Lahendong 5&6 Revised ESIA Vol III...

Lahendong 5&6 Revised ESIA Report - Volume III

Appendices

February 2011

Pertamina Geothermal Energy

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

wb370910

Typewritten Text

E2558 v6 REV

265718 RGE GEV 08 D

F:\PROJECTS\265718 PGE Geothermal ESIAs\(1) Lahendong\Reports\Submitted Draft\Addressing

16 February 2011


Appendices

February 2011

Pertamina Geothermal Energy

Mott MacDonald, Victory House, Trafalgar Place, Brighton BN1 4FY, United Kingdom

T +44(0) 1273 365 000 F +44(0) 1273 365 100, W www.mottmac.com

Menara Cakawala 15th floor, Jalan MH, Thamrin No. 09 Jakarta - 10340, Indonesia


Mott MacDonald, Victory House, Trafalgar Place, Brighton BN1 4FY, United Kingdom

T +44(0) 1273 365 000 F +44(0) 1273 365 100, W www.mottmac.com

Revision Date Originator Checker Approver Description

A 10/09/10 V. Hovland B. Cornet D Boyland Draft

B 28/09/10 V. Hovland B. Cornet D Boyland Final Draft for Disclosure

C 04/02/11 M. O’Brien H. White T. Streather

D. Boyland I. Scott Revised Draft ESIA

D. 16/02/11 H. White T. Ellis

D. Boyland D. Boyland Revised Final ESIA Report

Issue and revision record

This document is issued for the party which commissioned it

and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned

project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or

used for any other purpose.

We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this

document being relied upon by any other party, or being used

for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which

is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other

parties

This document contains confidential information and proprietary

intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties

without consent from us and from the party which

commissioned it.

265718/RGE/GEV/08/D 16 February 2011 F:\PROJECTS\265718 PGE Geothermal ESIAs\(1) Lahendong\Reports\Submitted Draft\Addressing comments\Final\Lahendong 5&6 Revised ESIA Vol III Final.doc


Chapter Title Page

Appendix A. Standards _________________________________________________________________________ 1

A.1. Overview__________________________________________________________________________ 1

A.2. Indonesian Standards ________________________________________________________________ 1

A.3. World Bank Group Guidelines_________________________________________________________ 10

Appendix B. Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan ________________________________________________ 15

B.1. Introduction _______________________________________________________________________ 15

B.2. Project Location and Description ______________________________________________________ 15

B.3. Regulations and Requirements________________________________________________________ 21

B.4. Previous Public Consultation and Disclosure _____________________________________________ 23

B.5. Project Stakeholders________________________________________________________________ 26

B.6. Information Disclosure and Community Engagement_______________________________________ 27

B.7. Implementation Timescales and Responsibilities __________________________________________ 29

B.8. Grievance Mechanism ______________________________________________________________ 30

B.9. Confidentiality and Anonymity_________________________________________________________ 31

B.10. Grievance Resolution _______________________________________________________________ 31

B.11. Monitoring and Reporting ____________________________________________________________ 32

Appendix C. Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework ______________________________________ 33

C.1. Introduction _______________________________________________________________________ 33

C.2. Institutional and Legal Policy Framework ________________________________________________ 36

C.3. Land Acquisition and Crop Compensation to Date (as of 1st January 2011)______________________ 54

C.4. Summary_________________________________________________________________________ 60

C.5. Annex - Requirements of Resettlement Plans ____________________________________________ 62

Appendix D. Technical Appendix – Air Quality Assessment ____________________________________________ 63

D.1. Introduction _______________________________________________________________________ 63

D.2. Methodology ______________________________________________________________________ 63

D.3. Emission Sources __________________________________________________________________ 71

D.4. Receptors ________________________________________________________________________ 74

D.5. Dispersion Modelling Results _________________________________________________________ 78

D.6. Mitigation_________________________________________________________________________ 85

Appendix E. Noise Assessment Glossary __________________________________________________________ 87

E.1. Glossary of Terms__________________________________________________________________ 87

Appendix F. Transmission line summary __________________________________________________________ 90

F.1. Introduction _______________________________________________________________________ 90

F.2. Project Description _________________________________________________________________ 90

F.3. Baseline _________________________________________________________________________ 90

F.4. Assessment of Impacts______________________________________________________________ 91

F.5. Cumulative impacts and transboundary issues____________________________________________ 91

Appendix G. Revised ESIA Change Register _______________________________________________________ 92

Appendix H. PGE and PLN Joint Agreement _______________________________________________________ 94

H.1. Overview_________________________________________________________________________ 94

Appendix I. Forestry Ministry Letter ______________________________________________________________ 97

I.1. Overview_________________________________________________________________________ 97

Appendix J. Ministry of Environment Meeting Minutes _______________________________________________ 100

J.1. Overview________________________________________________________________________ 100

Content

265718/RGE/GEV/08/D 16 February 2011

1


A.1. Overview

This appendix presents quantitative standards from both national and international standards and

guidelines as referenced in Section 4, Volume II relevant to this ESIA.

A.2. Indonesian Standards

A.2.1. Water Quality

Government Regulation (PP) No. 82 of 2001 on Water Quality Management and Water Pollution Control

includes the main Indonesian water quality standards as shown in Table A.1 below. The regulation defines

Class I for drinking water and Class II as water suitable for recreational, fresh water fish cultivation,

livestock and irrigation purposes.

In addition, Ministry of Health Regulation No. 416 of 1990 provides water quality standards for clean water.

The Regulation defines clean water as water that is used for everyday purposes with quality that meets

health requirements and can be drunk after being boiled. The standards are reported in Table A.2 (as a

reference in preparing ESMP).

Appendix A. Standards


2


Table A.1: Water Quality Standards (Government Regulation No. 82 of 2001)

Indonesia Standards

Government Regulation No. 82 of 2001

No. Parameter

1st Class 2nd Class

1 Temperature (0C) +/- 3ºC over ambient +/- 3ºC over ambient

2 TSS (mg/l) 50 50

3 TDS(mg/l) 1000 1000

4 pH 6-9 6-9

5 BOD(mg/l) 2 3

6 COD(mg/l) 10 25

7 DO(mg/l) 6 4

8 Total Phosphate (mg/l) 0.2 0.2

9 NO3 as N (mg/l) 10 10

10 NH3-N(mg/l) 0.5 NA

11 Arsenic (mg/l) 0.05 1

12 Cobalt (mg/l) 0.2 0.2

13 Barium (mg/l) 1 NA

14 Boron (mg/l) 1 1

15 Selenium (mg/l) 0.01 0.05

16 Cadmium (mg/l) 0.01 0.01

17 Chromium (VI) (mg/l) 0.05 0.05

18 Copper (mg/l) 0.02 0.02

19 Iron (mg/l) 0.3 NA

20 Lead (mg/l) 0.03 0.03

21 Manganese (mg/l) 1 NA

22 Mercury(mg/l) 0.001 0.002

23 Zinc (mg/l) 0.05 0.05

24 Chloride (mg/l) 1 NA

25 Cyanide (mg/l) 0.02 0.02

26 Fluoride (mg/l) 0.5 1.5

27 Nitrite (mg/l) 0.06 0.06

28 Sulphate (mg/l) 400 NA

29 Free Cl (mg/l) 0.03 0.03

30 Sulphur as H2S(mg/l) 0.002 0.002

31 Faecal coliform per 100 ml 100 1000

32 Total coliform per 100 ml 1000 5000

Source: Government Regulation No. 82 of 2001


3


Table A.2: Community Well Water Quality Standards (Ministry of Health Regulation No. 416 of 1990)

Clean Water Quality Standard No Parameter

Maximum Concentration

Remarks

A. Physical

1 Odour - No odour

2 TDS (mg/L) 1,500

3 Turbidity (NTU scale) 25

4 Taste - No taste

5 Temperature (°C) +/- 3 Deviation from air temperature

6 Colour (TCU Scale) 50

B. Chemical

B.1 Inorganic Chemicals

1 Mercury (mg/L) 0.001

2 Arsenic (mg/L) 0.05

3 Iron (mg/l) 1.0

4 Fluoride (mg/l) 1.5

5 Cadmium (mg/l) 0.005

6 CaCO3 (mg/l) 500

7 Chloride (mg/l) 600

8 Chromium (VI) (mg/l) 0.05

9 Manganese (mg/l) 0.5

10 Sodium (mg/l) NA

11 Nitrate (mg/l) 10

12 Nitrite (mg/l) 1.0

13 pH 6.5 - 9.0 Minimum and maximum limit. pH for rain water is 5.5

14 Selenium (mg/l) 0.01

15 Zinc (mg/l) 15

16 Cyanide (mg/l) 0.1

17 Sulphate (mg/l) 400

18 Sulfide (as H2S) (mg/l)) NA

19 Lead (mg/l) 0.05

20 Copper (mg/l)) NA

B.2 Organic Chemicals

1 Aldrin and Dieldrin (mg/l) 0.0007

2 Benzene (mg/l) 0.1

3 Benzo [a] pyrene (mg/l) 0.00001

4 Chloroform-Total Isomers (mg/l) 0.007

5 Chloroform (mg/l) 0.03

6 2.4-D (mg/l) 0.1

7 DDT (mg/l) 0.03

8 Detergent (mg/l) 0.5

9 1,2 Dichloroethene (mg/l) 0.01

10 1.1 Dichloroethene (mg/l) 0.0003


4


Clean Water Quality Standard No Parameter

Maximum Concentration

Remarks

11 Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide (mg/l)

0.003

12 Hexachlorobenzene (mg/l) 0.00001

13 Gamma-HCH (mg/L) 0.004

14 Methoxychlor (mg/l) 0.1

15 Pentachlorophenol (mg/l) 0.01

16 Total Pesticide (mg/l) 0.1

17 2.4.6-trichlorophenol (mg/l) 0.01

18 Organic substances (KMn04) (mg/l) 10

B.3 Microbiology

1 Total coliform per 100 ml 50 Not for piped water

2 Faecal coliform per 100 ml 10 For piped water

B.4 Radioactivity

1 Gross Alpha Activity (Bg/l) 0.1

2 Gross Beta Activity (Bg/l) 1.0

Source: Ministry of Health Regulation No. 416 of 1990


5


A.2.2. Wastewater Quality

The National Standard for wastewater quality from oil and gas and geothermal exploration and production

activities is the Minister of Environment Regulation No. 04 of 2007.

Table A.3: Wastewater Quality Standard for (Onshore) Geothermal Exploration and Production Activities

No Type of Wastewater Parameter Maximum Concentration

Measurement Methodology

Dissolved Sulphide (as H2S)

1 mg/L SNI 06-2470-1991 or APHA 4500-S2

Ammonia (as NH3-N) 10 mg/L SNI 06-6989.30-2005 or APHA 4500-NH3

Total Mercury (Hg) 0.005 mg/L SNI 19-1429-1989 or SNI 06-2462-1661 or SNI 06-2912-1992 or

APHA 3500-Hg

Total Arsenic (As) 0.5 mg/L APHA 3500-As

Temperature 45 oC SNI 06-6989.23-2005

1 Production Water

pH 6-9 SNI 06-6989.11-2004

Oil and Fat 15 mg/L SNI 06-6989.10-1004

2 Wastewater and Drainage Total Organic Carbon 110 mg/L SNI 06-6989.28-2005 or APHA 5310

Source: Minister of Environment Regulation No. 04 of 2007


6


In addition, effluent form thermal power plants are regulated by the Minister of Environment Regulation

No. 08 of 2009, as reported in Table A.4.

Table A.4: Wastewater Quality Standard MOE Regulation No. 08 of 2009

No Type of Wastewater Parameter Maximum Concentration

pH 6-9

TSS 100 mg/L

Oil and Grease 10 mg/L

Free Cl2 0.5 mg/L

Chromium (Cr) 0.5 mg/L

Copper (Cu) 1 mg/L

Iron (Fe) 3 mg/L

Zinc (Zn) 1 mg/L

1 Sourced from Main Processes

Phosphate (PO4-) 10 mg/L

pH 6-9

Free Cl2 1 mg/L

Zinc (Zn) 1 mg/L 2

Sourced from Blow down Cooling Water

Phosphate (PO4-) 10 mg/L

COD* 300 mg/L

TOC** 110 mg/L 3 Containing Oil***

Oil and Grease 15 mg/L

Source: Minister of Environment Regulation No. 08 of 2009

Note :

* COD parameter is only valid until 31 December 2009

** Parameters TOC into force on 1 January 2010

*** if the source of waste water containing oil is not flow to the WWTP


7


A.2.3. Air Quality and Atmospheric Emissions

The construction phase of the project could potentially lead to emissions of a range of combustion related

pollutants including nitrogen oxides (NOx), particles and carbon monoxide. In the operational phase, the

only pollutant of concern is hydrogen sulphide (H2S) which is released from the cooling towers, rock

mufflers and during the initial well testing phase.

The primary Indonesian ambient air quality standards are set out in Government Regulation No. 41 of 1999

regarding Air Pollution Control. These are presented in Table A.5, below.

The 1999 Regulations do not include ambient standards for hydrogen sulphide or ammonia (NH3);

concentrations of these pollutants are instead regulated under Ministry of Environment Decree No. 50 of

1996 regarding odour standard. These are also presented in Table A.5 below.

During the production of the ESIA, MML requested a meeting with the Indonesian Ministry of Environment

to clarify the applicability of the odour standard for geothermal power plant developments, specifically in

relation to H2S. This meeting was held in Jakarta on 14th January 2011 and the signed minutes are

presented in Appendix J. As the meeting minutes record, the H2S standard in the odour standard is

designed to protect against community nuisance and protect community health. The Ministry of

Environment acknowledged that the H2S standard is more stringent than international standards (see

Section A.3.2 below which presents the World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines for ambient H2S). In

addition, the meeting minutes record that:

“According to KLH [Ministry of Environment], the odour standard for H2S was specifically aimed at

manufacturing industry. Not operations in naturally occurring H2S areas.”

Such ‘naturally occurring H2S areas’ includes Tompaso where the Project is proposed. Although not

referenced in the odour standard, the MOE confirmed the H2S standard is a 2 hour average as determined

from the measurement method (see Appendix J). The Ministry of Environment noted that it was not in a

position to comment on the applicability of the odour standard to geothermal areas until the geothermal

industry, as a forum, presents evidence regarding the difficulty of the application of the standard. In

addition, the meeting minutes record that:

“KLH [Ministry of Environment] will review any evidence base presented against best practice with a view to

exempting the standard from geothermal areas.”

The ESMP (Volume IV) identifies the need for an Indonesian Geothermal Environment Forum in

recognition of the need for various government monitoring agencies to be more familiar with key issues that

represent potential barriers to geothermal development. PGE is committed to the formation of an industry-

wide geothermal environment forum whereby issues such as the difficulty with the application of the H2S

standard within MOE Decree No. 50 of 1996 can be presented as a collective for discussion with

government stakeholders.

On the basis of the meeting with the Ministry of Environment and PGE’s commitment to the formation of an

industry-wide geothermal environment forum, the 1996 Decree standard for H2S has been presented

below, but it has not been used within the EIS to assess the ambient air quality impacts of H2S emissions

from the Project. Instead, the WHO guideline standard for the protection of human health has been used

(see Section A.3.2, below).


8


Table A.5: Indonesian Ambient Air Quality Standards for the Protection of Public Health

Parameters and values

CO NH3 H2S NO2 SO2 PM10 TSP( a) Source Averaging

Period

µg/m3 µg/m3 µg/m3 µg/m3 µg/m3 µg/m3 µg/m3

1 Hour 30,000 - - 400 900 - -

24 Hour 10,000 - - 150 365 150 230 Government Regulation No. 41 of 1999

Annual - - - 100 60 - 90

MOE Decree No. 50 of 1996 (c) 2 Hour (b) - 1,360 28 - - - -

Note: (a)

Total suspended particulates (b)

Although not referenced in the MOE decree, the MOE advised that it is a 2 hour averaging period based on the

measurement method as recorded in the MOM with Ministry of Envyronment (see Appendix J) (c)

Decree regarding odour standard, not for protection of public health

In addition to the ambient air quality standard described above for the protection of the public, Ministry of

Manpower Letter No. SE-01/MEN/1997 regarding Ambient Threshold Limits of Chemical Factors in

Working Environments; provides occupational H2S exposure limits. This is presented in Table A.6 below.

Table A.6: Indonesian Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Protection of Occupational Health, H2S

Name Averaging Period H2S

Ministry of Manpower Letter No. SE-01/MEN/1997

8 Hour 10ppm / 14,000 µg/m3

Emissions to air from geothermal power plant are regulated by Ministry of Environment Regulation No. 21

of 2008 on air emissions from stationary sources and power plants. This limit is presented in Table A.7.

Table A.7: Indonesian Air Emission Standards for H2S

Parameters and Values(a)

Name Averaging Period NH3 (mg/Nm3)

H2S (mg/Nm3)

MOE Regulation No.21 of 2008

1 Hour 0.5 35

Note: (a)

At reference conditions 25oC, 1 ATM


9


A.2.4. Noise

Indonesian standard for environmental noise is set in Ministry of Environment Decree No. 48 of 1996 as

shown in Table A.8. A noise health and safety limit is set in Ministry of Manpower Decree No. 51 of 1999.

Table A.8: Indonesian Noise Standards (dBA)

Measured Sites National standard Kep. MenLH 48/1996

National standard Kep. Menaker 51/1999

Residential area 55

Green open space 50

Industrial area 70

Occupational safety and health 85 (8 hours)*

88 (4 hours)*

91 (2 hours)*

94 (1 hour)*

97 (30 minutes)*

Source: Ministry of Environment Decree No. 48 of 1996

Ministry of Manpower Decree No. 51 of 1999

* Exposure limit per day


10


A.3. World Bank Group Guidelines

A.3.1. Overview

IFC Performance Standard 3 and World Bank OP 4.01 specify the use of the World Bank Group

Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines (known as the "EHS Guidelines"). These guidelines were

developed as part of a two and a half year review process that ended in 2007.

The revised World Bank Group EHS Guidelines are a set of general and industry specific examples of

international good practice. The General EHS Guidelines contain information on crosscutting issues

applicable to projects in all industry sectors. They provide guidance on performance levels and

measurements considered to be achievable at reasonable cost by new or existing projects with the use of

existing technologies and practices. The Project will be designed to comply with the levels and measures

identified in the EHS Guidelines where Indonesian host country requirements are less stringent or do not

exist.

The General EHS Guidelines provide both environmental and occupational health & safety (OHS)

standards. No measurement method references are quoted within the World Bank Group guidelines and it

is assumed that internationally recognised measurement methods such as various ISO standards will

apply.

A.3.2. Waste water effluents

No specific liquid effluent discharge guidelines are provided within either the World Bank Group General

EHS Guidelines or EHS Guidelines for Geothermal Power Generation. However, liquid effluent discharge

guidelines are provided within the World Bank Group EHS Guidelines for Thermal Power Plants which are

presented for reference purposes. In comparison with Indonesian national standards, certain parameter

requirements in the World Bank Group EHS Guidelines are more stringent (total suspended solids, residual

chlorine, copper, iron and cadmium). The Project will comply with these more stringent standards.

Table A.9: World Bank Group Standards for Liquid Effluent Discharge

Pollutant Unit Limit Comment

pH pH 6 - 9 -

TSS mg/l 50 -

Oil and Grease mg/l 10 -

Total Residual Chlorine mg/l 0.2 Chlorine “shocking” may be preferable in certain circumstances.

Chromium (total) mg/l 0.5 -

Copper mg/l 0.5 -

Iron mg/l 1 -

Zinc mg/l 1 -

Cadmium mg/l 0.1 -

Mercury mg/l 0.005 -

Arsenic mg/l 0.5 -

Temperature Increase mg/l +5ºC Site specific requirement; elevated temperature areas due to discharge of once-through cooling water should be minimized by adjusting intake and outfall design through the project specific EA depending on the sensitive

aquatic ecosystems around the discharge point.


11


To limit impacts on water quality in case of limited or no sewerage network, the following World Bank

Group General EHS Guidelines will apply to any sanitary waste water after being treated in waste water

treatment plant.

Table A.10: Indicative Values for Treated Sanitary Sewerage Discharges

Pollutants Units Guideline Value

pH pH 6-9

BOD mg/l 30

COD mg/l 125

Total nitrogen mg/l 10

Total phosphorus mg/l 2

Oil and grease mg/l 10

Total suspended solids mg/l 50

Total coliform bacteria MPNb / 100ml 400a

Notes a) not applicable to centralised, municipal, wastewater treatment systems which are included in EHS guidelines for water

and sanitation

b) MPN = Most probable number

A.3.3. Ambient Air Quality

As noted above, the construction phase of the project could potentially lead to emissions of a range of

combustion related pollutants including nitrogen oxides (NOx), particles and carbon monoxide. In the

operational phase, the only pollutant of concern is hydrogen sulphide which is released from the cooling

towers, rock mufflers and during the initial well testing phase.

The Project shall be designed to comply with the relevant national standards or, in their absence, the

current WHO air quality guidelines, as required by the World Bank Group General EHS Guidelines. As

other pollutants such as NO2, SO2 and PM10 are adequately covered under Indonesian legislation

(Government Regulation No. 41 of 1999) only WHO guidelines for H2S are referenced given that the MOE

Decree No. 50 of 1996 regarding odour standard has not been used within this assessment for the

justification provided previously in Section A.2.3. The current WHO guidelines for H2S are presented in

Table A.11.

Table A.11: WHO Ambient Air Quality Guidelines

Pollutant Averaging Period Value (µg/m3)

Hydrogen Sulphide 24 Hour 150 (guideline)

The latest version of the WHO Guidelines (Global Update, 2005), focus on the key criteria pollutants of

particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide and do not contain specific guideline values

for H2S.

The WHO Air Quality Guidelines for Europe, 2nd

Edition 2000, (henceforth the WHO guidelines) was a

landmark publication that provided information on a much wider range of pollutants than previous guidance.

Although the publication was made in Europe, the preface and foreword notes that WHO guidelines were

and have been applied world-wide as best practice, and consequently led to the 2005 Guidelines adopting

a ‘Global’ moniker. The 2000 Guidance, from which the guideline for H2S is sourced and draws heavily on

international data, acknowledges that when States use the guidelines for setting legally binding standards,


12


considerations such as prevailing exposure levels, technical feasibility, source control measures,

abatement strategies, and social, economic and cultural conditions should be taken into account.

In many jurisdictions, such as the United States and Europe, such considerations have led to the

introduction of a threshold of tolerance to account for exceptional, worst case episodes. In practice this

means defining a number of allowable occurrences greater than the prescribed value to account for

potential abnormal or infrequent pollutions episodes - these are often referred to the guideline values being

applied as percentiles. This principal has been applied within the assessment by comparing the second

highest modelled 24 hour H2S concentrations against the WHO guideline value. Not only is this in

accordance with the spirit of the guidelines, but it also ensures that conclusions are not based on potential

outlier results produced by the modelling.

The WHO defines a guideline as “…any kind of recommendation or guidance on the protection of human

beings or receptors in the environment from adverse effects of air pollutants”. This assessment has

interpreted the application of the WHO standard as being relevant to those locations only where receptors

can reasonably be expected to be exposed for the specified averaging period. . This is in accordance with

the application of, for example, the EU Air Quality Directive (2008/50/EC) where application of ambient air

quality objectives excludes areas of non fixed habitation (i.e. residential areas), work and industrial

locations and within roads. In the case of H2S, the averaging period is 24 hours and therefore this

guideline has only been applied to locations where receptors can reasonably be expected to be located for

this duration, i.e. residential locations, as well as health care facilities, schools and similarly sensitive sites.

This approach is consistent with international interpretation of air quality standards such as those in

Europe.

Some studies of the potential impacts of H2S on vegetation have been undertaken in the US and Canada

which has included studies on plants in the biosphere as well as in laboratory experiments. In general,

studies have found that negative effects on vegetation occur only with prolonged exposure to H2S, and that

lower levels can stimulate growth in certain types of plants. No formal guidelines have been set for the

impacts of H2S on vegetation, but a report published by Alberta Environment (Assessment Report On

Reduced Sulphur Compounds, 2004) recommended a limit of 140µg/m3 as a no observable effect

concentration, for long-term exposure (long-term exposure usually being interpreted, for example within the

EU, as annual average periods). Therefore in the present assessment, this limit has been adopted as an

annual mean to assess the potential effects of H2S on vegetated areas. Modelled concentrations of ground

level H2S have therefore been compared against this standard for areas designated as Hutan Lindung

(Watershed Protection Forest) and surrounding agricultural areas. As the existing vegetation is already

exposed to some levels of ambient H2S they are likely to already be desensitized to exposure and therefore

this limit is likely to be conservative.


13


A.3.4. Noise

The World Bank Groups General EHS Guidelines set out recommended environmental noise limits for new

developments, as presented in Table A.12.

Table A.12: IFC / World Bank Noise Limits

One hour LAeq(dBA) Receptor

Daytime

07:00 – 22:00

Night-time

22:00 - 07:00

Residential; institutional; educational receptors: 55 45

Industrial; commercial 70 70

A.3.5. Occupational health and safety standards

Guidelines values for occupational health and safety (OHS) limits, as described in World Bank Group

guidelines that will be used for this project in addition to general good practice measures are provided in

further detail below. The Project shall be designed to comply with the relevant Indonesian and World Bank

Group guidelines on OHS. Where the Indonesian and international standards differ, the more stringent of

the two will be applied.

Noise

Table A.13 summarises relevant World Bank Group Guidelines for occupational noise exposure, which

should be complied with at the relevant locations on site.

Table A.13: Noise Limits for Various Working Environments

Location / Activity Equivalent Level LAeq,8h

Maximum LAmax,fast

Heavy industry (no demand for oral communication) 85 dB(A) 110 dB(A)

Open offices, control rooms, service counters or similar 45 – 50 dB(A) –

Individual offices (no disturbing noise) 40 – 45 dB(A) –

Hydrogen Sulphide H2S

The World Bank Group EHS Guidelines for Geothermal Power Generation provide examples for sources of

occupational health and safety guidelines. These include those established by the Occupational Safety

and Health Administration of the United States (OSHA). Other international standards include Icelandic

workplace exposure limits for hydrogen sulphide (Icelandic Regulation No. 320 on Pollution and the

working environment, 2009). These are presented in Table A.14. Both US and Icelandic standards are

comparable to the Indonesian occupational health exposure limit presented in Table A.6.

In accordance with requirements of the World Bank Group General EHS guidelines, as the Indonesian

occupational limit exists and is comparable with Icelandic standards and more stringent relevant US

standards referenced, it has been applied to assess the air quality impacts of the project at occupational

receptors.


14


Table A.14: International Occupational Exposure Standards for H2S

Organisation Averaging Period Value

Icelandic permitted concentration for occupational exposure

8 hours 14,000 µg/m3

- 20ppm / 28,000 µg/m3 (Acceptable

Ceiling concentration) Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the United States Acceptable maximum peak above the

acceptable ceiling concentration for an 8 hour shift

50 ppm / 70,000 µg/m3


15


B.1. Introduction

B.1.1. Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP) Objectives

Pertamina Geothermal Energy (PGE) applied for a grant from the Government of the Netherlands that has

been provided through the World Bank (WB). The purpose of the grant was to contribute to the cost of

initial development of three of PGE’s geothermal power projects. The scheme considered in this report is

the Lahendong Units 5&6 Geothermal Power Project (The Project) located in North Sulawesi. Each of the

two proposed units will have a net capacity of 20MW. The Project is also referred to as South Lahendong

and Tompaso Units 1&2.

Environmental assessment for the purpose of permitting and compliance with Indonesian legislation is

undertaken on behalf of PGE by a local university consultancy, Badan Konsultan AMDAL Unrat (the Local

Consultants). PGE has appointed Mott MacDonald Limited (MML) to assist them in completing a full

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) to international standards, in compliance with World

Bank (project financier) procedures and guidelines. One requirement of international standards is the

production of a Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP) or Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) to

ensure that the appropriate consultation and engagement with the public and relevant stakeholders is

undertaken.

In Indonesia, project related public consultation and disclosure is required under the AMDAL (national

environmental permitting) process. Appropriate and meaningful consultation is a key international finance

requirement because it is integral to project planning and development.

This PCDP is a strategic document for planning a comprehensive and culturally appropriate approach to

consultation and disclosure for the lifecycle of the Project. The purpose of this PCDP is to provide a

consultation and participation strategy for the Project which:

� Identifies people or communities that are or could be affected by the project, as well as other interested

parties;

� Ensures that such stakeholders are appropriately engaged on environmental and social issues that

could potentially affect them through a process of information disclosure and meaningful consultation;

� Maintains a constructive relationship with stakeholders on an ongoing basis through meaningful

engagement during project implementation; and

� Meets legal requirements related to consultation.

The PCDP is underpinned by the principles that community engagement should be free of external

manipulation, interference, coercion and intimidation, and conducted on the basis of timely, relevant,

understandable and accessible information, in a culturally appropriate manner. Consultation activities

should always be well planned and based on principles of respectful and meaningful dialogue.

B.2. Project Location and Description

The Project is located about 30 km South of Manado, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. It stretches across the

villages of Sendangan, Pinabetengan, Pinabetengan Utara (North), Tompaso II, Kanonang (I and II),

Tonsewer, Touure, Liba, Tember, Kamanga (I and II) and Talikuran in the Tompaso and Kawangkoan

sub-districts, Minahasa District.

Regional and local maps showing project location are shown in Figure B.1 and Figure B.3.

Appendix B. Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan


16


Figure B.1: Project Location

Source: National Coordinating Agency for Surveys and Mapping

Site Location


17


Figure B.2: Project Components

Legend

Source: Mott MacDonald


18


Figure B.3: Project Area Features

Legend


To utilise geothermal energy, production wells are drilled down into the heated water contained within the

Earth's crust - the geothermal reservoir. Once these geothermal reservoirs are tapped into, the heated

water and steam rise to the surface where the steam is separated and used to power steam turbines, which

then generate energy that can be harnessed as electricity. Brine and condensate are returned via

reinjection wells back to the geothermal reservoir.


19


During operation, the main process activities include:

� Steam production where steam is extracted, processed and also subsequently reinjected;

� Power plant, where the extracted steam is used to generate electricity; and evacuation of electricity via

transmission lines.

The project was originally conceived of three well clusters (two production well clusters and one reinjection

well cluster) and one power plant with two 20MW units. However, following analysis of preliminary data,

the technical feasibility study has recommended that the project should also consider up to two potential

additional production well clusters and one potential additional reinjection well cluster. The Project will be

connected by 150kV transmission line to the existing grid at the Kawangkoan substation which is

approximately 2.7km from the proposed power plant site.

Table B.1 summarises the currently identified Project Components of Lahendong Units 5&6. Land already

acquired and estimates of land required for future acquisition are provided together with approximate

locational co-ordinates.

Table B.1: Main Project Components

Easting Northing Component

WGS 84 Projection

Area (m2) Land Acquired?

Drilled / Built?

LHD-26 697161 129789 Yes Cluster 26

LHD-30 697161 129789.5

40,940 (a) Yes

Yes

LHD-27 699731 129744 Yes

LHD-31 699731 129764 Yes

LHD-33 699731 129714 Yes

Cluster 27

LHD-34 699731 129754

47,515 (a) Yes

Yes

LHD-32 699204 131384 Yes Cluster 32

LHD-35 699191.5 131388

55,128 (a) Yes

Yes

Water Pump Station (WPS) 698815 129802 8,171 Yes Yes

Potential Additional Production Cluster 1 (e) (e) 45,000 (a) (b) No No

Potential Additional Production Cluster 2 (e) (e) 60,000 (a) (b) No No

Potential Additional Reinjection Cluster 1 (e) (e) 45,000 (a) (b) No No

Separators (e) (e) 1,000(b) No No

Reinjection pipeline corridors (c) (c) 95,000 (b) No No

Production pipeline corridors (c) (c) 32,500 (b) No No

Lahendong Power Plant Units 5&6 (e) (e) 105,000 (a) (b) No No

2.7km Transmission Line (d) (d) (d) No No

Notes: (a) Includes area of road access

(b) Data is conservatively approximate based on preferred location and area as derived from AECOM feasibility study.

(c) Provisional routes between wellpads and power plant.

(d) Provisional route of transmission line.

(e) Exact co-ordinates unknown as not yet acquired. Proposed potential locations presented in Figure B.2.


20


B.2.1. PCDP Structure

This PCDP is organised by sections to cover:

� Regulations and requirements;

� Review of consultation and disclosure previously carried out on the project;

� Identification of stakeholders;

� The disclosure and consultation implementation programme;

� Details of a timetable for consultation and disclosure;

� The grievance mechanism; and

� Monitoring and reporting requirements.


21


B.3. Regulations and Requirements

B.3.1. Overview

This PCDP is undertaken to meet the legislation and policy regulations of the Government of Indonesia and

to meet the information disclosure, consultation and stakeholder participation requirements of the World

Bank. These requirements are summarised below.

B.3.2. National Consultation Requirements under the AMDAL Process

Public involvement was formally introduced into the AMDAL process through a decree by of the Head of

the Environmental Impact Management Agency (EIMA or Bapedal) in 2000. This decree—No. KepDal

08/2000 covers transparency of information and allows for governors to be flexible in arranging further

implementations at the provincial level according to context specificity. Four key objectives are addressed

in the guidelines including: the protection of the community’s interests; community empowerment;

transparency of the AMDAL process; and stakeholder partnership building. The guidelines also embody

four overarching principles: (1) the equal position of AMDAL stakeholders; (2) transparency in decision-

making; (3) equality in problem resolution; and (4) coordination, communication and cooperation among

AMDAL stakeholders. The term ‘public involvement’ in the AMDAL process is interpreted as public

participation in the decision making process.

Under Indonesian guidelines, consultation with the public is conducted during all stages of the project.

Firstly, during the prearrangement stage of the project (before AMDAL documents are prepared); secondly

during the Terms of Reference preparation; and thirdly through the public’s representative who sits on the

AMDAL commission or makes written submissions to the commission. Once all the AMDAL documents

have been prepared, the proponent presents those documents to the AMDAL commission for further

review. Ahead of the review process, members of the public have one further opportunity to express their

views and offer comments and suggestions.

Due to the size of the Project (2x20MW), a full AMDAL is not required. The consultation undertaken by

PGE and the Local Consultants has therefore been undertaken as part of PGE’s policy rather than for

compliance purposes.

B.3.3. International Consultation Requirements of the World Bank

Public consultation, disclosure and stakeholder engagement are key requirements of World Bank

Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies. World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.01 Environmental

Assessment states that for all Category A and B projects proposed for WB financing, during the ESIA

process the borrower must consult project-affected persons (PAPs) and groups and local nongovernmental

organizations (NGOs) about the project's environmental aspects and takes their views into account. The

borrower must initiate such consultations as early as possible. For Category A projects - such as this

project - the borrower must consult these groups at least twice:

� shortly after environmental screening and before the terms of reference for the ESIA are finalized; and

� once a draft ESIA report is prepared.

In addition, the borrower consults and engages with such groups throughout construction and operation

phases as appropriate about environmental and social considerations.


22


WB OP 4.01 also specifies information disclosure requirements. For meaningful consultations between the

borrower and project-affected groups and local NGOs on all Category A and B projects, the borrower must

provide relevant material in a timely manner prior to consultation and in a form and language that are

understandable and accessible to the groups being consulted.

For a Category A projects, the borrower must provide for:

� The initial consultation a summary of the proposed project's objectives, description, and potential

impacts.

� For consultation after the draft ESIA report is prepared, the borrower must provide a summary of the

ESIA's conclusions.

For Category A projects, the borrower makes the draft ESIA report available at a public place accessible to

project-affected groups and local NGOs.

Public availability in the borrowing country and official receipt by the WB of Category A reports for projects

proposed for WB financing are prerequisites to WB appraisal. Once the borrower officially transmits the

Category A ESIA report to the WB, the WB distributes the summary (in English) to the executive directors

and makes the report available through its InfoShop (http://publications.worldbank.org) for a period of 120

days for interested parties to submit comments prior to the meeting at which the Bank's Executive Directors

will decide whether to approve the project. The borrower can also make the report available through its

own website.


23


B.4. Previous Public Consultation and Disclosure

B.4.1. Overview

PGE has actively undertaken various community engagement activities including information disclosure

and public consultation. The sections below describe consultation activities carried out by PGE prior to and

during the UKL/UPL and land Acquisition Processes. An overview is also provided of stakeholder

responses to date and corporate responsibility activities of PGE. Subsequent activities carried out by the

International Environmental and Social Consultants during the ESIA process are reported in ESIA Volume

II.

B.4.2. Indonesia UKL / UPL Consultation

Community consultation about the proposed project has been undertaken prior to and during the UKL/UPL

process on:

� December 9th, 2004 at Pinabetengan village;

� December 20th, 2004 at Kanonang I and II villages

� October 2nd

, 2007 at Tonsewer village; and

� August 20th, 2009 at District office in Tompaso.

The UKL/UPL for the steamfield (produced by the Local Consultants, 2009) states that the following 6

villages affected had good knowledge about the project when surveyed as part of the UKL/UPL process:

� Pinabetengan: Approximately 70% of villagers aware of the project;

� Tompaso II: Approximately 100%of villagers aware of the project;

� Tonsewer: Approximately 100%of villagers aware of the project;

� Sendangan: Approximately 100%of villagers aware of the project;

� Kanonang1 II: Approximately 20%of villagers aware of the project; and

� Kanonang I: Approximately 50%of villagers aware of the project.

The sources of information villagers had drawn on for their knowledge of the Project was more extensive

than solely the consultations carried by PGE, however, and included sources such as Project surveyors, as

well as the village leadership.

B.4.3. Land Acquisition Consultation

One of PGE’s core land acquisition principles is:

“Land acquisition for development shall involve public participation commencing from the planning

stage of development through to execution and the post-acquisition of land stage – all negotiations

with the land owners are carried out collectively in a public location, and in the presence of village

heads and community leaders, in an open and consultative manner without any coercion and with

sufficient time for consideration of offers.”

_________________________

1 Kanonang has since been reorganised. Kanonang I split into Kanonang 1 and 3, and Kanonang II became Kanonang 2, 4 and 5.


24


In practice this means disclosing information about the project from the outset, and holding deliberations

with local community leaders and the land holders over local prevalent market prices and entitlements to

compensation. These activities are summarised in Table B.2 below.

Table B.2: Information Disclosure and Consultation Activities Undertaken as Part of the Land Acquisition Process

Village Date Details of deliberations (‘musyawarah’) and land acquisition

Sendangan 13 August 2006;

17 & 18 October 2008;

3 August 2009

In this village, 4.8 hectares of land that was owned by nine persons was acquired by PGE for the project and villagers were pleased with the deliberation process because PGE did not use the NJOP tax valuation in the negotiations. The people were satisfied with the price. They also owned other land. On 3 August 2009 a meeting was held to discuss compensation for crops damaged during well testing and Rp. 26,720,000 was paid to eleven farmers.

Kanonang 7 September 2006;

16 & 17 October 2006

PGE has acquired land for the project in this village and the people were satisfied with the compensation received following the deliberation process.

Pinabetengan 17 & 18 October 2006

Land acquired was owned by three individuals and a price of Rp.30,000 - 31,000 per m² was agreed between PGE and the landowners.

Tompaso II 17, 18 & 20 April 2009

Land acquired was owned by two families, with the one having the largest share living in Manado and the one with a small share living in Jakarta. They had land ownership (hak milik) and the land was registered at the Kabupaten Land Office. PGE stated that they would change the status of the land to right to use the land (Hak Guna Bangunan - HGB).

A PGE Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework has been produced (see Appendix C). It

outlines the methods PGE uses for disclosing information to and consulting with Project Affected Persons

subject to land acquisition impacts.

B.4.4. ESIA Consultation and Disclosure Activities

The international ESIA team undertook two site visits during the original ESIA process in order to inform the

inception (scoping) processes, to assist PGE in disclosing the inception (scoping) findings to local

communities and NGOs and to support PGE in gathering comments used to inform the preparation of the

draft ESIA (2010).

An additional site visit was undertaken by the international ESIA team to inform the revised ESIA to be

produced in accordance with the potentially revised project scope (2011).

� ESIA Inception (Scoping) Site Visit Stakeholder Interviews between 19th - 20th March, 2010;

� ESIA Main Site Visit Stakeholder Interviews between 7th - 10th June, 2010;

� ESIA Main Site Visit Consultation and Disclosure Events on 7th and 8th June, 2010;

� Disclosure of Draft ESIA for a 120-day period on 7th October 2010;

� Draft ESIA Consultation and Disclosure Event on 28th October 2010;

� ESIA Revision Site Visit Stakeholder Interviews on 8th January 2011; and

� ESIA Revision Site Visit Consultation Event on 10th January 2011

B.4.5. Community Investment Activities

PGE provides community investment to catalyse development benefits within the communities in which it

operates. During the ESIA Scoping Site Visit community leaders expressed satisfaction with past


25


community investment and the desire for future investment to provide opportunities to improve

infrastructure, employment, rural electrification, health and education services as part of the project.

The village leaders submit proposals for assistance to PGE. They are evaluated and some have been

approved. There are several programs by PGE assisting the village, which are providing medicine and a

medical doctor. A road in Sendangan has been improved by PGE and the village has received from PGE

materials such as cement, support for meetings, health assistance, and education.

PGE has a Corporate Social Responsibility program targeted at five areas as shown below:

� Income Generation

� Education

� Infrastructure

� Health

� Environment

In 2009 in Lahendong, the following amounts were invested.

� Health: 300,000,000Rp

� Infrastructure: 75,687,500Rp

� Environment: 2,800,000Rp

� Sponsorship: 60,860,000Rp.

The community investment activities are expected to continue and details will be reported on annually.


26


B.5. Project Stakeholders

B.5.1. Overview

Stakeholder consultation is undertaken to determine the views of persons and organisations that may be

affected directly or indirectly, positively or negatively, by the Project or that can affect the outcome of the

Project.

A key step in successful stakeholder engagement is the identification of the various individuals or groups

who (i) are affected or likely to be affected directly or indirectly by the project (“affected parties”), or (ii) may

have an interest in the project (“other interested parties”). The process of identifying affected parties and

other interested parties is summarised below.

B.5.2. Stakeholder Identification

To date PGE and Badan Konsultan AMDAL Unrat (local consultants) have been involved in identifying and

reaching out to stakeholders. Stakeholders identified to date during the development of the Project are

summarised below in Table B.3. Additional stakeholders will be incorporated into the disclosure and

consultation process. The Public Relations Officer (PRO) will keep a file with names and organisations and

their contacts. As new stakeholders are identified they will be added to the list.

Table B.3: Stakeholders Identified for the Project

Stakeholder Group Identified Stakeholders

Local communities Villages of Pinabetangan; Tompaso II; Tonsewer; Sendengan; Kanonang I; Kanonang II; Kanonang IV, Pinabetengan Utara (North), Toure, Liba, Tember, Kamanga (I and II) and Talikuran

Local government agencies (Districts and Regencies)

District Governor of Minahasa, Badan Lingkungan Hidup / BLH (Environmental Agency), Dinas Pertambangan Dan Energi (Mines And Energy Agency)

Provincial government agencies Badan lingkungan Hidup / BLH (env agency), dinas pertambangan dan energi (mines and energy agency), dinas pekerjaan umun (publict work agency), dinas social (social agency), dinas tata kota (spacial planning agency)

National Government Ministries/Bodies

Kementerian Negara Lingkungan Hidup (Ministry of Environment); Directorate Energy, Ministry of Mines and Energy; MPs for Project Area, Direktorat Jenderal (Ditjen) Energi Baru Terbarukan dan Konservasi Energi (EBTKE) (Directorate-General of New Energy, Renewable and Energy Conservation)

Industry and Businesses -

Local NGOs / Civil society organisation

PKK (Housewives association), Campaigners against power development in area at National and Provincial levels, Yayasan Hulu Lestari

Farmers Local Gapotkan representatives

Education Village school Heads

Local Universities/ academics unversitas minahasa (unima), universitas samratulangi

Others Media – local news paper such as manado post, tribun manado, komentar, tribun sulut


27


B.6. Information Disclosure and Community Engagement

B.6.1. Overview

To date there has been a range of activities to disclose information and to exchange opinions. The Project

is committed to information disclosure and community engagement throughout the project lifecycle. The

sections below look at activities to be implemented during the rest of the drilling phase, and for the

operation phase.

B.6.2. Information Disclosure

During the UKL/UPL process, statutory consultation requirements were met and efforts were made to

facilitate local community participation in that process. In addition, further activities were undertaken and

efforts made to meet with parties indicating opposition to the project. The key Project issues that local

community members and local authority representatives need to fully understand relate to:

� What the technology is, in particular for operation phase, and how it differs from combustion power

plants;

� What the project components look like;

� What the effects on maize, ground nuts and crops production will be; and,

� What the effects on human health will be.

Disclosure of relevant project information helps stakeholders understand the risks, impacts and

opportunities of the project. Sometimes information needs to be reiterated several times or described in

various manners to help people understand projects better.

For the Lahendong Units 5&6 Project, consultation is carried out during the ESIA process. These are all

described in more detail below.

B.6.3. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)

The ESIA, undertaken by MML, identifies the likely environmental and social effects associated with the

proposed Project. The ESIA process requires the following activities relevant to public disclosure and

consultation are undertaken:

� Public consultation event at the scoping stage of the ESIA to provide information about the project, the

ESIA approach and discuss key environmental and social issues;

� Public consultation on the draft ESIA report, providing an opportunity for comments on the report; and

� Production of a Non-Technical Summary of the ESIA.

ESIA Consultation activities and outcomes are be fed back to the ESIA technical specialists and reported in

the ESIA. MML produce these documents in English. The ESIA is translated into Bahasa Indonesia for

distribution to stakeholders. The documents are made available for consultation and comments by PGE at

their head office, site office and at the village head’s offices in the project affected area, for a period of 120

days. Additional consultation with individual stakeholders is undertaken by PGE where this is necessary to

inform individual issues identified in the ESIA.


28


B.6.4. Media Communications

PGE has a Corporate Secretary responsible for media communication. All project team members should

be made aware of this and all media requests or contacts should be directed to the Corporate Secretary

who will manage media relations. This role will involve other team members as appropriate and will inform

them of the key project messages that have already been identified. The Corporate Secretary has press

release contacts and content templates which will be used as required. The Corporate Secretary will work

closely with the Public Relations Officer who is responsible for the site.

B.6.5. Community liaison during Drilling, Construction and Operation

The PGE Public Relations Officer who is based on site has overall responsibility for managing consultation

and disclosure for the Project. This includes the drilling, construction and operation phases. In addition, the

contractors will be required (through contract clauses) to identify a Community Liaison Officer (CLO). The

PRO should organise meetings with stakeholders (except for media), especially the local group leaders (for

instance there are women’s groups, youth groups, village elders, religious leaders) and the elected and

appointed local authorities to provide a regular opportunity to discuss any issues or concerns stakeholders

may have. The PRO is the main point of contact for stakeholders.

The PRO, with assistance from the CLO, is responsible for logging grievances according to the grievance

mechanism detailed below. The definition of a complaint or grievance in the context of this PCDP and

additional requirements over and above the provisions of the existing procedure are discussed in more

detail in Section B.8 below. The PRO works to close out grievances in a timely and satisfactory manner.

The PRO is responsible for producing annual summaries that provide details related to community

investment activities and the use of the grievance mechanism. These are submitted to the Corporate

Secretary for inclusion in the Project’s Annual Reports.

For the first four years of operation, an annual open day will be organised to allow local villagers to see the

facilities functioning up close to improve local understanding of the technology.

B.6.6. Updating the PCDP

This PCDP should be reviewed annually by the Project Manager and Corporate Secretary to see if further

activities need to be included and to address any changes to the Project or local context that may occur.


29


B.7. Implementation Timescales and Responsibilities

B.7.1. Overview

It is important that consultation and disclosure undertaken as part of the Project occurs at appropriate

timescales to allow stakeholders to be informed and contribute to the appropriate management of

environment and the development of the Project. This section assigns timescales and responsibilities to the

activities identified in the previous section.

B.7.2. Implementation

The activities described above are presented in Table B.4 below with suggestions regarding when they

were or should be implemented and the various people who have responsibility.

Table B.4: Information Disclosure Consultation and Community Engagement Schedule

Activity Timing Responsibility

ESIA Pre-consultation March 2010 MML accompanied by PGE

ESIA Screening consultation and Disclosure event

June 2010 Material in English by MML

Event arranged and advertised by PGE

ESIA – consultation event on draft report

October 2010 Draft Non-technical summary in English by MML;

Final first version in Indonesian by PGE

Event arranged and advertised by PGE

ESIA – distribution of the Non-Technical Summary

October 2010 Final English version by Mott MacDonald,

Translation and distribution by PGE

Media communications As requested or when press releases deemed relevant

Corporate Secretary, Public Relations Officer

Stakeholder meetings during drilling and operation

Within the first three months and proactively as needed thereafter

Public Relations Officer

Community investment activities

Annually Public Relations Officer, Project Manager, Corporate Secretary

Annual reports Annually Public Relations Officer, Project Manager, Corporate Secretary

Open days during operation Annually for at least the first four years

Public Relations Officer, Project Manager, Corporate Secretary

B.7.3. Responsibilities

Specific documents related to the Environmental and Social Assessment are provided by MML and

implementation support from the Local Consultants. PGE will be responsible for organising translation of

documents other than the NTS into the local language and ensuring they are distributed to the appropriate

stakeholders.

During drilling and operation, the PRO will be responsible for meeting with stakeholders and implementing

the grievance mechanism. The PRO will pass media requests to and interact regularly with PGE’s

Corporate Secretary. The PRO will document interactions with all stakeholders. The PRO will be

responsible for logging grievances and working with PGE’s Project Manager and the contractor’s CLO to

resolve them. The funding for the corporate investment activities will be approved by PGE’s Board and be

managed by the Corporate Secretary.


30


B.8. Grievance Mechanism

B.8.1. Overview

A grievance can be defined as an actual or perceived problem that might give grounds for complaint. The

sections below consider types of grievances, confidentiality and anonymity, and the Project’s grievance

resolution process.

B.8.2. Current PGE Practice

At present, PGE does not have a formally documented community grievance mechanism and resolution

process. Grievances raised by community members, representatives or groups are not currently recorded

by PGE, therefore no list of grievances and their associated resolutions has been provided for the purposes

of the ESIA. PGE has stated however, that through the UKL/UPL consultation processes, it has been

explained to the local communities that grievances can be submitted to the site manager. If grievances are

not resolved to the complainant’s satisfaction they can then contact PGE’s Headquarter. It is not clear if

contact details have been provided to the local communities.

Although there is currently no formal grievance process, evidence of grievance resolution can be found in

PGE’s Corporate Social Responsibility activities (discussed in detail in Section 8.7) whereby PGE have

invested in infrastructure such as household water supplies and irrigation principally in response to

community complaints (whether substantiated or not).

PGE has agreed to develop a community grievance mechanism for the project (all phases) and disclose

this to the local community, as specified in the subsections below. PGE’s Project Manager with support

from the PRO has overall responsibility to manage grievance issues related to the Project.

B.8.3. Type of Grievances

Potential impacts and effects that are most likely to give rise to grievances for this Project are related to:

� Construction, drilling and steam venting noise;

� Presence of a construction labour force and the effects on neighbouring villages, local services and

infrastructure;

� Water resources and water pollution;

� Community health and safety, for instance in relation to impacts of increased traffic on nearby residents;

and,

� Damage to surrounding natural environment, including crops.

Anyone will be able to submit a grievance to the Project if they believe a practice is having a detrimental

impact on the community, the environment, or on their quality of life. They may also submit comments and

suggestions. Grievances could include:

� Negative impacts on a person or a community (e.g. financial loss, physical harm, nuisance);

� Dangers to health and safety or the environment;

� Failure of PGE its sub-contractors and their workers or drivers to comply with standards or legal

obligations;

� Harassment of any nature;

� Criminal activity;

� Improper conduct or unethical behaviour;


31


� Financial malpractice or impropriety or fraud; and

� Attempts to conceal any of the above.

Grievances during construction will be investigated by PGE to review the validity and responsibility. The

PRO or Corporate Secretary will explain in writing (or orally, where literacy is an issue) the manner in which

the review was carried out, the results of the review, any changes to activities that will be undertaken to

address the grievance or how the issue is being managed to meet appropriate environmental and social

management systems and requirements.

B.9. Confidentiality and Anonymity

The Project will aim to protect a person’s confidentiality when requested and will guarantee anonymity in

annual reporting. Individuals will be asked permission to disclose their identity. Investigations will be

undertaken in a manner that is respectful of the aggrieved party and the principle of confidentiality. The

aggrieved party will need to recognise that there may be situations when disclosure of identity is required

and the Project will identify these situations to see whether the aggrieved party wishes to continue with the

investigation and resolution activities.

B.10. Grievance Resolution

With implementation of the formal grievance mechanism, PGE logs grievances and the logging system will

be formalised. A comments sheet will be produced by PGE’s Corporate Secretary for those wanting to

make a complaint or comment, in addition to the route of writing to PGE, directly or through the village

leader. Should any member of PGE’s staff receive an informal or formal verbal complaint, it must be

written down and passed to the PRO for recording and follow up. PGE’s corporate procedure for

grievances will be included in appropriate project communication materials such as the non-technical

summary. In the first instance, grievances will be directed to the PRO (in some cases this may be via the

contractors CLO) who will classify grievances according to Table B.5.

Table B.5: Grievance Classification Criteria

Grievance Classification

Risk Level Validity Response

Low No or low Unsubstantiated PRO will conduct investigation, document findings and provide a response

Medium Possible risk and likely a one off event

Possible substantiation PRO and an appropriate investigation team (including contractors CLO) will conduct investigation. The Project/Site Manager may decide to stop work during the investigation to allow the corrective preventive actions to be determined. The PRO will provide a response.

High Probable risk and could reoccur

Probable substantiation PRO will organise a Major Investigation Team including PGE for prompt investigation and resolution. Work will be stopped in the affected area. The PRO will provide a response.

The PRO will log the receipt of a comment, formally acknowledge it, track progress on its investigation and

resolution, and respond in writing with feedback to the aggrieved party. The contractors CLO will initiate

the investigation and ensure its speedy conclusion aiming to provide a response with 10 working days,

unless there are exceptional circumstances. If the Project receives a large number of unsubstantiated

grievances, the process will be reviewed to define instances when no response is needed.


32


PGE may hire an independent national consultant to investigate grievances if required, or to monitor

environmental and social indicators during the operational phase; this independent company/consultant

would play an important role in investigating the validity and responsibility for the grievance effect. Project

staff, and outside authorities as appropriate, will also contribute to the investigation. The PRO and

contractor’s CLO will collaborate to identify an appropriate investigation team with the correct skills to

review the issue raised and to decide whether it is Project related or whether it is more appropriately

addressed by a relevant authority outside the Project. The investigation will also aim to identify whether the

incident leading to the grievance is a singular occurrence or likely to reoccur. Identifying and implementing

activities, procedures, equipment and training to address and prevent reoccurrence will be part of the

investigation activities. In some cases it will be appropriate for the PRO and contractors CLO to follow up

at a later date to see if the person or organisation is satisfied with the resolution or remedial actions.

The PRO will summarise grievances to report on project performance bi-annually during construction

(including drilling, SAGS and power plant) and annually during operation removing identification information

to protect the confidentiality of the complainant and guaranteeing anonymity.

The point of contact for grievances and comments is:

PGE PRO, Mr Remmy Basalama Address : Jl. Raya Tomohon No. 420 Tomohon, North Sulawesi - Indonesia Tel _+62 431 351378 Email: [email protected] / [email protected]

B.11. Monitoring and Reporting

This PCDP identifies various activities that require monitoring and reporting including the following:

� The progress / updating of the ESIA.

� PRO and contractor’s CLO activities: minutes of consultation meetings will be produced and all original

written consultation correspondence will be retained as evidence of the process and outcomes.

� Grievance logging and tracking: each grievance will be given an identification number and followed

through by recording details and timing for their resolution and closing out.

� Annual reporting: a Project specific annual report summarising project performance, PRO activities

including grievances, will be produced.

Public domain documents are to be distributed widely to stakeholders including regulatory agencies, project

financiers local authorities and local communities.


33


C.1. Introduction

C.1.1. Background

Pertamina Geothermal Energy (PGE), a subsidiary of PT Pertamina (Persero), was established in 2006 as

mandated by the Government of Indonesia (GoI) to develop 15 Geothermal Business Working Areas in

Indonesia.

Geothermal power is a clean and efficient alternative for diversifying Indonesia’s electricity generation mix.

Indonesia has the world’s largest geothermal potential that could fuel about 27,000 MW of generation

capacity. However, the resource makes up only 3.2 percent of the present generation capacity.

The GoI has requested a loan from the World Bank (WB) to support the development of up to 370 MW of

capacity. The designated implementing agency is PGE who has requested the WB to assist with finance

investment in two sites at an advanced stage of preparation: Ulubelu Units 3&4 in Lampung Province,

Sumatra, and Lahendong Units 5&6 in North Sulawesi

The development objective of the proposed WB investment is to increase the utilisation of clean

geothermal based electricity in order to reduce pollution and improve the environment. This will be

achieved through: a) development of geothermal power generation capacity in fields under the control of

PGE, and b) strengthening the institutional capabilities of the company through technical assistance and

capacity building so that PGE can contribute to sector development on a sustained basis.

The bulk of project investment will be devoted to establishing up to 150 MW of power generation capacity

(Ulubelu Units 3&4 and Lahendong Units 5&6) which will include the confirmation of resources, production

drilling, development of the steam gathering systems, and the construction of the power plants. Upon

completion, PGE will be in a position to sell geothermal power into the national electricity grid in order to

meet growing electricity demand in an environmentally friendly manner.

Pertamina has been working in Ulubelu since the mid 1990s undertaking preliminary exploration surveys.

Since the establishment of PGE in 2006 as a subsidiary of Pertamina, PGE progressed with developing a

number of clusters, drilling wells and preparing the roads and other infrastructure needed to start

production. Lahendong Units 5&6 is actually located on the Tompaso field which is located near PGE’s

existing Lahendong field in operation since 2000. Work in the Tompaso field (registered as Lahendong

Units 5&6) started in 2007, resulting in two production clusters and one reinjection cluster.

C.1.2. World Bank Operational Policy 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement)

Land for all facilities will be, or has been acquired by PGE. Since PGE is legally registered as a private

company, it acquires land through direct negotiations, based on the principle of willing buyer-willing seller.

However, PGE can request expropriation if negotiations fail and if no viable alternative siting exists.

Therefore, the World Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement) would be triggered, for

which PGE has prepared this Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework, which describes in

detail PGE’s land acquisition procedures as well as steps that will be taken under expropriation. OP 4.12

includes safeguards to address and mitigate against impoverishment risks associated with any land

acquisition or involuntary resettlement under development projects.

Appendix C. Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework


34


The primary objective of this Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework and Note is to provide

provision of details of the land acquisition procedures employed by PGE on both project sites to date, as

well as an indication as to the expected land acquisition required for the remainder of the Project. This

demonstrates that PGE practices follow the principle of willing buyer-willing seller. A secondary objective is

to provide detailed procedures that will be applied if PGE requests the expropriation of any land, as well as

requirements for reporting to the World Bank to ensure and demonstrate compliance with OP 4.12.

Although this policy framework is intended to provide a framework for land acquisition and resettlement

impacts associated with these specific projects, it is also intended to provide an overarching framework for

land acquisition relevant to any future project that PGE pursues.

Resettlement in this document refers to the direct economic and social impacts that are caused by the

involuntary taking of land which results in relocation or loss of shelter, loss of assets or access to assets, or

loss of income sources or means of livelihood whether or not the affected persons must move to another

location. The Bank policy also refers to the involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and

protected areas resulting in adverse impact on the livelihoods of the displaced persons.

C.1.3. Report Structure

PGE has prepared this Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework (LARPF) as a means to

demonstrate compliance with both national laws and regulations and international best practice as

exemplified by WB OP 4.12. The document consists of two main sections:

1. Firstly, an outline of PGE’s Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework which includes

acquisition principles and corporate and field-level institutional and management arrangements by PGE

Land Acquisition Teams. A detailed description of PGE’s actual approach to land acquisition through

negotiated settlement is provided. In addition, by law PGE may request the Government to expropriate

land through eminent domain2 (under the Presidential Regulation, Perpres 65/2006) as a last resort.

The LARPF also includes procedures in order to ensure compliance with WB OP 4.12.

2. Secondly, a description of land acquisition and asset compensation undertaken to date as well as the

land acquisition anticipated to complete Ulubelu Units 3&4 and Lahendong Units 5&6 sites.

Additionally, a comparison of the variation in prices paid for land and trees/crops across time and

between locations is provided.

The document is based upon known information at the time of writing and is intended to be a live document

that can be updated and modified to reflect changes in law and/or acquisition status.

_________________________

2 Eminent domain is the right of the state to acquire land, using its sovereign power, for public purposes. National law establishes

which public agencies have the prerogative to exercise eminent domain.


35


C.1.4. Resettlement Policy Framework – WB OP 4.12

This Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework corresponds with the requirements of a

Resettlement Policy Framework, the components of which are described in WB OP 4.12 Annex A

(paragraphs 23 – 25) and are shown below:

(a) a brief description of the project and components for which land acquisition and resettlement are

required, and an explanation of why a resettlement plan as described in paras. 2-21 or an abbreviated plan

as described in para. 22 cannot be prepared by project appraisal;

A project description is provided as part of the projects specific information in Section 2 of the ESIA

Volume 2. No resettlement has occurred to date and none is envisaged at this stage. Should expropriation

or resettlement be required at a later stage, an outline of the requirements of an ARAP and a RAP is

provided in C.5 and a framework for resettlement is provided in this document.

(b) principles and objectives governing resettlement preparation and implementation;

PGE’s principles for land acquisition are outlined in Section C.2.2.

(c) a description of the process for preparing and approving resettlement plans;

Section C.2.5 provides details on the necessary pre-requisites and procedures for resettlement planning

should it be required.

(d) estimated population displacement and likely categories of displaced persons, to the extent feasible;

Section C.3.3 gives information regarding the land acquisition needed for the remainder of the Ulubelu 3&4

and Lahendong 5&6 projects. Details on the number of affected persons are yet to be established; no

persons are expected to be displaced.

(e) eligibility criteria for defining various categories of displaced persons;

Eligibility for entitlements is discussed in Section C.2.5.10.

(f) a legal framework reviewing the fit between borrower laws and regulations and Bank policy requirements

and measures proposed to bridge any gaps between them;

The legal framework is reviewed in Section C.2.1.

(g) methods of valuing affected assets;

Section C.2.5.7 describes the establishment of an independent assessment to value affected assets if

there is expropriation.

(h) organizational procedures for delivery of entitlements, including, for projects involving private sector

intermediaries, the responsibilities of the financial intermediary, the government, and the private developer;

Organisational procedures, roles and responsibilities are detailed in Section C.2.3.


36


(i) a description of the implementation process, linking resettlement implementation to civil works;

The implementation process is presented in Section C.2.5.19.

(j) a description of grievance redress mechanisms;

This is described in Section C.2.5.16 and draws on the grievance mechanism presented in the Public

Consultation and Disclosure Plan for the ESIA for the project (Appendix B, Volume III), which will be

disclosed when completed.

(k) a description of the arrangements for funding resettlement, including the preparation and review of cost

estimates, the flow of funds, and contingency arrangements;

Issues of funding are addressed by Section C.2.3 and Section C.2.5.18 discusses cost estimation in the

event of expropriation or involuntary resettlement. Examples of prices paid for land and assets for the two

sub-projects (Ulubelu 3 &4 and Lahendong 5&6) are shown in Sections C.3.1 and C.3.2.

(l) a description of mechanisms for consultations with, and participation of, displaced persons in planning,

implementation, and monitoring; and

Consultation with project affected persons (PAPs) is a key element of this Land Acquisition Framework and

is an inherent part of PGE’s existing practices. This document discusses consultation in Section C.2.4.2,

which describes PGE’s current procedures of negotiated settlement, and in Section C.2.5.6 which

describes the processes required for consultation when expropriation of land becomes necessary.

(m) arrangements for monitoring by the implementing agency and, if required, by independent monitors.

Monitoring, reporting and evaluation requirements are discussed in Section C.2.6.

C.2. Institutional and Legal Policy Framework

C.2.1. PGE’s Land Acquisition Approach and the Legal Requirements

As a subsidiary of the state owned oil company PT Pertamina (Persero), PGE is legally registered as a

private company in accordance with the Law and Human Rights Ministerial Decree Number W7-00089

HT.01.01-TH. 2007, Amendment Number: AHU-74736.AH.01.02.Tahun 2008.

PGE acquires land through direct negotiations, based on the principle of ‘willing buyer-willing seller’. By

law, PGE also has the option to acquire land under the rubric of public interest, utilising the principle of

eminent domain according to the provisions of the presidential decree Perpres 65/2006. The use of

Perpres 65/2006 has a controversial history in Indonesia resulting in project affected persons (PAPs)

refusing to relocate and riots. It is not a popular regulation amongst public officials or infrastructure

developers, who tend to avoid its use where possible.

Perpres 65/2006 is expected to be replaced by a national law on Land Acquisition in the Public Interest

which is currently being drafted and championed by the President3. This law, whilst still specifying

_________________________

3 Source: Drafting Committee for the Land Acquisition Law


37


procedures for use of eminent domain, is expected to be more participatory than Perpres 65/2006 and

more aligned with best practice for land expropriation, as exemplified in WB OP 4.12.

PGE commits to employing expropriation and the use of the principle of eminent domain only as a last

resort in the unlikely event of failure to negotiate a settlement and to identify a viable alternative site. If

PGE decides to exercise this right, the approach used will be fully compliant with provisions of the

prevailing law on Land Acquisition in the Public Interest and adjusted to ensure compliance with World

Bank OP 4.12. This approach is described in more detail below.

C.2.2. PGE’s Land Acquisition Principles

As stated in their internal policy document on ‘Land Acquisition for Geothermal Exploration and

Exploitation’ (No. B-001/PGE500/2008-S0), which this documents complements, PGE adopts the following

principles which are consistent with international best practice when undertaking land acquisition:

a. PGE will ensure that compensation is paid based on replacement value which takes into account

prevalent market prices as determined through consultation with affected persons (owners) and

agreement with village heads along with transaction costs to enable all affected land owners to

replace their affected assets.

b. PGE will acquire land that is free of any encumbrances and to the extent possible does not affect

any households other than the land owners. Where this is not possible, land users, whether titled or

not, will be compensated, especially leaseholders and shareholders.

c. Land acquisition for development shall involve public participation commencing from the planning

stage of development through to execution and the post-acquisition of land stage – all negotiations

with the land owners and users will be carried out collectively in an accessible location, and in the

presence of village heads and community leaders, in an open and consultative manner without any

coercion and with sufficient time for consideration of offers.

d. Owners are free to refuse to sell their land or to refuse PGE’s offers. If negotiations fail, an

alternative site is selected and the process begins again.

e. When negotiations are completed, inventories of affected land and other fixed assets are prepared in

consultation with affected land owners and a copy of the same is to be given to each land owner.

f. The negotiated amount will be paid within one month after all necessary documents required for the

land acquisition process have been completed by the land owners.

g. All market analysis, negotiation and other consultation proceedings will be documented and the

agreement for sale and purchase of land will be signed by the negotiating parties in the presence of

PPAT (Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah) and the village head or community leaders.

h. In the unlikely case where expropriation is pursued, it will be done in such a way to ensure that the

PAPs’ pre-project standard of living is improved and at a minimum restored.

i. Perpres 65/2006 or the anticipated new law on Land Acquisition in the Public Interest (‘eminent

domain’) will not be used for any land acquisition except in cases where direct negotiations with the

land owners on a ‘willing buyer-willing seller’ basis fails AND, alternative sites cannot be identified

for technical reasons without resulting in significant project component cost increases.

This process aims to be transparent, consultative, fair, and open.


38


C.2.3. PGE’s Institutional Management of Land Acquisition

At the corporate level, land acquisition for geothermal projects is headed by the Vice President of Support

Services at PGE4, who is responsible for guiding the Land Acquisition Teams (LAT) that are established for

each project. Each LAT is comprised of staff with the required skills representing the following

departments: Legal, Finance, Planning and Management; plus the Project Manager or General Manager

for each respective geothermal field. In practice, the Project Manager or General Manager will be assisted

by other staff such as Public Relations Officers with good communication skills, who are respected and

sought out by local residents and officials in relation to land acquisition and compensation.

In addition to the LAT, a Corporate Secretary helps coordinate between different PGE departments and

follows-up on the decisions taken in meetings. The roles and responsibilities of each member of the LAT

are clearly defined in the Pertamina’s internal order Prin-1062/PGE000/2007-S8, particularly regarding

decision-making and documentation.

The project LAT working in the field reports back to the corporate level at two points in the process, and

possibly a third as well:

a. First, after completing the topographical survey and market research, and reaching the decision that

local people are amenable to selling, the team reports on the process and proposes compensation

levels which are reviewed and endorsed by the corporate level. At this time, funds to make

payments should be ring fenced.

b. Second, if local owners insist on prices significantly higher than the range agreed by the corporate

team, the project team refers to the corporate level for guidance.

c. Finally, once negotiations are concluded and final agreements are signed by individual owners, the

corporate level arranges budget approval to release funds for payment.

In the highly unlikely event that eminent domain is sought and expropriation is followed, PGE personnel will

participate in the District Land Acquisition Committee (DLAC) in accordance with Perpres 65/2006 as

described below (see Section C.2.5).

C.2.4. Negotiated Settlement Land Acquisition Procedure

The Project LAT goes through at least twelve distinct steps in the negotiated settlement land acquisition

process. They are described below.

C.2.4.1. Site Selection

Based on technical investigations, PGE selects a potential site and prepares preliminary designs that

indicate the likely location of platforms (clusters), roads, and other major characteristics. Meetings are held

with kecamatan (sub-district) and village officials to discuss preliminary designs and potential sites.

C.2.4.2. Initial Socialization (consultation)

Kecamatan and village officials conduct village level meetings to acquaint villagers with the nature of the

investment and the implications of construction for land acquisition, traffic, and other factors and discuss

_________________________

4 Meanwhile, in the Vice President’s absence, the Corporate Secretary will take this responsibility


39


potential benefits and impacts. These public information and dissemination meetings are generally held in

all villages in the kecamatan, beyond the immediate range of impact.

C.2.4.3. Topographical Survey

The project carries out a detailed topographical survey and mapping of the project area to pinpoint cluster

sites, roads, and other elements. An inventory of typical above-ground assets (crops, trees) is mapped on

cadastral maps to identify affected households.

C.2.4.4. Market Analysis

While the land survey and inventory are underway, PGE also obtains information on prevalent market

prices for the types of land, structures, trees and crops in the area. These prices are established though

consultation and agreement with village heads on both formal and informal (undocumented) market

transactions. Information on NJOP prices for land is collected from the village office. Information on

prevalent market prices is obtained by gathering information on both formal and informal (undocumented)

market transactions from discussions with local officials such as village heads.

C.2.4.5. Consultation with Affected Households

Staff approach members of affected households to discuss their willingness to sell the land required,

acquaint them with steps in the purchase process and, if the owners are amenable, prepare them for the

inventory and negotiations. Details of the grievance mechanism should also be made available to PAPs at

this point. Once the formal Grievance Mechanism is adopted, an outline of it will be distributed in each

discussion.

C.2.4.6. Submission of Land Acquisition Plan

Staff compile topographical, market and landholding data together with inventory estimates and submit a

report to the corporate office that proposes compensation levels and seeks endorsement.

C.2.4.7. Negotiations

Once the corporate office grants clearance of the Land Acquisition Plan, which should take approximately

one week, PGE staff start contacting land owners, individually and in groups to organize public meetings

prior to negotiations. It may take from one to three weeks to arrange public meetings, depending on how

difficult it is to contact all the land owners. The lag time between the first contact and the meeting provides

land owners with the opportunity to obtain information on prices and prepare themselves for negotiations.

All negotiations with the land owners are carried out collectively, and in the presence of village heads and

community leaders, in an open and consultative manner without coercion.

PGE starts negotiation sessions by providing information about the assets likely to be acquired for the

Project and then requests land owners for their asking prices for land per square metre. PGE then reviews

the offers and makes a counter offer, usually corresponding to the lowest requested price levels. Owners

are invited to discuss the offer among themselves and the next meeting is convened when owners are

ready for further discussion. Negotiation usually takes two to five rounds depending on the complexity of

the issues.


40


Once the land price is set, the unit price of other assets is also negotiated and these discussions are

generally easier to conclude. Once PGE and the owners agree on prices of both land and other assets and

negotiations are concluded, minutes of negotiations are prepared and signed by project staff, the village

head and other community leaders. The list of participants is signed by all present as confirmation of their

concurrence with the agreed prices.

In the event that the asking prices by land owners is significantly higher than the range provided by the

LAT, the matter is referred back to the Corporate LAT for further guidance and possible approval of

alternate rates. Ultimately, owners are free to decline the offer made by PGE and to decline to sell their

land for the Project.

When it is clear that land owners decide to not sell their land to PGE either due to disagreement over the

rates or for other personal reasons, PGE will make efforts to change the project design and find alternative

land parcels that meet project needs. Geothermal development normally requires several clusters of land

parcels of varying sizes often at some distance from each other, instead of one contiguous large plot.

Therefore, PGE has the flexibility to revise their project designs and change the location of the land that

needs to be acquired. PGE re-located proposed Platforms A and C in Ulubelu when negotiations failed for

the original sites; and the design of one platform in Lahendong was revised to exclude one parcel when the

owner could not provide the documentation needed to conclude a transaction.

If an alternative site cannot be identified due to technical reasons that would result in significant cost over-

runs, PGE may decide to pursue expropriation and exercise ‘eminent domain’ as a last resort. Additional

steps are required to ensure expropriation is done in accordance with Indonesian law and World Bank

OP 4.12, as specified in Section C.2.5 below. It should be reiterated, however, that PGE has no intention

of resorting to expropriation.

C.2.4.8. Inventory of Individual Household Assets

Once agreement on land and asset unit prices is reached between the PAPs and PGE, PGE staff meet

with each owner to make a thorough inventory of household assets. This includes all standing crops, trees

and structures. Prices vary according to the age and productivity of the trees. Where possible, evidence

regarding age and productivity is provided. The inventory is signed by both parties with witnesses.

C.2.4.9. Individual Agreements

Based on the results of the topographical survey, the household inventory and prices established in the

common agreement, PGE drafts a separate purchase agreement with each household, clarifying the

responsibilities of each party for reaching a final settlement. Both parties sign the agreement.

C.2.4.10. Owners Submit Documentation

When the agreement is concluded, the owners are required to submit their land certificates as proof of

ownership to PGE to process revisions of land titles.

C.2.4.11. Payment by PGE

PGE is expected to pay compensation within a month of receiving the owners’ documents. It takes two or

three weeks for PGE to obtain budget approval from the corporate office and payments are usually prompt.

PGE makes payments in cash at its offices, witnessed by the head of the village. Each owner signs a


41


standard agreement that all payments are made and the owner has no further claims over the land and

assets sold to PGE. In addition, owners and PGE jointly sign documents to submit to the BPN to transfer

title for the land.

Villagers have the option of receiving payment in cash or direct deposit in a bank account. To ensure

women are not subjected to pressure or harassment to sign over their rights or relinquish their entitlement

no payment will be made for compensation to a female PAP to a bank account other than one that is

opened specifically for her as the sole account holder.

C.2.4.12. PGE Transfers Revised Letters to Owners

As the final step in the process, PGE processes the transfer of title at BPN and the Camat (sub-district)

issues a revised land letter indicating the change in land ownership. This is in effect a revised title, rather

than a new title that is issued after the transaction. The revised letter refers to the original plot and

indicates the part of the plot that has been transferred to PGE and the amount still held by the owner.

PAPs will be given one month to vacate the land or sufficient time to collect the last harvest, whichever is

the longest.

C.2.5. Resettlement Planning when Expropriation is Required

C.2.5.1. Overview

Following failure to negotiate a settlement or identify an alternative site during PGE’s Land Acquisition

Principles outlined in Section C.2.2 above, PGE has the option to expropriate land using Perpres 65/2006

or the new law on Land Acquisition in the Public Interest once it is enacted. When this occurs, PGE will

notify the Bank of its intent to expropriate land and will decide jointly on the appropriate resettlement

instrument to use. If PGE decides to request expropriation, in addition to the field steps taken under the

negotiated settlement, PGE will undertake resettlement planning and implementation in accordance with

WB OP 4.12 and aligned with the prevailing laws relating to Land Acquisition in the Public Interest5. In

addition, if PGE determines in advance that a specific site is required, regardless of the outcome of

negotiations, it will notify the World Bank immediately and prepare a resettlement plan in accordance with

OP 4.12, prior to beginning negotiations.

C.2.5.2. Planning for Expropriation and/or Resettlement

This section outlines the preparatory stages required prior to expropriation or resettlement taking place.

These include: information about how to decide on an appropriate resettlement instrument; the process for

preparing resettlement plans; the eligibility criteria for compensation; an entitlement matrix to ensure fair

compensation for all PAPs; the institutional and legal framework; methods for the evaluation of assets; a

description of the implementation process; a grievance redress mechanism; the arrangements for funding

of resettlement; consultation mechanisms; and arrangements for monitoring of the resettlement process.

_________________________

5 If the project is still in effect when the law is changed, PGE will revise this document to update legal provisions and assure

compliance with OP 4.12 and submit it to the Bank for approval


42


C.2.5.3. Resettlement Planning Instruments

Selecting an appropriate resettlement tool is important. There are two main resettlement planning

instruments for project impacts, namely an abbreviated resettlement action plan (ARAP) which is

acceptable if fewer than 200 PAPs are affected, or if more than 200 people are affected but land acquisition

is minor (10 percent or less of all productive assets of the affected households is taken) and no physical

relocation is involved. A full resettlement action plan (RAP) is required when land acquisition affects more

than 200 people, takes more than 10 percent of household productive assets, and involves physical

relocation. For both types of resettlement plan, preliminary notification that the land is needed for public

purposes will be required.

Full details on the requirements of both an ARAP and a RAP are shown in C.5. There are no fundamental

differences in terms of achieving objectives of equality and compensating social cost; however there are

some procedural differences between an ARAP and RAP. The RAP is more detailed and takes longer to

complete. A RAP needs to include a review of the legal and institutional framework (such as is provided

within this document) whereas an ARAP does not. An ARAP can be based on an asset census with each

PAP household while a RAP requires both an asset census and a community socio-economic survey to

provide a monitoring benchmark for understanding how PAPs’ socio-economic conditions have changed.

The socio-economic survey generally covers one in every four households where PAPs live. It will draw

accurate information and help identify likely impacts of displacement based on a quantitative as well as

qualitative assessment. It also helps with the stakeholder analysis by identifying different categories and

groups, sectors and population involved and analysing the particular ways they are going to be affected. It

provides a useful baseline for evaluating income restoration and ensuring that PAPs are returned to at least

pre-project standards of living.

The RAP also needs to address provisional resettlement arrangements, if relevant, (which may include

transport arrangement and temporary accommodation if needed), livelihood restoration and community

access to service provision as well as land and housing provision.

The Project Land Acquisition Team at PGE will be responsible for coordinating the production of the

appropriate resettlement planning instrument and for ensuring its implementation. The following

procedures and considerations are expected to be part of the resettlement planning and implementation

monitoring processes.

C.2.5.4. Managing Gender Considerations

Women have important economic roles in project areas, particularly in farming, and the quantity and quality

of water significantly affects their well-being. PGE’s sub-projects will pay particular attention to ensure

women’s needs and perspectives are addressed in entitlement packages and to ensure the impact on them

as well as vulnerable groups is monitored and evaluated. Women will be major participants in the

consultation processes to determine and negotiate for compensation entitlements and implement the

resettlement plans. Where the PAP census identifies women headed households, these will be clearly

listed as beneficiaries of compensation and rehabilitation activities. To address gender issues, the

following actions have been identified:

� Collect gender disaggregated data;

� Include female surveyors in the household survey team;

� Have women only focus group discussions; and,


43


� Have monitoring indicators and evaluation questions related to how women’s and other vulnerable

groups needs have been addressed in resettlement implementation.

Vulnerable groups that have been identified include the elderly, the disabled or those with long term health

problems, and those who are untitled.

C.2.5.5. Establishment of the District Land Acquisition Committee (DLAC)

The District Land Acquisition Committee (DLAC) will be established as stipulated by Presidential Decree

Kepres 65/2006, to manage all aspects of the expropriation process in an open, transparent and

participatory manner. The DLAC will comprise of the:

� Bupati (Head of District Administration) who will chair the DLAC;

� District administration land agency representatives (secretary);

� Project affected village head;

� PAP representatives: a minimum of two representatives - one male and one female; and a suggested

one for every fifty PAPs; and

� PGE Land Acquisition Team Leaders.

The DLAC will be responsible for overseeing all of the expropriation activities specified in detail below

including:

� Public consultation and disclosure (socialisation) with PAPs;

� Household socio-economic and asset census surveys;

� Research on the legal status of the plots of land;

� Facilitation of deliberation (musyawarah) between PGE and the PAP with regard to the type of impacts,

form of compensation, appraisal of compensation, and appointment of the appraising agency;

� Preparation and issue of official monitoring reports with regard to the payment of compensation for land,

buildings, plants, and other objects thereon and release of title to land; and

� Administration and documentation of all files on the expropriation process and provision of legalized

copies of the original documents to the district/city land office.

C.2.5.6. Disclosure, Consultation (Socialisation) and Deliberation (‘Musyawarah’)

The DLAC shall disclose information about the Project and land acquisition process via a public information

booklet to the PAPs and the village leader explaining the development proposal, the results of the

topographical survey, the failure of the negotiations discussed in Section C.2.4.7, the reasons for pursuing

expropriation, the expropriation process moving forward, and the legal rights of the PAP under this

framework. This information will be disclosed in the appropriate local language and in non-technical terms,

taking into account literacy levels. The date of distribution of the public information booklet to PAPs shall

be the cut-off date for eligibility for entitlements under the expropriation process (see Section C.2.5.10).

The booklet will contain contact information—names, addresses, phone numbers—for those who wish to

raise queries or grievances (see Section C.2.5.16 below). PGE will retain documentation of the receipt of

the information by each PAP.

The DLAC together with PGE will meet with PAPs in order to disclose information about the process and to

deliberate the compensation and income restoration entitlements. This may be conducted several times as

required. In addition to the PAPs, deliberation must also involve the Appraising Agency (as discussed in

Section C.2.5.7 below) to ensure exchange of accurate information from the initial stage on the appraisal of

compensation and to prevent speculation on unit prices. Efforts will be made to minimise speculation by

having a transparent and inclusive decision on land rates, by using as much concrete, recent data as


44


possible, and by not allowing for the implementation schedule to be delayed, therefore reducing the amount

of time available for speculation to occur. The DLAC will ensure female representation to discuss issues

with female PAPs.

C.2.5.7. Organising Independent Assessment

The DLAC can establish a local assessment group or acquire the services of an appraising agency that has

obtained the required license from the National Land Agency of the Republic of Indonesia to act as an

Independent Assessor. The appointment of independent assessor should be agreed in principle by the

PAPs. The appraising agency shall clearly define in writing and inform affected persons of the proposed

valuation methods prior to beginning the appraisal. Whether a local assessment group is established or an

appraising agency is used, the valuation process is to be guided by the principle that the livelihood of the

people affected by the land acquisition shall be better off or at least equal to their condition before the land

acquisition. Valuation methods need to reflect use of replacement cost as the main basis for appraisal of

physical and economic displacement.

C.2.5.8. Socio-economic and Asset Census of Project Affected Persons (PAPs)

For a full resettlement action plan, a socio-economic baseline measurement of the PAPs pre-project

standard of living is required. A sample of twenty-five percent of local households must be surveyed to

determine baseline household composition and socio-economic status in terms of health, education,

livelihood, income, expenditure and vulnerability to impoverishment risks.

In addition an asset census for those who will be directly affected and suffer losses must be undertaken

with one hundred percent of PAPs for both abbreviated and full resettlement action plans. Gender-

disaggregated socioeconomic and asset census information for PAPs and local households will be included

in a database for reference and livelihood/income restoration monitoring purposes, particularly for

vulnerable or severely affected PAPs (see Section C.2.5.15 below).

Census information will cover, but is not limited to covering:

� Aggregate number of individuals and households;

� Age, gender, occupation of every individual;

� Ownership of personal property including structures, land, crops on land, other assets such as livestock,

wells, trees, fishing equipment;

� Use of public and common property including land, structures and facilities, and infrastructures; and

� Income sources including farm and natural environment-based income, off-farm labour or employment,

informal sector activities, remuneration from other family members.

During the census, detailed measurements of assets, including land plots, standing crops, in some cases

trees, structures, houses, and equipment will be taken to help value them. Sketches and photographs will

be used to record land use and assist in asset valuation.

C.2.5.9. Eligibility and Entitlements

Based on the results of the asset census, the entitlement package for each PAP will be prepared. The

entitlement matrix below (Table C.1) addresses loss of agriculture, non-agricultural, commercial, residential

land, crops, trees, and commercial, residential or other structures and community infrastructure.

Temporary losses are also reflected in the entitlement matrix.


45


C.2.5.10. Eligibility Criteria

For the purposes of this framework, a PAP will include:

� any person or household adversely affected by acquisition of assets or change in use of land due to

PGE’s operations;

� any vulnerable and affected person including women, destitute, artisans, tribal communities, squatters,

and those with usufruct rights, poverty groups depending for livelihood upon the land to be acquired by

the project; and

� any other person who may prove and establish his/her right as an affected person to the satisfaction of

the PGE’s Director General of Projects.

Compensation eligibility will be limited by a cut-off date to be set for each subproject as the day of the

distribution of the PAP information booklet. PAPs who settle in the affected areas after the cut-off date will

not be eligible for compensation. They will be given sufficient advance notice to vacate premises and

dismantle affected structures prior to project implementation. Dismantled structures materials will not be

confiscated and ineligible PAPs will not pay any fine or suffer any sanction if completed in the requested

time period.

Those entitled to receive compensation shall be:

� Holders of titles to land whether with certificates or without certificates;

� Customary law community members whose communal land is used for development;

� Nadzir for wakaf land;

� State land users;

� Owners of buildings, plants, or other objects related thereto;

� PAPs dependent on use of affected land for their livelihoods as well as business owners or employees;

and

� Other land users who may not be living on the land but may have been using its resources and now will

suffer from restrictions on that land use.

C.2.5.11. Compensation

The compensation, as in the procedures for negotiated settlement (see Section C.2.4), may be in the form

of:

� Replacement land (for instance where there is complete loss of a landholding, an equivalent area of

land with similar characteristics will be provided as an option to cash compensation); and/or

� Replacement shelter or structure (for instance where the main residence is lost, housing with similar

amenity will be provided as an option to cash compensation); and/or

� Money (allowances in addition to compensation for permanent losses can include cash assistance for

land preparation, transition allowances, transport allowance for shifting to a new location, and

allowances to cover repair cost of the remaining structure); and/or

� Income and livelihood restoration measures (see Section C.2.5.14 below).

If land is not directly replaced, cash compensation is to be based on replacement value taking into account

current market values or productive potential, and inclusive of all administrative fees and taxes and other

transaction costs, including moving costs.


46


C.2.5.12. Determining Entitlements to Compensation

Based on the results of the asset census, the entitlement package for each PAP will be prepared. The

entitlement matrix below addresses loss of agriculture, non-agricultural, commercial, residential land, crops,

trees, and commercial, residential or other structures and community infrastructure. Temporary losses are

also reflected in the entitlement matrix. Entitlement packages are classified in terms of category of loss

rather than category of person affected as each category of person may suffer more than one loss. Table

C.1 below presents the Entitlement Matrix.

Table C.1: Entitlement Matrix

Type of Loss

Application Category of PAP Compensation Entitlements

Owner: a person with legal title/registration of land ownership (including customary and traditional rights recognised under the laws of Indonesia)

Full replacement cost (Market Value) and relocation allowance.

Tenant Cash compensation for above ground assets and relocation allowance. Owner/Tenant agreements apply.

1. Permanent agricultural land loss

PAPs losing agricultural land

Encroachers (unofficial users of agricultural land)

Cash compensation for above ground assets and relocation allowance.


Full replacement cost (Market Value) and relocation allowance.

Tenant Relocation allowance.

2. Permanent residential land loss

PAPs losing their residential land

Squatters (unofficial users of residential land)

Relocation allowance.


Full replacement cost (Market Value), relocation allowance (see item 12) and compensation for temporary income loss.

Tenant Relocation allowance (see item 12), compensation for temporary income loss.

3. Permanent commercial land loss

PAPs losing their commercial land

Squatters (unofficial users of commercial land)

Relocation allowance (see item 12), compensation for temporary income loss.


Cash compensation for rent or plot rehabilitation equivalent to 1/10th of land market value.

4. Temporary land loss

Land used temporarily during construction of transmission lines

Tenant/Unofficial user Cash compensation lump sum equivalent to 1/10th of land market value shared between land users as per proportions.

5. Residential building loss

Loss of residential buildings

Owner: a person with legal title/registration of ownership

Cash compensation for residential building at replacement value based on market price free of depreciation/transaction costs and salvaged materials plus relocation allowance (see item 12).

Partial impacts will entail the compensation of the affected portion of the building plus repairs to return to at least pre-project standard.


47


Type of Loss


Tenants/squatters in residential buildings who are identified in census

Relocation and severe impact allowance as below.

Owner of commercial or non-residential buildings/assets with registration or who is identified in census

Cash compensation for non-residential building and other fixed assets at replacement value based on market price free of depreciation/transaction costs and salvaged materials plus relocation allowance (see item 12).

Partial impacts will entail the compensation of the affected portion of the building plus repairs.

6. Commercial and non- residential buildings/ asset loss

Loss of commercial and non-residential buildings

Tenants/squatters in commercial or non-residential buildings/assets who are identified in census

Relocation and severe impact allowance as below.

7. Crop Losses

Standing crops affected

Owner of crop Advance notice to harvest last crop

Cash compensation to equal amount of market value of crop lost plus cost of replacement of seed based on Agriculture Department estimate.

8. Tree Losses

Trees affected Owner of tree Advance notice to harvest tree products. Salvage material free of cost.

Cash compensation to equal amount of market value of tree lost plus cost of replacement of seed based on Agriculture Department estimate taking into account type, age and productive value.

9. Income losses

Business or employment loss

All PAPs regardless of legal status For a permanent impact, cash compensation of one year net business income or salary.

For a temporary impact, cash compensation of net income or salary for the number of months of business or employment stoppage for a period of up to 1 year.

Assessment to be based on paper evidence or oral testimony and Village Head confirmation. At least government decreed minimum salary will be provided.

10. Community structures or public infrastructure losses

Including losses affecting public service and religious infrastructure

The public via leadership of the relevant authority

Reconstruction of lost structure in consultation with community. They will be fully replaced or rehabilitated so as to satisfy their pre-project functions taking into account any recognised new needs that could increase use or service levels.

11. Allowance for severe impacts

Rehabilitation assistance for PAPs with more than 10 percent of land holding affected or to be relocated

All severely affected PAPs including informal settlers and relocated tenants

For severe land impacts, an additional allowance equal to the market value of the land for one year.

For those being relocated, a rehabilitation allowance of equal to six months of average annual salary.

12. Allowance for relocation

Transport/ transition costs

All relocated PAPs including relocated renters

Provision of funds to cover transport costs and livelihood expenses for 1 month of average annual salary.

13. Allowance for especially vulnerable people

Rehabilitation assistance for PAPs considered especially vulnerable

‘Especially vulnerable’ include households headed by a single parent, woman or widow; include a pregnant woman or woman with a newly born child; have more than six dependent children; and have a family member who has a disability, long term illness (including mental illness), or who has mobility challenges.

Allowance equivalent to 6 months of average annual salary and employment priority for a household family member in project-related jobs.


48


Type of Loss


14. Unforeseen impacts

Will be documented and mitigated or compensated based on the principles in this RPF.

C.2.5.13. Replacement Land or Shelter

Where land or shelter is replaced it should be of similar productive or amenity value. In particular, the

following screening criteria will be used for identifying relocation sites:

� the new site should not be within an environmentally sensitive area;

� the resettlement area should be within reach of infrastructure services such as water supply, electricity,

roads, hospitals, schools, etc;

� as far as possible, PAPs should be resettled within or close to their original settlement areas;

� there should be a sustainable source of water within 1 km of the site;

� the site should be large enough to accommodate PAPs and the public and social services provided

should be sufficient enough to cope with the revised population density;

� the site owners, users and PAPs should be consulted and invited to participate in the meetings and

activities related to resettlement;

� the project should secure legal title to the land for the PAPs who are resettled;

� the site boundaries and the land allocated for public service should be clearly marked, measured and

recorded;

� there should not be any natural or man made features on the site (e.g. swamps, water pipes, gullies,

bedrock, flood plains, graveyards, rock falls, steep cliffs, electricity pylons, etc) to obstruct construction

or cause danger to people, animals or building structures;

� the site must conform to the local development plan for the area or district; and

� utilisation of the site should not result in physical displacement of host site people, or the loss, denial or

restriction of their access to economic resources.

There shall be no deduction for depreciation or salvageable materials from partial or complete structural

losses.

C.2.5.14. Income and Livelihood Restoration

In some cases, income and livelihood restoration opportunities such as training and permanent

employment (minimum of three years), land preparation and access to credit may be provided in addition to

cash and land. Where PAPs need to be relocated from their homes and subsistence lifestyles were

practiced, income and livelihood restoration will be considered. It should be noted that no relocation is

anticipated at this point, thanks to the relative flexibility of PGE in terms of site locations.

C.2.5.15. Vulnerable / Severely Affected People’s Assistance

If the socio-economic census reveals that vulnerable, marginalised or disadvantaged people or households

– including those below the poverty line, ethnic minorities/indigenous peoples or female or disabled headed

households - are amongst the PAPs, then these individuals and groups will be consulted to determine their

development needs and priorities which will be accounted for through the compensation measures

provided to them. The same is the case for ‘severely affected’ PAPs - defined as those losing more than

10% of their productive agricultural land and unable to obtain access to alternative land.


49


C.2.5.16. Grievance Mechanism

PAPs will be informed of their land rights and the provisions in this RPF. The aim of building awareness

with the written and oral information will be to achieve clarity and avoid misinterpretation, complaints and

grievances. Care will be taken to prevent grievances rather than going through a redress process by

careful implementation, by ensuring full participation and consultation with the PAPs, and by establishing

extensive communication and coordination between the affected communities, PGE’s LAT, the DLAC and

local governments in general.

Even with precautions and care, a disagreement or dissatisfaction may emerge. To address such a

situation, for instance a PAP that is unsatisfied with the outcome of their eligibility decision or compensation

package, a grievance redress mechanism will be put in place. The main objectives of mediating conflicts

and having a grievance redress mechanism are to:

� reach mutually agreed solutions satisfactory to both the Project and the PAP;

� cut down on lengthy litigation processes ; and

� prevent delay in project implementation.

When grievances do occur, appeals are likely to focus on the following key issues: the intent to

expropriate, disputed ownership, compensation valuation. In the first instance, efforts should be made to

resolve the issue informally. Disputed ownership may be able to be resolved by consideration of additional

documentation including copies of land titles, mortgage deeds, revenue receipts or other legal tender

showing ownership of tenancy. In the case of renters of farmed or rented land, documentary evidence of

the understanding between the landowner and the renter may be available and in case of customary land

use, verification and evidence of use for land for instance through testimonies and receipts may be

possible. For proof of residence, voters list or other official records may be available.

For grievances related to the proposed compensation value, the LAT should review each case, review

these RPF guidelines especially the eligibility and entitlement matrix, and decide whether to reconfirm the

original offer or propose a revised offer. It may be necessary to establish new guidelines related to the

revised offer.

At the outset of the expropriation process, the DLAC and PGE must prepare and disclose a grievance

mechanism to PAPs. This provides contact details of local (project level) DLAC representatives to whom

they can submit grievances regarding the expropriation process or other project associated complaints or

information requests. The contact person for Ulubelu is Mr, Anshoruddin (Address : Pekon Karang Rejo,

Ulubelu District Tanggamus, Lampung Province – Indonesia, Tel : +62 21 39833316, Email:

[email protected] or [email protected]) and the contact person for Lahendong is Mr

Remmy Basalama (Address : Jl. Raya Tomohon No. 420 Tomohon, North Sulawesi – Indonesia, Tel +62

431 351378, Email: [email protected] or [email protected]).

The DLAC will consider the grievance and issue a response within seven days. If the PAP is not happy

with the compensation outcome they must submit their grievance to the District Court no later than 14 days

after the decision. The District Court’s decision is final. PGE will log and follow up grievances, reporting

every six months to the Bank.

Further details on the Grievance Mechanism are provided in the Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan

included in the Environmental and Social Impact Assessments prepared for each site.


50


C.2.5.17. Land Possession

Payment of compensation of assets other than structures (land, crops, and trees) will need to be made at

least 15 days, and preferably 30, prior to actual possession of the space being utilised by the PAPs. In the

case of a grievance, the assessed/allocated amount of compensation will be pledged in the names of the

concerned PAPs, pending a decision. Civil works cannot commence until all compensations have been

paid and entitlements provided, with documentation of receipt by the PAPs.

C.2.5.18. Resettlement Budget and Financing

Each ARAP/RAP will provide a budget that includes:

� Unit compensation rates for losses and the number of units affected;

� Unit costs for relocation activities (transporting PAPs and assets, transfer fees, taxes, costs for

identifying new housing or land, temporary shelter, etc.) and number of units;

� Resettlement site preparation costs; and

� Income restoration and improvement costs including temporary income support, purchasing alternative

income generating assets, training, extension services, start up capital, etc.

PGE will pay PAPs in a timely fashion as per their procedures for paying those involved in negotiated

settlement (see Section C.2.4.11 for details).

The WB requires that the full costs of involuntary resettlement activities are included in the total project

cost. Resettlement activities need not be economically viable on their own but they should be cost

effective. PAPs will not bear the resettlement costs.

C.2.5.19. Implementation Process

Involuntary resettlement is a sensitive process that takes time. RAPs take more time than ARAPs and both

can take several months to follow the required processes and ensure involvement of appropriate

organisations. Table C.2 below provides the general process that each subproject should follow to address

resettlement impacts.


51


Table C.2: Resettlement Plan Preparation and Implementation

Step Action Responsibility

A) ARAP/RAP PREPARATION

A1 Decide whether involuntary resettlement is an issue and, if so, what type of RAP is required LAT

A2 Establish the relevant DLAC PGE and Local authorities

A3 Identify independent assessor PGE and DLAC

A4 Establish system for channelling, logging and resolving grievances LAT

A5

Prepare surveys forms for household asset census and detailed measurement survey, train local survey teams, and establish coordination with relevant local government LAT

A6 Collect cadastral and land maps of area where there is involuntary resettlement LAT

A7 Verify land records in affected areas, update cadastral maps and carry out surveys LAT / Local government

A8 Conduct public consultations LAT / DLAC

A9 Negotiations with PAPs LAT / DLAC

A10 Integrate data from surveys, consultations and negotiations into the RAP LAT

A11 Submission of RAP to World Bank for approval LAT / World Bank

A12 Upon approval, issue formal notification about the particular land Local government

A13 Ring fence funds for RAP implementation, including contingency PGE

A14 Distribute RAP and its non-technical summary to stakeholders in an appropriate language, location and manner. LAT / DLAC

A15 Post on WB Infoshop World Bank

B) ARAP/RAP IMPLEMENTATION

B1 Inform PAPs where and when compensation will be paid along with project schedule and dates for vacating their premises LAT

B2 Disburse land and crop compensation and submit payment receipts to appropriate PGE finance department LAT / Local government

B3

Disburse other compensation, assistance and rehabilitation allowance and submit payment to appropriate PGE finance department DLAC / LAT

B4 Prepare new relocation sites as required LAT

B5 Finalise land transfer by demolishing and relocating affected structures and assets (if relevant) LAT / DLAC / Contractor

B6 Monitor and Document RAP implementation DLAC / LAT / Independent Assessor

B7 Issue notice to proceed with civil works DLAC / WB / PGE

B8 Internal monitoring with quarterly reports on RAP implementation DLAC

B9 External evaluation of RAP TBD

Key: LAT – Land Acquisition Team

DLAC - District Land Acquisition Committee

TBD – To be determined


52


C.2.6. Monitoring and Reporting

C.2.6.1. Project Documentation

To facilitate monitoring of compliance with this policy framework, PGE will prepare, maintain and make the

following documentation available to the World Bank as evidence of the negotiated settlement land

acquisition process:

� Initial site description and land acquisition plan;

� Schedule of survey, socialization activities and inventory;

� Record of receipt by PAPs of information and cut-off date manual

� Land acquisition report - submitted for corporate agreement;

� Minutes of negotiation;

� Summary compensation data - land and other assets;

� Payment date; and

� Date of transfer of revised certificates to owners.

In cases where resettlement planning is required because expropriation is pursued as a last resort, a

resettlement plan (RAP or ARAP) and reporting will be required. The following additional documentation is

relevant:

� Description of the discussions and negotiations that have taken place prior to initiating the expropriation

process and the circumstances that led to the decision to expropriate;

� Entitlement matrix;

� Any anticipated outcomes that are expected to be different than the outcomes from the standard

negotiated settlement land acquisition process;

� Identification of all PAPs (gender and age disaggregated);

� Identification of vulnerable and severely affected PAPs, and provisions to address their status.

� Record of receipt by PAPs of information and cut-off date manual

� Changes in administrative procedures, assignment of responsibility to individuals, or compensation

rates or measures that will result from expropriation;

� Official monitoring reports with regard to the payment of compensation for land, buildings, plants, and

other objects thereon and release of title to land; and

� Reports on all of the activities specified in Section C.2.5 above, for example reports on socio-economic

and asset census, additional consultation, etc.

C.2.6.2. Monitoring and Evaluation of ARAPs and RAPs

Regular, for instance monthly, reports should track items such as:

� Information campaign and consultation with PAPs;

� Status of land acquisition and payments on land compensation;

� Compensation for affected structures and other assets;

� Relocation of PAPs;

� Payments for loss of income;

� Selection and distribution of replacement land areas;

� Income restoration activities; and

� Number and type of grievances received, how they are being addressed and when they have closed

out).


53


PGE will need to produce a Final Land Acquisition and Resettlement Evaluation Report within four months

of the last resettlement activities being implemented, which can be used by World Bank supervision to

review and report on resettlement completion (called a RAP audit). It should provide a summary of

activities and amounts related to:

� Eligibility

� Valuation of property;

� Grievances;

� Losses and compensation;

� Income restoration;

� Consultation and participation of PAPs, especially women, the poor and the most vulnerable groups;

� Level of satisfaction of PAPs in the post resettlement period.


54


C.3. Land Acquisition and Crop Compensation to Date (as of 1st January 2011)

C.3.1. Ulubelu 3 & 4

C.3.1.1. Land Acquisition

Ulubelu Geothermal is situated in an open basin that appears to be fully utilised for agriculture and

horticulture. The bottom of the basin is paddy land and the surrounding hills are planted with coffee, cocoa

and other tree crops, sometimes mixed with small vegetable and fodder plots, depending on the land

contours. Except for the paddy land, the terrain is rugged, with relatively steep hills and valleys. Although

the hillsides appear to be scrub forests, on closer look they are densely covered by tree crops. Villages are

located on natural terraces above the paddy land. Residences are concentrated in villages, although the

new roads have prompted linear development of housing and retail outlets beyond the traditional villages.

Several small shops (warung) have appeared recently around new construction sites. Land ownership is

fragmented and it is common for one family to own several pieces of land in different locations. Pertamina

initially established an operations centre at the edge of the paddy land, off the main road into the area.

Subsequent works have been located in the hills, however, deliberately avoiding the paddy land.

The Ulubelu project consists of eight platforms (clusters or groups of wells numbered A to H) on which a

number of either production or reinjection wells are drilled, pumping stations, connection roads, connection

pipes and two power plant sites (each of two units). PLN has purchased the land for Ulubelu Units 1&2

and construction is underway; PGE recently concluded acquisition of the land for implementation of Ulubelu

Units 3&4. The various clusters will be interconnected by steam pipelines to the respective power units.

Each cluster comprises two to six wells. Five of the clusters (B, C, D, G and H) will be used for steam

production and two (A and F) for steam reinjection. Cluster E wells are reportedly not good enough for

production and may be used as spare reinjection capacity.

Pertamina originally acquired land for exploration wells. With the establishment of PGE in 2006, PGE has

subsequently acquired land for Clusters A to H, Ulubelu Units 3&4 power plant and the road network used

for transport and interconnection pipes. The first acquisitions, Clusters A and B, were completed when

PGE was a division of Pertamina; the remaining purchases were carried out by PGE as a separate entity,

the last of which was concluded in December, 2010. To date, PGE has acquired a total of 46.44 ha in

Ulubelu to support the overall Ulubelu development (approximately 34.7 ha is relevant to the Ulubelu Units

3&4 project component scope). Neither the roads nor the earthworks restrict the villagers’ access to

housing or agricultural plots. The PGE roads have significantly improved communication within the project

area and between the local villages and other parts of the kecamatan.

Table C.3 summarises the land acquisition activities to date for Ulubelu Units 3&4 project components and

Units 1&2 (outside project component scope). It is important to note that certain well clusters serve both

power plants (although have dedicated wells to respective power plant), and have therefore been included

in both tables.


55


Table C.3: Ulubelu Land Acquisition Undertaken for Main Project Components

Component Project Scope?

Area (m²) No. of Owners

Date Acquired

NJOP (Rp/m2)

Price Paid

(Rp/m2)(e)

Power Plant Units 1&2 (a) No NA NA NA NA NA

Water Pumping Station 1 Yes 260.00 1 May 13, 1997 NA 5,000

Well A1 (UBL-01) No

Well A2 (UBL-09) No

Well A3 (UBL-18) Yes

Wellpad Cluster A (Reinjection)

Well A4 (UBL-22) Yes

22,236.00 6 August 31,

2006 3,500

7,000 or 8,000

Well B1 (UBL-02) No

Well B2 (UBL-03) No

Well B3 (UBL-04) No

Well B4 (UBL-15) Yes

Wellpad Cluster B (Production)

Well B5 (UBL-16) No

52,144.00 (b)

37

August 31, 2006 and

September 2009

3,500

7,000 or 8,000 (2006)

and 12,500 or

20,000 (2009)

Well C1 (UBL-05) No

Well C2 (UBL-06) No

Well C3 (UBL-07) No Wellpad Cluster C

Well C4 (UBL-08) No

31,126.00 6 March 27,

2008 2,450 to 3,500

12,500 or 20,000

Well D1 (UBL-14) No

Well D2 (UBL-11) No

Well D3 (UBL-12) No Wellpad Cluster D

Well D4 (UBL-13) No

86,276.30 (b)

27

June 27, 2008 and

November 5, 2008

2,450 to 3,500

11,500 or 17,500

Well E1 (UBL-10) Yes Wellpad Cluster E (Production) Well E2 (UBL-20) Yes

47,046.55 (b)

16 November 5,

2008 2,450 to 3,500

11,500 or 17,500

Water Pumping Station 3 Yes 9,345.33

(c) 16

January 9, 2009

3,500 to 7,150

11,500 or 17,500

Production Pipeline Corridors Yes 5,253.63 15 January 9,

2009 3,500 to 7,150

12,500 or 20,000

Water Pumping Station 2 Yes 2,224.13 2 July, 2009 3,500 to 7,150

11,500 or 17,500

Well F1 (UBL-17) No

Well F2 (UBL-19) Yes Wellpad Cluster F (Reinjection)

Well F3 (UBL-21) Yes

31,115.68 (b)

9 September,

2009 3,500 to 7,150

12,500

Well G1 (UBL-23) Yes




Wellpad Cluster G (Production)


38,933.31 (b)

15 September,

2009 3,500 to 7,150

12,500 or 20,000

Well H1 (UBL-28) Yes



Wellpad Cluster H (Production)


56,442.38 (b) (d)

29 September 6,

2010 3,500 to 7,150

12,500 or 20,000

Power Plant Units 3&4 Yes 81,982.04 20 December 16, 2010

3,500 to 7,150

12,500 or 20,000


56


Source: PGE Land Acquisition Team

Notes: (a) The site was being prepared for construction during the visit of the ESIA team in June 2010, but the exact size of the

affected area and number of affected people is not known by PGE.

(b) Includes area of road access.

(c) Includes land acquired for the water supply pipeline corridor.

(d) Area acquired for Cluster H includes brine and condensate pipeline corridors to reinjection Clusters A and F.

(e) When two price amounts are presented, the first refers to the price for plantation (kebun) and the second for paddy land

(sawah).

C.3.1.2. Crop Compensation

Table C.4 provides an example of crop compensation paid during the acquisition of Cluster C as part of the

overall Ulubelu development.

Table C.4: Agreed Tariffs for Crop Compensation– Ulubelu Cluster C

Plant Rp/tree

Coffee 20,000

Pepper 25,000

Cocoa 15,000

Sugar palm 50,000

Vanilla 25,000

Cloves 100,000

Others 25,000

C.3.2. Lahendong 5 & 6

C.3.2.1. Land Acquisition

The Tompaso area (within which Lahendong Units 5&6 are being developed) is located on a gently sloping,

slightly undulating plane below a volcanic ridge. The area is intensively cultivated with a mixture of grazing,

fodder, vegetables, tall grains and tree crops. Plots appear to be larger than at Ulubelu, with open fields

demarcated by rows of trees, including coconut palms, interspersed with more dense horticulture. Cattle

are grazed in small herds. Communication is easy within the area, as it is well-served by village roads.

There are two existing production platforms (clusters) in Tompaso and one injection platform in place. The

clusters will be interconnected by steam pipelines to allow operational flexibility. Each cluster comprises

two to five wells. The land for two of them (Cluster 27 close to Sendangan and Cluster 26 close to

Kanonang) was purchased in October 2006. The land for the Cluster 32 close to Tompaso II was

purchased in 2009. Additionally, there is a smaller area of land that was acquired at Pinabetengan for the

purposes of water abstraction / pump-station.

The production clusters are located on village roads, and the injection site is very close to a road, so PGE

did not need to acquire land for roads. PGE upgraded village roads leading to the sites and linking the

clusters. .

The clusters will be interconnected by pipelines to allow operational flexibility. Each cluster comprises two

to five wells. Table C.5 summarises the land acquisition activities to date for Lahendong Units 5 & 6, a total

of 15.18 ha to date.


57


Table C.5: Lahendong Units 5 & 6 Land Acquisition Summary

Location Area (m2)

No. of Owners

Date Acquired

NJOP (Rp/m2)

Market Rate (Rp/m2)

Price Paid (Rp/m2)

Water Pump Station I 8,171.00 3 22 Feb. 2007 n.a. 15-30,000 30-31,000

Kanonang (IV) - Cluster 26 37,953.00 7 26 Mar. 2007 1,200-5,000

15 to 25,000 30,000

Cluster 26 expansion 2,987.37 2 2 April 2008 n.a. 15-25,000 30,000

Sendangan – Cluster 27 47,515.00 9 22 Feb 2007 n.a. 15 to 25,000 30,000

Tompaso II – Cluster 32 55,128.00 2 9 May, 2009 3,500 15-30,000 30,000


C.3.2.2. Crop Compensation

Table C.6 provides an example of crop compensation paid during the acquisition of land for the Lahendong

Units 5&6 project.

Table C.6: Crop Compensation Summary – Lahendong Units 5&6

Price paid 2006 per tree (Clusters 26,27, WPS)(Rp.) Price paid 2009 (Cluster 32) (Rp.)

Tree type Young Sapling

Mature Tree pre-

fruit bearing

Mature Tree fully producing

Young Sapling

Mature Tree pre-

fruit bearing

Mature Tree fully producing

Bamboo 50,000 100,000 150,000

Wood Tree 100,000

Saw timber trees 40,000 100,000

Cloves 25,000 35,000

Palm 20,000 40,000 80,000

Coffee 10,000 15,000 25,000

Lansat 5,000 10,000 25,000

Mahogany 25,000 100,000

Papaya 10,000 25,000

Guava 10,000 25,000

Coconut 10,000 30,000 100,000

Cinnamon 20,000 35,000

Fence Bamboo n/a n/a 75,000

Same as 2006


58


Following damages to crops as a result of a vertical well test in 2008, further negotiations took place on

compensation to be paid for the lost crops. Compensation amounts paid are summarised in Table C.7.

Table C.7: Damaged Crops Compensation – Cluster 27

No. Owner Total (Rp)

1 Jubels Salendu 2.280.000

2 Joutje Kalangi 5.092.000

3 Hartje Saroinsong 1.175.000

4 Nyong Pantow 1.603.000

5 Lexi Dajoh 750.000

6 Sani Langi 10.125.000

7 Sani Langi (Fertiliser + Chemicals) 1.595.000

8 Felix Tewuh 750.000

9 Welly Kawengian 1.000.000

10 Maxi Monimbar 600.000

11 Jon Kolompoy 750.000

12 Nona Langi 1.000.000

C.3.3. Land Acquisition Planned

C.3.3.1. Ulubelu 3 & 4

As of December 2010, PGE has completed all land acquisition currently planned for Ulubelu, but

requirements may change depending on the results of ongoing drilling and well testing. The only remaining

land acquisition planned is for the short transmission line that will connect Units 3&4 to the switchyard at

Units 1&2. For this, land will be acquired for the footprint of the towers (estimated total of 1,200 m2). For

the right of way between the towers, owners will be compensated a portion of land value, as well as any

above ground assets that need to be removed to meet safety requirements.

C.3.3.2. Lahendong 5 & 6

Final plans for Lahendong 5 & 6 are still evolving, reflecting the inherent nature of geothermal

development. Currently, PGE expects to construct possibly two more production well clusters, the power

house and perhaps an additional injection well cluster, as well as the transmission line from Units 5 & 6 to

the nearest PLN substation. The land requirement for the remaining project components could total up to a

maximum of 40 ha. Acquisition of the remaining land is estimated to be concluded by early 2012.


59


C.3.4. PGE Valuation and Compensation Experience

In the past, to establish a price for land, PGE has started with the local tax value (NJOP) which is adjusted

annually, and then assessed market prices. Market prices are ascertained through discussions with village

headmen and other local officials who are familiar with recent land transactions. Many transactions are

informal, thus there is no single source for up-to-date information. In practice, PGE has then set its offering

price between two and three times the NJOP. A comparison of recent examples is presented in Table C.8.

Table C.8: Land Price Comparison at Ulubelu Units 3 & 4 and Lahendong Units 5 & 6 (2006 to 2009)

Price Comparisons (Rp/m2) Location Year

NJOP Value Market Value PGE Value

2006 3,000 4,500 7-8,000

2008 6,000 4,500 11,500 to 20,000 Ulubelu 3 & 4

2009 3,500 up to

7,150 5000 – 6000 11,500 to 20,000

2006 7,000 to 8,000 15,000 to 20,000 30,000 Lahendong 5 & 6

2009 7,000 to 8,000 20,000 30,000


PGE has negotiated from a reasonable market assessment, thus it does not change its offer much during

negotiations. In Tompaso in 2006, PGE raised its offer from Rp 27,500 to Rp 30,000 per square metre, for

example, in light of the owners’ asking prices that varied from Rp 35,000 to Rp 50,000 per square metre.

In general, PGE has paid more for land in Tompaso (Lahendong Units 5&6) than in Ulubelu, which is a true

reflection of the value of the land. PGE always pays a considerably higher rate for land than has been

reasonably established as its prevailing market rate. As shown in Table C.8 above, there are marked

variations in the NJOP and market land prices across time and locations, to which PGE’s land acquisition

strategy is responsive and adaptive.

PGE’s compensation rate for crops and trees has also varied considerably by location as well as according

to the maturity of the trees, as seen in Table C.4: and Table C.6. Each location has a strikingly different

mixture of major crops and trees, and the actual variety of assets of individual farmers can be much more

complex. Table C.9 below shows the variation in prices paid for three trees common to both Tompaso and

Ulubelu. Coffee and Sugar Palm have been established as being of higher value in Tompaso than in

Ulubelu, although the rate paid in Tompaso has not changed over three years. In contrast, clove trees are

paid for at a higher rate in Ulubelu than they are in Tompaso. This data shows that PGE’s asset

compensation is sensitive to prevailing local market values and is able to be adapted to enable a fair price

to be paid in each case.

Table C.9: Tree Price Comparison at Ulubelu and Tompaso (Lahendong Units 5 & 6)

Price Per Mature Tree (Rp/m2) Tree Type

Ulubelu 2008 Tompaso 2006 Tompaso 2009

Coffee 20,000 25,000 25,000

Sugar Palm 50,000 80,000 80,000

Clove 100,000 35,000 35,000



60


Finally, to give an idea of the importance of the above ground assets, one owner in Ulubelu was

compensated for 18 different trees and plants in 28 different price categories and the combined value of the

trees was half that of the land. Despite the complexity of the subject of above-ground assets, however,

negotiations for compensation are much simpler than negotiations over the price of land. Provinces and

Kabupaten have standardized prices for each crop. PGE has used these references as a starting point in

negotiating compensation rates with owners, as well as market inquiries and discussions with local officials.

C.4. Summary

PGE is legally registered as a private company in Indonesia and it acquires land through direct

negotiations, based on the principle of willing buyer-willing seller. PGE has the legal right to request

expropriations if negotiations fail and if no viable alternative site exists for the Ulubelu Units 3&4 and

Lahendong Units 5&6 proposed geothermal projects. Hence, the World Bank Operational Policy 4.12 on

Involuntary Resettlement is triggered and will apply if expropriation is used.

This document has established a policy framework for PGE to manage land acquisition and resettlement

impacts in accordance with OP 4.12. It described the negotiated settlement procedures, which is PGE’s

standard practice for addressing land acquisition and resettlement. The negotiated settlement approach

involves establishing a project specific PGE land acquisition team (LAT). With a preliminary design in

mind, the LAT carries out topography and market data gathering exercises. Meetings are held with local

representatives and project affected persons (PAPs) and an initial plan for addressing compensation is

produced. Negotiations begin and when there is agreement on unit prices, valuation of assets is

undertaken. When individual agreements are made, land documents are provided to PGE who pay the

negotiated settlement and a letter revising the land title is organised.

If a settlement cannot be negotiated and there is not an acceptable viable alternative, expropriation is a last

choice solution requiring resettlement planning, but PGE has not reached that stage in any of its land

acquisition exercises and does not expect to do so. Nonetheless, if this should happen, an appropriate

resettlement planning instrument, either an abbreviated resettlement plan (ARAP) or a full action plan

(RAP) will be produced. It will reflect procedures including the establishment of a district land acquisition

committee (DLAC) to orient and implement resettlement activities. Information about the Project and land

acquisition process, including the grievance process, will be provided in writing and orally to PAPs. An

independent appraisal will be undertaken to establish replacement costs to be proposed to PAPs for

negotiation. PGE will work with the DLAC and a local institution to carry out the socio-economic baseline

survey with 25 percent of local households (for a full resettlement plan) and the asset census inventory and

detailed measurement survey with 100 percent of PAPs. The entitlement matrix in Table C.1 defines

resettlement compensation and will be used to develop assistance packages. Criteria for providing

replacement land and shelter is provided. Rehabilitation assistance to restore livelihoods and special

measures to support vulnerable, marginalised or disadvantaged PAPs are included in the entitlement

matrix and will be applied if relevant. A grievance procedure will be established and grievances will be

logged for monitoring resolution. Compensation and resettlement assistance will be provided prior to

construction commencing.

The status of land acquisition and resettlement to date indicates that much of the land needed for the

projects has already been acquired, all of which was acquired through negotiated settlements.

The overall Ulubelu project consists of eight clusters (groups of wells numbered A to H) and two power

plant sites (each of two units, although only Unit 3 & 4 are developed by PGE). Land for Clusters A to H,

the road network used for transport and interconnection pipes, pumping stations, and Unit 3&4 has already


61


been acquired in 12 acquisition efforts. PGE will purchase the land for the transmission line to connect

Units 3&4 to the switchyard at Units 1&2. PLN purchased land for Power Units 1&2 and has started

construction.

There are two production clusters and one reinjection cluster existing within the Tompaso area (within

which Lahendong Units 5&6 are being developed). Land acquisition for these three clusters has been

completed. PGE may construct two additional production clusters and one additional reinjection cluster.

Additional land will be acquired for these clusters (as required) as well as for Lahendong Power Units 5&6

and the transmission line between Units 5&6 and the nearby PLN substation. A rough estimate of the

maximum anticipated land acquisition is approximately 40 ha.

Review of past land acquisition indicates that PGE has paid more for land in Tompaso (Lahendong Units

5&6) than in Ulubelu, which reflects the relative market value of land in the two locations. PGE’s

compensation rate for crops and trees has also varied considerably by location. Additionally, in each

instance PGE seems to have paid a considerably higher rate for land in comparison to the prevailing

market rates of the time. PGE’s asset compensation practices seem to be sensitive to prevailing local

market values and adapt easily to assure that owners are awarded fair prices for the type of loss and

location. As a measure of its success, PGE has no outstanding challenges or appeals in either location.


62


C.5. Annex - Requirements of Resettlement Plans

C.5.1. Abbreviated Resettlement Plan (ARAP)

The ARAP covers the following minimum elements:

� Asset and livelihood census survey of 100% of PAPs and a valuation of their assets and respective

income sources;

� Description of compensation and resettlement assistance to be provided;

� Consultation with PAPs about acceptable alternatives;

� Institutional responsibility for implementation and procedures for grievance redress (as outlined in this

policy framework);

� Arrangements for monitoring and implementation; and

� A timetable and a budget.

C.5.2. Resettlement Action Plan (RAP)

The Scope and level of detail of the resettlement plan vary with the magnitude and complexity of

resettlement. The plan covers the elements below as relevant and when not relevant, it is noted in the

RAP.

� A description of the project, identification of how the Project has given rise to involuntary resettlement;

� Identification of potential project impacts;

� The objectives of the resettlement programme;

� A description of the socio-economic studies (both a baseline survey and an asset census survey);

� The legal framework (as outlined in this policy framework);

� The institutional framework and organisational responsibilities (as outlined in this policy framework);

� Eligibility and the entitlement matrix showing resettlement measures;

� Methodologies for valuation of losses and compensation for losses;

� A description of compensation packages/resettlement measures

� Site selection, site preparation and relocation where appropriate including housing, infrastructure and

social services, and integration support to be provided;

� Environmental protection and management;

� PAP participation, consultation and disclosure;

� Measures to mitigate the impact of resettlement on any host communities;

� Grievance mechanism procedures;

� Organisational responsibilities;

� Implementation schedule and budget; and,

� Monitoring and evaluation activities.


63


D.1. Introduction

The objective of this technical appendix is to present the detailed methodology and findings of the

dispersion modelling undertaken for the ESIA. The assessment focuses on atmospheric emissions of

hydrogen sulphide (H2S) as it is the only atmospheric pollutant associated with the Lahendong Units 5&6

geothermal project to be released in potentially significant quantities.

D.2. Methodology

D.2.1. Model Description

A new generation dispersion model, the United States’ American Meteorological Society/Environmental

Protection Agency Regulatory Model known as AERMOD, has been used for the purposes of this

assessment. A detailed model description is included below.

A committee, AERMIC (the American Meteorological Society / Environmental Protection Agency

Regulatory Model Improvement Committee), was formed to introduce state-of-the-art modelling concepts

into the EPA’s local-scale air quality models. AERMIC’s focus was on a new platform for regulatory steady-

state plume modelling; this platform would include air dispersion fundamentally based on planetary

boundary layer turbulence structure, scaling and concepts. AERMOD was designed to treat both surface

and elevated sources in simple and complex terrain. Special features of AERMOD include its ability to

treat the vertical heterogeneity of the planetary boundary layer, special treatment of surface releases,

irregularly-shaped area sources and limitation of vertical mixing in the stable boundary layer. AERMOD is

considered by the EPA to be the ‘preferred’ model for near-field modelling applications.

AERMOD is actually a modelling system with three separate components and these are as follows:

� AERMOD (AERMIC Dispersion Model);

� AERMAP (AERMOD Terrain Pre-processor); and

� AERMET (AERMOD Meteorological Pre-processor).

AERMET is the meteorological pre-processor for AERMOD. Input data can come from hourly cloud cover

observations, surface meteorological observations and twice-a-day upper air soundings. Output includes

surface meteorological observations and parameters and vertical profiles of several atmospheric

parameters.

AERMAP is a terrain pre-processor designed to simplify and standardise the input of terrain data for

AERMOD. Input data include receptor terrain elevation data. For each receptor, the output includes a

location and height scale, which is an elevation used for the computation of air-flow around hills.

The version used for this assessment is Breeze AERMOD 7, supplied by Trinity Consultants, released in

April 2010.

Appendix D. Technical Appendix – Air Quality Assessment


64


D.2.2. Factors Affecting Dispersion and Dilution

D.2.2.1. Overview

There are a number of factors that can affect how emissions disperse once released to atmosphere. The

following factors have the greatest effect on dispersion:

� Meteorology;

� Terrain;

� Surface roughness;

� Building downwash; and

� Emissions (including their quantity, temperature and velocity).

These factors, and how they have been taken account of in the dispersion modelling assessment, are

described in the following sections.

D.2.2.2. Meteorology

The most important meteorological parameters governing the atmospheric dispersion of pollutants are wind

direction, wind speed and atmospheric stability:

� Wind direction determines the sector of the compass into which the plume is dispersed;

� Wind speed affects the distance which the plume travels over time and can affect plume dispersion by

increasing the initial dilution of pollutants and inhibiting plume rise; and

� Atmospheric stability is a measure of the turbulence of the air, and particularly of its vertical motion. It

therefore affects the spread of the plume as it travels away from the source. New generation dispersion

models, such as AERMOD, use a parameter known as the Monin-Obukhov length that, together with

the wind speed, describes the stability of the atmosphere.

For meteorological data to be suitable for dispersion modelling purposes, a number of parameters need to

be measured on an hourly basis. These parameters include wind speed, wind direction, cloud cover and

temperature. There are only a limited number of sites where the required meteorological measurements

are made.

The most representative observing station for the region of the proposed Project which is able to provide

data of a suitable quality and format, is at Manado Airport, approximately 43 kilometres north east of the

Project site. Three years of hourly sequential data from Manado Airport (2007 to 2009) have been used as

input data for the dispersion modelling. Wind roses have been constructed for each of the three years of

meteorological data and are presented in Figure Figure D.2. Meteorological data were pre-processed to

establish surface and vertical profiles based on site specific conditions.

Although standard meteorological data pre-processing accounts for site specific parameters such as land

characteristics (albedo, roughness etc.) and latitude, no suitable correction is made for altitude. Within the

troposphere, temperature decreases with altitude (this process is known as the lapse rate) at an average of

approximately 6.5°C for every 1000 metres gained in altitude6. Applying this to the assessment at

Lahendong, with a proposed site location approximately 800 metres above sea level, the change in

_________________________

6 Wallace, J,M,. Hobbs, P,V,. 2006. Atmospheric Science - An Introductory Survey


65


temperature would be 5.2°C. For the purposes of this assessment a 5°C temperature reduction has been

applied to the processed meteorological data used within the dispersion model.

Additional meteorological data are available from the Manado Geophysical Observation Station at

Tondano, approximately 20 kilometres north east of the Project site and at an elevation of approximately

700 metres. Meteorological data from the Tondano station are only available as daily mean values and are

therefore not suitable for use within the dispersion modelling. However, a comparison between the

meteorological data from Tondano and the processed meteorological data from Manado Airport used in the

dispersion modelling is provided in Table D.1 for the 2007 to 2009 data. The comparison shows that

average temperatures at the Tondano station are slightly higher than those in the processed Manado data.

However, this is consistent with the difference in elevation between the Project site and the Tondano site.

Average wind speeds are also higher at the Tondano site. Wind direction data were only available from the

Tondano site for 2010. To allow a comparison of this data with the Manado processed data, a windrose

has been produced and is presented in Figure D.1. The Figure indicates that the prevailing wind direction

at Tondano is from the north, whilst in the processed Manado data it is from the south east. The

prevalence of northerly winds in the Tondano data could be due to terrain around the station site.

As described above, it is not possible to use the Tondano data within the dispersion modelling as hourly

data are not available. However, the higher daily average wind speeds present in the data suggest that

using the Tondano data would result in lower predicted concentrations than the Manado data as greater

dispersion of emissions would occur. In addition, the prevailing northerly wind would be likely to disperse

pollutants away from the closest receptors to the north of the Power Plant site. In summary, it is likely that

the processed Manado meteorological data is likely to provide more conservative modelling results than the

Tondano data and is therefore considered suitable for the assessment from a precautionary perspective.

Table D.1: Comparison between Manado Airport (processed) and Tondano Geophysical Station Meteorological Data

2007 2008 2009 Parameters(1)

Manado Tondano Manado Tondano Manado Tondano

Maximum Temperature (oC)

23.3 24.6 24.1 24.5 24.3 25.2

Minimum Temperature (oC)

19.0 20.5 18.5 19.9 18.0 20.6

Average Temperature (oC)

21.4 22.6 21.2 22.5 21.7 22.7

Average Wind Speed (m/s)

1.5 2.9 1.4 2.5 1.6 2.9

Note: (1)

Daily averages


66


Figure D.1: Windrose Comparing Manado Airport (processed) and Tondano Geophysical Station Meteorological Data

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

N

22.5

45

67.5

E

112.5

135

157.5

S

202.5

225

247.5

W

292.5

315

337.5

Manado 2009, Daily Tondano 2010, Daily

Notes: Radial axis represents the number of days in a year

Circumference axis represents wind direction in degrees


67


Figure D.2: Windroses for 2007 to 2009 at Manado Airport

2007 2008

2009

D.2.2.3. Terrain

The presence of elevated terrain can significantly affect ground level concentrations of pollutants emitted

from elevated sources such as stacks or cooling towers, by reducing the distance between the plume

centre line and ground level and increasing turbulence and funnelling of plumes around topographical

features.

Complex terrain around the power plant and clusters has been modelled for this assessment. Detailed

terrain data were supplied as a Digital Elevation Model and were used directly in the dispersion model. A

three-dimensional view of the area near the plants is represented in Figure D.3.


68


Figure D.3: Terrain Around the Site

Source: Terrain heights shown in metres

D.2.2.4. Surface Roughness

The roughness of the terrain over which a plume passes can have a significant effect on dispersion by

altering the velocity profile with height, and the degree of atmospheric turbulence. This is accounted for by

a parameter called the surface roughness length. Appropriate surface roughness lengths have been

applied during meteorological data processing reflecting the land-use in and around the Project area and

meteorological data site measurement area.


69


D.2.2.5. Building Downwash

The movement of air over and around buildings generates areas of flow circulation, which can lead to

increased ground level concentrations in the building wakes. Where building heights are greater than

about 30 – 40 percent of the stack height, downwash effects can be significant. The only buildings likely to

affect dispersion are the cooling towers’ own structure and the power house. AERMOD contains a

calculation model that determines building impacts on air flows which in turn affect dispersion around the

site. The building structures included in the assessment are described in Table D.2 and Figure D.4.

Table D.2: Modelled Building Properties

Building X (m) Y (m) Height (m) Width (m) Length (m) Angle (o)

Tower Structure 1 698732 128359 13 11 38 0

Tower Structure 2 698732 128311 13 11 38 0

Power House 698784 128317 18 22 62.5 0

Notes: Coordinates in UTM Zone 51, Northern Hemisphere

Figure D.4: Overhead Layout of Building Structures in the Model

D.2.3. Applicable Standards, Guidelines and Limits

A summary of the applicable standard and guidelines pertaining to human health, occupational health and

sensitive ecological systems is provided in Appendix A, and these guidelines and standards have been

used to assess the air quality impacts of the Project on public health and vegetation.

Emissions to air from geothermal power plant are regulated by the Indonesian Ministry of Environment

Regulation No. 21 of 2008 on air emissions from stationary sources and power plants. This is the standard

for H2S emissions (at the point of release, not to be confused with ambient air quality standards described

Power House

50m

Tower Structure 1

Tower Structure 2


70


above) and is set at 35mg/Nm3 (milligrams per normal cubic meter, i.e. with reference conditions; 25ºC,

1 atmosphere pressure).

D.2.4. Significance

A number of approaches can be used to determine whether the operational impacts on local air quality of a

project are significant at receptors (‘receptors’ are defined Section D.4). However, there remains no

universally recognised definition of what constitutes ‘significance’. The overall significance framework

adopted for the ESIA is presented in Volume II Section 5.4 and should be read in conjunction with the text

below which describes specifically how it has been applied in the context of ambient air quality within this

appendix.

In accordance with the overall framework, the significance of potential human health impacts has been

assessed by considering;

� the sensitivity of the receptors, which is defined by how close baseline concentrations are to the

relevant ambient air quality guideline;

� the magnitude of the increase in concentrations caused by emissions from the Project as a percentage

of the relevant ambient air quality guideline; and

� the resultant total pollutant concentrations (i.e. baseline concentrations plus the increase caused by

emissions from the Project), compared to the relevant guideline.

Some members of the public affected by emissions from the Project, would by their nature, be more

sensitive to changes in air quality than others. For example, a child would be more sensitive to a change in

air quality than member of the working population (who can be assumed to be of working age and generally

healthy). This aspect of ‘sensitivity’ is taken account of in the approach described above by considering

pollutant concentrations in the context of the relevant guideline; i.e. a guideline designed to protect the

health of a child will be lower (more stringent) than that designed to protect occupational health. As such, a

given concentration would represent a higher percentage of a more stringent guideline than a less stringent

one, and subsequently Project impacts would be assigned a higher significance.

For health impacts caused by H2S, the sensitivity of the receptor increases with elevated baseline

concentrations. This is consistent with the World Bank Group General EHS Guidelines which classify ‘poor

quality airsheds’ as those where relevant guidelines are exceeded significantly and therefore may warrant

more stringent emission control measures. Table D.3 presents the definitions of the sensitivity descriptors.

Table D.3: Descriptors for Receptor Sensitivity

Definition Descriptor

Baseline Concentrations (BC) >100% of WHO guideline High

Baseline Concentrations (BC) >75% of WHO guideline Medium

Baseline Concentrations (BC) >50% of WHO guideline Low

Baseline Concentrations (BC) <50% of WHO guideline Negligible

Impact magnitude descriptors are defined in Table D.4. Changes in ambient concentrations larger than 25%

of the relevant guidelines are considered to represent an impact of ‘Major’ magnitude as the World Bank

Group General EHS Guidelines note that projects should prevent or minimise impacts by ensuring that

emissions do not contribute a significant portion to the non-attainment of relevant ambient air quality

guidelines. As a general rule, the guideline suggests that no single project should increase concentrations

by more than 25 percent of the applicable air quality guidelines to allow for future sustainable development


71


in the same airshed. It is recognised that the application of, this principle is likely to be conservative as no

further geothermal power development is expected within the airshed.

Table D.4: Descriptors for Impact Magnitude

Definition Descriptor

Process Contribution (PC) >25% of WHO guideline Major

Process Contribution (PC) >15% of WHO guideline Moderate

Process Concentrations (PC) >10% of WHO guideline Minor

Process Concentrations (PC) <10% of WHO guideline Negligible

Sensitivity and magnitude have then been combined to establish significance following the general

significance matrix set in Volume II Section 4. Notwithstanding the above:

� Any non-negligible increases causing a new exceedance of the WHO guideline are afforded ‘Major’

adverse significance; and

� Any increases in concentrations above 25 percent of the WHO guideline which cause a new

exceedence are afforded ‘Critical’ adverse significance.

If the impact is negative then the effect is ‘adverse’; if the impact is positive then the effect is ‘beneficial’.

However, professional judgement was also used to vary the predicted effect where appropriate.

Due to the very conservative assumptions made in the assessment of potential impacts on sensitive

vegetation, the significance of impacts has been discussed qualitatively with reference to the adopted

guideline described in Appendix A.

As described previously, an occupational exposure limit for H2S has been set by the Ministry of Manpower.

As the methods for describing significance set out above are not applicable for occupational exposure, a

simple comparison has been made between predicted H2S concentrations and the occupational limit.

D.3. Emission Sources

D.3.1. Scenarios

Scenario A assesses the air quality impact of horizontal well testing which would result in emissions from

rock mufflers located on the well production clusters. Such emissions would be of short duration (tests at

each production cluster are limited to a discrete period of 6 to 12 weeks) and, as adjacent wells are not

expected to be tested at the same time, the assessment focused on one representative well located at

Potential Additional Production Cluster 2, which has been selected for its proximity to receptors at Touure

Village. Impacts from horizontal well testing at other well production clusters will be lower than those

predicted for Cluster 2. Due to the short duration of the plant operation modelled in Scenario A, baseline

concentrations have not been included within the results.

Scenario B, the main scenario, represents normal operation of the plant, where emissions from the cooling

towers and rock muffler located at the power plant have been modelled.

It is possible that, during a ‘trip’ of the Power Plant, total steam flow could be re-directed to the on site rock

muffler. This operating scenario is considered to represent a lower air quality impact than normal operation

as emissions would be far hotter and faster if passed through the rock muffler rather than the Power Plant,

and would therefore disperse better, resulting in lower ground level concentrations. It would also be a very

short term event. Consideration of this scenario has therefore not been made in the modelling scenarios.


72


For all scenarios, the H2S emissions were calculated based on steam flow (to the cooling towers and rock

muffler), the percentage non-condensable gas (NCG) content of the steam and the percentage H2S content

of the NCG. These data have been provided by the Technical Feasibility Consultant for the project,

AECOM.

The expected percentage NCG and H2S contents are provided in Section 8.8.2 of the Feasibility Study for

Tompaso Geothermal Power Project dated 15th October 2010 and presented in Table D.5, below. The

Technical Feasibility consultant has acknowledged that these NCG and H2S figures are conservative, and

have been used due to the limited well test data available at the time of the Feasibility Study. The use of

these figures to support this air quality assessment is considered to be the most robust approach given the

uncertainty over future well test data results and reported results and conclusions presented in this

assessment are considered to be conservative.

Table D.5: Percentage NCG Content, H2S Content and Mass Steam Flow used to Calculated H2S Emissions

Parameter Unit Value

NCG Content % 0.8

H2S Content % 11.5

Steam Flow (total) kg/s 85.2

D.3.2. Source Characteristics

D.3.2.1. Scenario A

It has been assumed that the steam releases would be equivalent to 1/12th (as there would be 12

production wells) of the total steam requirements. H2S content was therefore based on 1/12th steam flow

(NCG content and H2S content as per Table D.5. Release parameters were based on discussions with

AECOM and are summarised in Table D.6.

Table D.6: Point Sources Model Inputs for Scenario A

Source X (m) Y (m) H2S flow (g/s)

Height (m)

Temperature (ºC)

Exit velocity (m/s)

Diameter (m)

Rock Muffler 700210 127900 6.5 2.5 100 3.0 2.3



73


D.3.2.2. Scenario B

Two sets of three cooling towers were modelled based on the site layout and dimensions included in the

Feasibility Study. Emission rates from the cooling towers assumed full load all year to ensure that most

unfavourable conditions (worst met conditions and maximum releases) are captured by the model. In order

to account for the benefits of combined buoyancy from having the towers next to each other (which is not

accounted for by default in the model) the three towers in each block have been grouped into a virtual stack

combining the gaseous discharge (including H2S) of all three towers.

Further clarification with AECOM concluded that vent valves remain closed during normal plant operation

and motorised flow control valves at wellheads regulate well production, which is now industry standard.

However, a small bypass steam flow of 0.5 - 1 kg/s is used to keep piping and rock muffler warm. For this

scenario, is has therefore been assumed that a flow of 1 kg/s of steam was released through the rock

muffler. Muffler dimensions were sourced from direct site observations and exit velocity was calculated

based on muffler area, flow, density and release temperature of the steam. The cooling towers and the

rock muffler were modelled as point sources. The modelled parameters are summarised in Table D.7.

Table D.7: Point Sources Model Inputs for Scenario B

Source X Y H2S flow Height Temperature Exit

velocity Diameter

m m g/s m ºC m/s m

Combined Cooling Tower 1

698738 128378 39.1 16.5 35.0 10.0 12.1

Combined Cooling Tower 2

698738 128330 39.1 16.5 35.0 10.0 12.1

Rock Muffler 698661 128410 0.9 2.5 173.0 0.5 2.3


The calculated H2S concentration at the cooling tower exit is 35 mg/Nm3, which is in accordance with the

Indonesian limit of 35 mg/Nm3 set by Ministry of Environment under Regulation No. 21 of 2008.

D.3.3. Baseline Concentrations

As discussed in the baseline section of Volume II of the ESIA, an H2S baseline concentration of 7µg/m3 has

been adopted for the assessment. In order to account for the potential large variability in the short term

baseline concentrations, a pragmatic approach has been taken whereby this concentration has been

doubled before being added to modelled process contributions.


74


D.4. Receptors

D.4.1. Overview

Within this section of the ESIA, the phrase ‘discrete receptor’ has been used to refer to a specific identified

location where the dispersion model has been used to predict pollutant concentrations. Additionally a

‘receptor grid’ refers to a dispersion modelling concept where pollutant concentrations are predicted over a

grid in uniform or non-uniform arrangement. The receptor grid aids the assessment of pollutant

concentrations over a wide spatial area and by interpolating between these points, allowing the production

of pollutant contours which illustrate how pollutant concentrations change across the study area.

The overall purpose of the air quality assessment is to compare predicted pollutant concentrations with the

relevant guidelines, standards and limits identified in Appendix A. The respective guidelines, standards

and limits identified have been designed to be applied at specific locations and, as such, all have an

averaging period associated with them which is tailored to match the likely period of exposure associated

with those locations.

The WHO guideline of 150 µg/m3 is averaged over a 24 hour period and has been designed to ensure that

H2S concentrations do not result in a significant public health risk. It is therefore applied at all public

locations where people are likely to spend the majority of their day; i.e. residential areas. For the purpose

of the modelling assessment, the WHO guideline has therefore been compared against concentrations

predicted at discrete receptors which are located within identified residential areas and the significance

criteria applied to those concentrations. This identification of residential areas has been carried out through

site visits and a review of satellite mapping for the study area. Because the location of residential areas

may change in the future (i.e. new residential areas may be developed within the study area after the

Project is in operation), contour plots have also been presented which present the geographic spread of

pollutant concentrations across the study area.

The occupational exposure limit for H2S set by the Ministry of Manpower is averaged over an 8 hour period

and has been designed to protect the health of workers. It is therefore applied at locations where

employed people are present for a typical working day. For the purpose of the modelling assessment, the

Ministry of Manpower occupational exposure limit has therefore been compared against concentrations

predicted at receptor grids which are located within the power plant and production cluster site boundaries.

In addition, the maximum predicted 8 hour H2S concentration outside of the plant also been presented.

This is because the majority of the land in the vicinity of the power plant is used for agriculture and

therefore represents locations where local people of working age are likely to spend an 8 hour period.

Annual mean H2S concentrations have also been assessed to identify any potential impacts on vegetation

within the study area assessed against the adopted guideline for this assessment. The study area includes

the sensitive Hutan Lindung (Watershed Protection Forest).


75


D.4.2. Discrete Receptors

Discrete receptors have been used to predict pollutant concentrations at identified residential buildings that

are likely to be most affected by emissions from Alternative Potential Additional Production Cluster 2 (for

Scenario A) and the Power Plant (for Scenario B). The respective discrete receptors are presented in

Table D.8, Table D.9 and presented in Figure D.5.

Table D.8: Discrete Receptors Included In the Model – Scenario A

Name X Y

Ampreng A 700368 127970

Isolated Residential 700368 127891

Kanonang A 700738 127477

Kanonang B 699460 128513


Table D.9: Discrete Receptors Included In the Model – Scenario B

Name X Y

Ampreng A 701294 127166

Isolated Residential 698126 128052

Kanonang A 697831 129992

Kanonang B 697885 129995

Kanonang C 697935 130137

Kanonang D 698010 130299

Kanonang E 698154 130703

Kanonang F 698263 130770

Kanonang G 698392 131046

Kawangkoan A 698967 132129

Kayuuwi A 697419 132763

Pinabetengan A 699152 129303

Pinabetengan B 698905 129439

Pinabetengan C 698789 129389

Pinabetengan D 698723 129467

Pinabetengan E 698785 129653

Raringis A 701172 126325

Tumaratas A 700738 127477

Tompaso II A 699317 131094

Tonsewer A 699460 128513

Tonsewer B 699306 128627

Tonsewer C 699322 128745

Tonsewer D 699359 128806

Touure A 700368 127891

Touure B 700360 127970

Touure C 700522 128344



76


Figure D.5: Discrete Receptors Included In the Model



77


D.4.3. Receptor Grids

In addition to the discrete receptors, receptor grids were also included in the model to assess the impact

over a wider area and facilitate the presentation of contour plots to show the geographic spread of pollutant

concentrations.

In order to provide a high resolution of predicted concentrations close to the site (where concentrations can

vary greatly over a smaller distance) and allow coverage over a wider area up to 15 kilometres from the

modelled source, the following three grid sizes and resolutions were used together:

� Grid 1 – 15 kilometres by 15 kilometres at 150 metre resolution;

� Grid 2 – 5 kilometres by 5 kilometres at 50 metre resolution; and

� Grid 3 – 2.5 kilometres by 2.5 kilometres at 20 metre resolution.

For Scenario A and Scenario B, the receptor grids were centred on Alternative Potential Additional

Production Cluster 2 and the Power Plant site respectively.

In order to predict pollutant concentrations within the sites for comparison against the occupational

exposure limit, it was necessary to include an additional grid of receptors at a resolution of 5 metres within

the boundaries of Potential Additional Production Cluster 2 (excluding the area immediately next to the well

head) and the Power Plant site (excluding the area immediately next to the rock muffler). These high

resolution grids are appropriate for capturing the extreme changes in concentrations over short distances

associated with locations very close to low temperature emission sources and large buildings.


78


D.5. Dispersion Modelling Results

D.5.1. Overview

This section presents the results of the dispersion modelling of H2S emissions from the Project along with a

discussion of the results in the context of the site and process configuration and the applicable air quality

guidelines, standards and limits described above.

D.5.2. Scenario A – Well Testing

Results from Scenario A are presented in Table D.10 and Table D.11. It should be noted that all of the

predicted concentrations presented are likely to be very conservative as, by taking the maximum predicted

results from the 3 meteorological years, it has been assumed that horizontal well testing emissions would

coincide with the worst meteorological conditions for dispersion. As the duration of the tests at each

production cluster is limited to a discrete short period (6 to 12 weeks), the likelihood of this occurring is very

low and actual concentrations experienced are likely to be far lower.

The results in Table D.10 show that horizontal well testing is not predicted to result in exceedences of the

WHO guideline at discrete receptors representing residential areas. The impact of process contributions

from the Project is concluded to be ‘negligible’ to ‘moderate’ adverse at worst. As concentrations at all

discrete receptors remain well below the WHO guideline (less than 75%), given the temporary nature of the

emissions and given the conservative approach to the assessment, overall significance is considered to be

of negligible to adverse low significance using professional judgement.

Table D.10: Scenario A Results – Discrete Receptors (µg/m3)

Name Averaging Period

PC BC PEC Guideline PC as % of Guideline

Significance

Ampreng A 73 87 49 Moderate

Isolated Residential 111 125 74 Moderate

Kanonang A 20 34 13 Negligible

Kanonang B

24 Hour(a)

9

14

23

150

6 Negligible

Notes: (a)

Represents the 2nd

maximum 24 hour concentration

‘PC’ = Process Contribution; the predicted concentration caused by the Project (maximum of 3 meteorological years)

‘BC’ = Baseline concentration; the existing concentration in the study area

‘PEC’ = Predicted Environmental Concentration; PC plus BC

The results in Table D.11 show that horizontal well testing is not predicted to result in exceedences of the

Ministry of Manpower’s occupational exposure limit either at on-site or off-site receptor grids representing

locations of occupational exposure. Air quality impacts on occupational receptors are therefore concluded

to be of negligible significance.


79


Table D.11: Scenario A Results –Receptor Grids (µg/m3)

Receptor Averaging Period PC BC PEC Guideline, Limit or

Standard

Maximum of on-site receptor grid 11,405 11,419

Maximum of off-site receptor grid 8 Hour(a)

724 14

738 14,000 (limit)

Notes: a)

Represents the 1st maximum 8 hour concentration


‘BC’ = Baseline Concentration; the existing concentration in the study area


D.5.3. Scenario B - Normal Operation

D.5.3.1. Discrete Receptors

The results for the discrete receptors and the significance of the results are presented in Table D.12. No

exceedences are predicted at these receptors which represent identified residential locations where the

WHO guideline applies. The significance of the impact of H2S emissions from the Project is concluded to

be ‘negligible’ to ‘moderate’ adverse. In accordance with the significance criteria presented in Section

D.2.4, it is those discrete receptors which experience an increase in concentrations above 25 percent of the

guideline as a result of the Project which are concluded to experience a ‘moderate’ impact.

As concentrations at all discrete receptors remain well below the WHO guideline (less than 40% and

typically 5 to 10% of the guideline value), overall significance is considered to be of negligible to adverse

low significance. using professional judgement and therefore no H2S abatement is proposed.


80


Table D.12: Scenario B Results – Discrete Receptors (µg/m3)

Name Averaging Period

PC BC PEC Guideline PC as % of Guideline

Significance

Ampreng A 7 21 5 Negligible

Isolated Residential 45 59 30 Moderate

Kanonang A 15 29 10 Negligible

Kanonang B 16 30 10 Negligible

Kanonang C 21 35 14 Negligible

Kanonang D 21 35 14 Negligible

Kanonang E 23 37 15 Negligible

Kanonang F 24 38 16 Negligible

Kanonang G 25 39 17 Negligible

Kawangkoan A 9 23 6 Negligible

Kayuuwi A 8 22 5 Negligible

Pinabetengan A 17 31 11 Negligible

Pinabetengan B 28 42 19 Negligible

Pinabetengan C 55 69 37 Moderate

Pinabetengan D 54 68 36 Moderate

Pinabetengan E 43 57 28 Moderate

Raringis A 8 22 5 Negligible

Tumaratas A 8 22 5 Negligible

Tompaso II A 8 22 5 Negligible

Tonsewer A 19 33 13 Negligible

Tonsewer B 20 34 14 Negligible

Tonsewer C 14 28 9 Negligible

Tonsewer D 14 28 9 Negligible

Touure A 7 21 5 Negligible

Touure B 8 22 6 Negligible

Touure C

24 Hour(a)

15

14

29

150

10 Negligible

Notes: (a)

Represents the 2nd

maximum 24 hour concentration


‘BC’ = Baseline concentration; the existing concentration in the study area


D.5.3.2. Grid Receptors, Human Health

The results for the modelled grid receptors are presented in Table D.13. The results in Table D.13 show

that normal operation of the Power Plant is not predicted to result in exceedences of the Ministry of

Manpower’s occupational exposure limit either at on-site receptors or off-site grid receptors. Air quality

impacts on occupational receptors are therefore concluded to be ‘negligible’.

The WHO guideline is predicted to be exceeded off-site, however, this does not occur at an identified

residential area where the guideline applies (such locations are covered by the discrete receptors

described above). Figure D.6 presents a contour plot of predicted 2nd

maximum 24 hour concentrations

(based on 2009 meteorological data). The area of maximum impact, and area of exceedence of the WHO

guideline (denoted by the light blue lines) can be seen immediately north of the power plant site. An


81


additional area of exceedence can be seen approximately 1 kilometre to the south west of the Power Plant

site where the terrain is elevated and steep. This type of terrain results in higher concentrations because it

causes the distance between the plume centre line and ground level to be reduced and inhibits dispersion.

No residential areas have been identified in either area of exceedence. In addition, residential

development in either of these areas would not be expected in future as the area to the north is very close

to the power plant site, and the area to the south west is within the Hutan Lindung (where residential

development is prohibited) and/or on steep terrain.

Figure D.7 presents the area where Process Contributions are predicted to be above 25 percent of the

WHO guideline. As the Figure shows, this area includes only limited locations where residential areas are

present.

Table D.13: Scenario B Results – Receptor Grid, Human Health (µg/m3)

Receptor Averaging Period PC BC PEC Guideline, Limit or Standard

Maximum of on-site receptor grid 12,183 12,197

Maximum of off-site receptor grid 8 hours(a)

1,239 14

1,253 14,000 (limit)

Notes: a)

Represents the 1st maximum 8 hour concentration


‘BC’ = Baseline Concentration; the existing concentration in the study area



82


Figure D.6: Scenario B - Contour Plot of 2nd

Maximum 24hr H2S Concentrations (µg/m3)

Note: Results for 2009 meteorological data shown


83


Figure D.7: Scenario B - Contour Plot of 2nd

Maximum 24hr H2S Concentrations (µg/m3) Showing the Area where

Process Contributions are Greater than 25 Percent of the WHO Guideline

Note: Results for 2009 meteorological data shown


84


D.5.3.3. Grid Receptors, Sensitive Vegetation

The results for the modelled grid receptors are presented in Table D.14. The results show that the adopted

standard for impacts on vegetation would not be exceeded across the modelling domain. This includes the

sensitive area of the Hutan Lindung and surrounding agricultural areas.

On the basis that the modelled NCG and H2S content is conservative (as described in Section D.3), and

that the vegetation may already be desensitized to some exposure of H2S, it can be deduced that no

impacts from prolonged H2S exposure are predicted on vegetation and effects are concluded to be

‘negligible’.

Table D.14: Scenario B Results – Grid Receptors, Sensitive Vegetation (µg/m3)

PC Receptor Averaging Period

2007 2008 2009

Standard

Off-site Receptors Annual Mean 40.7 41.7 50.4 140

Notes: ‘PC’ = Process Contribution; the predicted concentration caused by the Project (maximum of 3 meteorological years)

D.5.4. Conclusions

The results show that horizontal well testing is not predicted to cause exceedences of the WHO guideline

at receptors representing residential areas. The impacts of horizontal well testing emissions are concluded

to be ‘negligible’ to ‘moderate’ adverse at worst. The WHO guideline is predicted to be exceeded at the

maximum location of impact off-site. However, this does not occur at identified residential areas where the

guideline would apply. In addition, horizontal well testing is not predicted to result in exceedences of the

Ministry of Manpower’s occupational exposure limit either at on-site receptors or off-site receptors where

the limit would apply.

During normal operation, the Project is not predicted to cause any exceedences of the WHO guideline at

receptors which represent identified residential areas. The significance of the impact of H2S emissions

from the Project is concluded to be ‘negligible’ to ‘moderate’ adverse. Moderate adverse impacts occur

at those receptors where Process Contributions are above 25 percent of the WHO guideline, however, this

covers only a small area where residential receptors have been identified and predicted environmental

concentrations (including baseline concentrations) remain well below the WHO guideline. As

concentrations at all receptors remain well below the WHO guideline (less than 40% and typically 5 to 10%

of the guideline value), overall significance at receptors within the airshed is considered to be of ‘negligible

to low’ adverse significance using professional judgement and no H2S abatement is proposed. In addition,

emissions during normal operation are not predicted to result in exceedences of the Ministry of Manpower’s

occupational exposure limit either at on-site receptors or off-site receptors.

H2S concentrations within the Hutan Lindung and surrounding agricultural areas are predicted to be below

the adopted standard for the protection of acute foliar injury and therefore impacts are concluded to be

‘negligible’.

On the basis of the above, no mitigation measures are proposed to control H2S emissions. Requirements

for monitoring are set out in the following Section.


85


D.6. Mitigation

D.6.1. Overview

As described above, no mitigation measures are required to control H2S emissions as predicted impacts

are not concluded to be significant. This is valid provided that the construction and implementation of the

project follows the parameters used for cooling tower heights and flow rates. Requirements for monitoring

during the operation of the Project are presented in the following Section (details of other mitigation

measures during construction and operation of the Project are presented in Volume II and the ESMP in

Volume IV).

D.6.2. Requirement for Monitoring

While the results of the assessment show that no exceedences of the WHO guidelines are expected at any

of the identified residential locations, some monitoring of ambient H2S outside of the Project site

boundaries will be undertaken for at least for the initial operations of the plant. A full description of the

proposed monitoring is provided within the ESMP, Volume IV. Equipment designed specifically to monitor

for 24-hour averaging periods is not readily available. A permanent continuous analyser enclosure (which

would provide hourly or sub-hourly estimates that could be averaged to 24-hours) is not recommended

given that concentrations at receptors are predicted to be low and the relative expense of such a solution.

However, hand-held H2S monitors are available which could be used as a substitute. In this case, the

hand-held monitoring could be affixed in a suitable location (e.g. at the property of the closest receptors) in

order to act as a permanent monitor. These units are self-contained, battery or mains powered and include

data loggers. At the relevant frequency, a representative from PGE will recover the hand-held monitor,

download the relevant data and replace for further monitoring. Ongoing calibration can be done in the field

but some initial training for PGE is required to undertake this, while the probe would be returned to the

equipment supplier/manufacturer annually or bi-annually for a full calibration and servicing as per the

manufacturer’s recommendations. These units have an applicable limit of detection in order to monitor

against the WHO guideline value for 24-hour exposure. Monitoring will be undertaken throughout the first

full year of operation simultaneously at the two nearest villages to the site (Tonsewer and Pinabetengen).

If concentrations are demonstrated to be below the WHO guidelines during the initial year period at both

locations, then further monitoring in subsequent years is unlikely to be required.

In accordance with the World Bank Group General EHS guidelines, the installation of a continuous H2S

monitoring and warning system within the Power Plant site during normal operation is required to ensure

compliance with the Ministry of Manpower occupational exposure limit. Although the modelling presented

above has not predicted that the occupational exposure limit will be exceeded, the monitoring is required to

ensure that elevated concentrations on a micro scale (such as the trapping of H2S within confined spaces)

and/or very short term abnormal operating or meteorological conditions do not lead to concentrations

above the standard.

The number and location of on site H2S monitors shall be determined based on an assessment of specific

individual plant and building locations prone to H2S emissions and occupational exposure once detailed

design information is finalised. The monitoring should be designed and implemented by accredited

professionals (accredited professionals may include nationally or internationally Certified Industrial

Hygienists, Registered Occupational Hygienists, or Certified Safety Professionals or their equivalent). In

addition, workers in locations with high risk of exposure on the power plant site or production well clusters


86


(during horizontal well testing) shall be provided with personal H2S monitors, self-contained breathing

apparatus and emergency oxygen supplies, and training in their safe and effective use.

Periodic (bi-annual) monitoring of H2S concentrations at the cooling tower emission points are required by

national legislation. To supplement this, monthly H2S monitoring of the steam line serving the Power Plant

(data from which can be used as a proxy for calculating H2S emissions) is also required during

commissioning and operation. If a stable H2S content is achieved and surrogate calculations for cooling

tower emissions comply with the emission limit, the monitoring frequency can be decreased to quarterly.

This additional monitoring is necessary to capture potential short term fluctuations in H2S content which

could result in exceedences of the WHO 24 hour guideline.


87


E.1. Glossary of Terms

Air Absorption The reduction in sound level due to atmospheric effects

Ambient Noise The total sound environment under a given set of circumstances

Annoyance A sensation of irritability or displeasure

Attenuation The reduction in sound pressure levels during transmission of sound

A-Weighting A filter capable of mimicking the frequency response of the human ear at 40-phons

Baseline The pre-existing noise conditions prior to the introduction of a noise source

Background Noise This is defined as the LA90 of the residual noise. The combined noise in an environment minus the presence of a specific noise contribution under measurement

Broadband A noise containing a wide range of frequencies

Character Single or multiple distinctive features to a given noise such as tone, impulse or whines

Daytime Defined as the hours 07:00 – 23:00 in the United Kingdom

Decibel (dB) Equal to one tenth of a Bel. Normally used to refer to sound pressure level, sound power level or sound intensity level

Decibel (dBA) Equal to one tenth of a Bel. Used to refer to sound pressure level, sound power level or sound intensity level that has been A-weighted

Directivity The directional characteristics of propagation from a noise source (as the emission characteristics may vary in intensity and frequency for different directions)

Dwelling A permanently or seasonally occupied residence

Emission Noise emitted by a source

Environmental Noise Unwanted or harmful outdoor noise generated by natural or manmade activities

Far-field

An area in free space at a significantly greater distance from a given sound source than the linear dimensions of the source, where the sound pressure level follows the inverse-square law (a decrease of 6 dB per doubling of distance from the noise source). The sound particle velocity is also in phase with the sound pressure in this area

Frequency The rate fluctuations that occur in a cyclical manner normally expressed as cycles per second in Hertz in the field of acoustics

Frequency Spectrum The range of noise frequencies audible (or inaudible) to the human ear

Appendix E. Noise Assessment Glossary


88


Ground Absorption Reduction in sound caused by the interaction of the sound wave and the ground

Harmonic A frequency of repetitive configuration that is a multiple of the harmonic

Hertz The unit of measurement for frequency, equal to cycles per second

Industrial Noise A distinctive type of noise arising from sources of an industrial nature

Intermittent Noise A noise level that suddenly and continuously reduces to background noise levels several times during the period of observation

LA90 The A-weighted level of noise exceeded for 90% of the measurement time. Normally taken as the background noise level

LAeq A-weighted equivalent sound pressure level. A steady sound level that produces the same energy as the fluctuating sound level over the measured time interval

LAmax Maximum A-weighted sound pressure level occurring over the measured time interval

Leq The equivalent sound pressure level

L90 The un-weighted level of noise exceeded for 90% of the measured time interval

Level A term used to describe sound that has been converted into decibels

Low Frequency Noise Noise generally in the frequency range of 20 Hz to 200 Hz

Measurement Interval The period over which a noise measurement is made

Near-field

The part of a sound field, typically within two wavelengths of a noise source, where a simple relationship between sound level and distance does not exist, where sound pressure does not follow the inverse square law and particle velocity is not in phase with the sound pressure.

Night-time Defined as the hours 23:00 – 07:00 in the United Kingdom

Noise A sound that can be described as being unnecessary or unwanted

Noise Sensitive Receptor

Any dwelling house, hotel, hospital, educational establishment, or any other place of high amenity that requires the absence of noise at nuisance levels for proper use

Noise Nuisance Noise that interferes with the internal or external amenity of a property, for example

Octave The range between two frequencies with a ratio of 2:1

Octave Band Components of the frequency spectrum contained within two frequencies one octave apart


89


Rating Level The specific noise level plus any adjustment for characteristic features

Receiver An individual or property in receipt of noise

Residual Noise The remaining ambient noise when a particular source of sound is suppressed to a degree that it does not contribute to the ambient noise

Screening An environmental or man-made barrier between noise source and receiver that interrupts the transmission path, reducing the received noise levels

Sound A sound is any form of disturbance that is transmitted in a flexible medium such as gas, liquid or a solid which causes pressure changes in the ear

Sound Level Meter

The instrumentation used to measure noise with a standardised frequency and exponential time weighting. There are many types used to measure various descriptions of sound. The measurement should be capable of accuracy and repeatability

Sound Power The rate of production of noise energy and is independent of environmental influences

Sound Power Level Ten times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the source sound power, W, to a standard reference power, Wref, of standardised value, 1 picowatt

Sound Pressure

The increase or decrease in the atmospheric pressure caused by a sound wave. It is dependent on both the sound power of the source and the surrounding acoustic features in the environment surrounding both source and receiver

Sound Pressure Level Ten times the logarithm to the base 10 of the square of the ratio of the effective or root mean square of the sound pressure fluctuations, P, and a standard reference pressure, Pref, of 20 micropascals

Specific Noise Level The equivalent continuous A-weighted sound pressure level at the assessment position produced by the specific noise source over a given measurement time interval

Specific Noise Source The noise source under investigation for assessing likelihood of complaint

Third Octave A frequency band where the frequencies have a ratio of 2 to the 1/3rd

power

Tone The acoustic energy at a particular frequency or within a narrow frequency band

Tonal The acoustic energy in a narrow frequency


90


F.1. Introduction

This appendix provides an assessment of the likely impacts associated with the construction of the 2.7km

transmission line required to export electricity produced by the power station to the main electricity

transmission network. The transmission line is one of the components of the Project, as described in

Section 2 of the revised ESIA Volume II. PGE will be responsible for construction of the transmission line.

F.2. Project Description

Electricity generated at the power plant will be transmitted to the main electricity transmission network via a

150kV double circuit steel tower transmission line connected to the existing Kawangkoan substation

located approximately 2.7km away. The existing substation is owned and operated by PLN.

Currently the exact routing of the transmission line has not been determined and will depend on the

outcome of a route selection exercise that is being undertaken, taking into account issues raised during

consultation and agreements with any landowners likely to be affected. Figure 2.6 presented in Volume II

of the ESIA provides an illustration of the preliminary routeing of the transmission line along the road

connecting the power station to the substation.

Tower spanning is approximately 300m and therefore it is estimated that nine transmission towers will be

required to connect the power station to the substation. Each tower typically has a 20m by 20m footprint

and a line corridor width of 40m.

The construction of transmission lines will involve removal of vegetation along the alignment where

required, excavation for installation of towers, erection of towers, erection of substation equipment, civil

works related to the transmission line and line stringing. Securing rights of way for access to the

transmission towers and lines would form part of land acquisition / compensation negotiations through a fair

negotiated settlement.

The World Bank Group EHS Guidelines for Power Transmission and Distribution have been considered in

undertaking the assessment of the transmission line.

F.3. Baseline

If directly routed, the transmission line would have to pass through terrain comprising agricultural land

(adjacent to the power plant) consisting mostly of corn, tomato and peanut plantations as well as some

shrub land. Two houses (thought to be disused) are located along this direct route, as well as some

stables.

Any acquisition of land or compensation required along the route of the transmission line will be undertaken

through PGE’s standard willing buyer-willing seller process as set out in the Land Acquisition and

Resettlement Policy Framework.

Appendix F. Transmission line summary


91


F.4. Assessment of Impacts

The environmental and social impacts associated with the construction phase are expected to occur as a

result of:

� Noise and dust from construction activities and the impact on wellbeing of any nearby residential areas.

This would be mitigated through construction best practice measures. Residual impact is low adverse.

� Land take for the siting of the transmission towers which may result in some agricultural land loss and

some disturbance to flora and fauna. The existing habitats are regarded as being of low or negligible

conservation value. The small area required for the tower bases will be acquired by PGE through a fair

negotiated settlement. In addition, compensation will be provided by PGE to secure the transmission

line Right of Way. The residual impact is assessed as being negligible.

� Temporary loss of crops or trees on agricultural land due to construction activity. The duration of this

impact is likely to be very short. Fair compensation will be paid for access to land. The residual impact is

assessed as being negligible.

The environmental and social impacts associated with the operation phase are expected to occur as a

result of:

� Landscape and visual impacts on the predominantly rural landscape. The transmission line is expected

to result in permanent visual intrusion on the landscape. These impacts could be mitigated through the

route selection process or consideration of alternative tower types or underground cabling. The residual

impact is assessed as being low to moderate adverse.

� Electro-magnetic fields EMF if the cables span above any residential buildings. There is little evidence

to link to community health effects. Avoiding stringing of lines directly over residential properties would

mitigate this effect. The residual impact is assessed as being negligible.

� Restrictions on land use (no structures, trees or vegetation above a certain height, etc) throughout the

right of way and provision of access for ongoing maintenance. PGE will provide compensation to

secure the rights of way for access to the transmission towers and lines. The residual impact is

assessed as being negligible.

Environmental and social impacts associated with the decommissioning phase are similar to those

identified for the construction phase.

F.5. Cumulative impacts and transboundary issues

No cumulative impacts or transboundary issues are anticipated as a result of the new transmission line.


92


This revised ESIA provides an update to the draft ESIA that was disclosed from 7th October 2010. A

number of minor changes have been made to the text as part of the natural evolution of the ESIA process.

The principal changes that have been incorporated into this document are set out in Table G.1

Table G.1: ESIA Principal Changes

No. Relevant Section of Revised ESIA

Description of Changes Relevant Section of Draft ESIA

1 Volume I Updated to reflect the revised project description and revised impact assessments.

Volume I

2 Volume II, Section 2 Additional detail and clarity is provided on the description of the project. This includes the relocation of the power plant and the potential addition of three clusters. A summary of the Project components and their status is provided.

Volume II, Section 2

3 Volume II, Section 4 Additional explanation has been provided on which World Bank Operational Policies are triggered and which are not.

Volume II, Section 4

4 Volume II, Section 6 Inclusion of details of additional consultation activities undertaken in January 2011.

Volume II, Section 6; Volume III Appendix B

5 Volume II, Sections 7, 8 and 9

Minor changes to the nomenclature and structure of the baseline and impact assessment sections.

Volume II, Sections 7, 8 and 9

6 Volume II, Sections 7, 8 and 9

Changes to the social and environmental baseline and assessments to reflect updated Project description and the outputs from additional consultation activities.

Volume II, Sections 7, 8 and 9

7 Volume II, Section 9 The assessment of air emissions has been updated to reflect changes to the Project. The revised assessment predicts that there will be no exceedences of relevant guidelines, limits and standards.

Volume II, Section 9; Volume III, Appendix D

8 Volume II, Section 9 The assessment of noise has been updated to reflect changes to the Project. The revised assessment predicts that with the application of mitigation measures, there will be no exceedences of relevant guidelines, limits and standards.

Volume II, Section 9; Volume III, Appendix F

9 Volume III, Appendix B Updated Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan to capture activities undertaken as part of the revised ESIA.

Volume III, Appendix C

10 Volume III, Appendix C Updated Land Acquisition and Resettlement Policy Framework to reflect current status of the Project.

Volume III, Appendix D

11 Volume III, Appendix D The assessment of air emissions has been updated to reflect changes to the Project. The revised assessment predicts that there will be no exceedences of relevant guidelines, limits and standards

Volume III, Appendix E

12 Volume III, Appendix F Updated summary of the impacts of the transmission line. Volume II, Section 9

13 Volume III, Appendix G The inclusion of a change register to explain the key differences between the draft ESIA (dated September 2010) and this revised ESIA (dated February 2011).

Not applicable

14 Volume III, Appendix H The inclusion of a Joint Agreement between PGE and PLN regarding the construction of the transmission line

Not applicable

15 Volume III, Appendix I The inclusion of a Forestry Ministry Letter confirming that the Project lies outside of the Hutan Lindung

Not applicable

16 Volume III, Appendix J The inclusion of minutes from a meeting with the Ministry of Environment to discuss the odour standards relevant to assessment of H2S

Not applicable

17 Volume IV, Sections 4 and 5

The Environmental and Social Management Plan has been removed from Volumes II and III and forms the basis of Volume IV

Volume II, Section 10.5; Volume III Appendix H

Appendix G. Revised ESIA Change Register


93


No. Relevant Section of Revised ESIA

Description of Changes Relevant Section of Draft ESIA

18 Volume IV, Sections 4 and 5

The Environmental and Social Management Plan separates the responsibilities for implementing actions between Project/Corporate and Institutional stakeholders

Volume II, Section 10.5 and 10.6

19 Volume IV, Section 6 Management Plans / Procedural Frameworks are incorporated into Volume IV

Volume III, Appendix G

20 Volume IV, Section 6 New Management Plans/Procedural Frameworks are included: Retrenchment Plan; Labour Grievance Mechanism Framework; and Framework Chance Finds Procedure

Not applicable

265718/RGE/GEV/08/D 16 February 2011 100


H.1. Overview

The enclosed Joint Agreement between PGE and PLN is referenced in Volume II of the ESIA and includes relevant information in relation to transmission line construction.

Appendix H. PGE and PLN Joint Agreement



I.1. Overview

The enclosed letter from the Ministry of Forestry (Directorate General of Forestry Planning for the Centre of Forest Area Region VI) is referenced in Volume II of the ESIA and is included by way of confirmation that the Project is located outside the Watershed Protection Forest (Hutan Lindung).

Appendix I. Forestry Ministry Letter

KEIUENTERIAN KEHUTANANDIREKTORAT JENDERAL PLANOLOGI KEHUTANAN

BALAI PEMANTAPAN KAWASAN IIUTAN WILAYAH VI MANADOJl. l? Agustus Kotak Pos 1322 Manado 95119

Te$. (M31) 852709 Fax.8410?5

2<! Ianuan 2MlNomorI-ampiranHal

s.4z fBPKtrv}.-alzotrI (satu) PetaHasil Telaahan lokasi Pengembangan

PLTPUnit5 dan6

KepadaYth.

Ketua Badan Konsultan Amdal Unsrat

diManado

Sehubungan dengan surat Saudara No. 03/AMDALw}}L1 Perihal lokasi pengembangan PLTP Unit 5 & 6

tanggal lg Januari 2011, dengan ini kami sampaikan hasil telaahan dengan peqielasan sebagai berikut :

1. Sesuai surat tersebut di atas, Saudara mengajukan permohonan analisis fungsi kawasan hutan berada dekat

dengan kedudukan lokasi kegiatan pengembangan lapangan uap dan PLTP di daerah Tompaso Kabupaten

Minahasa.

Z. Berkaitan dengan hal tersebut di atas, maka berdasa*an hasil telaahan yang mengacu pada :

- peta Kawasan Hutan dan Perairan Provinsi Sulawesi Utara Skata 1 : 250.000 No. Lembar 2417 (Lanpiran

Keputusan Menteri Kehutanan dan Perkebunan No.452ltrQts-M999 tgl 17 Juni 1999)

- peta Rupa Bumi Indonesia Lembar 241727 Skala 1 : 50.000 Edisi I Tahun 1991

- Peta Contour- Lahendong unit 5 dan 6

- Daftar kocrdinar kegiatan pengembangan lapangan uap dan PLTP rmit 5 dan 6 Tompaso,

diperoleh hasil sebagai berikut :

a. Seluruh titik pusat ke gratansesuai lampiran daftar koordinat terletak pada areal penggunaan lain (APL).

b. Berdasarkan hasil telaahan dimaksud area pada titik koordinat I seluas x 6,A2 ha, titik kordinat 3 seluas

t 9,67 ha serta lokasi pengembangan Kanonang seluas + 4,4O ha merupakan lokasi yang letaknya

berdekatan dengan kawasan HL. Gunung Soputan sebagaimana pada peta hasil telaahan terlampir.

3. Terkait dengan pengembangan Lapangan Uap dan PLTP Unit 5 dan 6 Lahendong Selatan selanjutnya

diharapkan agar memperhatikan batas kawasan hutan berdasarkan peta hasil telaahan dimaksud.

Demikian kami sampaikan, atas pertatiannya diucapkan terima kasih.

w MP



J.1. Overview

The enclosed Ministry of Environment meeting minutes is referenced in both Volume II and Appendix A of this volume of the ESIA and is included by way of confirmation / interpretation regarding application of various Indonesian standards relating to H2S emissions.

Appendix J. Ministry of Environment Meeting Minutes

Lahendong 5&6 Revised ESIA Vol III...

Documents

Transcript of Lahendong 5&6 Revised ESIA Vol III...