Technical Assistance for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (EIA / SIA) Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) – Grant TF#054683-IND E2658 v6 Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report DRAFT JUNE 2011 Contents Glossary................................................................................................................................ 1 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 3 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Context ................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Purpose and scope of Status Report....................................................................... 5 2 Adequacy of 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL ................................................................ 5 2.1 Specific review of the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL............................................ 6 2.1.1 Indonesian requirements.................................................................................. 6 2.1.2 Broader considerations .................................................................................... 7 2.2 Additional information and developments ................................................................ 9 2.2.1 Approval of the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL and Supplementary Report .............. 9 2.2.2 Additional baseline environmental information ................................................. 9 2.2.3 Sediment quality ............................................................................................ 10 2.2.4 Community Consultation ................................................................................ 10 2.2.5 Commencement of Ancol CDF Construction .................................................. 10 2.2.6 Offsite impacts from Ancol CDF ..................................................................... 10 2.3 Overall assessment .............................................................................................. 11 3 Ancol CDF Safeguards ................................................................................................ 12 3.1 Institutional arrangements ..................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 PT. PJA ......................................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Ancol Construction Contractors (ACC) ........................................................... 13 3.1.3 JUFMP Supervision Consultant (SC) ............................................................. 13 3.1.4 PIUs ............................................................................................................... 14 3.1.5 PMU .............................................................................................................. 14 3.1.6 Construction Contractors (CC) ....................................................................... 14 3.1.7 DKI BPLHD.................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Enhanced safeguards ........................................................................................... 14 3.2.1 Integration of JUFMP and Ancol CDF activities .............................................. 15 3.2.2 “Good practice” construction and supervision ................................................ 15 3.2.3 Sediment and other fill / cover material .......................................................... 16 3.2.4 Traffic management ....................................................................................... 17 Appendix 1 Detailed review of Ancol AMDAL and Ancol Updated RKL/RPL ................. 18 Appendix 2 Development of Ancol CDF and interaction with JUFMP project ................ 26 Appendix 3 Ancol integrated Environment Management and Monitoring Matrix ............ 27 List of Tables Table A - 1 : Detailed review of Ancol 2006 AMDAL and 2009Ancol Updated RKL/RPL ... 18 Table A - 2 : Development of Ancol CDF and interaction with JUFMP project (Schedule subject to periodic adjustments) .......................................................................................... 26 Table A - 3 : Ancol CDF Supplementary EMP Matrix ........................................................ 27 i Glossary Institutional – Functional English names BBWS – CC Regional Office for the Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin (Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane, BBWS-CC) DKI BPLHD Environmental Management Agency of Jakarta Provincial Government DGCK Directorate General Human Settlements, Ministry of Public Works DGWR Directorate General Water Resources, Ministry of Public Works DKI Jakarta Jakarta Provincial Government PMU Project Management Unit PIU Project Implementation Unit PT. PJA PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol, the concessionaire and operator of the Ancol reclamation project Environmental documentation: AMDAL Environmental Assessment (Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan, AMDAL, it includes ANDAL plus RKL / RPL) ANDAL Environmental Impact Assessment/Statement (Analisis Dampak Lingkungan, ANDAL) RKL Environmental Management Plan (Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan, RKL) RPL Environmental Monitoring Plan (Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan, RPL) Updated RKL / RPL Product resulting process whereby there is a substantive change in project scope from an already approved AMDAL sufficient to warrant an updating of the environmental and social management and monitoring plans, but the change is not so large as to require a completely new AMDAL. As will be seen this approach was adopted by DKI BPLHD and the AMDAL Commission to enable the disposal of JUFMP dredge material at the already approved Ancol reclamation site. The Updated RKL / RPL supersedes the earlier AMDAL, but does not necessarily have to re-address issues that were considered to have been adequately considered in the earlier AMDAL and for which there will be no substantial changed effects JUFMP Project-specific terminology B3 Waste (or B3) Hazardous and Toxic Waste (Limbah Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun) JUFMP Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project. [in various project documents, used synonymously with „Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative (JEDI)‟] Phase 1 Set of project sites for initial implementation of overall JUFMP. The Phase 1 sites were chosen because of their critical importance with respect to flood relief, and also because resettlement will not be required. A single AMDAL has been prepared for this set of Phase 1 activities Phase 2 The remainder of project sites to be undertaken under JUFMP. RPF Resettlement Policy Framework; a policy document to be followed by JUFMP for resettlement activities associated with the project. There is no resettlement for Phase 1 project sites. The RPF is based on World Bank policy / practice and Indonesian law Project Sites Identified individual components of JUFMP; either a defined length of drain/river / floodway, or a defined size of waduk (reservoir/flood 1 retention basin). Engineering designs have been based on each site; AMDAL preparation has been or will be for individual project site Terminology arising from JUFMP Contractual and implementation aspects Construction Contractor The contractor whose Construction Contract under the PIU will undertake dredging, embankment works, sediment transport and associated activities for construction of JUFMP Contractor Detailed ESMP An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) to be prepared on award of Contract by the Construction Contractor with detailed information on ESM practices to be followed. This must be based on the Construction Contract conditions, the AMDAL, this Supplementary Report, and other reports referred to in bidding documents. It must also follow all relevant laws and regulations. Community consultation prior to submission of the ESMP for Supervision Consultant formal approval is mandated Contractor ESM Plan Generic term used to include both the “Contractor General ESMP” and the “Contractor Detailed ESM Plan” Contractor Preliminary ESMP An ESM Plan to be prepared as part of the Technical Bid. It will include similar contents as per Contractor Detailed ESMP, but to a lesser degree of detail. Community consultation is “recommended” as part of preparation ESM Environmental and Social Management (includes environmental and social monitoring as appropriate) Supervision Consultant Consultant under contract to PMU. The Supervision Consultant will undertake day-to-day supervision of Construction Contracts – the role normally identified as “Engineer” (as principal‟s representative). The Supervision Consultant will also have a substantive role in environmental and social management and monitoring, with main focus on Construction Contractor‟s ESM but also including specific duties in relation to public communication / grievances, to resettlement (for some of the Phase 2 site activities) and to monitoring and reporting to DKI BPLHD on behalf of the project proponents (i.e. PIUs) 2 Summary PT. PJA had an AMDAL prepared and approved in 2006 for reclamation of a near-shore area in Jakarta Bay based on filling with sand derived from regional sources (the Ancol AMDAL). Following the announcement of the Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP), an Ancol Updated RKL / RPL was prepared and approved in 2009, to enable part filling of the area with JUFMP dredged material. Other changes in design were an increased channel width separating the reclamation area from the main shoreline from about 80 m to 200m and slight changes to overall shape and area. Inherent but not explicit in the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL was that the facility was to be designed, constructed and operated as a Confined Disposal Facility (hence the term „Ancol CDF‟ is commonly used to refer to the facility). An independent review of the Ancol AMDAL and Ancol Updated RKL / RPL (based largely on a World Bank supplied-checklist) was undertaken in 2009 by ERM (a consultancy firm). This current supplementary report further reviews the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL, and considers progress in JUFMP planning and design and in other factors that have occurred in the interim. The original Ancol AMDAL and Ancol Updated RKL / RPL followed appropriate and standard Indonesian practices such as preparation by independent certified AMDAL specialists, specified consultations during preparation and assessment by the AMDAL Commission. The overriding conclusion from the reviews and consideration of progress in JUFMP planning and design is that the Ancol CDF site and Ancol Updated RKL / RPL integrates well with the JUFMP project. Some aspects that might be expected to be addressed in an environmental assessment are missing or only very briefly addressed in the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL and/or earlier AMDAL - this probably arose because during scoping it was considered that they were of little or no relevance considering the specific project situation. This report identifies these aspects and concurs that they are of little or no relevance. Additionally it could be argued that greater consideration should have been given to future land use implications at the Ancol CDF site. The Ancol Updated RKL/RPL is specific to the filling / reclamation activity, and almost any type of future land use would require separate environmental assessment at the time. Furthermore, all indications are that the filling with JUFMP dredged sediment would not limit future land uses. This supplementary report concludes that some additional management and monitoring would be a prudent assurance to strengthen the implementation of safeguards measures. Based on this assessment, a supplementary EMP is presented in this supplementary report. This complements the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL and focuses mostly on the management and monitoring of environmental and social issues during the development of the Ancol CDF. Costs are mostly related to normal engineering / site management supervision, a need to integrate activity with the JUFMP Supervision Consultant and for some post-filling soil chemical analysis. 3 1 Introduction 1.1 Context The “owner” / “proponent” of the Ancol reclamation site in the near shore area of Jakarta Bay is PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT. PJA). Environmental approvals to reclaim the area were granted in 2006 following standard Indonesian AMDAL requirements, with fill material mostly based on sand. Following a very severe flood that inundated Jakarta in February 2007, the concept of a Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) evolved and has been in preparation since then. The JUFMP involves dredging accumulated sediment in the selected key floodways, canals and waduks (retention basins) within the Jakarta urban area and transporting the dredged material to a suitable disposal location. Several options were assessed and it was concluded that the Ancol reclamation site was the most appropriate facility for the disposal of the JUFMP dredge material1 since: It is central to the JUFMP project sites; It already had environmental approvals for development; By being in a nearshore area the social effects would be minimal (there would be no resettlement); and It represented a wise use of resources, replacing sand with dredged material as part filling material for reclamation. Interaction with the Environmental Management Agency of Jakarta Provincial Government (DKI BPLHD) and the associated AMDAL Commission determined that the change of fill material would require that there be an Ancol Updated RKL / RPL to address issues associated with change of fill material. This was prepared in accordance with local requirements including scoping, preparation, consultations, specific consideration of social issues and AMDAL Commission hearing. The updated RKL / RPL was approved by DKI BPLHD in 2009. The area approved was +/- 119 ha site, and slight changes to physical boundaries eventuated, especially in relation to widening the distance between the existing shoreline (itself reclaimed) and the Ancol CDF reclamation site. Recognising different “ownership” but also the need for integration, the approved Ancol Updated RKL / RPL specifically identifies the physical and administrative boundaries between Ancol CDF and the JUFMP project. Since approval of the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL: JUFMP project preparation has progressed significantly, especially in relation to: o Selection of a set of JUFMP sub-projects for JUFMP Phase 1 activities, with associated detailed design and preparation and approval of an AMDAL for these sub-projects. o On-going detailed design and studies for environmental approvals for other JUFMP sub-projects and studies into necessary resettlement at some of these sub-project sites. o Establishing project institutional and implementation arrangements. There has been on-going review of the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL, especially in relation to interaction with JUFMP requirements. 1 Excepting solid wastes (which will be separated and disposed at the existing Bantar Gebang landfill), and hazardous material if these are found (which is planned to be disposed at an existing commercial licensed existing hazardous material landfill, i.e., PPLi) 4 A further subsequent proposed change in design of the northern boundary (dyke) of the Ancol CDF was reviewed and approved by DKI BPLHD. This proposed design change was also review by the World Bank, and the recommendations of this review was acknowledged and adopted prior to the approval of DKI BPLHD. It is stressed that the 2006 Ancol AMDAL and the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL were specifically focussed on the reclamation activity itself at the Ancol site in line with Indonesian requirements. The fact that the reclamation site itself was in conformity with the long term spatial plan precluded detailed evaluation of “land use” issues, especially because the site is currently a near shore area. Boundaries were drawn in relation to the JUFMP activities. The 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL included detailed evaluation of the result of bringing JUFMP dredge material to the Ancol CDF site. The actual dredging activities themselves and transport of the JUFMP dredge material to the Ancol CDF site is addressed in the JUFMP- specific AMDALs. Evaluation of future land use activities was effectively left to post- reclamation AMDALs or similar environmental permitting which will be known only when there are specific proposals for the use of the area. 1.2 Purpose and scope of Status Report This supplementary report: Assesses whether the earlier Ancol AMDAL and the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL adequately address the social and environmental issues associated with the use of the site for JUFMP dredge material disposal (Section 2) including: o Considering the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL as a stand-alone document (Section 2.1) o Addressing new and updated information (Section 2.2) o Making an overall assessment, integrating the earlier Ancol Updated RKL / RPL and the new and updated information (Section 2.3) o Overall conclusions Identifies the current status of use of the Ancol site for JUFMP dredge material disposal (Section 3) addressing: o Institutional arrangements (Section 3.1) o Initial construction o Enhanced safeguards (Section 3.2) Appendices present: Nominal schedule of Ancol CDF development and interaction with JUFMP (Appendix 1) Supplementary EMP for Ancol CDF. (Appendix 2) 2 Adequacy of 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL Review of a document such as the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL could be undertaken for any one or more of the following reasons: 1. To check conformity with particular guidelines, legislation etc. 2. To assess the “quality” of the document and information contained therein. 3. To determine what requirements arising from the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL might influence how the JUFMP project could be implemented. 4. To assess whether conditions have changed since the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL was prepared and approved that might result in the document and associated RKL / RPL being at least partially “invalid”. 5 These reasons are not mutually exclusive and it is a matter of judgement as to the relative importance placed on these different reasons. In this current report, focus is on the reasons identified as 1, 3 and 4 above. The World Bank has specifically required assessment against its own provided checklist. This addresses reason 1 in part. Another check related to reason 1 is whether the document conforms to the Government of Indonesia (GOI) requirements. In relation to reason 2 the Consultants2 believe there is little to be gained by what must be a judgemental view of the “quality” of the document and how information is presented. However, the quality and completeness of the information can be and is partially considered in relation to conformity with the World Bank checklist. This report will not specifically address reason 2 again. At this stage of the project it important to be clear as to how the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL “enables” the JUFMP project to proceed, and what restrictions it might place on the implementation of the JUFMP project. This requires focus on reasons 3 and 4 above. 2.1 Specific review of the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL This Section focuses on Reason 1 identified at the beginning of this section, focussing on whether the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL conforms to regulations, policies etc. 2.1.1 Indonesian requirements While the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL effectively supersedes the earlier 2006 Ancol AMDAL, both documents and processes should be considered together. The decision to require an updated RKL / RPL rather than a complete new AMDAL is made based on the consideration of whether the earlier document adequately addressed aspects that might have a fundamental bearing on whether the project should proceed or not. By proceeding with the updated RKL / RPL approach, DKI BPLHD and the AMDAL Commission inherently determined that such aspects had been adequately addressed and what was required was a focus to ensure that adequate environmental management would be in place for the Ancol site to receive and dispose of JUFMP dredge material. The 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL was prepared on behalf of the “owner”, PT. PJA: Proponent Name : PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol, Tbk. Office Address : Jl. Pasir Putih Raya Kav. 5 Ancol, North Jakarta Telephone Number : (021) 6453456 Facsimile number : (021) 64710502 Responsible : Ir. Maleakhi John Position : Head of the Department of Licensing and Special Projects Project Name : Development of Eastern Regions of West Ancol for ±119Ha. Preparation was undertaken by AMDAL-certified consultants, informed by: the earlier 2006 Ancol AMDAL; specific engineering studies associated with formation of the outer retaining dike, current studies, and soil investigations; and the ERM 2008 sediment quality studies undertaken in the JUFMP drains and waduks; 2 The consultants retained by the PMU to prepared this supplementary report. 6 what would be involved with the JUFMP project. Assessment of the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL was done by DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission, which included a series of meetings in February / March 2009 before final approval was given. Reports from these meetings indicated extensive consideration by DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission on a range of social and environmental concerns, with the finally approved Ancol Updated RKL / RPL addressing these aspects. A notable aspect of the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL was the implication of the reclamation being developed as a Confined Disposal Facility (CDF), but this specific term was never used in the document. Additionally, “typical” drawings indicated sequencing of development of outer confining dikes, although there was no detailed written explanation of the whole sequencing and timing of development from initial outer dike construction, filling with dredged sediment and final covering. It is concluded that the process was properly conducted according to GOI requirements, that DKI BPLHD and the AMDAL Commission were detailed in their assessment and ensuring safeguards and that social matters were addressed in detail. The Ancol Updated RKL / RPL is very clear and specific about the scope and division of responsibilities between PT. PJA and JUFMP. In particular at Section 2.5.d the document states: In the context of the activities of JUFMP, the Ancol project site is a dumping site. JUFMP is the responsible party: o To ensure the dredged material does not contain B3 (hazardous and toxic waste) as per Government Regulation No. 85/19993. (This item further notes that based on the ERM 2008 sediment quality study, sediments do meet the criteria and can be accommodated at the Ancol reclamation site) o For dredging and transportation of materials to the Ancol location. o For selection of transportation route and carrier traffic arrangements. The responsibility of PT. PJA starts when a vehicle enters from Jl. RE Martadinata to the Ancol area. PT. PJA‟s obligation is to: o Provide access road in from Jl. RE Martadinata to the dumping site o Provide a means of laundering carrier (vehicle washing) as it leaves the Ancol area 2.1.2 Broader considerations This subsection is based on two separate consultants (ERM in 2009, PPA in 2010) independently reviewing the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL with some reference back to the 2006 Ancol AMDAL. Both reviews were made with assistance of a World Bank checklist, examination of the Ancol documents including notes made at the DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission meetings and with site visits. This detailed consolidated review is found in Appendix 1. Certain assessments and comments from these reviews require further additional discussions and considerations. These additional discussions and considerations are discussed in further detail in this and following sub-sections. The need for additional assessment / consideration arises because of one or more of the following: Contextual aspects. This relates to either standard check-list items being of limited relevance in relation to the project considering the context of the site itself, or of what 3 Note that the term of “B3” in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL/RPL refers to hazardous wastes as categorized and defined in the standards stipulated in Government Regulations no 85/1999 on Hazardous and Toxic Waste Management. 7 the Ancol AMDAL and Ancol Updated RKL / RPL (“Ancol permitting”) actually addresses. The documentation is non-specific about certain key aspects, especially in relation to the staging of reclamation activities and actually defining the activity as a Confined Disposal Facility. The evaluation of potential issues associated with use of JUFMP dredged material is limited. Mitigation measures do not necessarily consider the context of the site nor do they necessarily align with how site management will be arranged. Context of site The Ancol reclamation site is a near-shore site, located in a central position off Jakarta in Jakarta Bay. The Ancol CDF facility will be separated by a channel of some 200m width from a shoreline that itself has been subject to past filling / reclamation and accretion. Furthermore, under current spatial planning reclamation of the site has been formally identified since a 1995 government regulation. Considering this context: Long term planning issues are predetermined. The interaction with the closest residential communities (minimum of 200 m distant) would be limited during the reclamation period. The polluted nature of the immediate site reduces inherent “pristine” environmental quality (water and biological) and there are no nearby areas of biological value such as mangroves. Nevertheless this is not taken as a reason not to implement appropriate mitigation measures. Context of Ancol permitting As noted earlier, the scope of environmental permitting is limited to the reclamation stage of Ancol itself, notably excluding post-reclamation activities (to be addressed through future environmental permitting which will be known only when there are specific proposals for the use of the area) and JUFMP dredging and sediment transport activities (addressed in the JUFMP-specific AMDALs). Additionally, the sourcing of cover sand and topsoil would assume that those extractive industries themselves have appropriate environmental clearances, but assurances of the same are not specified in the Ancol mitigation measures. Staging of reclamation activities Drawings and discussion in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL infer that the site will be developed as a Confined Disposal Facility (CDF), with enclosing outer dikes internally lined with geotextile developed prior to the filling with dredge material. The timing of sand and topsoil cover-layer development is not defined. Potential issues arising from the use of JUFMP dredged material There is an inherent assumption that the requirement that JUFMP-transported sediment be “not B3” adequately covers the potential issues arising from the use of JUFMP dredge material. While this may be reasonable in many circumstances, additional evaluation and more specific mitigation measures would increase the safeguards. Mitigation measures Mitigation (including monitoring) measures as proposed do not necessarily consider the context of the site nor do they necessarily align with how site management will be arranged. While potential pollution from, for example, workforce sanitation is possible, it is not addressed in relation to the context that the numbers of workers would be limited, that Jakarta Bay is already polluted and that surrounding infrequent water quality testing would not be able to distinguish whether workforce sanitation was being adequately managed. As another example, for a construction activity much of the mitigation and monitoring should be 8 focussed on aligning to Construction Contract conditions and oversight by a supervising engineer. These are addressed later in this Supplementary Report. 2.2 Additional information and developments Since the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL there has been: Approval of the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL by the AMDAL Commission in March 2010. Preparation of a JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report, which includes further safeguards-related recommendations beyond the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL, and which will also be applicable to the JUFMP project. Detailed baseline data collection for the JUFMP Phase 2 AMDALs that are being prepared through 2010. Additional consideration of sediment quality issues, especially to incorporate additional information from the JUFMP Phase 2 primary data collection and to consider the most appropriate manner to satisfy the DKI BPLHD JUFMP Phase 1 requirement for on-going sediment monitoring. Additional consultations with stakeholders. Commencement of the construction of the Ancol outer confining walls (which will form the confined disposal facility) Further consideration of potential offsite impacts from the sourcing of sand and laterite material (in addition to JUFMP dredge material) for the construction of the Ancol CDF. 2.2.1 Approval of the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL and Supplementary Report The JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL was prepared for the 5 JUFMP sites for which construction is expected to commence soon after the approval of the project. This JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL was formally approved by DKI BPLHD in March 2010. The most significant issue in this report related to the Ancol site is a requirement for additional B3 monitoring at the JUFMP sites prior to and post dredging. A JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report was prepared and this provided new information arising from JUFMP detailed design, addressed the sediment quality issues arising from the JUFMP AMDAL approval conditions, re-estimated transport traffic volumes, and produced a supplementary EMP based on the JUFMP institutional arrangements with emphasis on the Construction Contractor and Supervision Consultant arrangements (which were not yet defined in detail at the time of the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL). 2.2.2 Additional baseline environmental information Additional baseline environmental information has been collected for the JUFMP Phase 1 and Phase 2 sub-project areas, with information most relevant to Ancol being: Confirmation that baseline levels for various environmental parameters (especially noise, some air quality and many water qualities) already exceed environmental standards from time to time. Additional sediment samples have been collected4 and had the quality tested – see next subsection. 4 In addition to the earlier sediment quality study (conducted by ERM consultants in 2008) which was the first comprehensive and detailed primary sediment quality study for Jakarta‟s drains and waduks, and which supported much of the initial planning for the JUFMP project including the ANCOL Updated RKL / RPL and the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL. 9 Observations of the performance of an earlier Dutch-funded pilot project5 dredged- sludge at different times after disposal. 2.2.3 Sediment quality The additional assessments and consideration of sediment quality issues undertaken since the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL: Demonstrated that the results of additional sediment sample analysis (done for JUFMP Phase 2 sites) all support the earlier sampling and analysis that none of the material is classified as B3 (i.e., hazardous and toxic waste)6. Identified a testing protocol to be used to check sediment quality prior to dredging and on JUFMP project completion in the JUFMP drains and waduks. Identified the need to ensure that JUFMP transport trucks could not be used for illegal transport of any non-JUFMP material (whether B3 or otherwise) to Ancol. Assessed all sediment quality results in terms of land use using appropriate local standards and concluded that for a confined disposal facility, all sampling and testing to date supported a conclusion that there would be no constraint to future land use. Some additional confirmatory monitoring at Ancol during and after JUFMP sediment deposition is identified. Undertook a health assessment and concluded that the health-related risks from the JUFMP dredge material are low for Ancol construction workers and for any future residents of the Ancol site. 2.2.4 Community Consultation Community consultations have continued in JUFMP locations especially as part of the preparation of the JUFMP AMDAL and JUFMP social safeguards instruments. The clear and dominant and consistent themes arising from these consultations are: Broad support for the JUFMP project, recognising the benefits of flood mitigation, acknowledging that there will be some disturbance but stressing that communities want better environmental management than for many previous projects around Jakarta. Wish for ongoing and meaningful consultation between “the project” and the local communities. A very strong wish for local employment. 2.2.5 Commencement of Ancol CDF Construction The construction of the outer confining walls of the Ancol CDF facility commenced in the second quarter of 2010. There was significant discussion including JUFMP project engineers and environmental specialists about the construction of the outer confining walls, including a subsequent change in the design of the northern boundary (dyke) of the CDF, for which the recommendations of the World Bank review of the proposal was acknowledged and adopted prior to the approval of DKI BPLHD. Monitoring inspections of the work has also been carried out by DKI BPLHD7. 2.2.6 Offsite impacts from Ancol CDF In addition to the JUFMP dredged material, the construction of the perimeter walls and the filling of Ancol CDF will require sand (about 8.6 million m3). According to the approved Ancol Updated RKL and RPL, this sand is to be obtained from a marine source, in the Banten Area 5 A pilot project undertaken by DKI Jakarta with Dutch government funding support to pilot dredge a minor drain in Jakarta (not part of the JUFMP project). 6 Referring to Indonesian standards, which is based on international practice. 7 In November 2010, with the participation of the World Bank during the inspection. 10 of the coast from North Jakarta. This location where the sand will be obtained from already has an approved Environmental Permit8. The engineering design shows that the sediment material would form the bottom most layer of the filled area, which will then be overlaid by the sand layer which will in turn be capped with laterite soil material. The volume of laterite material required is estimated at 400,000m 3 to be obtained from land based sources near Bekasi, West Java that is also operating under environmental permits. The environmental impacts at the marine sources of sand and the land based source of laterite are not mentioned in the Ancol ANDAL, RKL and RPL9. All that is mentioned is that these sites have an approved AMDAL and are operating under environmental permits. PT. PJA has agreed that the JUFMP Supervision Consultant will supervise and monitor the activities at these offsite locations (for the sourcing of the sand and the laterite). 2.3 Overall assessment Considering the discussions in this section above, the following overall assessment and conclusions are made: Project need is adequately established. Although the JUFMP project considered various options for dredged material disposal, this consideration has no bearing on whether the Ancol reclamation proceeds or not. The reclamation site was planned and approved prior to the proposal for JUFMP and has a completely different objective to that of JUFMP. The use of JUFMP dredge material to part fill the Ancol CDF site is an efficient utilization of resources (reducing sand requirement in Ancol CDF) and is a win-win situation for PT. PJA as well as JUFMP. The positive benefits are further reinforced by removing and confining sediment from the JUFMP waterways from where it is liable to be flushed into Jakarta Bay and contribute to already elevated pollution loads. The distinction in responsibilities between JUFMP and PT. PJA with regard to the development / reclamation period is well defined and appropriate. The distinction between the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL/RPL and future environmental approvals (AMDALs) needed for any future land use is unstated, but it is important to acknowledge this distinction exists and that the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL is adequate for its purposes. Explicit development of the reclamation site as a Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) is central to the environmental assessment and mitigation. Additional sediment collection and analysis and assessment confirms the earlier assessment that JUFMP sediment is most unlikely to be classified as B3; the AMDAL-Commission future monitoring will provide additional safeguards; health risk from the sediment to workers and the general community is low; and with the AMDAL-required post reclamation covering with sand and topsoil there are unlikely to be any long term adverse effects. The construction of the Ancol CDF facility will cause the associated physical loss of near-shore polluted marine habitat, which has no conservation significance. There are no close-by areas of habitat / ecosystem significance. There will likely be some marginal deterioration in local sea water quality from time to time, even with mitigation measures which are based on maintaining confinement and normal site sanitation. This has limited significance because of the already 8 According to the approved RKL and RPL, the environment permits for the Banten marine area to provide sand are (i) Serang Regency Number 666/750/LKH dated April 13, 2005 issued to PT. Gora Gahana and (ii) The Mining and Energy Central Amdal Commission Number 5038/0115/SJ.T/199 dated December 5, 1994 issued to PT. SAC Nusantara. The permit allows the company to exploit about 10 million m3 of sand from an area of 1,056 ha in the position of 5o 54‟ 47‟2‟‟ – 5o 56‟ 12.2‟‟ South and 106o 11‟ 39.9‟‟ – 106o 17‟ 36.3‟‟ East. 9 Although this issue was reviewed by DKI BPLHD during the approval of the change in the design of the northern boundary (dyke) of the CDF. 11 polluted status; normal intermittent sea water quality monitoring would be unable to detect other than gross pollution from the Ancol CDF construction and filling activities. Adequate site supervision and observation would provide appropriate and cost-effective monitoring. Air quality related effects are likely to be localised and of short duration, potentially involving dust and windborne plastic etc., if site management is inadequate. Indications from other dredging activities in Jakarta are that odour problems are most unlikely, with the sediment being effectively odourless within a few hours of being disposed. Local communities are inherently separated from the reclamation site by a +/- 200 m channel. There is unlikely to be any significant disturbance to these communities, though under certain conditions they would hear operations at the site and if site management is poor they could be affected by dust and windborne rubbish. Optimal environmental and social outcomes from the reclamation / development stage would occur with a focus on o good engineering practice by PT. PJA and its contractors at the Ancol CDF and associated sites. o adherence to the confined disposal facility (“CDF”) principles o close supervision by the PT. PJA and its supervising engineers and consultants to ensure that environmental and social safeguards are being followed, and o close consultation and integration with JUFMP project implementation. Section 3 addresses the safeguards in more detail, with a particular focus on issues not detailed in the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL 3 Ancol CDF Safeguards This section considers safeguards relevant to the development and filling of the Ancol CDF during the period when JUFMP dredge material will be transported to the Ancol CDF. Many safeguards measures are already required by the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL and these will not be addressed further. The focus is therefore on additional measures, and the institutional arrangements to ensure that they are implemented. 3.1 Institutional arrangements Institutional arrangements and responsibilities for JUFMP sub-projects are well defined. The following sub-sections identify similar institutional arrangements for the Ancol CDF reclamation activity, and the necessary interactions between various parties. 3.1.1 PT. PJA PT. PJA is the concessionaire for the Ancol CDF reclamation site. It is also the proponent of the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL/RPL. PT. PJA has: Specific legal responsibility to implement the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL. General responsibility to ensure good environmental and social management at the Ancol CDF site, regardless of specific requirement in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL. Agreed to implement any additional measures identified in this supplementary report and include reports of the implementation of these additional measures in the quarterly implementation reports of the RKL and RPL to DKI BPLHD. Interests in the long term use of the Ancol site. 12 The equivalent entity for the JUFMP project are the various PIUs (Section 3.1.4), though the JUFMP PMU (Section 3.1.5) has a co-ordinating role on behalf of the PIU‟s. Although the legal responsibility remains with PT. PJA for implementation of specified and general environmental and social management at the Ancol site, this does not limit the possibility that implementation of specific aspects could be contracted to other entities. Note that in order to further ensure the compliance to the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL: the World Bank‟s “no-objection” to any given JUFMP dredging contract will be subject to the World Bank being satisfied with the adequacy of the Ancol CDF (including having received satisfactory evidence of PT. PJA‟s compliance with the Ancol AMDAL and this Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report requirements, and compliance with the approved Detailed Engineering Drawings for the construction of the Ancol CDF), and the JUFMP legal agreements will include provision to require the Jakarta Provincial Government (DKI Jakarta) to exercise its rights, as a shareholder, to cause PT. PJA to implement the requirements (including mitigation measures) stated in the Ancol AMDAL and this Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report requirements. 3.1.2 Ancol Construction Contractors (ACC) This is a generic term adopted for this Supplementary Report to cover any Contractor, sub- contractors, etc., engaged by PT. PJA at the Ancol CDF site for such works as, but not necessarily limited to: Construction and / or maintenance of external confining dikes Construction and / or maintenance of internal separating or temporary confining dikes, if any are needed Development and / or maintenance of internal roads or tracks to facilitate movement of JUFMP sediment delivery trucks Providers of sand, topsoil etc that might be used as specified final cover or for any other purpose. This includes entities other than JUFMP that may be used to deliver fill material to the Ancol CDF site. Internal drainage or similar Providers and operators of the vehicle washing facility as required under the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL. PT. PJA itself as it undertakes any works using its own resources or, for example, day contract labour. The equivalent entity for the JUFMP project is the (JUFMP) Construction Contractors (Section 3.1.6) engaged by the PIUs. The supervision of the ACC is being carried out by PT. PJA through its Property Development Unit (including supervising the environmental aspects of the ACC contracts). Additionally, PT. PJA has recruited a consulting firm to carry out quarterly compliance monitoring of the ongoing construction works. PT. PJA, in compliance with the Indonesian AMDAL requirements, is preparing and submitting to the DKI BPLHD quarterly implementation reports of the RKL and RPL. 3.1.3 JUFMP Supervision Consultant (SC) PT. PJA has agreed to allow the JUFMP Supervision Consultant (SC) to have access to the Ancol CDF and all it offsite locations (including source locations for the sand and laterite fill material) for the purposes of carrying out supervision of the approved RKL and RPLs, the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report, PT. PJA‟s quarterly RKL and RPL 13 Progress reports and any other tasks as specified in the Terms of Reference (TOR) of the SC. The TOR for the SC will include these responsibilities. 3.1.4 PIUs The PIU‟s (DKI Jakarta, DGCK and DGWR) are in effect the current “owners” of the JUFMP drains and waduks which fall under their respective responsibility. Therefore they have specific ownership of the associated JUFMP AMDALs and hence responsibility for implementation of the JUFMP AMDALs, and will retain effectively sole control of the JUFMP drains and waduks once the JUFMP projects have been signed off after completion of construction contracts. 3.1.5 PMU The PMU within DGWR has been designated as the major unit with overall GOI responsibility for implementation of the JUFMP project. PMU has management responsibility for the JUFMP Supervision Consultant (SC), and via the SC the coordination responsibility for the Construction Contract execution for the JUFMP sub-projects and for implementing the associated AMDALs and submitting environmental monitoring reports to DKI BPLHD. The PMU is also closely associated with defining requirements for the JUFMP Construction Contracts and for the Terms of Reference of the SC. 3.1.6 Construction Contractors (CC) The Construction Contractors will be responsible for the dredging of the JUFMP drains and waduks and transport of the dredge material from the dredging sites to the Ancol CDF in accordance with Construction Contracts. Conditions of these contracts address, inter alia, environmental and social management. The Construction Contractors will have specific responsibilities in relation to preventing illegal transport and disposal of B3 (i.e., hazardous) waste (if any are found) to the Ancol CDF site. 3.1.7 DKI BPLHD DKI BPLHD is directly involved in the assessment and approval of AMDALs (including RKL / RPL) and will have an ongoing role in monitoring implementation of the RKL / RPL. Monitoring reports for the implementation of the RKL / RPL (including the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL submitted by PT. PJA) will be assessed by DKI BPLHD. With respect to Ancol CDF, DKI BPLHD has started monitoring the ongoing construction works and invited the World Bank to participate in the supervision and monitoring. It is expected that these joint supervision and monitoring will continue. In the future, DKI BPLHD would also be the authority involved in the assessment and approval of any AMDALs related to any proposed land use of the Ancol CDF site. 3.2 Enhanced safeguards Considering the review and assessments above, this subsection presents enhanced safeguards for the Ancol CDF site to be implemented during the period of construction (construction of the CDF confining walls and the reclamation filling including sand and topsoil covering) that will: Complement the environmental and social management and monitoring required in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL. 14 Integrate with the ESM for the JUFMP project, as established by the AMDALs and / or by later contract or requirement. Address some issues not clearly or specifically identified in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL. Provide additional security to ensure that all deposited material, cover material, etc., conforms to the requirement that no B3 waste is disposed at the Ancol CDF site, and to ensure that there are no constraints to future land use. For each defined mitigation / monitoring activity responsibilities are allocated. The table in Appendix 3 summarises this information. 3.2.1 Integration of JUFMP and Ancol CDF activities Activity PT. PJA shall provide DKI Jakarta and the PMU updates on the progress of the construction of the Ancol CDF facility, and provide documents confirming the completion of the confinement dykes. PT. PJA will cooperate with DKI Jakarta, PMU or World Bank review of the adequacy of the confined facility for dredge material disposal (including providing satisfactory evidence of compliance with the Ancol AMDAL and the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report requirements, and compliance with the approved Detailed Engineering Drawings for the construction of the Ancol CDF). Responsibilities PT. PJA to provide information and documentation DKI Jakarta, PMU and World Bank to carry out review and assessments Activity PT. PJA shall meet as frequently as required with PMU and / or SC to enable smooth integration of JUFMP and Ancol CDF activities. One tool to be used will be the development of (and the review and updating as necessary) a detailed schedule (an outline is given at Table A - 2) of the integrated operations Responsibilities Primary PT. PJA and PMU to implement regular coordination meetings Secondary SC, ACC and CC to participate in coordination meetings as necessary 3.2.2 “Good practice” construction and supervision Activity PT. PJA will ensure that all Ancol Construction Contractors (ACC) will have work plans which include environmental and social management plans. These should include such aspects as provision of workforce sanitary arrangements, health and safety, identification and proposed management of site specific environment and social management, training for workforce in relevant environment and social management. The detail of any Work Plan and ESMP shall be tailored to the particular activity; for example whereas a long term contract for disposal and levelling of deposited sediment would require a reasonably detailed ESMP, one for restricted activity such as vehicle washing for trucks prior to leaving the site might be 15 a 1-2 page document. Some activities would likely require no such specific plan. PT. PJA will supervise its ACC (through its Property Development Unit). Given the JUFMP interests in Ancol CDF, the SC‟s supervision and monitoring activities at Ancol CDF will include reviews of the ACC‟s environmental and social management of their activities. Responsibilities ACC for day-to-day activity at Ancol site PT. PJA (through it Property development Unit) for direct supervision of ACC SC for supervising and monitoring Ancol activities for JUFMP PMU to oversee SC activity and receive SC reports 3.2.3 Sediment and other fill / cover material Activity The PMU (with assistance from the SC) will provide PT. PJA with information as they become available of the results of the prior dredge testing of JUFMP sites / sections (see section 2.2.1). For sections where the sediment has been cleared as suitable for delivery to and disposal at Ancol CDF, PT. PJA will allow the material to be delivered to and disposed at Ancol CDF. For sections where the sediment is not cleared as suitable for delivery to Ancol CDF (e.g., if it is determined to be B3 waste, or determined to need further additional testing and interpretation), the PMU (with assistance of the SC) will ensure that these material are not delivered to Ancol CDF. The PMU (with assistance of the SC) will keep PT. PJA fully informed of the handling of any B3 waste found in JUFMP sites. PT. PJA may review and monitor the testing process in JUFMP. Responsibilities PMU (through SC) to provide information and documentation, and cooperate with any PT. PJA review PT. PJA to allow non-hazardous, cleared material, to be delivered to Ancol CDF Activity PT. PJA shall ensure that material (other than JUFMP dredged material) to be delivered to and disposed of or used at Ancol CDF by any ACC has received appropriate environmental clearance and is in accordance with the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL which limits non-JUFMP material to sand (from a defined location) and laterite. For example, this will require receiving copies of an AMDAL clearance letter prepared for sand or soil extraction operation, or a certified laboratory clearance of material. Qualified professional judgement shall be applied as the necessary type of clearance considering the nature of the material and the quantity that could be delivered. Given the JUFMP interests in Ancol CDF, the SC‟s supervision and monitoring activities at Ancol CDF will include reviews of these material sourcing and delivery, including reviews of potential offsite impacts at the source locations of these materials. Responsibilities ACC for day-to-day activity at Ancol site PT. PJA (through it Property development Unit) for direct supervision of ACC SC for supervising and monitoring Ancol activities for JUFMP PMU to oversee SC activity and receive SC reports Activity 16 PT. PJA in association with PMU assisted by the SC to undertake a programme of post- disposal sampling and analysis of JUFMP fill material areas in Ancol CDF. Two events are specified (an intermediate check 18 months after JUFMP material is first deposited to the Ancol CDF site at 10 sample sites, and approximately 1 month after the last of the JUFMP dredged material is deposited to the Ancol CDF site at the same 10 sites as the intermediate plus another 10 of more recently deposited material) with two composite samples 1 “shallow”; 1 “deep being collected at each sample site. Costs are estimated at about US$ 8,000 for the intermediate check sampling and analysis event and US$ 16,000 for the “at completion” event. Responsibilities PT. PJA to allow for post-disposal sampling at Ancol CDF SC for carry out post-disposal sampling at Ancol CDF PMU to oversee SC activity and receive SC reports 3.2.4 Traffic management Activity PT. PJA shall ensure that traffic management within its area of responsibility as defined in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL enables orderly arrival to, movement within and departure from the Ancol CDF by JUFMP sediment delivery trucks and any other trucks travelling to and from the site. For its part, PMU is obliged to advise to PT. PJA the likely schedules of trucks from JUFMP dredging sites giving due allowance for peaking. PT. PJA shall obtain schedules of likely truck movements from major ACC‟s also working at or delivering to the Ancol CDF and as necessary co-ordinate with all parties to develop and implement an Ancol traffic management plan to avoid congestion. Potential constraints such as vehicle washing shall be identified and facilities provided to enable both timely movement of vehicles and compliance with requirements for environmental management. Responsibilities PT. PJA to develop and implement the traffic management plan within the vicinity of Ancol CDF PMU (through SC) to provide JUFMP material transportation schedule to PT. PJA 17 Appendix 1 Detailed review of Ancol AMDAL and Ancol Updated RKL/RPL The following table presents a detailed review of principally the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL/RPL, with reference back also to the 2006 Ancol AMDAL. This is based on World-Bank supplied checklist items (Column 1) with Column 2 identifying the extent of coverage in the two documents as identified by the reviewers. Column 3 provides the reviewers‟ comments considering both a brief summary of the discussion in the documents, and the reviewers‟ assessments of the significance and relevance of the Checklist item. Two independent reviews were undertaken - by ERM consultants in 2009 and (through this supplementary report) by PPA in 2010. The results of these were then combined by PPA to produce the consolidated table identified below. Table A - 1 : Detailed review of Ancol 2006 AMDAL and 2009Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents PURPOSE AND NEED 1. Clear description of underlying need for OK Reclamation of the north coastline of Jakarta has been the proposed project planned since 1995, supported by official DKI Jakarta regulation, planning documents etc. Specific use of the Ancol site for JUFMP sediment disposal based on DKI Jakarta Governor‟s decree of 2008 2. Clear description of purpose of OK Covered in AMDAL and Updated RKL / RPL proposed project 3. Adequate description of the proposed Mostly OK project OK PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1. Consideration of all relevant alternative types a. No action Limited / No No discussion; the no dredging option not an alternative. discussion Land reclamation pre-decided by earlier government policy and planning b. alternative sites Limited / No No discussion; but alternative sites known and discussion dismissed before proceeding to preparation of Updated RKL / RPL because of social/resettlement issues or close to conservation areas c. Alternative design Limited / No No discussion, but design based on PT. PJA‟s extensive discussion experience in reclamation d. Alternative control Limited / No No discussion discussion e. Structural alternatives OK Some discussion. Techniques based on locally proven experience. f. Non-structural alternatives Limited / No discussion 2. All alternatives satisfy the stated Limited / No No alternatives to either the reclamation or the dredging purpose and need for the project discussion would satisfy the stated purposes and needs of the two projects. 3. Description of all alternative actions or Limited / No Overwhelming identified for flood control. JUFMP projects that were, or are being discussion dredging part of an integrated program. considered a. Size and location of reclamation b. land requirements OK Activity “forming” land c. operation and management OK requirements d. Auxiliary structures Limited / No discussion 18 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents e. Construction schedules Limited / No Two interrelated aspects to consider: scheduling of discussion JUFMP and scheduling of Ancol development. Limited real environmental significance apart from ensuring confining external dike precedes start of JUFMP sediment delivery, and sequencing of final covering. 4. Description of initial environmental OK The introduction of the Updated RKL-RPL explains the impact assessment processes and results earlier AMDAL process and why the Update was required. DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 1. Region of concern defined, OK Chapter 2 provides: standard practice within the AMDAL including boundary areas system. 2. Physical-chemical environment a. Air resources i) meteorological data (e.g. temperature, OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL wind) ii) ambient air quality (e.g. particulates, OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL ozone) iii) noise data OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL iv) mobile sources of emissions (e.g. cars OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL and trucks) b. Sea water OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL c. Surface Water i) location and type (e.g. estuaries, OK The estuarine Ancol River near the project site is only streams, lakes and their position relative important surface water body near the site. to the site) ii) water quality information (e.g. OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL dissolved oxygen, temperature, nutrients) iii) existing pollutant sources (locations Limited / No Causes of measured water quality exceedances not and amount of discharge) discussion identified, but well known that common in (especially) nearshore Jakarta Bay from combined effects of residential and industrial pollution from Jakarta. iv) future uses OK Described v) discussion of flooding events OK In relation to design wave heights. Plus modelling showed very minimal sea water changes resulting from development. d. Ground Water vi) description of key factors OK In 2006 AMDAL (e.g. depth to water table, overlying soils, geologic features) vii) water quality information Limited / No Of limited relevance since in marine environment (e.g. pH solids) discussion e. Soils and Geology i) physiographic and geomorphology OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL ii) soil structure OK In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL iii) ground water movement No discussion Of limited relevance since in marine environment iv) erosion potential OK In Updated RKL / RPL. Predictions presented. v) subsidence Mostly OK Addressed in terms of design settlement, without mention of well known overall/regional subsidence. vi) seismic activity (e.g. proximity to No discussion Well known in Jakarta with design to address. faults, history of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions) vii) mineral resources (e.g. locations of No discussion Considered as highly improbable deposits, types and quantities, ownership of mining rights) 3. Biological Conditions a. Wildlife and Vegetation Highly human-disturbed environment. i) description and listing of aquatic, OK No endangered or rare species were found. 19 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents wetland and terrestrial flora and fauna (e.g. species lists, abundances) ii) description and listing of native species OK Terrestrial flora and fauna and plankton and benthos are of wildlife and vegetation present catalogued. iii) description and listing of particularly No discussion Not significant. invasive exotic species of wildlife and vegetation b. Community and Habitat OK Very limited and largely human-disturbed natural Characterization habitats. i) maps and descriptions of the aquatic, Limited Considered not important. Site itself disturbed wetland and terrestrial communities found descriptions, no environment in and around the project site maps c. Ecologically Significant Features Most probably none. i) support of broader ecosystems by the Limited / No Highly unlikely to be important; part of polluted Jakarta project site (e.g. if located along a flyway discussion Bay or other biological corridor) ii) important ecological functions of the Limited / No Highly unlikely to be important; part of polluted Jakarta project site (e.g. nutrient source through discussion Bay flooding, storm water retention) iii) characterization of relevant OK Identified as part of human-disturbed environment disturbance regimes, natural and project- arising from Jakarta‟s waterborne pollution. induced (e.g. floods, fire, potential impact of logging) iv) description of hydrologic processes Limited Surface currents addressed; limited significance (e.g. ground and surface water flows and durations) v) description of important biotic Limited. Highly unlikely to be important; part of polluted Jakarta interactions (e.g. interdependence of Bay plants and animals at the site and with other sites) 4. Waste Management and Pollution Prevention a. Locations of expected waste disposal Limited Site itself becomes dredged sludge confined disposal or discharge site compared with current situation of material otherwise washing into Bay with no controls. b. Description of waste management Limited Describes sludge placement details; especially confined techniques (e.g. treatment, storage, and final top cover transport, recycling) c. Projected waste characteristics (e.g. OK Characteristics of dredged sludge identified. types, quantities, toxicity) 5. Socioeconomic Environment a. Land use Of very limited practical significance as site current nearshore water and will be limited interaction with land use during development. Post filling new land use developments will require separate assessment. i) description of present and historic land Limited Site itself currently nearshore and only occasional human use use for transit (by boats) and informal recreational fishing ii) map of present and historic land use Mostly OK Maps available, difficult to read but get general impressions. Also site is “water”, not land. b. Population and housing Of limited practical significance as will be little interaction with surrounding population during development i) demographic information (e.g. average Limited general Of no practical significance household size, age, age/sex distribution, information ethnic composition and community cohesion) c. Economic activity Limited but Of limited practical significance as there will be little adequate interaction with surrounding population during development i) description of present economic activity Limited but Of limited practical significance (e.g. number and type of businesses, adequate 20 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents annual revenues, ownership patterns) ii) description of unique features of Limited but Of limited practical significance business community (e.g. high adequate seasonality of trade, high outflow of profit, declining of trade or downtown revitalization) iii) consideration of interplay among Not relevant There is no information about the role of each local economic activity, capacity of public business groups and their relationship with public services and fiscal ability of community to services available. respond to capacity needs d. Community Services and Public Finances i) description of interplay among Limited but In Updated RKL / RPL economic activity, capacity of public adequate services and fiscal ability of community to respond to capacity needs e. Transportation Adequate Identifies immediate land and sea routes to site. More distant routs to be addressed by JUFMP i) description of all relevant forms of OK transportation for facility ii) current traffic volumes Mostly Old (2004) data presented, OK iii) current traffic capacity Mostly Old (2004) data presented, but adequate to highlight OK congestion during peak hours. iv) provision of public transportation Limited discussion Limited relevance v) assessment of the adequacy of the Limited discussion Identifies potential constraints; responsibility for JUFMP systems for meeting peak demands AMDALs to address during construction and operation f. Health and Safety i) description of present health and safety Limited discussion Of limited significance to general population. Not issues (e.g. statistics on industrial addressed in relation to Ancol site workforce accidents, emissions data from prior and existing facilities, levels of noise) ii) identification of special populations or Limited / No Of limited significance to general population. Not areas more likely to be exposed to discussion addressed in relation to Ancol site workforce adverse impacts 6. Cultural Resources a. Archaeological sites relating to the Limited / No Highly improbable because site is nearshore project discussion b. Paleontological sites in relation to the Limited / No Highly improbable because site is nearshore project discussion c. Historical site in relation to the project Limited / No Highly improbable because site is nearshore discussion d. Educational, religious, scientific or Limited discussion Some discussion; but very limited significance because cultural sites in relation to the project actual site is nearshore ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The EIA discusses primary, secondary OK Adequate for scope and context: 2006 Ancol AMDAL for and cumulative impacts during all stages, reclamation and integration with master spatial planning; including initial site preparation and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL to specifically address use of construction; facility operation and post JUFMP dredged sediment as main fill material; offsite facility or site closure for the following: dredging, transport etc to be addressed by JUFMP AMDALs; post-reclamation specific development would be subject to separate AMDALs at that stage but this not discussed. 1. Pollutant Generation, Transport and Receptors a. Air resources Air quality effects are considered of such low significance as to not require management and monitoring. 21 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents i) identification of emission sources and Limited discussion Limited relevance; issues mainly site based and effects project emission rates and comparison to (if any) limited to workforce ii) comparison of predicted atmospheric Not discussed Very difficult; non-point source of variable emission. levels with national, state or local ambient For several parameters standards often exceeded in levels Jakarta airshed. iii) description of stack emissions during Not relevant operation and maintenance activities iv) identification of best mitigation Limited discussion measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts b. Water resources i) address potential for water quality to be OK Addressed; but do not put in reasonable context given degraded by various factors regional conditions of existing polluted urban drains flowing uncontrolled into and polluting Jakarta Bay ii) prediction of pollutant concentrations in OK Addressed, basis of assessment uncertain. water bodies and comparison with existing iii) identification of best mitigation Mostly measures to avoid or minimize adverse OK impacts c. Geological resources i) determination of potential soil loss and Not relevant mitigation activities ii) identification of potential contamination Mostly OK Addressed, but focus of discussion of limited relevance. sources and mitigation measures d. Biological resources i) consideration of potential losses of OK Total loss of shallow polluted marine habitat in +/-119 ha biological resources within site boundaries ii) description of effluent and emission Limited relevance Theoretical pathways / effects identified; but context and concentrations and their potential effects significance not properly addressed. on biological resources iii) discussion of bio-accumulative effects Limited discussion By confining, limited pathways. Leaching tests indicate from facility emissions and discharged very limited pollution potential from dredged sediment. iv) identification of best mitigation Inferred By confining measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts 2. Habitat alteration a. Biological resources i) address potential for construction and OK Identified; non-critical nature identified by inference as site preparation activities to alter critical modified / polluted nearshore environment. habitats ii) consideration of potential for secondary Limited /No Considered of limited significance considering changes in habitats following construction discussion surrounding habitats. iii) assessment of possible permanent No discussed Very limited relevance; only (mostly marine) vegetation loss or displacement of vegetation disturbance / destruction will be of very low conservation significance. iv) identification of changes in local Inferred Total loss of polluted marine habitat species composition, diversity and abundances v) identification of best mitigation Inferred Confinement. In overall context by confinement rather measures to avoid or minimize adverse than (existing) uncontrolled transport of sediment to impacts Jakarta Bay overall improvement. 3. Waste Management and Pollution Construction waste management probably inadequately Prevention covered, but of little significance a. description of facility waste OK Briefly discussed; not put into context management plan with procedures for treatment and handling 22 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents b. discussion of projected facility waste OK Briefly discussed; not put into context characteristics c. identification of best mitigation OK Methods identified measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts 4 Socioeconomic Impacts 1 identification of existing or planned land Discussed Almost no relevance use areas lost to site preparation 2 determination of conflicting zoning Discussed In conformity with spatial plans requirements and land uses with site 3 description of anticipated changes in Discussed Of limited relevance nearby land as a result of the facility 4 identification of the best mitigation Limited discussion Probably adequate, considering context. measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts b) Economic Activity 1 address changes in employment Discussed Hypothetical, as will depend on contractor preferences. patterns 2 address ability of available labour pool Limited / No General acceptance that encouragement of local to meet project-related employment discussion employment beneficial. needs 3 identification of economic multipliers Limited discussion Of limited relevance during construction used in analysis and their source 4 discussion in potential change in Limited / No Of limited relevance during construction overall economic activity in the region discussion 5 identification of the best mitigation Limited discussion. Of limited relevance during construction measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts c) Population and Housing 1 address the relationship between Limited / no Adequate given context employment increases and population discussion increases 2 identification of deficiencies in available OK Identified housing for the potential increased workface 3 identification of best mitigation Limited discussion Mostly adequate given context measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts d) Community Services and Public Finance 1 identification of deficiencies in Limited discussion Limited relevance community services and infrastructure during project preparation 2 identification of shortfalls in Discussed Limited relevance transportation capacity due to either primary or secondary impacts 3 identification of best mitigation Limited discussion Limited relevance measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts 23 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents e) Transportation Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in JUFMP AMDALs 1 assessment of proposed project's Limited discussion Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in consistency with local and/or regional JUFMP AMDALs transportation plans 2 evaluation of changes on LOS resulting Limited / No Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in from the proposed project discussion JUFMP AMDALs 3 evaluation of the effect of heavy vehicle Limited / No Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in traffic on affected pavement and bridges discussion JUFMP AMDALs 4 description of mitigation measures to Limited / No Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in offset adverse impacts on structural discussion JUFMP AMDALs integrity f) Healthy and Safety 1 evaluation of whether construction, Limited discussion Limited relevance off-site; operation and maintenance activities present health and safety hazards to humans working or living at or near the project site 2 discussion on potential effects of facility Limited discussion Limited relevance off-site; noise levels on workers and local communities 3 analysis of potential long-term Limited discussion Requires addressing contaminant bio accumulative within the food chain 4 identification of best mitigation Limited discussion ok measures to avoid or minimize adverse impact g) Environmental Equity 1 determination of the equity of changes Limited discussion Limited relevance as off-site effects will be minimal in employment patterns attributable to site 2 determination of the equity of Limited discussion Limited relevance as off-site effects will be minimal community structure changes caused by the project construction and operation 3 identification of the best mitigation Limited discussion Limited relevance as off-site effects will be minimal measures to avoid for minimize adverse impacts 5 Cultural Resources a) Identification of any historical or Limited / No Limited relevance as construction in a near-shore cultural resources in close proximity to discussion location the site following correspondence with appropriate authorities b) Discussion in the mitigation measures Limited / No Limited relevance as construction in a near-shore necessary to preserve item of discussion location archaeological, historical or cultural interest c) Determination of the extent to which Limited / No Some relevance but little significance construction, operation and maintenance discussion activities disrupt the aesthetic or sensory attributes of the site d) Determination of whether the facility Limited / No Limited relevance as project focus on reclamation of components are designed with discussion essentially flat reclaimed area consideration given to human factors 24 Checklist item Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents MITIGATION MEASURES 1 Mitigation Measures a) Description of mitigation measures for Limited discussion Limited mitigation opportunities given context all significant impacts to both the natural but mostly OK and the human (socioeconomic) environments b) Description of mitigation measures with Limited discussion Impractical to determine quantitative residual effects adequate information to evaluate environmental consequence and residential (??residual) impacts c) Identification to the best mitigation Limited but mostly Scope does not include operation (i.e. post- measures avoid or minimize potential adequate reclamation)and post facility closure impacts during all stages of the project, including sitting and design, facility operation and post facility closure d) Support of the following types of Limited but mostly By inference, identified measures follow this order. mitigation measures, in the following adequate decreasing order of preference: avoidance or prevention minimization reduction or elimination over time correction compensation e) Implementation plan (schedule) and Some inferred Done criteria for performance for all mitigation measures f) Responsible entity assigned to carrying Mostly adequate Done out each mitigation measures g) Measures are socially an culturally Mostly adequate Mostly do not directly interact with local communities; but acceptable local communities have (sometimes unrealistic) expectations for employment etc h) Adequate financial and non-financial Not specifically Mostly part of “good practice” engineering construction. resources to implement measures addressed 25 Appendix 2 Development of Ancol CDF and interaction with JUFMP project Table A - 2 : Development of Ancol CDF and interaction with JUFMP project (Schedule subject to periodic adjustments) Prior 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 2010 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 On-going consultation JUFMP and PT. PJA Finalise detailed arrangements PMU/DKI Jakarta & PT. PJA On-going periodic consultations Formal end of PT. PJA - JUFMP disposal arrangements Outer Confining Dike Construction Facility Confinement Continued maintenance Period of filling with JUFMP Dredged Sediment On-going filling Final covering filled areas with sand Final capping with laterite / red soil JUFMP-deposited fill areas – Initial sampling / testing JUFMP-deposited fill areas - Final sampling / testing 26 Appendix 3 Ancol integrated Environment Management and Monitoring Matrix Table A - 3 : Ancol CDF Supplementary EMP Matrix The following matrix summarises the supplementary environmental and social management and monitoring for Ancol AMDAL site to provide more detail to safeguards measures to those identified in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL plus some additional safeguards. This complements but specifically does not override the Ancol Updated RPL / RKL formally approved by DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission. The following matrix summarises the supplementary environmental and social management and monitoring for Ancol AMDAL site to provide more detail to safeguards measures to those identified in the 2009 Ancol Updated RKL / RPL plus some additional safeguards. This complements but specifically does not override the Ancol Updated RPL / RKL formally approved by DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission. Reference to main Management Monitoring text items Description Responsibility1 Cost1 Description Responsibility1 Cost1 3.2.1 Integration of 1 Provide Ancol construction progress updates and cooperate PT. PJA PT. PJA; Review Report PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; JUFMP and Ancol CDF with JUFMP reviews of the adequacy of confined facility for PMU PMU activities dredge material disposal. 2 Meet and coordinate activities PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA; Meeting Reports PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; (assisted by the PMU; verified as correct PMU SC) SC 3 Produce integrated detailed schedule, expanding on that of Schedules approved at PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; SC SC Appendix 2 meetings PMU 3.2.2 “Good practice” 1 Draw up work plans and associated ESM Plans for all ACC ACC Ensure approved Work PT. PJA; SC PT. PJA; construction and contractors working at Ancol CDF, tailored to scale of activity / Plans / ESMP‟s / SC supervision extent of contract Monitor implementation 3.2.3 Sediment and 1 Provide information of results and status of prior dredge PMU / PIU SC Ensure records PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA; other fill / cover material sampling and testing at JUFMP sites to PT. PJA. (through the SC) collected and (DKI BPLHD kept PMU maintained informed) 2 Ensure that material (other than JUFMP dredge material) PT. PJA (through PT. PJA; Review and confirm PT. PJA; SC PT. PJA; delivered to Ancol CDF (fill and covering material) has ACC) ACC ACC-supplied SC appropriate environmental clearances. certification 3 Implement program for post-disposal sampling and testing at SC SC Laboratory analysis PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; Ancol CDF of JUFMP sediment 18 months after start, and 1 reports PMU month after completion of JUFMP dredged sludge disposal to 27 Reference to main Management Monitoring 1 1 1 1 text items Description Responsibility Cost Description Responsibility Cost Ancol CDF. 3.2.4 Traffic 1 JUFMP projected sediment delivery truck numbers and times SC (through SC Records of information PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; management to be advised to PT. PJA information from being handed over. PMU CC) Monthly reports of past movements (vs. prior projections) and future projections 2 Implement Ancol Updated RKL / RPL requirements, PT. PJA (some PT. PJA Quarterly report PT. PJA; SC PT. PJA; especially in relation to orderly movement of vehicles to / from through ACC) SC Ancol CDF site and to vehicle washing before vehicles leave Ancol CDF site Notes: 1: Responsibility PT. PJA = PT. Pembangunan Ancol Jaya ACC = Ancol CDF Construction Contractors PMU = Project Management Unit for JUFMP CC = Construction Contractor for JUFMP SC = Supervision Consultant for JUFMP DKI BPLHD = Environmental Management Agency of Jakarta Provincial Government 28
Группа Всемирного банка · Environmental Assessment
Indonesia - Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project : environmental assessment (Vol. 6 of 14) : Ancol updated RKL/RPL : supplementary report
Открыть оригинал документа
Полный текст размещён на сайте публикующей организации. lawenc.com индексирует метаданные и ведёт на официальный источник.
Полный текст
Основные сведения
Организация
Группа Всемирного банка
Тип документа
Environmental Assessment
Страна
Индонезия
Источник
Всемирный банк