D01.03.07 MDCO Dialogue Instrument with YB Dato’ Sri Ramanan Ramakrishnan on Planning Considerations for Low Frequency Noise

Dialogue Series: D01 — Low Frequency Noise During Data Centre Planning Approval
Dialogue Reference: D01.03 — Political and Public Representatives
Record: D01.03.07 — YB Dato’ Sri Ramanan Ramakrishnan
Date Issued: 21 August 2026
Status: Awaiting Response

Reference Research:
→A09.01 — Why Low-Frequency Noise Becomes a Community Conflict
→A09.02 Estimating Low-Frequency Noise from a Typical Data Centre
→A09.03 Low Frequency Noise Effects: What Research Shows
→A09.04 Data Centre Low Frequency Noise in Planning Approval by Local Councils
→A09.07 Community Concerns on Data Centre Development in Malaysia and Lessons Learned
→D01.01 Low Frequency Noise During Data Centre Planning Approval

Dialogue Purpose

This Dialogue Record documents MDCO’s formal engagement with the dialogue partner to seek clarification and views on current planning considerations for low frequency noise (LFN) associated with data centre developments.

MDCO’s Current Understanding:

1. Sections 22(2), 22(3) and 22(5) of Act 172 appear to provide Local Planning Authorities with broad discretion to consider matters necessary for proper planning and impose appropriate planning conditions, including where relevant environmental acoustic considerations such as LFN may arise.
2. Publicly available legislation and guidance reviewed by MDCO did not identify any specific published requirement addressing LFN assessment for data centre developments during the planning approval process.
3. Conventional environmental noise assessment generally relies on overall A-weighted sound levels (dBA), while international acoustic practices indicate that frequency-based analysis may provide additional information where significant low-frequency sources exist.
4. Act 172 appears to provide Local Planning Authorities with flexibility to incorporate appropriate planning conditions where necessary to manage potential environmental impacts associated with approved developments.
5. The rapid growth of data centre developments and advances in acoustic research may require continued consideration of how planning practices and technical guidance address potential LFN-related issues.

Additional Findings from Dialogue Responses

No additional information was available from the dialogue process as of the publication date.

Dialogue Instrument Submitted

Original letter in Malay language:

Ruj. Kami:       MDI-2026-03-07-DSRR
Melalui Emel: ramanan@mohr.gov.my, pusatkhidmatrakyat@sgbuloh.my

21 Ogos 2026

YB Dato’ Sri Ramanan Ramakrishnan
Ahli Parlimen Sungai Buloh (P107)
Menteri Sumber Manusia
Pusat Khidmat Rakyat Parlimen Sungai Buloh
C-46-G, Star Avenue Business Centre
Jalan Zuhal U5/178, Seksyen U5, 40150 Shah Alam
Selangor Darul Ehsan

YB Dato’ Sri,

PER: PERMOHONAN PENJELASAN DAN PANDANGAN BERHUBUNG PERTIMBANGAN PERANCANGAN BAGI BUNYI FREKUENSI RENDAH (LOW FREQUENCY NOISE) DALAM PEMBANGUNAN PUSAT DATA

Dengan segala hormatnya perkara di atas adalah dirujuk.

2. Kami, Malaysia Data Centre Observatory (MDCO) ingin memohon pandangan serta mendapatkan penjelasan berhubung dengan beberapa soalan penting berkaitan dengan pembangunan pusat data. Usaha ini selaras dengan prinsip teras MDCO yang mendukung kesaksamaan capaian maklumat (equal access to information) bagi semua pihak berkepentingan, termasuk melalui usaha mendapatkan, mendokumentasikan dan menyebarluaskan pandangan serta maklumat yang relevan secara seimbang dan telus, demi menyokong pembangunan industri pusat data di Malaysia yang mampan, harmoni, dan berintegriti.
3. MDCO mengambil maklum dan menghargai pendirian YB Dato’ Sri dalam menyuarakan kebimbangan penduduk Kota Damansara berhubung cadangan pembangunan pusat data tersebut, serta penegasan YB Dato’ Sri bahawa pembangunan dan pelaburan adalah penting tetapi perlu dilaksanakan dengan mengambil kira kepentingan dan kebajikan masyarakat setempat. MDCO juga mengambil maklum penekanan YB Dato’ Sri terhadap keperluan libat urus masyarakat, ketelusan dan penilaian menyeluruh terhadap kesan pembangunan berskala besar kepada kawasan sekitar. MDCO selanjutnya mengambil maklum bahawa cadangan pembangunan pusat data di Kota Damansara tersebut telah dihentikan pada masa ini. Penekanan YB Dato’ Sri terhadap keperluan ketelusan ini selaras dengan salah satu prinsip utama MDCO. MDCO berpandangan bahawa ketelusan maklumat bukan sahaja memberi manfaat kepada komuniti setempat, malah turut membantu pelabur, pemaju dan pengendali pusat data serta pihak berkepentingan lain dalam mengenal pasti dan menangani potensi kesan pembangunan secara lebih awal, demi menyokong kemampanan serta perkembangan industri pusat data yang dapat memberi manfaat kepada semua pihak.
4. MDCO juga mengambil maklum tentang isu dan kebimbangan komuniti setempat yang berkaitan dengan pembangunan pusat data di Selangor dan Johor baru-baru ini (Lampiran 1). Di peringkat antarabangsa, kesan operasi pusat data terhadap komuniti berdekatan, termasuk potensi gangguan daripada Bunyi Frekuensi Rendah (LFN), turut muncul sebagai suatu isu yang semakin mendapat perhatian. Dalam konteks ini, MDCO berpandangan bahawa perhatian YB Dato’ Sri terhadap peluang ekonomi, pembangunan infrastruktur dan kepentingan komuniti adalah amat relevan dalam meneliti aspek perancangan serta impak persekitaran yang berkaitan dengan pembangunan pusat data.
5. Mengambil kira perkembangan pembangunan pusat data serta peningkatan jumlah pusat data yang bakal beroperasi sepenuhnya pada masa hadapan, MDCO kini menjalankan kajian terperinci tentang kualiti persekitaran akustik, khususnya Bunyi Frekuensi Rendah (Low Frequency Noise, LFN). Kajian dan kes antarabangsa menunjukkan bahawa LFN yang dikaitkan dengan pengoperasian pusat data telah menimbulkan gangguan kepada komuniti dan, dalam sesetengah kes, membawa kepada pertikaian undang-undang di Amerika Syarikat (Lampiran 2). MDCO juga mengambil maklum bahawa bunyi dan getaran frekuensi rendah yang dihasilkan oleh kelengkapan mekanikal pusat data berpotensi tersebar pada jarak yang agak jauh dan menjejaskan keselesaan komuniti setempat (Lampiran 3 dan 4).
6. Berdasarkan pemahaman semasa MDCO daripada hasil kajian ini, peruntukan sedia ada di bawah Akta Perancangan Bandar dan Desa 1976 (Akta 172) memberikan ruang pertimbangan dan budi bicara kepada Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan (PBT) selaku Pihak Berkuasa Perancang Tempatan (PBPT) untuk menangani aspek alam sekitar yang berkaitan (Lampiran 5). Sehubungan dengan itu, MDCO telah memulakan siri dialog dengan Datuk Bandar dan Yang Dipertua PBT di Johor dan Selangor (Lampiran 6), serta dengan pemaju pusat data, wakil rakyat dan wakil parti politik yang berkaitan. Walau bagaimanapun, berdasarkan semakan maklumat awam dan penerokaan awal melalui siri dialog tersebut, MDCO belum menemukan maklumat terbuka yang menunjukkan bahawa penilaian LFN dipertimbangkan secara khusus pada peringkat Kebenaran Merancang (KM).
7. Sehubungan dengan itu, MDCO amat menghargai sekiranya YB Dato’ Sri, dalam kapasiti sebagai Ahli Dewan Rakyat bagi kawasan Sungai Buloh serta berdasarkan pengalaman YB Dato’ Sri dalam mewakili kepentingan masyarakat setempat, dapat meneliti pemahaman semasa MDCO serta mengemukakan pandangan berhubung dengan soalan-soalan berikut:

7.1 Peruntukan Perundangan di bawah Akta 172

• Pemahaman Semasa MDCO: Hasil kajian MDCO menunjukkan bahawa subseksyen 22(2), 22(3) dan 22(5) Akta 172 memberikan kuasa budi bicara yang luas kepada Pihak Berkuasa Perancang Tempatan (PBPT) untuk mempertimbangkan perkara-perkara yang perlu bagi tujuan perancangan yang sewajarnya, serta mengenakan syarat-syarat Kebenaran Merancang (KM). Walaupun Akta 172 tidak menyebut secara khusus berkenaan LFN, peruntukan sedia ada dilihat cukup terangkum untuk membolehkan pertimbangan akustik alam sekitar diambil kira.
• Permohonan Penjelasan / Pandangan:
  • Adakah YB Dato’ Sri berpandangan bahawa Akta 172 menyediakan kuasa perundangan yang mencukupi untuk membolehkan Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan (PBT) / Pihak Berkuasa Perancang Tempatan (PBPT) mempertimbangkan potensi kesan LFN dalam proses Kebenaran Merancang (KM)?
  • Pada pandangan YB Dato’ Sri, dalam keadaan atau senario bagaimanakah potensi kesan LFN wajar dipertimbangkan oleh pihak PBT/PBPT dalam proses perancangan dan kelulusan pembangunan pusat data?

7.2 Amalan Semasa Penilaian Perancangan

• Pemahaman Semasa MDCO: Berdasarkan perundangan perancangan dan garis panduan sedia ada untuk rujukan awam, MDCO tidak menemukan maklumat terbuka yang menunjukkan bahawa keperluan atau garis panduan khusus berkaitan LFN telah ditetapkan dalam proses KM bagi pembangunan pusat data.
• Permohonan Penjelasan / Pandangan:
• Adakah isu potensi gangguan LFN pernah diutarakan kepada YB Dato’ Sri atau dibincangkan pada peringkat dasar, perancangan atau libat urus berkaitan pembangunan pusat data berskala besar?
• Pada pandangan YB Dato’ Sri, adakah kaedah penilaian perancangan perlu berbeza mengikut skala pembangunan, jarak zon penimbal ke kawasan kediaman, atau keadaan setempat?
• Adakah YB Dato’ Sri melihat keperluan untuk Kerajaan Negeri atau PBT mewujudkan garis panduan teknikal khusus berkaitan LFN bagi mengurangkan risiko konflik antara pembangunan industri dengan kawasan kediaman pada masa hadapan?

7.3 Kaedah Penilaian Teknikal

• Pemahaman Semasa MDCO: Penilaian bunyi alam sekitar secara konvensional lazimnya berasaskan tahap bunyi keseluruhan mengikut pemberat A (A-weighted sound levels, dBA). Walau bagaimanapun, dalam senario yang melibatkan peralatan mekanikal berskala besar yang berpotensi menghasilkan LFN yang ketara, kaedah penilaian terperinci seperti analisis jalur oktaf (octave-band analysis) mungkin diperlukan.
• Permohonan Penjelasan / Pandangan:
  • Adakah YB Dato’ Sri menyokong cadangan supaya kajian akustik khusus atau penilaian ramalan bunyi berkaitan LFN dipertimbangkan bagi permohonan pembangunan pusat data berskala besar yang berhampiran dengan kawasan kediaman?
  • Adakah YB Dato’ Sri berpandangan bahawa maklumat akustik yang relevan bagi peralatan mekanikal utama (cooling tower, chiller, standby generator) wajar didedahkan untuk semakan awam, tertakluk kepada keperluan melindungi maklumat komersial yang sensitif, demi meningkatkan ketelusan?
  • Pada pandangan YB Dato’ Sri, sekiranya LFN dikenal pasti sebagai risiko yang relevan, adakah penilaian akustik dalam laporan Penilaian Kesan Alam Sekitar (EIA) sedia ada memadai, atau wajar dilengkapi dengan mekanisme penilaian dan semakan yang lebih khusus?

7.4 Syarat-Syarat Kebenaran Merancang (KM)

• Pemahaman Semasa MDCO: Akta 172 memberi kuasa kepada Pihak Berkuasa Perancang Tempatan (PBPT) untuk menilai dan mempertimbangkan permohonan kebenaran merancang dengan mengenakan syarat-syarat tambahan yang dianggap wajar, dengan demikian memberikan ruang fleksibiliti untuk menangani risiko dan aspek alam sekitar yang berkaitan.
• Permohonan Penjelasan / Pandangan:
  • Pada pandangan YB Dato’ Sri, adakah PBT/PBPT perlu mempertimbangkan syarat-syarat Kebenaran Merancang (KM) tertentu bagi mengawal potensi kesan LFN, seperti penetapan zon penimbal, kawalan akustik terperinci, atau pemantauan pascapengoperasian?
  • Pada pandangan YB Dato’ Sri, apakah faktor utama yang wajar dipertimbangkan oleh pihak PBT/PBPT dalam menetapkan syarat KM bagi pembangunan pusat data?

7.5 Hala Tuju Amalan Perancangan Masa Hadapan

• Pemahaman Semasa MDCO: Industri pusat data di Malaysia berkembang pesat, manakala pemahaman saintifik dan amalan penilaian berkaitan LFN juga terus berkembang. MDCO mengambil maklum bahawa amalan perancangan akan terus berkembang sejajar dengan pengalaman industri dan perkembangan garis panduan teknikal.
• Permohonan Penjelasan / Pandangan:
  • Adakah YB Dato’ Sri berpandangan bahawa kerangka kawal selia dan tatacara perancangan sedia ada di peringkat negeri dan daerah sudah memadai, atau terdapat keperluan untuk penambahbaikan termasuk pewujudan garis panduan teknikal khusus berkaitan LFN bagi melindungi komuniti?
  • Adakah YB Dato’ Sri sedia maklum tentang, atau mempunyai pandangan berhubung, sebarang inisiatif, jawatankuasa atau kajian di peringkat Kerajaan Negeri, Dewan Negeri, Kerajaan Persekutuan atau Parlimen Malaysia yang sedang meneliti isu LFN dan impak alam sekitar berkaitan dengan pembangunan pusat data?

8. MDCO berhasrat untuk mendapatkan perspektif YB Dato’ Sri bagi memastikan penerbitan laporan kajian MDCO mengambil kira pandangan berkaitan pembangunan ekonomi serta kepentingan komuniti setempat secara saksama. Instrumen Dialog MDCO (MDCO Dialogue Instrument, MDI) ini serta maklum balas yang diterima akan didokumentasikan secara telus dalam siri laporan kajian MDCO. Bagi membolehkan pandangan YB Dato’ Sri dipertimbangkan dalam siri laporan ini, MDCO amat mengalu-alukan sebarang ulasan rasmi dalam tempoh 14 hari dari tarikh surat ini, sebelum dapatan kajian dimuktamadkan untuk penerbitan. Sekiranya maklum balas diterima selepas tempoh tersebut, MDCO tetap akan mengambil kira pandangan berkenaan dalam kemas kini laporan pada masa hadapan.
9. Kerjasama dan keprihatinan YB Dato’ Sri serta pihak yang berkaitan dalam memberikan maklum balas berhubung dengan perkara ini amat dihargai dan didahului ucapan setinggi-tinggi terima kasih.

Sekian, terima kasih.

Yang benar,

(IR. DR. KOH SIONG LEE)
Pengarah Penyelidikan
Malaysia Data Centre Observatory (MDCO)

English Translation of the letter:

Our Ref.:          MDI-2026-03-07-DSRR
By Email:         ramanan@mohr.gov.my, pusatkhidmatrakyat@sgbuloh.my

21 August 2026

YB Dato’ Sri Ramanan Ramakrishnan
Ahli Parlimen Sungai Buloh (P107)
Menteri Sumber Manusia
Pusat Khidmat Rakyat Parlimen Sungai Buloh
C-46-G, Star Avenue Business Centre
Jalan Zuhal U5/178, Seksyen U5, 40150 Shah Alam
Selangor Darul Ehsan

YB Dato’ Sri,

RE: REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION AND VIEWS ON PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS FOR LOW FREQUENCY NOISE IN DATA CENTRE DEVELOPMENTS

With due respect, the above matter is referred.

2. Malaysia Data Centre Observatory (MDCO) respectfully seeks YB Dato’ Sri’s views and clarification regarding several important questions relating to data centre development. This effort is aligned with MDCO’s core principle of supporting equal access to information for all stakeholders, including through efforts to obtain, document and disseminate relevant views and information in a balanced and transparent manner, in support of a sustainable, harmonious and responsible data centre industry in Malaysia.
3. MDCO takes note of and appreciates YB Dato’ Sri’s position in voicing the concerns of residents of Kota Damansara regarding the proposed data centre development, as well as YB Dato’ Sri’s emphasis that development and investment are important but should be undertaken with due consideration for the interests and well-being of the local community. MDCO also takes note of YB Dato’ Sri’s emphasis on the need for community engagement, transparency and comprehensive assessment of the impacts of large-scale development on the surrounding area. MDCO further takes note that the proposed data centre development in Kota Damansara has been discontinued at this time. YB Dato’ Sri’s emphasis on the need for transparency is consistent with one of MDCO’s key principles. MDCO considers that transparency of information not only benefits the local community, but also assists investors, developers and data centre operators, as well as other stakeholders, in identifying and addressing potential development impacts at an early stage, thereby supporting the sustainability and growth of the data centre industry in a manner that can benefit all parties.
4. MDCO also takes note of the issues and concerns raised by the local community in relation to recent data centre developments in Selangor and Johor (Appendix 1). At the international level, the impacts of data centre operations on nearby communities, including potential disturbance from Low Frequency Noise (LFN), have also emerged as an issue receiving increasing attention. In this context, MDCO considers your attention to economic opportunities, infrastructure development and community interests highly relevant in examining the planning considerations and environmental impacts associated with data centre development.
5. Taking into consideration the data centres that are expected to become fully operational in the future, MDCO is currently conducting a detailed study on acoustic environmental quality, particularly Low Frequency Noise (LFN). International research and cases indicate that LFN associated with data centre operations has caused disturbance to communities and, in some cases, led to legal disputes in the United States (Appendix 2). MDCO also notes that low-frequency noise and vibration generated by mechanical equipment at data centres have the potential to propagate over relatively long distances and affect the amenity and comfort of local communities (Appendices 3 and 4).
6. Based on MDCO’s current understanding arising from the findings of this study, the existing provisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1976 (Act 172) provide Local Authorities (PBT), acting as Local Planning Authorities (PBPT), with scope for consideration and discretion in addressing relevant environmental aspects (Appendix 5). In this regard, MDCO has commenced a series of dialogues with the Datuk Bandar and Yang Dipertua of PBTs in Johor and Selangor (Appendix 6), as well as with data centre developers, elected representatives and relevant political party representatives. However, based on a review of publicly available information and preliminary exploration through these dialogue sessions, MDCO has not identified publicly available information indicating that LFN assessment is specifically considered at the Planning Permission (KM) stage.
7. In this regard, MDCO would greatly appreciate if YB Dato’ Sri, in your capacity as the Member of Parliament for Sungai Buloh and based on your experience in representing the interests of the local community, could review MDCO’s current understanding and provide your views on the following questions:

7.1 Legal Provisions under Act 172

• MDCO’s Current Understanding: MDCO’s review indicates that subsections 22(2), 22(3) and 22(5) of Act 172 provide Local Planning Authorities with broad discretionary powers to consider matters necessary for proper planning purposes and to impose conditions on Planning Permission (Kebenaran Merancang, KM). Although Act 172 does not specifically refer to LFN, the existing provisions appear sufficiently broad to allow environmental acoustic considerations to be taken into account.
• Request for Clarification / Views:
  • Does YB Dato’ Sri consider that Act 172 provides sufficient legislative powers to enable Local Authorities (PBT) / Local Planning Authorities (PBPT) to consider the potential impacts of LFN during the Planning Permission (KM) process?
  • In YB Dato’ Sri’s view, under what circumstances or scenarios should potential LFN impacts be considered by the PBT/PBPT in the planning and approval process for data centre developments?

7.2 Current Planning Assessment Practice

• MDCO’s Current Understanding: Based on publicly available planning legislation and existing guidance, MDCO has not identified publicly available information indicating that any specific requirements or guidelines relating to LFN have been established for the Planning Permission (KM) process for data centre developments.
• Request for Clarification / Views:
  • Has the issue of potential LFN disturbance ever been raised with YB Dato’ Sri or discussed at the policy, planning or engagement level in relation to large-scale data centre development?
  • In YB Dato’ Sri’s view, should the approach to assessing LFN impacts vary according to development scale, distance from residential areas (buffer zones), or site-specific conditions?
  • Does YB Dato’ Sri see a need for the State Government or PBT to establish specific technical guidelines relating to LFN to reduce the risk of conflict between industrial developments and residential areas in the future?

7.3 Technical Assessment Methods

• MDCO’s Current Understanding: Conventional environmental noise assessments generally rely on overall A-weighted sound levels (A-weighted sound levels, dBA). However, in scenarios involving large-scale mechanical equipment that may generate significant LFN, more detailed assessment methods such as octave-band analysis (octave-band analysis) may be required.
• Request for Clarification / Views:
  • Does YB Dato’ Sri support the proposal that specific acoustic studies or predictive noise assessments relating to LFN be considered for large-scale data centre development applications located near residential areas?
  • Does YB Dato’ Sri consider that relevant acoustic information relating to major mechanical equipment (such as cooling towers, chillers or standby generators) should be disclosed for public review, subject to the need to protect commercially sensitive information, in order to enhance transparency?
  • In YB Dato’ Sri’s view, if LFN is identified as a relevant risk, are the acoustic assessments contained in existing Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports adequate, or should they be supplemented by more specific assessment and review mechanisms?

7.4 Conditions of Planning Permission (KM)

• MDCO’s Current Understanding: Act 172 empowers Local Planning Authorities to assess and consider Planning Permission applications by imposing additional conditions considered appropriate, thereby providing flexibility to regulate potential environmental risks.
• Request for Clarification / Views:
  • In YB Dato’ Sri’s view, should the PBT/PBPT consider specific Planning Permission (KM) conditions to manage potential LFN impacts, such as the establishment of buffer zones, detailed acoustic control measures, or post-operational monitoring?
  • In YB Dato’ Sri’s view, what are the key factors that should be considered by the PBT/PBPT in imposing KM conditions for data centre developments?

7.5 Future Direction of Planning Practice

• MDCO’s Current Understanding: The data centre industry in Malaysia is expanding rapidly, while scientific understanding and assessment practices relating to LFN continue to evolve. MDCO notes that planning practices will likewise continue to evolve in line with industry experience and the development of technical guidelines.
• Request for Clarification / Views:
  • Does YB Dato’ Sri consider that the existing regulatory framework and planning procedures at the state and district levels are adequate, or is there a need for improvements, including the establishment of specific technical guidelines relating to LFN to protect communities?
  • Is YB Dato’ Sri aware of, or does YB Dato’ Sri have any views regarding, any initiatives, committees or studies at the level of the State Government, State Legislative Assembly, Federal Government or the Parliament of Malaysia that are currently examining LFN issues and environmental impacts associated with data centre development?

8. MDCO seeks to obtain your views to ensure that MDCO’s published research reports take into account, in a balanced manner, perspectives relating to economic development as well as the interests of the local community. This MDCO Dialogue Instrument (MDCO Dialogue Instrument, MDI) and any responses received will be documented transparently as part of the MDCO research series. To enable your views to be considered in this research series, MDCO would greatly welcome any official comments within 14 days from the date of this letter, before the findings are finalised for publication. Should any feedback be received after this period, MDCO will nevertheless take such views into consideration for incorporation into future updates of the research.
9. The cooperation and kind consideration of YB Dato’ Sri and the relevant parties in providing feedback on this matter are greatly appreciated, and we wish to express our sincere thanks in advance.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

(IR. DR. KOH SIONG LEE)

Director of Research
Malaysia Data Centre Observatory (MDCO)

Feedback and Responses Received

None as of the publication date.