.5 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Cheung Aek STP
(2/2) ............................................................................................................................... 4-5
Table 4.1.6 Outline of Tamok Treatment Area................................................................................. 4-9
Table 4.1.7 Design Inflow to Tamok STP ........................................................................................ 4-9

vi
Table 4.1.8 Design Water Quality of Cheung Aek STP ...................................................................4-9
Table 4.1.9 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Tamok STP (1/2)..............4-10
Table 4.1.10 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Tamok STP (2/2)..............4-11
Table 4.1.11 Outline of On-site Treatment System applied to Tamok Treatment Area ...................4-13
Table 4.1.12 Image of Application of Treatment (Tamok: Off-site) ................................................4-14
Table 4.1.13 Image of Application of Treatment (Tamok: On-site) .................................................4-15
Table 4.1.14 O&M Cost per Capita per Month.................................................................................4-16
Table 4.1.15 Summary of Application of On-site and Off-site Treatment .......................................4-17
Table 4.1.16 Conditions for Evaluation of Pollution Load Reduction ..............................................4-18
Table 4.2.1 Covered Area and Population of Cheung Aek Treatment Area ...................................4-19
Table 4.2.2 Summary of Sewer Network Facilities in Cheung Aek Treatment Area .....................4-22
Table 4.2.3 Overview of STP..........................................................................................................4-22
Table 4.3.1 O&M Items in STP ......................................................................................................4-26
Table 4.4.1 Policy for Staged Streamlining of Organizations that Implement the Project .............4-29
Table 4.4.2 Division Offices to implement Projects and their Work ..............................................4-30
Table 4.4.3 Summary of Discussions and Proposals on Organization and Legal System ..............4-33
Table 4.5.1 Overview of Trabek and Tumpun System ...................................................................4-35
Table 4.5.2 Phased Implementation Schedule (Sewage Management) ...........................................4-38
Table 4.5.3 Phased Implementation Plan for Construction Works .................................................4-39
Table 4.6.1 Project Cost for Sewerage Management ......................................................................4-40
Table 4.6.2 Disbursement Schedule of Project Cost for Sewerage Management ...........................4-41
Table 4.6.3 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost for Sewerage Management ........................4-42
Table 4.7.1 Operational Profit or Loss Excluding Depreciation (Imposing Charges only on
Cheung Aek Area) .......................................................................................................4-43
Table 4.7.2 Cash Flow of Sewerage Project (Sewerage Use Fee of 60% to Water Use Fee
Case) ............................................................................................................................4-44
Table 4.7.3 Profit or Loss Including Tamok (10% to 75% of Water Use Revenue) .......................4-46
Table 4.7.4 Cash Flow Including Tamok ........................................................................................4-47
Table 4.8.1 Cheung Aek System EIRR (Final Users) .....................................................................4-49
Table 4.8.2 Both Systems EIRR (Final Users)................................................................................4-50
Table 4.9.1 Components of Preparatory Project (Priority Project) .................................................4-51
Table 5.2.1 List of Drainage Areas ...................................................................................................5-2
Table 5.2.2 List of Alternatives (Tentative) ......................................................................................5-3
Table 5.3.1 Design Rainfall ..............................................................................................................5-4
Table 5.3.2 Outline of Two-Dimensional Unsteady Flow Model (MIKE 21) ..................................5-5
Table 5.3.3 Run-off Coefficient by Land Use ...................................................................................5-8
Table 5.3.4 Overall Run-off Coefficient ...........................................................................................5-8
Table 5.3.5 Outline of Inundation Analysis Model ...........................................................................5-9
Table 6.2.1 Run-off Analysis (1/2) .................................................................................................6-14
Table 6.2.2 Run-off Analysis (2/2) .................................................................................................6-15
Table 6.2.3 Summary of Proposed Drainage Channels and Pipes ..................................................6-16
Table 6.2.4 Summary of River Channel Analysis Model ...............................................................6-24
Table 6.2.5 Summary of Capacity of Pumping Station...................................................................6-24
Table 6.2.6 Summary of Regulation Pond ......................................................................................6-24

vii
Table 6.3.1 Items of Maintenance for Drainage Channels and Pipes ............................................. 6-25
Table 6.3.2 Items of Maintenance for Pumping Station and Regulation Pond ............................... 6-25
Table 6.5.1 Priority of Implementation for Each Drainage Area .................................................... 6-28
Table 6.5.2 Phased Implementation Plan ........................................................................................ 6-29
Table 6.6.1 Summary of Cost Estimate .......................................................................................... 6-30
Table 6.6.2 Cost Disbursement Schedule (Drainage Management 1/2) ......................................... 6-31
Table 6.6.3 Cost Disbursement Schedule (Drainage Management 2/2) ......................................... 6-32
Table 6.6.4 Summary of O&M Cost............................................................................................... 6-33
Table 6.7.1 Average House Damages per Household in Three Districts........................................ 6-34
Table 6.7.2 Average House Damage per Household in Phnom Penh ............................................. 6-34
Table 6.7.3 Production Loss Recovery in Phnom Penh .................................................................. 6-35
Table 6.7.4 EIRR of Drainage Management Projects ..................................................................... 6-35
Table 6.8.1 Priority Project for Pre-Feasibility Study .................................................................... 6-36
Table 7.2.1 Comparison of Alternatives of Sewage Management M/P (April 2015) ....................... 7-1
Table 7.2.2 Comparison of Alternatives of Drainage Management M/P (April 2015)..................... 7-2
Table 8.1.1 Component of Priority Project (Preparatory Project) in Sewage Management ............. 8-1
Table 8.1.2 Design Flow ................................................................................................................... 8-1
Table 8.3.1 Specification of Treatment Facilities (Preparatory Project)........................................... 8-5
Table 8.3.2 Specification of Treatment Facilities (Ultimate Stage).................................................. 8-5
Table 8.5.1 Project Cost (Preparatory Project) ................................................................................. 8-9
Table 8.5.2 Summary of O&M Cost (Preparatory Project) ............................................................ 8-10
Table 9.1.1 Components in Pochentong East Drainage Area ........................................................... 9-1
Table 9.3.1 Project Cost .................................................................................................................... 9-2
Table 9.3.2 Summary of O&M Cost................................................................................................. 9-3
Table 10.1.1 Preliminary Scoping for Preparatory Project in Sewage Management
(December 2015) ......................................................................................................... 10-1
Table 10.1.2 Preliminary Scoping for Priority Project in Drainage Management (December
2015) ............................................................................................................................ 10-4

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 1.4.1 Overall Study Schedule ..................................................................................................1-2

Fig. 2.1.1 Land Use of PPCC in 2035 ............................................................................................2-1
Fig. 2.1.2 Inland Flooding Area .....................................................................................................2-3
Fig. 2.1.3 Rainfall Intensity and Probable Rainfall ........................................................................2-4
Fig. 2.1.4 Annual Rainfall (1981 to 2013) .....................................................................................2-4
Fig. 2.1.5 Maximum Daily Rainfall (1981 to 2013).......................................................................2-4
Fig. 2.2.1 Administrative Area in PPCC (Old/New) ......................................................................2-7
Fig. 2.2.2 Population Projection by JICA Project ..........................................................................2-8
Fig. 2.3.1 Strategy for Sewage/Drainage Sector in White Book ..................................................2-10
Fig. 2.3.2 Water Consumption per Capita per Day ......................................................................2-11
Fig. 2.4.1 Drainage Pipe Location Map from Database ...............................................................2-13
Fig. 2.4.2 Location Map of Channels and Pumping Stations Managed by DPWT ......................2-15
Fig. 2.4.3 Variation of Annual Maximum Water Level in Sap River ..........................................2-16
Fig. 2.5.1 Location Map for Water Sampling Survey ..................................................................2-19
Fig. 2.6.1 Organizational Chart of MPWT ...................................................................................2-23
Fig. 2.6.2 Organizational Chart of Department of Sub-National Urban Infrastructure and
Engineering ..................................................................................................................2-24
Fig. 2.6.3 Organizational Chart of PPCC .....................................................................................2-24
Fig. 2.6.4 Organizational Chart of DPWT ...................................................................................2-25
Fig. 2.6.5 Organizational Chart of Drainage and Sewerage Division (DSD)...............................2-26
Fig. 2.6.6 Drainage and Sewerage Related Cost Resource Fund Flow in Phnom Penh ...............2-31
Fig. 2.7.1 Flowchart of the IEIA/EIA Process for National Level Projects .................................2-31
Fig. 2.7.2 Flowchart of Land Acquisition ....................................................................................2-33
Fig. 2.7.3 Workflow of Resettlement Process ..............................................................................2-34
Fig. 3.2.1 Location of Candidate Sites for Construction of Sewage Treatment Plant ....................3-5
Fig. 3.2.2 Target Area for Selection of Off-site Treatment Area ...................................................3-6
Fig. 3.3.1 Water Use Projection per Capita per Day for the Target Year 2035..............................3-8
Fig. 4.1.1 Comparison of Land Requirement of Lagoon and CASP ..............................................4-3
Fig. 4.1.2 Layout Plan of Cheung Aek STP ...................................................................................4-6
Fig. 4.1.3 Transition of Sewerage Fee to cover Cost of Cheung Aek Treatment Area ..................4-7
Fig. 4.1.4 Alternative Study on Tamok Treatment Area ................................................................4-8
Fig. 4.1.5 Layout Plan of Tamok STP ..........................................................................................4-12
Fig. 4.1.6 Transition of Sewerage Fee to cover Costs for Cheung Aek and Tamok
Treatment Area (Tamok Treatment Area: Off-site) .....................................................4-15
Fig. 4.1.7 Transition of Sewerage Fee to cover Cost of Cheung Aek and Tamok Treatment
Area (Tamok Treatment Area: On-site) .......................................................................4-16
Fig. 4.1.8 Reduction of Pollution Load ........................................................................................4-18
Fig. 4.2.1 Sewer Network Plan in Cheung Aek Treatment Area .................................................4-21
Fig. 4.2.2 Image of Johkasou (for 5 persons) ...............................................................................4-23
Fig. 4.2.3 Image of Johkasou (for 300 persons) ...........................................................................4-23
Fig. 4.2.4 Image of Community-Based Sewage Treatment applying Johkasou ...........................4-24

ix
Fig. 4.2.5 Treatment Facilities for Septage and Johkasou Sludge ............................................... 4-24
Fig. 4.3.1 Flowchart of O&M in STP .......................................................................................... 4-26
Fig. 4.4.1 Organizational Chart based on the Proposed Organization 1 ...................................... 4-29
Fig. 4.4.2 Example of Management Organization in STP ........................................................... 4-31
Fig. 4.4.3 Concept of the New Organization established in MPWT of Sewerage and
Drainage Management ................................................................................................. 4-32
Fig. 4.5.1 Trabek and Tumpun System in Cheung Aek Treatment Area ..................................... 4-36
Fig. 4.9.1 Location Map of Preparatory Project (Priority Project)............................................... 4-51
Fig. 5.2.1 Map of Drainage Areas .................................................................................................. 5-3
Fig. 5.3.1 Procedure of Establishment of Hydrological and Hydraulic Model .............................. 5-5
Fig. 5.3.2 Ground Elevation of Phnom Penh Metropolitan Area ................................................... 5-6
Fig. 5.3.3 Catchment Area and Present Inundation Area (Analysis based on Rainfall on
26 September 2012) ....................................................................................................... 5-7
Fig. 5.3.4 Image of Inundation Analysis ...................................................................................... 5-10
Fig. 6.2.1 General Layout of Proposed Drainage Management Plan ........................................... 6-13
Fig. 6.2.2 General Map of Drainage Improvement (1/7) (Boeung Thom/PPSEZ/NR. 3
West Drainage Areas) .................................................................................................. 6-17
Fig. 6.2.3 General Map of Drainage Improvement (2/7) (Krang Pongro/Pratek Lang
Channel/Tuol Pongro Drainage Areas) ........................................................................ 6-18
Fig. 6.2.4 General Map of Drainage Improvement (3/7) (Preaek Thloeng/Chbar Ampov
Middle/Cheung Aek Lake Drainage Areas)................................................................. 6-19
Fig. 6.2.5 General Map of Drainage Improvement (4/7) (Pochentong East Drainage Area)
..................................................................................................................................... 6-20
Fig. 6.2.6 General Map of Drainage Improvement (5/7) (Tamok East/Hanoi West
Drainage Areas) ........................................................................................................... 6-21
Fig. 6.2.7 General Map of Drainage Improvement (6/7) (Poung Peay/O’veng/Satellite
City/Chroy Changvar/City Core North Area Drainage Areas) .................................... 6-22
Fig. 6.2.8 General Map of Drainage Improvement (7/7) (Preaek Moat Kandol Drainage
Area) ............................................................................................................................ 6-23
Fig. 6.4.1 Proposal to divide DSD Technical Section .................................................................. 6-26
Fig. 8.2.1 Plan and Profile of Sewer Line in the Preparatory Project ............................................ 8-3
Fig. 8.3.1 Proposed STP Site in Cheung Aek Lake ....................................................................... 8-4
Fig. 8.3.2 Processing Flow of STP................................................................................................. 8-4
Fig. 8.3.3 General Layout Plan of STP in the Preparatory Project ................................................ 8-6
Fig. 8.3.4 General Layout Plan of Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the Preparatory
Project ............................................................................................................................ 8-7
Fig. 8.3.5 Transition of STP from Preparatory Project Stage to Ultimate Stage............................ 8-8
Fig. 8.4.1 Implementation Framework for Preparatory Project ..................................................... 8-9
Fig. 8.6.1 Implementation Schedule for Preparatory Project ....................................................... 8-10
Fig. 9.1.1 Location of Pochentong East Drainage Area ................................................................. 9-1
Fig. 9.1.2 Location of Components in Pochentong East Drainage Area ........................................ 9-2
Fig. 9.4.1 Implementation Schedule .............................................................................................. 9-3

x
 ABBREVIATIONS

1. Organizations/Programs/Projects
ADB Asian Development Bank
AFD Agence Française de Développement
CDS City Development Strategy
DPWT Department of Public Works and Transport
DHI Danish Hydraulic Institute
DOE Department of Environment
DOP Department of Planning
DSD Drainage and Sewerage Division
GDCE General Department of Customs and Excise
GDT General Department of Taxation
GOJ Government of Japan
ICHARM International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management
IRC Inter-Ministerial Resettlement Committee
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KOICA Korea International Cooperation Agency
MEF Ministry of Economy and Finance
MIH Ministry of Industry and Handicrafts
MLMUPC Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction
MOE Ministry of Environment
MOI Ministry of Interior
MOP Ministry of Planning
MOWRAM Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology
MPWT Ministry of Public Works and Transport
NSDP National Strategic Development Plan
PIU Project Implementation Unit
PISC Project Implementation Support Consultant
PMU Project Management Unit
PPCC Phnom Penh Capital City
PPSEZ Phnom Penh Special Economic Zone
PPUTMP Phnom Penh Urban Transport Mater Plan
PPWSA Phnom Penh Water Supply Authority
RGC Royal Government of Cambodia
WHO World Health Organization
WMD Waste Management Division

2. Technical Terms
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
CASP Conventional Activated Sludge Process
CCTV Closed-circuit Television
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
DEM Digital Elevation Model
DO Dissolved Oxygen
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
GDP Gross Domestic Product
IEIA Initial Environmental Impact Assessment
MPN Most Probable Number
OD Oxidation Ditch
pH Potential Hydrogen
PTF Pre-treated Trickling Filtration
TF Trickling Filter
T-N Total Nitrogen

xi
T-P Total Phosphorus
TSS Total Suspended Solid
SBR Sequential Batch Reactor
SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment
SLSC Standard Least Square Criterion
SRTM Shuttle Radar Topography Mission

3. Others
EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
F.C. Foreign Currency
FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return
F/S Feasibility Study
HH Income Household Income
HRD Human Resource Development
l/c/d Litre per capita per day
L.C. Local Currency
M/P Master Plan
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OJT On-the-Job Training
PAP Project Affected Peoples
Pop. Population
PV Present Value
RAP Resettlement Action Plan
RCS Replacement Cost Study
R/D Record of Discussions
SEZ Special Economic Zone
STP Sewage Treatment Plant
USD United States Dollars

xii
 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Since 2008 the administrative area of Phnom Penh Capital City (hereinafter referred to as “PPCC”)
has been expanding and reached up to 678.46 km2 in 2011. PPCC’s population has been also
increasing from about 1.0 million in 1998 to 1.5 million in 2010. The city is often threatened by floods
from the Mekong River due to the insufficient safety from the flood dikes.
Urban drainage facilities are not also functioning well. The facilities were constructed from the
beginning of 1960’s and thus superannuated. Poor maintenance during the civil war in the 1970’s has
worsened the situation. As a result, the city habitually suffers from inundation by local rainfall,
especially, in the rainy season.
The Japan International Cooperation Agency (hereinafter referred to as “JICA”), in response to the
request from the Royal Government of Cambodia (hereinafter referred to as “RGC”), conducted “The
Study on Drainage Improvement and Flood Control in the Municipality of Phnom Penh” in 1999.
Based on the Master Plan formulated in that study, the Government of Japan (hereinafter referred to as
“GOJ”) conducted grant aid projects (Phase I, II and III) for the purpose of strengthening the drainage
capacity in the city area and to protect the city from flooding. In spite of these efforts, drainage
problems are still generated in areas other than the areas of Phase I, II and III, due to the rapid
urbanization and changes in land use.
As for sewage management in PPCC, only human excreta are held on plot in septic tanks. On the other
hand, overflow effluent from the septic tanks as well as domestic wastewater, flows directly to the
drainage pipes or open channels and runs into the ponds/swamps located in the downstream of the
watersheds, in which wastewater is purified by the natural purification function to some extent.
However, the ponds/swamps have been invaded by houses, factories and other activities, and they no
longer demonstrate their natural purification functions. Since the amount of wastewater increased due
to the population growth and city development, the ponds and swamps have become black and smell
terribly. As a result, outbreak of insects and waterborne diseases are anticipated, and the water quality
of Mekong River, Sap River and Bassac River, which are the final disposal bodies of wastewater from
the city, are also polluted1.
Taking the above conditions into consideration, revision of the Master Plan (hereinafter referred to as
M/P) on urban drainage improvement as well as consideration of wastewater treatment is necessary.
Thus, the RGC requested assistance from the GOJ. In response to the official request, the GOJ decided
to conduct the “The Study on Drainage and Sewerage Improvement Project in Phnom Penh
Metropolitan Area”. Accordingly, JICA, which is the official agency responsible for the
implementation of technical cooperation programs of the GOJ, dispatched its Detailed Planning
Survey Team to Cambodia from March to April, 2014 and the Record of Discussions (R/D) was
finalized in May 2014.

1.2 Study Objectives

The objectives of the Study are:
(1) To formulate the M/P of drainage and sewerage improvement in PPCC;

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
1
Annual average of TSS and conductivity increased by more than 25% and 30% based on the monitoring results at 10
monitoring points in PPCC provided by MOE (1999 to 2004 and 2007 to 2013). In addition, TSS of Mekong River
became 1.5 times and conductivity of Sap and Bassac River increased by more than 25%. These data indicate progress of
contamination in the rivers.

1-1
 (2) To conduct a Pre-Feasibility Study on priority projects selected in the M/P;
(3) To develop planning capacity of drainage and sewerage improvement; and
(4) To transfer relevant skills and technologies to personnel concerned in Cambodia in the course
of the Study.

1.3 Study Area

The Study Area covers the entire area of PPCC.

1.4 Study Schedule

The Study is to be carried out in accordance with the schedule shown in Fig. 1.4.1. The study period is
about twenty-two (22) months. Various reports are to be submitted periodically as shown in the
schedule.
2014 2015 2016
Year/Month
8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Field Work

Reports IC/R P/R1 P/R2 DF/R F/R

Phase I Phase II Phase III

Phase

Legend: IC/R: Inception Report; P/R1: Progress Report I; P/R2: Progress Report II;
DF/R: Draft Final Report; F/R: Final Report
Phase I : Collection and analysis of basic information on sewerage and drainage improvement
Phase II : Formulation of M/P
Phase III : Pre-Feasibility Study on the priority projects
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 1.4.1 Overall Study Schedule

1-2
 CHAPTER 2 BASIC STUDY

2.1 Natural Condition

2.1.1 Land Use

As the urban development Master Plan of PPCC, the “White Book on Development and Planning of
Phnom Penh” was issued in October 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “White Book”). In the White
Book, the land use plan for the target year 2035 (Fig. 2.1.1) was formulated based on land use in 2004.
The land use plan is in the process of approval with the issuance of a sub-decree, followed by the
approval in the committee for land management and urban planning for the capital, which was
established in accordance with a Royal Decree.

Legend

Source: White Book on Development and Planning of Phnom Penh, PPCC

Fig. 2.1.1 Land Use of PPCC in 2035

2-1
2.1.2 Meteorology and Hydrology

(1) Climate of Cambodia

Cambodia is part of a tropical monsoon climate and average total annual rainfall from 1981 to
2013 (33 years) is 1,428.5 mm/year. However, large variation can be seen in annual rainfall from
1,095.4 mm/year (1992) to 2,147.3 mm/year (2000). The dry season is from December to April
and 80% or more of the annual precipitation are concentrated in the rainy season (May to
November).

(2) Meteorology

According to the observed data from 1985 to 2013 at Pochentong Station, the averages of
monthly maximum and minimum temperature are 35.3 and 21.8 degrees Celsius in Phnom Penh
Capital City. The temperature is as a whole higher in March to May and the difference of
maximum and minimum is about 20 degrees Celsius. The annual average of humidity is 77%,
ranging from 70% to 80% and secular change is not observed.

(3) Rainfall

PPCC belongs to the tropical monsoon climate. The annual average rainfall in 2004 to 2013 is
1,487.2 mm/year and large variation can be seen in annual rainfall from 1,170.9 mm/year (2006)
to 1,938.7 mm/year (2008).

(4) River Water Level

The highest water level of Bassac River and Sap River is generally recorded during August to
October. The highest water level of Bassac River is 9.84 m (2011) and lowest level is
7.47 m (2010). On the other hand, water level during March to May is very low (1.2 m). The
difference of water level between the dry season and the rainy season is about 8 m. According to
the interview survey with MOWRAM (Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology), water
level is not observed during the dry season (December to April) because of backwater from the
river month of Mekong River. The daily water level fluctuation is about 0.3 m to 0.5 m.

(5) River Discharge

According to the interview with MOWRAM, river discharge of the Upper Mekong River is
32,000 m3/s and maximum river discharges to Sap River and Bassac River are about 8,000 m3/s
and 1,500 m3/s respectively. Peak discharge of Mekong River is recorded in June to October and
the backflow from Mekong River to Sap River occur in this season.

(6) Inundation Area

(a) Inundation Area of Inland Flooding

Fig. 2.1.2 shows the inundation-prone area of inland flooding2, which was grasped through
interview with DPWT staff, DSD staff, public works office of each Khan, and social survey. It is
reported that inundation occurs several times in the rainy season every year in these areas.
In the city center (inside of the inner ring dike), damage of inland flooding has been decreasing
in many parts of the area with the upgrading of drainage pipe network and drainage channel,
rehabilitation of existing pumping stations and construction of new pumping station. On the
other hand, drainage improvement in the area on the northern side of Wat Phnom (eastern half
of Sangkat Srah Chak) and most parts of Tuol Kok District have lagged behind other area.
――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
2
Inland flooding: Inundation in urbanized area due to rainfall exceeds capacity of drainage facilities

2-2
 Inundation in these areas still occur several times a year in the rainy season
In the newly urbanised area located at Western Phnom Penh, especially in the Pochentong East
Area, not enough drainage facilities have been installed, and as a result, inland flooding damage
frequently occurs even in short-time duration rainfall in the rainy season.

Tuol Kork Area Wat Phnom North

S. Chroy Changvar
Hanoi West Area
S. Phnom Penh

S. Kakab S. Tuek
Pochentong
S. Chaom Chau Airport East

S. Boeng
Chbar Ampov Area

PPSEZ
(Phnom Penh
Special

Note S: Sangkat
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 2.1.2 Inland Flooding Area

2.1.3 Runoff and Inundation Analysis for Drainage Improvement Plan

(1) Rainfall Analysis

Rainfall intensity was estimated using short-time duration rainfall data observed from 1980 to
1997 at Pochentong Station in the previous JICA study, “The Study on Drainage Improvement
and Flood Control in the Municipality of Phnom Penh, 1999”. The rainfall intensity estimated in
the Master Plan in 1999 is shown in Fig. 2.1.3.

2-3
 Hourly Rainfall (Pochentong meteorological station)
Return Period (year) Hourly Rainfall (mm/h) Daily Rainfall (mm/day)
2 44.8 87.8
5 63.2 112.3
10 75.4 128.4

Horner Type3 was selected as rainfall intensity formula type. Rainfall intensity formula is
shown as follows;
I=2,566.07×(T+25.48)-0.93 (Design scale of sewer system, 2-year return period)
I=5,009.12×(T+31.38)-0.98 (Design scale of infrastructure, 5-year4 return period)
where, I：Rainfall intensity (mm/hr), T：Rainfall Duration (min)

Source: The Study on Drainage Improvement and Flood Control in the Municipality of Phnom Penh, JICA, 1999

Fig. 2.1.3 Rainfall Intensity and Probable Rainfall

Review of rainfall intensity and model hyetograph using recent rainfall data is needed because
15 years has passed after the last estimation in 1999, using the data in Figs. 2.1.4 and 2.1.5.

Annual Rainfall Average of annual rainfall 5-year moving average

2500

2000
Annual Rain fall （mm/year）

1500

1000

500

0
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Source: MOWRAM (Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology)

Fig. 2.1.4 Annual Rainfall (1981 to 2013)

Maximum daily rainfall （mm/day） 5-year moving average

200
182.5mm/日
180
Rainfall (mm/day)

160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Source: MOWRAM (Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology)

Fig. 2.1.5 Maximum Daily Rainfall (1981 to 2013)

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
3
In the Master Plan in 1999, actual rainfall data were analyzed by employing rainfall intensity formulae such as Talbot Type,
Sherman Type, Kuno and Ishiguro Type, and Cleveland Type, which are commonly employed in Japan, as well as Horner
Type, which is commonly employed in Asian countries such as the Philippines and Taiwan. Thus rainfall intensity was
established using Horner Type, which showed minimum error.
4
Pumping stations, regulation ponds and main channel drains area with approximately more than 1 km2 of catchment area.

2-4
 (a) Evaluation of Probable Rainfall

A probable rainfall analysis was performed using the daily rainfall data, condition and
probability distribution model shown below. As a result, “Extreme Value Distribution” model
was selected. The reference SLSC value of the selected model is less than 0.04. Probable
rainfall is summarised in Table 2.1.1.
Table 2.1.1 Probable Rainfall
Daily Rainfall (mm) Balance
Return Period
(1) Study of 1999 Note1 (2) This Study Note2 (1)-(2)
2 87.8 90.1 +2.3
5 112.3 109.6 -2.7
10 128.4 125.4 -3.0
30 152.9 154.5 +1.6
50 164.0 170.3 +6.3
Note 1: Estimated using observed rainfall data from 1981 to 1997
Note 2: Estimated using observed rainfall data from 1981 to 2013
Source: JICA Study Team

(b) Review of Rainfall Intensity

A large difference is not observed from the probability rainfall analysis result compared to the
previous study (1999) of 2-year and 5-year return periods for drainage facilities plan. Therefore,
rainfall intensity in the previous Master Plan (1999) is employed for the drainage improvement
plan in the Study.

2.2 Socioeconomic Situation

2.2.1 Socioeconomic Situation

(1) Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

GDP and related economic statistics data in Cambodia are shown in Table 2.2.1 to display the
national economic development state.
Table 2.2.1 National Accounts of Cambodia
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
GDP (Billion Riel) 14,083 15,633 16,781 18,536 21,438 25,754 29,849
GDP Growth Rate 5.3% 11.0% 7.3% 10.5% 15.7% 20.1% 15.9%
GDP per capita (USD) 295 319 340 367 417 487 558
GDP per capita Growth Rate 3.2% 8.2% 6.5% 8.0% 13.5% 16.9% 14.6%
GDP (Constant Price) 14,175 15,320 16,232 17,613 19,434 22,009 24,380
GDP (Constant Price) Growth Rate 10.7% 7.4% 6.6% 8.5% 10.3% 13.3% 10.8%

Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GDP (Billion Riel) 35,042 41,968 43,057 47,048 52,069 56,617
GDP Growth Rate 17.4% 19.8% 2.6% 9.3% 10.7% 8.7%
GDP per capita (USD) 656 760 753 830 911 971
GDP per capita Growth Rate 17.6% 15.8% -0.9% 10.2% 9.9% 6.6%
GDP (Constant Price) 26,870 28,668 28,692 30,406 32,553 34,916
GDP (Constant Price) Growth Rate 10.2% 6.7% 0.1% 6.0% 7.1% 7.3%
Note: The top GDP is in current price or market price different from constant price below.
Source: National Institute of Statistics (http://www.nis.gov.kh/nis/NA/NA2012.html)

2-5
 (2) Household Income

The National Institute of Statistics, Ministry of Planning, publishes socio-economic research

results every year. The household income is shown in Table 2.2.2. Total income and disposable
income in total Cambodia increased from 2009 to 2013 except in 2011. In 2011, self-employment
income, in particular, non-agriculture decreased so that total and disposable incomes decreased.
However, total and dispensable incomes in Phnom Penh decreased in not only 2011 but also 2010,
as shown in Table 2.2.3.
Table 2.2.2 Household Income Composition, Average per Month in Cambodia
Value in thousand Riels
Source of income
2009 2010 2011* 2012* 2013*
Cambodia
Primary income 727 877 862 984 1,183
Wage and Salary 241 292 340 403 505
Self-employment Income 482 582 520 576 675
Agriculture 162 205 209 229 195
Non Agriculture 250 290 224 249 369
Owner occupied house 70 88 86 98 111
Property income 4 3 2 5 3
Total transfers received 19 24 26 35 53
Total Income 747 901 888 1,019 1,236
Total transfers paid 11 24 17 5 95
Disposable Income 736 877 871 1,014 1,141
Note: * Preliminary results
Source: National Institute of Statistics
(http://www.nis.gov.kh/index.php/en/find-statistic/social-statistics/cses/cses-tables.html)

Table 2.2.3 Household Income Composition, Average per Month in Phnom Penh
Value in thousand Riels
Source of income
2009 2010 2011* 2012* 2013*
Phnom Penh
Primary income 1,986 1,940 1,770 1,847 2,478
Wage and Salary 765 910 991 930 1,135
Self-employment Income 1,203 1,023 769 909 1,326
Agriculture 22 20 8 22 11
Non Agriculture 878 650 423 560 935
Owner occupied house 338 327 381
Property income 17 7 10 8 17
Total transfers received 54 47 50 40 38
Total Income 2,039 1,987 1,819 1,886 2,517
Total transfers paid 24 44 26 17 138
Disposable Income 2,016 1,944 1,793 1,870 2,378
Note: * Preliminary results
Source: National Institute of Statistics
(http://www.nis.gov.kh/index.php/en/find-statistic/social-statistics/cses/cses-tables.html)

2.2.2 Population Dynamics in PPCC

(1) Population and Number of Households

According to the 1998 and 2008 census, the population of PPCC increased to 1,327,615 in 2008
from 999,804 in 1998. Additionally, due to the expansion of the jurisdiction area in 2010, its
population became 1,501,725. The population became about 1.5 times of 1998’s. Population and
the number of households in 1998 and 2008 are shown in Table 2.2.4. New Administrative Area
in Table 2.2.4 is shown in red hatched area in Fig. 2.2.1.

2-6
 Table 2.2.4 Population and Number of Households
1998 2008
Population
Old Administrative Area 999,804 1,327,615
Urban Area 570,155 1,242,992
Rural Area 429,649 84,623
New Administrative Area - 174,110
Total 999,804 1,501,725
Household
Old Administrative Area 173,678 260,468
Urban Area 97,296 242,974
Rural Area 76,382 17,494
New Administrative Area - 34,890
Total 173,678 295,358
Average Number of Persons in Household
Old Administrative Area 5.76 5.10
Urban Area 5.86 5.12
Rural Area 5.63 4.84
New Administrative Area - 4.99
Total 5.76 5.08
Note: Urban Area: (The Sum of Sangkat which satisfies the following 3 conditions.
Population Density; More than 200 people/km2, Proportion of farmers
of adult men; Less than 50%, Total Population; More than 2,000)
Source: Overview of Urban Development in Phnom Penh Capital City, 2011

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 2.2.1 Administrative Area in PPCC (Old/New)

(2) Population Projection

Population up to 2035 has been projected based on the population in base year of 2012, with the
reference of census of 1998, 2008, and report of population projection up to 2030, in the “Project
for Comprehensive Urban Transport Planning in Phnom Penh Capital City” implemented by

2-7
 JICA, as shown in Table 2.2.5 and Fig. 2.2.25. According to this projection, the population of
2035 will be 2,867,100 people. Sewerage and drainage improvement plans for year 2035 will be
formulated, using this population projection in this Study.
Table 2.2.5 Population Projection by JICA Project
Name of Khan 1998 2008 2012 2016 2020 2035
01 Chamkarmon 187,082 182,004 184,200 196,500 200,900 240,400
02 Daun Penh 131,913 126,550 119,500 123,300 126,700 138,200
03 7 Makara 96,192 91,895 93,300 95,100 96,600 102,700
04 Tuol Kok 154,968 171,200 186,100 187,900 185,100 181,100
01-04 Sub-total 570,155 571,649 583,100 602,800 609,300 662,400
05 Dangkor 48,921 73,287 96,100 128,500 148,900 183,700
06 Po Senchey 73,414 159,455 234,900 269,300 321,600 349,500
07 Meanchey 97,190 194,636 282,700 349,100 403,300 490,800
08 Chbar Ampov 108,796 133,165 160,500 194,300 210,100 251,500
09 Reussey Keo 76,473 115,740 152,600 178,800 204,300 251,300
10 Chroy Changvar 53,231 68,708 84,000 102,900 126,700 155,500
11 Sen Sok 70,676 137,772 198,600 237,000 296,700 392,500
12 Prek Pnov 34,574 47,313 59,700 84,700 84,500 129,900
05-12 Sub-total 563,275 930,076 1,269,100 1,544,600 1,796,100 2,204,700
Total Population 1,133,430 1,501,725 1,852,200 2,147,400 2,405,400 2,867,100
* The population is corrected based on new administrative area in PPCC (678.5 km2)
Source: JICA, “Project for Comprehensive Urban Transport Planning in Phnom Penh Capital City”
 

Thousand  2012 PPUTMP (new area) 

MP of PP2020 Projection (2020, old area)   
MOP Projection (2008‐2030, old area) 
2001MP Projection (00, 05, 10, 15, old area)

General Population Census (98, 08, old area)

Base Year Population of PPCC (unit: 1000)   
        :2012    = 1,852.2 
        :2016    = 2,147.4 
        :2020    = 2,405.4 
        :2035    = 2,867.1 

 
Source: JICA, “Project for Comprehensive Urban Transport Planning in Phnom Penh Capital City”

Fig. 2.2.2 Population Projection by JICA Project

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
5
“Old Area” in this figure represents the white hatching area, and “New Area” represents the area covering both white and
red hatching area, as shown in Fig. 2.2.1.

2-8
2.3 National Plans and Relevant Plans

2.3.1 Urban Planning and Development Planning

(1) National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP)

The RGC places top priority on establishing good governance (Fighting Corruption, Legal and
Judicial Reforms, Public Administration Reform, Reform of Armed Forces) for national strategy
that becomes the foundation of the national development plan. The RGC also set up “Rectangular
Strategy”, listing the most important issues: “1. Promotion of Agriculture Sector”;
“2. Development of Physical Infrastructure”; “3. Private Sector Development and Employment”;
and “4. Capacity Building and Human Resources Development”.
The RGC announced NSDP 2009-2013 as a development plan based on rectangular strategy in
June 2010. In this NSDP 2009-2013, installation and maintenance of sewage/drainage facilities is
ranked as priorities in the large cities located along national highway including Phnom Penh. In
the latest NSDP 2014-2018, that is also ranked as priorities.

(2) Wastewater Management Plan

MPWT prepares the Wastewater Management Plan, which consists of completed and ongoing
plans in wastewater management in major cities of Cambodia. However, this plan is not compiled
as documentary records.

(3) City Development Strategy (CDS)

PPCC formulated CDS for the target year 2015 based on NSDP in 2005. In order to develop
Phnom Penh and to improve civic life, CDS has listed the following five key visions: (1) Land
use and housing; (2) Environment and natural resources; (3) Infrastructure and transportation;
(4) Social services; and (5) Economic development. Under these 5 visions, there are goals such as
“Prevention of water pollution”, “Promotion of sewage treatment” and “Improvement of drainage
system”. Under the key visions, “Prevention of Water Pollution” and “Promotion of Wastewater
Treatment” are listed under Vision (2) and “Drainage Improvement” is listed under Vision (3).

(4) White Book on Development and Planning of Phnom Penh

PPCC with the support of the French government and the City of Paris formulated the White
Book for target year 2020 on the basis of CDS in 2007. Then, PPCC revised it by expanding the
target year to 2035. It was approved by the committee for land management and urban planning
for the capital and was finally approved by sub-decree, dated on 23rd December 2015..
The White Book suggests plans such as “Development of suburbs and expansion of the capital
area to prevent the overconcentration of PPCC”, “Promotion of public-private partnerships in the
housing and land development” and “Establishment of identity as an aesthetic and environmental
city”. The Book also shows the strategy for development policy of sewage/drainage sector as
shown in Fig. 2.3.1, suggesting construction of a new sewage treatment plant at Cheung Aek
Lake with lagoon system.

2-9
 Combined pipe network (Red shows main line) Location of sewage treatment plant (Cheung Aek Lake)
Source: White Book on Development and Planning of Phnom Penh

Fig. 2.3.1 Strategy for Sewage/Drainage Sector in White Book

2.3.2 Water Supply Plan

(1) Current Condition of Water Supply

Water Supply in Phnom Penh is operated and maintained by the Phnom Penh Water Supply
Authority (PPWSA). Current condition (2004-2013) of water supply by PPWSA is shown in
Table 2.3.1. It shows that supplied population and water supply amount has increased due to
rapid urbanization. Water consumption per capita per day is shown in Fig. 2.3.2. The growth rate
in annual average is about 2.0%. On the other hand, non-revenue water rate has been stable at
6.0-8.0% in the last 10 years. Ratio of domestic and non-domestic water supply is 6:4.
Table 2.3.1 Water Supply of PPWSA
Item Unit 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Supplied population (Ave.) Thousand 917.7 1,055.5 1,166.8 1,246.5 1,372.9
Authorized consumption (Ave.)
(1) Domestic Thousand m3/day 83.0 94.5 107.9 121.0 129.6
(2) Commercial/Industry Thousand m3/day 39.8 47.4 58.5 69.5 75.0
(3) Water distributor Thousand m3/day 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.6
(4) Government office Thousand m3/day 10.6 11.7 12.2 12.9 13.7
(5) Total Thousand m3/day 133.5 153.9 179.2 204.0 218.9
Ratio of Domestic consumption out of total (=(1)/(5)) 0.62 0.61 0.60 0.59 0.59
Water consumption per capita per day (Ave.)
(1) Domestic L/capita/day 90.4 89.5 92.5 97.1 94.4
(2) Commercial/Industry L/capita/day 43.4 44.9 50.1 55.8 54.6
(3) Water distributor L/capita/day 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.4
(4) Government office L/capita/day 11.6 11.1 10.5 10.3 10.0
(5) Total L/capita/day 145.5 145.8 153.6 163.7 159.4
Non-revenue water rate (Ave.) % 14.1 9.2 7.4 6.2 6.2

2-10
 Item Unit 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Supplied population (Ave.) Thousand 1,483.2 1,579.6 1,695.1 1,812.6 1,955.7
Authorized consumption (Ave.)
(1) Domestic Thousand m3/day 137.7 148.2 155.9 171.6 189.0
(2) Commercial/Industry Thousand m3/day 79.8 93.4 102.4 116.3 132.5
(3) Water distributor Thousand m3/day 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1
(4) Government office Thousand m3/day 14.3 16.2 14.9 15.5 17.1
(5) Total Thousand m3/day 232.2 258.1 273.3 303.6 338.7
Ratio of Domestic consumption out of total (=(1)/(5)) 0.59 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.56
Water consumption per capita per day (Ave.)
(1) Domestic L/capita/day 92.8 93.8 92.0 94.7 96.6
(2) Commercial/Industry L/capita/day 53.8 59.1 60.4 64.2 67.8
(3) Water distributor L/capita/day 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1
(4) Government office L/capita/day 9.6 10.3 8.8 8.6 8.7
(5) Total L/capita/day 156.6 163.4 161.2 167.5 173.2
Non-revenue water rate (Ave.) % 5.9 5.8 6.7 6.6 7.7
Source: PPWSA
Administrative
水使用量(1人1日当り)の推移
Water Consumption /capita/day Private w holesaler
Commercial & Industrial
200 Domestic
180
160
140
L/capita/day

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
year

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 2.3.2 Water Consumption per Capita per Day

2.4 Status of Existing Facilities

2.4.1 Sewage Facilities

(1) Current Conditions and Challenges

There is no sewage treatment plant in Phnom Penh. Table 2.4.1 shows the current condition of
sanitary facilities such as septic tanks. According to Table 2.4.1, 71.8% of households have toilet
facilities and connects to drainage facilities and 19.7% of the households have independent septic
tanks.
Table 2.4.1 Current Condition of Sewerage Facilities in PPCC
Installation of toilet
Total No. Type of toilets in household (%)
in household (%)
of
Connecting to
Households NO YES Septic Tank Pit Latrine Others
drainage facilities6
352,702 7.1 92.9 71.8 19.7 1.3 -
Source: Cambodia Inter-Census Population Survey, 2013

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
6
According to DPWT/PPCC, ‘Connecting to drainage facilities’ means the house which has a septic tank, and it discharges
supernatant water from the septic tank and gray water to the drainage pipe.

2-11
2.4.2 Drainage Facilities

(1) Condition of Existing Drainage Facilities

Drainage facilities are constructed by DPWT and local authorities, such as Khan and Sangkat.
After construction, the drainage facilities are operated and maintained by DPWT. DPWT records
the total length of drainage pipes by diameter and number of manholes by size since 1994.
Cumulative length of drainage pipe and number of manholes constructed in 2006-2013 are shown
in Table 2.4.2.
Table 2.4.2 Total Length of Drainage Pipes and Number of Manholes
Drainage Pipes (m)
Pipe size 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Ø200cm
Ø180cm 301 301 301 301
Ø160cm 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85
Ø150cm 8,331 9,631 10,847 13,918 17,966 17,966 18,752 19,782
Ø120cm 775 17,820 17,820 17,820 18,187 18,187 18,187 18,187
Ø100cm 42,837 57,962 65,620 81,250 82,110 82,417 84,325 87,876
Ø80cm 26,675 41,712 46,317 50,601 50,939 51,452 51,452 52,125
Ø60cm 124,106 142,125 147,297 157,628 158,068 160,173 160,545 162,049
Ø50cm 51,753 59,873 64,488 64,488 66,237 66,237 66,237 66,237
Ø40cm 13,815 18,942 22,049 22,049 22,105 22,105 22,105 22,105
Ø30cm 33,883 42,902 46,115 46,755 46,755 47,173 47,536 48,412
U-drain 320 320 320 320
Total (m) 302,260 391,052 420,638 454,594 463,073 466,416 469,845 477,479
Manholes
Size 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Rg200x130 45 45 61 127
Rg130x130 1,993 3,420 3,701 4,510 4,530 4,558 4,617 4,785
Rg110x110 1,395 1,669 1,823 2,025 2,025 2,025 2,025 2,052
Rg90x90 5,171 8,080 8,545 9,120 9,142 9,233 9,266 9,354
Rg70x70 6,629 9,103 9,334 16,662 16,682 16,822 16,895 17,104
Total 15,188 22,272 23,403 32,317 32,424 32,683 32,864 33,422
Source: DPWT/PPCC

DPWT is in the process of establishing the database7 of drainage pipes at present. Fig. 2.4.1
shows the location map derived from the database. However, there are still many drainage pipes
in the capital city that have not been recorded in this database yet. Further survey about drainage
pipe network is necessary.

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
7
The database is established in the soft component of the Japan’s Grant Aid Project, “The Project for Flood Protection and
Drainage Improvement in the Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase III)”.

2-12
 0 2.5 5.0 km

Source: DPWT/PPCC

Fig. 2.4.1 Drainage Pipe Location Map from Database

Details of open channels and pumping stations managed by DPWT as of September 2014, are
shown in Table 2.4.3 and Table 2.4.4. Total length of channel is about 55 kilometres and number
of pumping stations is 12.
Table 2.4.3 Total Length of Open Channels Managed by DPWT
Total
Improved
No. Name length Canal Type
Length (m)
(m)
1 Boeng Trabek Upper Canal 2,410 2,410 Reinforced Concrete Canal
2 Boeng Trabek Downstream Canal 850 0 Earth Canal
3 Boeng Tumpun Canal 3,710 3,710 Improved Earth Canal
4 Stoeng Mean Chey Canal 1,900 0 Earth Canal
5 East & West Tuol Sen Canals 1,118 1,118 Improved to Reinforced Concrete Canal
6 Boeng Salang canal 1,260 887 Improved Earth Canal (887m)
7 Canal Baraing (France) 3,700 Earth Canal
8 Canal Lou Pram 1,700 Earth Canal
9 Tuol Poung Ror Canal (South Prey Pring) 7,500 Earth Canal
10 Prey Spoeu Canal 7,000 Earth Canal
11 O Akuch Canal 4,200 Earth Canal
12 598 Canal 1,850 Earth Canal
13 Tuol Sampoeuv Canal (Philippines Canal) 5,000 Earth Canal
14 Kop Srov Canal 4,700 Earth Canal
15 Bak Touk Canal 3,800 Earth Canal
16 O Veng Canal 4,150 Earth Canal
Total 54,848 8,125
Improved to Reinforced Concrete Canal 3,528
Improved in Earth Canal 4,597
Normal Earth Canal 46,723
Source: DPWT/PPCC

2-13
 Table 2.4.4 List of Pumping Stations Managed by DPWT

Electrical Engine Driven Diesel Engine Driven Total

Observation
Station Discharge
Power Capacity Power Capacity Capacity (Date of
Name Pump Pump
Nos /Unit /Unit Nos /Unit /Unit Equipment)
type type [m3/sec.]
[kW] [m3/sec.] [HP] [m3/sec.]
Operation
Boeng 1 unit of Backup Generator,
1 8 Horizontal 132 1.0 8.0 since 2003
Trabek 1000 KVA
(ADB Loan)
Operation
Boeng Submergible 2 units of Backup Generator, since 2004
2 5 280 3.0 15.0
Tumpun Pump 700 KVA each (Japan’s Grant
Aid)
Tuol Vertical Vertical Constructed
3 2 45 0.47 2 145 0.69 2.32
Kork I shaft shaft in 1970’s
Tuol Vertical Vertical Constructed
4 1 45 0.47 2 145 0.69 1.85
Kork II shaft shaft in 1970’s
Operation
Chak Pump 1 unit of Backup Generator,
5 2 45 0.7 1.4 since 2010
Tomuk Gate 200 KVA
(Japan Grant Aid)
Preah Operation
Pump since 2004
6 Kumlung 1 0.2 - 0.2
Gate (Joint Research
1 with Kubota)
Operation
Preah
Pump since 2010
7 Kumlung 2 22 0.35 - 0.7
Gate (Japan’s Grant
2
Aid)
Operation
Phsar Pump 1 unit of Backup Generator, Since 2010
8 2 45 0.7 1.4
Kandal Gate 200 KVA (Japan’s Grant
Aid)
Operation
Phsar Pump 1 unit of Backup Generator, since 2010
9 2 45 0.7 1.4
Chaas Gate 200 KVA (Japan’s Grant
Aid)
Svay Pak Submergible Vertical Operation
10 4 75 0.13 3 190 0.38 1.66
Km No.9 Pump shaft since 2006
Vertical Operation
11 Kop Srov 5 400 2.8 - 14.0
shaft since 2010
Tuol Submergible Operation
12 3 0.66 - 1.98
Sampeo Pump since 2014
Source: DPWT/PPCC

Fig. 2.4.2 shows location of open channels and pumping stations managed by DPWT.

2-14
 11

10
12

4
9
3
8
6 7
5

1
2

0 2.5 5.0 km

Blue line: location of open channels, Red mark: location of pumping station
(Numbers correspond to Table 2.4.4)
Source: DPWT/PPCC, JICA Study Team

Fig. 2.4.2 Location Map of Channels and Pumping Stations Managed by DPWT

2.4.3 Sludge Management Facilities

The Waste Management Division of PPCC is responsible for septage management but there exists no
septage disposal site for septage collected by vacuum trucks. Therefore, the septage is disposed into
the lagoon in Dangkor solid waste disposal site with charge of 10,000 riel per vacuum truck. However,
most of septage collected by vacuum car from the households is illegally dumped in the drainage
channels or wetlands.

2.4.4 Flood Protection

Urbanized area in Phnom Penh is protected from flooding arising from overflow of Mekong/Sap River
by Kop Srov Dike at northern part, Tumpun Dike at southern part and natural levees along the
Mekong/Sap River.
When the M/P 1999 study was conducted, Kop Srov Dike formed a part of the northwest
administrative boundary of the Municipality of Phnom Penh, connecting National Roads of Routes 4
and 5. Due to expansion of the administrative area of Phnom Penh, the role of Kop Srov Dike has
changed into a dike to protect the city from flooding as well as a ring road to bypass the city center

2-15
area. Similarly, there are two roles of Tumpun dike, namely, as a dike and a ring road. The crests of
the two dikes are paved by asphalt or cement concrete.
Water level of Sap River has been observed since the 1960’s, the maximum water level was recorded
in 2000. Annual maximum water level recorded between 1993 and 2013 is shown Fig. 2.4.3. It is
obvious that there is no record which exceeds the maximum water level recorded in 2000
(E.L. 10.18m).

Annual Maximum Water Level of Sap River

(at Chaktmuk Station)
11.00
10.50
10.00
Water level, E.L.m

9.50
9.00
8.50
8.00
7.50
7.00
6.50 Water Level
6.00
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year
Source: MOWRAM

Fig. 2.4.3 Variation of Annual Maximum Water Level in Sap River

2.5 Water Quality

2.5.1 Water Quality and Effluent Standard

The Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control, 1999 was enacted on 6th April 1999, aiming to prevent
water pollution in Cambodia. This sub-decree defines “Classification of waste and hazard discharge”,
“Water Quality Standard”, “Effluent Standard”, “Responsibility of polluter”, “Monitoring”,
“Discharge Permit”, “Inspection” and “Penalty”, etc.
Water quality standard in public water areas such as river, lakes, reservoirs and coastal water is set for
bio-diversity conservation (Table 2.5.1). In addition, effluent standard (Effluent standard for pollution
sources discharging wastewater to public water areas or sewer) is set as shown in Table 2.5.2.
Table 2.5.1 Water Quality Standard for Bio-Diversity Conservation
No Parameter Unit Standard Value
1 pH - 6.5 – 8.5
2 BOD5 mg/l 1 – 10
1. River 3 Suspended Solid mg/l 2.4 – 100
4 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 2.0 – 7.5
5 Coliform MPN/100ml < 5,000
1 pH - 6.5 – 8.5
2 CODMn mg/l 1–8
3 Suspended Solid mg/l 1 – 15
2. Lakes and
4 Dissolved Oxygen mg/l 2.0 – 7.5
Reservoirs
5 Coliform MPN/100ml < 1,000
6 Total Nitrogen mg/l 1.0 – 0.6
7 Total Phosphorus mg/l 0.005 – 0.05

2-16
 No Parameter Unit Standard Value
1 pH - 7.0 – 8.3
2 CODMn mg/l 2–8
3 Suspended Solid mg/l 2 – 7.5
3. Coastal Water 4 Coliform MPN/100ml < 1,000
5 Oil Content mg/l 0
6 Total Nitrogen mg/l 0.2 – 1.0
7 Total Phosphorus mg/l 0.02 – 0.09
* Some parameters have ‘lower limit’ and ‘upper limit’. As the result of inquiry to MOE about ‘lower limit’, setting up
of the ‘lower limit’ (excluding pH) is not correct and those should be revised but the schedule of the revision is not
fixed.
Source: Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control, Annex 4: Water Quality Standard in public water areas for
bio-diversity conservation.

Table 2.5.2 Effluent Standard for Public Water Areas or Sewer

Standard
No Parameter Unit
Protected Public Water Area Public Water Area and Sewer
0
1 Temperature C < 45 < 45
2 pH 6–9 5–9
3 BOD5 ( 5 days at 20℃ ) mg/l < 30 < 80
4 CODCr mg/l < 50 < 100
5 Total Suspended Solids mg/l < 60 < 120
6 Total Dissolved Solids mg/l < 1,000 < 2,000
7 Grease and Oil mg/l < 5.0 < 15
8 Detergents mg/l < 5.0 < 15
9 Phenols mg/l < 0.1 < 1.2
10 Nitrate (NO3 ) mg/l < 10 < 20
11 Chlorine ( free ) mg/l < 1.0 < 2.0
12 Chloride ( ion ) mg/l < 500 < 700
13 Sulphate ( as SO4 ) mg/l < 300 < 500
14 Sulphate ( as Sulphur ) mg/l < 0.2 < 1.0
15 Phosphate ( PO4 ) mg/l < 3.0 < 6.0
16 Cyanide ( CN ) mg/l < 0.2 < 1.5
17 Barium ( Ba ) mg/l < 4.0 < 7.0
18 Arsenic ( As ) mg/l < 0.10 < 1.0
19 Tin ( Sn ) mg/l < 2.0 < 8.0
20 Iron ( Fe ) mg/l < 1.0 < 20
21 Boron ( B ) mg/l < 1.0 < 5.0
22 Manganese ( Mn ) mg/l < 1.0 < 5.0
23 Cadmium ( Cd ) mg/l < 0.1 < 0.5
24 Chromium ( Cr+3 ) mg/l < 0.2 < 1.0
25 Chromium ( Cr+6 ) mg/l < 0.05 < 0.5
26 Copper ( Cu ) mg/l < 0.2 < 1.0
27 Lead ( Pb ) mg/l < 0.1 < 1.0
28 Mercury (Hg ) mg/l < 0.002 < 0.05
29 Nickel ( Ni ) mg/l < 0.2 < 1.0
30 Selenium ( Se ) mg/l < 0.05 < 0.5
31 Silver ( Ag ) mg/l < 0.1 < 0.5
32 Zinc ( Zn ) mg/l < 1.0 < 3.0
33 Molybdenum ( Mo ) mg/l < 0.1 < 1.0
34 Ammonia ( NH3 ) mg/l < 5.0 < 7.0
35 DO mg/l >2.0 >1.0
36 Polychlorinated Byphenyl mg/l <0.003 <0.003
37 Calcium mg/l <150 <200
38 Magnesium mg/l <150 <200
39 Carbon tetrachloride mg/l <3 <3
40 Hexachloro benzene mg/l <2 <2
41 DTT (Dithiothreitol) mg/l <1.3 <1.3
42 Endrin mg/l <0.01 <0.01
43 Dieldrin mg/l <0.01 <0.01

2-17
 Standard
No Parameter Unit
Protected Public Water Area Public Water Area and Sewer
44 Aldrin mg/l <0.01 <0.01
45 Isodrin mg/l <0.01 <0.01
46 Perchloro ethylene mg/l <2.4 <2.4
47 Hexachloro butadiene mg/l <3 <3
48 Chloroform mg/l <1 <1
49 1,2 Dichloro ethylene mg/l <2.4 <2.4
50 Trichloro ethylene mg/l <1 <1
51 Trichloro benzene mg/l <2 <2
52 Hexaxhloro cyclohexene mg/l <2 <2
Note: “Protected public water area” is set in this standard. All effluents including those of industries should
be subject to the standard of “Public water area and sewer” since the protected area is not yet currently
specified.
Source: Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control, Annex 2: Effluent standard for pollution sources discharging
wastewater to public water areas or sewer

2.5.2 Water Monitoring and Analysis in the Study

(1) Monitoring Locations and Parameters

Water monitoring and analysis was implemented by JICA Study Team. The survey was
independent from MOE’s monitoring survey. Locations of monitoring are shown in Table 2.5.3
and Fig. 2.5.1. Sixteen monitoring locations in total include river, lake/swamp, small channel,
factory and commercial facilities. Samplings were conducted six times (three times in the dry
season and three times in the rainy season).
Table 2.5.3 Monitoring Points and Parameters in the Study
No Category Monitoring Point Parameters Remarks
1 River Sap River (Phnom Penh Port) pH, DO, BOD5, Surface water is taken from the
2 Mekong River (Kien Svay) CODCr, CODMn, riverside
3 Bassac River (Thakhmao) TSS, T-N, T-P,
4 Lake/swamp Tamok Lake (Discharge Point) Total Coliform Water is taken at discharge point of
5 Cheung Aek Lake (Discharge Point) (9 parameters) the lake/swamp
6 Small Channel Kop Slov Pumping Station pH, DO, BOD5, Surface water is taken at the middle
7 Svay Pak Sluiceway CODCr, TSS, of channels.
8 Trabek Pumping Station T-N, T-P, Total The points of factory and commercial
Coliform facilities are selected in collaboration
9 Tumpun Pumping Station (8 parameters) with DOE/PPCC.
10 Prek Thnot River (Thakhmao Bridge) <Treatment Facility>
11 Factory Men Sarun (Noodle Factory) Septic Tank
12 SKD (Liquor Factory) Digestion Tank + Lagoon
13 SL (Garment and Washing) Activated sludge process + Chemical
treatment
14 Commercial Phnom Penh Tower (Office Building) Activated sludge process
15 Facilities Intercontinental Hotel Septic tank + Aeration
16 Central Market Septic tank
Note: CODMn is monitored at rivers to compare the CODMn of lake and swamp where it is regulated.
Source: JICA Study Team

2-18
 Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 2.5.1 Location Map for Water Sampling Survey

(2) Survey Result

Minimum, maximum and average at each monitoring point are summarized in Table 2.5.4.
Table 2.5.4 Minimum, Maximum and Average Values at Monitoring Points in the Study
Total
pH DO TSS BOD5 CODMn CODCr T-N T-P
No. Location Coliform
(-) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
(MPN/100 ml)
1 Sap River Min 6.17 3.44 72.0 2.79 3.98 22.64 0.09 0.01 1.1E+04
Max 7.73 5.51 214.0 5.18 8.14 43.12 0.91 0.06 9.3E+05
Average 6.91 4.47 124.3 4.05 6.04 32.40 0.43 0.04 2.2E+05
2 Mekong River Min 4.20 4.37 98.0 0.90 2.79 19.60 0.13 0.04 2.9E+03
Max 7.54 5.82 364.0 3.06 6.20 37.50 1.67 0.28 7.5E+05
Average 6.41 5.15 179.5 2.04 4.51 27.67 0.54 0.09 1.8E+05
3 Bassac River Min 5.83 4.18 95.0 0.50 3.05 15.68 0.48 0.05 4.6E+03
Max 7.40 5.71 332.0 3.75 6.80 27.44 1.67 0.28 2.4E+06
Average 6.71 4.83 165.2 2.06 4.38 22.30 0.84 0.14 4.4E+05
4 Tamok Lake Min 6.61 4.72 59.0 2.90 4.31 33.80 0.66 0.12 2.3E+04
Max 9.16 7.59 102.0 6.44 12.29 62.40 4.86 0.51 2.4E+05
Average 7.64 6.06 85.8 5.17 9.76 49.43 1.74 0.30 9.8E+04
5 Cheung Aek Min 6.37 0.64 26.0 3.60 6.95 35.27 1.78 0.31 2.3E+04
Lake Max 7.38 4.85 164.0 9.69 18.24 74.16 4.76 0.76 7.5E+05

2-19
 Total
pH DO TSS BOD5 CODMn CODCr T-N T-P
No. Location Coliform
(-) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L)
(MPN/100 ml)
Average 6.85 2.06 95.7 7.13 13.11 54.48 3.45 0.53 2.3E+05
6 Kop Slov Min 6.10 0.13 84.0 10.80 - 36.84 2.23 0.99 1.5E+04
Pumping Max 7.42 6.10 154.0 26.73 - 59.00 6.65 2.17 1.1E+06
Station Average 6.92 2.82 106.5 18.05 - 46.00 3.49 1.47 3.2E+05
7 Svay Pak Min 5.82 0.00 134.0 88.00 - 50.96 3.44 0.36 2.1E+04
Sluiceway Max 7.23 3.57 640.0 156.62 - 90.16 8.80 2.10 2.4E+07
Average 6.73 1.59 315.0 121.35 - 74.21 5.75 1.19 4.2E+06
8 Trabek Min 6.66 0.00 72.0 89.00 - 116.52 2.74 1.17 2.1E+04
Pumping Max 7.06 0.07 740.0 299.85 - 247.61 26.31 4.01 9.3E+06
Station Average 6.85 0.03 254.5 243.05 - 195.71 11.13 2.18 1.8E+06
9 Tumpun Min 6.09 0.00 142.0 112.00 - 92.18 3.32 0.59 2.3E+04
Pumping Max 7.27 0.73 480.0 249.50 - 196.37 21.90 4.95 1.5E+07
Station Average 6.79 0.13 237.5 164.09 - 132.06 10.62 2.01 2.7E+06
10 Prek Thnot Min 6.18 0.98 170.0 7.38 - 31.32 1.84 0.19 3.5E+03
River Max 7.39 5.10 474.0 20.69 - 48.12 6.96 1.83 9.3E+06
Average 6.77 3.02 248.5 12.84 - 41.32 4.06 0.77 1.6E+06
11 Men Sarun Min 4.30 2.60 108.0 36.40 - 48.80 0.75 0.16 2.8E+04
(Noodle Max 7.25 6.12 478.0 127.50 - 595.84 4.10 1.04 1.1E+06
Factory) Average 6.15 4.83 218.8 79.70 - 251.24 2.91 0.56 6.1E+05
12 SKD (Liquor Min 3.35 1.03 52.0 30.75 - 48.76 0.59 0.14 7.5E+03
Factory) Max 7.32 6.78 98.0 47.06 - 104.16 5.96 1.58 2.4E+05
Average 6.34 3.09 79.2 39.34 - 71.36 2.33 0.54 1.4E+05
13 SL (Garment Min 6.30 2.60 52.0 36.95 - 70.68 4.87 0.18 1.5E+03
and Washing Max 7.51 6.35 128.0 65.52 - 160.72 14.75 2.18 7.5E+05
Factory) Average 6.96 4.38 80.8 45.17 - 112.29 8.61 0.57 1.9E+05
14 Phnom Penh Min 5.48 0.00 86.0 15.70 - 49.60 4.08 2.55 2.3E+04
Tower (Office Max 7.21 3.10 302.0 72.54 - 101.40 10.88 3.63 7.5E+05
Building) Average 6.63 1.67 201.7 37.37 - 79.90 7.56 3.01 1.7E+05
15 Intercontinental Min 5.38 4.70 64.0 21.06 - 58.82 7.92 1.09 2.1E+04
Hotel Max 7.83 5.72 268.0 75.58 - 84.88 26.14 2.96 2.1E+07
Average 7.03 5.10 149.2 41.41 - 74.37 13.10 2.13 3.6E+06
16 Central Market Min 4.70 0.00 144.0 135.62 - 202.80 7.21 2.24 2.3E+04
Max 6.95 0.34 276.0 292.50 - 356.72 22.08 5.81 7.5E+07
Average 6.17 0.07 190.0 212.91 - 283.35 11.19 3.38 1.3E+07
Standard for Monitoring Point
No. 1 to 3 6.5-8.5 >2.0 <100 <10 - - - - 5.0E+03
No. 4 to 5 6.5-8.5 >2.0 <15 - <8 - <1.0 <0.05 1.0E+03
No. 6 to 16 5.0-9.0 >2.0 <120 <80 - <100 - - -
Source: JICA Study Team

2-20
2.6 Current Status of Organizations and the System

2.6.1 Related Laws and Regulations

Cambodian laws consist of the Constitution, Constitutional Law, Kram (Law), Kret (Royal Decree),
Anukuret (Sub-Decree), Prakas (Regulation or Declaration), Sarachor (Circular) and other forms (such
as Ordinance of the Mayor, Provincial Governor or Bureau Director). The related laws and regulations
are as described below.

(1) Sewage and Sludge Management

No law relating to sewerage and drainage management currently exists. Therefore, a “Wastewater
Management Law” is being formulated by MPWT as a new law concerning sewerage and
drainage management. Formulation work has been ongoing as of February 2015. Although a draft
has been written, the work is still in the stage of gathering ideas from neighbouring countries;
therefore, completion of the final is still uncertain. This draft consists of 83 articles in 14 chapters.
Currently, assistance from UN-HABITAT and UN-ESCAP is being sought.
As stated above, no law has been enacted for wastewater management, except for those relevant
to the Ministry of Environment. In order to proceed with the establishment of a sewer system, a
law concerning the treatment of wastewater and disposal of sludge needs to be established. To
address this issue, a sewerage law as the basic law concerning treatment of wastewater and
disposal of sludge needs to be established and aligned with other relevant laws; while relevant
local government ordinances and decrees need to be formulated. The sewerage law (or ordinance)
to be proposed shall include, for example, definition of terms, business plan, structural standards,
discharged water quality, installation of drainage utilities, announcement of commission,
obligation of sewer connection, installation of specified facilities, monitoring of discharged water
quality and effluent utilities, treatment and disposal of sludge, standards for operation and
maintenance, setting sewerage fee and method to collect the charges, support scheme such as
reduction or exemption of the charges, procedures for respective notifications, and penalty
provisions.

(2) Sewage and Sludge Management in Private Developments

The “Law on Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (1994)” concerns private
development, stipulating provisions related to processes of national or provincial level
development planning and land use planning. Local authorities such as PPCC are mandated to
formulate a Master Plan for development planning and a land use plan, which must receive
national approval.
Sub-Decree No. 86 “Anukret 86 on Construction Permit (ANK/BK)” concerning building permits
was formulated on December 19, 1997. ANK/BK applies to all buildings in the absence of a land
use plan or approved Master Plan. As the conditions for issuance of a building permit, there are
provisions concerning sanitary facilities, connection of sewers and land reclamation (Article 2 of
the mentioned law), and provisions concerning drinking water supply and connection of sewers
and drains (Article 31 of the mentioned law). In the absence of a sewerage system, there are
provisions for obligation to install wastewater treatment facilities such as septic tanks and its
standards of facilities (Article 31-3 of the mentioned law). Building permits are issued by the
RGC (Council of Ministers). In particular, the buildings in the following list require approval of
the National Committee Chairman of the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and
Construction (Article 5 of the mentioned law). The member of the National Committee is
stipulated in Article 6.2 of the mentioned law.

 Commercial or industrial building whose floor area exceeds 3,000 m2

 Commercial hotel

2-21
  Farmland development not less than 500 ha
 Airport, seaport, railway or carriage storage
 Public or private facility whose floor area exceeds 3,000 m2 (including such a building
whose floor area exceeds 3,000 m2 after extension)
 Construction in a protected area (environmental, scenic or historical cultural asset)
 Building classified as national heritage
 Building for defence of military facilities

(3) Land Use and Regulations

The “Land Law” regulates land use. The “Land Law” was enacted in 1992 and revised in 2001.
This law stipulates rights, form and acquisition of land ownership, and the procedures for land
ownership. Although the “Land Law” recognizes legal ownership of land, it does not recognize
pre-1980 land ownership rights. However, there are categories of land ownership rights known as
ownership rights and a special right to occupy. Depending on the availability of documentary
evidence, one may be granted ownership rights or a special right to occupy. Note that land
ownership rights are only granted to citizens or organizations having Cambodian nationalities.
Incidentally, the 2001 revision of the Land Law clearly listed, in Article 29–31, the conditions for
which a special right to occupy is granted.

(4) Environmental and Social Considerations, as well as Land Expropriation

Details of laws concerning environmental and social considerations, as well as land expropriation
are mentioned in Section 2.7.

(5) Identification of Issues

As stated in Subsection 2.3.1 (Urban Plan, Development Plan, and Urban Plan), improvements in
sewerage and drainage area are identified as the focus of such materials as NSDP, CDS, and the
White Book. However, in the absence of a legal framework concerning establishment of the
sewer system, the following are identified as the issues concerning the legal framework.

(a) Absence of Legal Framework concerning Sewerage, Effluent and Sludge Management
(Sewerage Law)

The sewerage law governing the sewer system is the bible of smooth implementation of M/P of
sewage and drainage improvement. Therefore, establishment of the law is essential.

(b) Absence of Guidelines and Standards for Sewerage Management

Specific guidelines and standards related to the sewer system, based on the sewerage law, are
required, to stipulate such matters as subsidiary schemes concerning the sewer system, sewer
connection from factory/plant, commercial facility or general household, standards concerning
the structure of culvert/pipes and treatment plants, standards for regulating water quality and
standards for operation and maintenance.

(c) Establishment of the System to promote the Sewerage Management

In order to smoothly implement this project, which is targeting 2035, firstly, the formulation of
sewerage and other relevant laws is required. Also, to promote the sewerage improvement, the
following system design will be effective: formulation of short-, medium- and long-term plans,
followed by approval from central government and then detailing of a “Five-Year Plan for
Sewerage Improvement in Phnom Pen Capital City (provisional name)” to be sustainable until
the target year.

2-22
2.6.2 Organizations Concerned

(1) Ministry of Public Works and Transport

The Ministry of Public Works and Transport (MPWT) governs Cambodia’s public works and
transport such as roads, ports, transport, urban development, sewerage and drainage. MPWT
consists of five departments (General Directorate of Administrative Services, General Directorate
of Transport, General Directorate of Public Works, General Inspectorate and public works
regions).
MPWT has a plan to create two more departments under the General Directorate of Public
Works: one is sewerage and drainage department to promote the establishment and improvement
of laws and standards, the other is the department in charge of highways. In addition, alongside
organizational development at MPWT, organization at the Department of Public Works and
Transport (DPWT) will also be strengthened
When issues arise during establishment of sewerage system, a steering committee will be
established by the ministries and agencies concerned for coordination toward solving the issue.
The committee will be convened by the Secretariat at the Ministry of Economics and Finance,
with members coming from the concerned ministries and agencies.
The Office of Wastewater Treatment System and Flood Protection System in the Department of
Sub-national Urban Infrastructure and Engineering in DPWT is responsible for laws and
standards concerning sewerage and drainage. As of February 2014, MPWT has altogether 3,391
staff members, while the Department of Sub-national Urban Infrastructure and Engineering has
60. Fig. 2.6.1 shows the organization of the MPWT, while Fig. 2.6.2 shows the organization of
the Department of Sub-national Urban Infrastructure and Engineering. Incidentally, at present, the
sewerage and drainage services in Cambodia are the responsibilities of the General Department of
Public Works and Transport of each province or PPCC.

MINISTER

SECRETARY
　OF STATE UNDER SECRETARY
OF STATE
ADVISORS

GENERAL GENERAL GENERAL

３-PUBLIC　WORKS GENERAL (22)
DIRECTORATE OF DIRECTORATE OF DIRECTORATE OF
REGIONS INSPECTORATE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRANSPORT PUBLIC WORKS
SERVICES

DEPARTMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF (791)

２４-MUNICIPAL & DEPARTMENT OF (184)
(82) LAND TRANSPORT LOADS
PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION
PUBLIC　WORKS
AND　TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT OF HEAVY
DEP. OF (47) (410)
DEPARTMENTS WATER EQUIPMENT
PERSONNEL & TRANSPORT CENTER
(34)
HUMAN
RESOURCES PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT OF
(14) RESEARCH (59)
MERCHANT
DEP. OF CENTER
MARINE
ACCOUNTING & (32)
FINANCE
DEP. OF INLAND (47)
WATER　WAY

DEP. OF PLANNING (25)

DEP. OF SUB-
NATIONAL URBAN (60)
INFRASTRUCU &
ENGINEERING

Source: MPWT

Fig. 2.6.1 Organizational Chart of MPWT

2-23
 Director

Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director

Office of Office of Office of Office of Office of Office of

Administration Planning and Engineering Waste Water Roads in Environment
and Techniques Treatment Capitals, and Public
General Affairs System and Provinces,Cities Service
Flood Protection and Towns System
System

Source: MPWT

Fig. 2.6.2 Organizational Chart of Department of Sub-National Urban Infrastructure

and Engineering

(2) Phnom Penh Capital City

As shown in Fig. 2.6.3, PPCC consists of an Administration Division, Planning and Investment
Division, Finance Division, Urbanization Division, Human Resource Management Division,
Inter-Sectoral Division, Law and Human Right Affair Division, and Waste Management Division.
As of December 2010, 268 staff members work there. PPCC operates its services in collaboration
with respective ministries and departments under ministries. Concerning sewerage services, after
approval by the Governor of the Capital City, they will be carried out by the DPWT under
direction of and with technical support from MPWT

Governor
Six Deputy Governors

Source: Overview of Urban Development in Phnom Penh Capital City, 2011

Fig. 2.6.3 Organizational Chart of PPCC

2-24
 (3) Department of Public Works and Transport

(a) Organizational Structure and Staff Assignment

The Department of Public Works and Transport (DPWT/PPCC) is a branch under MPWT.
Under the oversight of PPCC and MPWT, DPWT/PPCC manages public services in Phnom
Penh such as roads, ports, transport, urban development, sewerage and drainage, and other
services, and is responsible for operation and maintenance of infrastructures. DPWT is one of
the counterpart organizations for the Study. In addition, when a project is implemented through
international cooperation such as this project, the deputy director responsible for International
Relation Affairs and the Public Works Office are also involved.
Among those divisions/offices, the Drainage and Sewerage Division (DSD) is strongly related
to the operation and maintenance of sewerage and drainage systems.
DSD consists of four sections and carries out tasks for operation and management of drainage
systems in Phnom Penh. DSD has 30 regular employees, assigned to the management of
drainage systems, and the management of cleaning equipment, etc. The Technical Section
prepares the improvement plans (budgetary requests) for drainage and sewage treatment
systems including such works as repairs of drainage pipes, channels and equipment, operation
and management of pumping stations, and reports to DPWT. Field works are implemented by
contracted employees in this system. Those contracted employees renew their contract annually.
Any change in the quantity of works results in the fluctuation of number of contracted
employees.
As shown in Table 2.6.1, the number of DPWT staff members is 826 as of end of February
2014, including the 193 staff members at DSD. Fig. 2.6.4 shows the DPWT organizational
structure and Fig. 2.6.5 shows the DSD organizational structure, respectively.

Director (All) Project

Mr. Sam Piseth Management Unit

Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director
Mr. Im Sam Ol Mr. Peov Meng Hay Mr. Ney Sona Mr. Neov Saroeurn Mr. Mey So Panha Mr. Seng KimSan Mr. Chou Kimtry Ms. Bopha Phanny

International Gender and

Motobike Public Works Vehicle Drainage and Finance and Public Garden Administration
Relation Affairs Traffic Safety
Registration Office Registration Sewerage Planning Office Division and Personel
Secretariat
Division Division Division Office

Districts' Public Road and Driving License Public Lighting Transport

Works Offices Tidiness and and Traffic Division Office
Bridge
Cleanliness Safety Division
Division
Division

River Bank Security and Weighbridge

Protection Taxi Terminal
Discipline of Station
Division DPWT

Source: DPWT/PPCC

Fig. 2.6.4 Organizational Chart of DPWT

2-25
 (1)
Chief
Mr.Doumg Chansarath

(1) (1) (1) (1)

Vice Chief Vice Chief Vice Chief Vice Chief (30)
Mr.Men Sokhen Mr.Meach Channy Mr.Chhormg Vantha Mr.Sam Vicheka

EMPLOYEE
(6)

REGULAR
Administration
and Personnel

(3) (6) (7) (3)

Pumping Station and Pond- Fabrication, Repairing and Installation Pipe and Manhole
Technical Section
Canal Maintenance Section of Sewer Pipes Section Maintenance Section

[0] [58] [17] [38] [0] [15] [28] [7]

CONTRACTED
and Others Related Elements
Team of Fabrication of Pipes
Wastewater Treatment Plant

EMPLOYEE
Installation of Sewer Pipes

Team of Cleaning Work

and Dump Truck Team
Team of Repairing and
Pumping Station Team

Technical Study Team

Vacuum Truck Team

Maintenance Team

Heavy Equipment

of Sewer Network
Pond and Canal

[163]

30 (regular employee)
Chart of DSD and Staff Number 163 (contracted employee)
total 193 persons
Source: DPWT/PPCC

Fig. 2.6.5 Organizational Chart of Drainage and Sewerage Division (DSD)

Table 2.6.1 Number of DPWT Staff Members
Regular Employees
Category 1 Category 2 Contracted
No. Section Total
(Engineer/Other) (Male/Female) Sub-Total Employees
Engr. Other Male Female
1 Director Board 5 0 4 1 5 - 5
2 Administration and Personnel Office - 7 5 2 7 2 9
3 Finance and Planning Office 1 11 9 3 12 1 13
4 Public Works Office 19 3 21 1 22 3 25
5 Transport Office 2 18 13 7 20 5 25
6 Road and Bridge Division 6 25 22 9 31 38 69
7 Drainage and Sewerage Division 6 24 19 11 30 163 193
8 Public Lighting Division - - - - - 20 20
9 Public Garden Division 4 14 12 6 18 272 290
10 Pound Division 1 7 8 - 8 7 15
11 Flood Control Division 0 1 1 - 1 - 1
12 Solid Waste Management Division - - - - - - -
13 District Public Works Offices 7 10 14 3 17 - 17
14 Motorbike Registration Division 3 26 23 6 29 14 43
15 Municipal Transport Authority - - - - - - -
16 Vehicle Registration Division 3 43 25 21 46 12 58
Driving License and Traffic Safety
17 7 33 29 11 40 3 43
Division
Sub Total 64 222 205 81
Total 286 286 286 540 826
Note: No. 12 is not shown in the organizational chart. Based on the latest information, staff numbers were reduced to 821,
but the section where staff was reduced is unclear.
Source: DPWT/PPCC

2-26
 (b) Capacity to implement the Service

DPWT/PPCC employs 826 staff members, 64 of which are engineers in regular employment.
Out of the 64, the number of engineers working for DSD, who operate and maintain drainage
system, is six employees. Although there are drainage pumping stations for flood protection, the
absence of sewerage treatment facilities means that they currently lack the capacity for
operation and maintenance for sewerage treatment system. Their main works are to clean and to
repair the drainage pipes and channels, without maintenance standards, operational manuals or
any rules. In order to implement sewerage services including drainage systems, capacity
development will be crucial.

(4) Identification of Issues

Issues concerning organizations are as described below.

(a) Improvement of Organizational Framework (departments and personnel) for operation

PPCC does not have any engineer for operation and maintenance of sewage treatment plant
since there is no sewage treatment plant at present. Although it depends on how future sewage
treatment plants are to be operated, for the time being, PPCC needs to organize departments in
charge of sewerage planning, sewage connection and sewerage fee collection. Currently there
are 193 staff members involved in drainage and sewerage services. Future staffing will need to
be an appropriate number for the operation, taking into consideration the operation form (direct
operation, contracted operation or another form of operation). Incidentally, PPWSA has 849
staff members for water supply operations.

(b) Clarification of Allocation of Roles between the Central and Local Organizations

This matter should be discussed with the related parties as the reference of Japanese
organization system; MPWT formulates the legal framework and standards, while DPWT
develops the technical and construction supervision guidelines, and operation and maintenance
manual based on the legislation and standards. For such formulation, it is necessary to consider
inviting experts from experienced countries. In addition, there is also an issue of role allocation
and staff assignment between regular employees and contracted employees in DPWT.

(c) Necessity to ensure Technical Skill and Personnel for Sewerage Services

Establishing and improving sewerage services require administrative abilities and operation
management abilities. Currently, DPWT has staff for maintenance of drainage pipe and channels,
but lacks engineers to operate sewerage services. Therefore, it is necessary to have trainings for
key-personnel utilizing the Capacity Development Program or overseas training in experienced
countries that have good sewerage systems such as Japan. Thereby, technical skill and
appropriate personnel are continuously ensured through on-the-job training.

2.6.3 Budget and Financial Situation

(1) State Budget Size

The budget of the Cambodian Government from the viewpoint of revenue is shown in
Table 2.6.2. The revenues in 2012, 2013 and 2014 are 8,452.0 billion Riels, 8,769.5 billion Riels
and 10,517.4 billion Riels, respectively, and increasing year by year. The revenue breakdown
shows that tax revenues account for 84.2% in 2014. In the tax revenues, GDCE (General
Department of Customs and Excise) revenues are more than half (51.2%). The GDT (General
Department of Taxation) revenues follow at 38.7%. Domestic Capital is only 2.2% of the
domestic revenue and much less than the Current Revenue accounting for 97.8%.

2-27
 Table 2.6.2 Cambodia State Budget Revenue
(Unit: Million Riels)
Actual 2012 Estimate 2013 BL 2014
Item
Amount % Amount % Amount %
Domestic Revenue 8,452,007 100.00% 8,769,480 100.00% 10,517,449 100.00%
Current 8,201,155 97.03% 8,690,464 99.10% 10,284,449 97.78%
-Tax 6,908,490 81.74% 7,487,915 85.39% 8,852,481 84.17%
GDCE 3,651,948 43.21% 3,566,079 40.66% 4,533,500 43.10%
GDT 2,558,859 30.28% 2,993,585 34.14% 3,429,800 32.61%
Other TR 212,440 2.51% 219,525 2.50% 245,321 2.33%
Province 455,243 5.39% 408,727 4.66% 543,860 5.17%
-Non Tax 1,292,665 15.29% 1,202,548 13.71% 1,431,968 13.62%
Domestic Capital 250,852 2.97% 79,015 0.90% 233,000 2.22%
Note: BL means Budget Law; TR means Taxable Resources.
Source: Ministry of Economy and Finance
(http://www.mef.gov.kh/documents/shares/budget/budget-in-brief-2014.pdf)

Next, the budget expenditures are shown in Table 2.6.3 and those in 2012, 2013 and 2014 are
12,034.7 billion Riel, 12,056.2 billion Riels and 13,595.6 billion Riels, respectively, showing
increase. The profit and loss balance is described soon later, but the breakdown of expenditures
shows that current expenditure accounts for approximately 60% and capital expenditure accounts
for the remaining 40% in 2014. 54.3% of the current expenditure is non-wage and non-salary, and
remaining 45.7% is wage and salary.
Table 2.6.3 Cambodia State Budget Expenditure
(Unit: Million Riels)
Actual 2012 Estimate 2013 BL 2014
Amount % Amount % Amount %
Current Expenditure 6,677,327 55.48% 7,173,718 59.50% 8,268,703 60.82%
-Wage and Salary 2,598,189 38.91% 3,079,429 42.93% 3,782,870 45.75%
-Non-wage & Salary 4,079,138 61.09% 4,094,289 57.07% 4,485,833 54.25%
Capital Expenditure 5,357,396 44.52% 4,882,500 40.50% 5,326,924 39.18%
Total 12,034,723 100.00% 12,056,218 100.00% 13,595,627 100.00%
Source: Ministry of Economy and Finance (http://www.mef.gov.kh/documents/shares/budget/budget-in-brief-2014.pdf)

(2) Ministry of Public Works and Transport (MPWT)

Revenue in the budget of MPWT in 2014 is 32 billion Riels and, concerning the central
administration and total provincial revenues, provincial total is a little more than the central
administration, accounting for 56%. Among the total provinces, Phnom Penh revenue is the most.
Although it is less than the 23 other provinces total, it accounts for 47.8%. The MPWT does not
clarify the budget by each sub-sector (such as road). However, it shows expenditures of materials
and external services for road and drainage so that operation and maintenance expenditures can be
grasped to some extent. Total expenditure is 307 billion Riels and the ministry’s budget is a big
loss, which seems to be covered by the Ministry of Economy and Finance. In the expenditures,
the central administration’s expenditure is much more than those of provinces and accounts for
88.7%. Among the provinces, Phnom Penh’s is not so much compared with the revenues and
accounts for only 21.6%. In the expenditures, capital expenditures are more and account for 80%.
However, this Ministry’s budget is only the sum of the MPWTs and there are other capital
expenditures in foreign currency such as soft loans, which are managed by the MEF. After the
coordination with the MEF, the official budget is finalized.
Among the ordinary expenditures other than capital expenditures, staff expenses (salaries and
bonuses, etc.) are the most accounting for 58.6%. Material purchase expenses (19.1%), external
service expenses (13.6%) and other service expenses (8.4%) such as PR and social expenses
follow. Staff expenses include allowances for family and mutual aid such as condolence, baby
delivery and disease support. It is noteworthy that drainage expenditures are not allocated to
Phnom Penh. Therefore, the fund for drainage expenses is not prepared by the MPWT, but by the

2-28
 Phnom Penh Capital government. Staff expenses are allocated to Phnom Penh, that is, the fund
goes to DPWT Phnom Penh.

(3) Phnom Penh Capital City Department of Public Works and Transport (DPWT)

The budget of DPWT in Phnom Penh Capital City is shown in Table 2.6.4. It is basically
increasing although it fluctuates a little. Its breakdown shows that salaries and indemnities and
capital expenditure are the most. In 2013, salaries and indemnities are more than capital
expenditure, but from 2008 to 2012 and 2014, capital expenditure exceeded salaries and
indemnities on the contrary. 100% of the salaries and indemnities come from the MPWT, but
operational expenditure and small repairs are burdened by the PPCC’s budget. However, the
budget for operation and maintenance of the national and main roads come from the MPWT.
Table 2.6.4 DPWT’s Budget
(Unit: Million Riels)
Items 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Salaries and Indemnities 3,581.80 4,053.35 2,393.47 2,442.53 2,658.43 6,082.53 7,524.95
Operational Expenditure & small repair 300.00 397.03 432.55 470.31 558.40 588.40 943.40
Social & cultural (ceremonies, etc.) 161.20 99.50 206.68 229.73 219.84 274.40 246.60
Capital expenditures 3.627.89 5,334.50 4,173.88 9,746.99 10,509.42 4,771.83 9,896.70
Total 7,670.89 9,884.38 7,206.58 12,889.56 13,946.09 11,717.16 18,611.65
Source: DPWT

Next, the expenditures of DSD (Drainage and Sewerage Division) under the DPWT are shown in
Table 2.6.5. The total amount increased a lot in 2012, 2013 and 2014. The breakdown shows that
drainpipe cleaning decreased, but new drainpipe construction increased recently accounting for
62.8% of the total in 2014.
Table 2.6.5 Expenditures of DSD
(Unit: Million Riels)
Item 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Drainpipe cleaning 321.48 438.05 732.98 682.03 496.17 390.09
Drainpipe repair 265.91 297.73 162.02 179.02 248.10 222.50
Pumping station repair 253.67 - - 171.00 262.00 255.95
Drainage ditch & balancing reservoir cleaning 672.17 - - 265.74 170.00 882.00
Diesel oil for pumping out to the city (kl) 103.9kl 115.7kl 90.5kl 129.4kl 123.6kl 83.9kl
New construction of drainpipe 526.47 373.30 168.00 747.22 2,525.98 2,959.37
Total 2,039.70 1,109.08 1,063.00 2,045.01 3,702.25 4,709.91
Source: DSD

(4) Phnom Penh Capital City (PPCC)

PPCC’s drainage related expenditures are shown in Table 2.6.6. The total expenditure decreased
from 2009 to 2011, but it increased in 2012 and 2013 and decreased again in 2014. In 2014, the
breakdown shows that pumping station electricity expenses, pipe & channel cleaning expenses,
and pipe repair and new construction expenses are much (one digit) more than others in order.
These expenditures include DSD’s expenditures in Table 2.6.5 above. Namely, it seems that
pumping stations are managed by the DSD, but most of the expenditures excluding personnel
expenditures are covered by the PPCC. Both PPCC and DSD seem to manage pipes and channels.
Table 2.6.7 shows drainage and sewerage cost transferred from PPWSA to PPCC, The overall
sewerage and drainage expenditures burden from the organizational viewpoint is explained later.

2-29
 Table 2.6.6 Drainage related Expenditures of PPCC
(Unit: Million Riels)
Item 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Pumping station electricity expenses 3,610 3,690 3,730 3,868 5,264 4,447
Pumping station fuel expenses 585 690 785 647 619 419
Pipe & channel cleaning expenses 3,670 2,960 3,137 3,970 3,866 4,272
Pipe repair and new construction expenses 2,760 3,050 1,980 3,070 2,774 3,181
Pumping building maintenance expenses 560 470 769 975 362 256
Pumping facility maintenance t expenses 440 758 826 649 450 456
Total 11,625 11,618 11,227 13,260 13,335 13,031
Note: These expenses include DSD’s expenditures in Table 2.6.5.
Source: PPCC

Table 2.6.7 Drainage and Sewerage Cost transferred from PPWSA to PPCC
(Unit: Million Riels)
Item 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Transferred amount (shown by PPCC) 5,158 5,873 6,253 6,500 7,300 7,200
PPWSA’s use charge revenues (sales) 85,869 96,024 102,041 114,157 127,446 137,018
Actual ration to sales 6.01% 6.12% 6.13% 5.69% 5.73% 5.25%
Source: PPWSA

(5) Organizational Burden of Drainage and Sewerage Facilities Cost in Phnom Penh

The budgets of drainage and sewerage related organizations in Phnom Penh were described for
each entity above, but it does not show the overview of the whole. Therefore, it is organized here.
At first, pumping facilities are managed by the DSD/DPWT and the budget is shown in the above
Table 2.6.5, but it is included in PPCC’s budget, that is, Table 2.6.6. The total amount of PPCC
is much more than DSD’s. Consequently, part of the budget came from DSD or DPWT.
On the other hand, DSD’s personnel expenses are included in DPWT budget, Table 2.6.4. It
means that these costs are burdened by the MPWT. In addition, PPCC’s drainage and sewerage
related expenses are covered by the 10% of PPWSA sales revenues other than PPCC’s own
budget resource. Amount from the PPWSA is 7,200 million Riels in 2014 and it accounts for
approximately 55.3%, more than a half of PPCC total expenditures, 13,031 million Riels.
However, if collection of more than 10% of PPWSA sales revenues is not easy based on the
discussion above, it is easily imagined that 10% of water supply sales is very insufficient
considering the investment and operation and maintenance costs of new sewage treatment
facilities because 10% of sales is not enough for even the present drainage facilities maintenance.
The relationship of present drainage and sewerage related cost resource burdening organizations
above can be shown in Fig. 2.6.6.

2-30
 Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 2.6.6 Drainage and Sewerage Related Cost Resource Fund Flow in Phnom Penh

2.7 Environmental and Social Consideration

2.7.1 EIA Process in Cambodia

(1) EIA Process in the Country

As shown in the flowchart below (Fig. 2.7.1), the project owner firstly submits the Environment
Application Form together with his report to the competent authority, which means, the Ministry
of Environment (MOE) or the Provincial Department of Environment (DOE). After the authority
has reviewed the report, it may require the project owner to revise the report or implement further
study as the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Should the environmental study fulfill the
requirement of the authority, the report is approved and forwarded to the Council for
Development/Sub-Committee of Royal Municipality, Provincial Department of Environment for
the approval of project implementation.

Source: Declaration on General Guidelines for Conducting Initial and Full Environmental Impact Assessment Reports

Fig. 2.7.1 Flowchart of the IEIA/EIA Process for National Level Projects

2-31
 (2) Legislation and Procedures for Environmental Study on Sewerage and Drainage
Project Development

Projects, which needs Environmental Assessment required are prescribed in the Annex in the
sub-decree, No. 72 ANRK.BK, 1999. This study aims to develop physical countermeasure for the
sewerage and drainage issues in PPCC. According to the Sub-decree, the expected activities
within the current project may be related to (i) waste processing, burning activities, all sizes; (ii)
wastewater treatment plants, all sizes; and (iii) drainage systems, ≧5,000 ha in the Annex.

2.7.2 Legislation and Legal Procedures for Resettlement and Land Acquisition for
Development

(1) Procedure of Land Acquisition

Acquisition of private land for the public interest shall be in accordance with the Land
Expropriation Law (2010). On the other hand, the acquisition of state land should be in
accordance with the Sub-Decree on State Land Management and it may follow the Prakas
(Declaration) No. 06, 1999, on measures to crack down on anarchic land grabbing and
encroachment if the area is occupied illegally and also Circular No. 2, 2007, if “related to illegal
occupation of state land” and Circular No. 3, 2010, if it involves the “settlement of illegal
construction on a state land in cities and urban areas”. In any case, a survey should be conducted
to identify the situation (Fig. 2.7.2).

2-32
 Source: Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), 2012, Basic Resettlement Procedure

Fig. 2.7.2 Flowchart of Land Acquisition

(2) Resettlement Framework in the Country

Resettlement framework is explained in the Standard Operating Procedures for All Externally
Financed Projects/Programs in Cambodia (2012, Ministry of Economy and Finance), as shown in
Fig. 2.7.3.

2-33
 Pre‐Implementation Stage 
Step 1 Resettlement Planning Implementation 
Project Identification, Census, Initial RAP Drafting,  Agency 
Project Appraisal

Implementation Stage 
Step 2 Institutional Arrangement

Step 3 Detail Measurement Survey(DSM)
Implementation 
Agency , 
Step 4 Replacement Cost Study(RCS) Inter‐Ministerial
Resettlement 
Committee(IRC), 
Step 5 Updating Resettlement Action Plan  IRC‐Working 
Group(IRC‐WG),
PRSC,
Step 6 Relocation Site Preparation  PRSC‐WG

Step 7 Negotiation and Contract

Step 8 Budget Disbursement and Payment

Step 9 Relocation and Clearance  

Cross Cutting Issue 
Implementation 
Step 10 Public Consultation Meeting (PCM) Agency , 
Provincial
Grievance 
Step 11 Grievance Redress Mechanism   Committee, 
Internal and 
External 
Step 12 Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring 
Agency

Source: JICA Study Team based on the MEF (2012), Basic Resettlement Procedure

Fig. 2.7.3 Workflow of Resettlement Process

2-34
 CHAPTER 3 STRATEGY FOR FORMULATION OF SEWAGE
MANAGEMENT MASTER PLAN

3.1 Summary of Issues

Current conditions and issues related to sewage management in PPCC, as well as countermeasures to
solve the issues, are summarized in Table 3.1.1 based on the study results discussed in Chapter 2.
Table 3.1.1 Current Conditions and Issues Related to Sewage Management in PPCC and
Countermeasures (1/2)
Items/current conditions and issues Countermeasures and roadmap to solve the issues
1. Technical Aspects
1.1 Deterioration of water quality in Cheung Aek Lake basin
Cheung Aek Lake basin, located in  Sewage from the area should be treated, introducing off-site
southern part of Phnom Penh, extremely treatment system, considering investible funds of Phnom Penh
suffers from water pollution. Results of ［Reasons］
water monitoring conducted in the Study,  Existing pipe network covers 100% of the basin and thus it is
reveal the situation as follows: easy to collect sewage from the basin using the network.
[Water quality of Cheung Aek Lake:  Population density of more than half of the basin is over
 Influent BOD5 Max. 200-300 mg/L 300 persons/ha in the target year of 2035, as described later.
 Effluent CODMn Max. 18 mg/L  The area is located inside of inner dike and sewage generated
(Standard: CODMn 8 mg/L) from the area is not diluted, which is different from condition in
Bangkok (In Bangkok, backwater from canal dilute sewage and
the efficiency of treatment is affected).
1.2 Lack of Septage Management
In Phnom Penh, most of people use septic  To secure land in PPCC to dispose septage.
tank as a sanitary facilities and Waste  To secure land in PPCC to dispose treated sludge, before sewage
Management Office PPCC, is responsible treatment plant is in operation.
for septage (sludge from septic tanks) [Reasons]
management. PPCC has however no  At present, a lagoon for treating leaching effluent in Dangkor
septage disposal site yet. solid waste disposal site temporarily accept septage due to the
lack of treatment facilities for septage, but there exists a
concern that the lagoon would be overloaded and thus water
quality would be deteriorated due to the septage.
 Dangkor solid waste disposal site was constructed in 2009 with
total area of 31.4 ha. At present, 11 ha of the area is in
commission and their lifetime would end in 2018 based on the
estimation. In addition, rapid population growth decreases the
capacity of the site. Thus, the disposal site would have no room
to accept septage and sewage sludge from STP in the future.
2. Organizational and Institutional Aspects
2.1 Establishment of implementation body responsible for sewage management (department/staff)
In PPCC, it is not clear if which  To empower existing department or to establish new department
department is responsible for formulating responsible for formulating sewage management plan,
sewage management plan and implementation plan, establishing framework of sewerage
implementation plan. connection and sewage charge collection.
2.2 Determination of scope of works for central and provincial government
At present, scope of works and allocation  To determine scope of work of central (MPWT) and provincial
for sewage management among central (DPWT) government and then, (i) to provide them budget for and
(MPWT) and provincial (DPWT) jurisdiction over sewage management, and (ii) to train engineers to
government are not clear. implement them.
2.3 Securing technical level and human resources for sewage management
Engineers for sewage management are  To cultivate key engineers in the field of sewage management and
insufficient especially in operation of implementation by inviting experienced engineers from other
sewage treatment plant. countries or dispatching engineers to the countries.
 To continuously train engineers by the key engineers mentioned
above, through On-the-Job Training (OJT)
2.4 Insufficient managing and monitoring of industrial wastewater
It is not enough to manage installation of  To increase budget for monitoring and to centralize authorities over
treatment plants and monitor whether regulating factories.
industrial wastewater meets discharge  To share strategies for regulating and monitoring factories and to

3-1
 Items/current conditions and issues Countermeasures and roadmap to solve the issues
standard by MIH, which is responsible for formulate activities plan with MOE.
managing industrial wastewater.
2.5 Lack of guideline for sewage management in large-scale development area
Large-scale development area has To establish guideline for sewage management in large-scale
expanded in recent years. However, development area
guideline for sewage management is not
available in PPCC and thus developers
install their treatment plant in accordance
with their own strategy.
3. Financial Aspects
3.1 Insufficient fund
DPWT, PPCC has insufficient budget for  To secure funds by soft loan.
implementing sewage management  To establish autonomous or semi-autonomous authority to
projects. In addition, central government implement projects and collect sewerage fee from users.
has insufficient budget allocation for
sewage management.
3.2 Establishment of autonomous sewerage authority
To allocate burden for sewage and  It is essential to allocate initial and running cost between PPCC and
drainage management between the autonomous sewerage authority in order not to threaten operation of
authorities concerned the autonomous sewerage authority.
Ratio of allocated burden for sewage and
drainage management will be a big issue
for authorities concerned in particular in
construction and O&M of combined
sewer system.
Sewerage fee collection system  To study on set up of sewerage fee system, sewerage fee collection
Existing sewerage management bodies in system to widely collect the charges, especially from wealthy and
Sihanoukville and Siem Reap have been ordinary households, which dominate in number in PPCC.
collecting sewerage fee, targeting large  To study alternative to include sewerage fee in some tax charges.
commercial facilities such as hotels and
restaurants but they face difficulties in
collecting enough charges covering O&M
cost of sewerage facilities.
3.3 Collaboration with PPWSA
PPWSA distributes 10% of water charge  In case of PPWSA is responsible for sewerage management
to PPCC for sewage and drainage together with water supply, elaborate coordination will be required
management. The amount of 10% between MIH and MPWT, which have jurisdiction over water
accounts for about 7,300 million Riel supply and sewage management, respectively.
annually but the amount would be  A listed company, PPWSA might be reluctant to incorporate sewage
insufficient to cover sewage treatment. management, which might be unprofitable. The following schemes
should be considered:
 To set up policy that the Government shoulder the soft loan
covering construction cost;
 To turn off water supply service to users who do not pay for
sewerage fee; and
 To establish cost-effective sewerage fee collection system in
collaboration with sewerage management body.
Source: JICA Study Team

Further, the envisaged bodies to implement countermeasures, as well as needs of assistance from
donors and priorities for the countermeasures listed in Table 3.1.1, are summarized in Table 3.1.2.
Table 3.1.2 Current Conditions and Issues related to Sewage Management in PPCC and
Countermeasures (2/2)
Items/current conditions Requirements of assistance from
Implementing body Priority
and issues the donors
1. Technical Aspects
1.1 Deterioration of DPWT  Assistance from the donors is [1st Priority]
water quality in indispensable, because PPCC Reason: it is urgent to improve the
Cheung Aek Lake has limited experience of area generating most of the
basin sewage management, pollution load and deteriorating
especially in planning and water environment in and around
construction of sewage Phnom Penh.

3-2
 Items/current conditions Requirements of assistance from
Implementing body Priority
and issues the donors
treatment plant.
1.2 Lack of septage Waste Management  Procedure to secure and [1st Priority]
management Division purchase disposal site is Reason: It is urgent to secure
/DPWT taken care of by the septage disposal site because most
/DOE government with own fund. people in Phnom Penh currently use
 Fund from donors might be septic tank as major sanitary
required to construct facilities facility.
in the disposal site.
2. Organizational and Institutional Aspects
2.1 Establishment of DPWT  Implemented with own fund [1st Priority]
implementation Reason: It is essential to smoothly
body responsible commence sewage treatment in
for sewage PPCC.
management
(department/staff)
2.2 Determination of MPWT/DPWT  Ditto [2nd Priority]
scope of work for Reason: Step-by-step
central and implementation will be required
provincial with coordination among the
government agencies concerned.
2.3 Securing technical MPWT/DPWT  Implemented by combination [1st Priority]
level and human of assistance from donors and Reason: It is essential to smoothly
resources for own fund commence sewage treatment in
sewage PPCC.
management
2.4 Insufficient MIH/MOE/DOE  Implemented with own fund [2nd Priority]
management and Reason: Step-by-step
monitoring of implementation will be required
industrial with coordination among the
wastewater agencies concerned.
2.5 Lack of guideline Urbanization  Ditto [2nd Priority]
for sewage Division/DPWT Reason: Step-by-step
management in implementation will be required
large-scale with coordination among the
development area agencies concerned in PPCC.
3. Financial Aspects
3.1 Insufficient fund MEF/MPWT/  Soft loan is to be secured [1st Priority]
PPCC from donors. Reason: It is essential to smoothly
 It is desirable to establish commence sewage treatment in
sewerage management PPCC.
authority with own fund but it
is acceptable to receive
support from donors in terms
of coordination and
introduction of good
approach.
3.2 Establishment of PPCC/MPWT/MIH  Ditto [1st Priority]
autonomous /DPWT Reason: Ditto
sewerage authority
3.3 Collaboration with PPCC/MPWT/MIH  Ditto [1st Priority]
PPWSA /DPWT Reason: Ditto
/PPWSA
Source: JICA Study Team

3-3
3.2 Planning Frame
Facilities design, legal and institutional setup plan, as well as human resource development plan, are
required for sewage management. For facilities design, the following planning frame is set up.

3.2.1 Target Year

Target year of the Study is the year 2035, as with the “Project for Comprehensive Urban Transport
Planning in Phnom Penh Capital City” and “White Book on Development and Planning of Phnom
Penh”.

3.2.2 Planning Frame

(1) Setting-up of Off-site and On-site8 Treatment Area

(a) Approach

The Sewage Management Plan is formulated as the combination of on- and off-site treatment,
considering development status, topological feature and availability of existing drainage
(combined sewer) network in the target area. Off-site treatment area is determined in
consideration of analysis of relevant plans/projects, development status, population density and
availability of existing combined sewer network, financial analysis, as well as acceptable
financial burden to PPCC. As for on-site treatment area, installation of pit latrine is proposed for
households without toilet and study on introduction of septic tank or decentralized treatment
system are carried out for households in which pit latrine or septic tank is installed.

(b) Candidate Sites for Construction of Sewage Treatment Plant

In the consultation with PPCC, four candidate sites for construction of sewage treatment plant in
off-site area are proposed, as shown in Table 3.2.1 and Fig. 3.2.1. Of the four sites, Tamok Lake
and Cheung Aek Lake are studied because the two lakes have a defined line of control.
Table 3.2.1 Candidate Sites for Construction of Sewage Treatment Plant
Depth (m)
No. Name Area (ha) Owner/Administrator Remarks
Dry Season Rainy Season
1 Tamok 3,270 3.0-4.5 2-3 m plus that Owner: PPCC
Lake of dry season, at Administrator: PPCC/
maximum MOWRAM
2 Trabek Unknown 1.0-2.0 Same as that of Owner: PPCC Definite boundary
Lake dry season Administrator: PPCC is not defined in
laws such as
Sub-Decree
3 Tumpun Unknown 1.0-2.0 Ditto Owner: PPCC Ditto
Lake Administrator: PPCC
4 Cheung 520 2.0-3.0 2-3 m plus that Owner: PPCC
Aek Lake of dry season, at Administrator: PPCC/
maximum MOWRAM
Source: JICA Study Team

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
8
In the M/P, off-site treatment is defined as the sewage treatment system consisting of sewer network and sewage treatment
plant. On the other hand, on-site treatment is defined as sewage treatment system consisting of individual facilities such as
septic tank and Johkasou or decentralized system such as community plant.

3-4
 Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 3.2.1 Location of Candidate Sites for Construction of Sewage Treatment Plant

(2) Preliminary Study on Setting-up of Off-site Treatment Area

In Phnom Penh, Tamok Lake and Cheung Aek basins are fully urbanized and densely populated,
considering planning population and population density for the target year 2035 in “Project for
Comprehensive Urban Transport Planning in Phnom Penh Capital City”, JICA.
Population density suitable for introducing off-site treatment in general ranges from more than
250 to 300 persons/ha9. In light of the population density, Cheung Aek basin can obviously be
included in the area suitable for introducing off-site treatment. On the other hand, Tamok Lake
basin would somewhat be premature to introduce off-site treatment. The following approach is
therefore employed to evaluate the applicability of on- and off-site treatment.

(a) Catchment Area of Cheung Aek Lake

A study on application of off-site treatment is carried out for the catchment area of Cheung Aek
Lake basin, targeting the area as shown in Fig. 3.2.2. Name of the off-site area is “Cheung Aek
Treatment Area”. Based on the preliminary study, the treatment area is estimated to be 41 km2
and present (year 2014) and future population (year 2035) in the area is 720 and 1,070 thousand.

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
9
Source: Guideline for Cost-Effective Sewerage System in Developing Countries (August 2004), Infrastructure
Development Institute- Japan

3-5
 (b) Catchment Area of Tamok Lake

Alternative study on selection of on- and off-site treatment is carried out. Boundary of off-site
treatment area for the alternative study is as shown in Fig. 3.2.2.
Moreover, some studies are conducted on septage disposal site, which is not yet secured by Phnom
Penh, how to collect and transport the septage to the site and division of roles of the departments
concerned.

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 3.2.2 Target Area for Selection of Off-site Treatment Area

(3) Sewage Management in Large-scale Development Area

Present condition of sewage management in large-scale development area is summarized in the

following table. In principle, the developer is responsible for establishing its sewage treatment
system in the site, and operates and maintains them to treat sewage from the development area.

3-6
 Table 3.2.2 Current Condition of Sewage Management in Large-Scale Development Area
Area Combined
No. Name Type of Use(Note 1) Sewage Treatment System
(ha) /Separate
1 Boueng Kok 133 Commercial and Office, Combined Individual house: Septic tank
Residential (40,000) Buildings: Any type of treatment
plant)
2 Diamond City 80 Commercial and Office, Combined Lagoon
Residential (5,000)
3 Camko City 119 Residential Separate Activated Sludge Process
(10,000)
4 Grand Phnom 233 Commercial and Office, Combined Bio-Filter
Penh Residential (12,000) (Septic tank, product of Thailand)
5 Chroy Changvar 13 Commercial Combined Unknown
6 Satellite City 380 Commercial and Office, Combined Unknown
Residential (40,000)
7 Pratinum City 140 Residential (8,000) Combined Two-stage septic tank
(individual and downstream end of
the area)
8 ING City 2,572 Residential (300,000) Separate Activated Sludge Process
9 BTP 10 Residential (1,000) Combined Two-stage septic tank
(individual and downstream end of
the area)
Note 1: Values in parentheses show planning population
Source: JICA Study Team

(4) Management of Industrial Wastewater

Owners of factories are responsible for installing sewage treatment plant and discharge treated
wastewater to sewer or directly to public water bodies to meet effluent standard.

(5) Sewage Generation per Capita

Sewage generation and pollution load per capita for the formulation of Master Plan are detailed in
Section 3.3.

3.2.3 Strategy for Phased Schedule

Proposed components in the M/P are scheduled in three phases; namely, Short-Term (present to year
2020), Medium-Term (year 2021 to 2030) and Long-Term (after year 2031). The proposed component
includes structural and non-structural measures.

3.3 Planning Conditions for Off-Site Treatment Area

3.3.1 Projection of Water Use

(1) Projection of Water Use

As discussed in Subsection 2.3.2, water use per capita per day in Phnom Penh increases at the
rate of about 2.0% each year. On the other hand, PPWSA predicts water use in Phnom Penh only
up to 2020 with value of 145 L/capita/day, which is already lower than that of present. Water use
for the target year is therefore projected in the Study, with the following cases; namely, increasing
rate of 1.0%, 1.5% and 2.0%.
Case-1: Growth rate 1.0%: Current growth rate (2.0%) cuts by half (1.0%) due to such reasons as
enhancement of water-saving awareness.
Case-2: Growth rate 1.5%: Medium growth rate of Case-1 and Case-3; namely, 1.5% is assumed.
Case-3: Growth rate 2.0% : Current growth rate of 2.0 is maintained up to 2035.

3-7
As shown in Fig. 3.3.1, result of Case-3 shows about 270 L/capita/day water use in 2035, which
is close to Japan’s (289 L/capita/day, domestic and commercial water use in 2011) and thus
deems to be slightly excessive. On the other hand, sharp drop of increase by applying 1.0%
growth rate might be unreasonable. Thus 240 L/capita/day in 2035, applying medium growth rate
of 1.5%, is employed in the M/P to project sewage generation.

Projection of Water Use per Capita per Day

300
268
250
240

200 216
173.2
L/capita/day

145.5
150

100 Actual Data

Case-3: 2.0% increase per year
Case-2: 1.5% increase per year
50
Case-1: 1.0% increase per year

0
04

06

08

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34
20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
Year

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 3.3.1 Water Use Projection per Capita per Day for the Target Year 2035

(2) Ratio of Domestic and Other Usage

Ratio of domestic and other usage is set at 60 to 40, in consideration of actual data in Table 2.3.1
and those of neighbouring countries in Table 3.3.1.
Table 3.3.1 Ratio of Domestic and Other Usage in Neighbouring Countries
Ho Chi Kuala
Jakarta Manila Osaka Seoul Shanghai Bangkok
Minh Lumpur
Year 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2009
Domestic water use 73 59 53 61 54 71 64 52
Non-domestic water use 27 41 47 39 46 29 36 48
Source: Preparatory Survey Report on the Project for the Improvement of Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage
System in Yangon City in the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2014, JICA

(3) Ratio of Daily Average, Daily Maximum and Hourly Maximum

Ratio of daily average and daily maximum is set at 1.0:1.1 based on actual data of PPWSA. Ratio
of daily maximum and hourly maximum is set at 1.0:1.5, also based on actual data provided by
PPWSA. Daily maximum is employed to design sewage treatment plant and hourly maximum is
employed to design pipe network and pumping stations.

(4) Sewage Generation Ratio

Sewage generation ratio of 85%, intermediate value of 80% and 90% is applied with reference to
WHO’s guideline, “A Guideline to the Development of On-site Sanitation” and typical values
ranging from 80 to 90% employed in the neighbouring countries.

(5) Ratio of Commercial and Industrial Use

PPWSA has no data related to ratio of commercial and industrial use. However, about 90% of
commercial and industrial users execute contracts with PPWSA to be supplied by water tap of
15 mm in diameter. According to PPWSA, a contractant supplied by 15 mm pipe uses not more

3-8
 than 50 m3/day. In general, amount of use not more than 50 m3/day, can be regarded as
commercial use. As a result, 90% of total commercial and industrial use is regarded as
commercial, while the remaining 10% is regarded as industrial use.

(6) Ground Water Infiltration

Actual data of groundwater infiltration is not available in Phnom Penh. On the other hand, in the
capital cities of neighbouring countries, unit groundwater infiltration of 10 m3/ha/day is applied to
Bangkok and Yangon, while 7.5 m3/ha/day is applied to Manila. In the Study, 7.5 m3/ha/day is
applied to estimate groundwater infiltration considering that the 10 m3/ha/day applied to Bangkok
includes incremental water from canal. However, upper limits of 15% of dairy maximum is set up
in the M/P, referring to intermediate value of groundwater infiltration, ranging from 10 to 20% of
daily maximum of domestic and commercial use in accordance with the “Guideline for Sewerage
Facilities Planning and Designing in Japan”, Japan Sewage Works Association.

(7) Sewage Generation per Capita

Sewage generation per capita is computed based on the amount of water use, as summarised in
Table 3.3.2.
Table 3.3.2 Sewage Generation per Capita (Off-Site Treatment Area)
Amount of Water Use (L/capita/day) Generation per
Generation
Capita
Domestic Commercial Industrial Total Ratio (%)
(L/capita/day)
Daily average 150 80 10 240 85 205
Daily maximum 160 95 10 265 85 225
Hourly maximum 240 140 20 400 85 340
Source: JICA Study Team

3.3.2 Water Quality for Designing

(1) Target Parameters

Sewage treatment plant, which is a key component of the off-site treatment system, is designed
targeting removal of BOD, TSS and total coliform, since the treatment plant will not discharge
the treated water to closed water.

(2) Pollution Load per Capita

(a) BOD

Influent BOD concentration of sewage treatment plant is computed, employing 45 g/capita/day,

which is maximum of typical BOD load per capita ranging from 40 to 45 g/capita/day applied in
developing countries located in the tropical region, considering relatively high BOD in six times
of water quality monitoring results in the Study, recorded at Trabek Pumping Station, which
receives extensive amount of sewage in PPCC. The 45 g/capita/day includes domestic and
commercial pollution load.
Industrial wastewater can be discharged to sewer under the condition that the owner of the
industrial facilities installs pre-treatment plant to meet BOD effluent standard of 80 mg/l as
indicated in Table 2.5.2.

(b) TSS

TSS load is set up considering average ratio of BOD to TSS (BOD:TSS=1.0:1.05), which is
typical value of quality monitoring conducted in the Study at Trabek Pumping Station.

3-9
 (3) Design Effluent Water Quality for STP

Upper limits of design effluent water quality for STP are summarized in Table 3.3.3, including
those of Cambodia and the neighbouring countries of Thailand, Vietnam and Myanmar. Of the
limits, neighbouring countries’ are definitely typical for effluent standard of STP targeting
removal of BOD and TSS. On the other hand, standard of “Public Water Area and Sewer”,
namely, BOD=80 mg/L and TSS=120 mg/L, are to be applied to Phnom Penh because Phnom
Penh has no “Protected Public Water Area”. However, those upper limits for Phnom Penh seem
to be relatively lax and suitable only for primary treatment, compared to those of the
neighbouring countries.
Treatment methods studied in the M/P will be able to treat water to BOD concentration of 30 to
40 mg/L as a whole. Therefore, same level of effluent water quality for “Protected Public Water
Area”, which exceeds standard of “Public Water Area and Sewer”, is applied to design STP
proposed in the M/P in consideration of: (i) to optimize facilities’ performance, (ii) to be
consistent to the trend of standard of secondary treatment in the neighbouring countries and (iii)
to effectively reduce pollution load in order to preserve water quality of public water bodies.
Table 3.3.3 Upper Limits of Design Effluent Water Quality for STP
Cambodia Thailand Vietnam Myanmar
Protected Public Public Water Area National National
Water Area and Sewer
Bangkok Yangon City3)
Level Level
1)
BOD (mg/L) < 30 < 80 < 20 < 20 10～30 < 20
TSS (mg/L) < 60 < 120 < 302) < 30 10～30 < 30
Note 1) Filtered sample shall be monitored for Lagoon
Note 2) 50 mg/L shall be applied to Lagoon
Note 3) National Standard is not available in Myanmar
Source: Sub-Decree on Water Pollution Control, Annex 2, Effluent standard for pollution sources discharging
wastewater to public water areas or sewer.
Vietnam: Discharge StandardTCVN7222:2002
Preparatory Survey for Bangkok Wastewater Treatment Project in Thailand, Final Report, 2011, JICA
Preparatory Survey Report on the Project for the Improvement of Water Supply, Sewerage and
Drainage System in Yangon City in the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, 2014, JICA

3.3.3 Structural Measures

(1) Collection System

Cheung Aek Treatment Area will adopt combined system, considering 100% of service ratio10 of
the existing drainage pipe network, in combination with the installation of interceptor in
downstream of Trabek and Tumpun open channels. On the other hand, an alternative study of on-
and off-site treatment is conducted for Tamok Treatment Area. As for off-site treatment in Tamok
Treatment Area, separate system is studied, considering low installation rate of drainage piles in
the area.

(2) Wastewater Treatment Method

The following wastewater treatment methods are to be studied and their applicability to Phnom
Penh are evaluated. As discussed later, estimated sewage of Cheung Aek and Tamok in 2035
exceeds more than 100 thousand m3/day, and thus aerated lagoon is not applicable to such amount
of sewage. Therefore, aerated lagoon is not evaluated in the M/P.

・ Lagoon
・ Aerated Lagoon
・ Tricking Filter
・ Oxidation Ditch (OD)
――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
10
Covering ratio of 100% was obtained by the site survey conducted in the Study.

3-10
 ・ Conventional Activated Sludge Process (CASP)
・ Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR)

On the other hand, Pre-treated Trickling Filtration (PTF), which has been recently developed in
Japan as an upgraded technology of traditional Trickling Filter system, is included in the
evaluation. As a result, six wastewater treatment methods are evaluated as summarized in
Table 3.3.4.
Table 3.3.4 Off-site Treatment Methods Evaluated
Method Typical Flow Sheet Salient Features
Lagoon  Wastewater is treated without machinery.
Oxygen is introduced into the lagoon by
photonic synthesis and thus wastewater
is purified.
 Among the four methods, O&M is the
easiest and unit cost for treatment is the
lowest. On the other hand, land
requirement is the largest.
Trickling  Wastewater is treated by sprinkling them
Filter (TF) to filter bed in the trickling filter.
 Energy consumption is much smaller
than treatment methods using blower.
 Land requirement is larger than that of
CASP.
 It is difficult to control offensive odor
and generation of flies from filter bed.
Pre-treated  This is new Japanese technology
Trickling upgrading trickling filter by introducing
Filtration new media to save processing time and
(PTF) space.
 Filter bed can be easily washable and
thus prevent offensive odor and
generation of flies from filter bed.
 Land requirement is smaller than CASP.
Oxidation  Endless channel is employed for
ditch wastewater circulation. Equipment is
(OD) simplified and easier O&M is achieved
compared with activated sludge process.
 Land requirement is smaller than that of
aerated lagoon, while bigger than that of
activated sludge process.

Conventional  Among the four methods, the highest

Activated efficiency in pollution load reduction and
sludge the smallest land requirement is
process achieved.
(CASP)  On the other hand, machinery equipment
is large in number and unit cost of
treatment is the highest. Further
sophisticated technique is required.
Sequential  All the processes of (i) feeding/mixing,
Batch (ii) aeration, (iii) sedimentation and
Reactor (iv) decant, are executed in batch reactor.
(SBR)  Land requirement is smaller than that of
CASP since primary and final
sedimentation tanks are not required.
 Skilled techniques are required to control
the batch reactor, in particular sludge
sedimentation and withdrawal.
Source: JICA Study Team

(3) Sludge Treatment Method

Typical sludge treatment configuration, consisting of thickener, digester and dewatering

equipment, is studied, considering effects of sufficient volume reduction and stabilization, as well

3-11
 as cost performance and easiness of O&M. In addition, re-use of treated sludge is considered, if
enough demands are expected around the STP.

3.4 Planning Conditions of On-site Treatment

3.4.1 Projection of Water Use

Amount of water use (175 L/capita/day), which is rounded up actual amount of 173.2 L/capita/day in
PPWSA in 2014, is employed for amount of water use in target year 2035, under the assumption that
urbanization in on-site treatment area delays compared to that in off-site treatment area. The
175 L/capita/day is equivalent to about 70% of 240 L/capita/day, the amount in off-site treatment area,
and same amount in 2014 of Dangkor District, which is located in suburban area.
Sewage amount in on-site treatment is estimated, adopting generation ratio of 80%, which is lower
limit of typical range (80 to 90%), under the assumption that the amount of water used in the garden
increases and thus the water will not reach to sewer pipe, in comparison with that in off-site treatment
area. Same ratio of daily average and maximum as well as hourly maximum in off-site area, is
employed in estimating those in on-site area. Consequently, sewage generation is projected as
summarized in Table 3.4.1.
Table 3.4.1 Sewage Generation per Capita (On-site Treatment Area)
Amount of Water Use (L/capita/day) Generation per
Generation
Capita
Domestic Commercial Industrial Total Ratio (%)
(L/capita/day)
Daily average 105 65 5 175 80 140
Daily maximum 160 95 5 195 80 160
Hourly maximum 240 140 10 295 80 240
Source: JICA Study Team

3.4.2 Pollution Load per Capita

As with amount of water use, pollution load will be estimated at 70% of off-site’s considering delay in
urbanization and improvement of living standard, compared to those of off-site area.

3.4.3 Structural Measures

Alternative study will be conducted on (i) promotion of septic tanks or pit latrines which are
commonly utilised as sanitary facilities and (ii) introduction of other on-site treatment facilities such as
Johkasou and community plants.

3.5 Effects of Environmental Improvement by the Proposed Plan

(1) Effect on Pollution Load Reduction of Implementation of Proposed Sewage

Management Plan

Effect on pollution reduction with and without projects proposed in the M/P implementation, will
be quantitatively evaluated.

(2) Others

Other than the effects on pollution reduction, such side effects as elimination of waterborne
disease will be evaluated.

3-12
3.6 Other Considerations

3.6.1 Non-Structural Measures

Implementation bodies and institutional set-up are proposed for smooth implementation of initial
attempt of off-site treatment in PPCC. Also, measures to strengthen existing institutions, develop
human resources, secure budget and set legal framework, are proposed for facilitating on-site
treatment such as septic tank.

3.6.2 Land Expropriation

Sewerage facilities consist of pipe network, pumping station and sewage treatment plant. Of the
facilities, pipes are in principle proposed to be laid under public roads. Pumping stations and sewage
treatment plant are in principle proposed in the public land to avoid land expropriation of public land
as much as possible. In public area, the facilities will not be proposed to occupy area in which illegal
residents are living, unless absolutely necessary. Compensation will be proposed, if the occupation in
the area is necessary.

3.6.3 Environmental and Social Considerations

Environmental and social impacts of all the proposed on- and off-site facilities are to be minimized in
pre-construction, construction and operation stages. Resettlement is in particular to be avoided as
much as possible in the site selection of facilities designing.

3-13
 CHAPTER 4 SEWAGE MANAGEMENT MASTER PLAN

4.1 Sewage Management Master Plan

As discussed in the previous chapter, the applicability of on- and off-site treatment is evaluated by
dividing PPCC into three areas, namely, (i) Cheung Aek Treatment Area, in which off-site treatment is
applicable, (ii) Tamok Treatment Area, in which alternative study of on- and off-site treatment is
conducted, and (iii) Other Area, in which on-site treatment is applicable.

4.1.1 Cheung Aek Treatment Area

As discussed in Subsection 3.2.2, Cheung Aek Treatment Area is evaluated applying off-site
treatment, with the following assumptions.

 Sewage collection system: Combined system (including interceptor)

 Sewage treatment methods: 6 methods are evaluated

(1) Sewage Collection System

As shown in Table 4.1.1, evaluation result shows that treatment area amounts to 4,701.9 ha with
population of 1,093 thousand. Total length of trunk sewer11 is 34.1 km (diameter from φ250 mm
to φ2,200 mm), with estimated construction cost of 130.7 million USD, as shown in Table 4.1.4.
Branch sewer is not required because combined system, which utilizes existing pipe network, is
adopted in this treatment area. On the other hand, no relay pumping station will be required.
Table 4.1.1 Outline of Cheung Aek Treatment Area
Item Contents
Area (ha) 4,701.9
Population (year 2035) 1,093,155
Sewage collection system Combined system
Trunk sewer (km) 34.1 (φ250 mm-φ2,200 mm)
Requirement of installing branch sewer Not required
Pumping station Not required
Construction cost of sewer network See Tables 4.1.4 and 4.1.5
Source: JICA Study Team

(2) Sewage Treatment Plant

Based on the population in Table 4.1.1 and sewage generation per capita discussed in Chapter 3,
design inflow to STP and pollution load are projected as shown in Tables 4.1.2 and 4.1.3.
Evaluation results of 6 treatment methods are summarized in Tables 4.1.4 and 4.1.5, with layout
plan of STP in Cheung Aek Lake as illustrated in Fig. 4.1.2.

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
11
Trunk sewer includes (i) Trunk Sewer: Sewer connected to STP, and (ii) Main Sewer: Sewer connected to the trunk sewer
or covers whole area of its sewer district.

4-1
 Table 4.1.2 Design Inflow to Cheung Aek STP
Sewage Groundwater Total Design inflow
(m3/day) (m3/day) (m3/day) (m3/day)
Daily average 224,097 35,264 259,361 260,000
Daily maximum 245,960 35,264 281,224 282,000
Hourly maximum 371,673 35,264 406,937 407,000
Note) (Groundwater Estimate 1)= 4,701.9 ha×7.5 m3/day/ha=35,264 m3/day…..(1)
(Groundwater Estimate 2)=Population×(160+95)L/capita/day×0.85×15%=35,541 m3/day......(2)
The results shows that (1)<(2). Therefore, (Groundwater estimate 1) is adopted.
Source: JICA Study Team

Table 4.1.3 Design Water Quality of Cheung Aek STP

Daily average Concentration Design water Remarks
inflow calculated quality
(m3/day) (mg/L) (mg/L)
Total BOD load: 49,935 kg/day
Of which
BOD 260,000 192 195 domestic and commercial:
49,192 kg/day
Industrial: 743 kg/day
TSS 260,000 202 205 BOD×1.05
Note: (Domestic and commercial BOD load)=(Population)×45 g/capita/day×10-3
(Industrial BOD load)=(Population)×8.5 L/capita/day (amount of water use)×80 mg/L×10-6
Source: JICA Study Team

Study result on STP is enumerated below.

 Land Requirement: Land requirements of PTF and SBR are almost the same and smallest
among six methods (PTF:13.0 ha, SBR:13.4 ha). Maximum is Lagoon with requirement of
262.4 ha. OD is second-ranked with area of 43.1 ha.

 Construction Cost: OD has the highest (397.9 million USD), followed by TF. Lowest one
is 214.2 million USD of Lagoon.

 O&M Cost: Lagoon’s cost is lowest (about 1.9 million USD/year) and OD’s is highest
(about 18.0 million USD/year).

 EIRR: EIRR in Tables 4.1.4 and 4.1.5 are estimated as reference, in consideration of loss
of social value with the reclamation of Cheung Aek Lake, which is surrounded by large
development and housing area. The tables show that EIRR of Lagoon is smallest because
its reclamation area amounts to more than 10 times of those of the other methods.

 Environmental and Social Aspects: If applying Lagoon, large-scale resettlement (about

100 households) will be required and almost all Cheung Aek Lake will be reclaimed, as
shown in Fig. 4.1.1, in which land requirements of the lagoon and typical mechanical
method of CASP are depicted for comparison. In addition, control of offensive odour is
difficult. As a result, Lagoon will much affect the surrounding environment.

4-2
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.1 Comparison of Land Requirement of Lagoon and CASP

In addition to above discussion, result of quantitative evaluation, focusing on construction cost,
O&M cost, easiness of O&M, number of application in large-scale STP and environmental and
social aspects due to reclamation and offensive odour, are summarized in the tables. Based on the
evaluation, Lagoon is the best option in terms of low construction and O&M cost, as well as
easiness of O&M. On the other hand, Lagoon has such disadvantages as (i) social impact due to
large-scale resettlement and reclamation is quite large, (ii) the reclaimed land will no longer be
used for the protected area or cultivation area for aquatic plants, and (iii) it has a lot of negative
environmental impacts such as uncontrolled offensive odour. In consideration of the
disadvantages of Lagoon, application of CASP is recommendable and PTF is will also be a good
option, although the method has so far not applied to large-scale STP.

4-3
 Table 4.1.4 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Cheung Aek STP
(1/2)
Lagoon Trickling Filter Pre-treated Trickling Filtration
(TF) (PTF)
Land requirement (ha) 262.4 28.8 13.0
Construction cost (million USD)
STP 214.2 328.5 271.8
Sewer 130.7 130.7 130.7
Sludge dumping site 16.5 16.5 16.5
Total 361.4 475.7 419.0
O&M cost (million USD/year)
STP 1.559 10.979 9.853
Sewer 0.157 0.157 0.157
Sludge dumping site 0.174 0.174 0.174
Total 1.890 11.310 10.184

EIRR -0.4% 9.4% 12.1%

Number of  About 100 households  No resettlement  No resettlement

resettlement
anticipated
Pros and cons  Large-scale resettlement is  Land requirement is 2nd  Land requirement is the
required and adverse social largest, which is twice as minimum among 6 treatment
impact due to large-scale large as that of PTF. method.
reclamation is anticipated.  3rd lowest of O&M cost due  2nd lowest of O&M cost due
 Construction and O&M costs to low energy consumption. to low energy consumption.
are lowest.  Control of offensive odour  Periodical mixing of media
 O&M is easy but control of and outbreak of filter bed keeps filter bed clean and
offensive odour by covering flies are difficult. thus prevented from
is difficult due to the reason  Application to large-scale out-break of filter flies.
that the system has to STP is small in number.  This method has strength in
introduce sunshine into the coping with first flush and
lagoons for provision of hence this method is
oxidization and disinfection. applicable to combined
 This method has strength in system.
coping with fluctuation of  At present, there is no
water quality but periodical application to large-scale
removal of sludge is required STP. Only in operation in:
so as not to reduce capacity. 1. Demo plant in Da Nang,
300 m3/day
2. Under construction plant
in Hoi An,
2,000 m3/day
3. Demo plant in Japan,
6,750 m3/day
Evaluation1)
Construction cost +++++ +++ ++++
O&M cost +++++ +++ ++++
Easiness of O&M +++++ ++++ ++++
Number of ++ ++ +
application in
large-scale STP2)
Number of + +++++ +++++
resettlements
Environmental + +++ +++++
and social aspects
Total +19 +20 +23
Note1: Scores in “Evaluation” are on a five-level descending system of “+++++” to “+”.
Note2: Large-scale STP in the table is defined as the STP with capacity of more than 100,000 m3/day.
Source: JICA Study Team

4-4
 Table 4.1.5 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Cheung Aek STP
(2/2)
Oxidation Ditch (OD) Conventional Activated Sludge Sequential Batch Reactor
Process (CASP) (SBR)
Land requirement (ha) 43.1 16.3 13.4
Construction cost (million USD)
STP 397.9 302.9 260.9
Sewer 130.7 130.7 130.7
Sludge dumping site 16.5 16.5 16.5
Total 545.1 450.1 408.1
O&M cost (million USD/year)
STP 17.711 14.564 16.433
Sewer 0.157 0.157 0.157
Sludge dumping site 0.174 0.174 0.174
Total 18.042 14.895 16.764

EIRR 7.1% 10.5% 11.7%

Number of  No resettlement  No resettlement  No resettlement

resettlement
anticipated
Pros and cons  O&M is easy because of its  Construction cost is higher  Construction cost is lower
simplified structure. On the but O&M is lower than those than that of CASP.
other hand, land requirement of SBR. In addition, O&M is O&M cost is higher than that
of OD reaches 2.5 times of easier compared to SBR. of CASP.
CASP's.  Large in number of  Skilled techniques including
 In general, this method is application to large-scale formulation of appropriate
applicable to STP with plants and operation methods sequence are required,
capacity of less than are well-established. because this method treat
10 thousand m3/day. wastewater in one reactor.
 Application of this method to This method is as a whole
large-scale plant tends to be applicable to a site in which
relatively high in cost. available land is limited.

Evaluation1)
Construction cost +++ +++ ++++
O&M cost + ++ +
Easiness of O&M ++++ +++ +++
Number of ++ +++++ +++
application in
large-scale STP2)
Number of +++++ +++++ +++++
resettlements
Environmental +++ +++++ +++++
and social aspects
Total +18 +23 +21
Note1: Scores in “Evaluation” are on a five-level descending system of “+++++” to “+”.
Note2: Large-scale STP in the table is defined as the STP with capacity of more than 100,000 m3/day.
Source: JICA Study Team

4-5
4-6

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.2 Layout Plan of Cheung Aek STP
 (3) Financial Analysis

Financial analysis is performed based on the result described above, targeting CASP and PTF,
which are 1st ranked in the quantitative evaluation, as well as Lagoon which has strength in terms
of low-cost.
The financial analysis figures out: (i) sewerage fee, and (ii) charge on vacuum truck dumping
on-site facilities’ sludge/septage to the proposed sludge dumping site, in order to cover O&M cost
only or to cover both O&M and construction cost. The analysis result is summarized in transition
of estimated total charge (expressed in percent) as presented in Fig. 4.1.3.
As shown in Fig. 4.1.3, for example, sewerage fee of 10% to water tariff can cover O&M cost of
Lagoon system. In contrast, sewerage fee of 10%, up to year 2025, will be required to cover
O&M cost of CASP system, and then the fee amounts to 20% up to year 2039 and 55% in and
after year 2040.

Cheung Aek Treatment Area  Cheung Aek Treatment Area 
(Covering O&M cost) (Covering O&M and Initial Cost)

60% 70%

Lagoon PTF CASP

Lagoon 60%
50%
PTF
CASP
50%
40%
% of Water Supply Charge

% of Water Supply Charge

40%

30%

30%

20%
20%

10% of 
Water  10% of 
10% Water 
Supply 10%
Charge Supply
Charge

0% 0%
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040

2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
Year Year

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.3 Transition of Sewerage Fee to cover Cost of Cheung Aek Treatment Area

(4) Conclusion

Based on the above discussion, Lagoon system is not preferable in consideration of social and
environmental negative impacts due to extensive land reclamation. Rather, a typical mechanical
treatment system of CASP or PTF, which is new Japanese treatment system being advantageous
to O&M cost reduction and minimization of land acquisition, are recommendable. However, in
applying the PTF, careful attention should be paid on the risks because the method is not yet
applied to large-scale STP. Additionally, more attention should be paid to PPCC’s strategies and
priorities for sustainable sewage management when selecting and finalizing wastewater treatment
method. Therefore, the selection of wastewater treatment method was discussed in the T/C and
S/C meeting.
In response, CASP was selected for M/P and Pre-F/S for Cheung Aek STP in the discussions of
S/C with PPCC, held in September 2016, because it is too early to apply PTF due to the fact that
the method is not yet applied to large-scale STPs.

4-7
4.1.2 Tamok Treatment Area

Alternative study of (i) Alternative 1, off-site and (ii) Alternative 2, on-site, have been carried out,
targeting an area in Tamok basin having a population density of more than 50 persons/ha in the
year 2035, as schematically illustrated in Fig. 4.1.412.

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.4 Alternative Study on Tamok Treatment Area

(1) Study Result of Off-site Treatment (Alternative 1)

As discussed in Subsection 3.2.2, the study on off-site treatment application has been conducted
on the following assumptions.

 Sewage collection system: Separate system

 Sewage treatment methods: 6 methods are evaluated

(a) Sewage Collection System

As shown in Table 4.1.6, evaluation results show that treatment area amounts to 6,019.2 ha with
population of 481 thousand. Total length of trunk sewer is 66.1 km (diameter from φ200 mm to
φ1,650 mm). Pumping station should be installed at nine locations, of which seven pumping
stations are manhole type. Construction cost of sewer system is estimated at 397.7 million USD,
higher than that of Cheung Aek area, as shown in Tables 4.1.9 and 4.1.10, because branch
sewers are required for the entire Tamok Treatment Area, unlike the Cheung Aek Treatment
Area.

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
12
Thus, area in Tamok basin with population density of less than 50 persons/ha is integrated into “Other Area”

4-8
 Table 4.1.6 Outline of Tamok Treatment Area
Item Contents
Area (ha) 6,019.2
Population (year 2035) 481,423
Sewage collection system Separate system
Trunk sewer (km) 66.1 (φ200 mm-φ1,650 mm)
Requirement of installing branch sewer Required
Pumping station Large-scale 2 locations
Manhole type 7 locations
Construction cost of sewer network See Tables 4.1.10 and 4.1.11
Source: JICA Study Team

(b) Sewage Treatment Plant

Based on the population in Tables 4.1.6 and sewage generation per capita discussed in
Chapter 3, design inflow to STP and pollution load are projected as shown in Tables 4.1.7 and
4.1.8. In addition, evaluation results of 6 treatment methods are summarized in Tables 4.1.9 and
4.1.10, as well as layout plan of STP in Tamok Lake as illustrated in Fig. 4.1.5.
Table 4.1.7 Design Inflow to Tamok STP
Sewage Groundwater Total Design inflow
(m3/day) (m3/day) (m3/day) (m3/day)
Daily average 98,692 15,652 114,344 115,000
Daily maximum 108,320 15,652 123,972 124,000
Hourly maximum 163,684 15,652 179,336 180,000
Note: (Groundwater estimate 1)= 6,019.2 ha×7.5 m3/day/ha=45,144 m3/day…..(1)
(Groundwater estimate 2)=Population×(160+95)L/capita/day×0.85×15%=15,562 m3/day......(2
The results shows that (2)<(1). Therefore, (Groundwater estimate 2) is adopted.
Source: JICA Study Team

Table 4.1.8 Design Water Quality of Cheung Aek STP

Daily average Concentration Design water Remarks
inflow calculated quality
(m3/day) (mg/L) (mg/L)
Total BOD load: 21,991 kg/day
Of which
BOD 115,000 191 195 domestic and commercial:
21,664 kg/day
Industrial: 327 kg/day
TSS 115,000 201 205 BOD×1.05
Note: (Domestic and commercial BOD load)=(Population)×45 g/capita/day×10-3
(Industrial BOD load)=(Population)×8.5 L/capita/day (amount of water use)×80 mg/L×10-6
Source: JICA Study Team

Evaluation results show that Lagoon is the best option in terms of lowest construction and O&M
cost. Unlike Cheung Aek Lake, Lagoon requires largest land requirement but negative
environmental impact to Tamok Lake is limited because the lake has a considerably large
surface area. In addition, resettlement will not be required.
Based on the quantitative evaluation in terms of construction cost, O&M cost, easiness of O&M,
number of application in large-scale STP and environmental and social aspects, Lagoon, PTF
and CASP are given the highest scores in the evaluation.

4-9
 Table 4.1.9 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Tamok STP (1/2)
Lagoon Trickling Filter Pre-treated Trickling Filtration
(TF) (PTF)
Land requirement (ha) 115.0 16.5 8.4
Construction cost (million USD)
STP 109.7 201.3 176.7
Sewer1) 397.7 397.7 397.7
Pumping station 1.7 1.7 1.7
)
Sludge disposal site2 - - -
Total 509.1 600.7 576.1
O&M cost (million USD/year)
STP 0.752 5.056 4.549
Sewer 1.492 1.492 1.492
Pumping station 0.075 0.075 0.075
Sludge disposal site1) - - -
Total 2.319 6.623 6.116

EIRR 4.3% 3.2% 3.5%

Number of  No resettlement  No resettlement  No resettlement

resettlements
anticipated
Pros and cons  Large-scale resettlement is  Land requirement is 2nd  Land requirement is less than
not required and social largest, which is twice as half of TF's.
impact due to large-scale large as that of PTF.  2nd lowest of O&M cost due
reclamation is limited,  3rd lowest of O&M cost due to low energy consumption.
compared to Cheung Aek to low energy consumption.  Periodical mixing of media
Lake.  Control of offensive odor keeps filter bed clean and
 Construction and O&M and outbreak of filter bed thus prevent from outbreak
costs are lowest. flies is difficult. of filter flies.
 O&M is easy but control of  Adoption to large-scale STP  This method has strength in
offensive odour by covering is small in number. coping with first flush and
is difficult due to the reason hence applicable to
that the system has to combined system.
introduce sunshine into the  At present, there is no
lagoons for provision of application to large-scale
oxidization and disinfection. STP. Only in operation in
 This method has strength in 1. Demo plant in Da Nang,
coping with fluctuation of 300 m3/day
water quality but periodical 2. Under construction plant
removal of sludge is required in Hoi An,
so as not to reduce capacity. 2,000 m3/day
3. Demo plant in Japan,
6,750 m3/day
Evaluation3)
Construction cost ++++ +++ ++++
O&M cost +++++ +++ ++++
Easiness of O&M +++++ ++++ ++++
Number of ++ ++ +
applications in
large-scale STP4)
Number of +++++ +++++ +++++
resettlements
Environmental ++ +++ +++++
and social aspects
Total +23 +20 +23
Note 1: Construction cost includes cost of branch sewer installation.
Note 2: Construction and O&M costs of sludge dumping site are included in Table 4.1.4 and Table 4.1.5.
Note 3: Scores in “Evaluation” are on a five-level descending system of “+++++” to “+”.
Note 4: Large-scale STP in the table is defined as the STP with capacity of more than 100,000 m3/day.
Source: JICA Study Team

4-10
 Table 4.1.10 Comparison of Wastewater Treatment Method applied to Tamok STP (2/2)
Oxidation Ditch (OD) Conventional Activated Sludge Sequential Batch Reactor
Process (CASP) (SBR)
Land requirement (ha) 24.1 10.4 8.1
Construction cost (million USD)
STP 235.3 198.8 168.3
Sewer1) 397.7 397.7 397.7
Pumping station 1.7 1.7 1.7
Sludge disposal site2) - - -
Total 634.7 598.2 567.7
O&M cost (million USD/year)
STP 8.039 6.681 7.463
Sewer 1.492 1.492 1.492
Pumping station 0.075 0.075 0.075
Sludge disposal site1) - - -
Total 9.606 8.248 9.030

EIRR 2.8% 3.1% 3.4%

Number of  No resettlement  No resettlement  No resettlement

resettlements
anticipated
Pros and cons  O&M is easy because of its  Construction cost is higher  Construction cost is lower
simplified structure. On the but O&M is lower than that than that of CASP.
other hand, land requirement of SBR. In addition, O&M is  O&M cost is higher than that
of OD reaches 2.5 times of easier compared to SBR of CASP.
CASP's.  Large in number of  Skilled techniques including
 In general, this method is application to large-scale formulation of appropriate
applicable to STP with plant and operation methods sequence are required
capacity of less than 10 are well-established. because this method treat
thousand m3/day. wastewater in one reactor.
 Application of this method to This method is as whole
large-scale plant tends to be applicable to the site in
relatively high in cost. which available land is
limited.

Evaluation3)
Construction cost +++ +++ ++++
O&M cost + ++ +
Easiness of O&M ++++ +++ +++
Number of ++ +++++ +++
applications in
large-scale STP4)
Number of +++++ +++++ +++++
resettlements
Environmental +++ +++++ +++++
and social aspects
Total +18 +23 +21
Note 1: Construction cost includes cost of branch sewer installation.
Note 2: Construction and O&M costs of sludge dumping site are included in Table 4.1.4 and Table 4.1.5.
Note 3: Scores in “Evaluation” are on a five-level descending system of “+++++” to “+”.
Note 4: Large-scale STP in the table is defined as the STP with capacity of more than 100,000 m3/day.
Source: JICA Study Team

4-11
4-12

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.5 Layout Plan of Tamok STP

(2) Study Result of On-site Treatment (Alternative 2)

More than 90% of households in Phnom Penh have pit latrine or septic tank. Therefore, most
probably, roughly 90% of households in Tamok treatment area have pit latrine or septic tank. In
order to select the appropriate on-site treatment method for the Tamok treatment area, on-site
treatment methods of pit latrine, septic tank, Johkasou and community plant have been
evaluated. As a result, Johkasou has been selected as the appropriate on-site treatment method in
Tamok treatment area for the following reasons.

 On-site treatment facilities, which exceed the capacity of septic tank, is appropriate in
consideration of the present deterioration of water environment in Tamok basin under the
condition that most of the households install septic tank or pit latrine, and the estimated
increase in population as well as pollution load generated

 Johkasou and community plant are candidates for the facilities exceeding septic tank, but in
particular Johkasou has advantages over community plant since (i) it can be fabricated in
factory and be easily installed on the site, (ii) it has in principle functionality equivalent to
community plant, and (iii) it has wide range of line-up covering community-based size.
Evaluation results applying Johkasou are summarized in Table 4.1.11, as described below.

 Construction and O&M Costs: Construction and O&M costs are estimated at 396 million
USD and 15.8 million USD/year. This construction cost is more than 100 million USD
lower than that of Lagoon, which is lowest in construction cost (509 million USD) of
off-site treatment system. This result arises from the reason that Tamok basin needs branch
sewer installation, unlike Cheung Aek treatment area. On the other hand, O&M cost
(15.8 million USD/year) is 1.90 times of CASP’s (8.3 million USD/year). However, total
cost including construction cost and O&M is lower than that of CASP.

 Others: Johkasou have advantages that phased construction and commission is easy
because it is generally installed individually. Moreover, unlike off-site treatment system,
reclamation of Tamok Lake is not required and EIRR is higher than those of the other
6 off-site treatment methods.
Table 4.1.11 Outline of On-site Treatment System applied to Tamok Treatment Area
Item Contents
Title of facilities On-site treatment (Johkasou)
Target population 481,423
Quantities of facilities1) Small scale (for 5 persons) ：48,085 units
Community-based scale (for 300 person)： 805 units
Construction cost (million USD) 396.2
O&M cost (million USD/year) 15.797

EIRR 6.5%

Pros and cons  Construction cost is lower than any other off-site
treatment methods (6 methods).
 O&M cost is higher than that of typical off-site treatment
method of CASP.
 Phased construction is easy because Johkasou can be in
commissioned individually.
 Reclamation of Tamok Lake is not required.
Evaluation2)
Construction cost +++++
O&M cost +
Easiness of O&M ++++
Number of application +++

4-13
 Item Contents
Number of resettlement +++++
Environmental and social +++++
aspect
Total +23
Note 1: Number of Johkasou is computed under assumption that 50% of population uses
small-scale Johkasou, while others use community-based Johkasou.
Note 2: Scores in “Evaluation” are on a five-level descending system of “+++++” to “+”, as with in
Tables 4.1.9 and 4.1.10.
Source: JICA Study Team

Based on the discussion in Tables 4.1.9 and 4.1.10, which summarise quantitative evaluation of
six off-site treatment methods, as well as Table 4.1.11, which outlines quantitative evaluation of
on-site treatment, off-site treatment applying Lagoon, CASP and PTF or on-site treatment
applying Johkasou are preferable as a whole.

(3) Financial Analysis

Based on the discussion above, financial evaluation is performed focusing on off-site treatment of
Lagoon, CASP and PTF, as well as on-site treatment of Johkasou, because the four methods
obtain the same score. It is noted that the financial analysis is performed to compute sewerage fee
and sludge dumping fee posed to vacuum truck, in order to cover cost of Tamok as well as
Cheung Aek Treatment areas, since Cheung Aek Treatment Area is covered by sewerage fee,
regardless of selection of treatment methods for Tamok Treatment Area.
Tables 4.1.12 and 4.1.13 illustrates application of treatment in Cheung Aek and Tamok treatment
areas, and Figs. 4.1.6 and 4.1.7 respectively present transitions of sewerage fee covering O&M
cost only or covering both O&M and construction cost, depending on the cases of : (i) Tamok
Treatment Area is serviced applying off-site treatment of Lagoon, PTF and CASP and (ii) Tamok
Treatment Area is serviced applying on-site treatment of Johkasou, in cases of application of
Lagoon, PTF and CASP in Cheung Aek Treatment Area.
Table 4.1.12 Image of Application of Treatment (Tamok: Off-site)
Case Tamok Treatment Area is Tamok Treatment Area is Tamok Treatment Area is
serviced applying off-site serviced applying off-site serviced applying off-site
treatment of Lagoon treatment of PTF treatment of CASP
(including cost of Cheung Aek (including cost of Cheung Aek (including cost of Cheung Aek
Treatment Area is serviced Treatment Area is serviced Treatment Area is serviced
applying Lagoon) applying PTF) applying CASP)
Image of
application of on- Tamok Tamok Tamok
and off-site (off-site) (off-site) (off-site)
Lagoon PTF CASP
Cheung Aek Cheung Aek Cheung Aek
(off-site) (off-site) (off-site)
Lagoon PTF CASP

Source: JICA Study Team

4-14
 Cheung Aek+Tamok(Off‐site) Treatment Area  Cheung Aek+Tamok(Off‐site) Treatment Area 
(Covering O&M cost) (Covering O&M and Initial Cost)

70% 80%
Cheung Aek (Lagoon)+Tamok (Lagoon)
Cheung Aek (PTF)+Tamok (PTF)
Cheung Aek (CASP)+Tamok (CASP) 70% Cheung Aek
60%
(Lagoon)+Tamok
(Lagoon)
60%
50%
Cheung Aek
(PTF)+Tamok (PTF)

% of Water Supply Charge
50%
% of Water Supply Charge

40%

40% Cheung Aek
(CASP)+Tamok
30% (CASP)
30%

20%
20%
10% of 
10% of 
Water 
10% Water 
Supply 10%
Supply
Charge
Charge

0% 0%
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040

2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
Year Year

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.6 Transition of Sewerage Fee to cover Costs for Cheung Aek and Tamok
Treatment Area (Tamok Treatment Area: Off-site)
Table 4.1.13 Image of Application of Treatment (Tamok: On-site)
Case Tamok Treatment Area is Tamok Treatment Area is Tamok Treatment Area is
serviced applying on-site serviced applying on-site serviced applying on-site
treatment of Johkasou treatment of Johkasou treatment of Johkasou

(including service cost of (including service cost of (including service cost of

Cheung Aek Treatment Area Cheung Aek Treatment Area Cheung Aek Treatment Area
applying Lagoon) applying PTF) applying CASP)
Image of
application of Tamok Tamok Tamok
on- and off-site (on-site) (on-site) (on-site)
Johkasou Johkasou Johkasou
Cheung Aek Cheung Aek Cheung Aek
(off-site) (off-site) (off-site)
Lagoon PTF CASP

Source: JICA Study Team

4-15
 Cheung Aek+Tamok(On‐site) Treatment Area  Cheung Aek+Tamok(On‐site) Treatment Area 
(Covering O&M cost) (Covering O&M and Initial Cost)

80% 100%
Cheung Aek (Lagoon)+Tamok (Johkasou)
Cheung Aek (PTF)+Tamok (Johkasou) 90% Cheung Aek
70%
Cheung Aek (CASP)+Tamok (Johkasou) (Lagoon)+Tamok
80% (Johkasou)
60%
70% Cheung Aek
(PTF)+Tamok
% of Water Supply Charge

% of Water Supply Charge
50% (Johkasou)
60%

Cheung Aek
40% 50% (CASP)+Tamok
(Johkasou)
40%
30%

30%
20%
20%
10% of  10% of 
10% Water  Water 
Supply 10% Supply
Charge Charge

0% 0%
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040

2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
Year Year

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.7 Transition of Sewerage Fee to cover Cost of Cheung Aek and Tamok Treatment
Area (Tamok Treatment Area: On-site)
Results in Figs 4.1.6 and 4.1.7 suggest that it is not realistic to cover construction cost by
sewerage fee. It is recommendable for sewerage to cover only O&M cost while construction cost
is borne by subsidy from the government.
To clarify sewerage fee per capita, sewerage fee presented by percentage in Figs 4.1.6 and 4.1.7,
are converted to O&M cost per capita per month, as shown in Table 4.1.14, depending on the
case analysis.
As in Table 4.1.14, O&M cost per capita per month ranges from 0.23 USD/month to
1.63 USD/month, by which Cheung Aek and Tamok treatment areas are serviced applying lagoon
in both areas, as well as CASP in Cheung Aek and Johkasou in Tamok, respectively. However,
total cost including construction cost and O&M of Johkasou is lower than that of CASP13.
Table 4.1.14 O&M Cost per Capita per Month
Treatment Contents
area
Population Cheung Aek 1,093,155
Tamok 481,423
Total 1,574,578
Treatment method Cheung Aek Lagoon Lagoon PTF PTF CASP CASP
Tamok Johkasou Lagoon Johkasou PTF Johkasou CASP
Construction cost Cheung Aek 361.4 361.4 419.0 419.0 450.1 450.1
(million USD) Tamok 396.2 509.1 396.2 576.1 396.2 598.2
(Reference) Total 757.6 870.5 815.2 995.1 846.3 1,048.3
O&M cost Cheung Aek 1.890 1.890 10.184 10.184 14.895 14.895
(million USD/year) Tamok 15.797 2.319 15.797 6.116 15.797 8.248
Total 17.687 4.209 25.981 16.300 30.692 23.143
O&M cost per capita
0.94 0.23 1.38 0.87 1.63 1.23
(USD/month)
Source: JICA Study Team

――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
13
It takes about 27 years to balance difference in construction cost of 202.0 (598.2-396.2) million USD and accumulated
difference in O&M cost of 7.549 (15.797-8.248) million USD/year.

4-16
 (4) Conclusion

Above discussion reveals that (i) introduction of off-site treatment system in Tamok Treatment
Area has a disadvantage that it is too costly and it takes a long time to install branch sewers in the
entire basin, and thus water environment is not improved immediately; (ii) the adaptation of
off-site treatment system in both Cheung Aek and Tamok Areas should be a financial burden to
PPCC, considering present budgetary allocation for sewage and drainage management sector; and
(iii) there is an advantage in introducing on-site treatment system in Tamok area because
step-by-step implementation approach can easily be applied. Ultimately, selection of on- and
off-site treatment in Tamok depends on the strategies and policies on sewerage management of
PPCC as with the case of Cheung Aek Area. Thus, selection of on- and off-site treatment in
Tamok Area was finalised through discussion in T/C and S/C meetings to be held in Phnom Penh.
In response, Johkasou was selected for M/P and Pre-F/S for Tamok Treatment Area in the
discussions of S/C with PPCC, held in September 2016, because overall cost (construction cost
and O&M cost) is lowest and step-by-step implementation approach can easily be applied in
Johkasou system.

4.1.3 Other Area

It is not timely to introduce off-site treatment system and high-grade on-site treatment facilities
such as Johkasou, which is proposed in Tamok area, because population projection and
population density estimated for the year of 2035 is too low and status of development is
immature. Installation of septic tank should be therefore promoted in the area (outer area of
Cheung Aek and Tamok). Introduction of high-grade on-site treatment or off-site treatment
should be discussed after the target year of 2035.

4.1.4 Summary of Application of On-site and Off-site Treatment System

Based on the discussion above, study on the sewage management M/P is hereinafter detailed,
according to the classification of on- and off-site treatment area in PPCC, as shown in
Table 4.1.15.
Table 4.1.15 Summary of Application of On-site and Off-site Treatment
Treatment system applied
Cheung Aek area Off-site treatment
Tamok and other area On-site treatment
Source: JICA Study Team

(1) Reduction of Pollution Load in the Implementation of the Master Plan

Effect of implementation of the M/P are evaluated by comparing pollution load at present (year
2015) and target year (year 2035), based on classification in Table 4.1.15 and planning and
design conditions described in Chapter 3 and Table 4.1.16.

4-17
 Table 4.1.16 Conditions for Evaluation of Pollution Load Reduction
Items Contents Remark
BOD load per capita (g/capita/day) 45
Removal rate Without project (at present and target year of 2035) 20 Note 1)
of septic tank (%) With project (year 2035) 40 Note 2)
Effluent from the facilities (STP or Johkasou) 30
in Alternative1 and 2 (mg/L)
Note 1: Removal rate [ (240-200)/240×100×20%] is set up, employing typical value obtained in the monitoring
survey (about 200 mg/L at Trabek pumping station) and assumed BOD at the source
(240 mg/L=45g/capita/day÷150 L(assumed sewage generation per capita in 2015)×1,000).
Note 2: Removal rate under the condition that desludge is appropriately conducted with reference to “Preparatory
Survey Report on the Project for the Improvement of Water Supply, Sewerage and Drainage System in
Yangon City in the Republic of the Union of Myanmar”, March 2014, JICA and "Project for Capacity
Development of Wastewater Sector through reviewing the Wastewater Management Master Plan in DKI
Jakarta", Final Report, March 2012, JICA.
Source: JICA Study Team

As shown in Fig. 4.1.8, pollution load of 76.1 t/day, generated at present (year 2015), will
increase to 113.8 t/day or 1.5 times of present in the target year 2035 but the pollution load
discharged (after treatment) is reduced from 60.9 t/day to 36.5 t/day by implementing proposed
Master Plan.

BOD(year 2015) BOD(year 2035)

120 120 113.8

Others
Others
Tamok
Tamok
100 Cheung Aek 100
Cheung Aek
Others 91.0

80 76.1 80
Others

Others 60.9
t/day

60 Tamok
60
t/day

Others
Tamok
Tamok

40 40 36.5
Tamok

Cheung Aek Others

20 Cheung Aek 20 Cheung Aek
Cheung Aek
Tamok
Cheung Aek
0
0
At source After treatment by sanitary At source Without project Alt-1, 2
facilities

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.1.8 Reduction of Pollution Load

(2) Others

Occurrence of water-borne diseases such as itches, the major symptoms manifested in social
survey conducted in the Study, would be reduced and dirty sewage in drainage canals would
disappear with the implementation of the M/P.

4-18
4.2 Facilities Plan

4.2.1 Sewer Network Plan in Cheung Aek Treatment Area

(1) Basic Strategy

Cheung Aek Treatment Area is located at the southern part of central PPCC. This area covers the
whole area of Khan 7 Makara and a part of the surrounding five (5) Khans. The area is 4,702 ha
and the total population is estimated at 1,093,155 in 2035. In Cheung Aek Treatment Area,
interceptor system is applied since the existing drainage pipe covers in almost all of the area.

(2) Design Criteria for Sewer

(a) Design Sewer Volume

Considering the condition of the existing drainage system, the possibility of conversion to
separate sewer systems in the future and the examples in surrounding countries, the design
sewage flow in PPCC is determined as the same volume as hourly maximum sewage flow in the
dry season.

(b) Equation of Hydraulic Calculation

The Manning’s equation is applied for hydraulic calculation with roughness coefficient of 0.013.

(c) Minimum Diameter of Sewer

Diameter of sewer is set to prevent sewage from being suspended caused by insufficient
capacity and unexpected obstruction, and to ease maintenance work. Therefore, the minimum
diameter of 200 mm is set in the M/P.

(d) Minimum Earth Covering Depth

Considering the above, the minimum earth covering depth is determined as 2.0 m for trunk and
main sewers. In case of branch sewers which will directly connect with households, the
minimum earth covering depth will be 1.0 m.

(e) Flow Velocity

Minimum velocity of 0.8 m/sec and maximum velocity of 3.0 m/sec are applied.

(3) Sewer Network Plan

Covered area and population in Cheung Aek treatment area is summarized in Table 4.2.1.
Table 4.2.1 Covered Area and Population of Cheung Aek Treatment Area
Name of Khan and Sangkat Covered Covered Population (Cheung Aek Treatment Area)
Area (ha) 2016 2020 2025 2030 2035
01 Chamkarmon 919.0 184,118 188,126 199,900 211,674 223,448
0101 Tonle Basak1 9.3 481 481 481 481 481
0102 Tonle Basak2 104.5 10,036 10,845 13,719 16,593 19,467
0103 Tonle Basak3 155.1 12,000 13,100 16,600 20,100 23,600
0104 Boeng Keng Kang Muoy 99.7 14,000 14,000 15,333 16,667 18,000
0105 Boeng Keng Kang Pir 29.2 11,700 11,700 11,700 11,700 11,700
0106 Boeng Keng Kang Bei 65.8 23,700 24,300 24,967 25,633 26,300
0107 Oulampik 30.3 10,000 10,600 11,100 11,600 12,100
0108 Tuol SvayPreyTiMuoy 58.9 14,700 14,700 15,300 15,900 16,500

4-19
Name of Khan and Sangkat Covered Covered Population (Cheung Aek Treatment Area)
Area (ha) 2016 2020 2025 2030 2035
0109 Tuol SvayPreyTiPir 35.0 11,600 11,900 12,367 12,833 13,300
0110 Tumnob Tuek 78.6 18,900 18,900 18,900 18,900 18,900
0111 Tuol TumpungTiPir 47.0 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300
0112 Tuol TumpungTiMuoy 62.6 13,800 14,400 15,433 16,467 17,500
0113 Boeng Trabaek 45.9 9,600 9,600 10,067 10,533 11,000
0114 Phsar Daeum Thkov 97.1 22,300 22,300 22,633 22,967 23,300
02 Daun Penh 592.1 106,336 108,438 111,535 114,631 117,728
0201 PhsarThmeiTiMuoy 16.5 5,300 5,500 5,767 6,033 6,300
0202 PhsarThmeiTiPir 10.7 7,500 7,400 7,200 7,000 6,800
0203 PhsarThmeiTiBei 31.4 10,400 10,400 10,300 10,200 10,100
0204 Boeng Reang 41.6 7,100 7,500 7,767 8,033 8,300
0205 Phsar KandalTiMouy 40.9 11,400 12,300 13,367 14,433 15,500
0206 PhsarKandalTiPir 14.7 7,500 8,400 9,533 10,667 11,800
0207 Chakto Mukh 149.7 12,000 12,000 13,000 14,000 15,000
0208 CheyChummeah 72.9 12,400 12,400 11,900 11,400 10,900
0209 PhsarChas 10.1 6,900 7,100 7,400 7,700 8,000
0210 SrahChak1 75.5 5,707 6,676 7,154 7,633 8,112
0211 SrahChak2 63.7 10,429 9,762 9,580 9,398 9,216
0212 VoatPhnum 64.4 9,700 9,000 8,567 8,133 7,700
03 7 Makara 219.9 95,100 96,600 98,633 100,667 102,700
0301 Ou Ruessei Ti Muoy 8.5 8,300 8,100 7,900 7,700 7,500
0302 Ou Ruessei Ti Pir 8.7 9,200 8,900 8,533 8,167 7,800
0303 Ou Ruessei Ti Bei 4.9 7,800 7,400 6,900 6,400 5,900
0304 Ou Ruessei Ti Buon 8.3 8,600 8,500 8,433 8,367 8,300
0305 Monourom 13.9 11,500 11,400 11,300 11,200 11,100
0306 Mittakpheap 38.7 10,800 11,600 12,367 13,133 13,900
0307 Veal Vong 96.9 28,100 29,100 30,400 31,700 33,000
0308 Boeng Prolit 40.1 10,800 11,600 12,800 14,000 15,200
04 Toul Kork 492.1 148,857 148,051 148,012 147,973 147,935
0401 Phsar Depou Ti Muoy 32.4 11,700 12,000 12,333 12,667 13,000
0402 Phsar Depou Ti Pir 20.5 11,500 11,300 11,300 11,300 11,300
0403 Phsar Depou Ti Bei 30.6 8,600 9,200 9,700 10,200 10,700
0404 Tuek L'ak Ti Muoy 90.8 16,300 17,300 18,800 20,300 21,800
0405 Tuek L'ak Ti Pir 42.5 13,600 13,600 13,300 13,000 12,700
0406 Tuek L'ak Ti Bei 117.1 32,900 31,600 30,833 30,067 29,300
0407 Phsar Daeum Kor 69.5 22,257 22,851 23,345 23,840 24,335
0408 Boeng Salang 88.7 32,000 30,200 28,400 26,600 24,800
05 Po Senchey 220.4 10,558 13,145 13,145 13,145 13,145
0501 Chaom Chau1 115.7 3,573 4,444 4,444 4,444 4,444
0502 Kakab1 104.6 6,985 8,700 8,700 8,700 8,700
06 Meanchey 1,587.9 271,000 301,700 319,200 336,700 354,200
0601 Stueng Mean Chey1 321.9 11,400 13,000 13,767 14,533 15,300
0602 Stueng Mean Chey2 804.7 157,900 178,200 188,733 199,267 209,800
0603 Boeng Tumpun 461.4 101,700 110,500 116,700 122,900 129,100
07 Sen Sok 670.5 97,400 110,400 118,267 126,133 134,000
0701 Tuek Thla 670.5 97,400 110,400 118,267 126,133 134,000
Total 4,701.9 913,369 966,459 1,008,691 1,050,923 1,093,155
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.2.1 shows the sewer network plan and Table 4.2.2 summarizes sewer network facilities in
the treatment area. This area is divided into two (2) sub-treatment areas and 14 sewer districts
considering the existing drainage system, road and topographic condition. STP will be located
near Tumpun Pumping Station at the Cheung Aek Lake. Design sewage volume in 2035 is
282,000 m3 at the daily maximum. Relay pumping station will not be required in this treatment
area.

4-20
4-21

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.2.1 Sewer Network Plan in Cheung Aek Treatment Area
 Table 4.2.2 Summary of Sewer Network Facilities in Cheung Aek Treatment Area
Item Length (m) Diameter (mm) Covering (m) Remark
1. Trunk Sewer
1) Chamkamon Trunk 5,984 1,000 ~ 1,650 4.36 ~ 10.25
2) Meanchey Trunk 7,665 900 ~ 2,200 2.47 ~ 10.01
2. Main Sewer ~ ~
1) C-1 Main 2,201 800 ~ 1,000 3.93 ~ 7.00 Connecting to
2) C-2 Main 843 250 ~ 400 2.70 ~ 10.25 Chamkarmon Trunk
3) C-3 Main 1,544 300 ~ 400 2.64 ~ 11.59
4) M-1 Main 1,226 600 ~ 800 4.32 ~ 9.33 Connecting to
5) M-2 Main 1,295 500 ~ 700 4.43 ~ 7.69 Meanchey Trunk
6) M-3 Main 4,812 600 ~ 1,350 2.09 ~ 9.30
7) M-4 Main 1,161 500 ~ 600 2.50 ~ 7.78
8) M-5 Main 352 600 ~ 4.32 ~ 4.32
9) M-6 Main 1,044 400 ~ 4.54 ~ 8.33
10) M-7 Main 4,100 300 ~ 900 2.64 ~ 12.01
11) M-8 Main 1,877 300 ~ 600 2.64 ~ 11.72
Total Length 34,104

Interception Facilities (Overflow Chamber) Amount

1) Chamkamon Trunk and connected Main 17
2) Meanchey Trunk and Connected Main 33
Total Amount 50
Source: JICA Study Team

In the Cheung Aek Treatment Area, sewer is about 34 km in length and installation depth is
12 m at a maximum considering collection of sewage utilizing existing drainage system.
Therefore, relay pumping station will not be required.

4.2.2 Sewage Treatment Plan Facilities Plan in Cheung Aek Treatment Area

Overview of the Cheung Aek STP is shown in Table 4.2.3. Sludge treatment system is simply
organized with the configuration of sludge thickener and dehydrator. Sludge digester is not proposed
because it has a number of accessories and thus operation of the facilities is not easy, especially in
controlling input depending on the condition of sludge. Sludge recycle facilities are not proposed in
the M/P because no great needs in PPCC has been recognized in the social survey conducted in the
Study. Instead, the sludge recycle facilities should be considered in the future.
Table 4.2.3 Overview of STP
Facilities Items
Pumping station Grit chamber and pumping equipment
Administration building Staff room/laboratory and so on
Wastewater treatment facilities Primary and final sedimentation chamber and reactor and so on
Sludge treatment facilities Gravity thickener/mechanical thickener/dehydrator
Disinfection chamber Chlorine chamber
Others Distribution chamber/ generator/ receiving and transforming station
Source : JICA Study Team

4.2.3 On-site Treatment Plan in Tamok Area

As discussed in Subsection 4.1.2, Johkasou is applied in Tamok treatment area. Johkasou can
simultaneously treat black and grey water and have a wide line-up, ranging from a household size (for
5 persons: see image in Fig. 4.2.2) and community based size (for several hundred persons: see image
in Figs. 4.2.3 and 4.2.4) to large-scale type for 1,000 persons. BOD removal rate of Johkasou reaches
90%, which is equivalent to off-site treatment facilities. Moreover, Johkasou can be fabricated in
factories and be easily installed on site.

4-22
Johkasou has advantages in treating wastewater but it was very costly compared to other on-site
treatment facilities such as septic tank and thus not so popular in the developing countries. But in the
recent years, a great deal of effort have made in cost reduction by localizing procurement of parts and
materials as well as fabrication. For instance, in the neighbouring country of Myanmar, installation of
Johkasou has been in progress especially in the capital city of Yangon. Considering the status of
Johkasou, there exists great potential for cost-reduction and dissemination of Johkasou in Phnom Penh
if some manufacturers expand their business to Cambodia or establish an affiliated company.
Therefore, Johkasou is introduced for alternative study in the M/P.

Source: Japanese Manufacturer

Fig. 4.2.2 Image of Johkasou (for 5 persons)

Source: Japanese Manufacturer

Fig. 4.2.3 Image of Johkasou (for 300 persons)

4-23
 Source : JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.2.4 Image of Community-Based Sewage Treatment applying Johkasou

4.2.4 Sludge Disposal Plan

At present, in PPCC, more than 90% of households have installed on-site facilities such as septic tank
but unfortunately PPCC has no septage disposal site. Meanwhile, in the M/P, Cheung Aek STP is
proposed as one of off-site treatment facilities and thus there exist additional need to dispose sludge
generated in STP. In response, sludge disposal site, in which septage, sludge withdrawn from
Johkasou and treated sludge from STP can be disposed, is proposed in the M/P.
Anaerobic and/or aerobic digestion system is a candidate of septage treatment facilities but they are as
a whole costly in terms of construction and O&M, so that the following simple septage treatment
facilities are proposed in the M/P (see Fig. 4.2.5). The treatment facilities consist of (i) receiving
station in which sludge unloaded from vacuum trucks are received, as well as sedimentation basin and
anaerobic pond in which septage are treated and (ii) lagoon consisting of anaerobic, facultative and
maturation lagoon, in which overflow water is treated. Treated sludge from STP is disposed in the site.
Land requirement of this sludge disposal site is estimated at 35 ha (i.e., 30 ha for treated sludge
disposal site and 5 ha for septage and Johkasou sludge treatment facilities). Expected lifetime of the
site will be about 15 to 20 years. If needs to establish sludge recycle system increase in the future,
such sludge recycle uses as construction material, aggregate for concrete, agricultural use, and material
for landfill, are to be proposed.

Source : JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.2.5 Treatment Facilities for Septage and Johkasou Sludge

4-24
4.3 Operation and Maintenance Plan

4.3.1 Sewer Network

(1) Operation and Maintenance for Sewer Networks

It is essential to establish sewerage ledger and to record the operation and maintenance works in
operating and maintaining sewer network. In sewerage ledger, it is required to organize such
information as sewer length, diameter, manhole depth and dimension of each sewer and manhole.
Based on the sewerage ledger, operation and maintenance plan shall be prepared in order to
effectively manage sewerage facilities.
In implementing operation and maintenance works, it is required to establish a management group
for the sewerage facilities. At present, DSD in DPWT is responsible for the drainage system
operation and maintenance work and their performance is good, because the works is conducted
in accordance with a work plan prepared by them. Therefore, it is desirable to establish a
management group for sewerage facilities in DSD. Items for sewer network maintenance works
are briefly described as below.

(a) Sewers and Manholes

Sewers and manholes will generally be installed under road or public land. Therefore, the
following maintenance works are required.
i) Recording and registration of operation and maintenance works
ii) Daily or weekly site inspection
iii) Checking and cleaning inside of sewers and manholes
iv) Periodical inspection inside sewers and manholes by manually or by television (CCTV
camera)
v) Detailed survey and evaluation of capacity of sewers and function of manholes
vi) Repair or rehabilitation

(b) Interception Facilities (Overflow Chambers)

Interceptor facilities are very important facilities to collect sewage and proper maintenance
works are:
i) Situation of sewage collection and water level of sewage
ii) Checking no overflow of sewage in the dry condition
iii) Checking weir and other equipment
iv) Removing suspended solids and debris

4.3.2 Sewage Treatment Plant and Sludge Disposal Site

(1) Sewage Treatment Plant

O&M in STP is implemented with objectives of optimizing the function of treatment facilities,
thereby complying with effluent and targeted standards, improving water environment, and
conserving water quality of public water bodies. Flowchart of O&M in STP is shown in
Fig. 4.3.1.

4-25
Source: JICA Study Team, based on Tentative Guidelines for Optimization of Operation and Maintenance of Sewage Works
in developing Countries, October 2001

Fig. 4.3.1 Flowchart of O&M in STP

O&M items in STP are as summarised in Table 4.3.1.
Table 4.3.1 O&M Items in STP
Facilities Items
Grit chamber/pumping station ・ Removal of debris
Influent channel ・ Record of inflow
Sewage Sedimentation ・ Removal of scum
treatment chamber ・ Control of putrefaction and floatation of sludge
facilities ・ Inspection of wearing and putrefaction and sludge collector
・ Control of sludge overflow from overflow weir
Reactors ・ Control of bulking
・ Prevention of floatation and deflocculation of activated sludge
Sludge Gravity thickener ・ Check of floatation of sludge and rise of sludge-liquid interface
treatment Mechanical ・ Check of abnormal vibration and rotation
facilities thickener/dehydrator ・ Control of injection ratio of flocculants
Chlorine chamber ・ Check of chlorine consumption
Water quality analysis ・ pH, DO, BOD, TSS, COD, Coliform and so on
Source: JICA Study Team

(2) Sludge Disposal Site

In sludge disposal site, activities such as drying up of sludge and ground levelling in order to
extend lifetime of the site, are required. O&M items of septage and Johkasou sludge treatment
facilities are as listed below.

- Sludge receiving station ：Removal of debris

- Lagoon and flow regulation pond ：Removal of scum and algae
- Sludge drying bed ：Check of sludge thickness and removal of sludge

4.3.3 On-site Treatment Facilities

Septic tank and Johkasou requires periodical desludging. In addition, Johkasou requires periodical
operation and maintenance such as control of aeration, circulated water, backwashing, flushing flow
rate in toilets in order to comply with the discharge criteria.

4-26
4.4 Review of Organization and Legal Framework of Sewage Management

4.4.1 Review for Proposal of a New Organization to Implement the Sewer Network Service

Based on the issues identified and described in Section 3.1, the option of creating a new organization
specialized for sewage management in the large, rapidly growing city of PPCC, is discussed in this
section. The organization will carry out planning of a sewer network service plan; and will have a
leadership who has strong abilities (authority and organizational strength) to carry out the
implementation plan based on the M/P, while coordinating and negotiating with relevant ministries
and agencies and respective authorities of the PPCC, with staff to support the leader and to carry out
the service, to set fee schedules and to be responsible for publicity. A phased plan to enhance the
organization, following M/P policy of staged establishment and improvement (short term, medium
term, and long term), is also considered14.
The new organization will be headed by the Director and has at least two sections as below.

 Sewerage Project Section: Responsible for publicity, fee schedule, financial plan,
coordination with relevant divisions, and so forth.

 Sewerage Technical Section: Responsible for formulating service plan, preparing

implementation plan, training of the engineers to plan and build sewage facilities (sewer,
pumping station and sewage treatment plant) and the engineers with technical expertise in
sewage treatment, and so forth.
It is assumed that the Sewerage Project Division will be staffed with selected employees selected from
general accountancy areas in such organizations as MPWT, MEF, and PPCC. Meanwhile, as the
Sewerage Technical Division will need to formulate the sewer network service plan and be engaged in
designing and construction of sewage treatment plants alongside installation of pipes and culverts
within three to four years of establishment of the organization. Therefore, during the initial stage of the
project, the staff requirement for the sewer network service plan, implementation plan, designing and
construction of sewer facilities, etc., should be met with the sewer policy specialists trained through
utilization of the technical cooperation projects, etc. Those specialists will also be responsible for
disseminating expertise related to the sewer network service throughout Cambodia, as well as for
training of other engineers. For instance, based on the experience with SRSWTPU (Siem Reap
Sewerage Works Treatment Plant Unit), it is thought that some 15 to 20 staff members will be
required at the initial stage after establishment of the organization.
Meanwhile, collaboration (integration) with PPWSA has been proposed as an option for carrying out
the sewer network service in PPCC. PPWSA had developed and expanded a water supply system
project for PPCC within just over ten years, and has become a major organization supplying 450,000
m3 of water daily for over 90% of the entire population of the Capital City, known as “Miracle of
Phnom Penh.” Therefore, it will be very beneficial in the initial stage of the sewer network service for
PPCC to draw on PPWSA’s experience and expertise in project implementation and service operation.
Meanwhile, the JICA Study Team obtained the following information through discussions with
relevant people, including the General Director in PPWSA, and other means of information gathering:

 At this point in time, PPWSA’s consider that the sewer network service body is too immature
to collaborate with PPWSA in the sewer network service.

 Although the government is the 85% majority shareholder, PPWSA has already become an
independent private corporation and a listed company. Making an investment in a project
with such little profit potential would not be accepted by its shareholders and other
stakeholders.
――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――――
14
The proposed plan should be coordinated with financial and human resources development plan of PPCC and related
organizations

4-27
  PPWSA still has loans to pay back to such donors as JICA, ADB, and AFD. Although loan
payments are not currently delayed, it will need to expand water supply service into less
profitable areas to address poverty, etc. and its financial condition will be tighter in the future.

 PPWSA has been instructed by the government (MIH) to consider lowering fees. (It cannot
raise fees.)

 As a result, PPWSA would like to continue the current system to collect a 10% sewer user fee
alongside the water supply fees.
Aside from the matters listed above, there are other issues similar to Japan such as: water supply
services (MIH) and sewer services (MPWT) are under separate authorities in Cambodia; each
project/service body has a different accounting system; drinking water supply and wastewater
treatment services have different methods of treatment and particulars of water quality management;
and operation including fee collection except for general affairs business, as well as technical matters,
differs largely between project/service bodies.
Furthermore, although all water supply service clients have signed a contract with PPWSA concerning
their water supply use, the contract only covers water supply use, but not covers sewerage use. If the
clients have to pay a sewerage fee to PPWSA, a new contract needs to be signed. In addition, currently
no law is available to impose payment of sewerage fees to users and the legislation of such fee rule
will be politically difficult. At present, there is only a Governor’s ordinance for collecting 10% of
water supply use fee from the water supply users within the areas subject to the ADB Water Supply
and Drainage Project.
However, it is widely known that establishment of a sewer system contributes to improvement of
water environment in lakes, swamps, rivers, etc. At PPCC, also, better water quality at Sap Lake,
Mekong River, Sap River and so on, will help ensure good sources of water supply, and thus
establishment of a sewer system, will sufficiently benefit PPWSA. Furthermore, there are cases in
Japan in which water supply and sewer services have separate accounts (even in the administration
division which can easily be integrated), with a mechanism to avoid sewerage project negatively
impacting the water supply service, and thus water supply and sewer services are effectively operated.
Therefore, in order for both the sewer and water supply project bodies to establish a win-win
relationship, it is recommended that a committee chaired by the Deputy Governor of PPCC or the
Director of DPWT for implementing sewage and water supply projects in PPCC, be established to
facilitate full discussion before reaching a conclusion.
Accordingly, the option to collaborate or integrate with PPWSA shall be considered a review topic in
and after Medium-Term (after year 2021), when the sewer pipes and the sewage treatment plant have
been established and the sewer network service will have a certain level of future prospects. In this
M/P, the following (proposals) shall be reviewed assuming that the organization to implement the
sewer network service will be established within DPWT.

(1) Organization Proposed

Based on the above discussion, the following organization in DPWT is proposed based on the
alternative study.

4-28
 (All) Project
Director
Management Unit

Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director Deputy Director

Drainage and Administration

Public Works Finance and International
Sewerage and Personnel
Office Planning Office Relation Affairs
Division Office

Road and Drainage & Sewerage Driving License

Public Lighting
Bridge Advancement Office and Traffic
Division
Division Safety Division

Draiange&Sewerage
River Bank Project Section Security and
Weighbridge
Protection Discipline of
Station
Division DPWT
Drainage&Sewerage
Technical Section
Note 1): Shaded items show the structure not in current organization
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.4.1 Organizational Chart based on the Proposed Organization 1

The organization in Fig. 4.4.1, the Sewerage and Drainage M/P Project Advancement Office will
be established directly under the Office of the Director of DPWT, to be initially operated in a
two-division structure of the Sewerage Project Section and Sewerage Technical Section, with
some 15 staff members.
Its primary tasks will be planning of the sewer network service plan, preparation and
implementation of an implementation plan, coordination with relevant divisions and bureaus,
publicity, fee schedule, planning and designing for installation of sewer pipes and treatment
plants/facilities, management of treatment facilities and so forth. As the project progresses such
organizations as Project Division, Planning Division, Design Division, Works Division, Facility
Management Division, Water Quality Monitoring Division, Operations Division, and Marketing
Division will be enhanced and staffed.
Meanwhile, the organizations within DSD that are responsible for maintenance and management
of drainage facilities will maintain their current structures. As the project expands, the divisions
involved in maintenance and management of wastewater pipes and cannels and sewage treatment
plant will be enhanced.

(2) Policy for Staged Organizational Improvement in the Organizations that Implement
the Project

For the new organization to be established within DPWT, according to the M/P Policy for staged
streamlining of organizations (Short-Term, Medium-Term, and Long-Term), those posts listed in
Table 4.4.1 shall be established according to the order. (Duties of respective posts are listed in
Table 4.4.2). It is noted that, for at least ten years until the end of the Medium-Term, when the
sewer network service will start to run its course, technical cooperation projects such as JICA’s
(for training of sewer project human resources) need to be utilized for continuing human resource
training.
Table 4.4.1 Policy for Staged Streamlining of Organizations that Implement the Project
Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term
( –2020) (2021–2030) (2031-)
Posts Sewerage Project Section Project Division Same as to the left
Operations Division
Marketing Division (Marketing branches)

4-29
 Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term
( –2020) (2021–2030) (2031-)
Sewerage Technical Section Planning Division
Design Division
Works Division (Work offices)
Facility Management Division
Water Quality Monitoring Division
Service Division Drainage Supervision Division
Note 1: Drainage Supervision Division will be separated from the Water Quality Monitoring Division and will carry
out water quality control and supervision of wastewater from commercial facilities and plants and discharged
into sewer (while the water directly discharged into public watercourse will be under the jurisdiction of
MOE).
Note 2: The marketing branches and work offices under Long- Term will be established as branch offices of the
government in each Khan, according to the progress of sewerage and drainage facilities in the Khans.
Source: JICA Study Team

Table 4.4.2 Division Offices to implement Projects and their Work

Posts Tasks/Responsibilities
Project Division Project implementation plan planning, project policy formulation, and coordination
between relevant departments and bureaus
Planning Division Project implementing plan formulation, monitoring and assessment of
development, supervision and training of work contractors
Design Division Designing standards of wastewater or drainage pipes/culverts, designing of
treatment plants, pumping stations, or similar facilities
Works Division Management and supervision of sewerage and drainage works, assessment and
inspection of drainage facilities (connection to sewer)
Facilities Management Management of facilities and utilities at treatment plants, pumping stations, or
Division similar facilities, facilities design, sludge treatment
Water Quality Water quality management at treatment plants, management and supervision of
Monitoring Division sewerage and drainage (commercial facilities and plants)
Operations Division Financial planning, management of budget and accounting, asset management,
publicity and education for the citizens, dissemination
Marketing Division Fee conciliation (coordination with PPWSA), levy, management of customer
information
Service Division Connection to sewer, promotion of installation of wastewater treatment facilities
such as septic tanks and Johkasou, maintenance and management
Note 1: Standards, guidelines, manuals and so forth are under jurisdiction of respective responsible divisions
Note 2: DSD is responsible for operation and management of treatment plants.
Note 3: Sewerage sludge disposal sites are under jurisdiction of WMD of PPCC.
Source: JICA Study team

The organization in Fig 4.4.1 is proposed in DPWT to improve the sewerage and drainage
management at PPCC. However, considering the current arrangement at PPCC; namely, WMD
(Waste Management Division) of PPCC is managing environmental matters including sewerage
and drainage sectors under the leadership of the Deputy Governor, it is imperative to establish a
strong partnership between the new organization at DPWT and the WMD of PPCC. Since waste
management at PPCC is under the jurisdiction of the WMD of PPCC, strong partnership between
the WMD and DPWT of PPCC will also be important in promoting septic tank or Johkasou
installation as on-site treatment facilities, formulating manuals for maintenance and management
(such as spot checks, disposal of septage, monitoring treated water, etc.) and securing disposal
sites to meet the future demand of sewerage sludge.

(3) Organization and Staffing at STP

The following chart shows the organization and staffing at the sewage treatment plant proposed in
Cheung Aek Treatment Area (Capacity: about 280,000 m3/day, applying combined system),
assuming application of CASP, based on the case at the City of Kitakyushu. (This organization is
equivalent to the Wastewater Treatment Plant Unit in Fig. 2.6.5)

4-30
 Staffing categories are in line with DSD’s staffing structure, consisting of fulltime and contracted
employees. However, the staffing in sludge treatment work would be changed considerably
depending on the method of sludge treatment and disposal. In this chart (Fig. 4.4.2), the case of
Thickener -Digester-Dewatering-Landfill System is considered. However, if the sludge treatment
system includes incineration, fuel recovery and sludge recycling system, staffing would increase
by 10-15 workers.

Operation Chief Staff

Manager 　 members Operators (10)
(1) (1) (3) ＊ 2-person team, 4 shifts (2 persons x 4 teams)

Water treatment staff (8)

(Spot checks and maintenance of water treatment)

Sedimentary sand and screenings

Plant Maintenance Chief Staff transport staff (3)
(Washing and transport of sedimentary sand)
Director Manager members
(1) (2) (2) (6) Sludge processing staff (10)
(Operation of spin dryer and spot checks and
maintenance of sludge processing facility)

Electricians (2)
(General electrical work)
Water
Chief Staff
Quality
Manager
members Water quality staff (4)
(1) (1) (2) General water quality work, SP, and others)

(Permanent staff: 20 persons) (Contract staff: 37 persons)

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.4.2 Example of Management Organization in STP

4.4.2 Review of Legal Framework

Although the Cambodian legal framework for management of wastewater and stormwater drainage is
not yet completed, the interviews at MPWT found that it currently has a plan for rebuilding
organizations of sewerage and drainage. Therefore, if the plan is approved and implemented,
preparation of a legal framework for sewerage and drainage will be accelerated.
According to the interviews, the new organization is created from an existing department, namely, the
Department of National Urban Infrastructure and Engineering (see Fig. 2.6.1), strengthening sewerage
and stormwater management capacities. Then a division specialised in sewerage and stormwater
drainage will be established. This organizational structure sets up various frameworks and systems
concerning sewerage and drainage policies, as well as establishes technical standards, criteria,
guidelines, sludge management and human resource training and so forth in Cambodia. The following
chart (Fig. 4.4.3) shows the concept of the new organization responsible for legal preparation, etc.
(with Division being a main driving force). No stipulation in such regulation as sub-decree is required
to establish the offices in the figure. Only the decision of director is required for the establishment.
The office has the same power as the division.

4-31
 Department

Division Office ･･･ Office Office

(Sewerage and stormwater
drainage management)

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.4.3 Concept of the New Organization established in MPWT of Sewerage and
Drainage Management
Under this organization, a Drainage & Sewerage Unit (equivalent of Division) will be established at
each Municipality or Province, and will be responsible for sewerage and drainage management in the
respective region.
Ideally, the proposed M/P should be implemented in PPCC in accordance with the legal framework for
sewerage and drainage management and the national policies established by the central government
(MPWT and DPWT). However, for the time being, MPWT (DPWT) should consider a special
legislative provision to designate areas in which urgently sewer system is required so as to improve the
current status of PPCC, in which rapid urbanization and absence of a sewer system accelerates
deterioration of water environment, headed by the Deputy Governor through a partnership with PPCC.
As previously discussed in Subsection 2.6.1(3), the “Law on Land Use Plan, Urbanization and
Construction 940524” clearly states the principle that major development projects and land use in
Cambodia must conform to the urban development Master Plan of the local government, as well as the
land use plan based on the urban development Master Plan. In addition, for construction of a structure
larger than a certain scale, a construction permit must be obtained pursuant to Ordinance No. 86,
concerning construction permits. On the other hand, major development projects and private
development projects are rapidly progressing.
To develop a sound city and good urban environment, a legal framework must be established to
govern major development project and land use areas, as discussed above. In addition, standards and
guidelines on development areas should be formulated in accordance with an urban development
Master Plan and relevant laws, specifying such matters as population size, roads, public facilities or
facilities for public benefits, water supply and drainage facilities, disaster resilience and safe facilities,
green belt plan, etc., to regulate land development. However, in PPCC, standards and regulation on
major development areas are particularly obscure, and responsibility of administrative unit(s) for
regulation is unclear. Those jurisdictions therefore need to be clarified.
For instance, the City of Kitakyushu in Japan has formulated the “City Planning Master Plan in the
City of Kitakyushu,” as well as “Ordinance on Permission for Development Activity in the City of
Kitakyushu” and “Rules on Permits, etc., for Development Activities in the City of Kitakyushu,”
based on the “City Planning Act” (a national statute). The City has developed the “Development
Activity Manual” in accordance with the City Planning Master Plan, the Ordinance and the Rule for
unified regulation of development areas.
The Development Activity Manual consists of five chapters: Chapter 1 (Principle of Development
Permit System); Chapter 2 (Definition of Development Activity); Chapter 3 (Permission for
Development Activity); Chapter 4 (Procedure for Development Activity; and Chapter 5 (Criteria of
Development Permission). Chapter 5 also lists specific matters subject to regulation in development
activities. It also has detailed description of the criteria for permission of drainage facilities and water
supply facilities.
Furthermore, concerning the technical standards of sewerage and drainage facilities, the City
developed detailed criteria for installation and structure of drainage facilities, pursuant to the

4-32
ordinance of the City of Kitakyushu on the sewer system. The City implements these technical criteria
(standards) on drainage facilities, aiming for technical unification of installation and structure of
drainage facilities in the City.
Table 4.4.3 summarizes the organization and legal system options proposed in this section, following
Section 3.1 (Identification of the issues).
Table 4.4.3 Summary of Discussions and Proposals on Organization and Legal System
Current State and Issues Summary of Actions to meet the Issues (Summary of Discussions and Proposals)
(1) Structure of the project implementing organizations (posts and staffing) to be established
At present, agencies  Based on the three proposed options in Subsection 4.4.1, an organization managing
responsible for planning of wastewater is established in DPWT. The organization formulates sewage management plan
projects concerning in accordance with the phased schedule of Short-Term, Medium-Term, and Long-Term,
wastewater is unclear aiming for synergic effect with the Sewage Management Master Plan.
 The new organization in DPWT shall be the main body of project plan planning.
 A system shall be established, in which the project planning is carried out through a
partnership with WMD, which is responsible for the environmental administration in PPCC,
while obtaining a consensus with PPCC.
 The subject areas need to have wastewater treatment measures, including on-site treatment;
therefore, agencies responsible for management of septic tanks, promotion of switching to
Johkasou, standards of maintenance and management, and so on.
 The departments engaged in septic tanks shall be unified and procedural rules and technical
standards shall be established, including those regarding installation, inspection, and
maintenance of septic tanks.
 The responsibilities of the house owners of septic tanks shall be specified.
 Systems for registering and giving companies permission to install, maintain, or inspect
septic tanks shall be established and a law shall be enacted so that only registered companies
can handle septic tanks.
(2) Determining task descriptions for central and regional organizations
Task descriptions are not  The central organization (MPWT) shall be responsible for establishing policies and legal
determined for either central framework, stipulating technical standards and criteria, medium to long term national project
(MPWT) or regional planning, human resource training plan, and coordination with other ministries and agencies
organization (DPWT) on laws, ordinances, ministerial orders, and so on.
 In terms of the human resource training plan, in particular, it shall carry out coordination in
relation to international technical support programs.
 Regional organization (DPWT or provincial) shall be responsible for drawing up manuals
and guidelines based on the central legal framework, central technical standards and criteria,
and the central project plan, while incorporating regional and geographical features, human
resource training, and other aspects.
 It shall strive for enhancing partnership (and sharing information) among the organizations in
PPCC under jurisdictions of MOI and the organizations under other ministries and agencies
so that the project is smoothly implemented. Tasks shall be clarified after reviewing the
provisions of No.425 BrK.SK.BT, Prakas: Article 2 (Jobs of MPWT) and Article 8
(Treatment of wastewater and flood prevention); and No.274 BRK.SK.BT, Declaration:
Section 3 of Chapter 4 (Jobs of DPWT) and Section 2 of Chapter 5 (Drainage, pumps, and
treatment of polluted water).
(3) Securing the technical standards and human resources concerning wastewater management

4-33
Current State and Issues Summary of Actions to meet the Issues (Summary of Discussions and Proposals)
Shortage of technicians for  To cultivate sewerage specialists utilizing technical cooperation projects (for training of
management and operation sewerage engineers, etc.) and inviting sewerage specialists from other countries.
of wastewater treatment  To establish training program, in which trainees are dispatched to cites with advanced sewer
facilities systems in foreign countries for short-term (1-3 months) or long-term (1-2 years), for
training of technicians.
 Technicians trained in the above program shall establish a human resource training cycle, in
central and regional level, to make technicians meet the progress of the sewer network
service.
 To establish section to administrate training program for cultivating sewerage specialists in
the central and regional governments.
 To establish “Sewer Association” (provisional name) or a similar specialized organization on
sewer system and to carry out such tasks as research, investigation, development of standards
and technologies of sewer systems, training, publicity, securing sewer technicians and
continuous training of technicians.
(4) Insufficient management for effluent from factories
MIH, the responsible  As well as assess criteria for issuing factory/plan operation permit, the MIH shall make
ministry, has not factories report status of wastewater treatment after commission and the water quality
implemented sufficient monitoring data, and shall work with them to check status. Strict management of the effluent
monitoring of status at treatment facilities especially in a major source of industrial effluent discharge in such areas
plants/factories such as as the Special Economic Zone (SEZ), are required.
installation of treatment  MIH shall work with the MOE, which is another regulatory authority.
facilities and compliance  DPWT shall discuss with related ministries (MIH and MOE) to establish regulations on
with standards installation of treatment facilities, standards for drainage and monitoring, and to confirm
structure and treatment capacity in the factories.
 Allocation of responsibilities among the related organizations (MIH, DOE, DLMUPC,
DPWT, WMD, and so forth) shall be discussed and protocols and framework of management
of factory/plant effluent shall also be discussed.
(5) Pollution control guideline, as well as land use regulation guideline for large-scale development areas, are unclear
There is no guideline to  To work with the committee in order that PPCC’s Urban Development Master Plan is
control wastewater in promptly approved.
large-scale development  To clarify agencies responsible for regulating development, develop a guideline and
areas, which are rapidly thoroughly supervise the developer with the guideline.
increasing recently. Each  To clarify agencies responsible for the regulation, as well as the procedures for notification,
development area manage application and so forth, concerning permission of development.
wastewater by themselves
since no unified guideline is
available in PPCC
Source: JICA Study Team

4.4.3 Financial Review

(1) Sewerage Financing in Phnom Penh

Revenues of the sewerage can be i) rate to the water supply (PPWSA) use payments and ii) other
additional rate or new taxes such as property tax or wastewater tax.
i) rate to water use payments is the present system, but if it becomes official (legalized) and the
rate is raised, it will be difficult because every customer has an agreement with PPWSA for use of
water and payment and it does not include sewerage payment. The present additional 10% of
PPWSA’s water use charge revenues payment to PPCC for drainage is based on the PPCC
Governor’s regulation (ordinance) demanded by the ADB when the ADB decided its loan for
Phnom Penh water supply and drainage project. It was suggested that if the rate raise is proposed,
the customers will oppose and even before that the governor and the government will not allow it
being concerned about the election. Actually, however, the Governor decided in January 2015 to
expand the ADB project area to the entire PPCC to impose 10% of PPWSA’s water use charge
revenue for drainage and sewerage service. The people in PPCC, however, seem to be far from
expressing strong opposition to the Governor’s decision.

4-34
 ii) new tax introduction is also difficult similarly to the rate increase above. Customers do not
want to pay for sewerage. Therefore, the present 10% of PPWSA’s water use charge revenues
payment is inevitably the starting method. However, it may not be enough even for operational
costs of the sewerage project.
At first, it is necessary to legalize the sewerage tariffs as rate to the water use charges as well as
defining that water use includes wastewater discharge.
Then, campaigns and public relations that wastewater treatment is essential for environmental
protection and human health (wastewater without treatment may go to water supply intake of
PPWSA and also the downstream people who use downstream river water for drinking) and the
user-pay principle is the worldwide trend technique should be conducted. Then, after the
customers are convinced, the rate will be raised gradually to cover the operational costs. However,
the object customers should be those within the new sewerage service coverage areas based on
the user-pay principle. In addition, the following are to be considered.

 Sludge disposal costs from the septic tanks etc. can be new revenues for the sewerage
treatment entity.

 It may be difficult to cover the investment cost (CAPEX) so that it is aimed to cover the
operational cost with sewerage use revenues.

 The government should shoulder soft loan for the CAPEX.

4.5 Implementation Plan

As discussed in Subsection 3.2.3, the implementation plan is formulated on a phased schedule of
Short-Term, Medium-Term and Long-Term.

4.5.1 Short-term

As described in Subsection 3.1.1, priority should be placed on Cheung Aek Treatment Area, because
(i) the area is fully urbanized and (ii) water pollution is more serious compared to any other areas in
Phnom Penh.
Cheung Aek treatment is further subdivided into the Trabek and Tumpun system, as shown in
Table 4.5.1. The Cheung Aek Treatment Area, which consists of STP with capacity of
282,000 m3/day and pipe network totalling 34.1 km, covers huge catchment area and, in particular, the
construction scale of the STP is large. Therefore, based on the overviews of the two systems in Table
4.5.1, priority is placed on improvement of the Trabek system, in which urbanization and water
pollution is in progress in comparison with the Tumpun system.
Table 4.5.1 Overview of Trabek and Tumpun System
Item Trabek System Tumpun System
Progress of urbanization This system covers the most urbanised This system is located west of Trabek
area in Phnom Penh, accommodating a system, and has been characterized with
large number of governmental and on-going and rapid urbanization in the
commercial buildings. recent years.
Current situation of water Water pollution is worst in Phnom Penh. Water pollution is second-worst in
pollution In particular, BOD concentration exceeds Phnom Penh, next to Trabek system. For
250 mg/L in the dry season at the instance, BOD concentration ranges from
downstream end of Trabek Pumping 150 to 250 mg/L in the dry season at the
Station, based on the water quality downstream end of Tumpun Pumping
monitoring conducted in the Study. Station, based on the water quality
monitoring conducted in the Study.

Conditions in the year 2035

4-35
 Item Trabek System Tumpun System
Area 1,581 ha 3,121 ha
Population 394,400 person 702,800 person
Population density 247 person/ha 225person/ha
Wastewater Daily ave. 80,000 m3/day 158,000 m3/day
generated Daily max 99,700 m3/day 181,500 m3/day
Estimated reduction of BOD 15.1 t/day 27.0 t/day
load1)
Source: JICA Study Team

As shown in Fig. 4.5.1, Trabek system is further subdivided into Trabek East and Trabek West areas.
Trabek East area encompasses the most urbanised area in Phnom Penh with populations of 237,900 in
2035, while Trabek West is located adjacent to Trabek East with population of 152,500 in 2035. In the
implementation plan, Trabek East, which encompasses the most urbanized area in Phnom Penh is
termed as the “Phase 1 Project” to be firstly implemented. Then, Trabek West area is called the “Phase
2 Project”, followed by the “Phase 3 project”, which represents projects in the Tumpun system.
In addition, a “Preparatory Project” is proposed to be implemented ahead of “Phase 1 Project”, in due
consideration that: (i) institutional and legal framework is urgently needed before commencement of
full-scale construction and installation of sewerage facilities; (ii) it is commendable for Phnom Penh to
mainly implement non-structural measures focusing on institutional and legal framework and to put
them on track particularly in Short-Term period; and (iii) it is also essential to accumulate technical
skills step-by-step in order to smoothly enter into full-scale construction and installation of sewerage
facilities in parallel with the establishment of institutional and legal framework. The Preparatory
Project is composed of a small-scale STP and the pipe collects and conveys wastewater equivalent to
the STP’s capacity, as detailed in subsequent Subsection 4.9.

Fig. 4.5.1 Trabek and Tumpun System in Cheung Aek Treatment Area

4.5.2 Medium-Term and Long-Term

As described in Subsection 4.5.1, a Preparatory Project is proposed to be implemented in the

Short-Term period in Cheung Aek Treatment Area. The Phase 1 Project is then subsequently

4-36
implemented together with Phase 2 in the Medium-Term period. After that, the Phase 3 Project is
implemented in the Long-Term period from 2031 to 2040. The Long-Term period of 10 years is set to
equalize the volume of projects implemented in each period. On the other hand, implementation of
projects in the Tamok Treatment Area is commenced in the Medium-Term and ended in 2040, the last
year of the Long-Term period.
Non-structural measures are continuously implemented, mainly focusing on review and improvement
of the issues on institutional and legal framework established and operated, throughout the course of
Medium- and Long term period.
Based on the above discussion, the phased implementation plan for sewage management is as
summarised in Table 4.5.2, and out of which construction schedule of the facilities are summarised in
Table 4.5.3.

4-37
 Table 4.5.2 Phased Implementation Schedule (Sewage Management)
Items Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term Remarks
(to year 2020) (year 2021 to year 2030) (year 2031 to year 2040)
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040
Structural Measures
Facilities design and construction
Design/ Construction
Construction of sewage facilities in Cheung Aek area
Fund arrangement Design/
Phase 1 Fund arrangement
Construction
Design/
Phase 2 Construction
Design/ Fund arrangement
Phase 3 Fund arrangement
Construction
Preparatory Project Design/
Construction of sewage sludge and septage disposal site Fund arrangement Construction
Installation of sewage facilities in Tamok area

Project cost (Million USD) Total

Construction of sewage facilities in Cheung Aek area
Phase 1 STP 65.9 65.9
Sewer pipe 29.5 29.5
Phase 2 STP 120.8 120.8
Sewer pipe 12.3 12.3
Phase 3 STP 157.4 157.4
Sewer pipe 109.6 109.6
Preparatory STP 20.9 20.9
Project Sewer pipe 6.0 6.0
4-38

Construction of sewage sludge and septage disposal site 9.1 16.1 25.2
Installation of sewage facilities in Tamok area 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 478.8
Total 36.0 111.5 34.2 167.3 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 301.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 34.2 1,025.0

O&M cost (Million USD/year)

Cheung Aek area 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 2.98 3.02 3.05 3.09 5.20 5.24 5.28 5.32 5.37 5.37 5.37 5.37 5.37 14.90 79.75
(including sludge disposal site)
Tamok area 0.88 1.75 2.63 3.65 4.78 5.91 7.03 8.39 9.80 11.32 12.70 14.23 15.80 15.80 114.65
Total 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 3.86 4.77 5.68 6.74 9.98 11.15 12.31 13.71 15.17 16.69 18.07 19.60 21.17 30.70 194.41

Non-structural Measures
Legal and institutional set-up
Establishment of sewage management body and HRD HRD is continued
Establishment of sewage implementation entity
Formulation of guideline for sewage treatment In operation
Procedures
Securing Cheung Aek STP construction site
Securing site for sewage sludge and septage disposal site
Strengthening of management of industrial wastewater
Formulation of guideline and starting of operation In operation
Strengthening of management of large-scale development
Formulation of guideline and starting of operation In operation

Source: JICA Study Team

 Table 4.5.3 Phased Implementation Plan for Construction Works
Year Year
Area Schesule 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040
Cheung Aek Area
F/S
Cheung Aek STP Fund Arrangement
(Capacity 58,000m3/day) D/D
Construction
F/S
Fund Arrangement
Phase1 Chamkamon Trunk
D/D
Construction
F/S
Fund Arrangement
Sludge Disposal Yard
D/D For Preparatory Project
Construction
F/S
Cheung Aek STP Fund Arrangement
3/
(Capacity 38,000m day) D/D
Construction
Phase2
F/S
Fund Arrangement
C-1, C-2, C-3 Main
D/D
Construction
4-39

F/S
Cheung Aek STP Fund Arrangement
3/
(Capacity 181,000m day) D/D
Construction
Phase3
F/S
Meanchey Trunk,
Fund Arrangement
M-1, M-2, M-3, M-4,
D/D
M-5, M-6, M-7, M-8
Construction
F/S
Cheung Aek STP Fund Arrangement
3/
(Capacity 5,000m day) D/D
Pre-
Construction
paratory
F/S
Project
Fund Arrangement
Trunk Sewer
D/D
Construction
Tamok Area
F/S
Fund Arrangement
Johkasou
D/D
Construction
Source: JICA Study Team
4.6 Cost Estimate

4.6.1 Construction Cost (Project Cost)

Project cost consists of construction cost, administration cost, engineering cost and land
expropriation/compensation cost. These costs are estimated at the exchange rate of 1USD=119.64JPY,
and 1Riel=0.030JYP, as of April 2015. The Project cost for sewage management has been estimated as
shown in Table 4.6.1. According to the table, the project cost for the Cheung Aek treatment area
amounts to 450.1 million USD and that of Tamok treatment area amounts to 396.2 million USD. Cost
disbursement schedule for the sewage management projects is shown in Table 4.6.2.
Table 4.6.1 Project Cost for Sewerage Management
Unit: million USD
Items Foreign currency Local currency Total
I. Construction Cost (1+2) 512.7 333.6 846.3
(1) Cheung Aek Treatment Area (a+b+c+d+e) 263.5 186.6 450.1
a) Phase1 (i+ii) 55.9 33.4 89.3
i) STP Construction 37.5 17.1 54.6
ii) Sewer Pipe Construction 14.6 9.9 24.5
b) Phase2 (i+ii) 57.1 53.5 110.6
i) STP Construction 53.3 47.1 100.4
ii) Sewer Pipe Construction 3.8 6.4 10.2
c) Phase3 (i+ii) 137.5 84.1 221.6
i) STP Construction 88.4 42.2 130.6
ii) Sewer Pipe Construction 49.1 41.9 91.0
d) Preparatory Project (i+ii) 11.8 10.5 22.3
i) STP Construction 9.8 7.5 17.3
ii) Sewer Pipe Construction 2.0 3.0 5.0
e) Sludge Disposal Yard (i+ii) 5.0 11.5 16.5
i) Construction in Short-Term 1.2 5.1 6.3
ii) Construction in Medium-Term 3.8 6.4 10.2
(2) Tamok treatment area 249.2 147.0 396.2
II. Administration Cost 0.0 42.3 42.3
III. Engineering Cost 67.7 16.9 84.6
IV. Physical Contingency 29.0 17.5 46.5
V. Land Expropriation 0.0 5.3 5.3
Total Project Cost (I+II+III+IV+V) 609.4 415.6 1,025.0
Source: JICA Study Team

4-40
 Table 4.6.2 Disbursement Schedule of Project Cost for Sewerage Management
Unit: million USD
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Item
F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total
A：Cost covered by loan（1+2+3） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 17.0 33.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.2 37.0 103.2
　1．Construction cost（a+b+c+d） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 15.6 28.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.9 33.4 89.3
　 a) Cheung Aek area: STP 9.8 7.5 17.3 37.5 17.1 54.6
　 b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 2.0 3.0 5.0 14.6 9.9 24.5
　 c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site 1.2 5.1 6.3 3.8 6.4 10.2
d) Tamok area: Johkasou
　2．Consultant fee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.6 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.1 1.8 8.9
　3．Phisical contingency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 1.8 5.0
B：Cost not covered by loan（4+5） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 8.3
　4．Administration cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 4.5
　5．Land expropriation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.8 3.8
Total（A+B） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 19.9 36.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.2 45.3 111.5

2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

Item
F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total
A：Cost covered by loan（1+2+3） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.1 11.7 32.8 90.3 70.1 160.4 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8
　1．Construction cost（a+b+c+d） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.8 10.5 28.3 74.9 64.0 138.9 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3
　 a) Cheung Aek area: STP 53.3 47.1 100.4
　 b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 3.8 6.4 10.2
　 c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3
　2．Consultant fee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.6 2.9 11.1 2.8 13.9 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9
　3．Phisical contingency 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.6 1.6 4.3 3.3 7.6 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6
B：Cost not covered by loan（4+5） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 6.9 6.9 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4
　4．Administration cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 6.9 6.9 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4
　5．Land expropriation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total（A+B） 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.1 13.1 34.2 90.3 77.0 167.3 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2

2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036

Item
F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total
A：Cost covered by loan（1+2+3） 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8 184.1 104.6 288.7 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8
　1．Construction cost（a+b+c+d） 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 155.3 94.6 249.9 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3
　 a) Cheung Aek area: STP 88.4 42.2 130.6
　 b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 49.1 41.9 91.0
　 c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3
　2．Consultant fee 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9 20.0 5.0 25.0 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9
　3．Phisical contingency 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6 8.8 5.0 13.8 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6
B：Cost not covered by loan（4+5） 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 12.5 12.5 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4
　4．Administration cost 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 12.5 12.5 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4
　5．Land expropriation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total（A+B） 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2 184.1 117.1 301.2 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2

2037 2038 2039 2040 Total

Item
F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total
A：Cost covered by loan（1+2+3） 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8 21.1 11.7 32.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 609.4 368.0 977.4
　1．Construction cost（a+b+c+d） 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 512.7 333.6 846.3
　 a) Cheung Aek area: STP 189.0 113.9 302.9
　 b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 69.5 61.2 130.7
　 c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site 5.0 11.5 16.5
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 17.8 10.5 28.3 249.2 147.0 396.2
　2．Consultant fee 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9 2.3 0.6 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.7 16.9 84.6
　3．Phisical contingency 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6 1.0 0.6 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.0 17.5 46.5
B：Cost not covered by loan（4+5） 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.6 47.6
　4．Administration cost 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.3 42.3
　5．Land expropriation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 5.3
Total（A+B） 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2 21.1 13.1 34.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 609.4 415.6 1,025.0

Source: JICA Study Team

4-41
4.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost

Annual operation and maintenance cost is summarized in Table 4.6.3. According to the table, annual
operation and maintenance cost of Cheung Aek and Tamok treatment area in year 2040, in which all
the construction of facilities are completed, are estimated at 14.895 million USD, and 15.797 million
USD, respectively.
Table 4.6.3 Annual Operation and Maintenance Cost for Sewerage Management
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
a) Cheung Aek area: STP 0.368 0.368
b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 0.005 0.005
c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site 0.006 0.006
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 0.000 0.000
Total 0.379 0.379

Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

a) Cheung Aek area: STP 0.368 0.368 0.368 2.858 2.893 2.927 2.962
b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029
c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.876 1.751 2.627
Total 0.379 0.379 0.379 2.947 3.858 4.767 5.678

Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036

a) Cheung Aek area: STP 2.996 5.028 5.071 5.115 5.158 5.201 5.201
b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 0.029 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050
c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site 0.060 0.117 0.117 0.117 0.117 0.117 0.117
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 3.652 4.779 5.906 7.033 8.386 9.799 11.322
Total 6.737 9.974 11.144 12.315 13.711 15.167 16.690

Year 2037 2038 2039 2040

a) Cheung Aek area: STP 5.201 5.201 5.201 14.564
b) Cheung Aek area: Pipe 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.157
c) Cheung Aek area: Sludge disposal site 0.117 0.117 0.117 0.174
d) Tamok area: Johkasou 12.700 14.229 15.797 15.797
Total 18.068 19.597 21.165 30.692
Source : JICA Study Team

4.7 Financial Analysis

4.7.1 Cheung Aek System

Ten percent (10%) of the PPWSA’s revenues in the ADB project area had been paid to PPCC as
drainage and sewerage costs until 2014, but from 2015 according to the Governor’s decision, this
charging system was expanded from the ADB project area to the total Phnom Penh area, However,
small garment manufacturers and their landowners contributing to exports are partially exempted
(4.4% on the 10% of water supply sales revenues basis). It is assumed that this exemption does not
exist and 10% of the PPWSA’s sales revenue is sewerage and drainage revenues for maintenance and
management. However, 9% is taken out by PPWSA for management and operation and so 91%
becomes the sewerage and drainage use revenue. Assuming that this is adopted to the 2014 sales
revenue of PPWSA, the sewerage and drainage use revenue is calculated as 137,018×0.1×
0.91=12.47 billion Riels, but it is less than the actual maintenance and operation costs, 13.03 billion
Riels, of DSD. In addition, sewerage operation entities cannot cover the investment costs with their
user fee revenues usually. Therefore, operational balance is analysed at first.

4-42
 (1) Revenues

At least it is expected that 10% of PPWSA revenues in the ADB project area continue or the
revenues start from this. At present, the revenues are used for drainage, but they should be
considered sewerage use fee revenues. Polluter-Pay principle should be adopted. Similarly,
although the sewerage and drainage cost burden was expanded to all the water supply users in
2015, the exempted garment manufacturers should be subsidized in the other way. Tax exemption
or other purpose subsidy should be implemented. It is not reasonable for the sewerage and
drainage operator to exempt use charges. Therefore, this exemption system should be abolished in
the future, by the time when the sewerage operation starts at the latest. Namely, it is assumed that
the sewerage use charge revenues start from 10% of PPWSA’s sales revenues. However,
assuming that PPWSA takes out 9% as a commission, the remaining 91% become the sewerage
use revenues. It is also supposed that 10% of PPWSA revenues or ratio of water supply revenues
(payment) for sewerage user fee payment is legalized and water use is defined not only water
supply but also wastewater. Since the sewerage treatment plant operation is supposed to start in
2021, the campaign and PR will convince the citizens that users or polluters must pay. If 10% is
not enough, the ratio is raised until the revenues exceed the expenditures. There is a possibility of
water supply tariff raise around 2017, but this analysis is based on constant price, namely real
without inflation and the raise may reflect inflation. Thus, tariff raise and inflation are excluded
and it is considered how many percent ratio of the sewerage charge revenues to the water supply
revenues is necessary. In fact, if water supply tariffs are raised, the ratio (10%) to water supply
revenues may be reduced excluding the inflation portion.
In addition, it is assumed that the average water supply user fee revenue per cubic meter will
increase because water use per customer per month will increase with the annual household
income increase (6.11%). Both of water supply user fee revenue per cubic meter and water use
per customer per month are estimated using linear regression analysis result.
In addition to the user fee revenues, there are other revenues as sludge disposal fee revenues from
the sludge truck services with vacuum hose, which remove sludge from household Johkasou or
septic tanks and carry it to sewerage sludge disposal site. It is supposed that the disposal fee
revenue is supposed 5USD per sludge truck, which is equivalent to one-sixth of desludge cost of
34.5USD per household on average based on the Social Survey result.

(2) Operational Balance

Based on the above revenues and expenditures, the operational profit or loss is estimated,
imposing charges only on Cheung Aek treatment area, as shown in Table. 4.7.1, In the estimation,
depreciation is excluded because IRR calculation deals in only cash flow and if investment costs
are covered by the government, depreciation should be excluded. As a result, profits are estimated
from 2021 when the Preparatory Project starts to operate, but losses are estimated from 2026 to
and after 2040. In order to get profits every year, it is necessary to increase 10% ratio to 20% in
2026 and to 55% in 2040.
Table 4.7.1 Operational Profit or Loss Excluding Depreciation (Imposing Charges only on
Cheung Aek Area)
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.69 1.75
Rev. from Desludge 0.36 0.36
Total Rev. 2.05 2.12
Expenditure 0.38 0.38
Profit/ Loss 1.67 1.74

4-43
 Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.81 1.88 1.95 2.01 2.09 2.17 2.25
Rev. from Desludge 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.38
Total Rev. 2.18 2.25 2.32 2.37 2.45 2.54 2.63
Expenditure 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 2.98 3.02 3.05
Profit/ Loss 1.80 1.87 1.94 -0.58 -0.53 -0.47 -0.42
Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Rev. from STP Pr. 2.34 2.43 2.53 2.63 2.74 2.85 2.85
Rev. from Desludge 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43
Total Rev. 2.73 2.80 2.92 3.02 3.15 3.27 3.28
Expenditure 3.09 5.20 5.24 5.28 5.32 5.37 5.37
Profit/ Loss -0.36 -2.39 -2.32 -2.26 -2.17 -2.10 -2.09
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Rev. from STP Pr. 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 47.37
Rev. from Desludge 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.35 7.80
Total Rev. 3.29 3.30 3.30 3.20 55.17
Expenditure 5.37 5.37 5.37 14.90 79.75
Profit/ Loss -2.08 -2.07 -2.06 -11.69 -24.58
Source: JICA Study Team

(3) FIRR (Financial Internal Rate of Return)

Next, profit and loss including investment costs are estimated although generally it is considered
difficult to cover sewerage investment costs. If the estimate is stopped in the final year on the way
that the invested facilities (assets) are not fully depreciated, profits covering the investment costs
can be brought about after that and so the calculation does not reflect that correctly. Therefore,
residual value of the investment assets needs to be included into the calculation as negative costs,
namely, the positive revenue side, in the final year.
The result of the case in which sewerage charges are imposed on the total planned area population
from the start, namely Table 4.7.1 including investment costs and residual values, is shown in
Table 4.7.2 to estimate how many percent ratio should be raised to cover the investment costs.
The result is that 60% ratio from 10% is necessary from 2026 and FIRR is almost positive zero,
namely sum of cash flow becomes zero. However, if FIRR is zero and the total investment costs
are funded by loans, even interest cannot be paid. In order to pay interest, more than 60% ratio is
necessary. It may be difficult to get agreement with more than water supply use charges so that it
is appropriate for the government (public) to burden the investment costs.
Table 4.7.2 Cash Flow of Sewerage Project (Sewerage Use Fee of 60% to Water Use Fee
Case)
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.69 1.75
Rev. from Desludge 0.36 0.36
Total Rev. 2.05 2.12
Expenditure 0.38 0.38
Profit/ Loss 1.67 1.74
Investment 36.00 111.50
Cashflow -36.00 1.67 -109.76
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.81 1.88 1.95 12.09 12.52 13.04 13.52
Rev. from Desludge 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.38
Total Rev. 2.18 2.25 2.32 12.44 12.89 13.41 13.90
Expenditure 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 2.98 3.02 3.05
Profit/ Loss 1.80 1.87 1.94 9.49 9.90 10.39 10.85
Investment 133.20
Cashflow 1.80 1.87 1.94 9.49 -123.30 10.39 10.85

4-44
 Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Rev. from STP Pr. 14.02 14.55 15.17 15.76 16.44 17.10 17.10
Rev. from Desludge 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43
Total Rev. 14.41 14.93 15.56 16.16 16.85 17.52 17.53
Expenditure 3.09 5.20 5.24 5.28 5.32 5.37 5.37
Profit/ Loss 11.33 9.73 10.32 10.87 11.53 12.15 12.16
Investment 267.00
Cashflow 11.33 9.73 10.32 -256.13 11.53 12.15 12.16
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Rev. from STP Pr. 17.10 17.10 17.10 17.10 238.79
Rev. from Desludge 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.35 7.80
Total Rev. 17.53 17.54 17.55 17.45 246.59
Expenditure 5.37 5.37 5.37 14.90 79.75
Profit/ Loss 12.17 12.18 12.18 2.55 166.84
Investment 547.70
Cashflow & IRR 12.17 12.18 12.18 2.55 25.38 FIRR= 0.48%
Residual value 406.24
Source: JICA Study Team

4.7.2 Tamok System

The Tamok Lake basin system is based on the on-site plants such as Johkasou and different from the
Cheung Aek basin system. The investment starts from 2026 and finishes in 2039. The annual
investment costs (only construction) are constant and USD 28.3 million. The annual operation costs
change from USD 0.876 million in 2027 to USD 15.797 million in 2039 and after 2039 they are
constant. The annual investment costs, USD 28.3 million, correspond to population of 25,000 and so
the per capita cost is USD 1,132. The annual per capita operation cost is USD 35.04. Assuming that
household size is approximately 5, these costs per household are USD 5,660 and USD 175.2,
respectively. The average monthly household income is estimated US$ 793 in 2017 and so the
Johkasou investment cost is (5,660÷793=) 7.1 months of income, that is, the burden seems a little too
heavy, especially to lower income household.

4.7.3 Financing of Sewerage Systems

The Cheung Aek sewerage system consists of STP and pipes and it seems that the operation costs can
be covered by the user fee revenues, but the investment needs to be burdened by the government since
it cannot be covered by the user fee revenues which are more than water supply user revenues. The
government does not have enough fund by itself and so it depends on soft loans such as the ADB’s or
JICA’s.
On the other hand, the Tamok sewage system consists of every user’s individual or community’s
Johkasou and so every user has to finance independently in principle. However, operation costs can be
covered by each user although low income users need public support. The investment cost of Johkasou
seems too expensive for each user. The government does not have funds. Then there is a problem
whether the government can get soft loans for each user’s Johkasou investment. Johkasou belongs to
each user and usually soft loans cannot be used for private citizens. If two-step loan can be available,
soft loan may be possible, but the second step loan is borrowed by each user (private) from the
government (or the central bank) with usual commercial interest although the first step loan is between
the international organization such as the ADB or JICA and the Cambodian government with long
tenure, grace period and low interest rate. In that case, the second step loan is not supportive to each
user. If the second step loan conditions are similar to the first step, it will be a problem of competition
with commercial loans. If this problem is solved because users need support for Johkasou investment,
the next problem that Johkasou users have to cover the investment costs while STP users do not need
to cover the investment costs and it can be mentioned that it is unfair. In order to solve this unfair
problem, it can be considered that the sewerage user fees in the Cheung Aek system should be a little
expensive than necessary and the surplus should be used to reduce the investment costs of Johkasou in

4-45
the Tamok system. It should be designed at the implementation stage how much is fair to both system
users including some support of operation and investment costs for low income households.
Looking at the Tamok system from a different angle, it can be considered that the Johkasou are
supplied by the new sewerage operation entity operating the Cheung Aek system instead of each
user’s ownership. For example, since there is a limit for individual households to bear the costs of
Johkasou, each municipal government in Japan establishes a municipal Johkasou promotion policy
introducing a system to view Johkasou as public assets, bear the investment and maintenance costs and
collect user charges from the residents instead of a simple subsidy system. Since an STP system for
the Tamok basin area is not efficient, an independent on-site Johkasou system is selected and so these
Johkasou are operated by the entity instead of STP. Although there is a problem that Johkasou appear
each user’s asset, the sewerage entity invests each Johkasou at user’s site and collect user fee revenues
from users. In this case, the user fees are similar to those of the Cheung Aek system.
Table 4.7.3 shows the result of profit and loss including Cheung Aek and Tamok areas, in order to
make profits. The ratio should be 10% from 2021 to 2025, 15% from 2026, 30% from 2030, 50% from
2035 and 75% from 2040. Furthermore, in order to cover the investment costs including the Tamok
system, the ratio to water supply charge revenues should be 10% from 2021 to 2022, 30% from 2023
to 2025, 50% from 2026 to 2028, 60% from 2029 to 2033 and 90% from 2034 so that cash flow
becomes a little positive, as shown in Table 4.7.4.
Table 4.7.3 Profit or Loss Including Tamok (10% to 75% of Water Use Revenue)
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.69 1.75
Rev. from Desludge 0.36 0.36
Total Rev. 2.05 2.12
Expenditure 0.38 0.38
Profit/ Loss 1.67 1.74
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.81 1.88 1.95 3.02 4.48 4.67 4.85
Rev. from Desludge 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.38
Total Rev. 2.18 2.25 2.32 3.37 4.84 5.04 5.23
Expenditure 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 3.86 4.77 5.68
Profit/ Loss 1.80 1.87 1.94 0.43 0.99 0.27 -0.45
Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Rev. from STP Pr. 10.06 10.45 10.90 11.33 11.83 20.52 20.52
Rev. from Desludge 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43
Total Rev. 10.45 10.83 11.29 11.73 12.24 20.94 20.95
Expenditure 6.74 9.97 11.14 12.31 13.71 15.17 16.69
Profit/ Loss 3.71 0.85 0.15 -0.58 -1.47 5.78 4.26
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Rev. from STP Pr. 20.52 20.52 20.52 30.78 214.08
Rev. from Desludge 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.35 7.80
Total Rev. 20.96 20.97 20.98 31.13 221.88
Expenditure 18.07 19.60 21.17 30.69 194.41
Profit/ Loss 2.89 1.37 -0.19 0.44 27.47
Source: JICA Study Team

4-46
 Table 4.7.4 Cash Flow Including Tamok
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Rev. from STP Pr. 1.69 1.75
Rev. from Desludge 0.36 0.36
Total Rev. 2.05 2.12
Expenditure 0.38 0.38
Profit/ Loss 1.67 1.74
Investment 36.00 111.50
Cashflow -36.00 1.67 -109.76
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Rev. from STP Pr. 5.44 5.64 5.84 10.07 14.94 15.57 19.39
Rev. from Desludge 0.37 0.37 0.38 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.38
Total Rev. 5.81 6.01 6.21 10.43 15.30 15.94 19.76
Expenditure 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 3.86 4.77 5.68
Profit/ Loss 5.43 5.63 5.83 7.48 11.44 11.17 14.09
Investment 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.20 167.40 34.20 34.20
Cashflow 5.43 5.63 5.83 -26.72 -155.96 -23.03 -20.11
Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Rev. from STP Pr. 20.12 20.90 21.81 22.67 35.50 36.94 36.94
Rev. from Desludge 0.39 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43
Total Rev. 20.51 21.28 22.19 23.06 35.91 37.36 37.37
Expenditure 6.74 9.97 11.14 12.31 13.71 15.17 16.69
Profit/ Loss 13.77 11.30 11.05 10.75 22.20 22.19 20.68
Investment 34.20 34.20 34.20 301.20 34.20 34.20 34.20
Cashflow -20.43 -22.90 -23.15 -290.45 -12.00 -12.01 -13.52
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Rev. from STP Pr. 36.94 36.94 36.94 36.94 422.96
Rev. from Desludge 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.35 7.80
Total Rev. 37.38 37.38 37.39 37.29 430.76
Expenditure 18.07 19.60 21.17 30.69 194.41
Profit/ Loss 19.31 17.79 16.23 6.60 236.35
Investment 34.20 34.20 34.20 0.00 1,026.50
Cashflow&IRR -14.89 -16.41 -17.97 6.60 4.89 FIRR= 0.06%
Residual value 795.04
Source: JICA Study Team

4-47
4.8 Economic Analysis

4.8.1 Preconditions for Economic Analysis

(1) Costs

Costs consist of investment cost and operation costs similarly to financial analysis. However, in
economic analysis, costs and benefits must be modified from market price to economic price. In
particular, prices of imported goods must be border prices excluding customs and results of other
trading policies, etc. When monetary amounts are expressed in foreign currency, market prices of
imported equipment and materials are converted to border prices with conversion factors, which
are specific to the countries. In Cambodia, The conversion factors are shown in ADB’s Urban
Water Supply Project report. (http://www.adb.org/projects/documents/Cambodia-urban-water
-supply-project-rrp)
The conversion factors for capital costs and O&M costs are 0.96 and 0.92, respectively. The
operational costs are the same as those in financial analysis.

(2) Benefits

In economic analysis, financial profits are excluded. Instead, social benefits of the project are
included in the calculation. Social benefits of sewerage can be considered in several ways. At first,
satisfaction of sewerage users can be mentioned. For this benefit, willingness-to-pay prices are
surveyed. However, most users cannot imagine the un-existing service effects and additionally,
people in developing countries cannot and do not want to pay for environmental purposes such as
sewerage or pollution improvement. In this project, Social Survey is conducted, but the
willingness-to-pay results are very low. Less than USD 1.5 per month accounts for more than
90%. This amount corresponds to 10% to 20% of water supply use monthly payments. That is
similar to the actual ADB project drainage payments of 10% water supply charge. Since the
willingness-to-pay price is too cheap, affordable price, that is, 1.5% of disposable household
income for sewerage (or about 97.8% of average household income), based on the World Bank or
ADB references is used instead of willingness-to-pay results in this economic analysis. In
addition, benefits such as (i) increased land value, (ii) agricultural harvest improvement of water
spinach, and (iii) decreasing cost medical care for such as itchy skin diseases, caused by the dirty
wastewater, are considered.

4.8.2 Cheung Aek System EIRR

The investment costs are converted as the imported part is converted to border price described above
using conversion factor, 0.96. The operation costs are the same as those of the financial analysis.
Concerning the benefits, users’ benefits are calculated multiplying water volume and affordable
sewerage price instead of sewerage use tariff. However, user numbers can be two alternatives. One is
sewerage user numbers similar to those of financial analysis. The other is user numbers, which are
final project object user numbers. The former is the actual user number in the year, but the latter is the
planned area population in the year. Of course, the latter (benefit) is more than the former. The former
concept is that the actual users are the benefit takers, but the latter concept is that the final project area
users are the participants to pay for the project from the beginning. The latter seems appropriate.
Land value increase benefit is supposed to be 3% of land value. The land width is 50 meters and
length of the Cheung Aek Lake is 32.3 km. The total land value increases are supposedly fulfilled
when the project was completed 100% and so the change at each implementation stage reflects land
values. Land value around the Cheung Aek Lake is supposedly USD 320/m2 based on the web site
information. If those sites are developed as housing lots, the land values may be more expensive, but

4-48
these are adopted as conservative values. However, the land values are estimated to increase as
household income increases in the future.
Concerning water spinach in the Cheung Aek, the affected area, where wastewater directly discharged
is too dirty to cultivate water spinach, is supposed to be 10% of the Cheung Aek Lake, that is, (total
area-STP area)×0.1=(520 ha-16.3 ha)×0.1= 50.37 ha. Potentially, this area has USD 1,533/ha/dry
season, but it is assumed that the productivity is recovered 100% at the project completion and till then
it is proportional to the population coverage of the project. Rice fields around both lakes are supposed
outside of the directly affected areas, but since water used for rice cultivation is polluted, rice growth
and harvest are affected proportionally to the project coverage.
Medical care costs of farmers for dermatitis are supposed proportional to household income growth
yearly. The total farmer numbers are calculated using cultivation areas and producers numbers
according to “Spatial Analysis of Human Activities Performed in Cheung Aek inundated Lake,
Cambodia” (Phearith Teang and Puy Lim, 2010).
EIRR result of total project user case (total final users) is shown in Table 4.8.1. The EIRR is 28.78%.
Although it is usually said that 12% of EIRR is minimum, the calculated EIRR exceeds this 12%.
Table 4.8.1 Cheung Aek System EIRR (Final Users)
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Users' Benefit 35.01 37.48
Land Value Rise 0.34 0.00
Agri. & Fishery 0.01 0.01
Medical Care 0.000 0.000
Operational Costs 0.38 0.38
Investment 35.36 108.85
Cash flow -35.36 34.98 -71.75
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Users' Benefit 40.12 42.94 45.96 49.18 52.63 56.32 60.26
Land Value Rise 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.46 0.02 0.02 0.03
Agri. & Fishery 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.12
Medical Care 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
Operational Costs 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 2.98 3.02 3.05
Investment 130.43
Cash flow 39.75 42.57 45.59 51.79 -80.65 53.44 57.36
Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Users' Benefit 64.48 68.98 73.79 78.94 84.43 90.31 90.31
Land Value Rise 0.03 5.39 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00
Agri. & Fishery 0.13 0.22 0.24 0.25 0.27 0.28 0.28
Medical Care 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002
Operational Costs 3.09 5.20 5.24 5.28 5.32 5.37 5.37
Investment 260.48
Cash flow 61.54 69.39 68.80 -186.56 79.39 85.24 85.23
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Users' Benefit 90.31 90.31 90.31 90.31 1,332.37
Land Value Rise 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.88 42.21
Agri. & Fishery 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.79 3.77
Medical Care 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.006 0.030
Operational Costs 5.37 5.37 5.37 14.90 79.75
Investment 535.12
Cash flow 85.23 85.23 85.23 107.09 1,212.36 EIRR= 28.78%
Residual value 448.85
Source: JICA Study Team

4-49
4.8.3 Tamok System EIRR

The method is similar to that of the Cheung Aek system. However, the Tamok system benefits and
costs are added. Concerning the Tamok system, the following information is added.

 The length of the Tamok Lake is 29 km. Land value around the Tamok Lake is USD 220/m2.

 Around the Tamok Lake, lotus cultivation is similar to water spinach in the Cheung Aek and
it is assumed that present production is 3 million riels/ha/year×70 ha, but it is at the project
completion stage and by then it is proportional to the project population coverage.

 Fishery benefits in the Tamok Lake are assumed similar to the rice cultivation affected.
The EIRR result of total project user case is shown in Table 4.8.2. The EIRR is 26.31%.
Table 4.8.2 Both Systems EIRR (Final Users)
Unit: million USD
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Users' Benefit 35.01 37.48
Land Value Rise 0.34 0.00
Agri. & Fishery 0.01 0.01
Medical Care 0.000 0.000
Operational Costs 0.38 0.38
Investment 35.36 108.85
Cash flow -35.36 34.98 -71.75
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Users' Benefit 40.12 42.94 45.96 49.18 75.34 80.68 86.40
Land Value Rise 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.46 0.56 0.55 0.54
Agri. & Fishery 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.14 0.15 0.16
Medical Care 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002
Operational Costs 0.38 0.38 0.38 2.95 3.86 4.77 5.68
Investment 33.36 163.79 33.36 33.36
Cash flow 39.75 42.57 45.59 18.44 -91.60 43.27 48.07
Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Users' Benefit 92.52 99.06 106.05 113.53 121.53 130.08 130.08
Land Value Rise 0.66 6.06 0.67 0.65 0.82 0.83 0.87
Agri. & Fishery 0.18 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.35 0.38 0.38
Medical Care 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
Operational Costs 6.74 9.97 11.14 12.31 13.71 15.17 16.69
Investment 33.36 33.36 33.36 293.84 33.36 33.36 33.36
Cash flow 53.26 62.07 62.52 -191.65 75.64 82.77 81.30
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Users' Benefit 130.08 130.08 130.08 130.08 1,806.28
Land Value Rise 0.93 0.95 0.89 30.98 51.78
Agri. & Fishery 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.80 4.74
Medical Care 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.012 0.055
Operational Costs 18.07 19.60 21.17 30.69 194.41
Investment 33.36 33.36 33.36 0.00 1,002.10
Cash flow 79.99 78.48 76.83 131.18 1,491.13 EIRR= 26.31%
Residual value 824.79
Source: JICA Study Team

4-50
4.9 Selection of Priority Projects for Pre-F/S
As described in Subsection 4.5, a Preparatory Project is proposed in the Short-Term period to achieve
technical skills for the preparation of full-scale construction and operation of sewage facilities, in
parallel with establishing institutional and legal framework, considering current lack of institutional
and legal provisions for sewage management in Phnom Penh.
The Preparatory Project is composed of small-scale STP and sewer pipe to collect and convey
wastewater equivalent to the STP’s capacity.
Capacity of the STP is set at 5,000 m3/day, which deems to be a minimum unit to demonstrate the
performance of the STP as well as the effectiveness of treatment method applied, and to accumulate
technical skills and experience covering construction, operation and maintenance work. The sewer
pipe for the STP is proposed to collect wastewater from outlet of Tumpun Pumping Station, which is
located in the west of construction site of the STP. Thus the STP and sewer pipe, as shown in Fig.
4.9.1 and Table 4.9.1, are provided for priority projects for Pre-F/S.
Along with the sewage treatment facilities, some measures such as landscaped pond for the people will
be proposed in the Pre-F/S to visualize accomplishments and enhance public relations.

Preparatory Project

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 4.9.1 Location Map of Preparatory Project (Priority Project)

Table 4.9.1 Components of Preparatory Project (Priority Project)
Component Contents
Sewer Pipe Diameter : φ500 mm
Length :about 1,300 m
STP Capacity:5,000 m3/dairy maximum
Source: JICA Study Team

4-51
 CHAPTER 5 STRATEGY FOR FORMULATION OF DRAINAGE
MANAGEMENT MASTER PLAN

5.1 Summary of Issues

Based on the study results discussed in Chapter 2, the current condition and issues related to drainage
improvement in PPCC are summarized below:

 In many parts of the city center (inside of the inner ring dike), the drainage condition has
been improved under the Japan’s Grant Aid projects for drainage improvement (Phase 1,
Phase 2 and Phase 3) and ADB’s loan project. These projects were implemented on the basis
of the Master Plan for drainage improvement in Phnom Penh City formulated in “The Study
on Drainage Improvement and Flood Control in the Municipality of Phnom Penh (1999)”. On
the other hand, drainage improvement on the northern side of Wat Phnom (eastern half of
Sangkat Srah Chak) and most parts of Tuol Kok District have lagged behind other areas.
Since these areas are densely-populated and still vulnerable to inundation damage, drainage
improvement is important and urgently necessary. The rehabilitation or construction of new
pumping stations, rehabilitation of drainage channels and improvement of drainage pipe
network are necessary for these areas.

 In the drainage catchment area of Trabek Pumping Station located in the southern part of the
city center, Trabek Pumping Station and Trabek Drainage Channel were improved under the
ADB’s loan project in 2003 and drainage pipes are being installed under the Japan’s grant aid
project. Since land development and reclamation have kept encroaching the Trabek regulation
pond little by little year by year during 10 years after completion of the ADB project, the
capacity of Trabek regulation pond has decreased, resulting in the decreased function of the
Trabek drainage system. In addition, the indiscriminate land development in many parts of
Phnom Penh metropolitan area has reduced the area of water body which has been
functioning as temporary storage of stormwater. It is expected that these circumstances will
generate other inundation damage in the near future.

 In the area between the inner ring and outer ring dikes, although urbanization is proceeding
vigorously, drainage issues are not so prominent and hence drainage facility development has
not been performed sufficiently in this area. However, inundation has increased and has
recently become a new problem in the area. There are now strong requests for drainage
improvement at the eastern side of Pochentong Airport, Chroy Changvar area and Chbar
Ampov area.

 Nine (9) massive satellite city development zones, including completed and undergoing zones,
exist in Phnom Penh at present. The respective developers planned and designed drainage
facilities by themselves, but not under the unified standard. In addition, impact onto outside
of development zone such as increase of ratio of run-off is not generally considered. One of
the reasons for the issue above is that MLMUPC and PPCC which issues the permission for
development, do not have any standard for drainage facility in large-scale land development.
Accordingly, besides the provision that “stormwater drainage should be managed under the
responsibility of developer in satellite city” defined in Sub-Decree No. 86, it is necessary to
enact a law or set regulations, such as standard for installation of rainwater regulation
reservoirs for disaster prevention in satellite city, and strengthen the enforcement capacity.

 As the result of capacity development of DPWT/DSD staff members through assistance from
Japan and other countries, the capacity to operate and maintain the drainage facilities of
DPWT/DSD has been improving. However, since the number of staff occupying management
positions in the organization is still insufficient, it is necessary and important to continue
enhancing the capacity development of DPWT/DSD staff.

5-1
  Although equipment for operation and maintenance (O&M) work of drainage facilities has
been increasing gradually, they are still deficient in covering the whole PPCC area. Although
more equipment is necessary for proper O&M work, in parallel with the enhancement of the
equipment, it is also necessary to increase the number of personnel and strengthen the
organizational structure to operate equipment properly.

5.2 Planning Frame

5.2.1 Target Year

Target year of the M/P should be 2035, same as that of sewage management.

5.2.2 Planning Scale

Planning scale of drainage facilities in the 1999 M/P was set with reference to the previous scale or
case of similar cities. Since the previous drainage projects in Phnom Penh were implemented based on
the planning scale set in the 1999 M/P and that the planning scale is considered as adequate, the same
conditions shall be adopted for the new M/P.

 Major drainage facilities such as pumping stations, floodgates/sluiceways, regulation ponds,

drainage mains, canals and channels (catchment area more than 1 km2) will be designed as
5-year probable rainfall.

 Branch drainage pipes, channels/canals and sewer pipes will be designed as 2-year probable
rainfall.

5.2.3 Drainage Area for Master Plan

The Study Area, which is the whole administrative area of Phnom Penh Capital City, is divided into
27 drainage areas as shown in Table 5.2.1 and Fig. 5.2.1 for the formulation of M/P. The drainage
plan for each drainage area will be formulated respectively.
Table 5.2.1 List of Drainage Areas
Area
No. Sub-Catchment Area
(km2)
1 Boeung Thom 15.39
2 PPSEZ 10.56
3 NR.3 West 27.36
4 Krang Pongro 11.01
5 Pratek Lang Channel 7.17
6 Cheung Aek Channel 16.46
7 Preaek Thloeng 8.53
8 Tuol Pongro 32.98
9 Pochentong East 18.23
10 Tamok East 26.60
11 Hanoi West 59.46
12 Poung Peay 31.46
13 O'veng 12.15
14 Preaek Maot Kandol 22.43
15 Chbar Ampov West 4.77
16 Chbar Ampov Middle 25.63
17 Chbar Ampov East 34.32
18 Satellite City 4.63
19 Cheung Aek Lake 23.28
20 Bak Khaeng 18.74
21 Chroy Changvar 2.10
22 Wat Phnom North 1.17
23 Trabek 13.01

5-2
 Area
No. Sub-Catchment Area
(km2)
24 Tumpun 14.49
25 Tamok West 133.85
26 Prek Thnot South 39.97
27 City Core North Area 5.80
Total 621.73
Source: JICA Study Team

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 5.2.1 Map of Drainage Areas

5.2.4 Drainage Management Plan per Drainage Area

The optimum drainage plan will be formulated with consideration and comparison of alternatives in
each drainage area. Tentative alternatives are listed in Table 5.2.2.
Table 5.2.2 List of Alternatives (Tentative)
Tentative Alternatives for Drainage Plan
Construction / Preservation/
No. Drainage Area Improvement of
Extension of Extension/ Creation No
Drainage Pipes / Note
Drainage of Regulation Pond/ Change
Canals/ Channels
Pumping Station Retarding Basin
1 Boeung Thom ● ● ● -
2 PPSEZ ● ● ● -
3 NR.3 West ● ● ● -
4 Krang Pongro ● ● ● -
5 Pratek Lang Channel ● - - -
6 Cheung Aek Channel ● - - -
7 Preaek Thloeng ● ● ● -
8 Tuol Pongro ● ● ● -

5-3
 Tentative Alternatives for Drainage Plan
Construction / Preservation/
No. Drainage Area Improvement of
Extension of Extension/ Creation No
Drainage Pipes / Note
Drainage of Regulation Pond/ Change
Canals/ Channels
Pumping Station Retarding Basin
9 Pochentong East ● ● ● -
10 Tamok East ● ● ● -
11 Hanoi West ● ● ● -
12 Poung Peay ● ● ● -
13 O'veng ● ● ● -
14 Preaek Maot Kandol ● ● ● -
15 Chbar Ampov West ● ● ● -
16 Chbar Ampov Middle ● ● ● -
17 Chbar Ampov East ● ● ● -
18 Satellite City ● - - *3
19 Cheung Aek Lake ● - - *3
20 Bak Khaeng ● ● ● -
21 Chroy Changvar ● ● ● -
22 Wat Phnom North ● ● ● -
23 Trabek ● ● ● - *2
24 Tumpun ● ● ● -
25 Tamok West ● - ● ● *1
26 Prek Thnot South ● - - ● *1
27 City Core North Area ● ● ● -
*1) Currently, non-inundation area; future land use is planned to be agriculture field.
*2) Area of ongoing project for flood protection and drainage improvement in the municipality of Phnom Penh.
*3) Area for large-scale development; responsibility for installation of drainage facilities falls under the developer.
Source: JICA Study Team

With the consideration and comparison of the above alternatives, the optimum drainage plan will be
formulated. Following items are considered and presented in the M/P:

 Structural Measures: Preliminary drawings, construction cost estimate, O&M cost

estimate and construction plan for drainage channels, pumping
stations, drainage pipes and regulation ponds/retarding basin.

 Non-Structural Measures: Development of laws regarding standards for installation of

stormwater regulation reservoirs in satellite city, environmental
education, strengthening organization, human resource capacity
development, securing financial resource.

 Economic and Financial Analysis

5.3 Design Criteria

5.3.1 Rainfall

Design rainfall will be prepared by model pattern of center-concentrated type. Hourly rainfall and
daily rainfall are shown in Table 5.3.1 as mentioned in Subsection 2.1.3.
Table 5.3.1 Design Rainfall
Scale of Probable Year Hourly Rainfall (mm/h) Daily Rainfall (mm/day)
2 year 44.8 87.8
5 year 63.2 112.3
Source: JICA Study Team

5-4
5.3.2 Catchment Area, Run-off and Inundation Analysis

(1) Methodology

Inland flooding is a very complicated phenomenon influenced by overflow, volume of runoff and
topographical condition. Therefore, runoff and inundation analysis model must reappear past
inland flooding and predict future flooding area. The procedure for establishing runoff and
inundation analysis model and parameter fitting for reproducing flood situations is shown in Fig.
5.3.1.

(1) 2-Dimentional Analysis (MIKE 21)

・ Modeling of flood plain using DEM (spot survey result and previous elevation data)
・ Set-up of catchment area of surface water
・ Set-up of drainage basin referring to land use situation and drainage plan based on the result
of 2-dimentional analysis

(2) Runoff Analysis

Execution of runoff analysis→Estimation of runoff volume in each drainage basin

(3) Inundation Analysis (MIKE-FLOOD)

・ Modeling of inundation analysis model → Set-up of roughness coefficient of floodplain
considering land use situation → Selection of target rainfall and set-up of parameters →
Execution of inundation analysis

(4) River/Canal Network Model (MIKE11)

・ Analysis of pumping capacity
・ Collection of cross section data of open channel and establishment of channel network
・ Set-up of initial roughness coefficient
・ Set-up of existing drainage facilities
・ Set-up of boundary condition

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 5.3.1 Procedure of Establishment of Hydrological and Hydraulic Model

(2) Setup of Catchment Area

Catchment areas are set considering analysis of behaviour of surface water based on the relations
between rainfall and inundation area. The analysis is performed using 2-dimentional unsteady
flow model (MIKE 21); its outline is summarized in Table 5.3.2.
Table 5.3.2 Outline of Two-Dimensional Unsteady Flow Model (MIKE 21)
Items Contents
Software DHI MIKE 21
Grid Size 100 m×100 m
Elevation Setup based on spot survey result and KOICA’s survey result
Roughness Coefficient Set up based on present land-use
Rainfall Pattern Actual rainfall pattern of 26 September 2012
Computing Time 24 hrs
Source: JICA Study Team

5-5
Elevation data of floodplain is set based on spot survey result in this Study and previous survey
result of KOICA Project (The production of the National Base Map and the Establishment of the
Master Plan for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure in Cambodia, KOICA, 2011) and
SRTM’s (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission) digital elevation data with 90 m resolution. Ground
elevation of Phnom Penh metropolitan area is shown in Fig. 5.3.2.

Source: JICA Study Team using data of “The production of the National Base Map and the Establishment of the Master
Plan for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure in Cambodia, KOICA” and SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography
Mission 3sec) and topographical survey result in the Study

Fig. 5.3.2 Ground Elevation of Phnom Penh Metropolitan Area

Fig. 5.3.3 shows the result that stormwater tends to inundate ponds and low-land (low-elevation
area) and do not reach the existing channels. Hence, inundation occurs in PPCC. This
phenomenon arises from the following reasons: (i) stormwater cannot easily travel due to gentle
slope in the area and thus the stormwater is locally stored in the low-lying area; (ii) drainage
channels as a whole have insufficient capacity due to limited gradient.

5-6
 ：Catchment Area
：Existing Drainage Network

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 5.3.3 Catchment Area and Present Inundation Area

(Analysis based on Rainfall on 26 September 2012)

(3) Calculation of Run-off (Run-off Analysis: Rational Formula)

(a) Selection of Run-off Model

Inundation in urban area usually occurs due to insufficient drainage capacity for peak flow
caused by high-intensity rainfall in short-time duration. Therefore, the rational formula, with
which run-off discharge can be computed on the safe side, is employed in consideration of
present and future land-use in the target area, as enumerated below. The rational formula is
shown below.

Rational 1
Q C  I  A
formula 360
Where,
Q : Run-off (m3/s)
C : Run-off coefficient
I : Rainfall intensity (mm/h)
A : Drainage area (ha)

 Almost all target areas are developed and transformed into housing, commercial and
industrial development, based on the land-use plan for the target year 2035.

5-7
  Above development is likely to accompany installation of secondary and tertiary drainage
pipe/channel in the area. As a result, stormwater immediately concentrate on the channels
evaluated in the analysis.

 Stormwater should quickly be conveyed and discharged to prevent inundation especially in

urban area.

(b) Run-off Coefficient

Run-off coefficient is set up based on run-off coefficient by land-use (Table 5.3.3) and future
land-use and then overall run-off coefficient is computed. Future land-use in the computation is
set up based on the following concepts.

【Concepts of Future Land-use Setting】

 Land-use is based on PPCC’s Land-use plan of 2035
 All large-scale development are completed by 2035
 Small-scale development is not considered except for development
designated in PPCC’s Land-use plan of 2035

≪Overall Run-off Coefficient≫

m m
C   Ci  Ai /  Ai
m1 m1

where; C ：Overall Run-off Coefficient

Ci ：Run-off coefficient by land use
Ai ：Area by land use
m ：Number of land use
Table 5.3.3 Run-off Coefficient by Land Use
Land Use Run-off Coefficient
Residential Area Residential area with little unused area 0.80
Suburban Area 1 Suburban area with small gardens 0.65
Suburban Area 2 Suburban area with large gardens 0.40
Industrial Area 0.65
Agricultural Area 0.30
Park 0.25
Source: JICA Study Team

Overall run-off coefficient, which is set up based on the methodology described above, is
summarized in Table 5.3.4.
Table 5.3.4 Overall Run-off Coefficient
Area (km2)
Total
Overall
Name of Area Residen Sub- Sub- Indust Agri- Area
No. Run-off
Drainage Area (km2) tial urban urban rial cultur- Park Pond (except
Coefficient
Area Area 1 Area 2 Area al Area pond
area)
1 Boeung Thom 15.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.39 0.00 0.00 15.39 0.30
2 PPSEZ 10.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.48 7.08 0.00 0.00 10.56 0.42
3 NR.3 West 27.36 0.00 0.00 3.08 1.82 22.46 0.00 0.00 27.36 0.33
4 Krang Pongro 11.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.01 0.00 0.00 11.01 0.30
Pratek Lang
5 7.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.17 0.00 0.00 7.17 0.30
Channel
Cheung Aek
6 16.46 0.00 0.00 3.52 0.00 12.95 0.00 0.00 16.46 0.32
Channel

5-8
 Area (km2)
Total
Overall
Name of Area Residen Sub- Sub- Indust Agri- Area
No. Run-off
Drainage Area (km2) tial urban urban rial cultur- Park Pond (except
Coefficient
Area Area 1 Area 2 Area al Area pond
area)
7 Preaek Thloeng 8.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.53 0.00 0.00 8.53 0.30
8 Tuol Pongro 32.98 3.50 0.00 20.49 3.61 4.77 0.00 0.62 32.36 0.46
Pochentong
9 18.23 0.00 0.00 18.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.23 0.40
East
10 Tamok East 26.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.72 19.88 0.00 0.00 26.60 0.39
11 Hanoi West 59.46 4.58 0.00 12.41 4.80 35.37 2.31 0.00 59.46 0.39
12 Poung Peay 31.64 7.28 12.18 12.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 31.64 0.59
13 O'veng 12.15 0.00 12.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.15 0.65
Preaek Maot
14 22.43 0.00 0.00 8.92 6.03 7.48 0.00 0.00 22.43 0.43
Kandol
Chbar Ampov
15 4.77 4.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.77 0.80
West
Chbar Ampov
16 25.63 1.67 0.00 23.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.63 0.43
Middle
Chbar Ampov
17 34.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.32 0.00 0.00 34.32 0.30
East
18 Satellite City 4.63 0.00 0.00 4.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.63 0.40
Cheung Aek
19 23.28 3.39 0.00 7.82 0.00 7.84 0.00 4.23 19.05 0.43
Lake
20 Bak Khaeng 18.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18.74 0.00 0.00 18.74 0.30
Chroy
21 2.10 0.00 0.00 2.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.10 0.40
Changvar
Wat Phnom
22 1.17 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.17 0.80
North
23 Trabek 13.01 2.58 10.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 12.81 0.68
24 Tumpun 14.49 1.99 3.34 8.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 14.15 0.52
25 Tamok West 133.85 1.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 1.99 0.80
Prek Thnot
26 39.97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.97 0.00 0.00 39.97 0.30
South
City Core North
27 5.80 1.17 0.00 4.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.80 0.48
Area
Total 621.73 34.08 37.90 130.78 26.46 252.96 2.31 5.72 484.49 ―
Source: JICA Study Team

(c) Evaluation of Inundation (Inundation Analysis: Without-Project)

For the inundation analysis in floodplain, the two-dimensional unsteady flow analysis model is
employed. Outline of inundation analysis model and image of analysis model is shown in
Table 5.3.5 and Fig. 5.3.4.
Table 5.3.5 Outline of Inundation Analysis Model
Items Contents
Software DHI MIKE-FLOOD
Grid Size 100 m×100 m
Elevation Setup based on spot survey result and previous survey result
Evaporation 4 mm/day
Roughness Coefficient Setup based on land-use (2035)
Source: JICA Study Team

5-9
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 5.3.4 Image of Inundation Analysis

5-10
 CHAPTER 6 DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT MASTER PLAN

6.1 Improvement Plan for Stormwater Drainage Management

In principle, the improvement plan for stormwater drainage management is formulated primarily based
on the following considerations:
 Original flow direction of existing drainage network in each drainage area
 Status of existing drainage facilities (drainage channel, pumping station and so forth)
Basic conditions for the formulation of the drainage management plan are enumerated below.
 One drainage area has one outlet.
 Flow direction of each drainage area is determined in consideration of topographical condition,
land-use and status of existing drainage facilities.
 Priorities are placed on improvement of existing drainage facilities to minimize cost.
 Stormwater is in principle collected and conveyed by gravity
 Pumping station and sluiceway are proposed at crossing points of ring dikes and rivers, if
necessary.

6.1.1 Improvement Plan for Each Drainage Area

Flow direction of each drainage area is in general determined based on topographical condition, status
of existing drainage facilities and land-use. However, studies on the alternatives to “No.6 Cheung Aek
Channel Drainage Area” and “No.8 Toul Pongro Drainage Area”, as well as “No.12 Poung Peay
Drainage Area” and “No.13 O’veng Drainage Area”, are conducted to determine if these drainage
areas are to be combined or separated.
Improvement plan for drainage areas other than “No.6 Cheung Aek Channel Drainage Area” and
“No.8 Toul Pongro Drainage Area”, as well as “No.12 Poung Peay Drainage Area” and “No.13
O’veng Drainage Area”, are thus summarised below.

(1) Boeung Thom Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.1)

Item Contents
Location An area located in the southwestern edge of PPCC, and on the west of
PPSEZ, bordered by National Road No.4 on the north, Prek Thnot
River on the south, PPSEZ on the east and the city boundary of PPCC
on the west.
Land-use Present: Almost all of the area is farmland
Future: Farmland
Salient features Ground surface elevation of the area is over 15 meter, gently sloping
of drainage area from west to east. Existing drainage channel of Pratek Lan drains
stormwater with flow direction from west to east by gravity.
Issues PPSEZ and its adjacent area in the west annually suffer from
inundation in about 1 to 5 days in the rainy season, due to the reasons
that (i) Pratek Lan channel has a bottleneck at the crossing point of
railway and (ii) capacity of Pratek Lan channel is not enough.
Strategy for New construction of drainage channel is proposed to drain stormwater by gravity from north to south
improvement in order to reduce burden to existing Pratek Lang Channel.
Structural Drainage channel (Sluiceway)
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6-1
 (2) PPSEZ Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.2)

Item Contents
Location An area bordered by National Road No. 4 on the north, Prek Thnot
River on the south, PPSEZ on the west and railway on the east.
Land-use Present: Industrial area and farmland
Future: SEZ, used as industrial and farmland
Salient features This area is new development area flatly reclaimed. Residential
of drainage area development is in progress along National Road No.4. An existing
channel of Pratek Lan, which is utilized for irrigation and drainage
drains stormwater by gravity, running from west to east in the
premise of PPSEZ.
Issues PPSEZ and its adjacent area in the west suffer from inundation in
about 2 to 5 days in the rainy season once in about 2 years, due to
the reasons that (i) Pratek Lan Channel has a bottleneck at the
crossing point of railway and (ii) capacity of Pratek Lan Channel is
not enough.
Strategy for Improvement of existing drainage channel is proposed to drain stormwater from PPSEZ and its
improvement adjacent area in the east to Prek Thnot River by gravity.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(3) NR.3 West Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.3)

Item Contents
Location An area bordered by National Road No.4 on the north, Prek Thnot
River on the south, railway on the west and National Road No.3 on
the east.
Land-use Present: About 20% of the total or area along National Road No.4
is industrial and residential area. The other area is farmland.
Future: About 30% is urbanized area and SEZ and the other area is
farmland.
Salient features Land development is in progress from north to south. Existing
of drainage area channels of Pratek Lan and Cheung Aek is utilized for irrigation
and drainage but they have insufficient capacity. There exists
another channel along National Road No.3, running from north to
south, but being disconnected in spots. Irrigation channels are
widely installed in a grid pattern in the southern part of the
drainage area (paddy field area). At present no inundation damage
is detected.
Issues The northern part of the area will be developed for residential use and SEZ, and would suffer from
inundation. Thus, construction of drainage channel running from west to east is required to drain
stormwater of the area.
Strategy for New construction of drainage channel is proposed to drain stormwater to Prek Thnot River by
improvement gravity, since the area is bordered by roads and railway in higher elevation on the north, east and
west side.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6-2
 (4) Krang Pongro Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.4)

Item Contents
Location An area in the catchment area of Krang Pongro Channel,
bordered by Prek Thnot River in the south and east.
Land-use Present: Farmland
Future: Farmland and low density residential area
Salient features This area gradually slopes from west to east. An existing
of drainage area channel named Krang Pongro, which is utilized for irrigation
and drainage, crosses the area from west to east but has small
capacity. At present no inundation damage is detected and the
damage in the future will be limited because the area is
dominated by farmland.
Issues Improvement of existing channel is required.

Strategy for Improvement of existing Krang Pongro Channel is proposed to accommodate stormwater from the
improvement area and drain them to Prek Thnot River by gravity.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(5) Pratek Lang Channel Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.5)

Item Contents
Location A part of Pratek Lang channel’s catchment area, covering area
along National Road No.3 in the east, bordered by Prek Thnot
River on the east.
Land-use Present: Farmland
Future: Farmland and low density residential area
Salient features This area gradually slopes from west to east. An existing
of drainage area channel named Pratek Lang, which is utilized for irrigation and
drainage, cross the area from west to east but has small
capacity. At present no inundation damage is detected and the
damage in the future will be limited because the area is
dominated by farmland.
Issues Improvement of existing channel is required.
Strategy for Improvement of existing Pratek Lang Channel is proposed to accommodate stormwater from the
improvement area and drain them to Prek Thnot River by gravity.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(6) Preaek Thloeng Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.7)

Item Contents
Location An area in the south of Cheung Aek lake, bordered by Prek
Thnot River on the east, west and south. This area is also a part
of large-scale development area of ING City.
Land-use Present: Farmland and wetland
Future: Low density residential area
Salient features This area is topographically flat and is occupied by wetland in
of drainage area the centre of the area. At present no inundation damage is
detected. In the land-use plan for year 2035, this area is
categorized into low density residential area but is likely to be
developed because the area is included in ING City.
Issues Installation of new drainage channel is required for future
provisions.
Strategy for Specification for the new drainage channel is proposed to drain stormwater to Prek Thnot River by
improvement gravity. It is recommendable that the drainage channel should be installed by developer of ING
City or be installed by PPCC depending on the progress of development.
Structural Drainage channel

6-3
Item Contents
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(7) Pochentong East Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.9)

Item Contents
Location An area including Phnom Penh International Airport (former
Pochentong International Airport) and its adjacent area in the
east and southeast, bordered by National Road No. 4 on the
north and west, Veng Sreng road (former BOT road) on the
south, and catchment boundary of Tumpun Drainage Area on
the east.
Land-use Present: high density residential area, commercial and
industrial area (factory, shop).
Future: high density residential areas, commercial and
industrial area, economic development zone.
Salient features This area is topographically flat and is in most urbanized area
of drainage area of Phnom Penh in parallel with expansion of urbanization
toward west in recent years.
Issues Installation of drainage facilities have not been catching up
with rapid urbanization. Inundation occurs especially in the
southern part of the area. With the progress of urbanization,
inundation damage will be bigger.
Strategy for Installation of new box culvert is proposed to connect exiting drainage channels/pipes, and drain
improvement stormwater to Cheung Aek Lake, through Veng Sreng road (former BOT road) and new pumping
station and Moul drainage channel.
Structural Box culvert, Pumping station, Regulation pond and Drainage channel.
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(8) Tamok East Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.10)

Item Contents
Location An area located in the north and west of Kop Srov Dike, which
forms outer ring dike of Phnom Penh.
Land-use Present: Farmland, wetland
Future: Economic development zone, farmland and low density
residential area
Salient features Drainage facilities is required to drain stormwater from proposed
of drainage area large-scale development area, which is located in the north of
intersection of Kop Srov Dike and National Road No.4. At present
no inundation damage is detected,
Issues Installation of drainage channel is required for future provisions.
Strategy for Stormwater from the area is drained toward north because
improvement National Road No.4 forms watershed dividing Phnom Penh into
the north and south. New drainage channel is proposed along Kop
Srov Dike, by which stormwater is drained to Sap river via Tamok
Lake.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6-4
 (9) Hanoi West Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.11)

Item Contents
Location An area located inside of Kop Srov Dike, which forms outer ring
dike of Phnom Penh, bordered by Kop Srov Dike on the north and
west, Hanoi road (or St.1019) on the east and National Road No.4
on the south.
Land-use Present: High density residential area, commercial and industrial
area along National Road No.4 in the south and Hanoi Road in the
east. The other area is farmland and low density residential area.
Future: Residential area, commercial and industrial area in the
south and east, farmland and low density residential area in the
north and west.
Salient features This area, including an area in the north-western region of
of drainage area international airport and National Road No.4, is topographically
Issues flat and suffers from inundation. Stormwater from the area is
drained to Toul Sampov Channel and pumped up by Tuol Sampov
Pumping Station (located in the west of Kop Srov Pumping
Station), and finally discharged to Tamok Lake. As with
Pochentong East Drainage Area, urbanization in the southern part
of the area is in progress.

Issues Installation of drainage facilities has not been catching up with rapid urbanization, and thus
inundation occurs in the area. With the progress of urbanization, inundation damage will be
bigger.
Strategy for Drainage channel starting from downstream end is proposed for future provisions. Existing
improvement drainage facilities, namely, Tuol Sampov Channel, Tuol Bakha 1 Channel and Tuol Dampov
Pumping Station, are augmented to accommodate stormwater from the area. At the same time, the
other existing channels are maintained to keep present condition. Additionally, a regulation pond
is proposed to reduce initial investment, as well as O&M cost for the pumping station.
Structural Drainage channel, Pumping station and Regulation pond
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(10) Preaek Maot Kandol Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.14)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the northern peninsular part of Chroy Changvar
District, sandwiched between Mekong River and Sap River.

Land-use Present: Low density residential area along with National Road No.6.
The other area is wetland
Future: Economic development zones and low density residential area
Salient features This area is located on lowland and wetland. Northern part of the area
of drainage area is developed for economic development zone. At present not
inundation damage is detected.
Issues Improvement of existing channel is required for future provision.
Strategy for In principle the developer should improve existing drainage channels to
improvement drain stormwater from the area to Sap River by gravity when present
wetland is developed into residential area, or PPCC should install
drainage facilities on behalf of the developer, depending on the
progress of the development.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6-5
 (11) Chbar Ampov West Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.15)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the north-western part of Chbar Ampov
District and in the north of Barang Channel, sandwiched between
Mekong River and Bassac River.
Land-use Present: Residential and commercial area located on the west
half, as well as wetland and future development area on the east
half
Future: high density residential area and cluster of high-rise
buildings
Salient features This area is topographically flat and the urbanization is in
of drainage area progress, especially in the western part of the area. All of the area
will be urbanized in the future
Issues River water flows back to Barang Channel in the rainy season
because of high water level of Bassac. A lot of houses and large
amount of garbage are found in and along the Barang Channel.
Installation of drainage facilities has not been catching up with
rapid urbanization and thus inundation occurs. With the progress
of urbanization, inundation damage will be bigger.
Strategy for Improvement of Barang Channel and construction of new pumping station is proposed to drain
improvement stormwater in the rainy season. Improvement of existing channel is also proposed to drain
stormwater from the northern part of National Road No.1 and discharge them to Bassac River
and Mekong River by gravity, when the area is developed in the future.
Structural Drainage channel and Pumping station
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(12) Chbar Ampov Middle Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.16)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the central part of Chbar Ampov District,
sandwiched between Mekong River and Bassac River.
Land-use Present: Residential and commercial area along National Road
and dike road in the west, and wetland and farmland in the east
Future : high and low density residential area
Salient features This area is topographically flat and almost all area is in wetland.
of drainage area Urbanization in the western part of the area, being adjacent to
city centre, has been in progress, and in the future the area is
developed into residential area. On the other hand, the eastern
part of the drainage area is wetland in which stormwater is
retained.
Issues In parallel with urbanization, inundation problem has emerged
because wetlands in the drainage area have no outlet. With the
progress of urbanization, inundation damage will be bigger.
Strategy for In principle the developer should install drainage channels and pumping station to drain
improvement stormwater from the area even to high water level observed in the rainy season, and the should
also install regulation pond to reduce initial investment, as well as O&M cost for the pumping
station, when the wetlands in the area is developed into residential area, or PPCC should, on
behalf of the developer, install drainage facilities depending on the progress of development.
Structural Drainage channel, Pumping Station and Regulation Pond
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6-6
(13) Chbar Ampov East Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.17)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the eastern part of Chbar Ampov District,
sandwiched between Mekong River and Bassac River.

Land-use Present: Wetland and low density residential area

Future: No land-use plan
Salient features Almost all area is wetland.
of drainage area
Issues Not available.

Strategy for No plan is proposed since at present and in the future no

improvement inundation is detected or anticipated. In addition, future
land-use plan is not available.
Structural Not proposed.
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(14) Satellite City Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.18)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the central peninsular part of Chroy
Changvar District, sandwiched between Mekong River and Sap
River.
Land-use Present: low density residential area along National Road No.6.
The other area is being developed into residential area
Future: Low density residential area
Salient features No drainage facilities are installed. Almost all area is located in
of drainage area large-scale development area of Satellite City.
Issues Installation of drainage facilities is required in parallel with
development.
Strategy for In principle the developer should install drainage facilities.
improvement Specifications for the drainage facilities are proposed to drain
stormwater to Mekong or Sap Rivers by gravity.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(15) Cheung Aek Lake Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.19)

Item Contents
Location An area including Cheung Aek Lake and its surrounding area,
bordered by Tumpun ring Dike (St.371) and St.271 on the
north, National Road No.2 on the east, Cheung Aek road on the
west, and Prek Thnot River on the southeast. The area is also a
part of large-scale development area of ING City.
Land-use Present: Farmland, lake and wetland
Future: Low and high density residential and commercial area
Salient features This area is located in ING City. ING City has ownership of the
of drainage area land except for water bodies. All the area under the ING’s
ownership is reclaimed in the future in parallel with
development.
Issues In principle ING should install drainage facilities in the area in
parallel with land development.
Strategy for Specification for the drainage facilities is proposed to drain stormwater to Prek Thnot River by
improvement gravity. Based on the specification, ING or PPCC should install the drainage facilities depending
on the progress of development
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6-7
(16) Bak Khaeng Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.20)

Item Contents
Location An area located along National Road No.6 and on the
northern edge of Chroy Changvar District.
Land-use Present: Wetland and low-density residential area along
National Road
Future: No land-use plan
Salient features Almost all area is wetland.
of drainage area
Issues Not available.
Strategy for No plan is proposed since at present and in the future no
improvement inundation is detected or anticipated. In addition, future
land-use plan is not available.
Structural Not proposed.
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(17) Chroy Changvar Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.21)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the southern edge of peninsular part of
Chroy Changvar District, sandwiched between Mekong River
and Sap River.

Land-use Present: Low density residential area and wetland

Future: Low density residential area
Salient features Urbanized area is formed on the reclaimed area. Existing
of drainage area residential area located at the centre of peninsula suffers from
inundation with the expansion of reclamation in the
surrounding area. All the area is developed into low density
residential area according to future land-use plan of Phnom
Penh.
Issues Inundation occurs due to the absence of existing drainage
channel and outlet to discharge stormwater from the central
lowland area. With the progress of urbanization, inundation
damage will be bigger.
Strategy for New construction of drainage channel is proposed to drain stormwater to Mekong River or Sap
improvement River by gravity.
Structural Drainage channel
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(18) Wat Phnom North Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.22)

Item Contents
Location An area located in the northeast of city centre of Phnom Penh,
bordered by the approach road of Japan Bridge on the north,
Sap River on the east, Monivong street on the west and St.102
on the south.
Land-use Present: High density residential area, commercial and
administrative area
Future: High density residential area, commercial and
administrative area
Salient features Improvement work in the area was requested and studied in
of drainage area Phase 2(*1) but was finally excluded from the project
components from viewpoint of project size and priority.
Priority of improvement of this area is therefore very high.
Issues Inundation frequently occurs in the rainy season.
Furthermore, lots of facilities like hospital and governmental
office situate in the area, so that improvement of drainage
facilities is urgent.
Strategy for Establishment of drainage pipe network is proposed, along with construction of underground
improvement reservoir and pumping station to drain stormwater to Sap River. In addition, installation of

6-8
 Item Contents
interceptor is proposed to divert sewage to Trabek Channel in the dry and rainy season.
Structural Drainage channel, Regulation Pond and Pumping Station
measure
(*1) The Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Municipality of Phnom Penh (Phase 2)
Source: JICA Study Team

(19) Trabek Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.23)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the eastern part of city center of Phnom
Penh.
Land-use Present: High density residential area, commercial and
administrative area
Future: High density residential area, commercial and
administrative area
Salient features This area is the target area of Phase 2(*1) and Phase 3(*2), and is
of drainage area located in the catchment area of existing Trabek Pumping
Station. Urgent and minimum improvement work is done with
the implementation of Phase 2 and 3 projects.
Issues Screens installed in Phase 2 project are not functioning due to
clogging triggered by extensive amount of trash than expected.
Strategy for Improvement of the screen installed in Phase 2 project is proposed.
improvement
Structural Mechanical screen (4 locations)
measure
(*1) The Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Municipality of Phnom Penh (Phase 2)
(*2) The Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase 3)
Source: JICA Study Team

(20) Tumpun Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.24)

Item Contents
Location An area located in the western part of city centre of Phnom
Penh.
Land-use Present: High density residential area, commercial and
administrative area
Future: High density residential area, commercial and
administrative area
Salient features This area is located on the target area of Phase 1(*1) and is in the
of drainage area catchment area of Tumpun Pumping Station. With the
implementation of Phase 1 project, urgent and minimum
improvement works in the downstream of the drainage area are
already done.
Issues There exists newly urbanized area in which drainage facilities
are not installed.
Strategy for No project is proposed in the M/P.
Improvement
Structural Not proposed.
measure
(*1) The Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Municipality of Phnom Penh
Source: JICA Study Team

6-9
(21) Tamok West Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.25)

Item Contents
Location An area located at outer area of Kop Srov Ring Dike, bordered
by the north-western city boundary.
Land-use Present: Farmland, lowland and low density residential area
Future: Farmland, lowland, low density residential area. No
land-use planning available
Salient features This area is located in the catchment area of Tamok Lake with
of drainage area natural river flowing to Tamok Lake. At the outlet of Sap River,
a weir is installed with the assistance of Korea to control water
level because the area is affected by fluctuation of water level
of Sap River. In the rainy season, stormwater is discharged to
wetland located in the north of Tamok Lake. Urbanization is
not in progress and the drainage area is dominated by farmland
except for Tamok Lake and wetland surrounding the lake.
Issues Not available.
Strategy for No improvement work is proposed because the drainage area gradually slopes from west to east
improvement and no inundation is detected at present and in the future.
Structural Preservation of existing rivers.
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(22) Prek Thnot South Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.26)

Item Contents
Location An area located at the southern edge of PPCC, bordered by
south bank of Prek Thnot River.
Land-use Present: Farmland and low density residential area
Future: No land-use plan
Salient features Almost all area is farmland.
of drainage area
Issues Not available.
Strategy for No plan is proposed since at present and in the future no
improvement inundation is detected or anticipated, and future land-use plan
is not available.
Structural Not proposed.
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

(23) City Core North Area Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.27)

Item Contents
Location An area located inside inner ring dike and in the north-western
part of city centre, covering the northern part along National
Road No. 4 in Tuol Kok District and the reclaimed area of
Boeung Kak Lake, bordered by St.598 on the west; St.355,
St.273 and St.70 on the north; Monivong Boulevard on the
east; and Russian Boulevard on the south.
Land-use Present: High density residential and commercial area
Future: High density residential and commercial area
Salient features Improvement of this area is proposed in 1999 M/P but is not yet
of drainage area implemented in viewpoint of priority, so that the priority is very
high. The drainage area includes catchment area of Tuol Kork
and Tuol Kork 2 Pumping Stations in Tuol Kork District.
SHUKAKU reclaimed Boeung Kak Lake and now installing
drainage facilities in parallel with the development.

Issues Inundation frequently occurs especially in the northern part of Tuol Kok District in the rainy
season. The northern part of Tuol Kok District has high population density and a large number of
commercial facilities, so that the installation of drainage facilities is urgent.
Strategy for Construction of new box culvert and a sluice way is proposed in the northern part of Tuol Kok

6-10
 Item Contents
improvement District to drain stormwater from inside inner ring dike by gravity. On the other hand,
SHUKAKU should install drainage facilities in the reclaimed area of Boeung Kak Lake
Structural Box culvert and Sluiceway
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6.1.2 Alternative Study on Cheung Aek Channel Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.6) and
Tuol Pongro Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.8)

In this subsection, alternative study on whether to combine Cheung Aek Channel Drainage Area
(Drainage Area No.6) and Tuol Pongro Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.8) is conducted. Based on
the alternative study, the two drainage areas are combined in the drainage management M/P.
Item Contents
Location An area located in the south of Pochentong East Drainage Area
and in the catchment area of Cheung Aek Channel, bordered by
Veng Sreng road (former BOT road) on the north, National
Road No.3 on the west and Cheung Aek Channel on the south.

Land-use Present: Farmland, wetland, residential area and factories

Future: low and high density residential area, economic
development zone
Salient features This area gradually slopes from west to east. The existing
of drainage area channels cannot drain stormwater especially in the rainy season
due to lack of capacity. The stormwater is thus retained in
wetlands scattered in the area. Land development in the
northern part of the area is in progress and the area will be
finally developed from farmland into residential area.
Issues Inundation damage is already detected in the northern part of the drainage area. Almost all Tuol
Pongro Drainage Area will be highly urbanized in the future, and as a result the inundation
damage will be bigger. Drainage facilities in the area should be improved in the early stages.
Strategy for Preservation of existing Tuol Pongro Channel and its tributaries is proposed. In addition,
improvement installation of new drainage channel, which runs through wetlands in the eastern part of the
drainage area, is proposed to drain stormwater to the downstream end by gravity. New pumping
station is also proposed at the downstream end of the new channel to discharge the stormwater to
Prek Thnot River. Further, new regulation pond is proposed to downsize the pumping equipment
and reduce initial investment and O&M cost. Improvement of existing Cheung Aek Channel is
also proposed to connect it to the new regulation pond and drain stormwater to Prek Thnot River.
Structural Drainage channel, Pumping Station, Regulation pond
measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6.1.3 Alternative Study on Poung Peay Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.12) and O'veng
Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.13)

In this subsection, alternative study on whether to combine Poung Peay Drainage Area (Drainage Area
No.12) and O'veng Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.13) is conducted. Based on the alternative
study, the two drainage areas are combined in the drainage management M/P.

6-11
 Item Contents
Location An area located inside of Kop Srov Ring Dike in the north of
Phnom Penh, bordered by Hanoi Street on the west; Kop Srov
Dike on the north; National Road No.5 on the east; and St.355,
St.273 and St.70 on the south.
Land-use Present: Southern part of the area is high density residential area,
commercial and industrial area, while northern part of
the area is residential development area and wetland.
Future: High density residential area and commercial and
industrial area
Salient features This area includes inundated area sandwiched between National
of drainage area Road No.4 and railway. Stormwater from the drainage area is
conveyed to the north through Poung Peay and O’veng Channels
and discharged through Kop Srov Pumping Station or Svay Pak
Sluiceway. Urbanization in the southern part of the drainage area
is in progress. Almost entire area, including wetland, is to be
developed into residential, commercial area in the future.
Issues Installation of drainage facilities has not been catching up with rapid urbanization and thus
inundation occurs in the area. With the progress of urbanization, inundation damage will be
bigger.
Strategy for Improvement of drainage channel starting from downstream end is proposed for future
improvement provisions. The improvement work includes (i) connection of Poung Peay and O’veng Channels
at the north of Poung Peay Lake, (ii) augmentation of Poung Peay and O’veng Channels to
accommodate stormwater from the area, (iii) preservation of the other drainage channels to keep
present condition and (iv) construction of regulation pond at Kop Slov Pumping Station to reduce
initial investment, as well as O&M cost for the pumping station. On the other hand, improvement
of Svay Pak Pumping Station is not proposed in the M/P.

Structural Drainage channel, Pumping station and Regulation pond

measure
Source: JICA Study Team

6.2 Drainage Facilities Plan

6.2.1 General Layout of Drainage Management Plan

Based on the above discussion, general layout of drainage management plan is shown in Fig. 6.2.1.

6-12
Source ：JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.1 General Layout of Proposed Drainage Management Plan

6.2.2 Run-off Analysis

Result of run-off analysis applying Rational Formula is summarized in Tables 6.2.1 and 6.2.2.

Run-off 1
Q C  I  A
(m3/s) 360
Where,
Q : Run-off (m3/s)
C : Run-off coefficient
I : Rainfall intensity (mm/h):I=5,009.12×(T+31.38)-0.98
[Return period of 5 years, and T:duration of rainfall (min)]
A : Drainage area (ha)

6-13
 Table 6.2.1 Run-off Analysis (1/2)

Time of Concentration R5 Overall

Run-off
Name of Area Inlet Time Drain Flow Time 5-Year run-off Design Flow
No. Sub-Catchment Area n:
Tc calculated Proposed Works
Facilities Li Starting End Ti Ld Starting End Td Rainfall coefficient
3 3
km
2 m roughness G.L. G.L. min m G.L. G.L. min min mm/hr m /s m /s

1 Boeung Thom BT 15.39 1,940 0.20 16.90 16.60 180.9 3,670 16.60 16.20 68.0 248.9 20.0 0.30 25.65 26.00 New Construction
2 PPSEZ PZ 10.56 2,670 0.15 16.30 14.70 133.8 7,010 14.70 12.58 116.8 250.7 19.9 0.42 24.50 25.00 Improvement
3 NR.3 West NW 27.36 5,560 0.15 13.33 12.29 247.4 7,150 12.29 11.96 132.4 379.8 13.7 0.33 34.46 35.00 Improvement
4 Krang Pongro KP 11.01 1,430 0.15 13.57 11.71 83.4 4,490 11.71 8.82 74.8 158.3 29.3 0.30 26.93 27.00 Improvement
5 Pratek Lang Channel PLC 7.17 780 0.15 11.62 11.28 81.1 5,720 11.30 8.86 95.3 176.5 26.8 0.30 16.02 17.00 Improvement
6&8 Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol Pongro CAC1 10.26 1,010 0.10 12.95 12.37 71.0 7,730 12.37 7.58 128.8 199.9 24.2 0.40 27.55 28.00 Improvement
CAC2 2.02 1,160 0.10 9.77 9.57 100.4 1,840 9.57 7.58 20.4 120.8 36.4 0.40 8.16 9.00 Improvement
6-14

TP1 11.68 6,110 0.06 13.00 7.90 118.8 2,220 7.90 5.90 37.0 155.8 29.7 0.46 44.33 45.00 Improvement
TP2 33.00 6,110 0.06 13.00 7.90 118.8 4,560 8.07 7.70 84.4 203.3 23.8 0.46 100.39 101.00 New Construction
TP3 45.28 6,110 0.06 13.00 7.90 118.8 7,450 7.70 7.63 138.0 256.8 19.5 0.46 112.62 113.00 New Construction
7 Preaek Thloeng PT 8.53 2,820 0.10 7.91 4.50 96.4 2,740 4.50 4.44 50.7 147.2 31.1 0.30 22.13 23.00 New Construction
9 Pochentong East PE1 7.57 2,930 0.06 11.40 11.00 128.7 1,010 11.00 9.10 11.2 139.9 32.4 0.40 27.27 28.00 New Construction
PE2 18.23 2,930 0.06 11.40 11.00 128.7 3,890 11.00 9.60 64.8 193.5 24.8 0.40 50.26 51.00 New Construction
10 Tamok East TE1 22.52 2,620 0.15 14.60 14.00 166.0 12,460 14.00 7.00 207.7 373.7 13.9 0.39 34.02 35.00 New Construction
TE2 25.46 2,620 0.15 14.60 14.00 166.0 14,780 14.00 6.30 246.3 412.4 12.8 0.39 45.18 46.00 New Construction
TE3 26.60 2,620 0.15 14.60 14.00 166.0 16,620 14.00 10.43 307.8 473.8 11.2 0.39 57.36 58.00 New Construction
11 Hanoi West HW1 59.46 9,460 0.10 14.50 10.30 214.4 5,290 10.30 8.70 88.2 302.6 16.8 0.39 108.53 109.00 Improvement
HW2 12.20 2,370 0.10 12.90 10.16 89.8 2,560 10.16 8.87 42.7 132.5 33.8 0.39 44.72 45.00 Improvement
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng PP1 24.98 5,690 0.06 8.38 7.21 159.4 5,460 7.90 7.20 101.1 260.6 19.2 0.62 82.70 83.00 Improvement
PP2 49.59 5,690 0.06 8.38 7.21 159.4 8,740 7.90 7.50 161.9 321.3 16.0 0.62 136.41 137.00 Improvement
OV 15.04 3,580 0.06 8.80 7.80 119.6 7,310 7.80 7.20 135.4 254.9 19.6 0.62 50.74 51.00 Improvement

Source: JICA Study Team

 Table 6.2.2 Run-off Analysis (2/2)
Time of Concentration R5 Overall
Run-off
Name of Area Inlet Time Drain Flow Time 5-Year run-off Design Flow
No. Sub-Catchment Area n:
Tc calculated Proposed Works
Facilities Li Starting End Ti Ld Starting End Td Rainfall coefficient
3 3
km
2 m roughness G.L. G.L. min m G.L. G.L. min min mm/hr m /s m /s

14 Preaek Maot Kandol PMK 22.43 2,770 0.06 11.40 7.19 71.4 7,000 7.19 6.54 129.6 201.0 24.0 0.43 64.39 65.00 Improvement
15 Chbar Ampov West CAW1 1.22 1,060 0.06 11.00 10.60 63.1 2,140 10.60 9.70 35.7 98.8 42.4 0.80 11.49 12.00 Improvement
CAW2 1.36 990 0.06 10.50 10.40 83.2 1,040 9.51 9.29 19.3 102.4 41.3 0.80 12.51 13.00 Improvement
CAW3 2.19 730 0.06 10.40 10.20 57.2 1,460 11.00 10.72 27.0 84.2 47.7 0.80 23.24 24.00 Improvement
16 Chbar Ampov Middle CAM 25.63 2,040 0.06 9.80 8.40 74.5 5,300 7.70 6.80 98.1 172.7 27.3 0.43 83.57 84.00 New Construction
17 Chbar Ampov East
18 Satellite City SC 4.63 720 0.06 9.75 8.76 39.0 4,780 7.11 7.02 88.5 127.5 34.9 0.40 17.96 18.00 New Construction
19 Cheung Aek Lake CAL1 27.45 4,250 0.10 5.66 4.69 172.4 4,230 4.69 8.80 78.3 250.7 19.9 0.43 65.18 66.00 Improvement
CAL2 4.05 740 0.10 9.02 8.49 58.3 2,820 8.49 4.69 31.3 89.7 45.5 0.43 22.04 23.00 Improvement
20 Bak Khaeng No Proposed Works
21 Chroy Changvar CC 2.10 870 0.06 10.07 10.00 82.6 1,650 10.72 10.56 30.6 113.1 38.3 0.40 8.92 9.00 New Construction
Drainage pipes, pumping station and underground reservoir will be constructed in the Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Phnom Penh
6-15

22 Wat Phnom North Capital City (Phase 4) New Construction

Drainage pipes, pumping station and underground reservoir will be constructed in the Project for Flood Protection and Implemented in the Project for Flood Protection
23 Trabek and Drainage Improvement in the Municipality of Phnom Penh (Phase 2 and 3) Improvement
Mechanical screens will be installed in the existing pumping stations in the Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Phnom Penh Capital City
(Phase 4)

24 Tumpun Implemented in the Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Municipality of Phnom Penh (Phase 1) No Proposed Works
25 Tamok West No Proposed Works
26 Prek Thnot South No Proposed Works
27 City Core North Area CCN1 Box culvert and sluiceway will be constructed in the Project for Flood Protection and Drainage Improvement in the Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase New Construction
CCN2 4)
CCN3
CCN4
S1
S2

Source: JICA Study Team

6.2.3 Planning of Drainage Channels and Pipes

Based on the result of run-off, drainage channels and pipes are proposed as summarised in
Table 6.2.3, and general map of each drainage area is shown in Fig.6.2.2 to Fig.6.2.8.
Table 6.2.3 Summary of Proposed Drainage Channels and Pipes
Drainage Channel
Name of R5
Drainage Area Discharge Proposed Works Facilities Length Slope /Box Culvert
Facilities
No. Area 5-Year Width Depth
Rainfall Int. Q5 b h
km2 mm/hr m3/s m 1/I m m
1 Boeung Thom BT 15.39 20.0 26.00 New Construction Open Cannal 3,670 2,000 15.7 3.6
2 PPSEZ PZ 10.56 19.9 25.00 Improvement Open Cannal 7,010 1,500 14.4 3.6
3 NR.3 West NW 27.36 13.7 35.00 Improvement Open Cannal 7,150 2,300 19.0 3.6
4 Krang Pongro KP 11.01 29.3 27.00 Improvement Open Cannal 4,490 1,500 15.0 3.6
5 Pratek Lang Channel PLC 7.17 26.8 17.00 Improvement Open Cannal 5,720 1,500 13.0 3.6
6&8 Cheung Aek Channel & CAC1 10.26 24.2 28.00 Improvement Open Cannal 7,730 3,000 22.0 3.6
Tuol Pongro
CAC2 2.02 36.4 9.00 Improvement Open Cannal 1,840 1,300 18.0 2.6
TP1 11.68 29.7 45.00 Improvement Open Cannal 2,220 2,200 38.0 2.6
TP2 33.00 23.8 101.00 New Construction Open Cannal 2,560 2,000 53.0 2.6
TP3 45.28 19.5 113.00 New Construction Open Cannal 670 3,400 47.9 3.6
PCT New Construction Pumping Station
RCT New Construction Regulation Pond
7 Preaek Thloeng PT 8.53 31.1 23.00 New Construction Open Cannal 2,740 1,800 14.6 3.6
9 Pochentong East PE1 7.57 32.4 28.00 New Construction Box Culvert 1,010 2,600 W3.5m x H2.5m x 3 Barrel
PE2 18.23 24.8 51.00 New Construction Box Culvert 2,880 2,600 W4m x H3m x 4 Barrel
PPE New Construction Pumping Station
RPE New Construction Regulation Pond
PE3 2,660 1,800 20.0
10 Tamok East TE1 22.52 13.9 35.00 New Construction Open Cannal 12,460 3,000 24.5 3.6
TE2 25.46 12.8 46.00 New Construction Open Cannal 2,320 2,000 57.0 3.6
TE3 26.60 11.2 58.00 New Construction Open Cannal 1,840 2,000 102.0 3.6
11 Hanoi West HW1 59.46 16.8 109.00 Improvement Open Cannal 5,290 2,700 42.4 3.6
HW2 12.20 33.8 45.00 Improvement Open Cannal 2,560 2,000 21.0 3.6
HW3 New Construction RCP 450 φ1800 x 3 Barrel
PHW New Construction Pumping Station
RHW New Construction Regulation Pond
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng PP1 24.98 19.2 83.00 Improvement Open Cannal 5,460 3,200 36.8 3.6
PP2 49.59 16.0 137.00 Improvement Open Cannal 3,100 3,600 56.8 3.6
PP3 New Construction RCP 310 φ2000 x 4 Barrel
PPP New Construction Pumping Station
OV 15.04 19.6 51.00 Improvement Open Cannal 7,310 2,800 24.9 3.6
RPP New Construction Regulation Pond
14 Preaek Maot Kandol PMK 22.43 24.0 65.00 Improvement Open Cannal 7,000 3,000 30.1 3.6
Chbar Ampov West CAW1 1.22 42.4 12.00 Improvement Open Cannal 2,140 1,900 13.0 3.6
15 CAW2 1.36 41.3 13.00 Improvement Open Cannal 1,040 2,100 13.0 3.6
CAW3 2.19 47.7 24.00 Improvement Open Cannal 1,460 1,900 14.9 3.6
PCAW New Construction Pumping Station
16 Chbar Ampov Middle CAM 25.63 27.3 84.00 New Construction Open Cannal 5,300 3,200 37.2 3.6
PCAM New Construction Pumping Station
RCAM New Construction Regulation Pond
17 Chbar Ampov East
18 Satellite City SC 4.63 34.9 18.00 New Construction Open Cannal 4,780 1,700 13.0 3.6
Cheung Aek Lake CAL1 27.45 19.9 66.00 Improvement Open Cannal 4,230 3,000 30.5 3.6
19
CAL2 4.05 45.5 23.00 Improvement Open Cannal 2,820 1,500 18.5 3.6
20 Bak Khaeng No Proposed Works
21 Chroy Changvar CC 2.10 38.3 9.00 New Construction Box Culvert 1,650 1,000 W3.0m x H3.0m
22 Wat Phnom North Drainage Pipe Under Ground Reservoir Pumping Station, will be constructed in Phase IV.
23 Trabek Implemented in Phase II & Phase III but mechanical screen will be installed in existing Pumping Station.
24 Tumpun Implemented in Phase I.
25 Tamok West No Proposed Works
26 Prek Thnot South No Proposed Works
27 City Core North Area Box Culvert and Sluiceway will be constructed in Phase IV.
Source ：JICA Study Team

6-16
6-17

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.2 General Map of Drainage Improvement (1/7) (Boeung Thom/PPSEZ/NR. 3 West Drainage
Areas)
6-18

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.3 General Map of Drainage Improvement (2/7) (Krang Pongro/Pratek Lang Channel/Tuol
Pongro Drainage Areas)
6-19

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.4 General Map of Drainage Improvement (3/7) (Preaek Thloeng/Chbar Ampov Middle/Cheung
Aek Lake Drainage Areas)
6-20

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.5 General Map of Drainage Improvement (4/7) (Pochentong East Drainage Area)
6-21

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.6 General Map of Drainage Improvement (5/7) (Tamok East/Hanoi West Drainage Areas)
6-22

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.7 General Map of Drainage Improvement (6/7) (Poung Peay/O’veng/Satellite City/Chroy
Changvar/City Core North Area Drainage Areas)
6-23

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 6.2.8 General Map of Drainage Improvement (7/7) (Preaek Moat Kandol Drainage Area)
6.2.4 Planning of Pumping Stations

(1) Calculation of Discharge Capacities (Model of River Channel Analysis:

One-Dimensional Unsteady Flow Model)

Flow conditions of channels flowing through low-lying areas are influenced by confluences of
branch channels, as well as retention in the channels. Therefore, evaluation of fluctuation of water
level and flow rate are necessary to estimate capacities of pumping stations. As shown in
Table 6.2.4, one-dimensional unsteady flow model, which can estimate water level and flow rate
for each section, is employed.
Table 6.2.4 Summary of River Channel Analysis Model
Item Contents
Hydraulic model One dimensional unsteady flow model (Dynamic wave model: DHI-MIKE11 HD
model)
Drainage network of Determination of drainage network for each alternative
planning
Cross sections Set according to planned cross sections
Structure Drainage facilities (Pumping station)
Flow hydrograph Hydrograph is drawn using synthetic rational formulas, obtaining the same peak
flow by shortening or lengthening the graph.
Source ：JICA Study Team

(2) Calculation Results of Capacity for Pumping Station

Pumping stations are necessary to pump water from low-land area to the higher outlet located at
the downstream end. Discharge capacity of pumping stations is computed employing
one-dimensional unsteady flow to consider retention in channels and not to allow water overflow.
The results are summarised in Table 6.2.5.
Table 6.2.5 Summary of Capacity of Pumping Station
Catchment Catchment Name Capacity Head Land Land
No. (m3/s) (m) requirement owner
(m2)
6&8 Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol Pongro 5 5 2,500 Private
9 Pochentong East 40 5 6,000 Public
11 Hanoi West 35 5 5,500 Public
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng 40 5 6,000 Public
15 Chbar Ampov West 1 4 500 Public
16 Chbar Ampov Middle 10 6 4,000 Private
Source：JICA Study Team

(3) Plan of Regulation Pond

Required area and volume of regulation pond at the end of each drainage area, is summarized in
Table 6.2.6.
Table 6.2.6 Summary of Regulation Pond
Drainage Area No. Name of Drainage Area Area (m2) Volume (m3) Land owner
6&8 Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol Pongro 700,000 700,000 Private
9 Pochentong East 25,000 100,000 Public
11 Hanoi West 500,000 600,000 Private/public
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng 175,000 350,000 Private/public
16 Chbar Ampov Middle 160,000 160,000 Private
Source：JICA Study Team

6-24
6.3 Maintenance Plan

6.3.1 Drainage Channels and Pipes

(1) Agency in Charge

DSD/DPWT is responsible for operation and maintenance of the drainage channels and pipes as
before.

(2) Methodology for Maintenance

The items of maintenance of channels and pipes are shown in Table 6.3.1.
Table 6.3.1 Items of Maintenance for Drainage Channels and Pipes
Details Frequency
Periodical inspection  Check of amount of sedimentation Once at least
 Check of damage of road above pipelines every 2 to 3 years
 Check of damage (crack, penetration of root of street trees)
 Check of infiltration of groundwater
 Check of illegal connection
 Check of status of manhole covers
 Record of inspection works
Cleaning/dredging  Implementation of clearing or dredging according to results Frequency is set
of inspection (Cleaning works is implemented using high based on volume of
pressure cleaning equipment) sedimentation
Repair/rehabilitation  Repair and rehabilitation of damaged part
Source：JICA Study Team

6.3.2 Pumping Station and Regulation Pond

(1) Agency in Charge

DSD/DPWT is responsible for operation and maintenance of the drainage channels and pipes as
before.

(2) Methodology for Maintenance

Required maintenance items for pumping station and regulation ponds are summarized in
Table 6.3.2.
Table 6.3.2 Items of Maintenance for Pumping Station and Regulation Pond
Details Frequency
Pumping station  Check of current and voltage Everyday
 Check of abnormal noise/vibration Everyday
 Check of leakage/ float switch Once a month
 Check of main body Once every 3 months
 Check of lubricating oil Once every 3 months (Oil change:
once a year)
 Overhaul Once every 2 years
Regulation pond  Removal of trash/sludge in the pond At least once before the rainy
season
Source: JICA Study Team

6-25
6.4 Review of Organization and Legal Framework of Drainage Management
PPCC has established its drainage facilities in an orderly fashion, in accordance with the details
stipulated in the “M/P 1999.” In the PPCC, in the areas in need of large-scale and systematic work or
urgent measures, ADB’s financial assistance, Japanese Grant Aid project (Phases 1-3), and other
programs helped the progress of the City’s drainage issues. As a result, in PPCC, especially in the
existing suburban areas, drainage pipes, channels, manholes, and pumping stations were installed
and/or established, eliminating flood damage. The total length of drainage pipes installed is growing
year after year.
However, in PPCC, in addition to its topographical constraint making natural drainage impossible in
many areas, disorderly reclamation of lakes, swamps, and wetlands, has reduced regulating capacity of
stormwater. Further, the rapid urbanization in recent years in the areas surrounding the existing urban
zones and large-scale housing developments without sufficient drainage infrastructures, are another
issues. As one cause of those is the lack of or poor regulation, standards and legal framework
concerning establishment of drainage infrastructures, review of legal framework concerning
stormwater drainage shall be considered.

6.4.1 Review of Organization

As discussed above, stormwater drainage infrastructure has been established in an orderly manner,
thanks to donations and aids, and, the DSD, a division within DPWT responsible for maintenance and
management of the infrastructure, has been organized and their staffing and assets have been
improved. However, the capacity of the DSD is still insufficient to manage the drainage infrastructure
that covers the entire PPCC, proposed in this M/P. It is essential to develop their capacities for
formulating drainage infrastructure plan and stipulating design standards, in relation to the large-scale
development rapidly growing in recent years, as well as to clarify the scope of responsibilities.
Against this backdrop, with the aim to clarify which posts are responsible for the drainage
infrastructure establishment/improvement in relation to the large-scale development and development
of their abilities, it is proposed that the current DSD Technical Section is divided into two sections to
be responsible for respective tasks as presented in Fig. 6.4.1. (For information on current
organizational structure, refer to Fig. 2.6.5, DSD Organizational Chart.)

<Tasks responsible for>

・ Survey and plan formulation concerning drainage plan
・ Development of design standards, work standards, management
Section 1 manual, etc., concerning drainage infrastructure
・ Supervision of drainage facilities and validation of design
documents in application
・ Supervision of large-scale developers
・ Coordination with relevant agencies (DLMUPC, DOE, and DOP)

<Tasks responsible for>

・ Supervision and oversight of works related to drainage
facilities/infrastructure
Section 2
・ Formulation of plan of maintenance and management or plan of
repair of drainage pipes and channels
・ Maintenance and management of machinery, equipment, etc., for
repair of channels and pipes

Fig. 6.4.1 Proposal to divide DSD Technical Section

6-26
To develop their capacities to carry out work, drainage technicians shall be invited (for 2-3 year term)
to enhance available technician workforce. In addition, young staff shall be sent to developed
countries, to be trained to become key persons. Those key persons shall be the core of the technicians
in DSD. At the same time, the internal training system based on such activities as OJT, shall be
established in DSD.

6.4.2 Review of Legal Framework

In Cambodia, if a Master Plan for land-use has not been provided, a large-scale residential
development or similar project requires MLMUPC’s approval, in accordance with Royal Decree
No. 86 concerning construction permits. Although Article 31 of the decree provides rules for sewer
connection, there is no clear indication of specific permission criteria for stormwater drainage
facilities/infrastructure.
To control stormwater drainage for large-scale residential development or similar projects, it is
necessary to clarify such matters as the legal criteria and regulation of improving or developing
infrastructure in the areas, and obligations and responsibilities of the developer.
As described in Subsection 4.4.2, to realize sound development in the City and a good urban
environment in the development area in accordance with the Urban Development Master Plan and
relevant laws, a developer engaging in large-scale residential development needs to provide a part of
infrastructures such as roads, public facilities, public facilities, waste facilities, water supply facilities,
drainage facilities, disaster management and safety facilities, and/or planned green zones, as a
condition of development permit, after negotiation with relevant offices (such as MIH, DOE,
DLMUPC, DPWT, and WMD). Therefore, the Study Team proposes that the relevant offices
collaborate to develop the standards of development, criteria, and guidelines on
improving/establishing the infrastructure in the development area, so as to determine a unified process
of notifying the development area, condition of permit, obligations of developer, and administrative
procedures necessary for development and to ensure thorough supervision of the developers.
In principle, the criteria/standards of development permit closely related to drainage management shall
enforce the developers to install drainage facilities to discharge stormwater from entire development
area into public water. However, if the drainage capacity of the downstream of the area is not enough,
it is proposed that the developer can create regulating reservoir within the development area to
temporarily retain stormwater.

6.5 Phased Implementation Plan

Phased implementation plan is formulated in consideration with the following preconditions.
(1) Each drainage area is classified into 4 groups by priority.
(2) Four groups are formulated, based on EIRR.
(3) Drainage area located in large-scale development area is categorized into lower group regardless
of EIRR, because drainage facilities in the area should be constructed by the developer and
progress of the development is unclear.
Based on the above preconditions, priority of each drainage area is set as shown in Table 6.5.1.

6-27
 Table 6.5.1 Priority of Implementation for Each Drainage Area
Con-
Population Population Resettle- Land O&M
Sub-Catchment Area struction EIRR Ranking
No. in 2035 density ment expropriation
cost Priority Remarks
Area cost of EIRR
(person) (km2) person/km2 (house) (m2) M USD M USD %
Subsequently implemented
1 Boeung Thom 19,900 15.39 1,293 0 71,932 5.8 0.028 2.7 14 3 after improvement of PPSEZ
2 PPSEZ 13,800 10.56 1,307 5 10,655 10.9 0.047 10.2 7 2 EIRR 10~15
3 NR.3 West 43,100 27.36 1,575 36 54,340 14.4 0.070 2.3 15 4 EIRR<5
4 Krang Pongro 8,100 11.01 736 2 7,184 8.6 0.032 0.0 18 4 EIRR<5
5 Pratek Lang Channel 7,400 7.17 1,032 10 6,864 9.0 0.032 -3.3 19 4 EIRR<5
Cheung Aek Channel &
6&8 122,800 49.44 2,484 81 879,943 48.2 0.384 12.9 5 2 EIRR 10~15
Tuol Pongro
Commercial area developed in
7 Preaek Thloeng 29,600 8.53 3,470 2 51,293 3.7 0.019 0.3 17 4 medium- or long-term
9 Pochentong East 183,300 18.23 10,055 40 26,915 89.6 1.172 13.3 4 2 EIRR 10~15
10 Tamok East 63,100 26.60 2,372 154 549,374 53.6 0.318 -9.2 20 4 EIRR<5
11 Hanoi West 287,200 59.46 4,830 28 512,273 62.6 1.167 5.7 10 3 EIRR 5~10
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng 359,000 43.79 8,198 90 182,507 82.0 1.409 10.4 6 2 EIRR 10~15
Commercial area developed in
14 Preaek Maot Kandol 78,100 22.43 3,482 47 20,160 24.8 0.122 3.6 12 4 medium- or long-term
15 Chbar Ampov West 67,600 4.77 14,172 179 0 8.8 0.087 8.4 8 3 EIRR 5~10
Commercial area developed in
16 Chbar Ampov Middle 118,200 25.63 4,612 17 355,040 27.0 0.423 0.6 16 4 medium- or long-term
17 Chbar Ampov East 61,700 34.32 1,798 - - - - 0 - -
18 Satellite City 42,000 4.63 9,071 4 83,363 9.4 0.027 5.4 11 3 EIRR 5~10
Commercial area developed in
19 Cheung Aek Lake 212,800 23.28 9,141 152 50,760 18.3 0.091 3.6 13 4 medium- or long-term
20 Bak Khaeng 10,200 18.74 544 - - - - - - -
21 Chroy Changvar 23,700 2.10 11,286 42 0 6.1 0.002 6.3 9 3 EIRR 5~10
22 Wat Phomn North 20,000 1.17 17,094 0 0 10.3 0.007 15.8 2 1 EIRR>15
23 Trabek 372,400 13.01 28,624 0 0 2.5 0.040 16.1 1 1 EIRR>15
24 Tumpun 471,800 14.49 32,560 - - - - - - -
25 Tamok West 121,700 133.85 909 - - - - - - -
26 Prek Thnot South 54,500 39.97 1,364 - - - - - - -
27 City Core North Area 74,800 5.80 12,897 18 0 9.1 0.002 15.2 3 1 EIRR>15
TOTAL 2,866,800 621.73 907 2,862,603 504.7 5.479

Note 1) Priority is firstly classified into the following 4 groups based on the EIRR
Group 1: Drainage area with EIRR of 15% or more
Group 2: Drainage area with EIRR of 10% to less than 15%
Group 3: Drainage area with EIRR of 5% to less than 10%
Group 4: Drainage area with EIRR of less than 5%
Note 2) Boeung Thom Drainage is grouped under Group 3, because the area should be improved immediately after PPSEZ
area to optimize the improvement works done in the areas.
Source: JICA Study Team

Phased implementation plan based on the order of priority in Table 6.5.1 is shown in Table 6.5.2.
Construction period in the implementation plan is established based on the similar projects
implemented in PPCC.

6-28
 Table 6.5.2 Phased Implementation Plan
Sub-Catchment Year
No.
Area 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040

1 BT Boeung Thom

2 PZ PPSEZ

3 NW NR.3 West

4 KP Krang Pongro

Pratek Lang
5 PLC
Channel

6 CAC Cheung Aek

& & Channel & Tuol
8 TP Pongro

7 PT Preaek Thloeng

9 PE Pochentong East

10 TE Tamok East

11 HW Hanoi West

12 PP
Poung Peay &
& &
O'veng
13 OV

Preaek Maot
14 PMK
Kandol

Chbar Ampov
15 CAW
West

Chbar Ampov
16 CAM
Middle

Chbar Ampov
17 CAE
East

18 SC Satellite City

Cheung Aek
19 CAL
Lake

20 BK Bak Khaeng

21 CC Chroy Changvar

Wat Phnom
22 WPN
North

23 TRA Trabek

24 TUM Tumpun

25 TW Tamok West

26 PTS Prek Thnot South

City Core North

27 CCN
Area

28 TP

Feasibility Study/Financial Preparation/Designing Study Construction

Source: JICA Study Team

6-29
6.6 Cost Estimate

6.6.1 Construction Cost (Project Cost)

The Cost Estimate is summarized in Table 6.6.1. As shown in the table, total project cost is
estimated at 662.2 million USD, of which construction cost amounts to 506.5 million USD. In
addition, cost disbursement schedule for drainage management projects is shown in Tables 6.6.2
and 6.6.3.
Table 6.6.1 Summary of Cost Estimate
Unit: million USD
Item Foreign Local Total
currency currency
I. Construction Cost 86.4 420.1 506.5
1) Boeung Thom 0.1 5.7 5.8
2) PPSEZ 0.1 10.8 10.9
3) NR.3 West 0.2 14.2 14.4
4) Krang Pongro 0.1 8.5 8.6
5) Pratek Lang Channel 0.1 8.9 9.0
6&8) Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol Pongro 3.6 44.6 48.2
7) Preaek Thloeng 0.0 3.7 3.7
9) Pochentong East 31.4 58.2 89.6
10) Tamok East 0.6 53.0 53.6
11) Hanoi West 19.1 43.5 62.6
12&13) Poung Peay & O’veng 16.8 65.2 82.0
14) Preaek Maot Kandol 0.3 24.5 24.8
15) Chbar Ampov West 0.7 8.1 8.8
16) Chbar Ampov Middle 6.4 20.6 27.0
17) Chbar Ampov East
18) Satellite City 0.1 9.3 9.4
19) Cheung Aek Lake 0.2 18.1 18.3
20) Bak Khaeng
21) Chroy Changvar 0.7 5.4 6.1
22) Wat Phnom North 1.1 9.2 10.3
23) Trabek 2.0 0.5 2.5
24) Tumpun
25) Tamok West
26) Prek Thnot South
27) City Core North Area 1.2 7.9 9.1
28) Drainage Pump Vehicle1) 1.6 0.2 1.8
II. Administration cost 0.0 25.3 25.3
III. Engineering cost 40.5 10.1 50.6
IV. Physical contingency 6.3 21.5 27.8
V. Land expropriation/ compensation cost 0.0 52.0 52.0
Grand total (I+II+III+IV+V) 133.2 529.0 662.2
Note 1) Drainage pump vehicle is a component not included in specific drainage area but covers all drainage
areas for emergency. Similarly, Tables 6.6.2 and 6.6.3 are formulated including procurement of drainage
pump vehicle.
Source: JICA Study Team

6-30
 Table 6.6.2 Cost Disbursement Schedule (Drainage Management 1/2)

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
Items
F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total
A. Cost covered by loan （I+II+III） 8.2 19.2 27.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.5 63.0 103.5 7.9 47.9 55.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.6 70.1 94.7 1.1 11.6 12.7 1.5 8.7 10.2 26.6 52.8 79.4 0.6 6.1 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 10.0 10.9
　I．Construction cost 5.9 17.8 23.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.4 58.2 89.6 3.6 44.6 48.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.8 65.2 82.0 0.1 10.8 10.9 0.7 8.1 8.8 19.8 48.9 68.7 0.1 5.7 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 9.3 9.4
　 1 Boeung Thom 0.1 5.7 5.8
2 PPSEZ 0.1 10.8 10.9
3 NR.3 West
4 Krang Pongro
5 Pratek Lang Channel
6&8 Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol thloeng 3.6 44.6 48.2
7 Preaek Thloeng
9 Pochentong East 31.4 58.2 89.6
10 Tamok East
11 Hanoi West 19.1 43.5 62.6
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng 16.8 65.2 82.0
14 Preaek Maot Kandol
15 Chbar Ampov West 0.7 8.1 8.8
16 Chbar Ampov Center
17 Chbar Ampov East
6-31

18 Satellite City 0.1 9.3 9.4

19 Cheung Aek Lake
20 Bak Khaeng
21 Chroy Changvar 0.7 5.4 6.1
22 Wat Phnom North 1.1 9.2 10.3
23 Trabek 2.0 0.5 2.5
24 Tumpun
25 Tamok West
26 Prek Thnot South
27 City Core North Area 1.2 7.9 9.1
28 Drainage Pump Vehicle 1.6 0.2 1.8
　II．Consultant fee 1.9 0.5 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 1.8 9.0 3.9 1.0 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 1.6 8.2 0.9 0.2 1.1 0.7 0.2 0.9 5.5 1.4 6.9 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.2 1.0
　III．Phisical contingency 0.4 0.9 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 3.0 4.9 0.4 2.3 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 3.3 4.5 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.5 1.3 2.5 3.8 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5
B. Cost not covered by loan（IV＋V） 0.0 2.2 2.2 0.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 4.5 4.5 0.0 6.0 6.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 9.7 9.7 0.0 4.1 4.1 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 3.4 3.4 0.0 7.1 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.8
　IV．Administration cost 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 4.5 0.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 4.1 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.0 3.4 3.4 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5
　V．Land expropriation/compensation cost 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 14.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 9.7 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.3
Total （A＋B） 8.2 21.4 29.6 0.0 14.0 14.0 40.5 67.5 108.0 7.9 53.9 61.8 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 9.7 9.7 24.6 74.2 98.8 1.1 13.6 14.7 1.5 9.1 10.6 26.6 56.2 82.8 0.6 13.2 13.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 11.8 12.7

Source: JICA Study Team

 Table 6.6.3 Cost Disbursement Schedule (Drainage Management 2/2)
2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 合計
Items
F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total F.C. L.C. Total
A. Cost covered by loan （I+II+III） 9.0 22.2 31.2 2.2 24.4 26.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.0 4.3 2.6 28.9 31.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 26.3 28.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 56.8 61.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 133.2 451.7 584.9
　I．Construction cost 6.4 20.6 27.0 0.3 22.7 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 0.3 27.0 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 24.5 24.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 53.0 53.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 86.4 420.1 506.5
　 1 Boeung Thom 0.1 5.7 5.8
2 PPSEZ 0.1 10.8 10.9
3 NR.3 West 0.2 14.2 14.4 0.2 14.2 14.4
4 Krang Pongro 0.1 8.5 8.6 0.1 8.5 8.6
5 Pratek Lang Channel 0.1 8.9 9.0 0.1 8.9 9.0
6&8 Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol thloeng 3.6 44.6 48.2
7 Preaek Thloeng 0.0 3.7 3.7 0.0 3.7 3.7
9 Pochentong East 31.4 58.2 89.6
10 Tamok East 0.6 53.0 53.6 0.6 53.0 53.6
11 Hanoi West 19.1 43.5 62.6
12&13 Poung Peay & O'veng 16.8 65.2 82.0
14 Preaek Maot Kandol 0.3 24.5 24.8 0.3 24.5 24.8
15 Chbar Ampov West 0.7 8.1 8.8
6-32

16 Chbar Ampov Center 6.4 20.6 27.0 6.4 20.6 27.0

17 Chbar Ampov East
18 Satellite City 0.1 9.3 9.4
19 Cheung Aek Lake 0.2 18.1 18.3 0.2 18.1 18.3
20 Bak Khaeng
21 Chroy Changvar 0.7 5.4 6.1
22 Wat Phnom North 1.1 9.2 10.3
23 Trabek 2.0 0.5 2.5
24 Tumpun
25 Tamok West
26 Prek Thnot South
27 City Core North Area 1.2 7.9 9.1
28 Drainage Pump Vehicle 1.6 0.2 1.8
　II．Consultant fee 2.2 0.5 2.7 1.8 0.5 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.4 2.2 0.5 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.5 2.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 1.1 5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.5 10.1 50.6
　III．Phisical contingency 0.4 1.1 1.5 0.1 1.2 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.4 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.3 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.7 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 21.5 27.8
B. Cost not covered by loan（IV＋V） 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 4.3 4.3 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 10.7 10.7 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 77.3 77.3
　IV．Administration cost 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.3 25.3
　V．Land expropriation/compensation cost 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 3.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 10.5 10.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 52.0 52.0
Total （A＋B） 9.0 23.6 32.6 2.2 28.7 30.9 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 14.7 15.0 2.6 30.3 32.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 27.5 29.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 59.5 64.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 133.2 529.0 662.2

Source: JICA Study Team

6.6.2 Operation and Maintenance Cost

Annual operation and maintenance cost is summarized in Table 6.6.4. According to the table,
annual operation and maintenance cost is estimated at 5.5 million USD for the target year 2040.
Table 6.6.4 Summary of O&M Cost
Unit: million USD
Item Annual O&M cost
1) Boeung Thom 0.028
2) PPSEZ 0.047
3) NR.3 West 0.070
4) Krang Pongro 0.032
5) Pratek Lang Channel 0.032
6&8) Cheung Aek Channel & Tuol Pongro 0.384
7) Preaek Thloeng 0.019
9) Pochentong East 1.172
10) Tamok East 0.318
11) Hanoi West 1.167
12&13) Poung Peay & O’veng 1.409
14) Preaek Maot Kandol 0.122
15) Chbar Ampov West 0.087
16) Chbar Ampov Middle 0.423
17) Chbar Ampov East
18) Satellite City 0.027
19) Cheung Aek Lake 0.091
20) Bak Khaeng
21) Chroy Changvar 0.002
22) Wat Phnom North 0.007
23) Trabek 0.040
24) Tumpun
25) Tamok West
26) Prek Thnot South
27) City Core North Area 0.002
28) Drainage Pump Vehicle 0.022
Annual total O&M cost 5.501
Note 1) Drainage pump vehicle is a component not included in specific
drainage area but covers all drainage areas for emergency.
Source: JICA Study Team

6-33
6.7 Economic Analysis

6.7.1 Preconditions for Economic Analysis

The investment and operational costs are clarified in Section 6.6. However, the investment costs are
converted to border prices similarly to the economic analysis on sewerage project.
The benefits of drainage project as follows are different from those of the sewerage project. The first
benefit of the drainage project is avoidance of inundation. The inundation damage can be estimated
based on the Social Survey result and Table 6.7.1.
Table 6.7.1 Average House Damages per Household in Three Districts
Relative water depth with House Damages in USD per Calculated recovery year Remarks
average year water level household = Damage/Recovery
(m) cost per year
0 129.34 0.7 Actual damages in 2006
0.5 162.307 0.9 Potential damages
1 193.20 1.0 Potential damages
1.5 327.23 1.8 Potential damages
2 468.73 2.5 Potential damages
Source: Badri Bhakta Shrestha et al., International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management (ICHARM),
“Assessment of Flood Hazards and Vulnerability in Cambodian Floodplain,” 2013

However, the table above is derived from the rural areas in Cambodia. Therefore, the data above
should be converted to damage in Phnom Penh using household income statistics. In addition, it is
supposed that the damages are proportional to household income change year by year. Based on the
frequency and depth of inundation in the Social Survey and Table 6.7.1, the damages per household in
Phnom Penh are estimated as shown in Table 6.7.2.
Table 6.7.2 Average House Damage per Household in Phnom Penh
Depth Damage Frequency Share Damage (USD/HH)
(cm) (USD/HH) 1/ year 1/ year 1/ year
(Including 2/ year (Including 2/ year (Including 2/ year
heavy rain) heavy rain) heavy rain)
A B C D E F = A×D G = A×2E Total (2016)
10 45.48 8 4 0.3265306 0.119403 14.85 10.86 225
25 58.03 7.5 19.5 0.3061224 0.582090 17.77 67.57 ↑ increase
50 87.12 8 7 0.3265306 0.208955 28.45 36.41 Total (2006)
75 130.78 1 2 0.04081633 0.059702 5.34 15.62 F×B/(B+C)
100 196.34 0 1 0 0.029851 0 11.72 +G×C/(B+C)
Total 24.5 33.5 100: Total sample number 66.41 142.18 110
HH: Household
Source: JICA Study Team

The inundation damage per household and covered population (converted to household number with
household size, 5) is multiplied and inundation avoidance benefits can be estimated. The drainage
project aims to avoid inundations of once in five years and so it seems that the above Social Survey
results can be avoided.
The second benefit is avoidance of inundation impacts as work damage such as “Cannot go out for
business” or “Cannot open for business” in the Social Survey. Cross-analysis of frequency, duration
and troubles in the Social Survey results is shown in Table 6.7.3. Multiplying the annual total below,
household income (converted to day from month) and covered population (converted to household
number with household size, 5), the lost production (avoided production loss) can be estimated.

6-34
 Table 6.7.3 Production Loss Recovery in Phnom Penh
Frequency Share
Duration (day) 1/year (Including 2/year 1/year 1/year (Including Annual Total
heavy rain) heavy rain)
0.0625 4 1 0.0139 0.00463 0.02315
0.09375 7 7 0.0365 0.04861 0.13368
0.3125 3 12 0.0521 0.27778 0.60764
0.625 3 0 0.1389 0.27778
0.7 1 0 0.05185 0.10370
1 4 3 0.222 0.2222 0.66667
18 27 0.325 0.74398 0.57625
Source: JICA Study Team

Similarly, large-scale factories production losses are obtained multiplying employee number and the
average household income damage above.
The third benefit is khans’ cost reduction of discharging water after inundation and the fourth benefit
is medical cost reduction of the diseases caused by inundation.

6.7.2 EIRR

Based on the preconditions in Subsection 6.7.1, EIRR for the proposed drainage management M/P is
estimated at 12.6%, as shown in Table 6.7.4.
Table 6.7.4 EIRR of Drainage Management Projects
Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Inundation benefit 0 0 2.73 2.88 3.05 3.23 18.47
Production 0 0 0.32 0.34 0.36 0.38 1.65
Pumping Diesel Oil 0 0 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
Medical Care 0 0 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.015
Operational Costs 0 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 1.05
Investment 28.47 0.00 107.18 71.88 0.00 0.00 101.4
Cash flow -28.47 0.00 -104.18 -68.73 3.34 3.54 -82.32
Year 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Inundation benefit 19.65 40.42 42.97 59.46 63.38 71.81 76.45
Production 1.76 3.32 3.53 4.95 5.29 6.08 6.48
Pumping Diesel Oil 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03
Medical Care 0.016 0.023 0.024 0.036 0.038 0.046 0.049
Operational Costs 1.24 1.63 1.63 3.14 3.17 4.36 4.37
Investment 13.456 12.34 90.036 8.076 0 12.7 37.7
Cash flow 6.74 29.81 -45.12 53.25 65.56 60.93 40.89
Year 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036
Inundation benefit 81.33 86.95 94.38 102.24 109.00 116.05 126.03
Production 6.90 7.40 8.11 8.78 9.39 10.01 10.90
Pumping Diesel Oil 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Medical Care 0.053 0.057 0.064 0.070 0.075 0.080 0.088
Operational Costs 4.38 4.61 4.83 4.92 4.94 4.94 5.02
Investment 29.012 0 5.288 35.296 0 30.604 0
Cash flow 54.92 89.83 92.45 70.90 113.55 90.62 132.04
Year 2037 2038 2039 2040 Total
Inundation benefit 134.20 142.79 155.06 165.64 1,718.14
Production 11.63 12.39 13.57 14.52 148.05
Pumping Diesel Oil 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.47
Medical Care 0.094 0.101 0.113 0.122 1.18
Operational Costs 5.06 5.12 5.18 5.29 75.14
Investment 74.096 0 0 0 657.6
Cash flow 66.79 150.18 163.58 175.02 EIRR 12.6%
Residual value - - - - 303.1
Source: JICA Study Team

6-35
6.8 Selection of Priority Project for Pre-Feasibility Study
As shown in Table 6.8.1, construction of drainage facilities in Pochentong East Drainage Area
(Drainage Area No. 9) is selected as the priority projects for Pre-F/S, because implementation plan for
(i) construction of drainage facilities in Wat Phnom North Area (Drainage Area No.22) and City Core
North Area (Drainage Area No.27) and (ii) installation of mechanical screen at 4 locations in Trabek
Drainage Area (Drainage Area No.23), is to be formulated in “The Project for Flood Control and
Drainage Improvement in Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase 4)”.
Table 6.8.1 Priority Project for Pre-Feasibility Study
Facilities Specification/capacity
Construction of drainage Drainage channel  Box culvert: 5,220 m
facilities in Pochentong East  Inlet channel: 480 m
Drainage Area (Drainage Area  Rehabilitation of existing channel: 2,660 m
No. 9) Pumping station  1 location: Capacity 40 m3/s
Regulation pond  1 location :Area required: 25,000 m2
Source: JICA Study Team

6-36
 CHAPTER 7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL
CONSIDERATION OF MASTER PLAN

7.1 Consideration at the Master Plan Formulation

To evaluate the M/P and select the priority projects, items to be considered and the evaluation methods
are to be proposed by applying the SEA approach in accordance with both Cambodian environmental
related laws and regulations and JICA’s Guidelines for Environmental and Social Consideration.

7.2 Alternative Comparison

Alternatives of the sewage management M/P and the drainage management M/P are compared in
Chapter 4 and Chapter 6. Potential impacts associated with the projects of the M/P are as described
below.

(1) Environmental Consideration for the Sewage Management Master Plan

In accordance with the M/P alternatives, potential impacts of the plans are as presented in Table
7.2.1. The ratings are not based on absolute comparison but on relative comparison.
Table 7.2.1 Comparison of Alternatives of Sewage Management M/P (April 2015)
Alternative 2
Alternative 1 (Combined development plan Alternative 3
Alternative (2 STPs, one each for Cheung on-site and off-site treatment; (Without Project)
Aek and Tamok Lakes) 1 STP at Cheung Aek area and No project implementation
On-site treatment in Tamok area)
Rating --- -- Not applicable
Natural Seasonal wetland area is to be Seasonal wetland area is to be Water quality in Tamok Lake
Environ- transformed into the STP transformed into the STP area in and Cheng Aek Lake will
ment construction in Cheung Aek Lake Cheung Aek Lake. decline due to the decline of
and Tamok Lake. natural purification function;
Large scale of land reclamation Biological diversity of the
may be required for the Tamok lakes may remain poor;
Lake due to the depth of water at Habitat for wildlife may be
Environmental & Social Consideration

the candidate site in the lake, reduced;

which is adjacent to the existing Further eutrophication of the
pumping station. lakes in the capital may
progress.
Social Farmers and fisheries who are Farmers and fisheries who are Water pollution affects
Environ- working at the lakes are to be working at the lakes are to be quality of crops from the
ment affected in both lake areas. affected in Cheung Aek Lake wetland which may cause
area. some health problems to
consumers.
Further eutrophication of the
lakes may reduce crop yield
in future.
Pollution Water quality at Cheung Aek Water quality of Cheung Aek Poor water quality of the
Lake is expected to be improved
Lake area is expected to be wetland may cause health
through STP operation. improved through STP operation. problems to farmers and
Water quality flowing into Tamok
Water quality of Tamok Lake area fishermen who work at the
Lake area is expected to be is expected to be improved lakes.
improved through STP operation.
through applying on-site
treatment and strict control over
them.
Legend: ---: high negative impact; --: less negative impact)
Source: JICA Study Team

7-1
 (2) Environmental Consideration for the Drainage Management Master Plan

In accordance with the M/P alternatives, potential impacts of the plans were identified in Table
7.2.2. The ratings are not based on absolute comparison but on relative comparison.
Table 7.2.2 Comparison of Alternatives of Drainage Management M/P (April 2015)
Alternative Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Without Project
(27 Sub-catchment areas) (25 Sub-catchment areas)
Regulation pond: 5 locations Regulation pond: 5 locations -
(North 3 and South 2 locations) (North 2 and South 3 locations)
Pumping station: 6 locations Pumping station: 6 locations
(North 3 and South 3 locations) (North 2 and South 4 locations)
Channel (Total length): 123 km Channel (Total length): 123 km
New open canal: 33 km New open canal: 36 km
Canal improvement: 77 km Canal improvement: 78 km
New box culvert: 12 km New box culvert: 8 km
RCP: 1 km RCP: 1 km
Rating --- -- -
Natural <Improvement of Drainage <Improvement of Drainage Inundation problems in
Environment Pipes/Canals/Channels> Pipes/Canals/Channels> the city area will
・ As a positive impact, flood ・ Same as the left. continue.
problems are expected to be
reduced with project
implementation.

< Construction /Extension of < Construction /Extension of

Drainage Pumping Station> Drainage Pumping Station>
・ No significant negative impact is ・ Same as the left.
expected.
・ As a positive impact, tentative ・ Same as the left.
habitat for wildlife may be
provided even in the city area by
cleaning currently polluted
ditches.
Environmental & Social Consideration

・ Reduction of wetland in the city ・ Same as the left.

area may be facilitated by
improvement of drainage.

<Creation of Regulation Pond <Creation of Regulation Pond

/Retarding basin> /Retarding basin>
・ As a positive impact, tentative ・ Same as the left.
habitat for wildlife may be
provided even in the city area by
creating ponds.
Social <Improvement of Drainage <Improvement of Drainage Current inundation
Environment Pipes/Canals/Channels> Pipes/Canals/Channels> problems will continue/
・ Some residents are living close to ・ Some residents are living close to worsen.
existing ditches in city area. existing ditches in city area. Those are:
Approximately 1,000 structures Approximately 900 structures are ・ Drainage
are located at surrounding area of located at surrounding area of improvement in
existing ditch which requires existing ditch which requires the northern area
improvement. At the improvement. At the of Wat Phnom and
improvement of the existing improvement of the existing most parts of Tuol
ditches, impact to the residents ditches, impact to the residents Kok District will
should be avoided and minimized should be avoided and minimized lag behind other
based on survey for the existing based on survey for the existing area.
ditched at planning stage. ditched at planning stage. ・ Due to land
・ In the installation work of the ・ Same as the left. development and
new pipe under the existing road, reclamation, the
road traffic hazards such as traffic area of Trabek
jam and accidents may occur. regulation pond
has been reduced

7-2
Alternative Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Without Project
< Construction /Extension of < Construction /Extension of and capacity of
Drainage Pumping Station> Drainage Pumping Station> Trabek regulation
・ Construction of new pumping ・ Same as the left. pond has been
station may require additional decreased and
land acquisition (sometimes cause inundation
resettlement are required) in city problems. Present
area. capacity of
・ Expansion of the existing ・ Same as the left. existing Trabek
pumping station may affect the pumping station is
residents nearby without any insufficient.
consideration. ・ Explosive land
・ Land values in the area may ・ Same as the left. developments
increase. reduce water body
・ In the rainy season, easy traffic in ・ Same as the left. area and cause
inundated road will be obtained. other inundation
damage in near
< Preservation/Extension/Creation of <Preservation/Extension/Creation of future.
Regulation Pond /Retarding basin> Regulation Pond /Retarding basin> ・ In the area
・ Additional land and ・ Same as the left. between inner ring
resettlement/land acquisition dike and outer
associated with expansion of ring dike
existing pond, should be avoided (especially in
and minimized based on detailed drastically
survey at the planning stage. urbanized area),
・ Without adequate instruction to ・ Same as the left. drainage facilities
the users, the regulation pond will are not properly
be a source of pollution, as with installed and it
current condition of water ditches increases
in city area. inundation
problem (in the
area at eastern
side of
Pochentong
airport, Chroy
Changvar area and
Chbar Ampov
area.

7-3
 Alternative Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Without Project
Pollution <Improvement of Drainage <Improvement of Drainage Water pollution at the
Pipes/Canals/Channels> Pipes/Canals/Channels> current existing ditches
・ Stormwater will be treated ・ Same as the left. may cause some health
separately from the sewage problems such as
applying separate sewer system, infectious diseases.
and water flow in the capital will
be purified.
・ At the construction stage, ・ Same as the left.
disturbance of river bottom
sediment due to bed excavation
and foundation works, offensive
odor may be generated in limited
area and period.

< Construction /Extension of < Construction /Extension of

Drainage Pumping Station> Drainage Pumping Station>
・ During construction, water ・ Same as the left.
turbidity in the area will be
increased.
・ During construction, water ・ Same as the left.
leakage from the old system to
the new system may temporarily
contaminate the area

<Preservation/Extension/Creation of <Preservation/Extension/Creation of
Regulation Pond /Retarding basin> Regulation Pond /Retarding basin>
・ In operating facilities, people ・ Same as the left.
dispose garbage in the sites
without routine maintenance of
the system/adequate education to
the people.
Legend: ---: high negative impact; --: less negative impact)
Source: JICA Study Team

7-4
 CHAPTER 8 PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY ON PRIORITY
PROJECT OF SEWAGE MANAGEMENT

8.1 Components of Priority Project

The Preparatory Project is a component for Pre-F/S, as shown in Table 8.1.1. Design flow of the
Preparatory Project is summarised in Table 8.1.2.
Table 8.1.1 Component of Priority Project (Preparatory Project) in Sewage Management
Component Contents
Sewer Pipe Diameter : φ500 mm
Length :about 1,300 m
STP Capacity:5,000 m3/dairy maximum
Source : JICA Study Team

Table 8.1.2 Design Flow

Design flow for Preparatory (Reference)
Project Design flow for ultimate stage
(m3/day) (m3/day)
Daily average 4,600 260,000
Daily maximum 5,000 282,000
Hourly maximum 7,300 407,000
Source : JICA Study Team

8.2 Preliminary Design of Sewer Line

8.2.1 Design Flow

Sewer is designed based on hourly maximum of 7,300 m3/day, which is equivalent to 0.085 m3/s.

8.2.2 Study on Sewage Interception and Conveyance

(1) Location of Sewage Interception

In the Preparatory Project, sewer is planned from discharging point of Tumpun Pumping Station
to STP. The sewerage facilities will be constructed inside of the Cheung Aek Lake.
Location of sewage interception is to be determined not to disturb drainage stream discharged
from Tumpun Pumping Station and to ensure intercepting design sewage volume. Therefore, the
location of sewage interception will be determined at around 80 m distance from the discharge
point of the Tumpun Pumping Station, considering annual variability of water level in the Lake.

(2) Conveyance of Sewage to STP

Sewage is conveyed to the STP by gravity considering cost effectiveness and easiness of
maintenance.

(3) Route of Sewer

Proposed sewer will be installed at the southern side of the access road to STP, considering future
expansion of the sewer system.

8-1
(4) Sewer and Manhole

(a) Sewer

(i) Selection of Pipe Material

Two options for pipe material are considered. One is concrete pipe (CP) and another is hard
vinyl chloride pipe (uPVC). Based on the comparison, uPVC will not applicable
considering covering depth. As a result, concrete pipe is applied to this project.

(ii) Diameter

Diameter of the sewer is 500 mm based on design sewage volume and hydraulic
calculation.

(5) Preliminary Design of Sewer Line

Fig. 8.2.1 shows plan and sectional drawing of the sewer line in the Preparatory Project. The
length of the sewer is 1,271 m and depth of the sewer line ranges from 6.7 m to 9.2 m.

8-2
8-3

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.2.1 Plan and Profile of Sewer Line in the Preparatory Project
8.3 Preliminary Design of Sewage Treatment Plant

8.3.1 Construction Site

Construction site of STP is located in Cheung Aek Lake, as shown in Fig. 8.3.1. The area reclaimed
for STP is 3.5 ha for the Preparatory Project.

Source: JICA Study Team, based on Google Earth

Fig. 8.3.1 Proposed STP Site in Cheung Aek Lake

8.3.2 Treatment Facilities

(1) Processing Flow

Treatment flow is shown in Fig. 8.3.2. Applied wastewater treatment method is CASP
(Conventional Activated Sludge Process).

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.3.2 Processing Flow of STP

8-4
(2) Specification of Treatment Facilities

Specification of treatment facilities for Preparatory Project are summarised in Table 8.3.1.
Table 8.3.1 Specification of Treatment Facilities (Preparatory Project)
Name Specification Remarks
Grit chamber/pumping station Grit chamber: W0.80 m×L2.6 m×2 ponds Generator for pumping
Pumping station: 3.0 m3/min×3 units (1stand-by) station will be equipped.
Primary sedimentation tank W3.6 m× L15.0 m× D3.0 m×2 ponds
Reactor W7.55 m× L34.0 m× D6.0 m×1 reactor
Final Sedimentaton tank W3.6 m× L35.0 m×D3.5 m×2 ponds
Chroline contact chamber W3.0 m× L10.0 m× D4.0 m
Blower 20 m3/min×2 units (1 stand-by) Roots blower type
Gravity thickener Diameter3.0 m×1 unit
Mechanical thickener 10 m3/hr×2 units (1 stand-by) Belt type filteing
Mechanical dewatering 110 kg-DS/hr×2 units (1 stand-by) High-efficiency screw press
equipment type
Others Administration building and landscaping pond
Source: JICA Study Team

Based on the specifications in the above table, general layout plan of the STP and wastewater
treatment facilities are illustrated in Figs. 8.3.3 and 8.3.4. As a reference, specification of STP in
ultimate stage is shown in Table 8.3.2 and also transition from Preparatory Project to ultimate
stage (final stage of construction of STP) is illustrated in Fig. 8.3.5.
Table 8.3.2 Specification of Treatment Facilities (Ultimate Stage)
Item Specification Remark
Grit chamber/pumping station Grit chamber: W3.00 m×L13.0 m×6 ponds
Pumping station: 50.0 m3/min×7units (1stand-by)
Primary sedimentation tank W3.6 m×L15.0 m×D3.0 m×8 ponds×2 lanes
W5.3 m×L 15.0 m×D3.0 m×8 ponds×8 lanes
Reactor W7.55 m×L 34.0 m×D6.0 m×4 ponds×2 lanes
W10.95 m×L 34.0 m×D6.0 m×4 ponds×8 lanes
Final Sedimentaton tank W3.6 m×L 35.0 m×D3.5 m×8 ponds×2 lanes
W5.3 m×L 35.0 m×D3.5 m×2 ponds×8 lanes
Chroline contact chamber W30.0 m×L 50.0 m×D4.0 m×1 pond
Blower 90 m3/min×2 units Turbo blower
180 m3/min×5 units (1 stand-by)
Gravity thickener Diameter 11.0 m×4 units
Mechanical thickener 50 m3/hr×8 units (1 stand-by) Belt type filteing
Mechanical dewatering 840 kg-DS/hr×9 units(1 stand-by) High-efficiency screw
equipment press type
Others Administration building, generator, power receiving
station and landscaping pond
Source: JICA Study Team

8-5
8-6

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.3.3 General Layout Plan of STP in the Preparatory Project

8-7

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.3.4 General Layout Plan of Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the Preparatory Project
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.3.5 Transition of STP from Preparatory Project Stage to Ultimate Stage

8-8
8.4 Implementation Framework
Implementation framework is established to construct and operate STP with capacity of 5,000 m3/day,
as shown in Fig. 8.4.1. The framework consists of Project Management Unit (PMU), Project
Implementation Unit (PIU), Project Implementation Support Consultant (PISC) and so on.
During After Responsible
Construction Construction for O&M
Project MPWT
Project
Implementation and Ministries
Management
Support concerned DPWT
Unit
Consultant (MEF, MOE, MOI and
(PISC)
(PMU) so on)

Project PPCC
(Urbanization
Implementation
Division, Financial DSD
Unit (PIU) Division, WMD,
(established in DSD) Khans and so on)

Stakeholders
Contractor
(including group of local residents)
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.4.1 Implementation Framework for Preparatory Project

8.5 Cost Estimate

Project cost is summarized in Table 8.5.1. The cost consists of construction cost, engineering cost,
administration cost, and physical contingency, is computed with exchange rate of 1USD=122.85JPY
and 1Riel=0.030JPY. Summary of O&M cost is shown in Table 8.5.2.
Table 8.5.1 Project Cost (Preparatory Project)
Unit: million USD
Item Local Foreign Total
currency currency
I. Construction cost ((1)+(2)+(3)) 14.01 5.76 19.77
(1) STP 10.27 5.27 15.54
1) Civil 8.69 0.52 9.21
Reclamation (3.5 ha) 3.37 0.04 3.41
Structure 5.32 0.48 5.80
2) Architecture 1.31 0.04 1.35
3) Mechanical work 0.23 4.39 4.62
4) Electrical work 0.04 0.32 0.36
(2) Sewer 1.97 0.32 2.29
(3) Access road 1.77 0.17 1.94
II. Engineering cost 0.44 1.75 2.19
III. Administration cost 0.99 0 0.99
IV. Physical contingency 0.72 0.38 1.10
Total (I+II+III+IV) 16.16 7.89 24.05
Source: JICA Study Team

8-9
 Table 8.5.2 Summary of O&M Cost (Preparatory Project)
Unit: USD
Item Total Remark
I. Treatment facilities ((1)+(2)+(3)+(4)) 407,119
(1) Personnel expenses 126,240 Based on estimated number of 5 regular, including
chief of STP and 15 contracted employees
(2) Electricity 175,262 Based on electrical requirements of machinery
(3) Chemicals 72,380 sodium hypochlorite and high-polymer coagulant
(4) Repair and spare parts 23,820 1% of construction cost of machinery
(5) Sludge disposal 9,417 Transportation of sludge
II. Sewer 5,621
III. Access road 2,700
Annul O&M total cost (I+II+III) 415,440
Source : JICA Study Team

8.6 Implementation Schedule

Implementation schedule is formulated as shown in Fig.8.6.1 in consideration with setting-up of
duration of designing, selection of contractor and construction works.
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Feasibility Study

Detailed Design

Selection of Contractor

Construction Works
　　Earth and foundation works
　　Pipe installation
　　STP civil/architecture
　　STP mechanical/electrical works
　　Construction of access road
　　Training for operation

Non-structural Measures
　 Formulation of related legal system
　 Institutional set-up

Commencement of Operation

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 8.6.1 Implementation Schedule for Preparatory Project

8.7 Financial Analysis

In the financial analysis for the Preparatory Project, at first, profit and loss in the case of 10% of
Preparatory Project beneficiaries’ water supply use revenues is estimated. In this case, the sewerage
use revenues are very small and cannot cover the operation costs. Then, the case result including
Phase 1 beneficiaries’ revenues is estimated. In this case, sum of profit minus loss from the start to
2040 is positive.

8.8 Economic Analysis

The method in this Preparatory Project is similar to that described in Section 4.8. Concerning the
benefits of sewerage users, the method is similar and it is an issue whether the objects are only
sewerage users or the total final planned area population from the start because they can get water
pollution improvement benefits. In particular, wastewater to be treated in this Preparatory Project is
partially taken in from the total wastewater so that it means all the water supply users relate to this

8-10
Preparatory Project wastewater (of course, the total wastewater is not treated, though). At first, the
beneficiaries are supposed to be population responding to the treated wastewater volume and EIRR is
estimated. The result is positive, 0.57%, but very low. Next, the case result supposing Phase 1 users as
objects is estimated. In this case, users’ benefits become larger responding to Phase 1 users number
and EIRR becomes 25.22%, sufficiently high. It will be higher if the beneficiaries are supposed to be
the Cheung Aek system area users, but it is not necessary because the Phase 1 users case is sufficient.

8.9 Project Evaluation

Project evaluation based on the result of Pre-F/S is summarized as follows.

 Preparatory Project contributes accumulation of knowledge and experience for full-operation

of the STP because all processes (elements) of STP are equipped in the facilities installed in
the Preparatory Project.

 In parallel to implementation of the Preparatory Project, establishment of institutional and

legal framework is required to smoothly implement sewerage projects proposed for year 2020
or after.

 Preparatory Project beneficiaries’ water supply use revenues (10% of water supply fee)
cannot cover operation costs for the Preparatory Project. On the other hand, Phase 1
beneficiaries’ revenues (10% of water supply fee) can cover the cost. In other words, sum of
profit minus loss from the start to 2040 is positive.

 EIRR of 0.47% is expected depending on population (19,000 people in 2035) equivalent to

5,000 m3/day, whereas the EIRR of 25.22% is expected depending on entire population of
Phase 1 area in Cheung Aek treatment area (238,000 people in 2035).

 Resettlement is not required to implement the Preparatory Project because the STP is
constructed in Cheung Aek Lake. Reclaimed area for Preparatory Project stage and ultimate
stage are 3.5 ha and 16.3 ha, which are equivalent to 0.67% and 3.1% of total area of the
Cheung Aek Lake (520 ha).

 Negative impacts such as traffic interruption, noise, dust and vibration would be unavoidable
during the construction stage. However, the impacts could be minimized by introducing
counter measures such as setting up of diversion road, sprinkling water and selecting
low-noise and/or low-vibration type construction equipment as far as practicable.

 PPCC needs to secure land to dispose dewatered sludge from STP.

8-11
 CHAPTER 9PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY ON PRIORITY PROJECT
OF DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT

9.1 Components of Priority Project

Priority project in drainage management is improvement in Pochentong East Drainage Area. The
location of the Pochentong East Drainage Area is shown in Figs. 9.1.1 and 9.1.2. Components in
Pochentong East Drainage Area are subdivided into two sub-components, as shown in Table 9.1.1.

Pochentong East Drainage Area

(Drainage Area No.9)

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 9.1.1 Location of Pochentong East Drainage Area

Table 9.1.1 Components in Pochentong East Drainage Area
No. Type Specification
Sub-component 1
1-1 Construction of box culvert W3.5 m×H2.5 m, L=1,010 m
1-2 Construction of box culvert W4.0 m×H3.0 m×2 lanes, L=1,080 m
1-3 Construction of inlet channel W20 m, L=480 m
1-4 Rehabilitation of Moul drainage channel W20 m, L=2,660 m
1-5 Construction of regulation pond Volume: 100,000 m3
1-6 Construction of Pochentong East pumping station Capacity:20 m3/s
1-7 Construction of sluiceway crossing road W4.0 m×H3.0 m×2 lanes, L=10 m
Sub-component 2
2-1 Construction of box culvert W 3.5 m×H2.5 m×2 lanes, L=1,370 m
2-2 Construction of box culvert W 4.0 m×H3.0 m×2 lanes, L=1,760 m
2-3 Augmentation of Pochentong East pumping station Capacity:20 m3/s
Note : W=Width, H=Height, L=Length
Source: JICA Study Team

9-1
Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 9.1.2 Location of Components in Pochentong East Drainage Area

9.2 Framework of Implementation

Similar framework in DPWT established in the past drainage projects under the supports from donors,
is applied to this priority project, because the implementation framework was functional.

9.3 Cost Estimation

Project cost is summarized in Table 9.3.1. The cost consists of construction cost, engineering cost,
administration cost, physical contingency and land expropriation/compensation cost, and is computed
with exchange rate of 1USD=122.85JPY and 1Riel=0.030JPY. Summary of O&M cost is shown in
Table 9.3.2.
Table 9.3.1 Project Cost
Unit: million USD
Item Local Foreign Total
currency currency
I. Construction cost ((1)+(2)) 51.93 23.89 75.82
(1) Sub-component 1 23.77 11.36 35.13
1) Construction of box culvert (W3.5 m×H2.5 m) 5.63 0.71 6.34
2) Construction of box culvert (W4.0m×H3.0m×2) 9.39 1.18 10.57
3) Construction of inlet channel (480m) 0.81 0.01 0.82
4) Rehabilitation of drainage channel (2,660m) 4.50 0.06 4.56
5) Construction of regulation pond 0.13 0.01 0.14
6) Construction of pumping station 2.08 9.24 11.32
7) Construction of sluiceway crossing road 1.23 0.15 1.38
(2) Sub-component 2 28.16 12.53 40.69
1) Construction of box culvert (W3.5m×H2.5m×2) 10.79 1.36 12.15
2) Construction of box culvert (W4.0m×H3.0m×2) 15.29 1.93 17.22
3) Augmentation of pumping station 2.08 9.24 11.32
II. Engineering cost 1.68 6.71 8.39
III. Administration cost 3.79 0 3.79

9-2
 Item Local Foreign Total
currency currency
IV. Physical contingency 2.68 1.53 4.21
V. Land expropriation / compensation cost 0 0.80 0.80
Total (I+II+III+IV+V) 60.08 32.93 93.01
Source: JICA Study Team

Table 9.3.2 Summary of O&M Cost

Unit: million USD
Item Total Remark
I. Pumping station 1.19
Electricity 0.97 Based on actual unit cost of existing pumping
station
Personnel expenses 0.04 Based on estimated number of 5 regular and 15
contracted employee
Fuel 0.12 Based on actual unit cost of existing pumping
station
Repair and spare parts 0.05 1% of construction cost of machine and electronic
facilities
Others 0.01 Cleaning and miscellaneous expense
II. Drainage channel and regulation 0.04
pond
Annul O&M total cost (I+II) 1.23
Source: JICA Study Team

9.4 Implementation Schedule

Implementation schedule is formulated as shown in Fig. 9.4.1 in consideration of setting-up of
duration of designing, selection of contractor and construction works.

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Feasibility Study

Detailed Design

Selection of Contractor

Construction Works
Sub-component 1
　　　　Construction of box culvert
　　　　Rehabilitation of drainage channel
　　　　Construction of regulation pond
　　　　Construction of sluiceway crossing road
　　　　Construction of pumping station

Sub-component 2
　　　　Construction of box culvert
　　　　Construction of pumping station

Commencement of Operation

Source: JICA Study Team

Fig. 9.4.1 Implementation Schedule

9.5 Economic Analysis

EIRR is computed considering relation between benefit (mitigation of inundation damage) and
investment and O&M cost. The EIRR is estimated at 12.72%

9-3
9.6 Project Evaluation
Project evaluation based on the result of Pre-F/S is summarized as follows.

 Inundation damage to households, commercial and industrial activities, traffic interruption

associated with access to Phnom Penh International Airport, are reduced by implementing the
project in Pochentong East Drainage Area.

 EIRR of 12.72%, obtained by improvement in Pochentong East Drainage Area (Drainage

Area No.9), shows significant economic effect.

 Resettlement of 40 households is anticipated to implement the project for Pochentong East

Drainage Area. Detailed survey in the succeeding Feasibility Study will therefore be required
to minimize the number of resettlement.

 Negative impacts such as traffic interruption, noise, dust and vibration would be unavoidable
during the construction stage. However, the impacts could be minimized by introducing
counter measures such as setting up of diversion road, sprinkling water and selecting
low-noise and/or low-vibration type construction equipment as far as practicable.

9-4
 CHAPTER 10 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL
CONSIDERATION OF PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY

10.1 Impact Assessment for the Pre-Feasibility Study

Assistance on the preparation of the IEE level information was provided during the study period.

10.1.1 Impact Assessment for Preparatory Project in Sewage Management

Anticipated impacts associated with the implementation of the Preparatory Project in Sewage
Management are compiled in Table 10.1.1.
Table 10.1.1 Preliminary Scoping for Preparatory Project in Sewage Management
(December 2015)
Rating
Classifi
No. Items Reason and Description
cation

Planning phase, Construction phase: C-

Some residents are living closely to the Discharge point of the existing Tumpun
Station where new construction of Sewage interception facility and Sewer to the
Plant are currently proposed. Also, There are dense population at existing road of
No.371 (Outer ring-road). At the improvement of the existing ditches, impact to
the residents should be avoid/minimized based on the adequate survey for the
existing ditched at planning.
Involuntary Planning phase, Construction phase: There are some raised floor structures in
1
resettlement the Cheung Aek lake and people may be living permanently or temporally. At the
planning phase, impact to those residents should be avoided/minimized
resettlement and area of land acquisition. The Cheung Aek lake which is planned
for the STP site has been used for agriculture and domestic fishery. Some
resident may lose their income source partly/fully. Although the land of the
Cheung Aek is declared as Public State Land, adequate socio-economic survey
may require for establishing compensation /rehabilitation schemes in accordance
with the JICA environmental and social guideline (2010).
Planning phase, Construction phase: Residents who live in Cheung Aek lake C-
may include some poor household, are likely affected to be loose a part of their
Local economy
income source of the farm land. In the case, supporting programs such as
2 such as employment
resettlement plan and rehabilitation plan will be required.
and livelihood, etc.
Construction phase: The project is expected to increase working opportunity for
construction.
Planning phase, Construction phase: Associated to the STP construction, water B-
bodies/wet land where local people are using for agriculture and fishery will be
Land use and
reclaimed. Although the scale of the Plants area might not be large, less than
3 utilization of local
approximately 16ha, at the planning, the impact should be avoided/ minimized.
resources
In case of no fully avoidable, adequate compensation should be made based on
the socio economic survey in the area.
Planning phase, Construction phase: In the capital, there are many land B-
development project that the wetland is diverted to the other land use such as
residential area and industrial area. Associated to those developments, there are
4 Social institutions
some problems in flood and land use. Adequate information disclosure by
Social Environment

implementation agency to project affected peoples (PAPs) may require at actual

planning phase.
Construction phase: In the Preparatory Project, the pipe systems are planned to B-
Existing social
be installed under the access roads which connects Road 371 and proposed STP.
5 infrastructures and
Associated to the construction work of access road, the disturbance to the road
services
traffic movement in Road 371 is likely to occur.

10-1
 Rating
Classifi
No. Items Reason and Description
cation

Planning phase, Construction phase: For selection of the STP, special B-

consideration should be taken to poor households in the wetland. There are some
The poor,
raised floor structures in the Cheung Aek Lake where people may be living
6 indigenous and
permanently or temporarily. Also, some residents are living closely to existing
ethnic people
ditches in the city area. At the planning phase, impact to these residents should be
avoided or resettlement and area of land acquisition should be minimized.
Planning phase: Although the project aims to contribute environmental B-
improvement of the capital, there are possible residents in the STP candidate area
Misdistribution of
7 and along the existing ditches. The impact to residents should be avoided
benefit and damage
/minimized considering current situation based on adequate survey at the
planning phase.
Historical and D
8 No particular impact is identified at the moment.
cultural heritage
Planning phase: In the capital city, there are many land development project B-
where the wetland is diverted to the other land use such as residential area and
industrial area. Associated to those developments, there are some problems in
Local conflict of
9 flood and land use. The city government is currently proceeding on the
interests
identification of land rights.
Some conflicts on land right is will likely to occur if private land is involved in
the project area.
Water usage or D
10 water rights and No particular impact is identified at the moment.
rights of common
Operation phase: The project is expected to improve the current water A+
11 Sanitation
environment situation in the capital.
Hazardous (risk) A+
Operation phase: After operation, the risk of the water related diseases is
12 infectious diseases
expected to be reduced, through the sewerage projects and drainage projects.
such as HIV/AIDS
Construction phase: At the construction phase, some topographical B-
Topography and
13 modification will occur associated with land filling in the current water area in
geographic features
Cheung Aek Lake.
Operation phase: At the operation of the STP, water quality in groundwater is A+
14 Groundwater
expected to improve.
For the construction of the STP, land reclamation for access road and STP in the B-
15 Soil erosion Cheung Aek Lake is planned. Adequate countermeasures to protect the slope
surface should be considered.
Planning phase, Construction phase: The project will be planned based on the B-
current water flow and no large hydrological change is associated. No particular
Natural Environment

impact is identified at the moment.

16 Hydrological situation
The land reclamation in the Cheung Aek Lake will possibly affect current water
flow in the area depending on the site selection and adequate hydrological study
may be needed to avoid flood damage.
17 Coastal zone There is no coastal zone in project area. D
Planning phase, Construction phase: There is no legally protected area such as B-/B+
National Park, Wildlife preserve, Protected scenic view area and Multi-purpose
area in the project area.
Habitats for the common fish species in the Cheung Aek Lake will likely be
Fauna and flora and affected to be decreased. The Cheung Aek Lake is functioning as natural waste
18
biodiversity water treatment lagoon for the capital city and water quality will highly
deteriorate. Due to decline of the water quality, poor biodiversity can only be
remained and the impacts are limited.
Operation phase: Through the water quality improvement by the project,
biological value of the lakes may increase.
19 Meteorology No particular impact is identified at the moment. D

10-2
 Rating
Classifi
No. Items Reason and Description
cation

20 Landscape No particular impact is identified at the moment. D

The candidate site for the STP is contributing as natural pond in the watershed D
21 Global warming
and the excessive global warming gas emission is not expected.
Construction phase: During construction, the suspended dust and gas emission B-
22 Air pollution
from the construction machinery are expected even if limited in area.
Water Construction phase: Associated with earthwork in the construction turbidity of B-
23
contamination the water will be likely increased at the downstream even if temporarily.
Construction phase: During construction, accidental spillage of toxic chemicals B-
24 Soil contamination
such as fuel, lubricants, and solvents may cause soil contamination.
Construction phase: During construction and operation, the project owner B-
25 Waste
should implement adequate handling of waste (including sludge).
Construction phase: During construction period noise pollution will be generated B-
26 Noise and vibration
by vehicles, stone crushing, generators etc.
Ground modification and ground water exploitation are not planned and no any D
27 Ground subsidence
impact is anticipated.
Pollution

Construction phase: During construction work, associated with the disturbance B-/B+
of the river bottom sediment such as bed excavation and foundation works,
offensive odour may be generated.
Operation phase: Associated with the operation of STP, offensive odour at
28 Offensive odor surrounding area may increase.
The wetlands which are candidate sites for STP, already contribute as actual
waste water treatment lagoons for water purification in the Phnom Penh Capital
City. Odour at the surrounding area of existing ditches and lagoon may be
improved at the operation of STP.
Operation phase: With the operation of the STP, situation of the bottom A+
29 Bottom sediment sedimentation at existing ditches will be improved through separate systems for
sewer and rainwater.
Construction phase: During construction, operation of heavy vehicles and B-
30 Accidents machineries may cause traffic accidents to residents and labours in and around
the proposed project sites.
Rating
A-: Serious impact is expected, if no measure is implemented against the impact.
B-: Some impact is expected, if no measure is implemented against the impact.
C-: Extent of impact is unknown (Examination is needed. Impact may become clear as study progresses.)
D: No impact is expected.
A+: Remarkable effect is expected due to the project implementation itself and environmental improvement caused by the
project.
B+: Some effect is expected due to the project implementation itself and environmental improvement caused by the
project.
Source: JICA Study Team

10.1.2 Impact Assessment for Priority Project in Drainage Management

Anticipated impacts associated with the implementation of the Priority Project in Drainage
Management are compiled in Table 10.1.2.

10-3
 Table 10.1.2 Preliminary Scoping for Priority Project in Drainage Management (December
2015)
Rating
Classifi
No. Items Reason and Description
cation

Planning phase, Construction phase: Some residents are living closely to C-

existing ditches such as Phum Mor Canal at downstream of the catchment
area(Approximately 100 structures are located closely in approximately 1km of
Phum Mor Canal up to the area of bridge on the Road 217). At the improvement
of water flow/drainage in the catchment, impact to the residents in downstream
should be avoided/minimized based on the adequate survey in downstream. To
some extent, the project may require the resettlement of the residents who lives
Involuntary
1 near the existing ditches/canals.
resettlement Planning phase, Construction phase: Construction of box culvert, new
pumping station, and new regulation pond may require additional land
acquisition and sometime associated with resettlement in the city area
(approximately 40 structure is likely relocated in the estimation in the Master
Plan stage).
Expansion of the existing pumping station may affect the residents nearby
without any consideration.
Planning phase, Construction phase: Residents who live in marginal areas C-/B+
such as wetland and ditch side may include some poor households which will
likely be affected and loss a part of their income source or to be resettled/lost the
land. In the case, supporting programs such as resettlement plan and
Local economy rehabilitation plan will be required.
2 such as employment Operation phase: With the operation of the drainage system, flood damage risks
and livelihood, etc. would decrease and the local economy is expected to improve.
At the construction, the project is expected to increase working opportunity for
construction.
Planning phase, Construction phase: During construction, the project would
increase work opportunities.
Land use and B+
Social Environment

Operation phase: With the operation of drainage system, there will be a

3 utilization of local
decrease in flood damage risks and land use is expected to improve.
resources
Planning phase, Construction phase: In the capital city, there are many land B-
development project so that the wetland are converted to other land use such as
residential area and industrial area. Associated to those developments, there will
4 Social institutions
be some problems with flood and land use. Adequate information disclosure by
implementation agency to project-affected people is required at the actual
planning phase.
Construction phase: The drain systems are basically planned to be installed B-/
under existing roads. Associated to the installation works, disturbance to road B+
traffic will likely to occur.
Existing social Planning phase: The proposed site for the box culvert includes some newly
5 infrastructures and improved or planned roads such as Veng Sreng Blvd., Northbridge Street,
services St. Doung Neap II and St. 2004. Adequate coordination with the road
construction plan may be needed.
Operation phase: With the operation of drainage system, traffic movement in
rainy season may be improved.
The poor, Planning phase, Construction phase: Some residents are living closely to C-
6 indigenous and existing ditches in the city area. At the planning phase, impact to those residents
ethnic people should be avoided with minimized resettlement and area of land acquisition.
Misdistribution of D
7 No particular impact is identified at the moment.
benefit and damage
Historical and D
8 No particular impact is identified at the moment.
cultural heritage
Planning phase: In the capital city, there are many land development project that B-
the wetland are converted to the other land uses such as residential area and
industrial area. Associated to these developments, there are some problems with
Local conflict of
9 flood and land use. The city government is currently proceeding with the
interests identification of land rights.
Associated with the above-mentioned land acquisition and resettlement (if
involved), some conflicts on the land right is will likely to occur and need a long

10-4
 Rating
Classifi
No. Items Reason and Description
cation
resolution procedure. Especially in the target area where some box culvert
installations are planned, Veng Sreng Blvd. and Trung Morn Street (North Bridge
Road) are currently being expanded and paved. Frequent resettlement and
setback may generate conflict between the government and the residents.
Water usage or Planning phase: No particular impact is identified at the moment. Some canals B-
in Phnom Penh Capital City are managed by the water resource department for
10 water rights and
the irrigation purpose. For water flow improvement, adequate coordination with
rights of common the irrigation is required.
Operation phase: The project is expected to improve the current water A+
11 Sanitation
environmental situation in the capital.
Hazardous (risk) A+
Operation phase: After operation of the sewerage and drainage projects, the risk
12 infectious diseases
from water related diseases is expected to be reduced.
such as HIV/AIDS
Topography and Construction phase: With the construction, some topographical modification of B-
13
geographic features waterway is expected.
14 Groundwater No particular impact is identified at the moment. D
No large soil erosion is anticipated because the area is generally flat. D
15 Soil erosion
Water way modification,
Natural Environment

Planning, Construction and Operation phase: With new pumping station and B-
16 Hydrological situation
regulation ponds, modification of the water flow may be associated.
17 Coastal zone There is no coastal zone -
Planning phase: D/B+
There are no legally protected area such as national parks, wildlife preserves,
Fauna and flora and protected scenic view areas and multi-purposes areas in the project area. Most
18
biodiversity existing ditches and regulation ponds in the capital are highly polluted for
habitation of wildlife. At the planning phase, the situation may be confirmed in
the survey.
19 Meteorology No particular impact is identified at the moment. -
20 Landscape No particular impact is identified at the moment. D
21 Global warming No particular impact is identified at the moment. D
Construction phase: At the construction, the suspended dust and gas emission B-
22 Air pollution
from the construction machinery is expected to be limited.
Water Construction phase: Associated with earthwork in the construction, turbidity of B-
23
contamination the water will be likely increased at the downstream.
Construction phase: During construction, accidental spillage of toxic chemicals B-
24 Soil contamination
such as fuel, lubricants, and solvents may cause soil contamination.
Construction phase: During construction and operation, the project owner B-
25 Waste
should implement adequate handling of waste (including sludge).
Construction phase: During construction, noise pollution will be generated by the B-
Pollution

26 Noise and vibration

use of vehicles, stone crushing, generators etc.
Ground modification and groundwater exploitation are not planned and no any -
27 Ground subsidence
impact is anticipated.
Construction phase: Associated with disturbance of the river bottom sediment B-
28 Offensive odor due to bed excavation and foundation works in the construction phase, offensive
odour may be generated.
Operation phase: With the operation of existing ditches, the improved water B+
29 Bottom sediment
flow may reduce sedimentation.
Construction phase: During construction, operation of heavy vehicles and B-
30 Accidents machinery may cause traffic accidents to residents and labours in and around the
proposed project sites.
Rating
A-: Serious impact is expected, if no measure is implemented against the impact.
B-: Some impact is expected, if no measure is implemented against the impact.
C-: Extent of impact is unknown (Examination is needed. Impact may become clear as study progresses.)
D: No impact is expected.
A+: Remarkable effect is expected due to the project implementation itself and environmental improvement caused by the project.
B+: Some effect is expected due to the project implementation itself and environmental improvement caused by the project.
Source: JICA Study Team

10-5
 CHAPTER 11 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

11.1 Conclusion

11.1.1 Sewage Management

For sewage management, PPCC is subdivided into three areas (Cheung Aek, Tamok and Other areas)
and the on-site and off-site treatment methods for the target year 2035 are evaluated as structural
measures. As a result, off-site treatment is applied to the Cheung Aek Treatment Area and the Sewage
Treatment Plant (STP) employing the Conventional Activated Sludge Process (CASP) is proposed. On
the other hand, on-site treatment introducing Johkasou is proposed for the Tamok Treatment Area. In
the “Other area”, the installation of septic tank, which is the most popular sanitary device in PPCC, is
recommended, especially in households in which no toilet or pit latrine is equipped, and the
introduction of advanced wastewater facilities such as Johkasou is recommended beyond the target
year.
Due to the lack of institutional and legal provisions in sewage management, the establishment of
institutional and legal framework of sewage management in PPCC is indispensable to commence and
sustainably implement full-scale sewage management, particularly, the construction and operation of
STP. Sewerage and Drainage Advancement Office under the Director of DPWT/PPCC is therefore
proposed in the M/P, with the approach of “Start small and grow big”. After the establishment of the
Advancement Office, phased implementation plan for establishing independent sewage implementing
body, in parallel with human resource development, is proposed.
In parallel with the establishment of institutional and legal framework of sewage management, phased
construction plan is formulated to gradually accumulate experience and knowledge of sewage
management. Based on the phased construction plan, “Preparatory Project”, followed by three phases
of STP construction, is proposed for Cheung Aek Treatment Area. The Preparatory Project is outlined
in the Pre-F/S.
Phased establishment of institutional and legal framework, along with implementation of the
Preparatory Project, will realize the smooth and sustainable implementation of subsequent sewage
projects in PPCC.

11.1.2 Drainage Management

In the drainage management, PPCC is subdivided into 25 catchment areas. Structural measures
consisting of drainage channels, pumping stations and regulation ponds are proposed considering
topographical conditions as well as availability of existing drainage facilities for the target year 2035.
Institutional and implementation framework in drainage management is already established to some
extent through implementation of drainage improvement projects such as “The Project for Flood
Protection and Drainage Improvement Project in Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase 1, 2 and 3)”.
However, strengthening of institutional framework is proposed because the present framework is
insufficient to smoothly implement the number of drainage projects proposed in the M/P to address
rapid urbanization.
Pre-F/S in drainage management is conducted targeting one of the prioritized drainage areas of
Pochentong East, because “The Preparatory Survey on the Project for Flood Protection and Drainage
in the Phnom Penh Capital City (Phase 4) is commenced from end of March 2016, targeting the other
prioritized drainage areas of Wat Phnom Northern Area and Tuol Kok.
After the Phase 4 project, implementation of the project in Pochentong East Drainage Area is
recommendable to mitigate inundation damage recently identified in the newly developed area in
PPCC.

11-1
11.2 Recommendation

11.2.1 Sewage Management

Recommendations for sewage management are enumerated as follows.

 CASP is selected in the M/P and Pre-F/S as the applicable wastewater treatment method for
Cheung Aek STP, for the reason that it is premature to apply the PTF (Pre-Trickling
Filtration) method employed in large-scale STPs. However, re-evaluation of the PTF in the
implementation stage is required based on actual performances in other countries, because the
PTF has the advantage of reducing O&M cost and minimizing land acquisition, and the
introduction of advanced technologies is essential in order to promote “quality infrastructure
investment”.

 Establishment of institutional and legal framework in sewage management is essential to

smoothly implement full-scale construction and operation of sewerage facilities, considering
the current lack of institutional and legal provisions in sewage management in PPCC. In the
establishment of the framework, assistance from donors in collaboration with MPWT is
beneficial.

11.2.2 Drainage Management

Recommendations for drainage management are enumerated as follows.

 A number of small to large-scale development projects are on-going in PPCC. As a result,

swamps and lakes, which have been protecting PPCC from inundation, rapidly disappear.
Therefore, PPCC should impose severe restrictions on the reclamation of swamps and lakes
by land developers in order to prevent inundation and require them to install drainage
facilities in accordance with the drainage management plan in the M/P.

 In PPCC, garbage disposed to drainage channels severely affects function of drainage

channels especially in the rainy season. In order to improve the condition, PPCC should
educate people with such slogans as “Do not dispose garbage to drainage channels”,
“Drainage channel is not garbage box”, and “Disposed garbage in drainage channel leads to
inundation and inconvenience in your daily life” in a repetitive manner.

11-2