Analisis mengenai Dampak Lingkungan (Amdal) dalam rangka kegiatan Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) / Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiatif (JEDI) 1. Phase 1 Amdal Supplementary Report in English / Indonesia 2. Ancol Update RKL/RPL Supplementary Report in English / Indonesia 3. Enviromental and Management Framework in English / Indonesia 4. Consolidated Summary of Enviromental Assesment in English / Indonesia 5. Notulen Rapat Sosialisasi Pelaksanaan Pekerjaan JUFMP/JEDI Fase 1
Technical Assistance for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (EIA / SIA) Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) – Grant TF#054683-IND
JUFMP PHASE 1
Environmental and Social Management Supplementary Report
SEPTEMBER 2011
Contents Glossary................................................................................................................................ 1 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 3 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Context ................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Purpose and scope of Supplementary Report......................................................... 5 2 Alternatives .................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Strategic Level Decision.......................................................................................... 7 2.1.1 Setting ............................................................................................................. 7 2.1.2 The “do nothing” option.................................................................................... 7 2.1.3 Catchment wide vs. local flood management ................................................... 8 2.1.4 Engineering vs. non-engineering approach...................................................... 8 2.1.5 Choice of dredging sites .................................................................................. 8 2.2 Engineering design ................................................................................................. 8 2.2.1 Design flow capacity ........................................................................................ 9 2.2.2 Dredging technology ........................................................................................ 9 2.2.3 Solid Waste ..................................................................................................... 9 2.2.4 Transport options............................................................................................. 9 2.2.5 Dredged material disposal options ................................................................... 9 2.3 Construction Contracting and Supervision ............................................................ 10 2.3.1 Overall Approach ........................................................................................... 10 2.3.2 Integration of environment and social issues ................................................. 11 3 Institutional and contracting arrangements................................................................... 11 3.1 Key institutions...................................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Steering Committee ....................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 PMU .............................................................................................................. 12 3.1.3 PIUs............................................................................................................... 13 3.1.4 Panel of Experts ............................................................................................ 13 3.1.5 Supervision Consultant (SC).......................................................................... 13 3.1.6 Construction Contractors ............................................................................... 14 3.1.7 DKI BPLHD.................................................................................................... 15 3.1.8 World Bank .................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Construction contracting approach........................................................................ 15 3.2.1 Overall approach ........................................................................................... 15 3.2.2 Detailed approach to environmental and social management ........................ 15 4 Refinement of engineering design................................................................................ 16 5 Additional environmental and social information........................................................... 18 5.1 Overview............................................................................................................... 18 5.2 Social and community issues ................................................................................ 19 5.3 Baseline environmental information ...................................................................... 19 5.3.1 Sediment quality ............................................................................................ 19 5.3.2 Traffic ............................................................................................................ 19 5.3.3 Noise ............................................................................................................. 19 5.3.4 Air quality....................................................................................................... 19 5.3.5 Water quality.................................................................................................. 19 5.3.6 Biological environment................................................................................... 20 5.3.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 20 6 Phase 1 environmental assessment and mitigation...................................................... 20 6.1 Pre-construction period ......................................................................................... 20 6.2 Construction period............................................................................................... 20 6.2.1 Contractors Environment and Social Management Plan ................................ 20 6.2.2 Community perception and interaction ........................................................... 21 i
6.2.3 Local employment.......................................................................................... 21 6.2.4 Hydraulics...................................................................................................... 22 6.2.5 Spillage of dredged material .......................................................................... 22 6.2.6 Air quality....................................................................................................... 23 6.2.7 Noise ............................................................................................................. 23 6.2.8 Traffic ............................................................................................................ 24 6.2.9 Sediment quality ............................................................................................ 26 6.2.10 Solid Waste ................................................................................................... 27 6.3 Post-Construction period....................................................................................... 29 6.3.1 Community .................................................................................................... 29 6.3.2 Solid Waste and Maintenance dredging......................................................... 29 Appendix 1 Contractors’ Environment and Social Management Plan............................ 31 Appendix 2 JUFMP Phase 1 Environment Management and Monitoring Matrix............ 37
List of Tables Table 1-1 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Ponds ....................................... 6 Table 4-1 JUFMP Phase 1and 2 Contract packaging.......................................................... 18 Table 6-1 Sediment quality testing for JUFMP Phase 1 sites .............................................. 27 Table A - 1 JUFMP Phase 1 EMP Matrix..................................................................... 37
List of Figures Figure 3-1 Institutional and Implementation Arrangements ................................................. 12
ii
Glossary Institutional – Functional English names BBWS – CC Regional Office for the Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin (Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane) 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 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) Note: Under Indonesian law, Resettlement Plan (RP) is not part of AMDAL documents; such Plans are prepared separately and are the responsibility of the local government. For JUFMP this is the Jakarta provincial government - DKI Jakarta.
Project specific terminology 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 site
Identified individual components of JUFMP; either a defined length of drain/river /floodway, or a defined size of waduk (reservoir/flood retention pond). Engineering designs have been based on each site; AMDAL preparation has been or will be for individual project site.
1
Terminology arising from Contractual and implementation aspects Construction Contractor
The Contractor whose contract under PIU will undertake dredging, embankment works, dredge material 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 The AMDAL for the Phase 1 sites of the Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) was prepared in late 2009 and received approval from the DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission on 30 March 2010. The purpose of this supplementary report on environmental and social management for JUFMP Phase 1 activities is to: (i) update the AMDAL as project preparation has continued since the original AMDAL was approved, and (ii) following World Bank review of the original AMDAL, to ensure additional concerns are addressed for compliance with the World Bank’s own Environmental Assessment OP 4.01. Institutional arrangements are based on the Project Management Unit (PMU) representing the combined interests of the three PIUs that are “owners” / managers of JUFMP waterways and waduks. Through the Project Implementation Unit (PIU), contracts will be entered into with Construction Contractors for dredging and transport of JUFMP dredged material, construction and / or rehabilitation of some embankments and associated activities. There will be an additional contract between PMU and a Supervision Consultant (SC) who will have the dual and integrated role of “Engineer” supervising the Construction Contractors and of implementing significant environmental and social management and monitoring on behalf of the PMU and PIUs. An approach to follow international standards to construction contracting has been adopted. International standard is based on the World Bank General and Specific Conditions of Contract, detailed designs specifying required works, preparation of Preliminary Contractor Work Plans by the bidders, then Detailed Work Plan by the successful contractor. Contractor-required environmental and social management (ESM) will follow this approach, with required Contractor Preliminary ESM Plans and then Contractor Detailed ESM Plans at bidding and after contract award. These Contractor ESM Plans are required to comply with the AMDAL, this supplementary report, other ESM documentation that forms part of the tendering package, and all local laws and regulations. The Contractor Detailed ESM Plan must be informed by specified contractor-community consultation. The ESMP’s are adjunct to and must integrate with the Work Plans. Additional community consultations and field studies since the Phase 1 AMDAL approval reinforce the findings of the Phase 1 AMDAL activity. Environmental and social issues are closely intertwined with community perception of and interaction with the project. Several prevailing baseline conditions (e.g. noise, certain elements of air and water quality) are already above local standards. Traffic congestion is well recognized in Jakarta and while there are local regulations in place in relation to traffic issues, some aspects, especially restricting heavy transport to night-time activity reduces congestion at the city level. There are obvious follow-on effects at the community level where the dredging and truck loading will take place. Community concerns persist about “proper implementation of environmental and social safeguards”. Additional detailed sediment quality monitoring at the Phase 2 sites reinforces the earlier findings that no dredged material that is classified as hazardous waste (locally termed as B3 (Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun) waste) as per Indonesian legislation has been identified within the Jakarta waterways and waduks. The health assessment identifies no concerns, and there are no land use concerns of using appropriate standards (and considering the proposed development) of the disposal site at the Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (Ancol CDF). The amount of solid waste that would be removed from the dredged material and transported to the Bantar Gebang Landfill, Bekasi is about 95 000 m3 (Phase 1 and Phase 2) of an estimated total 3.4 million m3 of dredged material to be dredged and transported to Ancol CDF. The community repeatedly expressed the need for flood reduction from the JUFMP project and accepted that there will be short term disturbance to the communities to achieve these objectives. 3
However, communities also requested meaningful consultations and that environmental and social performance of the project be improved from those experienced in other past projects. Based on this assessment, a supplementary environmental management plan (EMP) is presented in this supplementary report. This complements the ANDAL, RKL and RPL and focuses mostly on the management and monitoring of environmental and social issues during the construction period. Responsibilities aligned with current institutional arrangements are simplified. Significant attention is given to community consultation and to developing agreements between the Construction Contractor and communities on issues such as noise and local traffic management where there will be unavoidable disturbances. Where mitigation is clearly feasible such as safety, preventing dredge material spillage and dust, the EMP and other contract documentation requires such mitigation to be implemented, with authority of the Supervision Consultant (SC) to require immediate rectification by the Construction Contractor or bringing-in of third parties. In line with the contracting approach, many costs are to be incorporated into unit rates for dredging and for transport of the dredged material. Specific line item costs are identified and possible costs given for the following main items: 1) Contractor community consultation meetings ($5000); 2) Supervision Consultant (SC) sediment quality monitoring to meet DKI BPLHD requirements ($15 - 30,000 – plus provisional sum for special management in the unlikely event that hazardous material is subsequently identified); 3) Setting-up and operating public information and complaint centres at every project site by Supervision Consultant ($50,000 plus). Actual costs will depend on bids submitted for tender.
4
1 Introduction 1.1 Context 1. JUFMP has been in preparation after one of the most severe floods that inundated Jakarta in February 2007. JUFMP involves dredging of accumulated sediment deposition in 11 of the main drains and 4 waduks (retention ponds) within the Jakarta urban area and transporting the dredged material to an existing and AMDAL-approved disposal site termed the Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (CDF). 2. A set of project sites were chosen as the initial Phase 1 works, in part because of the urgent need to mitigate floods and because there would be no involuntary resettlement at these sites. The Phase 1 AMDAL was submitted to the Environmental Management Agency of the Jakarta Provincial Government (DKI BPLHD) in December 2009, updated and resubmitted in February 2010, and the full environmental approval to proceed was notified by DKI BPLHD letter dated 30 March 2010 after consideration by the AMDAL Commission in accordance with Government of Indonesia (GOI) requirements. 3. Since March 2010, there have been additional activities that will influence details of JUFMP Phase 1 environmental and social management: JUFMP project management and institutional arrangements have become much more defined. The JUFMP project descriptions for Phase 1 have been more refined as detailed design has been undertaken. Under a separate contract with the JUFMP Project Management Unit (PMU) a local consultancy (PPA) with international input is working on the environmental and social aspects of Phase 2 sites, with a focus on closely aligning and integrating these with Phase 1 aspects.
1.2 Purpose and scope of Supplementary Report 4. This supplementary report identifies how activities since the Phase 1 AMDAL approval could influence the environmental and social management of the JUFMP Phase 1 project activities. In particular the report addresses: The various alternatives considered and the rationale behind the choice of the preferred set of alternatives (Section 2) Institutional and contracting arrangements (Section 3) Detailed design implications (Section 4) Findings from on-going environmental studies (Section 5) The environmental assessment and management as presented in the Phase 1 AMDAL, which based on proposed interventions, determines whether any changes may be required (Section 6). Following from this a supplementary environmental management and monitoring plan to complement the Phase 1 AMDAL is presented in Appendix 3. 5. It is important to emphasise that while there have been some slight changes to the physical limits of JUFMP Phase 1 project activities, no resettlement is required for these Phase 1 activity. The Phase 1 and 2 project activities are listed in Table 1-1 below.
5
Table 1-1 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Ponds Package
Location
Phase
1 (DKI) 1
2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK)
4 (DKI)
Ciliwing-Gunung Sahari Drain Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side) Lower Sunter Floodway Note 1
Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain) Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III
5 (DGCK)
Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain
2 6 (DGWR)
West Banjir Canal (sea side) Note Upper Sunter Floodway 1
7 (DKI)
Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain Note 2 Krukut Cideng Drain Krukut Lama Drain Note 2
Dredging Estimates Dredging Volume Volume Depth (m) Dredge of Solid 3 material (m ) Waste 3 (m ) 1.90 ~ 156,970 3,140 2.70 2.20 ~ 99,490 1,250 3.10 1.50 ~ 1,225,500 22,510 3.50 1.60 ~ 399,250 19,970 2.30 0.60 ~ 33,230 810 2.30 0.50 ~ 140,150 7,010 2.10 1.30 ~ 413,400 10,340 2.10 1.00 ~ 48,200 1,210 2.10 0.70 ~ 51,000 1,280 3.30 1.10 ~ 11,500 290 1.90 2.00 ~ 248,000 6,200 3.60 1.70 ~ 350,080 8,760 2.50 1.80 ~ 82,000 4,100 3.40 0.70 ~ 40,500 1,020 2.30 0.60 ~ 100,000 5,000 1.60 0.70 ~ 28,700 1,440 0.80 0.50 ~ 14,900 750 0.80 3,441,870 95,080
Note 1
Embankment Works (m)
4,832 1,905 4,600 1,800 2,570 3,865 5,000 3,057 305 1,092 821 1,190 1,850 2,391 2,882 1,658 2,400 42,218
For contracting purposes, the Sunter Floodways has been divided into two sub-packages – Upper Sunter Floodway and Lower Sunter Floodway. Note 2 For contracting purposes, the Krukut Drain has been divided into two sub-packages – Krukut Cideng Drain and Krukut Lama Drain
6
2 Alternatives 6. This section consolidates the evaluation of alternatives made at different stages of project formulation. Decisions were not made in isolation, as there are many interrelationships – for example, the choice of dredging method, dredged material transport and disposal locations all interact with each-other. While this supplementary report focuses on JUFMP dredging sites, some reference is made to the Ancol CDF site because of such interactions.
2.1 Strategic Level Decision 2.1.1 Setting 7. Flooding in Jakarta has been a problem for many decades, as a combined result of large areas of low-lying land, with conditions worsening as drainage channels become more clogged with sediment, informal settlement encroaching on drainage waterways, land subsidence, catchment clearing and increasing high intensity development in many areas. Flooding in the Jakarta urban area results from: Catchment-wide rainfall, with Jakarta’s waterways being required to carry high flows from middle-upper catchment areas through urban Jakarta to the sea. Riverbanks overflow and flood urban areas. Localized rainfall within the urban area, with flooding both resulting from the inability of local water to be delivered to drains that can efficiently transport flows to the sea, and to overflowing of the drains. Storage factors influence this also. Intrusion from the sea, with many parts of especially north Jakarta being below sea level. Often two or more of the factors operating simultaneously. 8. The effects of flooding are well documented, including significant social dislocation, high economic costs and at times deaths resulting directly from flooding. Unsanitary conditions and poor public health are also aggravated by flooding. 9. Multiple studies and investigations have been conducted over the years, that cite the integrated package of both structural (engineering) and non-structural actions that are required including better catchment management, improved land use sympathetic to flood management, construction of major diversions (such as the recently completed East Banjir Canal) and retention basins, improved wastewater and solid waste servicing, improved groundwater management and most critically, institutional strengthening and improved operations.
2.1.2 The “do nothing” option 10. At a strategic level, the “do nothing” option is to allow flooding and its adverse effects to continue and to worsen. Clearly this is not acceptable. 11. Specifically in relation to the proposed JUFMP project, the “do nothing” alternative essentially means worsening the situation of clogged drainage channels and socio-economic effects of frequent flooding. This is not a situation favoured by the GOI, DKI Jakarta (Jakarta Provincial Government) and by the affected communities. Additionally, the sediment in the waterways would continue to get flushed in an uncontrolled manner into Jakarta Bay.
7
2.1.3 Catchment wide vs. local flood management 12. For the purposes of this subsection major flood management refers to very major activity such as construction of new major diversions to reducing flooding in the urban area from middle and upper catchment rainfall. Local flood management refers to actions that can be undertaken at the local level to enhance efficient delivery of local rainfall to local channels / drains and thence to the sea. While there may be debate on the relative priorities, there is common agreement that the two options are not mutually exclusive, both are required as part of an integrated package. 13. JUFMP is based on the lower part of the catchment. While focusing mostly on local flood management, JUFMP project activities will increase the ability of already established but underperforming floodways to more effectively transfer upper catchment-derived floods to the sea. As an “urgent” dredging project it is not designed to address, for example, the very extensive planning and implementation required.
2.1.4 Engineering vs. non-engineering approach 14. Engineering-works for the purposes of this subsection are defined as normal engineering construction and operation projects such as improving flow carrying capacity of drains, pumps, barriers / sea walls. The non-engineering approach by contrast addresses such aspects as changing people’s behaviour (e.g., preventing deposition of solid waste into the waterways) and land use planning and implementation to move people away from flood-prone areas. 15. JUFMP’s focus is on the engineering approach that will yield immediate benefits. However, this would support the much broader non-engineering approach and opportunities are being undertaken through JUFMP to highlight the broader issues. For example, management of solid waste at and immediately around the dredging sites will demonstrate reduced clogging of water channels and other benefits of appropriate management, thereby setting practical examples of what can be achieved.
2.1.5 Choice of dredging sites 16. JUFMP hydraulic simulation studies have recommended the rehabilitation of the city’s floods management system to its original design capacity and a routine maintenance system as the most beneficial first step for flood mitigation in Jakarta. The sections of the Jakarta flood management system included in the project have been identified by the GOI as in priority need of urgent rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities. Prioritization was made based on previous studies under the Western Java Environmental Management Project (WJEMP) and various earlier studies on flood control and flood mitigation in the Jakarta area. The project scoping also took into account the inclusion of all responsible institutions as a means to encourage and establish the required long term sustained routine maintenance system. The project is expected to have important beneficial demonstration effects in terms of institutional coordination, dredging technology and methods, disposal of dredge material, sound environmental and equitable resettlement practices. As such, the technical, environmental and social complexities of works were also taken into account in project scoping and implementation sequencing in order to increase the likelihood of success.
2.2 Engineering design 17. The dredging design and associated technology required for the project integrated several considerations especially the constraints afforded by the sites themselves.
8
2.2.1 Design flow capacity 18. Being within the congested urban area all dredging would invariably cause some disturbance to the local population, and in several instances to settlement that had developed on the banks of the waterways and even over the original alignment of the waterway. The decision was made to minimize disturbance to the settlements consistent with the need to obtain an increase in-flow and storage capacity. Design generally considered the implications of 1 in 100 year events for the larger floodways, and 1 in 25 year events for the smaller waterways.
2.2.2 Dredging technology 19. Dredging technologies can be broadly grouped as the back-hoe / clam shell type and the suction dredging (with or without cutter heads). Suction dredging was not pursued as it is incompatible with the significant amount of solid waste in the sediment of the waterways. Pontoonbased back-hoes are the preferred technology as the majority of construction activity can be restricted to the waterway itself, rather than having to disturb a wide strip along the length of the waterway being dredged.
2.2.3 Solid Waste 20. Separation of the solid waste from the dredged material was considered in terms of the amount of material to be separated, use of mechanical or manual sorting and the location of any sorting. Examination of previous filling of other areas with dredged material determined that disposal methods and post-filling land use would not be constrained by separation of only the large size waste items from the dredged material. 21. Sorting at the dredging sites themselves is preferred as it limits the potential congestion at the Ancol CDF site, offers the potential for temporary local employment and integrates with other activities to keep the dredging sites and immediate surroundings “clean and tidy” during dredging. Mechanical separation was tested, but would need to be located at the Ancol CDF site and the nature of the material, need for supplementary water and operational difficulties demonstrated no advantage. 22. Thus the proposed method of manual separation of only large sized items (and possibly optional separation of smaller items that can be recycled) at the dredging sites has been adopted. DKI Jakarta’s existing operational general landfill at Bantar Gebang offers the only reasonable and secure disposal site for solid waste material.
2.2.4 Transport options 23. Transport considered three main options – hydraulic (pumping), barge and truck, integrating these with dredging technologies and with the chosen disposal site. Pumping was considered inappropriate since the amount of solid waste would likely cause blockages. This would significantly affect any dredging program. Barge transport would not be feasible in most locations because of the bridges and bottlenecks over the drains preventing access to the sea; however, this may be a contractor-preferred method for the lower portions of the larger waterways. Truck transport is therefore the only alternative for the majority of sites and hence is chosen, with the assumption that it will be used everywhere representing a potential worst case situation with regard to traffic effects.
2.2.5 Dredged material disposal options 9
24. For disposal of the dredged sediment material, several options and alternatives were considered based on sediment test results, past experiences, technical and financial reasons and opportunistic project development works, as part of the decision making process that led to the selection of the Ancol CDF as the final disposal site for non hazardous material. For instance, during past dredging operations, excavated material was usually dumped on any vacant land owned by DKI Jakarta. In some cases sediments are placed on embankments and not otherwise disposed of, which results in sludge returning to waterways. The JUFMP provides the first opportunity for DKI Jakarta and the GOI to coordinate and dispose dredged materials in a defined and managed disposal area, and to introduce best-practice management principles. 25. GOI assessed several disposal sites and management alternatives. Initially DKI Jakarta proposed several land based sites that were available, scattered throughout the city. These proposed sites were rejected due to their minimal disposal capacity, resettlement issues, aesthetic and odor issues, and supervision difficulties. Three sea-based disposal locations were also considered at Muara Kali Adem (MKA), Marunda, and West Ancol, before the decision on Ancol was made. 26. The site at Ancol was strategically chosen for its accelerated preparedness, size and capacity (capable of receiving almost three times the dredged materials of the project, or approximately 12 million m3). It is also important to note that the Ancol site also had the advantage that it was already an approved ongoing reclamation project. The utilization of the Ancol site is considered a 'win-win' scenario. The other two sea-based locations considered would have had to be constructed, at considerable costs and with the effect of displacing more near-shore area with additional environmental impacts. At the same time, the utilization of non-hazardous dredge material for the Ancol site reclamation will reduce the negative impact from use of other material (sand) to be sourced from quarries
2.3 Construction Contracting and Supervision 2.3.1 Overall Approach 27.
28.
Construction contracting should result in: Achieving the desired engineering outcome. Enabling the experience of construction contractors to be reflected in detailed work plans and implementation. Ensuring that principal interests are addressed. For JUFMP this includes proper implementation of environmental and social safeguards. Cost-effective tenders. Enabling effective supervision and audit of performance. Within this framework there are opposing alternatives of: Defining to the contractor “exactly how” the work will be performed. For example, what technology equipment must be used, how to set up the site and mobilization arrangements, how and where to access the work sites, and precise schedule. This inevitably transfers a lot of responsibility to the principal and typically leads to higher cost tenders and more opportunity for subsequent claims. Defining the engineering outcome, and allowing for the contractor to determine how to achieve that outcome. Tender costs are generally lower and many responsibilities are with the contractor. There remains a risk however that some of the principal interests could be partially neglected.
10
29. In relation to JUFMP and as very common in international contracting the second approach is preferred and has been chosen but with particular safeguards to ensure that the principal interests are properly addressed and implemented. As a result: The overall contract documentation and tendering approach is focused on achieving the five desired “results” as identified at the beginning of this subsection. The Construction Contractor will have flexibility, within contract-defined constraints, to develop work plans detailing in effect “how the construction will be implemented”. Close supervision, including necessary pre-approval of work plans prior to implementation, is built in to the process.
2.3.2 Integration of environment and social issues 30.
As for the engineering aspects there is the fundamental distinction between: Identifying to the contractor exactly how to achieve desired environmental and social outcomes. Contractually requiring the desired outcomes, with the contractor having some flexibility to use practical knowledge and experience to achieve these outcomes.
31. Further there is the legal requirement that the approved AMDAL must be followed. The latter approach is taken, but with very substantial safeguards built-in to ensure that the principal environmental and social desired/required safeguards are instituted and fully integrated with the contracting approach. Resulting from this are the following key aspects: Rather than the traditional role of “Engineer” the JUFMP project will have a Supervision Consultant (SC) with both engineering and environmental/social responsibilities. While the access points and temporary construction lay down areas will not be defined in general until tendering and in detail until after construction contract award, there is an absolute obligation for the Construction Contractors to consult with local communities to ensure that there is minimal disturbance to the communities.
3 Institutional and contracting arrangements 32. Institutional and contracting arrangements have progressed to the stage where roles and responsibilities for environmental and social management for Phase 1 (and later for Phase 2) are now clearly defined. The institutional and implementation arrangements are as follows.
11
Figure 3-1 Institutional and Implementation Arrangements
3.1 Key institutions 3.1.1 Steering Committee 33. A high level advisory committee, the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) has been formed to oversee the preparation and implementation of the project and to provide coordination and advisory support at the policy level. The JSC is led by Bappenas and comprises representatives from Ministry of Finance, MoPW, and DKI Jakarta. The JSC met regularly during project preparation and has proven instrumental in providing advisory support and as a forum for high level decision making. The JSC will continue to provide high level oversight during the implementation of the project.
3.1.2 PMU 34. The project requires close coordination among three implementing agencies at both central and local government levels: DGWR and DGCK of the Ministry of Public Works (MoPW), and DKI Jakarta. DGWR will play the role of the Executing Agency. A Project Management Unit (PMU) has been established by DGWR for the purposes of preparing and overseeing the implementation of the project. The PMU comprises three staff from DGWR, three from DGCK, three from DKI Jakarta and one from MoPW’s Office of Planning and Overseas Cooperation. The PMU is supported by a secretariat of five staff from DGWR. During project implementation, the PMU will oversee the overall implementation of the project by the three PIUs as well as undertake to implement common activities, particularly the overall construction supervision consultancy and the Floods Management Information Systems (FMIS). The joint PMU represents an opportunity to evolve into a joint operations and management group for future coordinated management of the Jakarta flood management system.
12
3.1.3 PIUs 34. The project will be implemented through the appropriate existing institutions in line with the sector institutional responsibility and legislative framework. There are three Project Implementing Units (PIUs), comprising DGWR (through the Regional Office for the Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin, BBWS-CC), DGCK and DKI Jakarta. Each will be responsible for carrying out the dredging and rehabilitation of the selected key floodways, canals and retention basins under its responsibility.
3.1.4 Panel of Experts 35. A Panel of Experts (POE) consisting of three independent, internationally recognized specialists will be mobilized to provide advice on all aspects of the project. The specialists are expected to comprise an environmental expert, an engineer experienced in dredging and dredge disposal, and an urban resettlement expert. The POE’s main responsibilities will include monitoring and evaluating the preparation and implementation of various safeguards instruments (RPF, RPs, EMPs and the grievance redress procedures) and advising the PMU on actions to be taken to improve compliance. If required, the POE may be enlarged on a temporary or permanent basis by the addition of specialists to provide expertise for specific, unplanned or critical issues or needs, which may arise during project implementation. These additional experts, if any, may be mobilized with terms of reference agreed among the PMU, the World Bank, and the three initial experts that will comprise the POE. The POE will convene at regular intervals to review the status of work in progress. However, special extraordinary meetings may also be called to review particular critical stages of technical, environmental, and social activities.
3.1.5 Supervision Consultant (SC) 36. This is the key consultancy contract that will be instrumental in supporting the PMU’s overall management, oversight and monitoring of the project. Where there are assessed weaknesses in capacity, particularly in the areas of the supervision of project environmental plans, the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) and the Grievance Redress System (GRS), the SC has been tasked to provide the necessary expertise to support the PMU during project implementation. The scope of this technical assistance services include (i) supervising the implementation of the various dredging and construction works contracts under the project including at all disposal sites (ii) supervising the implementation of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/RPL) by the works contractors, (iii) supporting the PMU and DKI Jakarta in the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs), and (iv) developing and implementing the grievance / complaint handling mechanism of the project with DKI Jakarta. A summary of the detailed scope of activities to be undertaken are as follows: Supervision of Construction Works 1.1 Review / check final contracts with contractors. 1.2 Review / check Detailed Engineering Designs and drawings, method statements, specifications, and activity schedules, carry out additional survey and investigation as required, as well as conduct any revisions deemed necessary and to obtain their approval by the PMU. 1.3 Test all sections of each project site for hazardous material prior to dredging works. 1.4 Supervise the implementation of the works, including (but not limited to): Dredging (including the separation of solid waste from dredge material, and their transportation and disposal at approved landfill and Ancol CDF respectively), embankment and rehabilitation of canals, pumps, rack repairs and maintenance. Provide assistance to the PMU for processing of payment requests made by the contractors as required. 13
Maintain site records and prepare detailed monthly progress reports. Prepare work as executed drawings and records, and operation manuals and hand over the completed works to the PMU. Prepare a Practical Completion and Outstanding Defects Report for each construction contract supervised. Prepare a Final Completion and Handover Report for each construction contract supervised. 1.5 Supervise and monitor the construction activities at the Ancol CDF site during project implementation, and at all its offsite locations such as the source locations for the sand and the laterite soils. 1.6 Provide PMU with technical assistance as needed from time to time. This may include the provision of support and advice to the PMU regarding implementation of project works, particularly on the technical, overall planning and procurement aspects of the project. Environmental Management 1.7 Monitor (including preparation of quarterly RKL/RPL implementation report) and supervise the environmental protection measures undertaken to mitigate environmental impairment due to construction and disposal activities, consistent with The Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/RPL) of each work site including all disposal sites. The Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) of the project. Resettlement Plans (RPs) 1.8 Supervise and support the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs), consistent with The Resettlement Plan (RP) of each site where involuntary resettlement in required. The Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) of the project. 1.9 Provide technical and administration assistance in land acquisition and resettlement process Grievance Redress System (GRS) / Complaint Handling Mechanism 1.10 Develop and operate the Grievance Redress System (GRS), which will include but will not be limited to administering complaints from Project Affected Persons (PAPs) in a systematic way on a day to day basis; 1.11 Update complaints on the website, informing those who complain on the status of their complaint as well as providing feedback or follow up actions; 1.12 Assist DKI Jakarta in providing acceptable follow-up actions on complaints, ensuring that decisions are made based on transparent, fair, independent, and accountable processes through Grievance Redress or Complaint Handling Advisory; 1.13 Provide recommendations to DKI Jakarta authorities on status of complaints, from the onsite unit through the provincial level processes. Others 1.14 Monitor and report on any activities at the project’s “linked” sites. 1.15 Design, develop, and operate a web-based project communications and reporting system
3.1.6 Construction Contractors 38. The Construction Contractors will be responsible for the dredging and transport of dredged drain and waduk material from dredging sites to the Ancol CDF (non-hazardous dredge material), Bantar Gebang Landfill (solid waste separated from the dredge material) and PPLi secure landfill (hazardous material, if any are found) in accordance with the construction contracts, approved AMDAL for Phase 1 and this supplementary report. The civil works contracts will include contractual requirements for implementing the environmental requirements.
14
3.1.7 DKI BPLHD 39. DKI BPLHD is the environment management agency of DKI Jakarta with the responsibility of approving and enforcing the AMDAL for all city wide (Jakarta) projects. Also, the agency is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the associated management plans. In the implementation of AMDAL, the DKI BPLHD is also supported by the city level (Municipal-Walikota) environment management agencies. DKI BPLHD has already approved the AMDALs for Phase 1 of this project and for the Ancol CDF. DKI BPLHD has already started monitoring the ongoing construction works at Ancol CDF and will continue to do so. Joint monitoring with the World Bank is planned during implementation of the JUFMP project.
3.1.8 World Bank 40. The World Bank will supervise and monitor implementation of the project in line with its own operational policies for all aspects of the project, including environmental and social issues.
3.2 Construction contracting approach 41.
This approach has been developed by the PMU/PIUs’ construction contract committee.
3.2.1 Overall approach 42. Contracts are to be established under standardized international competitive bidding arrangements with pre-qualification, short-listing and then tendering, bid assessment and contract award. The approach as identified below is based on international and local experience to ensure that: cost-competitive bids are obtained the project proponent via the Supervision Consultant (SC) retains close control on how the construction is implemented, and there is a close audit of the volumes of material dredged and properly transported to and disposed at the Ancol CDF. 43. The technical requirements are based on the detailed designs by the engineering design consultants retained by the PMU (i.e. Project Preparation Consultant). Importantly and this influences environmental management, the bid documents will specify design, but not the sequencing of work, nor the method to conduct the work, nor equipment to be used, nor define access locations. Bidders are required to identify such matters in a preliminary Contractor’s Work Plan to be submitted at the time of bidding. There will be an assessment of this during contract negotiations with the preferred bidder, and within one month of contract award the Construction Contractor will be required to submit a detailed Contractor’s Work Plan. The Work Plans are required to be examined and approved by the Supervision Consultant (SC).
3.2.2 Detailed approach to environmental and social management 44. It is necessary to align the environmental and social management aspects of the Construction Contracts to the overall approach. Specific aspects include: The AMDAL and the requirements recommended by this current report will form part of the construction contract with those parts relating to the Construction Contractor being specific requirements to be followed by the contractor. Certain items have been further emphasised by including them in the “Special Conditions of Contract.” In particular, as detailed in this report, the majority of the potential effects relate to interaction with the local community and very specific conditions are being included in relation to the minimum number of contract-required meetings with the community. Staffing of the Construction Contractor includes requirements for specific staff with responsibility for environmental and social management. 15
HIV/AIDS awareness and prevention measures have been included in the Special Conditions of Contract though has not been examined in detail under the local AMDAL process. The Construction Contractor is being required as part of the bid to submit a Contractor Preliminary Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) as an adjunct to the preliminary Contractor’s Work Plan. The Contractor Preliminary ESMP will be assessed as part of bid evaluation, both in terms of compliance with AMDAL / this current report and its suitability. Within 1 month of contract award the Construction Contractor will be required to submit for approval the Contractor Detailed Work Plan and associated detailed Contractor’s Environmental and Social Management Plan.
45. It will be seen later that local regulations require certain mitigation measures, the most relevant for JUFMP being restricted hours of transport truck movement, development of detailed traffic management plans and testing and certification of trucks for safety, emissions etc. These have been developed by the local government recognizing the existing social and environmental conditions within Jakarta. Compliance with such regulations is specifically required through the AMDAL, this report, and Contract General and Special Conditions as appropriate. 46. Costing for environmental and social mitigation is also required to align closely with the approach to costing used for the construction factors. With limited exception all costs are being built into unit costs for dredging and unit costs for transport, with additional breakdown for distance of dredging sites from the Ancol CDF. Environmental and social costs built-into the unit costs include, but are not limited to: Workplace sanitation Safety Traffic management Preventing spillage of dredged material around the site and transport routes Vehicle emission control Noise management; and General consultation with the community. 47. Specific identifiable environmental and social cost items to be included in the contract include a series of community consultation meetings.
4 Refinement of engineering design 48. Engineering designs as presented in the approved Phase 1 AMDAL was naturally based on the latest information (that was included in the AMDAL Terms of Reference) provided by the Project Preparation Consultants (PPC) and some early investigation / design work during the engineering design consultancy that commenced in October 2009. Since the preparation of the Phase 1 AMDAL: Detailed survey information has been obtained for all sites and incorporated into the design. Preliminary designs have been reviewed by the PIUs, PMU and the World Bank and some details were changed to accommodate certain issues, for example specific local knowledge (what bank protection would be desirable), optimizing performance, contracting procedures and packaging, potential effects on infrastructure, etc. More detailed social and environmental information from both the Phase 1 AMDAL and Phase 2 preparation activities has been considered, especially in relation to construction contract formulation. Specific mitigation measures have been reviewed in relation to adequacy and practicality. Schedules have been refined. 49.
The main changes that have occurred in the interim period are: 16
50.
Contract packaging and scheduling have been adjusted. Volumes of material to be dredged and transported and embankment works are better defined. Summarized information is given in Table 4-1. Separation of solid waste from the dredged material has been reviewed. Considering many factors (known local conditions, practicality, effects at disposal site) it has been determined that it is necessary to separate only major items from the dredged material and for the Construction Contractor to coordinate with other agencies to manage floating wastes and garbage on the riverbanks. Possible equipment requirements have been reviewed. The majority of equipment remains as described earlier, but with the potential use of water-jetting under bridges for local dislodging and movement of sediment to locations where it can be picked up by excavator being identified to minimize infrastructure disturbance and reduce the amount of manual excavation. While employment of immediate local persons will be encouraged it will not be mandated. The approach to incorporating environmental and social considerations into Construction Contracts has been defined (Section 3.2 and throughout Section 6). Comparing this with Table II-7 of the Phase 1 AMDAL: The lengths of individual drains to be dredged are reduced. The dredged volumes in each site are reduced. The volume of total solid waste included with the sediment has now been estimated.
17
Table 4-1 JUFMP Phase 1and 2 Contract packaging 1
Package
Location Dredging Depth (m)
Dredging Estimates Volume Dredge Volume of material (m3) Solid Waste (m3)
Embankment Works (m)
Phase 1 1 (DKI) 2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) Phase 2 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI) 5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR) 7 (DKI)
Ciliwing-Gunung Sahari Drain Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side) Note 1 Lower Sunter Floodway Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain) Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain West Banjir Canal (sea side) Note 1 Upper Sunter Floodway Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kail Besar – Jelakeng Drain Note 2 Krukut Cideng Drain Note 2 Krukut Lama Drain
1.90 ~ 2.70 2.20 ~ 3.10
156,970 99,490
3,140 1,250
4,832 1,905
1.50 ~ 3.50
1,225,500
22,510
4,600
1.60 ~ 2.30
399,250
19,970
1,800
0.60 ~ 2.30
33,230
810
2,570
0.50 ~ 2.10
140,150
7,010
3,865
1.30 ~ 2.10 1.00 ~ 2.10 0.70 ~ 3.30 1.10 ~ 1.90 2.00 ~ 3.60 1.70 ~ 2.50 1.80 ~ 3.40 0.70 ~ 2.30 0.60 ~ 1.60
413,400 48,200 51,000 11,500 248,000 350,080 82,000 40,500 100,000
10,340 1,210 1,280 290 6,200 8,760 4,100 1,020 5,000
5,000 3,057 305 1,092 821 1,190 1,850 2,391 2,882
0.70 ~ 0.80 0.50 ~ 0.80
28,700 1,440 1,658 14,900 750 2,400 3,441,870 95,080 42,218 Note 1 For contracting purposes, the Sunter Floodways has been divided into two sub-packages – Upper Sunter Floodway and Lower Sunter Floodway. Note 2 For contracting purposes, the Krukut Drain has been divided into two sub-packages – Krukut Cideng Drain and Krukut Lama Drain
5 Additional environmental and social information 5.1 Overview 51.
1
Since the completion of the Phase 1 AMDAL, the following have been undertaken: Detailed baseline data collection for the Phase 2 AMDALs (that were being prepared through 2010). A series of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) in all kelurahan (villages) of both Phase 1 and Phase 2 sub-project areas. Additional consideration of sediment quality issues, especially to incorporate additional information from the Phase 2 primary data collection and to consider the most appropriate manner to satisfy the DKI BPLHD (Phase 1 AMDAL) requirement for on-going sediment monitoring. As discussed in several places in preceding sections, determination of the best method to align environmental and social requirements into the construction contracts and into the institutional arrangements that will exist during JUFMP implementation.
Note that contract packages 1, 2a and 2b are in Phase 1 and the rest of the packages are in Phase 2.
18
5.2 Social and community issues 52. Apart from resettlement (which is not required in the JUFMP Phase 1 sites) the most dominant environmental and social issues all relate to the dredging impacts and the interaction of the JUFMP project with the local community. The desire for flood mitigation is very commonly expressed by the community. 53. As evidenced from information from the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) there was limited real awareness of the project amongst local communities, there is a wish for more information and community consultation, and there are concerns that environmental and social considerations will not be given proper attention. Pre- and post- FGD questionnaires identify that that the FGDs themselves are being considered as both a successful avenue for information sharing and as helping to allay concerns about the level of environmental and social management. 54. The types of issues that are being raised by the communities in mid-2010 are similar to those identified during the Phase 1 AMDAL preparation; namely dirty environment, traffic, noise, disturbance to daily activity. It is thus reasonable to adopt these as key issues to give attention to in any environment and social management plan for the implementation of JUFMP.
5.3 Baseline environmental information 55. This sub-section addresses additional physical, chemical and biological baseline information collected since the Phase 1 AMDAL was completed. While this information has focused on Phase 2 sites, both Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites are generally similar in that they are in the highly urbanized Jakarta area.
5.3.1 Sediment quality 56. Additional sediment samples have been collected and analysed. The results all support the earlier sampling and analysis that none of the material is classified as B3 (i.e., hazardous) waste, using the local standards referenced with international levels.
5.3.2 Traffic 57. Traffic studies confirm the unsurprising conclusion during Phase 1 preparation that there is prevailing substantial congestion within the Jakarta area. As part of this supplementary report there has been further investigation of potential total Phase 1 sediment transport truck volumes in the vicinity of the Ancol CDF, with the assessment and mitigation addressed in Section 6.
5.3.3 Noise 58. Detailed noise measurements were undertaken at Phase 2 sites in accordance with Indonesian methodology. These show that the prevailing (baseline) noise levels frequently are already above local standards.
5.3.4 Air quality 59. Detailed air quality measurements were undertaken at Phase 2 sites in accordance with Indonesian methodology and indicate that prevailing (baseline) conditions generally met local standards.
5.3.5 Water quality 60. Detailed water quality measurements were undertaken at Phase 2 sites in accordance with Indonesian methodology and indicate that prevailing (baseline) conditions frequently did not meet local standards. 19
5.3.6 Biological environment 61. With the exception of the wildlife sanctuary adjoining the downstream portion of the West Banjir Canal project site (a JUFMP Phase 2 site), the biological environment of the Phase 2 sites are very similar to that of the Phase 1 sites; aquatic ecosystems reflecting the polluted drains and waduks, terrestrial ecosystems reflecting the highly urbanized environment with value related to aesthetics and food crops rather than any conservation value.
5.3.7 Conclusions 62. Additional baseline information collection for Phase 2 sites supports the findings of the Phase 1 studies.
6 Phase 1 environmental assessment and mitigation 63. This section addresses whether the assessment and mitigation of potential impacts from JUFMP Phase 1 as presented in early 2010 remains valid considering the additional baseline information, refined designs and now-established institutional and contracting arrangements. 64. The Jakarta physical and biological environment is a highly modified urban environment supporting a major and diverse population. Flooding significantly disrupts the lives of much of the population, and especially the poor. The communities have clearly expressed their desire to get relief from flooding, but also the wish for on-going consultation and for attention to be given to environmental and social matters. 65. In line with Indonesian practice, effects and mitigation are divided in the following subsections into “pre-Construction”, “Construction” and “Post-Construction” periods. Most attention is naturally given to the “Construction” period when there is potential for the majority of adverse effects and the need for carefully integrated mitigation. A matrix summarizing effects, mitigation and monitoring for these various periods is found in Appendix 2.
6.1 Pre-construction period 66. This period is defined for this report as the period between approval of the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL (formally by letter dated 30 March 2010) and when the first construction contract is signed (currently projected for early 2012). There will be a transition period when there will be construction bidding and assessment, and for the purposes of this report this transition period will be incorporated into the “Pre-construction” period.
6.2 Construction period 6.2.1 Contractors Environment and Social Management Plan 67. As noted in Section 3.2, in addition to the requirements of the AMDAL for Phase 1 (and the AMDAL for Ancol CDF), the major element of environmental and social management during the construction period will be the need for the Construction Contractor to develop and have approved the Contractor’s Detailed Environmental and Social Management Plan that integrates with the Contractors Detailed Work Plan and is in line with the AMDAL and this current document. Appendix 1 of this current report further details the requirements for the Contractors ESMP.
20
6.2.2 Community perception and interaction 68. The potential for significant negative adverse effects exists, as does the potential for each JUFMP works sub-project to integrate positively with the local community. What will actually occur is a combination of: Realistic expectations of the community about the project. The amount and timing of information provided to the community. Whether the community believes that their concerns have been adequately addressed. Whether avenues for communication remain open, meaningful and able to achieve common understanding. 69. JUFMP has developed measures to mitigate potential adverse effects and to reinforce positive outcomes. Nevertheless, there remains a residual potential that some expectations of the community will not be realized. These expectations relate to: The extent of flood mitigation that will be achieved – a factor that is difficult to explain considering the many influencing aspects and especially that it is always a statistical possibility that at any point there may be an extreme flood beyond design capacity of the dredged waterways. Local employment arising from the project. At best, the project would have some but limited short term employment potential. Aspects outside of the scope of JUFMP e.g., long term solid waste management. 70.
Specific mitigation measures are: Required and specified formal community consultation by successful Construction Contractor during initial development of Contractor’s Detailed Work Plan and Contractor’s Detailed ESMP – to be included as line cost item in construction contract. Required and specified on-going community consultation meetings by Construction Contractor during the construction period – to be included as line cost item in the construction contract. Required and specified establishment, operation and manning of POSKO’s (project site office which will, amongst others, function as “project information centers” to disseminate project information, receive complaints, etc) at each sub-project site, supported by specified centralized IT support – responsibility of the Supervision Consultant and to be included in the scope of the Supervision Consultant contract.
71. Specific monitoring of community perception and consultation will be undertaken by the Supervision Consultant. These consultations will aim to provide indications of how individuals have altered opinions over time and the extent of understanding that has been transferred to the community via the information center, etc. This monitoring will be complemented by such indicators as visits to the POSKO’s, complaints received and the satisfactory resolution of complaints.
6.2.3 Local employment 72. In line with the approach to contracting (Section 3.2) the Construction Contractor will have the flexibility to determine workforce composition and the source of the workforce. However, bid documents will highlight to the bidder the expectation of the local communities that there will be opportunities for local employment. 73. The Contractors preliminary ESMP submitted with the bid will be required to identify what local employment is intended. Based on previous practice on dredging projects elsewhere in Jakarta it is expected that most of the unskilled employment will be derived locally.
21
6.2.4 Hydraulics 74. There will be gradually increasing flow capacity in the drains as construction progresses. This is not considered further under the “Construction Period”, but the positive effects of flood mitigation resulting from the project have been analyzed as part of the design preparation process.
6.2.5 Spillage of dredged material 75. Spillage can occur at the dredging sites themselves and also during transport of dredged material to the disposal sites. This potential effect is of major concern to the community in terms of various consequential effects: Safety for moving vehicles General area cleanliness Spilled material left on roads and allowed to dry out. Accelerated damage to roads. 76. Based on a variety of historically poorly managed construction projects around Jakarta the concerns are justifiable. The project is undertaking several measures to reduce spillage and to ensure that the adverse effects do not occur. Furthermore, if there is accidental spillage, procedures are in place to correct the situation. 77. Spillage in the immediate vicinity of the dredging sites could occur within the designated Construction Contractor’s work area(s). By various conditions in the construction contract and AMDAL (and this current report) work site spillage and the consequential effects will be managed as follows: By specific exclusion of the public from the Construction Contractor work area(s) the community would not be directly affected by the spillage. By general requirements to maintain a safe and clean work site, the Construction Contractor will be obliged to both limit spillage and then to clean spillage should it occur. By requirements to ensure that vehicle tires and vehicle bodies do not transfer dredged material to roads external to the work areas, the Construction Contractor will have a major incentive to limit spillage within the work site. 78. Spillage to the external roads could come from one or more of: Dirty tires or vehicle bodies. “Too wet” dredged material leaking from improperly sealed truck doors or transport containers. Overfilling the trucks / containers. Excessive speed. 79. Management options for these include: Vehicle washing or cleaning. Draining dredge material prior to filling transport containers or directly to trucks Use of transport containers and ensuring any drainage valves are closed prior to transport Sealing the back flaps of transport trucks Limiting the amount of filling that can occur. Covering loads during transport. Limiting speed limits Having a clean-up team with brushes, shovels, water washdown along transport routes to clean up spillage as it occurs. 80. In line with the AMDAL and this report the Construction Contractor is obliged to identify in the Contractors ESMP’s what combination of measures will be adopted to prevent spillage to the roads. These measures are then reviewed for suitability and adequacy by the Supervision Consultant 22
and as appropriate, accepted “as is” or after modification. However, the responsibility for successful implementation remains with the Construction Contractor. 81. Monitoring of successful implementation is the specific responsibility of the Supervision Consultant who has the powers to require rectification if spillage does occur, including if necessary bringing in an external party to undertake clean-up at the Construction Contractor’s expense. Furthermore, the community has an informal role in monitoring in that if spillage occurs any community member has the right to complain, preferably via the POSKO at site to the Supervision Consultant, or via the required Construction Contractor-community consultation meetings whose proceedings must be reported to the Supervision Consultant. It is noted that the aspect of spillage to roads by vehicles returning from the Ancol CDF site is specifically addressed in the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL by the requirement for a vehicle wash for vehicles prior to leaving the Ancol CDF site.
6.2.6 Air quality 82.
Potential adverse effects arise from: Vehicle emissions and from construction equipment Odors and smells, principally from the dredged material Dust
83. The vehicle emissions will add to the already high, but mostly within standards local air quality as represented by levels of NOx, SOx, HC, etc. Considering the amount of project-induced traffic, hundreds rather than the multi-thousands of prevailing normal background traffic movements per day, the marginal adverse effect is expected to be low. 84. The air chemistry monitoring to date indicates that identifiable odor-producing compounds are below standards. In various areas the community notes odors variously from the general poor quality of drain and waduk water, poorly disposed solid waste and in places from material dredged or removed from the drains and waduks. Reliable quantitative information on the odors from the dredge material has not been possible, but observation is that the freshly dredged material occasionally generates local odors, but the odors decrease rapidly with time. It can be expected that there will be increases in odors, with the extent of the increase depending on amount of exposed, freshly-dredged material, local weather patterns and disturbance of the water of the drains and waduks. 85. The greatest potential source of elevated dust is from spilled dredge material drying on the roads and then subjected to on-going traffic movement. In relation to vehicle emissions, Construction Contractors are required to ensure that all vehicles have and maintain “compliance certificates” in relation to emissions and road worthiness, with monitoring for compliance by the Supervision Consultant. 86. For odors, there are no realistic mitigation measures for full prevention. Rather mitigation is to be based on a combination on minimizing the amount of exposed, odor-producing dredge material in critical areas, on maintaining close communication with the community and on developing measures that align with the overall Contractors Work Plan and Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP). Oversight of this is by the Supervision Consultant. 87. For dust, prevention is the key mitigation measure with a strong project focus and requirement to prevent spillage of dredged material and to clean it up when it does occur.
6.2.7 Noise
23
88. As noted in Section 5.3.3 existing noise levels are already above local standards. Project noise will be derived from various sources; traffic, dredging equipment, and pile driving (only where works include embankment repairs with sheet-piles). With noise levels already exceeding standards in various locations it is unrealistic to expect that noise levels to be controlled to remain within standards. 89.
90.
6.2.8 91.
Thus noise management will based on a combination of: requirement to keep noise producing equipment such as vehicle in efficient operational conditions obtaining an agreement with the local community whereby the perception of intrusive noise and acceptance, or otherwise, of noise is more important than absolute noise levels. The Construction Contractor’s ESMP will be required to document the discussions with community representatives and resultant detailed noise management measures that could be expected to include such factors as: o limiting certain high noise activities such as pile driving during noise-sensitive times such as prayer times o placing stationary generators, compressors, etc away from noise-sensitive locations and / or using noise shields o choosing local vehicle access routes where there would be least possible interaction with noise-sensitive areas. Required instructional programmes for Construction Contractor’s staff in the requirement for and methods to control noise; for example, limiting transport vehicle noise by slowly accelerating trucks and prohibiting use of horns unless in an emergency situation. Monitoring will be by a combination of: Self monitoring by Construction Contractor, with this reinforced by feedback from community and Supervision Consultant. Compliance monitoring by the Supervision Consultant, to ensure that the Construction Contractor is implementing the agreed Contractors ESMP. Informal monitoring by the community, with feedback through the project complaints system (including local POSKO’s) and through Construction Contractor’s community meetings.
Traffic Project generated traffic will involve: Very occasional mobilization / demobilization of heavy equipment to and between the dredging sites. Most of this will likely occur during night hours. The regular transportation of dredged sludge to Ancol CDF and of solid waste to the Bantar Gebang disposal site (TPA). This will be restricted to night hours. Frequent, “all hours” movement of a few light vehicles transporting people etc. to / from sites.
92. The first two items are discussed further. Traffic congestion within Jakarta and the effects arising are well recognized problems, and in part to address this issue DKI Jakarta has well established rules and procedures to control heavy vehicles. Notable are: General controls both for hours of operation (generally at night to avoid times when roads are most busy) and for “designated” roads. Requirement for Traffic Management Plans to be developed and approved in advance for “extraordinary” movements (such as mobilization of very heavy construction equipment) and for regular medium term intensive truck movement as will occur with the dredged material transport trucks. 24
Requirements for vehicles to be regularly checked for road worthiness and for emissions.
93. As a minimum all JUFMP project traffic will be contractually required to abide by these established rules and procedures. However, given the nature of the project additional considerations as outlined below are required. Areas affected by the project traffic can be categorized as: Sub-project site immediate access and local feeder routes to the main transport routes. The main transport routes. Main road in immediate vicinity of Ancol (Jl. RE Martadinata) where JUFMP transport truck movement will be at highest immediately prior to entry to Ancol CDF. 94. Different issues are important for these different areas. Issues associated with the immediate access and local feeder routes are very much focussed on interaction with the local communities. Roads are typically narrow, parking opportunities limited and there is often a high density of people living and working in the area. Hence issues relate to preferred dredging access location (as this will influence road access and local feeder routes), methods of safe operation and operational practices such as control of noise, preferred hours of operation, emission control, preventing spillage etc. Thus in addition to the standard traffic management plan attention must be given to the interaction with local population, recognizing that there will be adverse short /medium term traffic effects but with Construction Contractor and community working together to achieve an acceptable outcome. For example, the Construction Contractor may involve local people for security or as informal traffic personnel. 95. The traffic effects on the main transport routes will be minimal considering that transport truck movement will be at night when general vehicle traffic movement will be very much less than during daytime and especially morning and afternoon peaks. At Jl. RE Martadinata near the Ancol site project related truck movement will be highest. At this location effects are related to road capacity issues and also premature road damage because of the repetitive loaded truck movement. While the actual numbers of JUFMP trucks will depend on individual contractor work plans it is estimated that there could be as many as 40-50 movements per hour each way from the JUFMP Phase 1 dredged material movement, but more likely with an average of about 30 movements per hour, with all movement being during the low traffic night-time period. In this area the road is in good condition, divided and with 2 lanes of free traffic movement each way, with the capacity calculated from standard tables as 3250 “passenger car units” (pcu) per hour per 2 lanes 1 way vehicles per hour. Allowing for a truck to be equivalent 3 pcu, peak JUFMP truck movements would be about 5% of capacity, and at these times the other-than-JUFMP traffic is well below capacity. 96. Thus management of traffic will be by the Construction Contractor providing the Contractor Detailed Traffic Management Plan based on: Requirements of transport and associated authorities. JUFMP-required consultation with the local communities. Integration with the Construction Contractors Work Plan. Addressing requirements of the AMDAL and this current report. The Detailed Traffic Management Plan will address as a minimum the following: Identification of access points to / from the dredging sites and the feeder routes. Community-agreed hours of operation in the areas at and adjacent to the dredging sites. Any special operational conditions agreed to with the local community. Contractor staffing, signage, barriers etc to facilitate safe movement of vehicles at and surrounding dredging sites.
25
Identification of nominated primary routes, and alternatives if primary routes are closed or otherwise unavailable, between dredging sites and the Ancol CDF in conformity with the requirements of traffic authorities. General specifications of the trucks to be used, including net and gross weights, load capacity and maximum load per truck considering the “no spillage” requirement. Specific reference to spillage prevention is given in Section 6.2.5. Estimation of peak hourly truck movements from each dredging area, and average hourly numbers of truck movements considering dredging plan, daily peaks and long term averages. Certification that only vehicles holding current roadworthiness certificates will be used. Method of clearly identifying (from quick external inspection) that trucks are both related to the JUFMP project and that are associated with a particular Construction Contractor and a particular sub-project. Outline of safety requirements and training that will be required of all drivers, including a program focussed on the particular hazards of extensive night driving. Certification that the Construction Contractor takes responsibility for ensuring that the Detailed Traffic Management Plan is implemented, whether trucks are operated directly by the Construction Contractor or by a sub-contractor etc.
97. This Plan will require the approval of both the relevant authorities (at Contractor’s expense) and the Supervision Consultant. The Supervision Consultant will have primary responsibility for monitoring compliance. Furthermore, considering JUFMP will have multiple concurrent Construction Contracts the Supervision Consultant will be responsible to ensure as far as possible conformity between the different individual Construction Contractor Traffic Management Plans produce an integrated assessment of traffic volumes for the section of Jl. RE Martadinata close to the Ancol site to ensure that the overall JUFMP-related traffic remains well within available capacity. For the first six (6) months of the construction period undertake a detailed traffic count in the vicinity of the Jl. RE Martadinata / Ancol CDF intersection at least once every two months from 1900 one evening until 0700 the following morning that will identify and count nonJUFMP traffic (by category; for example, standard, trucks, buses) and JUFMP-traffic (broken down by Construction Contracts and sub-project. The day (of week and of month) shall be random and vary, and shall not be announced to Construction Contractors in advance of or during the survey. Be aware of possible events that may lead to congestion problems and as necessary coordinate with the Construction Contractors to reschedule dredged material delivery trucks. Ensure that any road damage arising from JUFMP trucks has to be repaired by the contractor within 24 hour or covered with temporary steel plate in accordance with UU No.22 / 2009 regarding traffic and land transport. 98. Requirements of this section shall be integrated with other “traffic” aspects in other sections such as prevention of spillage.
6.2.9 Sediment quality 99.
Based on extensive sampling and analysis it was found that: None of the material tested can be defined as “hazardous” (or “B3” using Indonesian terminology) which would require special disposal conditions. Using relevant international “screening levels” (such levels are not included in the Indonesian regulatory system) almost all of the material is identified as suitable for future land uses without any additional investigation. As noted this aspect is related to the Ancol 26
CDF and relevant AMDAL / Updated RKL / RPL and limited additional monitoring is identified for the Ancol site. Using direct toxicity information and also standard health assessments, the material does not have any risks.
100. The AMDAL Commission / DKI BPLHD have requested that there be additional sediment testing in the JUFMP Phase 1 sites before dredging commences and after the dredging is completed. Appropriate protocols have been developed that integrate the proposed dredging operations with effective and cost-efficient pre-dredging testing procedures. For the pre-dredging testing procedures, the protocols include the method for sampling and interpretation and action arising after sample analysis. 101. Management is based on the requirement that B3 material is not to be disposed of at the Ancol site. The main method to achieve this is a monitoring programme to identify compliance with this requirement in advance of the dredging. Using the protocols established, Table 6-1 summarizes the expected number of composite samples that are to be taken for pre-dredging sampling for the JUFMP Phase 1 sites. Table 6-1 Sediment quality testing for JUFMP Phase 1 sites JUFMP Phase 1 Sub-project Ciliwung Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati Cengkareng Floodway Lower Sunter
Length km / Area ha 5.10 km 4.90 ha 7.84 km 9.98 km Total:
No. Composite samples 4 3 5 6 18
102. Sampling and analysis is the responsibility of the Supervision Consultant on behalf of the PMU / relevant PIU. This will be included as a scope of work in the consultant’s Terms of Reference. It is estimated that collection and analysis will cost about 3 - 4,000,000 rupiah (US$ 300 - 400) per sample. 103.
The Construction Contractor’s responsibilities are: defining the dredging program so that the sampling, analysis and interpretation program can be undertaken in a timely manner (not too early such that that planned dredging is delayed while sampling, analysis and interpretation is undertaken; not too late as the pre-dredging sampling is to reflect conditions that will occur during the dredging activities). To not commence dredging in an area until the material has been cleared for disposal to Ancol CDF. Specific requirement to prevent any material other than “tested and cleared” JUFMP dredged material to be transported to and disposed of at Ancol CDF.
104. DKI BPLHD has responsibility to “receive” the information, and if in the unlikely event that pre-dredge testing identifies any B3 material, to participate in decision making on what further steps to take. The final decision however has to be that of the Ministry of Environment, and PMU and the relevant PIU and would also need to be involved in the discussions. The possible procedures and outcomes could include: More sampling and analysis to closer define the extent of elevated levels. Disposal to the PPLi hazardous waste facility.
6.2.10 Solid Waste 105.
Solid Waste management is closely linked to the project in various ways: 27
It is well recognized that illegal disposal of solid waste to Jakarta’s waterways contributes to sediment build-up / loss of flow capacity and to unsightly conditions. Authorities are involved in on-going programmes to remove (mostly) floating solid waste from the waterways (the relevant waterway owner / PIU) and from areas immediately surrounding the waterways (Sanitary Agency (Dinas Kebersihan) of DKI Jakarta) Some local solid waste collection / sorting / transfer sites are close to the waterways Communities frequently request an improved solid waste collection service in response to being encouraged to cease disposing solid waste to the waterways. Solid waste will be incorporated in the material dredged from the waterways by the Construction Contractors.
106. The Construction Contractors will have responsibility for the management of dredging sites during the construction period (including 6 month maintenance period) and will be required to coordinate with the local community, DKI Jakarta “Cleaning Department” and relevant owner / PIU to manage solid waste within the designated dredging site. An additional specific responsibility will be to separate those large items from the dredged material before sediment transport to the Ancol CDF site. In specific terms the Construction Contractor will be required to ensure that the designated dredging site remains clean and free of solid waste during contract implementation and also that during this period no floating solid waste passes from the dredging site to external areas. While sorting to remove the large items is expected to occur within the dredging site it is the Construction Contractor’s responsibility to arrange for this and all other solid waste material to be managed in a non-offensive (odors, health, visual) and timely manner and to be transported to and disposed of at Jakarta’s Bantar Gebang TPA (landfill). Details of how individual contractors will manage this aspect will be required in the Construction Contractor’s Work Plans and ESMPs. 107.
108.
The effects on solid waste thus include: During the construction period JUFMP will facilitate maintaining clean waterways and surrounds. The “lost opportunity” that however undesirable, at present with some members of the community, using the waterways for solid waste disposal, either because of cost, convenience or lack of any realistic alternative. Some local collection / sorting transfer locations used by the community prior to either recycling or disposal to the TPA or elsewhere and which exist within what will be the Construction Contractor’s work sites will be disturbed. The Construction Contractor will be required to negotiate with the community and the operator of such sites for mutually acceptable alternative arrangements during the construction period. The on-site separation of large items of solid waste from dredged material that will either be recycled or be diverted to and disposed of at Bantar Gebang TPA. In terms of influencing operations of Bantar Gebang TPA Solid waste associated with waterway and surrounds clean-up is solid waste that should otherwise go to Bantar Gebang TPA if the waste collection and disposal system, including community input was functioning effectively. At most, solid waste removed from the dredged material and diverted to Bantar Gebang TPA could be considered as an additional load for Bantar Gebang TPA. The estimated volume of solid waste to be removed and disposed of Bantar Gebang is about 95,000m3 over a 3 - 4 year duration. This will make up an insignificant percentage of normal loads being received at Bantar Gebang (currently between 5,000 – 6,000 tons per day, or about 20,000 to 24,000 m3 per day).
109. The direct responsibility for management is with the Construction Contractor’s working in association with the local communities and local authorities etc. The costs for solid waste 28
management will be included in contracts as a unit cost item of solid waste transported to and disposed of at the Bantar Gebang TPA
6.3 Post-Construction period 110. This period relates to the time after construction and the 6 months Construction Contractor’s maintenance period has been completed. Mostly the effects are the beneficial reduction in flooding that is expected to occur and consequential flow-on benefits to the community. The aspect of sustainable solid waste management is also identified and discussed. 111. From time to time ongoing maintenance dredging will be required to sustain the benefits of the JUFMP program. It is not possible to estimate the frequency of this as it depends on many factors including catchment management and actual weather / high flow conditions that occur.
6.3.1 Community 112.
The effects on the community post-construction will be associated with: The perceived and actual effects of JUFMP, and especially benefits associated with increased flood mitigation and whether the project succeeded in appropriate levels of environmental and social management. The potential for improved (over current) solid waste management systems – see next subsection.
113. As noted in Section 6.2.2 construction period monitoring of community perceptions will continue until the maintenance period following the dredging and transport. Thus additional postconstruction period monitoring is not warranted.
6.3.2
Solid Waste and Maintenance dredging
114. The JUFMP project will have required a high standard of solid waste management associated with the period of dredging and immediate following 6 month maintenance period. While certain responsibilities will have been with the Construction Contractor, this will also have involved coordination and cooperation with the relevant waterway “owner” / PIU, the DKI Jakarta Sanitary Agency and the community. 115. Continuing sedimentation of the waterways is inevitable post-JUFMP dredging since there will continue to be sediment delivery and the very flat grades of the waterways limits self scouring for all but high flow periods. However, the prior (to JUFMP dredging) practice of significant inputs of solid waste that reduces flow capacity is expected to be much reduced as a result of the project, though not entirely prevented. Thus on-going maintenance dredging will be required. 116. The relevant “owner” of each waterway will be responsible for monitoring of sediment build-up / waterway profiles and the relationship of this to flow capacity. The timing for maintenance dredging will be balanced between not letting the situation deteriorate to the stage of significant increasing flooding and not undertaking very frequent and uneconomical dredging. Thus maintenance dredging will be on a much smaller scale than JUFMP dredging, both in terms of the amount of material to be removed as well as in the area to be dredged for future maintenance contracts. Therefore while similar effects to JUFMP dredging will be likely, the magnitude of effects will be much less. Mitigation and monitoring would likewise be similar, learning from the JUFMP experience and again with a focus on integrating operations via consultation with the community. 117. The responsibilities of JUFMP will not carry through to the post-construction period, though by providing a working model to the relevant long term stakeholders for the approximate 2 year 29
construction period it is likely that there will be long term improvements in solid waste management and maintenance dredging works of the project areas.
30
Appendix 1
Contractors’ Environment and Social Management Plan
Environmental and social management (ESM) is considered important by the project proponents (PMU/PIUs). The project has been subject to both Indonesia AMDAL processes and to World Bank assessment. In relation to ESM the Contractor must abide by: The relevant JUFMP AMDAL approved for the dredging sites. Any “Supplementary Report” or similar provided as part of the tendering / bidding documents. All social and environmental conditions in the Contract documents. All relevant laws, regulations, and policies regarding environmental and social matters in Jakarta. The Contractors Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP). This Appendix details requirements for two types of Contractor’s ESMP: o Contractor’s Preliminary ESMP, to be prepared and submitted as part of the bid / Tender. o Contractor’s Detailed ESMP, to be prepared and submitted along with the Contractor’s Detailed Work Plan within the time specified in Contract documents (nominally 30 days after Contract Award). o Both ESMP’s cover essentially the same aspects, the main difference being the amount of detail. Unless otherwise specified the term “Contractors ESMP’s” is inclusive of both the Preliminary and the Detailed ESMP. The following identifies the minimum requirements for appropriate “Contractor ESM Plans.” Extension of responsibility. Where the term “Contractor” is used below this shall refer to the main Contractor(s) and all sub-contractors, sub-sub-contractors etc. Regardless of whatever subcontracting arrangements are in place the Contractor shall remain fully responsible to the Principal for implementation of sound environmental and social management. Furthermore, when nominating sub-contractors either in the bid or during Contract implementation to the Supervision Consultant, the Contractor shall provide written and signed evidence that the sub-contractor(s) have been made aware of project environmental and social arrangement requirements. Tender documents will identify: Requirement for the bidder to prepare a “Preliminary Contractor Environmental and Social Management Plan” (ESMP) in parallel with the “Preliminary Work Plan” as part of the bidding process. Requirement for the successful contractor to prepare the “Contractor’s Detailed ESMP” as part of the Detailed Work Plan to be submitted within one month of Tender Award and to be approved by the Supervision Consultant. The Technical Bid shall include in the section on Corporate experience the following information: o Corporate policies related to environment, social responsibility and occupational health and safety o Records of implementation of these policies, including any external / independent audit of such implementation. o Copies of any awards or other recognition for "good" / "excellent" performance related to actual implementation of social or environmental management and monitoring on construction contracts in the previous 5 years. o A signed statement identifying any penalties incurred in the previous 5 years relating to environment and / or social and / or occupational health matters. The Principal 31
reserves the right to disqualify any organization that has been shown to have falsified such a statement. o Examples of Construction of environmental, social and safety management and monitoring plans that have been specifically developed by the organization. a person nominated by the Contractor who shall have specific qualifications and practical experience of implementing ESM’s on similar Construction Contracts. This may be a nominated individual with 100% responsibility for ESM or alternatively the ESM duties may be shared with other duties (such as safety) provided that at least 50% of the time is available for ESM activities. Scoring shall be as identified in the section on staffing. The financial proposal shall include costs related to ESM for the Construction Contract as follows: o Costs associated with preparation of the “Contractor’s ESMPs” shall be included as part of any identified payment made in relation to the preparation of the Contractor’s Work Plan. o Other specific identified “environmental and social” items in the Cost Schedule o Without limitation, unit price costs shall include all other ESM costs associated with implementation of the “Contractor’s ESMP”, Temporary Construction Areas, ESM staffing costs, any penalties or charges imposed by government authorities, responding to complaints from the public and rectifying as necessary breaches of good ESM practice and / or the approved “Contractor ESMP”.
Environmental and social issues The often interrelated environmental and social issues for which the Contractor would have direct responsibilities are described in the following. These aspects shall also be read in conjunction with the AMDALs, Supplementary Reports” etc.: Community interaction This is a general but overarching issue addressing such aspects as noise and vibration, traffic, odor / smell, appearance / aesthetics, worksite sanitation, dredged sediment “spillage” to roads and public areas, public safety, physical dislocation that have been identified as issues of concern to the community. Further information on matters raised during community consultation to date is available from the Principal. Specific objectives / performance requirements are set out in other following issues. Bidders are encouraged to identify what other aspects they might address or undertake to further minimize adverse “community disturbance”. Additionally the Tenderer and Contractor shall identify in the “Contractor ESMPs” how they will participate in the public grievance / dispute resolution arrangements for the project. Furthermore: The bidder is encouraged to engage in a community consultative process during bidding to ensure that what is being proposed in the Contractors Preliminary ESMP aligns with the interests of the local community. This process is at the bidder’s expense. On Contract award the successful Contractor is required to engage in a community consultative process as part of the development of the Contractor’s Detailed Work Plan and Detailed ESMP. A line item in the cost schedule allows for a community meeting associated with this process. During implementation of the Contract the Contractor is required to engage in further community meetings, with a line item in the Contract to allow for these. Temporary construction areas The design drawings clearly define the limits of permanent works which are mainly associated with the canal / drain (or waduk), and as appropriate, embankment works; in a few locations structures such as pumps, gates etc. are also included. As noted elsewhere, the Contractor shall set out these 32
areas by detailed survey plan prior to any other activity on the site. Any of these permanent areas may also be used for construction related purposes, provided that necessary environmental and social safeguards are implemented. It is envisaged that the Contractor may wish or need to use additional areas for such temporary purposes as, including but not limited to, storage yards, construction offices and yards etc. These areas shall be defined as “Temporary construction areas”. The responsibility for identifying “Temporary Construction Areas” is with the Tenderer and Contractor and shall form part of the “Contractor ESM Plans” in terms of clear identification of the areas and the expected timing and duration of use of each site. Selection of areas must give consideration to social and environmental factors and the “Contractor ESMPs” must define specific environmental and social management associated with each and every Temporary Construction Area. Noise and vibration Noise and vibration have been raised during various community consultation activities as “items of interest.” Measurements as part of the AMDAL identifies that noise and vibration do not always meet local standards. It is also noted that standards do not necessarily account for culturally sensitive situations such as prayer times. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” details of how the Contractor shall manage and monitor noise and vibration at the site. Costs in relation to, for example, low-noise generators or noise shields shall be considered as part of normal equipment and / or site establishment costs. The Engineer, Principal or others may at their own expense undertake noise and / or vibration monitoring at any time during execution of the Contract without necessarily informing the Contractor in advance that such measurements will be taken. If in the opinion of the Engineer, based on either such measurements or justifiable complaints from the public and / or authorities, that excessive noise or vibration is occurring, the Engineer may direct the Contractor to comply with relevant standards and with commitments made in the “Contractor ESMPs” without any payments being made to accord with such compliance. Traffic The AMDAL and comments by the public have identified traffic as an issue in relation to: Congestion Source of air emissions As the transporter of dredged material, the source of potential spillage (see later) Damage to roads. All Contractor Traffic shall be required (at no additional cost to the Contract) to comply with all regulations and requirements with respect to traffic, including but not necessarily limited to restricted hours of operation, signage, and holding of valid emission testing certificates. The Tenderer shall prepare a Preliminary Traffic Management Plan giving consideration to aspects raised in the AMDAL and Supplementary Report. It is emphasised that this Plan addresses social issues as well as the more standard issues such as truck size, routes etc.
33
The Contractor shall prepare a detailed Traffic Management Plan for the Contract and have this approved by the Supervision Consultant and then by the relevant authorities. This Traffic Management Plan shall form part of the Contractor Detailed Work Plan and ESMP proposed methods of minimizing the potential adverse effects of traffic. Costs related to preparation and implementation of the Traffic Management Plan are built into unit costs associated with transport of dredged material and transport of solid waste as appropriate.
Odor / smell The AMDAL and comments by the public have identified odor as an issue in relation to odors arising from (especially) from recently dredged material. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” proposed methods of minimizing odors, together with performance standards that can be measured for compliance by the Supervision Consultant. Costs associated with operational activities such as covering material, limiting the period of exposure, etc, as well as Contractor-initiated monitoring shall be built into unit costs. Appearance / aesthetics Given that dredging and associated operations are largely in built-up and occupied urban areas, the Tenderer and Contractor shall specifically identify proposed methods of reducing any adverse appearance and aesthetics in the “Contractor ESM Plans”. Note that this may also interact with public safety issues. Water quality While it is recognized that water quality in the project area is poor, the AMDAL and community expectations are that the project will not cause additional significant deterioration. Potential causes of further deterioration could arise from one or more of the following: dewatering of dredged sediment prior to transport, spilt fuels, oil and grease, improper sanitation, untreated vehicle and site washdown entering the drain, aggravation of surface floating solid waste, excessive disturbance of sediment whilst still under water. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” proposed methods of protecting water quality. Costs associated with set up and operational activities including any Contractor-initiated monitoring shall be built into unit costs. The Supervision Consultant (on behalf of project proponent), DKI BPLHD or others may at their own expense undertake water quality monitoring at any time during execution of the Contract without necessarily informing the Contractor in advance that such measurements will be taken. If in the opinion of the Engineer, based on either such measurements or justifiable complaints from the public and / or authorities, that excessive water pollution is occurring the Supervision Consultant may direct the Contractor to comply with relevant standards and with commitments made in the “Contractor ESMPs” without any payments being made to accord with such compliance. Worksite sanitation The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” proposed sanitation facilities and practices to be undertaken throughout the whole permanent and Temporary Construction Areas. Costs associated with set up and operational activities shall be built into unit costs. 34
Dredged sediment “spillage” to roads and public areas Based on previous operations, the community has expressed concerns regarding spillage of dredged material from transport trucks onto roads leading to the disposal site at Ancol. The AMDAL made specific mention of this factor, and the approved RPL / RKL (Environmental management and monitoring plans) requires that measures be undertaken to effectively prevent any spillage, as well as for a monitoring program to ensure that spillage is not occurring. In the event that spillage does occur procedures must be in place to enable rapid clean up of the spillage. It is recognised that there are various methods by which these requirements could be achieved. In addition to these requirements special environmental conditions pertain to the Ancol reclamation / disposal site. These include that all vehicles leaving the site shall be required to pass through a vehicle washing facility. Because of multiple contractors using the Ancol site, a common vehicle washing facility shall be developed and operated by the entity managing the Ancol CDF with each Contractor required to direct all vehicles through this facility. There shall be no charge for the use of the facility, but there shall be no claim for any delays occasioned by using the facility. Should the Contractor wish to establish and operate a dedicated facility for sole use by the Contractor, plans and details shall be provided to the Engineer for approval. No additional payments will be made for such independent action by the Contractor. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” proposed methods to prevent any spillage, Contractor self-monitoring and procedures that will be adopted to enable rapid clean up of any spillage that does occur, whether identified by the Contractor or by the Engineer. Costs associated with this shall be built into unit costs. Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, the Supervision Consultant may direct the Contractor to undertake additional or alternative clean-up procedures if spillage is significant and / or frequent and / or causing harm to the local community. No additional costs will be paid to the Contractor for such additional or alternative clean-up procedures. Furthermore, should the Contractor not undertake such procedures in a timely manner as directed by the Engineer, the Supervision Consultant at his discretion may call in another party to undertake the clean up, and the full cost of this shall become a charge against the Contractor. Public safety The project has the potential for significant public safety issues; construction areas are within densely populated urban areas, operations involve heavy machinery and movement of materials and equipment and many operations will be undertaken during night hours. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” proposed methods to maintain public safety. Associated costs shall be built into unit costs. Notwithstanding the preceding paragraph the Supervision Consultant may direct the Contractor to undertake additional safety measures if an unsafe situation occurs. No additional costs will be paid to the Contractor for such additional safety measures. Furthermore, should the Contractor not undertake such procedures in a timely manner as directed by the Supervision Consultant, the Supervision Consultant at his discretion may call in another party to implement additional safety measures and or direct the dredging and transport operations to cease; and the full cost of this shall become a charge against the Contractor and the Contractor shall have no claim arising from the enforced cessation of operations. Public grievance and dispute resolution A key requirement of the Principal and of the project funders (the World Bank) is that there be suitable public grievance and dispute resolution mechanisms in place. Overall JUFMP will have 35
established project public grievance mechanisms by the time of Construction Contract signing, specifically in relation to resettlement and compensation on project “permanent areas” and also in relation to enabling local communities to bring to the attention of local institutions and authorities comments, including complaints, about project related activities. The majority of such comments / complaints have been and are expected to continue to be related to environmental and social issues. In relation to resettlement and compensation as discussed previously, the Contractor will have: No involvement at all in relation to “permanent” works areas Full involvement in relation to “Temporary Construction Areas” The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” proposed methods and arrangements for handling public grievances and dispute resolution for environmental and social issues (other than resettlement and compensation). Options available to the Contractor range from “complete reliance on other project public grievance and dispute resolution mechanisms”, joint working together “fully independent Contractor public grievance and dispute resolution mechanism”.
In deciding which approach to use, it must be clearly understood that the Principal, via the Supervision Consultant, is required and committed to consider all comments (and complaints) made to the overall project public grievance and dispute resolution mechanisms. Whichever approach is used, all Contractor-associated costs to set up and maintain shall be part of unit rates for the project. Local employment In common with proposed projects the local community has expressed interest in employment opportunities. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” all realistic employment opportunities that will be available to the local community, giving the numbers of available jobs by category, the qualifications and experience necessary to fulfil those jobs, the duration of employment available, and steps that will be taken to ensure preferential employment from the local community. Other factors Successful implementation of ESM requires more than just identification of measures that are proposed to be undertaken. It is necessary for example that there is human resource support in terms of aspects such as specific staffing, identified chains of responsibility and a workforce that is both aware of issues and capable (often with some training) of implementation. The Tenderer and Contractor shall identify within the “Contractor ESMPs” details of such aspects. It is noted that the bid itself requires identification of a suitably qualified person with practical ESM experience who will be required to devote at least 50% of available time for ESM.
36
Appendix 2 Table A - 1
JUFMP Phase 1 Environment Management and Monitoring Matrix
JUFMP Phase 1 EMP Matrix
The following matrix summarises the environmental and social management and monitoring for the JUFMP Phase 1 Sub-projects. Additional detail is found in the main report. This complements but specifically does not override the RPL / RKL of the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL formally approved by DKI BPLHD / AMDAL Commission in late March 2010. Period Management Monitoring Effect
Description
Responsibility 1 Cost 1
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
Pre-construction * Enable effective & 1 Ensure alignment of AMDAL, PMU (via PC) integrated environmental Engineering Design Finalisation, Contract and social management Documentation and project institutional
PC
Ensure necessary PMU conditions in tender documents
PMU
2 Produce supplementary environmental PMU (via PC) / social reports as required
PC
Receipt of reports
PMU
PMU
3 Analyze environmental and social PMU (via PC) management options for various issues * Community perception 1 Community consultations, including PMU (via PC) FGDs
PC
Receipt of reports
PMU
PMU
PC
Questionnaires reporting
& PMU
PMU
CC
Receive reports
SC
arrangements
Construction * Community perception 1 Contract required meetings between CC Construction Contractor & community – initially during development of
Est. $1000 37
SC
Period
Management
Effect
Description
Monitoring Responsibility 1 Cost 1
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
Contractors Detailed ESMP, then at specified intervals thereafter
/ site
2 Ability for on-going information and SC complaints – establish & operate POSKO
SC
1 Investigate SC complaints Est. PMU 2 Activity monthly $1000020000 per reporting site
SC PMU
3 Series of questionnaires and interviews SC with community.
SC
Reporting to PMU / PMU PIUs; plus feedback Est. $1000 to Construction Contractor per site
PMU
* Environment and social 1 Contractor ESMP as adjunct to CC management closely Contractor Work Plans prepared by integrated with Construction Contractor to align with AMDAL, supplementary report etc. – Construction activities After required community consultation including in relation to access & work area locations. 2 Requirement for instruction to ad training as necessary of staff, subContractors etc
CC
Required to be SC approved by SC; then ongoing monitoring of compliance
SC
* Local employment 1 Contractor encouraged (desired by community) local persons
CC
1. Feedback from CC, SC community. SC 2. Reporting to SC;
CC, SC SC
to employ CC
38
Period
Management
Effect
Description
* Spillage material
Monitoring Responsibility 1 Cost 1
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
dredged 1 Methods detailed in Construction CC Contractor ESMP; plus worker training
CC
Plan to be approved SC
SC
2 Specified clean-up of spilled material - SC including by others if Construction Contractor does not clean-up as and when directed.
SC
Visual monitoring, PMU receipt of complaints
PMU
* Air Quality (at times 1 Vehicles to have emission compliance CC background certificates
CC
Compliance checking SC
SC
2 Dust – prevention by, for example, CC spillage control, clean- up
CC
Visual monitoring, SC receipt of complaints
SC
3 Odour – minimise exposure amount / CC duration; agreement with community
CC
SC
* Noise (note background 1 Agreement to be reached with local CC often exceeds standards) community, especially in relation to timing of activities and noise sensitive areas.
CC
On site manual SC monitoring, receipt of complaints. Review Plan & SC Consultation
2 Worker training; As necessary silenced CC equipment,
CC
SC
1 Produce detailed Traffic Management CC Plan (TMP) as part of Contractor Work Plan and ESMP – to include technical
CC
On site manual SC monitoring, receipt of complaints. Review plan prior to SC submission to authorities. Receive from Construction
* Traffic See other sections for
39
SC
SC
Period
Management
Effect
Description
Monitoring Responsibility 1 Cost 1
aspects, legislation / regulation, and after required community consultation. Such as noise, emissions, Have plan approved by local authorities. spillage Training of truck operators
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
Contractor. Copy of fully approved plan.
consequential effects
2 Maintain operational periods / local CC access / routes as per TMP
C
Visual monitoring, SC receipt of complaints
GSC
3 Integration with all other JUFMP CC, SC transport to prevent congestion near Ancol
CC, SC
Visual monitoring SC and specific monthly counts, receipt of complaints
SC
1 Pre and post dredging monitoring to SC determine whether B3. This required by (based on preventing BPLHD / AMDAL Commission with B3 being disposed of at approval for Phase 1 AMDAL (see 4 Ancol CDF below if sediment quality testing does identify B3 material)
SC Lab reports. SC, PMU Est. Clearance to dredge BPLHD $15,000 & transport – or onPLUS hold) provisional $15,000 for additional testing Instructions via SC, PMU CC BPLHD formal reports
* Sediment quality
2 Requirement to dredge and transport CC sediment only after material cleared. 3 Specific prohibition to pick up, store, CC transport or otherwise handle any solid material other than “cleared” JUFMP dredged material without express
CC
40
Spot checks, receipt SC of complaints
SC, PMU BPLHD
SC, PMU BPLHD SC
Period
Management
Effect
Description
Monitoring Responsibility 1 Cost 1
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
approval in writing from SC 4i Decision required on what further KLH – legally Provisional Minutes of meetings KLH, SC investigations required and ultimate responsible for $ 5000 for (only if testing under 1 decision. Inputs extra management that would be applied above identifies that from BPLHD, testing in material is B3) PMU, PIU, SC JUMFP cost * Sediment quality
KLH, SC
4ii Possible resultant decision to either KLH to make Provisional Reporting on close SC – in JUFM dispose of to Ancol (perhaps with special decision $ 100000 in supervision of conformity with P conditions) or dispose of to PPLi JUFMP cost dredging, transport KLH and PIU additi PIU & SC to hazardous waste site disposal requirements onal arrange to SC contra ct * Solid Waste
1 General requirement to keep site and CC surrounds clean; in consultation / agreement with authorities and community. Details to be set in Work Plan and ESMP.
CC
Visual monitoring, SC receipt of complaints
SC
2 Separation of large items from CC dredged material before transport to Ancol
CC
Visual monitoring
SC
SC
3 Arrange for transport and disposal of CC nett solid waste i.e. after recyclables
CC
Visual monitoring
SC
SC
41
Period
Management
Effect
Description
Monitoring Responsibility 1 Cost 1
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
removed) from construction sites to Bantar Gebang TPA. 4 Develop sustainable local solid waste PIU, collection, separation / recycling and cleaning transport / disposal programmes for agencies local areas in preparation for PostConstruction period
DKI PIU, DKI
* Environmental 1 Reports to be prepared for PMU & PIU SC SC (monthly) and BPLHD (quarterly) (preparing for reporting and on behalf of PIU / PMU)
Coordinate and SC attend meetings. Meeting minutes and action plans
SC
Reports produced PMU, PIUs and received
PMU, PIU
Post-Construction * Reduced flood heights 1 Operate systems in accordance with PIU design parameters and as necessary update operation rules as overall Jakarta flood management evolves
PIU
Water level PIU recording, especially during floods
PIU
2 Disseminate information to and PIU receive feedback from community
PIU
Records community interactions
PIU
1 Derive from flood management and PIU, DKI solid waste management – community has stakeholder participatory role
PIU, DKI
None required
* Community benefits
42
of PIU
Period
Management
Effect
Description
* Solid management
Monitoring Responsibility 1 Cost 1
Description
Responsibility1 Cost 1
DKI
Visual monitoring
DKI DKI Informal monitoring by community
future PIU
PIU
Visual monitoring, PIU participation in overall Jakarta flood monitoring / prediction / crosssection surveys
PIU
2 Similar as per JUFMP dredging, but PIU modified to benefit from lessons learned and considering smaller scale of maintenance dredging
PIU
Similar to JUFMP PIU Construction stage monitoring, modified because of scale and experience gained.
PIU
Waste 1 Sustainable solid waste management DKI systems in place that avoid need to use waterways and surrounds as part of disposal option
* Maintenance dredging 1 Determine need maintenance dredging
for
Note 1: Responsibility (Prime responsibility only) PMU = Project Management Unit PIU = Project Implementation Unit PC = Project preparation consultants CC = JUFMP Construction Contractor SC = JUFMP Supervision Consultant BPLHD = Environmental Management Agency of Jakarta Provincial Government KLH = National / Central Ministry of Environment
43
Bantuan Teknis untuk Analisis Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial (EIA / SIA) Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta (Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigaton Project/JUFMP) – Hibah TF#054683-IND
JUFMP FASE 1
Laporan Tambahan Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial
SEPTEMBER 2011
Daftar Isi Glosarium ............................................................................................................................. 1 1 Pendahuluan.................................................................................................................. 6 1.1 Konteks................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Tujuan dan ruang lingkup Laporan Tambahan........................................................ 6 2 Alternatif-Alternatif ......................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Keputusan Tingkat Strategis ................................................................................... 8 2.1.1 Latar Belakang................................................................................................. 8 2.1.2 Pilihan "tidak melakukan apa pun" ................................................................... 8 2.1.3 –Pengelolaan banjir berdasarkan daerah tangkapan versus pengelolaan banjir setempat ....................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.4 Pendekatan teknik versus pendekatan nonteknik ............................................ 9 2.1.5 Pemilihan lokasi-lokasi pengerukan ................................................................. 9 2.2 Desain teknik ........................................................................................................ 10 2.2.1 Kapasitas desain aliran.................................................................................. 10 2.2.2 Teknologi pengerukan ................................................................................... 10 2.2.3 Sampah ......................................................................................................... 10 2.2.4 Pilihan-pilihan untuk pengangkutan ............................................................... 11 2.2.5 Pilihan-pilihan pembuangan material hasil kerukan ....................................... 11 2.3 Pembuatan Kontrak Konstruksi dan Pengawasan ................................................ 12 2.3.1 Pendekatan Menyeluruh ................................................................................ 12 2.3.2 Integrasi isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial........................................................... 13 3 Pengaturan institusional dan kontrak ........................................................................... 13 3.1 Institusi-institusi utama.......................................................................................... 14 3.1.1 Komite Pengarah ........................................................................................... 14 3.1.2 PMU .............................................................................................................. 14 3.1.3 PIU ................................................................................................................ 15 3.1.4 Panel Tenaga Ahli ......................................................................................... 15 3.1.5 Konsultan Pengawasan (Supervision Consultant/SC).................................... 15 3.1.6 Kontraktor ...................................................................................................... 17 3.1.7 BPLHD DKI.................................................................................................... 17 3.1.8 Bank Dunia .................................................................................................... 18 3.2 Pendekatan pembuatan kontrak Pelelangan......................................................... 18 3.2.1 Pendekatan menyeluruh ................................................................................ 18 3.2.2 Pendekatan terperinci terhadap pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial .............. 18 4 Penyempurnaan desain teknik ..................................................................................... 19 5 Informasi tambahan tentang lingkungan dan sosial...................................................... 21 5.1 Gambaran Umum ................................................................................................. 21 5.2 Isu-isu sosial dan masyarakat............................................................................... 22 5.3 Informasi rona lingkungan..................................................................................... 22 5.3.1 Kualitas sedimen ........................................................................................... 22 5.3.2 Lalu lintas ...................................................................................................... 22 5.3.3 Kebisingan..................................................................................................... 23 5.3.4 Kualitas udara................................................................................................ 23 5.3.5 Kualitas air..................................................................................................... 23 5.3.6 Lingkungan hayati.......................................................................................... 23 5.3.7 Kesimpulan.................................................................................................... 23 6 Fase 1 penilaian lingkungan dan penanggulangan ...................................................... 23 6.1 Periode prakonstruksi ........................................................................................... 24 6.2 Jangka waktu konstruksi....................................................................................... 24 6.2.1 Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial............................................... 24 6.2.2 Persepsi dan interaksi masyarakat ................................................................ 24 6.2.3 Lapangan kerja setempat............................................................................... 25 6.2.4 Hidraulika....................................................................................................... 25 i
6.2.5 Tumpahan material hasil kerukan .................................................................. 25 6.2.6 Kualitas udara................................................................................................ 27 6.2.7 Kebisingan..................................................................................................... 28 6.2.8 Lalu lintas ...................................................................................................... 28 6.2.9 Kualitas sedimen ........................................................................................... 31 6.2.10 Sampah ......................................................................................................... 33 6.3 Periode Pascapembangunan................................................................................ 34 6.3.1 Masyarakat .................................................................................................... 35 6.3.2 Pengelolaan Sampah dan Pengerukan.......................................................... 35 Lampiran 1 Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial Kontraktor .......................... 37 Lampiran 2 Matriks Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan JUFMP Fase 1 ........... 45
Daftar Tabel Tabel 1-1 Uraian Kanal-Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal, dan Kolam-Kolam Penampungan......... 7 Tabel 4-1 Paket Kontrak JUFMP Fase 1 dan Fase 2 .......................................................... 21 Tabel 6-1 Pengujian kualitas sedimen untuk lokasi-lokasi JUFMP Fase 1 .......................... 32 Tabel A - 1 Matriks EMP JUFMP Tahap 1 ................................................................... 45
Daftar Gambar Gambar 3-1 Pengaturan Institusional dan Kontrak.............................................................. 14
ii
Glosarium Nama-nama Institusi - Fungsional BBWS – CC Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane BPLHD DKI Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah Pemerintah DKI Jakarta DGCK Directorate General Human Settlements (Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya), Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum DGWR Directorate General Water Resources (Direktorat Jenderal Sumber Daya Air), Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum DKI Jakarta Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta PMU Project Management Unit (Unit Pengelola Proyek) PIU Project Implementation Unit (Unit Pelaksana Proyek) Dokumen terkait lingkungan: AMDAL Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan, yang mencakup ANDAL dan RKL/RPL ANDAL Analisis Dampak Lingkungan RKL Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan RPL Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan Catatan: Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Indonesia, Rencana Permukiman Kembali (Resettlement Plan/RP) tidak merupakan bagian dari dokumen-dokumen AMDAL; Rencana Permukiman Kembali dibuat secara terpisah dan merupakan tanggung jawab pemerintah daerah. Untuk JUFMP, Rencana Permukiman Kembali merupakan tanggung jawab pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Istilah khusus proyek JUFMP Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta). [dalam berbagai dokumen proyek, digunakan dengan arti yang sama dengan istilah ‘Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative (JEDI)’ Fase 1
Rangkaian Subproyek-subproyek untuk dilaksanakan pada tahap awal dari keseluruhan JUFMP. Lokasi Fase 1 dipilih karena nilai penting terkait dengan pemulihan banjir, dan juga karena tidak memelukan pemukiman kembali. Dokumen AMDAL telah disiapkan untuk rangkaian kegiatan-kegiatan Fase 1.
Fase 2
Lokasi-lokasi proyek lainnya yang akan dikerjakan dalam JUFMP
RPF
Resettlement Policy Framework (Kerangka Kerja Kebijakan Pemukiman Kembali); sebuah dokumen kebijakan yang harus diikuti oleh JUFMP apabila terdapat kegiatan pemukiman kembali yang terkait dengan proyek tersebut. Pemukiman kembali tidak akan dilakukan pada proyek Fase 1. RPF disusun berdasarkan kebijakan/praktik Bank Dunia dan undang-undang Indonesia.
Lokasi proyek Komponen-komponen tersendiri yang diidentifikasi dalam JUFMP; baik berupa sebuah saluran air/sungai/kanal banjir dengan panjang yang ditentukan, atau sebuah waduk dengan ukuran yang ditentukan. Desain-desain teknik telah dibuat berdasarkan masing-masing lokasi; 1
penyusunan AMDAL telah dilakukan atau akan dilakukan untuk lokasi proyek secara tersendiri. Istilah yang muncul dari aspek-aspek Kontrak dan pelaksanaan Kontraktor
Kontraktor yang memiliki kontrak di bawah PIU yang akan melaksanakan pekerjaan pengerukan, pembuatan tanggul, pengangkutan material kerukan, dan kegiatankegiatan yang terkait JUFMP.
ESMP Kontraktor yang Terperinci Sebuah Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (Environmental and Social Management Plan/ESMP) yang akan disusun oleh Kontraktor setelah diberikan Kontrak, dan praktik-praktik Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (Environmental and Social Management/ESM) yang harus diikuti. Rencana tersebut harus dibuat berdasarkan syarat-syarat Kontrak, AMDAL, Laporan Tambahan, dan laporan lainnya yang disebutkan dalam dokumen tender. Rencana tersebut juga harus mematuhi semua peraturan terkait. Konsultasi dengan masyarakat wajib dilakukan sebelum ESMP diserahkan untuk mendapatkan persetujuan resmi. Rencana ESM Kontraktor Istilah umum yang digunakan untuk mencakup “ESMP Kontraktor” dan “Rencana ESM Terperinci Kontraktor”. ESMP Awal Kontraktor
Rencana ESM yang harus disusun sebagai bagian dari Penawaran Teknis. Rencana tersebut harus memuat isi yang serupa dengan ESMP Kontraktor yang Terperinci, tetapi dengan tingkat perincian yang lebih rendah. Konsultasi dengan masyarakat “disarankan” untuk dilakukan sebagai bagian dari penyusunannya.
ESM
Environmental and Social Lingkungan dan Sosial lingkungan dan sosial)
Konsultan Pengawasan
Konsultan yang dikontrak untuk PMU. Konsultan Pengawasan akan melaksanakan pengawasan seharihari atas Kontrak-Kontrak konstruksi – peran yang biasanya dikenali sebagai “Ahli Teknik” (sebagai perwakilan dari prinsipal). Konsultan Pengawasan juga memiliki peran yang substantif dalam pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial, dengan fokus utama pada ESM Kontraktor, tetapi juga mencakup tugas-tugas spesifik terkait dengan komunikasi/pengaduan masyarakat, pemukiman kembali (untuk beberapa kegiatan pada lokasi Fase 2), dan pemantuan serta pelaporan kepada BPLHD DKI atas nama para pengusul proyek (yakni, PIU). 2
Management/Pengelolaan (termasuk pemantauan
3
Ringkasan AMDAL untuk lokasi Fase 1 Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta (Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project, selanjutnya disingkat dengan “JUFMP”) dibuat pada akhir tahun 2009 dan telah disetujui oleh BPLHD DKI/Komisi AMDAL pada tanggal 30 Maret 2010. Tujuan dari laporan tambahan tentang pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial untuk kegiatan-kegiatan dalam Fase 1 JUFMP ini adalah: (i) memutakhirkan AMDAL karena persiapan proyek telah berlangsung sejak AMDAL awal disetujui, dan (ii) setelah dilakukannya tinjauan Bank Dunia atas AMDAL yang awal, memastikan diperhatikannya kekhawatiran-kekhawatiran tambahan untuk mematuhi Penilaian Lingkungan OP 4.01 Bank Dunia. Pengaturan-pengaturan institusional dilakukan berdasarkan Unit Pengelola Proyek (Project Management Unit/PMU) yang mewakili kepentingan-kepentingan gabungan dari ketiga Unit Pelaksana Proyek (Project Implementation Unit/PIU) sebagai “para pemilik”/para pengelola Sungai/Kanal dan waduk-waduk JUFMP. Melalui PIU, kontrak-kontrak akan dibuat dengan Kontraktor pengerukan dan pengangkutan material kerukan JUFMP, pembangunan dan/atau rehabilitasi beberapa tanggul dan kegiatan terkait lainnya. Kontrak tambahan juga akan dibuat antara PMU dengan Konsultan Pengawas (Supervision Consultant/SC) yang akan memiliki peran terpadu sebagai “Ahli Teknik” yang mengawasi Kontraktor dan melaksanakan pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial atas nama PMU dan PIU-PIU. Suatu pendekatan untuk mengikuti standar-standar internasional tentang pembuatan kontrak konstruksi telah diterapkan. Standar internasional didasarkan pada Ketentuan-Ketentuan Kontrak Umum dan Khusus Bank Dunia, rancanganrancangan terperinci dalam menentukan pekerjaan-pekerjaan yang diperlukan, pembuatan Rencana-Rencana Kerja Pendahuluan Kontraktor oleh para peserta tender, kemudian Rencana Kerja Terperinci oleh kontraktor pemenang tender. Pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial (ESM) yang wajib dilakukan oleh kontraktor harus mengikuti pendekatan ini, beserta Rencana-Rencana ESM Pendahuluan Kontraktor yang diperlukan dan kemudian Rencana-Rencana ESM Kontraktor yang Terperinci yang diserahkan dalam penawaran dan setelah diberikannya kontrak. Rencana-Rencana ESM Kontraktor diperlukan untuk mematuhi AMDAL, Laporan Tambahan ini, dokumen-dokumen ESM lainnya yang merupakan bagian dari paket tender, dan semua peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku. Rencana ESM Kontraktor yang Terperinci harus diinformasikan melalui konsultasi kontraktormasyarakat. Rencana-Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMP) merupakan tambahan yang terintegrasi dengan Rencana Kerja. Konsultasi masyarakat tambahan dan studi-studi lapangan yang dilaksanakan sejak disetujuinya AMDAL Fase 1 menguatkan temuan-temuan dari kegiatan AMDAL Fase 1. Isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial berjalin erat dengan persepsi masyarakat dan interaksi mereka terhadap proyek tersebut. Beberapa syarat dasar yang berlaku (misalnya, kebisingan, kualitas udara dan air tertentu) telah berada di atas standarstandar setempat. Kemacetan lalu lintas telah sangat disadari di Jakarta, dan meskipun peraturan-peraturan daerah terkait dengan isu-isu lalu lintas telah dibuat, beberapa aspek, khususnya pembatasan transportasi berat untuk hanya dilakukan pada kegiatan malam hari dapat mengurangi kemacetan.
4
Terdapat dampak lanjutan yang nyata di tingkat masyarakat pada kegiatan pengerukan dan pengangkutan material ke truk berlangsung. Tetap terjadi kekhawatiran-kekhawatiran masyarakat tentang “penerapan yang benar atas pengaman lingkungan dan sosial”. Pemantauan kualitas sedimen terperinci tambahan di lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 menguatkan temuan sebelumnya bahwa material kerukan tidak ditemukan limbah berbahaya (limbah B3- Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun). Menurut penilaian kesehatan tidak ditemukan adanya kekhawatiran material kerukan masih sesuai standar (dengan mempertimbangkan pengembangan yang diusulkan) di lokasi pembuangan di Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (Confined Disposal Facility/CDF) Ancol. Jumlah sampah dari material kerukan yang akan diangkut ke Tempat Pengolahan Sampah Bantar Gebang, Bekasi sekitar 95.000 m3 (Fase 1 dan Fase 2) dari perkiraan total material kerukan sebesar 3,4 juta m3 yang akan dikeruk dan diangkut ke CDF Ancol. Masyarakat berulang kali mengungkapkan perlunya pengurangan banjir melalui JUFMP dan mereka dapat menerima bahwa akan terjadi gangguan jangka pendek terhadap masyarakat untuk mencapai tujuan-tujuan tersebut. Namun demikian, masyarakat juga meminta diadakan konsultasi-konsultasi agar kinerja proyek terkait dengan lingkungan dan sosial ditingkatkan di atas berbagai kinerja yang telah dialami dalam proyek-proyek sebelumnya. Berdasarkan penilaian ini, disusun Laporan Tambahan EMP. Untuk melengkapi melengkapi ANDAL, RKL dan RPL, dan terutama berfokus pada pengelolaan dan pemantauan isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial selama konstruksi. Tanggung jawabtanggung jawab disederhanakan dan disesuaikan dengan pengaturan-pengaturan institusional yang ada. Perhatian besar diberikan pada konsultasi masyakarat dan mengembangkan kesepakatan-kesepakatan antara Kontraktor dengan masyarakat pada isu-isu gangguan yang tidak dapat dihindari seperti kebisingan dan pengelolaan lalu lintas. Pada lokasi yang memerlukan tindakan penanggulangan seperti keselamatan, pencegahan tumpahan material kerukan dan debu sangat mungkin dilaksanakan, EMP dan dokumen kontrak lainnya mengharuskan tindakantindakan penanggulangan untuk diterapkan, dengan wewenangnya SC mewajibkan perbaikan segera dilakukan oleh Kontraktor atau melibatkan pihak ketiga. Sejalan dengan pendekatan pembuatan kontrak, banyak biaya yang masuk ke dalam harga satuan pengerukan dan pengangkutan material. Biaya-biaya tertentu telah diidentifikasi dan biaya-biaya yang mungkin timbul telah ditentukan untuk pos-pos utama berikut ini: 1) Rapat-rapat konsultasi kontraktor dengan masyarakat ($5.000); 2) Pemantauan kualitas sedimen oleh SC untuk memenuhi persyaratan BPLHD DKI ($15.000-30.000 – ditambah jumlah sementara untuk pengelolaan khusus apabila terdapat material berbahaya yang ditemukan kemudian); 3) Membangun dan mengoperasikan pusat informasi dan keluhan masyarakat di setiap lokasi proyek oleh SC ($50.000 lebih). Biaya-biaya yang sebenarnya akan bergantung pada penawaran-penawaran yang diajukan dalam tender.
5
1 Pendahuluan 1.1 Konteks 1. JUFMP disiapkan setelah terjadi banjir besar yang merendam Jakarta pada Februari 2007. JUFMP mencakup pengerukan sedimen di 11 Sungai/Kanal dan 4 waduk utama di Jakarta dan pengangkutan material kerukan ke lokasi pembuangan yang telah disiapkan dan disetujui oleh AMDAL, yang disebut dengan CDF Ancol. 2. Serangkaian lokasi dipilih sebagai pekerjaan-pekerjaan pada Fase 1, pada satu sisi karena adanya kebutuhan yang mendesak untuk menanggulangi banjir dan disisi lain diupayakan untuk tidak terjadi pemukiman kembali . AMDAL Fase 1 diserahkan kepada BPLHD DKI pada Desember 2009, dimutakhirkan dan diserahkan kembali pada Februari 2010, dan persetujuannya telah sampaikan melalui surat BPLHD DKI Jakarta tanggal 30 Maret 2010 setelah ada pertimbangan dari Komisi AMDAL sesuai dengan persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia. 3. Sejak Maret 2010, telah dilaksanakan kegiatan tambahan yang akan mempengaruhi rincian dari pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial JUFMP Fase 1: Pengelolaan proyek dan pengaturan institusional JUFMP menjadi lebih jelas. Uraian proyek JUFMP Fase 1 lebih sempurna seiring dilaksanakannya DED. Berdasarkan kontrak terpisah dengan PMU JUFMP, konsultan (PPA) dengan masukan internasional sedang mengerjakan aspek-aspek lingkungan dan sosial di lokasi-lokasi Fase 2, dengan berfokus untuk menyelaraskan dan memadukan secara erat aspek-aspek tersebut dengan aspek-aspek Fase 1. 1.2 Tujuan dan ruang lingkup Laporan Tambahan 4. Laporan tambahan ini menunjukkan bagaimana kegiatan-kegiatan yang dilaksanakan sejak disetujuinya AMDAL Fase 1 dapat mempengaruhi pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial dari kegiatan-kegiatan proyek Fase 1 JUFMP. Secara khusus, laporan ini membahas: Berbagai alternatif yang dipertimbangkan dan alasan atas rangkaian alternatif yang diutamakan Pengaturan-pengaturan institusional dan kontrak Implikasi-implikasi desain terperinci Temuan-temuan dari kajian-kajian lingkungan yang dilakukan secara terusmenerus Penilaian dan pengelolaan lingkungan sebagaimana disajikan dalam AMDAL Fase 1, yang didasarkan pada intervensi-intervensi yang diusulkan, menentukan apakah setiap perubahan mungkin diperlukan. Yang diikuti dengan sebuah rencana pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan tambahan untuk melengkapi AMDAL Fase 1 yang disajikan dalam Lampiran 3. 5. Penting untuk ditekankan bahwa meskipun terdapat beberapa perubahan kecil pada batas-batas fisik dari kegiatan-kegiatan proyek Fase 1 JUFMP, tidak memerlukan pemukiman kembali pada Fase 1. Kegiatan-kegiatan proyek Fase 1 dan Fase 2 tercantum dalam Tabel 1-1 di bawah ini.
6
Tabel 1-1 Uraian Kanal-Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal, dan Kolam-Kolam Penampungan Tahap
Paket
1 (DKI) 1
2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK)
4 (DKI)
2
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR)
Lokasi
Saluran Air CiliwingGunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Drain (termasuk tepi laut) Sungai Sunter Bawah Catatan 1
Sungai Cideng Thamrin (saluran air Jalan Lingkar) Sungai SentiongSunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (saluran air Pembuangan) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Sungai Tanjungan Sungai Angke Bawah Banjir Kanal Barat (tepi laut) Sungai Sunter Atas Catatan 1
7 (DKI)
Perkiraan Pengerukan Kedalam Volume Volume Pengerukan Material Limbah (m) Kerukan Padat 3 3 (m ) (m ) 1,90 ~ 2,70 156.970 3.140
Pekerjaan Tanggul (m)
4.832
2,20 ~ 3,10
99.490
1.250
1.905
1,50 ~ 3,50
1.225.500
22.510
4.600
1,60 ~ 2,30
399.250
19.970
1.800
0,60 ~ 2,30
33.230
810
2.570
0,50 ~ 2,10
140.150
7.010
3.865
1,30 ~ 2,10
413.400
10.340
5.000
1,00 ~ 2,10 0,70 ~ 3,30 1,10 ~ 1,90 2,00 ~ 3,60 1,70 ~ 2,50
48.200 51.000 11.500 248.000 350.080
1.210 1.280 290 6.200 8.760
3.057 305 1.092 821 1.190
1,80 ~ 3,40
82.000
4.100
1.850
Grogol –Sekretaris Sungai Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Sungai Krukut Cideng
0,70 ~ 2,30 0,60 ~ 1,60
40.500 100.000
1.020 5.000
2.391 2.882
0,70 ~ 0,80
28.700
1.440
1.658
Sungai Krukut Lama
0,50 ~ 0,80
14.900
750
2.400
Catatan 2
Catatan 2
3.441.870 95.080 42.218 Untuk tujuan pembuatan kontrak, Kanal Banjir Sunter telah dibagi menjadi dua subpaket – Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas dan Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah. Catatan 2 Untuk tujuan pembuatan kontrak, Saluran Air Krukut telah dibagi menjadi dua subpaket – Saluran Air Krukut Cideng dan Saluran Air Krukut Lama Catatan 1
7
2 Alternatif-Alternatif 6. Bagian ini menggabungkan evaluasi terhadap alternatif-alternatif yang dilakukan di berbagai tahapan formulasi proyek yang berbeda. Keputusan tidak dibuat secara terpisah, karena terdapat banyak keterkaitan – contohnya, pilihan metode pengerukan, pengangkutan material hasil kerukan, dan lokasi-lokasi pembuangan material , semuanya saling terkait. Sementara laporan tambahan ini fokus pada lokasi-lokasi pengerukan JUFMP, beberapa acuan kepada lokasi CDF Ancol karena keterkaitan-keterkaitan tersebut. 2.1 Keputusan Tingkat Strategis 2.1.1 Latar Belakang 7. Banjir di Jakarta telah menjadi masalah pada beberapa dekade akibat dari gabungan luasnya dataran rendah, disertai dengan keadaan-keadaan yang memperparah seperti saluran-saluran drainase tersumbat sedimen, permukiman informal yang tumbuh di atas drainase, penurunan permukaan tanah, penggundulan daerah tangkapan air, dan meningkatnya intensitas pengembangan di berbagai wilayah. Banjir di Jakarta diakibatkan oleh: Curah hujan dengan daerah tangkapan air yang luas, dengan saluran air dibebani membawa arus deras dari daerah tangkapan air menengah-atas melalui wilayah Jakarta ke laut. Meluapnya sungai yang membanjiri Jakarta. Curah hujan terbatas dalam wilayah perkotaan, dengan banjir yang diakibatkan oleh tersumbatnya aliran air setempat ke saluran air yang dapat membawa air ke laut secara efisien, serta dikarenakan meluapnya saluransaluran air. Faktor daya tampung juga mempengaruhi. Intrusi air dari laut, dengan banyak bagian wilayah dengan ketinggian di bawah permukaan laut khususnya di Jakarta Utara. Seringkali dua buah faktor atau lebih muncul secara bersamaan. 8. Dampak-dampak banjir telah didokumentasikan dengan baik, termasuk dislokasi sosial secara signifikan, biaya ekonomi yang tinggi, dan terkadang kematian yang diakibatkan oleh banjir. Lingkungan-lingkungan yang kurang bersih dan kesehatan masyarakat yang buruk juga semakin diperparah oleh banjir. 9. Selama bertahun-tahun, berbagai kajian dan penyelidikan telah dilakukan, yang menyatakan diperlukannya paket terpadu yang terdiri atas tindakan-tindakan struktural (teknik) dan nonstruktural, termasuk pengelolaan daerah tangkapan air yang lebih baik, perbaikan penggunaan lahan yang mendukung pengelolaan banjir, pembangunan saluran-saluran pengalihan utama (seperti Kanal Banjir Timur yang baru-baru ini diselesaikan) dan waduk-waduk, penanganan air limbah dan sampah yang semakin baik, pengelolaan air tanah yang lebih baik dan yang paling penting, penguatan institusional dan peningkatan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional. 2.1.2 Pilihan "tidak melakukan apa pun" 10. Pada suatu tingkatan strategis, pilihan “tidak melakukan apa pun” adalah membiarkan banjir dan dampak-dampaknya yang merugikan tetap berlanjut dan memburuk. Hal tersebut jelas tidak dapat diterima. 11. Terkait dengan proyek JUFMP yang diusulkan, alternatif “tidak melakukan apa pun” pada dasarnya memperburuk situasi saluran-saluran drainase yang tersumbat dan dampak-dampak sosial-ekonomi dari banjir yang sering terjadi. Hal ini bukanlah situasi yang diinginkan oleh Pemerintah Indonesia, Pemerintah DKI 8
Jakarta, dan masyarakat yang terkena dampak. Sebagai tambahan, sedimen di jalan-jalan air akan terus terbawa secara tidak terkendali ke Teluk Jakarta. 2.1.3 –Pengelolaan banjir berdasarkan daerah tangkapan versus pengelolaan banjir setempat 12. Untuk tujuan-tujuan dari subbagian pengelolaan banjir mengacu pada kegiatan yang sangat besar seperti pembangunan saluran-saluran pengalihan utama yang baru untuk mengurangi banjir di wilayah perkotaan yang diakibatkan oleh hujan di daerah tangkapan air menengah dan atas. Pengelolaan banjir setempat mengacu pada tindakan-tindakan yang dapat dilaksanakan pada tingkat daerah untuk memperbaiki penyaluran air hujan setempat secara efisien ke kanalkanal/saluran-saluran air setempat, dan kemudian ke laut. Meskipun mungkin terjadi perdebatan tentang prioritas relatif, terdapat kesepakatan bersama bahwa dua pilihan tersebut tidak saling terpisah, keduanya diperlukan sebagai bagian dari suatu paket terpadu. 13. JUFMP dibuat berdasarkan bagian yang lebih rendah pada daerah tangkapan air. Sementara proyek tersebut fokus pada pengelolaan banjir setempat, kegiatankegiatan proyek JUFMP akan meningkatkan kemampuan kanal-kanal banjir yang telah terbentuk tetapi kinerjanya belum sesuai harapan untuk lebih secara efisien menyalurkan banjir dari daerah tangkapan atas ke laut. Sebagai suatu proyek pengerukan “darurat”, JUFMP tidak dirancang untuk menangani perencanaan dan pelaksanaan yang sangat luas yang diperlukan. 2.1.4 Pendekatan teknik versus pendekatan nonteknik 14. Pekerjaan-pekerjaan teknik untuk tujuan-tujuan dari subbagian ini ditentukan sebagai proyek-proyek pembangunan teknik dan operasional biasa seperti peningkatan kapasitas penyaluran dari saluran-saluran air, pompa-pompa, bendungan-bendungan/dinding-dinding laut. Sebaliknya, pendekatan nonteknik menangani aspek-aspek seperti mengubah perilaku masyarakat (misalnya, mencegah menumpuknya sampah di saluran air) dan perencanaan penggunaan lahan serta pelaksanaannya untuk memindahkan masyarakat dari wilayah-wilayah rawan banjir. 15. JUFMP fokus pada pendekatan teknik yang segera menghasilkan manfaat. Namun akan mendukung pendekatan nonteknik yang jauh lebih luas dan kesempatan-kesempatan yang dilaksanakan melalui JUFMP untuk menyoroti isu-isu yang lebih luas. Sebagai contoh, pengelolaan sampah di lokasi-lokasi pengerukan dan di sekitar lokasi-lokasi pengerukan akan menunjukkan pengurangan sumbatan di saluran-saluran air dan manfaat lain dari pengelolaan yang tepat, dan dengan demikian memberikan contoh-contoh praktis tentang apa yang dapat dicapai. 2.1.5 Pemilihan lokasi-lokasi pengerukan 16. Kajian-kajian simulasi hidraulika JUFMP telah merekomendasikan rehabilitasi atas sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta sesuai kapasitas rancangan awal dan suatu sistem pemeliharaan rutin sebagai langkah pertama yang paling bermanfaat untuk penanggulangan banjir di Jakarta. Bagian-bagian dari sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta yang termasuk dalam proyek tersebut telah diidentifikasi oleh Pemerintah sangat membutuhkan rehabilitasi dan peningkatan kapasitas aliran secara mendesak. Penentuan prioritas dibuat berdasarkan kajian-kajian sebelumnya dalam Proyek Pengelolaan Lingkungan Bagian Barat Jawa (Western Java Environmental 9
Management Project/WJEMP) dan beragam kajian sebelumnya tentang pengendalian dan penanggulangan banjir di wilayah Jakarta. Pencakupan proyek tersebut juga mempertimbangkan disertakannya semua institusi yang bertanggungjawab untuk mendorong dan membangun sistem pemeliharaan rutin yang berkesinambungan secara jangka panjang. Proyek tersebut diharapkan memberikan dampak-dampak yang menguntungkan dalam hal koordinasi institusi awal, teknologi dan metode-metode pengerukan, pembuangan material kerukan, praktik-praktik lingkungan yang baik dan pemukiman kembali yang adil. Oleh karena itu, kompleksitas-kompleksitas teknis, lingkungan, dan sosial dari pekerjaanpekerjaan tersebut juga dipertimbangkan dalam pencakupan dan pentahapan pelaksanaan proyek untuk meningkatkan peluang keberhasilan. 2.2 Desain teknik 17. Rancangan pengerukan dan teknologi yang terkait yang diperlukan untuk proyek tersebut mengintegrasikan beberapa pertimbangan, khususnya batasanbatasan yang terdapat pada lokasi-lokasi itu. 2.2.1 Kapasitas desain aliran 18. Berada di dalam wilayah perkotaan yang padat, kegiatan pengerukan mau tidak mau akan menimbulkan gangguan terhadap penduduk setempat, dan dalam beberapa kejadian, terhadap pemukiman yang telah berkembang di tepian saluran air, dan bahkan di atas saluran air tersebut. Keputusan dibuat untuk meminimalkan dampak terhadap pemukiman-pemukiman yang sejalan dengan kebutuhan untuk meningkatkan aliran masuk dan kapasitas penampungan. Rancangan secara umum mempertimbangkan implikasi-implikasi yang terjadi sekali dalam seratus tahun pada kanal-kanal yang lebih besar, dan peristiwa yang terjadi sekali dalam 25 tahun untuk saluran air yang lebih kecil. 2.2.2 Teknologi pengerukan 19. Teknologi-teknologi pengerukan secara umum dapat dikelompokkan sebagai jenis backhoe/clamshell dan pengerukan dengan penyedotan (dengan atau tanpa kepala-kepala pemotong). Pengerukan dengan penyedotan tidak digunakan karena tidak cocok dengan besarnya limbah sampah dalam sedimen. Backhoe beralaskan ponton menjadi teknologi yang dipilih karena sebagian besar kegiatan pengerukan dapat dilakukan dari atas air, daripada harus mengganggu bidang lebar di sepanjang saluran air yang sedang dikeruk. 2.2.3 Sampah 20. Pemisahan sampah dari material kerukan dipertimbangkan untuk dilakukan, terkait dengan jumlah material yang akan dipisahkan, diperlukan penyortiran mekanis atau manual. Pemeriksaan atas penimbunan di area-area lain sebelumnya dengan material kerukan menunjukkan bahwa metode-metode pembuangan dan penggunaan lahan pascapenimbunan tidak akan terhambat dengan pemisahan benda-benda berukuran besar dari material kerukan. 21. Penyortiran di lokasi-lokasi pengerukan sendiri dipilih karena akan membatasi potensi kemacetan di lokasi CDF Ancol, dapat menciptakan potensi lapangan kerja sementara, dan terintegrasi dengan kegiatan-kegiatan lain untuk menjaga lokasi 10
pengerukan dan lingkungan sekitarnya “bersih dan rapi” selama dilaksanakan pengerukan. Pemisahan mekanik telah diuji, tetapi harus ditempatkan di lokasi CDF Ancol, dan sifat material, kebutuhan air tambahan dan kesulitan-kesulitan operasional tidak menunjukkan adanya keuntungan. 22. Dengan demikian, metode pemisahan secara manual yang diusulkan untuk benda-benda berukuran besar (dan kemungkinan pemisahan opsional atas bendabenda kecil yang dapat didaur ulang) di lokasi pengerukan telah diterapkan. Lahan penimbunan umum yang beroperasi yang telah ada milik Pemerintah DKI Jakarta di Bantar Gebang menawarkan satu-satunya lokasi pembuangan yang layak dan aman untuk sampah. 2.2.4 Pilihan-pilihan untuk pengangkutan 23. Pengangkutan mempertimbangkan tiga pilihan utama – hidraulis (pemompaan), tongkang, dan truk, memadukan ketiganya dengan teknologiteknologi pengerukan serta dengan lokasi pembuangan yang dipilih. Pemompaan dianggap tidak sesuai karena jumlah sampah kemungkinan akan menyebabkan penyumbatan. Hal tersebut akan sangat mempengaruhi setiap program pengerukan. Pengangkutan dengan tongkang tidak akan dapat dilakukan di sebagian besar lokasi karena jembatan-jembatan dan jalur-jalur sempit di atas saluran-saluran air menghalangi akses ke laut; namun demikian, hal tersebut dapat menjadi suatu metode yang dipilih kontraktor untuk bagian-bagian rendah dari jalan-jalan air yang lebih besar. Pengangkutan dengan truk menjadi satu-satunya alternatif untuk sebagian besar lokasi sehingga metode inilah yang dipilih, dengan asumsi bahwa penggunaan metode tersebut di semua lokasi dapat menandakan potensi situasi kasus buruk terkait dengan dampak lalu lintas. 2.2.5 Pilihan-pilihan pembuangan material hasil kerukan 24. Untuk pembuangan sedimen yang dikeruk, beberapa pilihan dan alternatif telah dipertimbangkan berdasarkan hasil-hasil uji sedimen, pengalamanpengalaman di masa lalu, alasan-alasan teknis dan keuangan, serta peluang pekerjaan pengembangan proyek, sebagai bagian dari proses pembuatan keputusan yang mengarah pada pemilihan CDF Ancol sebagai tempat pembuangan akhir untuk material tidak berbahaya. Sebagai contoh, selama operasi pengerukan terdahulu, material galian biasanya dibuang di tanah kosong yang dimiliki oleh Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Dalam beberapa kasus, sedimen-sedimen dibuang ke tanggul-tanggul dan tidak dibuang dengan cara lain, yang menyebabkan lumpur kembali masuk ke saluran air. JUFMP memberikan kesempatan pertama bagi Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dan Pemerintah Indonesia untuk mengkoordinasikan dan membuang hasil kerukan di sebuah area pembuangan yang ditentukan dan dikelola, serta untuk menggunakan prinsip-prinsip pengelolaan dengan praktik yang baik. 25. Pemerintah Indonesia telah melakukan penilaian atas beberapa lokasi pembuangan dan alternatif pengelolaan. Pada awalnya Pemerintah DKI Jakarta mengusulkan beberapa lokasi berbasis tanah yang tersedia, yang tersebar di seluruh penjuru kota. Lokasi-lokasi yang diusulkan tersebut ditolak karena kapasitas pembuangannya yang kecil, isu-isu pemukiman kembali, isu-isu estetika dan bau, serta kesulitan-kesulitan dalam hal pengawasan. Tiga lokasi pembuangan berbasis 11
laut juga dipertimbangkan, yaitu di Muara Kali Adem (MKA), Marunda, dan Ancol Barat, sebelum diambilnya keputusan dipilihnya Ancol. 26. Ancol secara strategis dipilih karena kesiapannya cepat, ukuran dan kapasitasnya (mampu menerima hampir tiga kali lipat volume material hasil kerukan dari proyek tersebut, atau kira-kira 12 juta m3). Penting untuk dicatat bahwa Ancol juga mempunyai keuntungan karena merupakan suatu proyek reklamasi secara terus-menerus yang telah disetujui. Pemanfaatan Ancol dianggap sebagi suatu skenario yang ‘sama-sama menguntungkan'. Dua lokasi berbasis laut lainnya dianggap akan harus dibangun terlebih dahulu, dengan biaya yang besar serta mengakibatkan penggeseran lebih banyak area dekat pantai dengan dampak lingkungan tambahan. Pada saat bersamaan, pemanfaatan material hasil kerukan yang tidak berbahaya untuk reklamasi Ancol akan mengurangi dampak negatif dari penggunaan material lainnya (pasir) yang diperoleh dari penggalian-penggalian. 2.3 Pembuatan Kontrak Konstruksi dan Pengawasan 2.3.1 Pendekatan Menyeluruh 27.
Pembuatan kontrak konstruksi harus dapat: Mencapai hasil teknik yang diinginkan. Memungkinkan pengalaman kontraktor konstruksi tercermin dalam rencanarencana kerja perinci dan pelaksanaannya. Memastikan bahwa kepentingan-kepentingan pokok diperhatikan. Untuk JUFMP, hal tersebut termasuk penerapan pengaman lingkungan dan sosial dengan benar. Menghasilkan tender-tender yang hemat biaya. Memungkinkan pengawasan dan audit kinerja secara efektif.
28. Dalam kerangka kerja ini, terdapat alternatif-alternatif yang bertentangan sebagai berikut: Menjelaskan kepada kontraktor “bagaimana persisnya” pekerjaan tersebut akan dilaksanakan. Sebagai contoh, peralatan teknologi apa yang harus digunakan, bagaimana cara menyiapkan lokasi dan melakukan pengaturanpengaturan mobilisasi, bagaimana cara dan di mana dapat mengakses lokasilokasi pekerjaan, serta jadwal yang tepat. Hal ini mau tidak mau mengalihkan banyak tanggung jawab kepada prinsipal dan biasanya menghasilkan tenderberbiaya tinggi serta lebih banyak kemungkinan klaim-klaim selanjutnya. Menentukan hasil teknik, dan mengizinkan kontraktor untuk menentukan bagaimana cara untuk mencapai hasil tersebut. Biaya-biaya tender umumnya lebih rendah dan lebih banyak tanggung jawab pada kontraktor. Namun demikian masih terdapat risiko bahwa beberapa kepentingan prinsipal mungkin terabaikan secara sebagian. 29. Terkait dengan JUFMP dan karena sangat lazim dalam pembuatan kontrak internasional, pendekatan kedua lebih disukai dan telah dipilih namun dengan pengaman-pengaman tertentu untuk memastikan bahwa kepentingan-kepentingan prinsipal telah diperhatikan dan dilaksanakan dengan sebagaimana mestinya. Sebagai hasilnya:
12
Dokumen kontrak keseluruhan dan pendekatan tender difokuskan pada pencapaian kelima “hasil” yang diinginkan sebagaimana disebutkan pada awal subbagian ini. Kontraktor akan memiliki fleksibilitas, dalam batasan-batasan yang dijelaskan dalam kontrak, untuk mengembangkan rencana-rencana kerja sehingga memperinci “cara pelaksanaan pembangunan”. Pengawasan secara ketat, termasuk prapersetujuan yang diperlukan atas rencana kerja sebelum pelaksanaan, dimasukkan ke dalam proses tersebut.
2.3.2 Integrasi isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial 30.
Untuk aspek-aspek teknik, terdapat pembedaan yang mendasar antara: Menjelaskan kepada kontraktor secara persis bagaimana cara mencapai hasil-hasil lingkungan dan sosial yang diinginkan. Mewajibkan hasil-hasil yang diinginkan berdasarkan kontrak, di mana kontraktor memiliki beberapa fleksibilitas untuk menggunakan pengetahuan dan pengalaman untuk mencapai hasil-hasil tersebut.
31. Lebih lanjut, terdapat persyaratan hukum bahwa AMDAL yang disetujui harus diikuti. Pendekatan yang terakhirlah yang diambil, tetapi dengan disertakannya pengaman-pengaman yang sangat substansial untuk menjamin bahwa pengamanpengaman lingkungan dan sosial yang diinginkan/disyaratkan tersebut ditetapkan dan terintegrasi secara penuh dengan pendekatan pembuatan kontrak. Hal tersebut menghasilkan aspek-aspek penting berikut ini: Daripada menggunakan peran tradisional dari “Ahli Teknik”, proyek JUFMP akan mempunyai SC yang tanggung jawab teknik maupun lingkungan/sosial. Sementara titik-titik akses dan area-area lay down pembangunan sementara tidak akan ditentukan secara umum sampai dilaksanakannya tender dan secara terperinci sampai setelah diberikannya kontrak pembangunan, terdapat kewajiban mutlak bagi Kontraktor untuk berkonsultasi dengan masyarakat setempat untuk memastikan bahwa akan terdapat sekecil mungkin gangguan terhadap masyarakat. 3 Pengaturan institusional dan kontrak 32. Pengaturan institusional dan kontrak telah masuk ke fase di mana peranperan dan tanggung jawab-tanggung jawab atas pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial untuk Fase 1 (dan kemudian untuk Fase 2) telah ditentukan dengan jelas. Pengaturan-pengaturan institusional dan pelaksanaan adalah sebagai berikut.
13
Gambar 3-1 Pengaturan Institusional dan Kontrak Pelaksana Proyek
Kegiatan-Kegiatan Proyek
Komite Pengarah Bersama BAPPENAS, Kementerian Keuangan, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum, DKI
Konsultasi Pemantauan dan Evaluasi Independen
Melaksanakan FMIS Panel Tenaga Ahli
Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir Jakarta
Konsultasi Pengawasan
Tinjauan dan RekomendasiRekomendasi Proyek Independen
Melaksanakan
PIU – DKI Dinas Pekerjaan Umum DKI
Kontrak-Kontrak Pekerjaan 2 Kontrak/9 Lokasi
Melaksanakan
Bantuan Teknis
Kontrak-Kontrak Pekerjaan 2 Kontrak/3 Lokasi
Pemantauan dan Evaluasi Independen
Melaksanakan
Kontrak-Kontrak Pekerjaan 3 Kontrak/3 Lokasi
Bantuan Teknis
PIU - DGCK Unit Kerja MSW Pengembangan Prasarana dan Sanitasi untuk
Melaksanakan
Mengawasi
PIU - DGWR Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane
Mengawasi
Mengawasi
Melaksanakan
Pemantauan dan Evaluasi Independen
PMU Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum (Biro Perencanaan dan Kerjasama Luar Negeri), DGWR, DGCK, DKI
Pemukiman Kembali Proyek 7 Lokasi Sistem Penanganan Pengaduan Proyek
Melaksanakan
3.1 Institusi-institusi utama 3.1.1 Komite Pengarah 33. Sebuah komite penasihat tingkat tinggi, Komite Pengarah Bersama (Joint Steering Committee/JSC) telah dibentuk untuk mengawasi persiapan dan pelaksanaan proyek dan untuk memberikan dukungan koordinasi dan nasihat pada tingkat kebijakan. JSC dipimpin oleh Bappenas dan terdiri atas para perwakilan dari Kementerian Keuangan, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum, dan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. JSC bertemu secara rutin selama persiapan proyek dan telah terbukti berperan penting dalam memberikan dukungan nasihat dan sebagai sebuah forum untuk pembuatan keputusan tingkat tinggi. JSC akan terus melakukan pengawasan tingkat tinggi selama pelaksanaan proyek ini. 3.1.2 PMU 34. Proyek ini membutuhkan koordinasi yang erat di antara tiga lembaga pelaksana pada tingkat pemerintahan pusat maupun daerah: Direktorat Jenderal Sumber Daya Air (DGWR) dan Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya (DGCK) di Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum, serta Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. DGWR akan memainkan peran sebagai Badan Pelaksana. Sebuah Unit Pengelola Proyek (PMU) telah dibentuk oleh DGWR dengan tujuan untuk mempersiapkan dan mengawasi pelaksanaan proyek. PMU terdiri atas tiga orang staf dari DGWR, tiga orang staf dari DGCK, tiga orang staf dari Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, dan seorang staf dari Biro Perencaan dan Kerjasama Luar Negeri Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum. PMU didukung oleh suatu sekretariat yang terdiri dari lima orang staf dari DGWR. Selama pelaksanaan proyek, PMU akan mengawasi pelaksanaan proyek serta melaksanakan kegiatan-kegiatan bersama, khususnya konsultasi pengawasan pekerjaan menyeluruh dan Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (Floods Management Information Systems/FMIS). PMU gabungan memberikan suatu 14
peluang untuk berevolusi menjadi sebuah grup operasi dan gabungan pengelolaan yang terkoordinasi di masa mendatang dalam sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta. 3.1.3 PIU 34. Proyek tersebut akan dilaksanakan melalui institusi-institusi yang sesuai, sejalan dengan tanggung jawab institusional serta kerangka kerja perundangundangan dari sektor tersebut. Proyek ini memiliki tiga PIU, terdiri atas DGWR (melalui Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane/BBWS-CC), DGCK, dan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Masing-masing akan bertanggungjawab untuk melaksanakan pengerukan dan rehabilitasi atas kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk utama yang ditentukan yang berada dalam tanggung jawabnya. 3.1.4 Panel Tenaga Ahli 35. Sebuah Panel Tenaga Ahli yang terdiri atas tiga orang spesialis independen yang diakui secara internasional akan dimobilisasi untuk memberikan saran pada semua aspek proyek. Para spesialis tersebut diharapkan akan terdiri atas seorang ahli lingkungan, seorang ahli teknik yang berpengalaman dalam pengerukan dan pembuangan kerukan, dan seorang ahli pemukiman kembali perkotaan. Tanggung jawab-tanggung jawab utama dari Panel Tenaga Ahli tersebut termasuk memantau dan mengevaluasi persiapan dan pelaksanaan berbagai instrumen pengaman (Kerangka Kerja Kebijakan Pemukiman Kembali [Resettlement Policy Framework/RPF], Rencana-Rencana Pemukiman Kembali (Resettlement Plan/RP), EMP, dan prosedur-prosedur penanganan pengaduan), dan memberikan nasihat kepada PMU tentang tindakan-tindakan yang harus diambil untuk meningkatkan kepatuhan. Apabila perlu, Panel Tenaga Ahli dapat diperbesar secara sementara atau tetap dengan menambahkan para spesialis yang akan memberikan keahlian untuk isu-isu atau kebutuhan-kebutuhan yang spesifik, tidak terduga, atau kritis, yang mungkin muncul selama pelaksanaan proyek. Para tenaga ahli tambahan tersebut, apabila ada, dapat dimobilisasi dengan terms of reference yang disepakati antara PMU, Bank Dunia, dan ketiga orang tenaga ahli awal yang merupakan bagian dari Panel Tenaga Ahli. Panel Tenaga Ahli tersebut harus mengadakan pertemuan secara teratur untuk meninjau status perkembangan pekerjaan. Namun demikian, rapat-rapat luar biasa khusus juga dapat dilakukan untuk meninjau tahap-tahap kritis tertentu dalam kegiatan-kegiatan teknis, lingkungan, dan sosial. 3.1.5 Konsultan Pengawasan (Supervision Consultant/SC) 36. Ini adalah kontrak konsultasi yang akan berperan penting dalam mendukung pengelolaan, pengawasan, dan pemantauan proyek secara menyeluruh oleh PMU. Apabila terdapat kelemahan-kelemahan yang dinilai dalam kapasitas, khususnya dalam wilayah-wilayah pengawasan atas rencana-rencana lingkungan proyek, penerapan Rencana Pemukiman Kembali (RP) dan Sistem Penanganan Pengaduan (Grievance Redress System/GRS), SC telah ditugasi untuk menggunakan keahlian yang diperlukan untuk mendukung PMU selama pelaksanaan proyek. Ruang lingkup pelayanan bantuan teknis ini termasuk (i) mengawasi pelaksanaan berbagai kontrak pekerjaan pengerukan dan pembangunan dalam proyek tersebut termasuk di semua lokasi pembuangan (ii) mengawasi pelaksanaan RKL dan RPL oleh para kontraktor pekerjaan, (iii) mendukung PMU dan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dalam pelaksanaan RP, dan (iv) mengembangkan serta mengimplementasikan mekanisme penanganan pengaduan/keluhan proyek tersebut dengan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Ringkasan 15
dari ruang lingkup yang terperinci dari kegiatan-kegiatan yang akan dilaksanakan adalah sebagai berikut: Pengawasan Pekerjaan Pengerukan 1.1 Meninjau/memeriksa kontrak-kontrak akhir dengan para kontraktor. 1.2 Meninjau/memeriksa Desain-desain Teknik Terperinci dan gambar-gambar, pernyataan-pernyataan metode, spesifikasi-spesifikasi, dan jadwal-jadwal kegiatan, melaksanakan survei dan penyelidikan tambahan sebagaimana diperlukan, serta melakukan setiap revisi yang dianggap perlu dan memperoleh persetujuan dari PMU untuk revisi tersebut. 1.3 Menguji semua bagian dari setiap lokasi proyek untuk material berbahaya sebelum dilaksanakannya pekerjaan pengerukan. 1.4 Mengawasi pelaksanaan pekerjaan, termasuk (tetapi tidak terbatas pada): Pengerukan (termasuk pemisahan sampah dari material hasil kerukan, serta pengangkutan dan pembuangannya masing-masing di lahan penimbunan yang disetujui dan CDF Ancol), pembuatan tanggul dan rehabilitasi atas kanal-kanal, pompa-pompa, perbaikan dan perawatan saringan. Memberikan bantuan kepada PMU untuk proses permintaan pembayaran dari kontraktor. Menyimpan arsip-arsip lokasi dan menyusun laporan-laporan perkembangan bulanan secara perinci. Menyiapkan pekerjaan sebagaimana gambar-gambar dan arsip-arsip yang telah ditandatangani, serta buku-buku panduan operasional, dan menyerahterimakan pekerjaan-pekerjaan yang telah selesai kepada PMU. Menyusun sebuah Laporan Penyelesaian Praktis dan Cacat-Cacat yang Belum Diperbaiki untuk masing-masing kontrak pembangunan yang diawasi. Menyusun sebuah Laporan Penyelesaian Akhir dan Penyerahterimaan untuk masing-masing kontrak pembangunan yang diawasi. 1.5 Mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan-kegiatan pembangunan di lokasi CDF Ancol selama pelaksanaan proyek, dan di semua lokasi di luar lokasi proyek seperti lokasi-lokasi sumber pasir dan tanah laterit. 1.6 Memberikan bantuan teknis kepada PMU sebagaimana dibutuhkan dari waktu ke waktu, yang mungkin termasuk pemberian dukungan dan saran kepada PMU mengenai pelaksanaan pekerjaan-pekerjaan proyek, khususnya pada aspek-aspek teknis, perencanaan menyeluruh, dan pengadaan dalam proyek tersebut. Pengelolaan Lingkungan 1.7 Memantau (termasuk pembuatan laporan penerapan RKL/RPL triwulanan) dan mengawasi langkah-langkah perlindungan lingkungan yang dilaksanakan untuk menanggulangi kerusakan lingkungan akibat kegiatan-kegiatan pembangunan dan pembuangan, yang sejalan dengan RKL/RPL dari masing-masing lokasi pekerjaan yang termasuk semua lokasi pembuangan. Kerangka Kerja Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMF) dalam proyek tersebut. Rencana Pemukiman Kembali 1.8 Mengawasi dan mendukung pelaksanaan Rencana Pemukiman Kembali, 16
yang sejalan dengan Rencana Pemukiman Kembali dari masing-masing lokasi di mana pemukiman kembali diperlukan. RPF JUFMP. 1.9 Memberikan bantuan teknis dan administrasi dalam pembebasan lahan dan proses pemukiman kembali. Sistem Penanganan Pengaduan (GRS)/Mekanisme Penanganan Keluhan 1.10 Mengembangkan dan menjalankan GRS, yang akan termasuk tetapi tidak terbatas pada menangani keluhan-keluhan dari Warga Terkena Dampak Proyek secara sistematis setiap hari; 1.11 Memutakhirkan keluhan-keluhan di situs internet, memberitahu orangorang yang menyatakan keluhan tentang status keluhan mereka serta memberikan umpan balik atau tindakan-tindakan penindaklanjutan; 1.12 Membantu Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dalam mengambil tindakantindakan penindaklanjutan yang dapat diterima untuk keluhan-keluhan, memastikan bahwa keputusan-keputusan dibuat berdasarkan proses-proses yang transparan, adil, independen, dan dapat dipertanggungjawabkan melalui Penanganan Pengaduan atau Saran Penanganan Keluhan; 1.13 Memberikan rekomendasi-rekomendasi kepada para pihak yang berwenang di Pemerintah DKI Jakarta tentang status keluhan-keluhan, dari unit di lokasi melalui proses-proses tingkat provinsi. Lainnya 1.14 Memantau dan melaporkan setiap kegiatan di lokasi-lokasi proyek yang saling “terhubung”. 1.15 Merancang, mengembangkan, dan mengoperasikan suatu sistem komunikasi dan pelaporan proyek berbasis web. 3.1.6 Kontraktor 38. Kontraktor Konstruksi akan bertanggungjawab untuk pengerukan dan pengangkutan material hasil kerukan saluran air dan waduk dari lokasi-lokasi pengerukan ke CDF Ancol (material hasil kerukan yang tidak berbahaya), Lahan Penimbunan Bantar Gebang (sampah yang dipisahkan dari material hasil kerukan), serta lahan penimbunan yang aman milik PT. Prasadha Pamunah Limbah Industri (PPLi) (material berbahaya, apabila ditemukan) sesuai dengan kontrak-kontrak pembangunan, AMDAL yang disetujui untuk Fase 1, dan laporan tambahan ini. Kontrak-kontrak pekerjaan sipil akan termasuk persyaratan-persyaratan kontrak untuk pelaksanaan persyaratan lingkungan. 3.1.7 BPLHD DKI 39. BPLHD DKI adalah badan pengelolaan lingkungan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dengan tanggung jawab untuk menyetujui dan memberlakukan AMDAL untuk semua proyek di kota (Jakarta). Selain itu, badan tersebut bertanggungjawab untuk memantau pelaksanaan rencana-rencana pengelolaan yang terkait. Dalam pelaksanaan AMDAL, BPLHD DKI juga didukung oleh badan-badan pengelolaan lingkungan tingkat kota (Walikota). BPLHD DKI telah menyetujui AMDAL untuk Fase 1 proyek ini dan AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol. BPLHD DKI telah mulai memantau pekerjaan pembangunan terus-menerus di CDF Ancol dan akan terus melakukan hal 17
tersebut. Pemantauan gabungan dengan Bank Dunia direncanakan untuk dilakukan selama pelaksanaan proyek JUFMP. 3.1.8 Bank Dunia 40. Bank Dunia akan mengawasi dan memantau penerapan proyek agar sejalan dengan kebijakan-kebijakan operasionalnya untuk semua aspek proyek, termasuk isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial. 3.2 41.
Pendekatan pembuatan kontrak Pelelangan Pendekatan ini telah dikembangkan oleh komite Pelelangan PMU/PIU.
3.2.1 Pendekatan menyeluruh 42. Kontrak-kontrak ditetapkan berdasarkan pengaturan-pengaturan tender kompetitif internasional terstandarisasi, dengan prakualifikasi, pembuatan short-list, dan kemudian pelaksanaan tender, penilaian penawaran, dan pemberian kontrak. Pendekatan tersebut sebagaimana diidentifikasi di bawah ini ditentukan berdasarkan pengalaman internasional dan setempat untuk memastikan bahwa: penawaran-penawaran dengan harga bersaing diperoleh pengusul proyek melalui SC melakukan pengendalian secara ketat atas cara pelaksanaan pembangunan tersebut, dan terdapat suatu audit yang ketat atas volume material yang dikeruk dan diangkut serta dibuang dengan sebagaimana mestinya ke CDF Ancol. 43. Persyaratan teknis ditentukan berdasarkan rancangan-rancangan terperinci dari para konsultan desain teknik yang diperoleh PMU (yakni, Konsultan Persiapan Proyek). Penting untuk diingat, dan hal ini mempengaruhi pengelolaan lingkungan, dokumen-dokumen penawaran harus menentukan rancangan, tetapi tidak boleh menentukan urutan pekerjaan atau metode pelaksanaan pekerjaan tersebut atau perlengkapan yang akan digunakan atau lokasi-lokasi akses. Para peserta tender diwajibkan untuk mengidentifikasi hal-hal tersebut dalam sebuah Rencana Pekerjaan Kontraktor Pendahuluan yang harus diserahkan pada waktu penawaran. Suatu penilaian tentang hal tersebut akan dilakukan selama negosiasi-negosiasi kontrak dengan penawar yang terpilih, dan dalam jangka waktu satu bulan sejak diberikannya kontrak, Kontraktor akan diwajibkan untuk menyerahkan sebuah Rencana Kerja Kontraktor yang terperinci. Rencana Kerja perlu diperiksa dan disetujui oleh SC. 3.2.2 Pendekatan terperinci terhadap pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial 44. Aspek-aspek pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial dalam Kontrak perlu diselaraskan dengan pendekatan menyeluruh. Aspek-aspek khusus termasuk: AMDAL dan persyaratan yang direkomendasikan oleh laporan saat ini akan membentuk bagian dari kontrak pembangunan bersama bagian-bagian yang terkait dengan Kontraktor yang akan menjadi persyaratan khusus yang harus dipenuhi oleh kontraktor. Hal-hal tertentu telah ditekankan secara lebih lanjut dengan menyertakan halhal tersebut dalam “Ketentuan Khusus Kontrak”. Secara khusus, sebagaimana dirincikan dalam laporan ini, sebagian besar dampak potensial 18
terkait dengan interaksi dengan masyarakat setempat, dan syarat-syarat yang sangat khusus disertakan terkait dengan jumlah minimum pertemuan dengan masyarakat yang disyaratkan oleh kontrak. Penentuan staf Kontraktor termasuk persyaratan untuk staf khusus dengan tanggung jawab pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial. Kesadaran langkah-langkah pencegahan HIV/AIDS telah disertakan dalam Ketentuan Khusus Kontrak, meskipun langkah-langkah tersebut belum dicermati secara terperinci dalam proses AMDAL daerah. Sebagai bagian dari penawaran, Kontraktor diwajibkan untuk menyerahkan sebuah ESMP Kontraktor Pendahuluan sebagai tambahan untuk Rencana Kerja Kontraktor pendahuluan. ESMP Kontraktor Pendahuluan akan dinilai sebagai bagian dari evaluasi atas penawaran, keduanya dalam hal kepatuhan terhadap AMDAL/laporan saat ini dan kesesuaiannya. Dalam jangka waktu 1 bulan sejak diberikannya kontrak, Kontraktor akan diwajibkan untuk menyerahkan Rencana Kerja Kontraktor Terperinci dan ESMP Kontraktor terperinci yang terkait untuk memperoleh persetujuan.
45. Akan diketahui kemudian bahwa peraturan-peraturan daerah mensyaratkan langkah-langkah penanggulangan tertentu, langkah yang paling relevan untuk JUFMP adalah pembatasan jam pergerakan truk pengangkut, pengembangan rencana-rencana pengelolaan lalu lintas terperinci, dan pengujian serta sertifikasi atas truk-truk untuk keselamatan, emisi, dan lain-lain. Peraturan-peraturan telah dibuat oleh pemerintah daerah untuk menghadapi kondisi-kondisi sosial dan lingkungan yang ada di Jakarta. Kepatuhan terhadap peraturan-peraturan tersebut secara khusus diwajibkan melalui AMDAL, laporan ini, dan Ketentuan-Ketentuan Umum dan Khusus Kontrak, sesuai keadaan. 46. Penentuan biaya untuk penanggulangan lingkungan dan sosial juga diperlukan untuk menyelaraskan secara erat dengan pendekatan terhadap penentuan biaya yang digunakan untuk faktor-faktor pembangunan. Dengan beberapa pengecualian, semua biaya disusun ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan untuk pengerukan dan biaya-biaya satuan untuk pengangkutan, dengan penjabaran tambahan untuk jarak lokasi-lokasi pengerukan dari CDF Ancol. Biaya-biaya lingkungan dan sosial yang disusun ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan termasuk, tetapi tidak terbatas pada: Sanitasi tempat kerja Keselamatan Pengelolaan lalu lintas Pencegahan tumpahan material hasil kerukan di sekitar lokasi dan rute-rute pengangkutan Pengendalian emisi kendaraan Pengelolaan kebisingan; dan Konsultasi umum dengan masyarakat. 47. Pos-pos biaya khusus lingkungan dan sosial yang dapat diidentifikasi yang akan dimasukkan ke dalam kontrak termasuk serangkaian rapat konsultasi masyarakat. 4
Penyempurnaan desain teknik 19
48. Desain-desain teknik sebagaimana disajikan dalam AMDAL Fase 1 yang telah disetujui pada pokoknya dibuat berdasarkan informasi terakhir (yang dimasukkan dalam Terms of Reference AMDAL) yang diberikan oleh Para Konsultan Persiapan Proyek (Project Preparation Consultants/PPC) dan beberapa pekerjaan penyelidikan/perancangan terdahulu selama konsultasi desain teknik yang dimulai pada bulan Oktober 2009. Sejak dilakukannya persiapan AMDAL Fase 1: Informasi survei terperinci telah diperoleh untuk semua lokasi dan dimasukkan ke dalam rancangan tersebut. Rancangan-rancangan pendahuluan telah ditinjau oleh PIU, PMU, dan Bank Dunia, dan beberapa rincian telah diubah untuk mengakomodasi isu-isu tertentu, contohnya, pengetahuan khusus setempat (perlindungan pinggiran sungai apa yang sesuai), optimalisasi kinerja, prosedur-prosedur dan paketpaket kontrak, dampak-dampak potensial terhadap infrastruktur, dan lain-lain. Informasi sosial dan lingkungan yang lebih terperinci dari AMDAL Fase 1 dan kegiatan-kegiatan persiapan Fase 2 telah dipertimbangkan, khususnya terkait dengan perumusan kontrak pembangunan. Langkah-langkah penanggulangan khusus telah ditinjau dalam hal kecukupan dan kepraktisannya. Jadwal-jadwal telah disempurnakan. 49. Perubahan-perubahan utama yang telah terjadi dalam jangka waktu sementara adalah sebagai berikut: Paket kontrak dan penjadwalan telah disesuaikan. Volume-volume material yang akan dikeruk dan diangkut, serta pekerjaan pembuatan tanggul ditentukan dengan lebih baik. Ringkasan informasinya diberikan dalam Tabel 4-1. Pemisahan sampah dari material hasil kerukan telah ditinjau. Dengan mempertimbangkan banyak faktor (kondisi-kondisi setempat yang diketahui, kepraktisan, dampak-dampak pada lokasi pembuangan), telah ditentukan bahwa perlu untuk memisahkan benda-benda besar saja dari material hasil kerukan dan Kontraktor harus berkoordinasi dengan badan-badan lainnya untuk mengelola limbah-limbah dan sampah-sampah yang mengapung di pinggiran sungai. Kemungkinan kebutuhan perlengkapan telah ditinjau. Sebagian besar perlengkapan masih sama sebagaimana diuraikan sebelumnya, tetapi dengan potensi penggunaan penyemprotan air (water-jetting) di bawah jembatan-jembatan untuk pemindahan setempat dan penggerakan sedimen ke lokasi-lokasi di mana endapat tersebut dapat diambil oleh ekskavator yang dipertimbangkan untuk meminimalkan gangguan terhadap infrastruktur dan mengurangi tingkat ekskavasi secara manual. Meskipun penggunaan tenaga kerja lokal akan didorong, tetapi hal tersebut tidak akan diamanatkan. Pendekatan untuk memasukkan pertimbangan-pertimbangan lingkungan dan sosial ke dalam Kontrak-Kontrak Pembangunan telah ditentukan (Bagian 3.2. dan seluruh Bagian 6). 50.
Membandingkan hal tersebut dengan Tabel II-7 dalam AMDAL Fase 1: Dikuranginya panjang saluran-saluran air tersendiri yang akan dikeruk. Dikuranginya volume-volume kerukan di masing-masing lokasi.
20
Volume total sampah yang terdapat dalam sedimen sekarang telah dapat diperkirakan.
Tabel 4-1 Paket Kontrak JUFMP Fase 1 dan Fase 2 Paket
1
Lokasi
Perkiraan Pengerukan Kedalaman Volume Volume Pengerukan Material hasil Sampah (m) kerukan (m3) (m3)
Pekerjaan Pembuatan Tanggul (m)
Fase 1 1 (DKI) 2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) Fase 2 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR) 7 (DKI)
Saluran Air Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Kanal banjir Cengkareng (termasuk tepi laut) Kanal banjir Sunter Bawah
1,90 ~ 2,70
156.970
3.140
4.832
2,20 ~ 3,10
99.490
1.250
1.905
1,50 ~ 3,50
1.225.500
22.510
4.600
1,60 ~ 2,30
399.250
19.970
1.800
Saluran air Cideng Thamrin (saluran air Jalan Lingkar) Saluran air Sentiong-Sunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (saluran air Pembuangan) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Saluran air Tanjungan Saluran air Angke Bawah Banjir Kanal Barat (tepi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas
0,60 ~ 2,30
33.230
810
2.570
0,50 ~ 2,10
140.150
7.010
3.865
1,30 ~ 2,10
413.400
10.340
5.000
1,00 ~ 2,10 0,70 ~ 3,30 1,10 ~ 1,90 2,00 ~ 3,60 1,70 ~ 2,50 1,80 ~ 3,40
48.200 51.000 11.500 248.000 350.080 82.000
1.210 1.280 290 6.200 8.760 4.100
3.057 305 1.092 821 1.190 1.850
Saluran air Grogol – Sekretaris Saluran air Pakin – Kail Besar – Jelakeng Saluran air Krukut Cideng
0,70 ~ 2,30
40.500
1.020
2.391
0,60 ~ 1,60
100.000
5.000
2.882
0,70 ~ 0,80
28.700
1.440
1.658
Saluran air Krukut Lama
0,50 ~ 0,80
14.900
750
2.400
Catatan 1
Catatan 1
Catatan 2
Catatan 2
3.441.870 95.080 42.218 Untuk tujuan pembuatan kontrak, Kanal Banjir Sunter telah dibagi menjadi dua sub-paket – Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas dan Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah. Catatan 2 Untuk tujuan pembuatan kontrak, Saluran Air Krukut telah dibagi menjadi dua sub-paket – Saluran Air Krukut Cideng dan Saluran Air Krukut Lama Catatan 1
5 Informasi tambahan tentang lingkungan dan sosial 5.1 Gambaran Umum 51. Sejak diselesaikannya AMDAL Fase 1, hal-hal berikut telah dilakukan: Pengumpulan data dasar terperinci untuk AMDAL Fase 2 (yang telah disiapkan sepanjang tahun 2010). Serangkaian Diskusi Kelompok Terarah (Focus Group Discussions /FGD) di seluruh kelurahan (desa) dalam area subproyek Fase 1 maupun Fase 2. Pertimbangan tambahan isu-isu kualitas sedimen, terutama untuk memasukkan informasi tambahan dari pengumpulan data primer Fase 2 dan untuk mempertimbangkan cara yang paling tepat untuk memenuhi 1
Perhatikan bahwa paket-paket kontrak 1, 2a, dan 2b masuk dalam Tahap 1 dan sisanya masuk dalam Tahap 2.
21
persyaratan BPLHD DKI (AMDAL Fase 1) untuk pemantauan sedimen secara terus-menerus. Sebagaimana dibahas di beberapa tempat pada bagian sebelumnya, penentuan metode terbaik untuk menyelaraskan persyaratan lingkungan dan sosial ke dalam kontrak-kontrak pembangunan dan ke dalam pengaturan institusional yang akan dilakukan selama pelaksanaan JUFMP.
5.2 Isu-isu sosial dan masyarakat 52. Selain dari pemukiman kembali (yang tidak diperlukan dalam lokasi-lokasi JUFMP Fase 1), isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial yang paling dominan terkait dengan dampak pengerukan dan interaksi proyek JUFMP dengan masyarakat setempat. Kebutuhan akan penanggulangan banjir sangat sering diungkapkan oleh masyarakat. 53. Seperti telah dibuktikan dari informasi yang diperoleh dari FGD, hanya terdapat sedikit kesadaran nyata akan proyek tersebut di antara masyarakat setempat, terdapat harapan untuk diperolehnya lebih banyak informasi dan konsultasi dengan masyarakat, dan terdapat kekhawatiran bahwa pertimbanganpertimbangan lingkungan dan sosial tidak akan mendapatkan perhatian yang sebagaimana mestinya. Kuesioner-kuesioner pra-FGD dan pasca-FGD menunjukkan bahwa FGD-FGD itu sendiri dianggap sebagai cara yang berhasil untuk berbagi informasi dan untuk membantu meredakan kekhawatiran mengenai pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial. 54. Jenis-jenis isu yang diangkat oleh masyarakat pada pertengahan tahun 2010 adalah serupa dengan isu-isu yang diidentifikasi selama persiapan AMDAL Fase 1, yaitu lingkungan yang kotor, lalu lintas, kebisingan, gangguan aktivitas sehari-hari. Oleh karenanya wajar untuk mengambil isu-isu tersebut sebagai isu-isu utama yang harus diperhatikan dalam setiap rencana pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial untuk pelaksanaan JUFMP. 5.3 Informasi rona lingkungan 55. Subbagian ini membahas tambahan informasi dasar fisik, kimia dan biologi yang dikumpulkan sejak diselesaikannya AMDAL Fase 1. Walaupun informasi ini berfokus pada lokasi-lokasi Fase 2, baik lokasi-lokasi Fase 1 maupun Fase 2 secara umum serupa di mana lokasi-lokasi tersebut berada di daerah perkotaan Jakarta. 5.3.1 Kualitas sedimen 56. Sampel-sampel sedimen tambahan telah dikumpulkan dan dianalisis. Semua hasilnya mendukung pengambilan sampel dan analisis sebelumnya bahwa tidak ada materi yang diklasifikasikan sebagai limbah B3 (yakni berbahaya), dengan menggunakan standar setempat dan mengacu kepada standar internasional. 5.3.2 Lalu lintas 57. Studi-studi lalu lintas menegaskan kesimpulan yang tidak mengejutkan selama persiapan Fase 1 bahwa terdapat kemacetan parah di daerah Jakarta. Sebagai bagian dari laporan tambahan ini, penyelidikan lebih lanjut telah dilakukan untuk mengetahui potensi total volume truk pengangkut sedimen Fase 1 di sekitar CDF Ancol, dengan penilaian dan penanggulangan yang dibahas dalam Bagian 2. 22
5.3.3 Kebisingan 58. Pengukuran kebisingan secara terperinci dilakukan di lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 sesuai dengan metodologi yang dipakai di Indonesia. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa tingkat-tingkat kebisingan (dasar) yang ada sering kali sudah berada di atas standar setempat. 5.3.4 Kualitas udara 59. Pengukuran kualitas udara secara terperinci dilakukan di lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 sesuai dengan metodologi yang dipakai di Indonesia dan menunjukkan bahwa kondisi-kondisi (dasar) yang ada secara umum telah memenuhi standar setempat. 5.3.5 Kualitas air 60. Pengukuran kualitas air secara terperinci dilakukan di lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 sesuai dengan metodologi yang dipakai di Indonesia dan menunjukkan bahwa kondisi-kondisi (dasar) yang berlaku seringkali tidak memenuhi standar setempat. 5.3.6 Lingkungan hayati 61. Dengan mengecualikan suaka margasatwa yang bersebelahan dengan bagian hilir lokasi proyek Kanal Banjir Barat (sebuah lokasi JUFMP Fase 2), lingkungan hayati dari lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 sangat mirip dengan lokasi-lokasi Fase 1; ekosistem-ekosistem perairan menunjukkan saluran-saluran air dan waduk-waduk yang tercemar, ekosistem-ekosistem darat menunjukkan lingkungan yang telah menjadi perkotaan dengan nilai yang terkait dengan estetika dan tanaman pangan ketimbang nilai konservasinya. 5.3.7 Kesimpulan 62. Pengumpulan informasi dasar tambahan untuk lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 mendukung temuan-temuan dari kajian-kajian Fase 1. 6 Fase 1 penilaian lingkungan dan penanggulangan 63. Bagian ini membahas tentang apakah penilaian dan penanggulangan dampak-dampak potensial dari JUFMP Fase 1 seperti yang disajikan pada awal tahun 2010 tetap berlaku mengingat adanya informasi dasar tambahan, rancangan yang disempurnakan, dan pengaturan-pengaturan institusional dan kontrak yang sekarang telah ditetapkan. 64. Lingkungan fisik dan biologis Jakarta adalah sebuah lingkungan perkotaan yang sangat termodifikasi yang mendukung populasi yang besar dan beragam. Banjir yang terjadi mengganggu kehidupan sebagian besar penduduk secara signifikan, dan terutama pada kaum miskin. Masyarakat telah menyatakan dengan jelas keinginan mereka untuk dapat bebas dari banjir, serta keinginan untuk dilakukannya konsultasi secara berkesinambungan dan diberikannya perhatian terhadap masalah-masalah lingkungan dan sosial. 65. Sejalan dengan praktek di Indonesia, dampak-dampak dan penanggulangan dibagi dalam subbagian-subbagian berikut ini ke dalam periode "prakonstruksi", "konstruksi" dan "Pascakonstruksi". Perhatian terbesar secara wajar diberikan pada periode "Pembangunan" di mana terdapat potensi terjadinya sebagian besar dampak merugikan dan perlu diperlukannya penanggulangan yang diintegrasikan secara cermat. Sebuah matriks yang merangkum dampak-dampak, penanggulangan, dan pemantauan seperti disajikan dalam Lampiran 2. 23
6.1 Periode prakonstruksi 66. Periode ini didefinisikan untuk laporan ini sebagai periode antara disetujuinya AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 (secara resmi melalui surat tertanggal 30 Maret 2010) dengan ditandatanganinya kontrak konstruksi pertama (saat ini diperkirakan akan dilakukan pada awal tahun 2012). Akan ada sebuah jangka waktu transisi pada saat akan dilakukannya tender dan penilaian, dan untuk tujuan-tujuan laporan ini, jangka waktu transisi akan dimasukkan ke dalam periode "Prakonstruksi". 6.2 Jangka waktu konstruksi 6.2.1 Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial 67. Sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Bagian 3.2, selain persyaratan AMDAL untuk Fase 1 (dan AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol), unsur utama dalam pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial selama jangka waktu konstruksi adalah dibutuhkannya Kontraktor untuk mengembangkan dan memiliki Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial yang rinci yang telah disetujui, terintegrasi dengan Rencana Kerja yang rinci dan sesuai dengan AMDAL. Lampiran 1 dalam laporan ini merincikan lebih lanjut persyaratan ESMP untuk Kontraktor. 6.2.2 Persepsi dan interaksi masyarakat 68. Potensi dampak negatif dan signifikan, demikian pula potensi setiap subproyek pekerjaan JUFMP untuk berintegrasi secara positif dengan masyarakat setempat. Apa yang sebenarnya akan terjadi adalah kombinasi dari: Harapan realistis masyarakat terhadap proyek . Jumlah dan waktu informasi yang disediakan untuk masyarakat. Apakah masyarakat percaya bahwa kekhawatiran-kekhawatiran mereka telah cukup diperhatikan. Apakah jalur-jalur komunikasi tetap terbuka, bermakna, dan dapat mencapai pemahaman yang sama. 69. JUFMP telah mengembangkan langkah-langkah untuk mengurangi potensi dampak-dampak merugikan dan untuk meningkatkan hasil-hasil positif. Namun demikian, masih terdapat potensi bahwa beberapa harapan masyarakat tidak akan terwujud. Harapan-harapan tersebut terkait dengan: Tingkat penanggulangan banjir yang akan dicapai - suatu faktor yang sulit dijelaskan dengan banyaknya aspek yang mempengaruhi dan terutama karena selalu terdapat kemungkinan secara statistik bahwa pada titik tertentu mungkin terjadi banjir besar yang melebihi kapasitas rancangan dari jalanjalan air yang dikeruk. Lapangan kerja setempat yang dihasilkan oleh proyek tersebut. Kemungkinan terbaik, proyek tersebut memiliki beberapa potensi pekerjaan jangka pendek tetapi terbatas. Aspek-aspek di luar ruang lingkup JUFMP misalnya, pengelolaan sampah jangka panjang. 70.
Langkah-langkah penanggulangan khusus sebagai berikut: Konsultasi masyarakat secara resmi yang diperlukan dan ditentukan, yang dilaksanakan oleh Kontraktor pemenang tender selama pengembangan awal atas Rencana Kerja Kontraktor Terperinci dan ESMP Kontraktor Terperinci untuk dimasukkan sebagai pos biaya lini dalam kontrak pembangunan. 24
Pertemuan-pertemuan konsultasi masyarakat berkelanjutan yang diperlukan dan ditentukan, yang dilaksanakan oleh Kontraktor selama jangka waktu konstruksi - untuk dimasukkan sebagai pos biaya lini dalam kontrak pembangunan. Pendirian, pengoperasian, dan penentuan personil POSKO (kantor di lokasi proyek yang antara lain akan berfungsi sebagai "pusat informasi proyek" untuk menyebarkan informasi proyek, menerima keluhan-keluhan, dan lainlain) yang diperlukan dan disyaratkan di setiap lokasi subproyek, yang memperoleh dukungan IT terpusat yang telah ditentukan – yang merupakan tanggung jawab Konsultan Pengawasan dan akan dimasukkan ke dalam ruang lingkup kontrak Konsultan Pengawasan.
71. Pemantauan khusus atas persepsi dan konsultasi masyarakat akan dilakukan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan. Konsultasi bertujuan untuk memberikan indikasi tentang bagaimana individu-individu telah mengubah pendapat mereka dari waktu ke waktu dan tingkat pemahaman yang telah dialihkan kepada masyarakat melalui pusat informasi, dan lain-lain. Pemantauan ini akan dilengkapi dengan indikator seperti kunjungan ke POSKO, penerimaan dan penyelesaian keluhan secara memuaskan. 6.2.3 Lapangan kerja setempat 72. Sejalan dengan pendekatan pembuatan kontrak (Bagian 3.2), Kontraktor Konstruksi akan memiliki fleksibilitas untuk menentukan komposisi tenaga kerja dan sumber tenaga kerja. Akan tetapi, dokumen-dokumen penawaran akan menekankan kepada penawar tentang harapan masyarakat setempat bahwa akan ada kesempatan untuk lapangan kerja setempat. 73. ESMP pendahuluan dari para Kontraktor yang diserahkan bersama dengan penawaran akan diwajibkan untuk mengidentifikasi lapangan kerja setempat apa yang direncanakan. Berdasarkan praktik sebelumnya dalam proyek-proyek pengerukan di tempat lain di Jakarta, diharapkan bahwa sebagian besar tenaga kerja tanpa keterampilan akan diperoleh dari penduduk setempat. 6.2.4 Hidraulika 74. Secara bertahap akan ada peningkatkan kapasitas aliran dalam saluransaluran air seiring dengan kemajuan pembangunan. Hal ini tidak dibahas lebih lanjut dalam "Jangka Waktu Konstruksi", tetapi dampak positif dari penanggulangan banjir yang dihasilkan dari proyek tersebut telah dianalisis sebagai bagian dari proses persiapan rancangan. 6.2.5 Tumpahan material hasil kerukan 75. Tumpahan dapat terjadi di lokasi-lokasi pengerukan itu sendiri dan juga selama pengangkutan material hasil kerukan ke lokasi-lokasi pembuangan. Dampak potensial ini merupakan kekhawatiran utama masyarakat terkait dengan berbagai dampak yang diakibatkan seperti: Keamanan untuk kendaraan-kendaraan yang bergerak Kebersihan area secara umum Tumpahan material yang tertinggal di jalan-jalan dan dibiarkan mengering. Semakin cepatnya kerusakan jalan.
25
76. Berdasarkan berbagai proyek pembangunan yang secara historis dikelola dengan buruk di sekitar Jakarta, kekhawatiran-kekhawatiran tersebut dapat dipahami. Proyek ini melakukan beberapa langkah untuk mengurangi tumpahan dan untuk memastikan bahwa dampak-dampak yang merugikan tidak terjadi. Selain itu, apabila terdapat tumpahan yang tidak disengaja, prosedur-prosedur untuk memperbaiki situasi telah disiapkan. 77. Tumpahan di daerah sekitar lokasi pengerukan dapat terjadi dalam area kerja Kontraktor yang ditunjuk. Melalui berbagai syarat dalam kontrak dan AMDAL (dan dalam laporan ini), tumpahan di lokasi kerja dan dampak-dampak yang diakibatkan harus dikelola dengan cara sebagai berikut: Dengan dijauhkannya masyarakat dari area kerja Kontraktor, masyarakat tidak akan terkena dampak langsung dari tumpahan. Dengan persyaratan umum untuk menjaga tempat kerja agar aman dan bersih, Kontraktor akan diwajibkan untuk membatasi tumpahan dan kemudian membersihkan tumpahan apabila terjadi. Dengan persyaratan untuk memastikan bahwa ban-ban kendaraan dan badan-badan kendaraan tidak membawa material-material hasil kerukan ke jalan-jalan di luar area kerja, Kontraktor akan memiliki kepentingan yang besar untuk membatasi tumpahan dalam lokasi kerja. 78.
Tumpahan ke jalan dapat disebabkan dari satu atau lebih hal: Ban atau badan kendaraan yang kotor. Material hasil kerukan yang "terlalu basah" yang bocor dari pintu-pintu truk atau kontainer pengangkut yang tidak ditutup dengan benar. Truk/kontainer yang muatannya berlebihan. Kecepatan yang berlebihan.
79.
Pilihan-pilihan pengelolaan untuk sebab-sebab tersebut termasuk: Pencucian atau pembersihan kendaraan. Pengeringan material hasil kerukan sebelum dimuat ke kontainer-kontainer pengangkut atau langsung ke truk-truk Penggunaan kontainer-kontainer pengangkut dan memastikan bahwa setiap katup drainase telah ditutup sebelum pengangkutan Menutup rapat pintu belakang truk-truk pengangkut Membatasi jumlah pemuatan yang dapat dilakukan. Menutupi muatan selama pengangkutan. Menetapkan batas kecepatan Menyiapkan tim pembersih yang dilengkapi dengan sikat, sekop, air pembersih di sepanjang rute pengangkutan untuk membersihkan tumpahan.
80. Sejalan dengan AMDAL dan laporan ini, Kontraktor wajib untuk menyebutkan dalam ESMP Kontraktor kombinasi langkah apa yang akan digunakan untuk mencegah tumpahan ke jalan. Langkah-langkah ini kemudian ditinjau dalam hal kesesuaian dan kecukupannya oleh Konsultan Pengawasan dan apabila perlu, diterima "sebagaimana adanya" atau setelah dimodifikasi. Namun, tanggung jawab untuk keberhasilan pelaksanaan tetap berada di pihak Kontraktor. 81. Pemantauan atas keberhasilan pelaksanaan merupakan tanggung jawab khusus dari Konsultan Pengawasan yang memiliki kekuasaan untuk meminta 26
perbaikan apabila terjadi tumpahan, termasuk apabila perlu membawa pihak eksternal untuk melakukan pembersihan, atas biaya Kontraktor. Selain itu, masyarakat memiliki peran informal pemantauan di mana apabila terjadi tumpahan, setiap anggota masyarakat memiliki hak untuk menyampaikan keluhan, diutamakan melalui POSKO di lokasi kepada Konsultan Pengawasan, atau melalui pertemuan konsultasi Kontraktor-masyarakat yang prosesnya harus dilaporkan kepada Konsultan Pengawasan. Perlu dicatat bahwa aspek tumpahan ke jalan oleh kendaraan yang kembali dari lokasi CDF Ancol secara khusus dibahas dalam Update RKL / RPL Ancol dengan persyaratan adanya sebuah fasilitas pencucian kendaraan sebelum meninggalkan lokasi CDF Ancol. 6.2.6 82.
Kualitas udara Potensi dampak-dampak merugikan timbul dari: Emisi kendaraan dan dari peralatan pembangunan Bau tidak sedap dan busuk, dari material hasil kerukan Debu
83. Emisi kendaraan akan menambah polusi udara yang sudah tinggi, tetapi sebagian besar masih dalam standar kualitas udara setempat yang ditunjukkan oleh tingkat NOx, SOx, HC, dan lain-lain. Mengingat tingkat lalu lintas yang dihasilkan oleh proyek, ratusan, dibanding dengan ribuan pergerakan lalu lintas latar belakang normal yang terjadi setiap hari, dampakk merugikan marginalnya diperkirakan akan rendah. 84. Pemantauan kualitas udara sampai saat ini menunjukkan bahwa senyawasenyawa penghasil bau yang dapat diidentifikasi berada di bawah standar. Di berbagai area, masyarakat menyadari bau umumnya berasal dari buruknya kualitas air di saluran air dan waduk, buruknya pembuangan sampah dan di tempat-tempat di mana material-material dikeruk atau diangkat dari saluran air dan waduk. Informasi kuantitatif yang dapat dipercaya tentang bau dari material hasil kerukan belum dapat diperoleh, tetapi pengamatan menunjukkan bahwa material yang baru saja dikeruk terkadang menghasilkan bau setempat, tetapi berkurang dengan cepat seiring waktu. Dapat diperkirakan bahwa akan terdapat peningkatan bau, dengan peningkatan tergantung pada jumlah material hasil kerukan yang terpapar dan baru dikeruk, cuaca setempat, dan gangguan air di -saluran air dan waduk. 85. Sumber potensi terbesar debu yang berterbangan adalah dari tumpahan material hasil kerukan yang mengering di jalan dan kemudian terkena pergerakan lalu lintas secara terus-menerus. Dalam kaitannya dengan emisi kendaraan, Kontraktor diharuskan untuk memastikan bahwa semua kendaraan memiliki dan memelihara "sertifikat kepatuhan" terkait dengan emisi dan kelayakan jalan, dengan dilakukannya pemantauan kepatuhan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan. 86. Untuk bau, tidak ada langkah-langkah penanggulangan yang realistis untuk pencegahan secara penuh. Sebaliknya, penanggulangan harus didasarkan pada kombinasi dari meminimalkan jumlah material hasil kerukan penghasil bau yang terpapar di area-area penting, mempertahankan komunikasi yang erat dengan masyarakat, dan mengembangkan langkah-langkah yang sejalan dengan Rencana Kerja dan Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMP) Kontraktor secara keseluruhan. Pengawasan atas hal tersebut dilakukan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan. 27
87. Untuk debu, pencegahan adalah langkah penanggulangan utama dengan fokus proyek yang kuat dan kewajiban untuk mencegah tumpahnya material hasil kerukan dan membersihkannya apabila terjadi. 6.2.7 Kebisingan 88. Sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Bagian 5.3.3, tingkat kebisingan yang ada sudah berada di atas standar setempat. Kebisingan proyek akan berasal dari berbagai sumber; lalu lintas, peralatan pengerukan, dan pemindahan tumpukan (hanya di mana pekerjaannya meliputi perbaikan tanggul dengan tumpukan lapisan/sheet pile). Dengan tingkat kebisingan yang sudah melampaui standar di berbagai lokasi, adalah tidak realistis untuk mengharapkan bahwa tingkat kebisingan yang akan dikendalikan akan tetap di bawah standar. 89. dari:
90.
Dengan demikian, pengelolaan kebisingan akan didasarkan pada kombinasi ketentuan untuk menjaga peralatan yang dapat menghasilkan kebisingan, seperti kendaraan, untuk tetap berada dalam kondisi operasional yang efisien memperoleh kesepakatan dengan masyarakat setempat di mana persepsi mengenai kebisingan yang mengganggu dan penerimaan atas, atau yang selainnya, kebisingan lebih penting daripada tingkat kebisingan absolut. ESMP Kontraktor akan diwajibkan untuk mendokumentasikan pembicaraanpembicaraan dengan perwakilan masyarakat dan langkah-langkah pengelolaan kebisingan dengan hasil terperinci yang dapat diperkirakan mencakup faktor-faktor seperti: o membatasi kegiatan-kegiatan dengan kebisingan tinggi tertentu seperti pemindahan tumpukan selama waktu-waktu yang peka kebisingan seperti waktu-waktu sembahyang o menempatkan generator stasioner, kompresor, dan lain-lain, jauh dari lokasi-lokasi yang peka kebisingan dan/atau menggunakan penghalang-penghalang kebisingan o memilih rute akses kendaraan setempat di mana akan ada interaksi yang paling sedikit dengan area-area yang peka kebisingan. Program-program instruksional yang wajib untuk staf Kontraktor, persyaratan dan metode-metode untuk mengendalikan kebisingan; misalnya, membatasi kebisingan kendaraan pengangkutan dengan meningkatkan laju truk secara perlahan dan melarang penggunaan klakson kecuali dalam situasi darurat. Pemantauan akan dilakukan melalui kombinasi dari: Pemantauan sendiri oleh Kontraktor, dengan diperkuat oleh umpan balik dari masyarakat dan Konsultan Pengawasan. Pengawasan kepatuhan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan, untuk memastikan bahwa Kontraktor menerapkan ESMP Kontraktor yang disepakati. Pemantauan informal oleh masyarakat, dengan umpan balik melalui sistem penyampaian keluhan proyek (termasuk POSKO setempat) dan melalui pertemuan-pertemuan komunitas dengan Kontraktor.
6.2.8 Lalu lintas 91. Lalu lintas yang dihasilkan proyek akan meliputi:
28
Mobilisasi/demobilisasi yang terjadi sekali-sekali atas peralatan berat ke dan antara lokasi-lokasi pengerukan. Sebagian besar hal ini kemungkinan akan terjadi pada malam hari. Pengangkutan secara reguler lumpur yang telah dikeruk ke CDF Ancol dan sampah ke Tempat Pembuangan Akhir (TPA) Bantar Gebang. Hal ini akan dibatasi hanya pada malam hari. Pergerakan yang sering terjadi, di "semua jam" oleh beberapa kendaraan ringan yang mengangkut orang, dan lain-lain ke/dari lokasi.
92. Dua butir pertama di atas akan dibahas lebih lanjut. Kemacetan lalu lintas di Jakarta dan dampak-dampak yang timbul merupakan masalah-masalah yang telah sangat disadari, dan secara sebagian untuk menangani masalah ini, Pemerintah DKI Jakarta telah memiliki aturan dan prosedur yang ditetapkan dengan baik untuk mengendalikan kendaraan-kendaraan berat. Yang patut diperhatikan adalah: Pengendalian umum baik untuk jam-jam operasi (umumnya pada malam hari untuk menghindari saat-saat dimana jalan paling sibuk) dan untuk jalan-jalan yang "ditentukan". Persyaratan agar Rencana-Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas dikembangkan dan disetujui terlebih dahulu untuk pergerakan-pergerakan "di luar kebiasaan" (seperti mobilisasi peralatan pembangunan yang sangat berat) dan untuk pergerakan truk intensif jangka menengah secara rutin yang akan terjadi pada truk-truk pengangkut material hasil kerukan. Persyaratan agar kendaraan-kendaraan secara teratur diperiksa untuk kelayakan jalan dan untuk emisinya. 93. Sekurang-kurangnya semua lalu lintas proyek JUFMP akan diwajibkan oleh kontrak untuk mematuhi aturan-aturan dan prosedur-prosedur yang telah ditetapkan tersebut. Namun mengingat sifat proyek ini, diperlukan adanya pertimbanganpertimbangan tambahan sebagaimana diuraikan di bawah ini. Area yang terkena dampak lalu lintas proyek dapat dikategorikan sebagai berikut: Akses langsung ke lokasi subproyek dan rute-rute pengumpan setempat ke rute-rute pengangkutan utama. Rute-rute pengangkutan utama. Jalan utama di sekitar Ancol (Jl. RE Martadinata) di mana akan terjadi pergerakan truk pengangkut JUFMP paling banyak sebelum masuk ke CDF Ancol. 94. Isu-isu yang berbeda sangatlah penting untuk area-area yang berbeda tersebut. Isu-isu yang terkait dengan akses langsung dan rute-rute pengumpan setempat sangat difokuskan pada interaksi dengan masyarakat setempat. Jalanjalan biasanya sempit, tempat parkir terbatas, dan sering terjadi kepadatan tinggi dari orang-orang yang tinggal dan bekerja di area tersebut. Oleh karena itu, isu-isu yang terkait dengan akses pengerukan yang dipilih (karena hal ini akan mempengaruhi akses jalan dan rute-rute pengumpan setempat), metode operasi yang aman, dan praktik-praktik operasional seperti pengendalian kebisingan, jamjam operasi yang dipilih, pengendalian emisi, pencegahan tumpahan, dan lain-lain. Dengan demikian, selain rencana pengelolaan lalu lintas standar, perhatian harus diberikan untuk interaksi dengan penduduk setempat dengan menyadari bahwa akan ada dampak-dampak lalu lintas merugikan jangka pendek/menengah, tetapi dengan Kontraktor dan masyarakat bekerja sama untuk mencapai hasil yang dapat 29
diterima. Sebagai contoh, Kontraktor dapat melibatkan masyarakat setempat untuk pengamanan atau sebagai petugas lalu lintas tidak resmi. 95. Dampak-dampak lalu lintas pada rute-rute transportasi utama akan kecil dengan mempertimbangkan bahwa pergerakan truk pengangkutan akan terjadi pada malam hari ketika kendaraan pergerakan lalu lintas umum akan sangat jauh lebih sedikit dibandingkan pada siang hari dan terutama puncaknya pada pagi dan sore hari. Tingkat pergerakan truk yang tertinggi akan terjadi di Jl. RE Martadinata dekat lokasi proyek Ancol. Di lokasi ini, dampak-dampaknya terkait dengan masalah kapasitas jalan dan juga kerusakan jalan prematur karena pergerakan truk bermuatan yang terjadi berulang-ulang. Sementara jumlah yang sebenarnya dari truk-truk JUFMP akan bergantung pada rencana-rencana pekerjaan kontraktor masing-masing, diperkirakan bahwa mungkin terdapat sebanyak 40-50 pergerakan per jam sekali jalan dari pergerakan material hasil kerukan JUFMP Fase 1, tetapi lebih cenderung dengan rata-rata sekitar 30 pergerakan per jam, dengan semua pergerakan terjadi pada waktu malam hari di saat lalu lintas sepi. Di daerah ini, jalannya dalam kondisi baik, terbagi, dengan 2 jalur pergerakan lalu lintas bebas di masing-masing arah, dengan kapasitas yang dihitung dari tabel standar sebanyak 3.250 "unit mobil penumpang" (passenger car unit/pcu) per jam per 2 jalur 1 arah kendaraan per jam. Dengan menentukan sebuah truk setara dengan 3 pcu, puncak pergerakan truk JUFMP akan berada sekitar 5% dari kapasitas, dan pada waktuwaktu tersebut, lalu lintas selain JUFMP akan berada jauh di bawah kapasitas. 96. Dengan demikian, pengelolaan lalu lintas akan dilakukan dengan Kontraktor memberikan Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas Terperinci Kontraktor yang didasarkan pada: Persyaratan dari otoritas pengangkutan dan otoritas terkait. Konsultasi dengan masyarakat setempat yang disyaratkan dalam JUFMP. Integrasi dengan Rencana Kerja Kontraktor. Membahas persyaratan dalam AMDAL dan laporan ini. Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas Terinci sekurang-kurangnya harus membahas halhal sebagai berikut: Penentuan titik-titik akses ke/dari lokasi-lokasi pengerukan dan rute-rute pengumpan. Waktu operasi yang disepakati oleh masyarakat di area-area yang terdapat di dan berdekatan dengan lokasi-lokasi pengerukan. Setiap syarat operasional khusus yang disepakati dengan masyarakat setempat. Petugas kontraktor, marka, pembatas-pembatas, dan lain-lain, untuk memfasilitasi pergerakan kendaraan-kendaraan secara aman di dalam dan di sekitar lokasi pengerukan. Penentuan rute-rute utama yang ditunjuk, dan alternatif-alternatifnya jika ruterute utama ditutup atau dengan cara lain tidak tersedia, antara lokasi-lokasi pengerukan dan CDF Ancol sesuai dengan persyaratan dari otoritas lalu lintas. Spesifikasi umum dari truk-truk yang akan digunakan, termasuk bobot bersih dan kotor, daya muat, dan muatan maksimum per truk dengan mempertimbangkan persyaratan "tidak ada tumpahan". Acuan khusus kepada pencegahan tumpahan diberikan dalam Bagian 6.2.5.
30
Perkiraan puncak pergerakan truk per jam dari setiap area pengerukan, dan jumlah rata-rata pergerakan truk per jam dengan mempertimbangkan rencana pengerukan, puncak harian dan rata-rata jangka panjang. Sertifikasi bahwa hanya kendaraan-kendaraan yang saat ini memiliki sertifikat kelayakan jalan yang akan digunakan. Metode yang mengidentifikasi dengan jelas (dari inspeksi eksternal secara cepat) bahwa truk-truk terkait dengan proyek JUFMP dan terkait dengan Kontraktor tertentu dan subproyek tertentu. Garis besar persyaratan keselamatan dan pelatihan yang akan dibutuhkan oleh semua pengemudi, termasuk sebuah program yang difokuskan pada bahaya tertentu dari mengemudi pada malam hari secara terus-menerus. Sertifikasi bahwa Kontraktor bertanggung jawab untuk memastikan bahwa Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas Terperinci telah diimplementasikan, apakah truk-truk dioperasikan langsung oleh Kontraktor atau oleh subkontraktor, dan lain-lain. 97. Rencana ini akan memerlukan persetujuan dari otoritas terkait (atas biaya Kontraktor) dan Konsultan Pengawasan. Konsultan Pengawasan akan memiliki tanggung jawab utama untuk memantau kepatuhan. Selanjutnya, mengingat JUFMP akan memiliki beberapa Kontrak yang bersamaan, Konsultan Pengawasan akan bertanggung jawab untuk: sedapat mungkin memastikan kesesuaian antara Rencana-Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas Kontraktor yang berbeda membuat penilaian yang terintegrasi atas volume-volume lalu lintas untuk bagian Jl. RE Martadinata di dekat lokasi Ancol untuk memastikan bahwa lalu lintas secara keseluruhan yang terkait dengan JUFMP tetap terjaga dalam kapasitas yang tersedia. Selama enam (6) bulan pertama dalam jangka waktu konstruksi, melakukan penghitungan lalu lintas secara terperinci di sekitar Jl. RE Martadinata/persimpangan CDF Ancol setidaknya sekali setiap dua bulan dari pukul 19.00 malam sampai pukul 07.00 keesokan harinya, yang akan mengidentifikasi dan menghitung lalu lintas non-JUFMP (berdasarkan kategori, misalnya, standar, truk, bus) dan lalu lintas JUFMP (dibagi berdasarkan Kontrak dan subproyek). Harinya (dalam minggu dan bulannya) akan acak dan bervariasi, dan tidak akan diumumkan kepada Kontraktor sebelum atau selama survei dilakukan. Mengetahui peristiwa-peristiwa yang mungkin menimbulkan masalahmasalah kemacetan dan berkoordinasi sebagaimana perlu dengan Kontraktor untuk melakukan penjadwalan ulang atas truk pengangkut material hasil kerukan. Pastikan bahwa setiap kerusakan jalan yang ditimbulkan oleh truk JUFMP harus diperbaiki oleh kontraktor dalam jangka waktu 24 jam atau ditutupi sementara dengan pelat baja sesuai dengan UU No.22 / 2009 tentang lalu lintas dan angkutan jalan. 98. Persyaratan dalam bagian ini harus terintegrasi dengan aspek-aspek "lalu lintas" lainnya di bagian-bagian lain seperti pencegahan terjadinya tumpahan. 6.2.9 Kualitas sedimen 99. Berdasarkan pengambilan sampel dan analisis ditemukan bahwa: 31
Tak satu pun material yang diuji dapat ditentukan sebagai "berbahaya" (atau "B3" dalam istilah Indonesia) yang akan membutuhkan kondisi-kondisi pembuangan khusus. Menggunakan "tingkat penyaringan" internasional yang relevan (tingkattingkat tersebut tidak termasuk dalam sistem regulasi Indonesia), hampir semua material diidentifikasi sesuai untuk digunakan dalam penggunaanpenggunaan lahan di masa depan tanpa adanya penyelidikan tambahan. Sebagaimana diketahui, aspek ini terkait dengan CDF Ancol dan AMDAL atau RKL/RPL yang Dimutakhirkan yang terkait dan pengawasan tambahan terbatas diidentifikasi untuk lokasi Ancol. Menggunakan informasi toksisitas langsung dan juga penilaian-penilaian kesehatan standar, material tersebut tidak memiliki risiko apa pun.
100. Komisi AMDAL/BPLHD DKI telah meminta dilakukannya pengujian sedimen tambahan di lokasi-lokasi JUFMP Fase 1 sebelum pengerukan dimulai dan setelah pengerukan selesai. Protokol-protokol yang sesuai telah dikembangkan, yang mengintegrasikan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional pengerukan yang diusulkan dengan prosedur-prosedur pengujian prapengerukan yang efektif dan hemat biaya. Untuk prosedur-prosedur pengujian prapengerukan, protokol-protokolnya mencakup metode pengambilan sampel dan interpretasi, dan tindakan yang timbul setelah analisis sampel. 101. Pengelolaan didasarkan pada persyaratan bahwa materi B3 tidak boleh dibuang di lokasi Ancol. Metode utama untuk mencapai hal ini adalah program pengawasan untuk mengidentifikasi kepatuhan dengan persyaratan ini sebelum dilakukannya pengerukan. Dengan menggunakan protokol yang telah ditetapkan, Tabel 6-1 merangkum perkiraan jumlah sampel gabungan yang akan diambil untuk pengambilan sampel prapengerukan untuk lokasi-lokasi JUFMP Fase 1. Tabel 6-1 Pengujian kualitas sedimen untuk lokasi-lokasi JUFMP Fase 1 Subproyek JUFMP Fase 1 Ciliwung Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati Kanal Banjir Cengkareng Sunter Bawah
Panjang km / Luas ha 5,10 km 4,90 ha 7,84 km 9,98 km Total:
Jumlah Sampel Gabungan 4 3 5 6 18
102. Pengambilan sampel dan analisis merupakan tanggung jawab dari Konsultan Pengawasan atas nama PMU/PIU yang terkait. Hal ini akan dimasukkan sebagai ruang lingkup pekerjaan dalam Terms of Reference konsultan. Diperkirakan bahwa pengumpulan dan analisis akan memakan biaya sekitar 3 - 4.000.000 rupiah (AS$300 - 400) per sampel. 103.
Tanggung jawab Kontraktor adalah: menentukan program pengerukan sehingga program pengambilan sampel, analisis, dan interpretasi dapat dilakukan secara tepat waktu (tidak terlalu awal sehingga menyebabkan tertundanya pengerukan yang direncanakan selama dilakukannya pengambilan sampel, analisis, dan interpretasi; tidak terlambat karena pengambilan sampel prapengerukan dilakukan untuk menunjukkan kondisi yang akan terjadi selama kegiatan pengerukan). Untuk tidak memulai pengerukan di suatu area sampai material telah diizinkan untuk dibuang ke CDF Ancol. 32
Persyaratan khusus untuk mencegah material apapun selain material hasil kerukan JUFMP yang "telah diuji dan diizinkan" untuk diangkut dan dibuang ke CDF Ancol.
104. BPLHD DKI bertanggung jawab untuk "menerima" informasi, dan apabila, meskipun kemungkinannya kecil, pengujian prapengerukan mengidentifikasi adanya material B3, untuk berpartisipasi dalam pengambilan keputusan tentang langkahlangkah lebih lanjut apa yang harus diambil. Namun keputusan akhir berada pada Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup, dan PMU serta PIU yang terkait, dan juga perlu dilibatkan dalam pembicaraan-pembicaraan. Kemungkinan prosedur dan hasil-hasil dapat termasuk: Lebih banyak pengambilan sampel dan analisis untuk menentukan dengan lebih pasti taraf kenaikan tingkat-tingkat. Pembuangan ke fasilitas limbah berbahaya PPLi. 6.2.10 Sampah 105. Pengelolaan sampah terkait erat dengan proyek dalam berbagai cara: Sangat disadari bahwa pembuangan sampah secara ilegal ke saluran air Jakarta menyumbang terhadap penimbunan sedimen/hilangnya kapasitas aliran dan kondisi yang tidak sedap dipandang. Pihak-pihak yang berwenang terlibat dalam program berkesinambungan untuk menyingkirkan (sebagian besar) sampah yang terapung disaluran air (pemilik jalan air yang terkait/PIU) dan dari area-area di sekitar jalan-jalan air tersebut (Dinas Kebersihan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta) Beberapa lokasi pengumpulan/pemilahan/pemindahan sampah setempat berada di dekat saluran air Masyarakat sering meminta layanan pengumpulan sampah terimprovisasi sebagai respon untuk menghentikan pembuangan ke saluran air. Sampah akan dimasukkan ke dalam material yang dikeruk dari saluran air oleh Kontraktor. 106. Kontraktor akan memiliki tanggung jawab untuk pengelolaan lokasi-lokasi pengerukan selama jangka waktu konstruksi (termasuk jangka waktu 6 bulan pemeliharaan) dan akan diharuskan untuk berkoordinasi dengan masyarakat setempat, "Dinas Kebersihan" Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, dan pemilik/PIU yang terkait untuk mengelola sampah dalam lokasi pengerukan yang ditentukan. Sebuah tanggung jawab khusus tambahan yang ditetapkan adalah untuk memisahkan benda-benda besar dari material hasil kerukan sebelum sedimen diangkut ke lokasi CDF Ancol. Secara khusus Kontraktor diharuskan untuk memastikan agar lokasi pengerukan yang ditentukan tetap bersih dan bebas dari sampah selama pelaksanaan kontrak dan juga agar selama jangka waktu tersebut tidak ada sampah terapung yang keluar dari lokasi pengerukan ke area-area luar. Sementara pemilahan untuk membersihkan benda-benda besar diperkirakan akan terjadi dalam lokasi pengerukan, Kontraktor bertanggung jawab untuk mengatur hal tersebut dan sampah lainnya akan dikelola secara tidak mencolok (dalam hal bau, kesehatan, pemandangan) dan tepat waktu dan yang akan diangkut dan dibuang ke TPST Bantar Gebang. Rincian tentang bagaimana cara kontraktor individu mengelola aspek ini akan disyaratkan dalam Rencana-Rencana Kerja dan ESMP Kontraktor. 107.
Dengan demikian, dampak-dampak pada sampah meliputi: 33
108.
Selama jangka waktu konstruksi, JUFMP akan memfasilitasi pemeliharaan jalan-jalan air dan lingkungan sekitarnya tetap bersih. "Peluang yang hilang", meskipun tidak diinginkan saat ini oleh sebagian anggota masyarakat, untuk menggunakan saluran air untuk pembuangan sampah, baik karena biaya, kemudahan, atau tidak ada alternatif yang realistis. Beberapa lokasi pengumpulan/pemilahan pemindahan setempat yang digunakan oleh masyarakat baik sebelum daur ulang maupun pembuangan ke TPA atau ke tempat lain, dan yang berada di lokasi-lokasi yang akan menjadi lokasi-lokasi kerja Kontraktor, akan terganggu. Kontraktor akan diminta untuk bernegosiasi dengan masyarakat dan pengelola lokasi-lokasi tersebut untuk membuat pengaturan-pengaturan alternatif yang dapat diterima bersama selama jangka waktu konstruksi. Pemisahan di tempat atas benda-benda besar sampah dari material hasil kerukan yang akan didaur ulang maupun dialihkan dan dibuang ke TPA Bantar Gebang. Dalam hal mempengaruhi kegiatan operasional di TPA Bantar Gebang Sampah yang terkait dengan pembersihan jalan air dan lingkungan sekitarnya adalah sampah yang seharusnya dibuang ke TPA Bantar Gebang apabila sistem pengumpulan dan pembuangan sampah, termasuk masukan dari masyarakat, berfungsi secara efektif. Kemungkinan terbesar, sampah yang diambil material hasil kerukan dan dialihkan ke TPA Bantar Gebang dapat dianggap sebagai beban tambahan untuk TPA Bantar Gebang. Perkiraan volume sampah yang akan diambil dan dibuang ke Bantar Gebang adalah sekitar 95.000 m3 selama jangka waktu 3 4 tahun. Ini merupakan persentase yang tidak signifikan dari beban normal yang diterima di Bantar Gebang (saat ini antara 5.000 - 6.000 ton per hari, atau sekitar 20.000 sampai 24.000 m3 per hari).
109. Tanggung jawab langsung untuk pengelolaan berada pada Kontraktor yang bekerja sama dengan masyarakat setempat dan pemerintah daerah, dan lain-lain. Biaya untuk pengelolaan sampah akan dimasukkan ke dalam kontrak-kontrak sebagai pos biaya satuan dari sampah yang diangkut dan dibuang ke TPA Bantar Gebang 6.3 Periode Pascapembangunan 110. Periode ini terkait dengan waktu setelah pembangunan dan jangka waktu pemeliharaan 6 bulan oleh Kontraktor telah selesai. Sebagian besar dampakdampaknya adalah pengurangan banjir secara menguntungkan yang diperkirakan akan terjadi dan dihasilkannya manfaat-manfaat kelancaran aliran untuk masyarakat. Aspek pengelolaan sampah secara berkesinambungan juga diidentifikasi dan dibahas. 111. Dari waktu ke waktu, pengerukan pemeliharaan secara berkesinambungan akan diperlukan untuk mempertahankan manfaat-manfaat dari program JUFMP. Perkiraan atas frekuensi hal ini tidaklah mungkin untuk dilakukan hal tersebut bergantung pada banyak faktor, termasuk pengelolaan daerah tangkapan air dan kondisi cuaca sebenarnya/aliran deras yang terjadi.
34
6.3.1 Masyarakat 112. Dampak-dampak pascapembangunan pada masyarakat akan terkait dengan: Dampak-dampak JUFMP yang dirasakan dan yang sebenarnya, dan terutama manfaat-manfaat yang terkait dengan meningkatnya penanggulangan banjir dan apakah proyek tersebut berhasil berada pada tingkat-tingkat pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang tepat. Potensi untuk meningkatkan sistem pengelolaan sampah (di atas yang ada saat ini) - lihat subbagian berikutnya. 113. Sebagaimana disebutkan dalam Bagian 2.2.2, pemantauan jangka waktu konstruksi atas persepsi masyarakat akan terus berlanjut sampai jangka waktu pemeliharaan setelah dilakukannya pengerukan dan pengangkutan. Sehingga pemantauan tambahan dalam periode pascapembangunan tidak diperlukan. 6.3.2 Pengelolaan Sampah dan Pengerukan 114. Proyek JUFMP akan mensyaratkan standar yang tinggi untuk pengelolaan sampah yang terkait dengan jangka waktu pengerukan dan jangka waktu pemeliharaan 6 bulan yang mengiringinya. Sementara tanggung jawab-tanggung jawab tertentu berada pada Kontraktor, hal ini juga melibatkan koordinasi dan kerjasama dengan "pemilik" jalan air terkait/PIU, Dinas Kebersihan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, dan masyarakat. 115. Berlanjutnya penimbunan sedimen di jalan-jalan air tidak dapat dihindari pascapengerukan JUFMP, karena akan terus ada pengiriman sedimen dan tingkat yang sangat rendah dari jalan-jalan air membatasi pembersihan diri untuk semua jangka waktu kecuali jangka waktu dengan aliran deras. Akan tetapi, praktik sebelumnya (sebelum pengerukan JUFMP) terkait dengan masuknya sampah secara signifikan yang mengurangi kapasitas aliran diharapkan akan jauh berkurang sebagai hasil dari proyek tersebut, meskipun tidak dapat sepenuhnya dicegah. Sehingga pengerukan pemeliharaan secara terus menerus perlu untuk dilakukan. 116. "Pemilik" terkait dari masing-masing jalan air akan bertanggung jawab untuk memantau penumpukan sedimen/profil jalan air dan hubungannya dengan kapasitas aliran. Waktu untuk pengerukan pemeliharaan akan diseimbangkan antara tidak membiarkan situasi memburuk dengan tahap banjir yang meningkat secara signifikan dan tidak melakukan pengerukan dengan sangat sering dan tidak ekonomis. Sehingga pengerukan pemeliharaan akan dilakukan dalam skala yang jauh lebih kecil dibandingkan dengan pengerukan JUFMP, baik dari segi jumlah material yang akan diangkat serta area yang akan dikeruk untuk kontrak-kontrak pemeliharaan di masa mendatang. Oleh karena itu, meskipun dampak-dampak yang serupa dengan pengerukan JUFMP akan mungkin terjadi, ukuran dampak-dampak tersebut akan jauh lebih kecil. Penanggulangan dan pemantauan juga akan serupa keadaannya, dengan belajar dari pengalaman JUFMP dan kembali dengan fokus pada mengintegrasikan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional melalui konsultasi dengan masyarakat. 117. Tanggung jawab JUFMP tidak akan dibebankan sampai melewati periode pascapembangunan, meskipun dengan menyediakan sebuah model kerja kepada para pemangku kepentingan jangka panjang yang relevan untuk jangka waktu konstruksi selama sekitar 2 tahun, terdapat kemungkinan bahwa akan ada 35
perbaikan-perbaikan jangka panjang dalam pengelolaan sampah dan pekerjaanpekerjaan pengerukan pemeliharaan di area-area proyek.
36
Lampiran 1 Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial Kontraktor Pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial (ESM) dianggap penting oleh para pengusul proyek (PMU/PIU). Proyek ini telah menjalani proses AMDAL Indonesia maupun penilaian Bank Dunia. Dalam kaitannya dengan ESM, Kontraktor harus mematuhi: AMDAL JUFMP terkait yang disetujui untuk lokasi-lokasi pengerukan. Setiap "Laporan Tambahan" atau laporan serupa yang diberikan sebagai bagian dari dokumen tender/penawaran. Semua persyaratan sosial dan lingkungan yang ada dalam dokumendokumen Kontrak. Semua undang-undang, peraturan, dan kebijakan yang terkait, tentang masalah-masalah lingkungan dan sosial di Jakarta. Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (Environmental and Social Management Plan/ESMP) Kontraktor. Lampiran ini merinci persyaratan untuk dua jenis ESMP Kontraktor: o ESMP Kontraktor Pendahuluan, yang harus disusun dan diserahkan sebagai bagian dari penawaran/Tender. o ESMP Kontraktor Terperinci, yang harus disusun dan diserahkan bersama dengan Rencana Kerja Kontraktor Terperinci dalam jangka waktu yang ditentukan dalam dokumen-dokumen Kontrak (secara nominal 30 hari setelah Pemberian Kontrak). o Kedua ESMP ini pada dasarnya mencakup aspek-aspek yang sama, perbedaan utamanya adalah pada jumlah rinciannya. Kecuali apabila ditentukan lain, istilah "ESMP Kontraktor" termasuk ESMP Pendahuluan maupun ESMP Terperinci.. Berikut ini merupakan hal-hal yang mengidentifikasi persyaratan minimum untuk "Rencana-Rencana ESM Kontraktor” yang sesuai. Perpanjangan tanggung jawab. Apabila istilah "Kontraktor" digunakan di bawah ini, istilah tersebut mengacu kepada (para) Kontraktor utama dan semua subkontraktor, sub-subkontraktor, dan lain-lain. Terlepas dari pengaturan subkontraktor apapun yang dibuat, Kontraktor akan tetap bertanggung jawab sepenuhnya kepada Prinsipal untuk pelaksanaan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang baik. Selanjutnya, ketika mengajukan para subkontraktor baik dalam penawaran atau selama pelaksanaan Kontrak kepada Konsultan Pengawasan, Kontraktor harus memberikan bukti tertulis dan ditandatangani sebagai bukti bahwa (para) subkontraktor telah mengetahui persyaratan pengaturan-pengaturan lingkungan dan sosial. Dokumen-dokumen tender harus menunjukkan: Persyaratan untuk penawar untuk menyusun sebuah "Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial Kontraktor Pendahuluan" (ESMP) bersaamaan dengan "Rencana Kerja Pendahuluan" sebagai bagian dari proses tender. Persyaratan untuk kontraktor pemenang untuk menyusun "ESMP Kontraktor Terperinci" sebagai bagian dari Rencana Kerja Terperinci yang harus diserahkan dalam jangka waktu satu bulan sejak Pemberian Tender dan harus disetujui oleh Konsultan Pengawasan. Pada bagian pengalaman Perusahaan dalam Penawaran Teknis, informasi berikut ini harus disertakan: o Kebijakan-kebijakan perusahaan terkait dengan lingkungan, tanggung jawab sosial, serta kesehatan dan keselamatan kerja 37
o Arsip-arsip tentang pelaksanaan kebijakan-kebijakan, termasuk setiap audit eksternal/independen atas pelaksanaan tersebut. o Salinan dari setiap penghargaan atau pengakuan lain untuk kinerja yang "baik"/"istimewa" terkait dengan pelaksanaan aktual atas pengelolaan sosial atau lingkungan dan pemantauan atas kontrakkontrak pembangunan dalam jangka waktu 5 tahun sebelumnya. o Sebuah pernyataan yang ditandatangani yang menyebutkan setiap denda yang ditimbulkan dalam jangka waktu 5 tahun sebelumnya yang terkait dengan masalah-masalah lingkungan dan/atau sosial dan/atau kesehatan kerja. Prinsipal mempertahankan hak untuk mendiskualifikasi setiap organisasi yang telah terbukti memalsukan pernyataan seperti itu. o Contoh-contoh Pembangunan rencana-rencana pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan, sosial, dan keselamatan yang telah dikembangkan secara khusus oleh organisasi. seseorang yang dicalonkan oleh Kontraktor harus memiliki kualifikasi khusus dan pengalaman praktis dalam menerapkan ESM di Kontrak-Kontrak Pembangunan yang serupa. Orang tersebut dapat merupakan seorang individu yang dicalonkan dengan tanggung jawab 100% untuk ESM atau dengan cara lain, tugas-tugas ESM dapat dibagi bersama dengan tugastugas lain (seperti keselamatan) dengan ketentuan bahwa sekurangkurangnya 50% dari waktunya disediakan untuk kegiatan-kegiatan ESM. Penentuan skor harus dilakukan sebagaimana yang ditunjukkan dalam bagian tentang penentuan staf. Proposal keuangan harus mencakup biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan ESM untuk Kontrak Pembangunan sebagai berikut: o Biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan penyusunan "ESMP Kontraktor" harus dimasukkan sebagai bagian dari setiap pembayaran yang diidentifikasi terkait dengan penyusunan Rencana Kerja Kontraktor. o Pos-pos "lingkungan dan sosial" khusus lainnya yang disebutkan dalam Jadwal Biaya o Tanpa pembatasan, biaya-biaya harga satuan harus mencakup semua biaya ESM lain yang terkait dengan pelaksanaan "ESMP Kontraktor" tersebut, Area-Area Pembangunan Sementara, biaya staf ESM, setiap denda atau beban yang dikenakan oleh otoritas pemerintah, menanggapi keluhan-keluhan dari masyarakat, dan apabila diperlukan, memperbaiki pelanggaran-pelanggaran terhadap praktik ESM yang baik dan/atau "ESMP Kontraktor” yang telah disetujui.
Isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial Isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial yang sering kali saling terkait yang menjadi tanggung jawab langsung Kontraktor dijelaskan berikut ini. Aspek-aspek tersebut juga harus dibaca dalam hubungannya dengan AMDAL-AMDAL, Laporan-Laporan Tambahan, dan lain-lain: Interaksi masyarakat Isu ini adalah suatu isu yang umum tetapi menyeluruh, yang terkait dengan aspekaspek seperti kebisingan dan getaran, lalu lintas, bau tidak sedap/bau busuk, penampilan/keindahan, kebersihan tempat kerja, "tumpahan" sedimen kerukan ke jalan-jalan dan tempat-tempat umum, keselamatan umum, perpindahan fisik yang telah diidentifikasi sebagai isu-isu yang menjadi perhatian masyarakat. Informasi 38
lebih lanjut tentang masalah-masalah yang diangkat selama konsultasi masyarakat sampai saat ini tersedia dari Prinsipal. Tujuan-tujuan spesifik/persyaratan kinerja ditetapkan dalam isu-isu lain yang mengiringi. Para penawar didorong untuk mengidentifikasi aspek-aspek lain apa saja yang mungkin mereka bahas atau lakukan untuk lebih meminimalkan "gangguan masyarakat" yang merugikan. Selain itu, Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor wajib mengidentifikasi dalam "ESMP Kontraktor" bagaimana mereka akan berpartisipasi dalam pengaturan-pengaturan penyelesaian pengaduan/sengketa masyarakat untuk proyek tersebut. Selanjutnya: Penawar didorong untuk terlibat dalam proses konsultasi masyarakat selama dilakukannya tender untuk memastikan bahwa apa yang diusulkan dalam ESMP Kontraktor Pendahuluan sejalan dengan kepentingan-kepentingan masyarakat setempat. Proses ini dilakukan atas biaya penawar tersebut. Pada saat diberikannya Kontrak, Kontraktor pemenang diharuskan untuk terlibat dalam sebuah proses konsultasi masyarakat sebagai bagian dari pengembangan Rencana Kerja Terperinci dan ESMP Terperinci oleh Kontraktor tersebut. Sebuah pos lini dalam jadwal biaya memungkinkan untuk diadakannya suatu pertemuan masyarakat terkait dengan proses ini. Selama pelaksanaan Kontrak, Kontraktor diharuskan untuk terlibat dalam pertemuan-pertemuan masyarakat lebih lanjut, dengan pos lini dalam Kontrak untuk memungkinkan dilakukannya hal tersebut. Area-area pembangunan sementara Gambar-gambar desain jelas menentukan batas-batas dari pekerjaan-pekerjaan permanen yang terutama terkait dengan kanal/saluran air (atau waduk), dan apabila diperlukan, pekerjaan-pekerjaan pembuatan tanggul; di beberapa lokasi, strukturstruktur seperti pompa, gerbang, dan lain-lain juga disertakan. Sebagaimana dinyatakan di tempat lain, Kontraktor wajib menentukan area-area tersebut melalui rencana survei terperinci sebelum dilakukannya setiap aktivitas lainnya di lokasi. Setiap area permanen tersebut juga dapat digunakan untuk tujuan-tujuan yang terkait dengan pembangunan, dengan ketentuan bahwa pengaman-pengaman lingkungan dan sosial yang diperlukan telah diimplementasikan. Diperkirakan bahwa Kontraktor mungkin ingin atau perlu menggunakan area tambahan untuk tujuan-tujuan sementara seperti, termasuk tetapi tidak terbatas pada, lapangan penyimpanan, kantor dan lapangan pembangunan, dan lain-lain. Area tersebut harus ditentukan sebagai "Area-area pembangunan sementara”. Tanggung jawab untuk menentukan "Area Sementara" berada pada kontraktor Peserta Tender, dan merupakan bagian dari "Rencana ESM Kontraktor" dalam hal penentuan yang jelas atas area-area dan waktu serta durasi yang diperkirakan untuk penggunaan setiap lokasi. Pemilihan area-area harus mempertimbangkan faktorfaktor sosial dan lingkungan dan "ESMP " harus menentukan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial spesifik terkait dengan setiap Area Sementara. Kebisingan dan getaran Isu kebisingan dan getaran telah diangkat selama dilaksanakannya berbagai kegiatan konsultasi masyarakat sebagai "isu yang menarik.” Pengukuranpengukuran sebagai bagian dari AMDAL menunjukkan bahwa kebisingan dan getaran tidak selalu memenuhi standar setempat. Diketahui pula bahwa standarstandar tidak selalu memperhitungkan situasi-situasi yang peka budaya seperti waktu sembahyang. 39
Kontraktor Peserta Tender wajib menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " rincian tentang cara Kontraktor mengelola dan memantau kebisingan dan getaran di lokasi. Biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan, misalnya, generator-generator dengan kebisingan rendah, atau penahan-penahan kebisingan harus dianggap sebagai bagian dari peralatan normal dan/atau biaya-biaya penetapan lokasi. Ahli Teknik, Prinsipal, atau pihak-pihak lainnya atas biaya mereka sendiri dapat melakukan pemantauan kebisingan dan/atau getaran pada setiap saat selama pelaksanaan Kontrak tanpa harus memberitahu Kontraktor terlebih dahulu bahwa pengukuran-pengukuran tersebut akan dilakukan. Jika menurut pendapat Ahli Teknik, baik berdasarkan pengukuran-pengukuran maupun keluhan-keluhan yang dapat dibenarkan dari masyarakat dan/atau otoritas, terjadi kebisingan atau getaran yang berlebihan, Ahli Teknik dapat memerintahkan Kontraktor untuk mematuhi standar yang relevan dan dengan komitmen-komitmen yang dibuat dalam "ESMP " tanpa adanya pembayaran yang dilakukan untuk menyesuaikan dengan kepatuhan. Lalu lintas AMDAL dan komentar dari masyarakat telah menunjukkan lalu lintas sebagai isu dalam kaitannya dengan: Kemacetan Sumber emisi udara Sebagai pengangkut material hasil kerukan, sumber potensi tumpahan (lihat selanjutnya) Kerusakan jalan. Semua Lalu Lintas Kontraktor wajib (tanpa biaya tambahan pada Kontrak) mematuhi semua peraturan dan persyaratan yang terkait dengan lalu lintas, termasuk tetapi tidak terbatas pada pembatasan waktu operasi, marka, dan kepemilikan sertifikatsertifikat uji emisi yang berlaku. Peserta Tender harus menyusun sebuah Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas Pendahuluan yang mempertimbangkan aspek yang disebutkan dalam AMDAL dan Laporan Tambahan. Perlu ditekankan bahwa Rencana ini membahas isu-isu sosial serta isu-isu yang lebih standar seperti ukuran truk, rute-rute, dan lain-lain. Kontraktor harus menyusun sebuah Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas terperinci untuk Kontrak dan memperoleh persetujuan dari Konsultan Pengawasan dan kemudian dari otoritas yang terkait. Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas akan menjadi bagian dari Rencana Kerja Kontraktor Terperinci dan metode-metode yang diusulkan ESMP untuk meminimalkan potensi dampak-dampak lalu lintas yang merugikan. Biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan penyusunan dan pelaksanaan Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas dibuat ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan yang terkait dengan pengangkutan material hasil kerukan dan pengangkutan sampah, sesuai keadaan. Bau tidak sedap/bau busuk AMDAL dan komentar dari masyarakat telah mengidentifikasi bau sebagai isu yang berkaitan dengan bau-bau yang timbul (terutama) dari material yang baru dikeruk. Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor wajib mengidentifikasi dalam "ESMP " metodemetode yang diusulkan untuk meminimalkan bau, bersama dengan standar kinerja 40
yang dapat diukur untuk kepatuhan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan. Biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional seperti material penutup, membatasi periode paparan, dan lain-lain, serta pengawasan yang diprakarsai Kontraktor harus dibuat ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan. Penampilan/keindahan Mengingat bahwa pengerukan dan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional yang terkait sebagian besar berada di area-area perkotaan dengan bangunan dan berpenghuni, Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor harus menyebutkan secara spesifik metode yang diusulkan untuk mengurangi setiap penurunan penampilan dan keindahan dalam "Rencana ESM ". Ingat bahwa hal ini juga dapat berinteraksi dengan isu-isu keselamatan umum. Kualitas air Meskipun diakui bahwa kualitas air di wilayah proyek tersebut buruk, AMDAL dan masyarakat berharap bahwa proyek tersebut tidak akan menyebabkan memburuknya kualitas air secara signifikan. Penyebab-penyebab potensial pemburukan lebih lanjut dapat muncul dari satu atau lebih hal berikut ini: pengeringan sedimen kerukan sebelum diangkut, tumpahnya bahan bakar, minyak, dan pelumas, sanitasi yang tidak benar, kendaraan yang tidak ditangani, dan air cucian di lokasi masuk ke saluran air, gangguan sampah yang mengapung di permukaan, gangguan sedimen berlebihan pada saat masih di bawah air. Kontraktor Peserta Tender wajib mengidentifikasi dalam "ESMP " metode-metode yang diusulkan untuk melindungi kualitas air. Biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan kegiatan-kegiatan persiapan dan operasional termasuk setiap pemantauan yang diprakarsai Kontraktor akan dibuat ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan. Konsultan Pengawasan (atas nama pengusul proyek), BPLHD DKI, atau pihak-pihak lainnya atas biaya mereka sendiri dapat melakukan pemantauan kualitas air pada setiap saat selama pelaksanaan Kontrak tanpa harus memberitahu Kontraktor terlebih dahulu bahwa pengukuran-pengukuran tersebut akan dilakukan. Jika menurut pendapat Ahli Teknik, baik berdasarkan pengukuran-pengukuran maupun keluhan-keluhan yang dapat dibenarkan dari masyarakat dan/atau otoritas, terjadi pencemaran air secara berlebihan, maka Konsultan Pengawasan dapat memerintahkan Kontraktor untuk mematuhi standar yang relevan dan dengan komoitmen-komitmen yang dibuat dalam "ESMP " tanpa adanya pembayaran yang dilakukan untuk menyesuaikan dengan kepatuhan tersebut. Sanitasi tempat kerja Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor wajib menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " fasilitas-fasilitas sanitasi yang diusulkan dan praktik-praktik yang akan dilakukan di seluruh Area Pembangunan Sementara dan permanen. Biaya yang terkait dengan kegiatan persiapan dan operasional akan dibuat ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan. "Tumpahan" sedimen kerukan ke jalan-jalan dan tempat-tempat umum Berdasarkan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional sebelumnya, masyarakat telah menyatakan kekhawatiran mengenai tumpahan material hasil kerukan dari truk-truk pengangkutan ke jalan-jalan yang mengarah ke lokasi pembuangan di Ancol. AMDAL menyebutkan faktor ini secara khusus, dan RPL/RKL yang telah disetujui mensyaratkan agar langkah-langkah dilakukan untuk mencegah tumpahan secara 41
efektif, serta dibuatnya sebuah program pemantauan untuk memastikan bahwa tumpahan tidak terjadi. Apabila tumpahan terjadi, prosedur-prosedur harus sudah disiapkan untuk memungkinkan dilakukannya pembersihan tumpahan tersebut secara cepat. Telah diketahui bahwa terdapat berbagai metode untuk memenuhi persyaratan tersebut. Sebagai tambahan untuk persyaratan tersebut, terdapat syarat-syarat lingkungan khusus terkait dengan lokasi reklamasi/pembuangan Ancol, termasuk syarat bahwa semua kendaraan yang meninggalkan lokasi wajib melewati fasilitas pencucian kendaraan. Karena terdapat beberapa kontraktor yang menggunakan lokasi Ancol, fasilitas pencucian kendaraan bersama harus dibangun dan dioperasikan oleh entitas pengelola CDF Ancol di mana masing-masing Kontraktor diwajibkan untuk mengarahkan semua kendaraannya melalui fasilitas ini. Tidak akan ada biaya untuk penggunaan fasilitas tersebut, namun tidak akan ada klaim untuk setiap keterlambatan disebabkan penggunaan fasilitas tersebut. Apabila Kontraktor berkeinginan untuk membangun dan mengoperasikan fasilitas khusus untuk penggunaan sendiri oleh Kontraktor tersebut, rencana-rencana dan rincian-rincian harus diberikan kepada Ahli Teknik untuk memperoleh persetujuan. Tidak ada pembayaran tambahan yang akan dilakukan untuk tindakan independen oleh Kontraktor tersebut. Kontraktor Peserta Tender wajib menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " metode-metode yang diusulkan untuk mencegah terjadinya setiap tumpahan, pemantauan sendiri oleh Kontraktor, dan prosedur-prosedur yang akan digunakan untuk memungkinkan dilakukannya pembersihan secara cepat atas setiap tumpahan yang terjadi, baik yang diidentifikasi oleh Kontraktor atau oleh Ahli Teknik . Biaya-biaya yang terkait dengan hal tersebut harus dibuat ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan Tanpa mengabaikan paragraf sebelumnya, Konsultan Pengawasan dapat memerintahkan Kontraktor untuk melakukan prosedur-prosedur pembersihan tambahan atau alternatif apabila terjadi tumpahan yang signifikan dan/atau sering dan/atau menyebabkan kerugian bagi masyarakat setempat. Tidak ada biaya tambahan yang akan dibayarkan kepada Kontraktor untuk prosedur-prosedur pembersihan tambahan atau alternatif tersebut. Selain itu, apabila Kontraktor tidak melakukan prosedur-prosedur tersebut secara tepat waktu sebagaimana diperintahkan oleh Ahli Teknik, Konsultan Pengawasan atas kebijaksanaannya sendiri dapat memanggil pihak lain untuk melakukan pembersihan tersebut, dan biayanya akan sepenuhnya dibebankan kepada Kontraktor. Keselamatan umum Proyek ini memiliki potensi isu-isu keselamatan umum yang signifikan, area-area pembangunan berada di dalam wilayah perkotaan yang berpenduduk padat, kegiatan-kegiatan operasional melibatkan mesin-mesin berat dan pergerakan material dan peralatan serta banyak kegiatan operasional akan dilakukan pada malam hari. Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor wajib menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " metode-metode yang diusulkan untuk menjaga keselamatan masyarakat. Biayabiaya yang terkait akan dibuat ke dalam biaya-biaya satuan. Tanpa mengabaikan paragraf sebelumnya, Konsultan Pengawasan dapat memerintahkan Kontraktor untuk melakukan langkah-langkah keselamatan tambahan apabila terjadi situasi yang tidak aman. Tidak ada biaya tambahan yang 42
akan dibayarkan kepada Kontraktor untuk langkah-langkah keamanan tambahan tersebut. Selain itu, apabila Kontraktor tidak melakukan prosedur-prosedur tersebut secara tepat waktu sebagaimana diperintahkan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan, Konsultan Pengawasan atas kebijaksanaannya sendiri dapat memanggil pihak lain untuk melaksanakan langkah-langkah keamanan tambahan dan/atau memerintahkan kegiatan-kegiatan operasional pengerukan dan pengangkutan untuk dihentikan, dan biayanya akan sepenuhnya dibebankan kepada Kontraktor dan Kontraktor tidak berhak melakukan klaim apa pun dari penghentian paksa kegiatankegiatan operasional tersebut. Pengaduan umum dan penyelesaian sengketa Suatu persyaratan penting dari Prinsipal dan dari para penyandang dana proyek (Bank Dunia) adalah bahwa harus terdapat mekanisme pengaduan masyarakat dan penyelesaian sengketa yang sesuai. JUFMP keseluruhan akan telah menetapkan mekanisme pengaduan masyarakat terkait dengan proyek pada saat penandatanganan Kontrak Pembangunan, khususnya terkait dengan pemukiman kembali dan ganti rugi untuk "area-area permanen" proyek, dan juga terkait dengan memungkinkan masyarakat setempat untuk menyampaikan komentar-komentar, termasuk keluhan-keluhan, tentang kegiatan-kegiatan terkait proyek agar menjadi perhatian dari instansi dan otoritas setempat. Sebagian besar dari komentarkomentar/keluhan-keluhan tersebut telah dan diharapkan untuk terus berkaitan dengan isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial. Terkait dengan pemukiman kembali dan ganti rugi sebagaimana dibahas sebelumnya, Kontraktor: Tidak akan memiliki keterlibatan sama sekali terkait dengan area-area kerja "permanen" Akan memiliki keterlibatan penuh terkait dengan "Area-Area Pembangunan Sementara” Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor wajib menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " metode-metode dan pengaturan-pengaturan yang diusulkan untuk penanganan pengaduan masyarakat dan penyelesaian sengketa untuk isu lingkungan dan sosial (selain pemukiman kembali dan ganti rugi). Tersedia berbagai pilihan untuk Kontraktor seperti: "ketergantungan sepenuhnya terhadap mekanisme-mekanisme pengaduan masyarakat dan penyelesaian sengketa lainnya terkait dengan proyek", bekerja bersama "mekanisme pengaduan masyarakat dan penyelesaian sengketa dari Kontraktor yang sepenuhnya independen". Dalam memutuskan pendekatan mana yang akan digunakan, harus dipahami dengan jelas bahwa Prinsipal, melalui Konsultan Pengawasan, diwajibkan dan berkomitmen untuk mempertimbangkan semua komentar (dan keluhan) yang dibuat dengan mekanisme-mekansime pengaduan masyarakat dan penyelesaian sengketa terkait dengan proyek secara keseluruhan. Pendekatan apa pun yang digunakan, semua biaya terkait Kontraktor untuk persiapan dan pemeliharaan akan menjadi bagian dari tarif satuan untuk proyek tersebut. Lapangan kerja setempat Bersamaan dengan proyek yang diusulkan, masyarakat setempat telah menyatakan minat untuk memperoleh kesempatan kerja. Peserta Tender dan Kontraktor wajib 43
menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " semua kesempatan kerja yang realistis yang akan tersedia untuk masyarakat setempat, memberikan jumlah pekerjaan yang tersedia berdasarkan kategori, kualifikasi, dan pengalaman yang diperlukan untuk mengisi pekerjaan-pekerjaan tersebut, jangka waktu kerja yang tersedia, dan langkahlangkah yang akan diambil untuk memastikan diutamakannya tenaga kerja dari masyarakat setempat. Faktor-faktor lainnya Keberhasilan pelaksanaan ESM membutuhkan lebih dari sekedar identifikasi langkah-langkah yang diusulkan untuk dilakukan. Diperlukan misalnya dukungan sumber daya manusia dalam aspek- aspek seperti penentuan staf secara spesifik, rantai tanggung jawab yang ditentukan, dan tenaga kerja yang menyadari isu-isu maupun mampu melaksanakan (seringkali dengan diberikan beberapa pelatihan). Kontraktor Peserta Tender wajib menyebutkan dalam "ESMP " rincian dari aspekaspek tersebut. Perlu dicatat bahwa penawaran itu sendiri disyaratkan untuk menentukan orang yang memenuhi syarat yang sesuai dengan pengalaman ESM praktis yang akan diperlukan untuk mengalokasikan setidaknya 50% dari waktu yang tersedia untuk ESM.
44
Lampiran 2 Matriks Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan JUFMP Fase 1 Tabel A - 1 Matriks EMP JUFMP Fase 1 Matriks berikut merangkum pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial untuk Subproyek-Subproyek JUFMP Fase 1. Rincian tambahan diberikan dalam laporan utama. Matriks ini melengkapi namun secara khusus tidak mengesampingkan RPL/RKL dalam AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 yang disetujui secara resmi oleh BPLHD DKI/Komisi AMDAL pada akhir bulan Maret 2010. Periode Dampak
Pengelolaan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
Prapembangunan * Memungkinkan 1 Memastikan kesesuaian antara PMU (melalui PC pengelolaan lingkungan & AMDAL, Finalisasi Desain teknik, PC) sosial secara efektif dan Dokumen Kontrak, dan pengaturanpengaturan institusional proyek terpadu 2 Membuat laporan lingkungan/sosial PMU (melalui PC tambahan sebagaimana diperlukan PC) PC 3 Menganalisis pilihan-pilihan PMU (melalui pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial untuk PC) berbagai macam isu * Persepsi masyarakat 1 Konsultasi masyarakat, termasuk FGD PMU (melalui PC PC) Pembangunan * Persepsi Masyarakat
1 Pertemuan-pertemuan yang CC disyaratkan dalam Kontrak antara Kontraktor dengan masyarakat – awalnya selama pengembangan ESMP Kontraktor Terperinci, kemudian pada selang waktu tertentu sesudahnya 2 Kemampuan untuk penyediaan SC informasi dan penerimaan keluhan secara terus menerus – membangun dan mengoperasikan POSKO 3
Serangkaian
kuesioner
dan SC
45
1
Pemantauan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
Memastikan syarat-syarat PMU yang diperlukan dalam dokumen-dokumen tender
PMU
Penerimaan laporan-laporan PMU
PMU
Penerimaan laporan-laporan PMU
PMU
Kuesioner-kuesioner pelaporan
PMU
dan PMU
CC Penerimaan laporan-laporan SC Perkiraan $1.000/lokasi
SC
SC 1 Menyelidiki keluhan- SC Perkiraan keluhan PMU $10.0002 Pelaporan kegiatan bulanan 20.000 per lokasi SC Pelaporan kepada PMU/PIU; PMU
SC PMU
PMU
1
Periode Dampak
Pengelolaan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
wawancara dengan masyarakat
1
Pemantauan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Perkiraan ditambah umpan balik kepada $1.000 per Kontraktor lokasi CC Disyaratkan untuk disetujui SC oleh SC; kemudian pemantauan kepatuhan secara terus menerus.
* Pengelolaan lingkungan 1 ESMP Kontraktor sebagai tambahan CC dan sosial yang untuk Rencana-Rencana Kerja terintegrasi erat dengan Kontraktor yang disusun oleh Kontraktor kegiatan-kegiatan untuk menyesuaikan dengan AMDAL, Pembangunan laporan tambahan, dan lain-lain – Setelah konsultasi masyarakat yang disyaratkan termasuk dalam kaitannya dengan akses dan lokasi-lokasi kerja. 2 Kebutuhan untuk instruksi untuk pelatihan sesuai kebutuhan untuk staf, para Subkontraktor, dan lain-lain * Pekerjaan setempat 1 Kontraktor didorong untuk CC (yang diinginkan oleh mempekerjakan orang-orang setempat masyarakat) * Tumpahan material 1 Metode-metode terperinci dalam CC hasil kerukan ESMP Kontraktor; ditambah pelatihan untuk pekerja. 2 Pembersihan tumpahan material yang SC telah ditentukan – termasuk oleh pihak lain apabila Kontraktor tidak membersihkan sebagaimana dan pada saat diperintahkan. * Kualitas Udara (pada 1 Kendaraan-kendaraan harus memiliki CC waktu-waktu tertentu, sertifikat kesesuaian emisi latar belakang) 2 Debu – pencegahan dengan, misalnya CC pengendalian tumpahan, pembersihan 3 Bau – meminimalkan jumlah CC paparan/durasi, kesepakatan dengan masyarakat * Kebisingan (catatan, 1 Kesepakatan untuk dicapai dengan CC latar belakang sering kali masyarakat setempat, terutama dalam
CC CC
dari CC, SC SC SC
CC, SC SC SC
Pemantauan secara visual, PMU penerimaan keluhan-keluhan
PMU
CC
Pemeriksaan kesesuaian
SC
SC
CC
Pemantauan secara visual, SC menerima keluhan-keluhan Pemantauan manual di SC lokasi, penerimaan keluhankeluhan. Meninjau Rencana & SC Konsultasi
SC
CC
1
SC
SC
CC
46
1. Umpan balik masyarakat. 2. Pelaporan ke SC; Rencana untuk disetujui
Biaya
SC SC
Periode Dampak
Pengelolaan Uraian
melebihi standar)
kaitannya dengan waktu kegiatan dan area-area yang peka kebisingan. 2 Pelatihan untuk pekerja; Peralatan CC peredam suara yang diperlukan
* Lalu lintas Lihat bagian lain untuk dampak konsekuensial Seperti kebisingan, emisi, tumpahan
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
1
C
Pemantauan secara visual, SC penerimaan keluhan-keluhan
GSC
CC, SC
Pemantauan secara visual SC dan perhitungan spesifik bulanan, penerimaan keluhan-keluhan Laporan laboratorium, Izin SC, PMU untuk mengeruk & BPLHD mengangkut – atau ditunda)
SC
SC Perkiraan $15.000 DITAMBAH penyisihan $15.000 untuk pengujian tambahan Instruksi CC resmi CC
47
Biaya
SC
CC
* Kualitas sedimen 1 Pemantauan prapengerukan dan SC (berdasarkan pascapengerukan untuk menentukan B3 pencegahan atau bukan, yang disyaratkan oleh pembuangan limbah B3 BPLHD/Komisi AMDAL dengan di CDF Ancol persetujuan untuk AMDAL Fase 1 (lihat nomor 4 di bawah ini apabila pengujian kualitas sedimen mengidentifikasikan adanya material B3) 2 Persyaratan untuk mengeruk dan CC mengangkut sedimen hanya setelah material memperoleh izin 3 Larangan khusus untuk mengambil, CC
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Pemantauan manual di SC lokasi, penerimaan keluhankeluhan. Meninjau rencana sebelum SC diajukan kepada otoritas. Menerima dari Kontraktor. Salinan dari rencana yang telah disetujui sepenuhnya.
CC
1 Membuat Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu CC Lintas (Traffic Management Plan/TMP) terperinci sebagai bagian dari Rencana Kerja Kontraktor dan ESMP Kontraktor – untuk menyertakan aspek-aspek teknis, perundang-undangan/peraturan, dan setelah dilakukannya konsultasi dengan masyarakat yang disyaratkan. Memperoleh persetujuan atas rencana dari otoritas setempat. Pelatihan untuk para operator truk 2 Menjaga jangka waktu CC operasional/akses setempat/rute sebagaimana dalam TMP 3 Mengintegrasikan dengan semua CC, SC angkutan JUFMP yang lain untuk mencegah kemacetan di dekat Ancol.
Pemantauan Uraian
Uji
melalui
petik,
laporan SC, PMU BPLHD
penerimaan SC
1
SC
SC, PMU BPLHD
SC, PMU BPLHD SC
Periode Dampak
Pengelolaan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
1
Pemantauan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
1
keluhan-keluhan menyimpan, mengangkut, atau dengan cara lain menangani setiap material padat selain dari material hasil kerukan JUFMP yang telah “diizinkan” tanpa adanya persetujuan tertulis dari SC Notulen rapat KLH, SC KLH, SC – Penyisihan * Kualitas sedimen 4i Keputusan dibutuhkan untuk KLH (hanya jika pengujian menentukan penyelidikan lebih lanjut bertanggung sebanyak $ alam butir 1 di atas apa yang diperlukan dan pengelolaan jawab secara 5.000 untuk mengidentifikasi adanya utama apa yang akan diterapkan hukum untuk pengujian tambahan material B3) mengambil dalam keputusan. biaya Masukan dari JUMFP BPLHD, PMU, PIU, SC 4ii kemungkinan keputusan yang KLH harus Penyisihan Pelaporan tentang SC – sesuai JUFMP tambahan dihasilkan untuk membuang ke Ancol mengambil sebanyak $ pengawasan ketat atas dengan untuk (mungkin dengan kondisi khusus) keputusan 100.000 pada pengerukan, pengangkutan, persyaratan KLH dan PIU kontrak SC maupun membuang ke lokasi PIU & SC harus biaya JUFMP dan pembuangan pembuangan limbah berbahaya PPLi mempersiapkan * Sampah 1 Persyaratan umum untuk menjaga CC Pemantauan secara visual, SC SC CC lokasi dan lingkungan sekitarnya bersih, penerimaan keluhan-keluhan berdasarkan konsultasi/kesepakatan dengan pihak berwenang dan masyarakat. Rinciannya akan ditentukan dalam Rencana Kerja dan ESMP. 2 Pemisahan benda-benda besar dari CC CC Pemantauan secara visual SC SC material hasil kerukan sebelum diangkut ke Ancol 3 Mengatur pengangkutan dan CC CC Pemantauan secara visual SC SC pembuangan sampah bersih, yakni setelah benda-benda yang dapat didaur ulang telah disingkirkan) dari lokasilokasi pembangunan ke TPA Bantar Gebang.. 4 Mengembangkan program-program PIU, dinas PIU, DKI Mengkoordinasikan dan SC SC
48
Periode Dampak
* Pelaporan lingkungan
Pengelolaan Uraian
Tanggung Biaya 1 Jawab kebersihan DKI
1
pengumpulan, pemisahan/pendaurulangan dan pengangkutan/pembuangan sampah setempat secara berkelanjutan untuk area-area setempat dalam persiapan untuk periode Pascapembangunan 1 Laporan-laporan harus disusun untuk SC SC PMU & PIU (bulanan) dan BPLHD (menyusun (triwulan) untuk dan atas nama PIU/PMU)
Pascapembangunan * Pengurangan ketinggian 1 Mengoperasikan sistem-sistem sesuai PIU banjir dengan parameter rancangan dan apabila perlu memutakhirkan aturan pengoperasian seirin dengan berkembangnya pengelolaan banjir Jakarta secara keseluruhan 2 Menyebarluaskan informasi kepada PIU masyarakat dan menerima umpan balik dari masyarakat. * Manfaat bagi 1 Memperoleh manfaat dari pengelolaan PIU, DKI masyarakat banjir dan pengelolaan sampah – masyarakat memiliki peran partisipatif pemangku kepentingan * Pengelolaan sampah 1 Tersedianya sistem-sistem DKI pengelolaan sampah yang berkelanjutan yang menghindari kebutuhan untuk menggunakan jalan-jalan air dan lingkungan sekitarnya sebagai bagian dari pilihan pembuangan * Pemeliharaan 1 Menentukan kebutuhan untuk PIU pengerukan pengerukan pemeliharaan di masa mendatang
49
Pemantauan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab
Biaya
1
menghadiri pertemuanpertemuan. Notulen rapat dan rencana aksi.
Laporan-laporan dibuat dan PMU, PIUs diterima
PMU, PIU
PIU
Pencatatan tingkat ketinggian PIU air, terutama selama banjir
PIU
PIU
Arsip-arsip tentang interaksi PIU masyarakat
PIU
PIU, DKI
Tidak diperlukan
DKI
Pemantauan secara visual
PIU
Pemantauan secara visual, PIU partisipasi dalam pemantauan/prediksi/survei lintas-bagian atas banjir di Jakarta secara keseluruhan
DKI DKI Pemantauan secara informal oleh masyarakat PIU
Periode Dampak
Pengelolaan Uraian 2 Serupa dengan pengerukan JUFMP, tapi dimodifikasi untuk mendapatkan manfaat dari pelajaran-pelajaran yang diambil dan mempertimbangkan pengerukan pemeliharaan dalam skala yang lebih kecil
Tanggung 1 Jawab PIU
Biaya PIU
1
Pemantauan Uraian
Tanggung 1 Jawab Mirip dengan pemantauan PIU tahap pembangunan JUFMP, diubah karena skala dan pengalaman yang diperoleh
Catatan 1: Tanggung jawab (Tanggung jawab utama saja) PMU = Project Management Unit/Unit Pengelolaan Proyek PIU = Project Implementation Unit/Unit Pelaksana Proyek PC = Project preparation consultants/Konsultan persiapan Proyek CC = JUFMP Construction Contractor/Kontraktor Konstruksi JUFMP SC = JUFMP Supervision Consultant/Konsultan Pengawasan JUFMP BPLHD = Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah Pemerintah DKI Jakarta KLH =Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup
50
Biaya PIU
1
1
Technical Assistance for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (EIA / SIA) Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) – Grant TF#054683-IND
Ancol Updated RKL/RPL
Supplementary Report
SEPTEMBER 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 JUFMPspecific AMDALs. Evaluation of future land use activities was effectively left to postreclamation 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 dredgedsludge 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 400,000m3 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, subcontractors, 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 Secondary
PT. PJA and PMU to implement regular coordination meetings 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 postdisposal 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
PURPOSE AND NEED 1. Clear description of underlying need for the proposed project
2. Clear description of purpose of proposed project 3. Adequate description of the proposed project PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 1. Consideration of all relevant alternative types a. No action
Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents OK
Reclamation of the north coastline of Jakarta has been 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 Covered in AMDAL and Updated RKL / RPL
OK Mostly OK
Limited / No discussion
b. alternative sites
Limited / No discussion
c. Alternative design
Limited / No discussion Limited / No discussion OK
d. Alternative control e. Structural alternatives f. Non-structural alternatives 2. All alternatives satisfy the stated purpose and need for the project 3. Description of all alternative actions or projects that were, or are being considered a. Size and location of reclamation b. land requirements c. operation and management requirements d. Auxiliary structures
Limited / No discussion Limited / No discussion Limited / No discussion
OK OK
OK
No discussion; the no dredging option not an alternative. Land reclamation pre-decided by earlier government policy and planning No discussion; but alternative sites known and dismissed before proceeding to preparation of Updated RKL / RPL because of social/resettlement issues or close to conservation areas No discussion, but design based on PT. PJA’s extensive experience in reclamation No discussion Some discussion. Techniques based on locally proven experience.
No alternatives to either the reclamation or the dredging would satisfy the stated purposes and needs of the two projects. Overwhelming identified for flood control. JUFMP dredging part of an integrated program.
Activity “forming” land
Limited / No discussion
18
Checklist item
e. Construction schedules
4. Description of initial environmental impact assessment processes and results DESCRIPTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 1. Region of concern defined, including boundary areas 2. Physical-chemical environment a. Air resources i) meteorological data (e.g. temperature, wind) ii) ambient air quality (e.g. particulates, ozone) iii) noise data iv) mobile sources of emissions (e.g. cars and trucks) b. Sea water c. Surface Water i) location and type (e.g. estuaries, streams, lakes and their position relative to the site) ii) water quality information (e.g. dissolved oxygen, temperature, nutrients) iii) existing pollutant sources (locations and amount of discharge) iv) future uses v) discussion of flooding events d. Ground Water vi) description of key factors (e.g. depth to water table, overlying soils, geologic features) vii) water quality information (e.g. pH solids) e. Soils and Geology i) physiographic and geomorphology ii) soil structure iii) ground water movement iv) erosion potential v) subsidence vi) seismic activity (e.g. proximity to faults, history of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions) vii) mineral resources (e.g. locations of deposits, types and quantities, ownership of mining rights) 3. Biological Conditions a. Wildlife and Vegetation i) description and listing of aquatic,
Coverage in AMDAL and Updated RKL / RPL documents Limited / No discussion
OK
Comments by reviewers. Further description of discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ assessments. Two interrelated aspects to consider: scheduling of 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. The introduction of the Updated RKL-RPL explains the earlier AMDAL process and why the Update was required.
OK
Chapter 2 provides: standard practice within the AMDAL system.
OK
In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL
OK
In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL
OK OK
In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL
OK
In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL
OK
The estuarine Ancol River near the project site is only important surface water body near the site.
OK
In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL
Limited / No discussion OK OK
OK
Causes of measured water quality exceedances not identified, but well known that common in (especially) nearshore Jakarta Bay from combined effects of residential and industrial pollution from Jakarta. Described In relation to design wave heights. Plus modelling showed very minimal sea water changes resulting from development. In 2006 AMDAL
Limited / No discussion OK OK No discussion OK Mostly OK
Of limited relevance since in marine environment
No discussion
In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL In 2006 AMDAL and 2009 Updated RKL / RPL Of limited relevance since in marine environment In Updated RKL / RPL. Predictions presented. Addressed in terms of design settlement, without mention of well known overall/regional subsidence. Well known in Jakarta with design to address.
No discussion
Considered as highly improbable
Highly human-disturbed environment. No endangered or rare species were found.
OK
19
Checklist item
wetland and terrestrial flora and fauna (e.g. species lists, abundances) ii) description and listing of native species of wildlife and vegetation present iii) description and listing of particularly invasive exotic species of wildlife and vegetation b. Community and Habitat Characterization i) maps and descriptions of the aquatic, wetland and terrestrial communities found in and around the project site c. Ecologically Significant Features i) support of broader ecosystems by the project site (e.g. if located along a flyway or other biological corridor) ii) important ecological functions of the project site (e.g. nutrient source through flooding, storm water retention) iii) characterization of relevant disturbance regimes, natural and projectinduced (e.g. floods, fire, potential impact of logging) iv) description of hydrologic processes (e.g. ground and surface water flows and durations) v) description of important biotic interactions (e.g. interdependence of plants and animals at the site and with other sites) 4. Waste Management and Pollution Prevention a. Locations of expected waste disposal or discharge b. Description of waste management techniques (e.g. treatment, storage, transport, recycling) c. Projected waste characteristics (e.g. types, quantities, toxicity) 5. Socioeconomic Environment a. Land use
i) description of present and historic land use ii) map of present and historic land use b. Population and housing i) demographic information (e.g. average household size, age, age/sex distribution, ethnic composition and community cohesion) c. Economic activity i) description of present economic activity (e.g. number and type of businesses,
Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents
OK No discussion OK Limited descriptions, no maps
Terrestrial flora and fauna and plankton and benthos are catalogued. Not significant. Very limited and largely human-disturbed natural habitats. Considered not important. Site itself disturbed environment
Limited / No discussion
Most probably none. Highly unlikely to be important; part of polluted Jakarta Bay
Limited / No discussion
Highly unlikely to be important; part of polluted Jakarta Bay
OK
Identified as part of human-disturbed environment arising from Jakarta’s waterborne pollution.
Limited
Surface currents addressed; limited significance
Limited.
Highly unlikely to be important; part of polluted Jakarta Bay
Limited
Site itself becomes dredged sludge confined disposal site compared with current situation of material otherwise washing into Bay with no controls. Describes sludge placement details; especially confined and final top cover
Limited OK
Characteristics of dredged sludge identified.
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. Limited Site itself currently nearshore and only occasional human use for transit (by boats) and informal recreational fishing Mostly OK Maps available, difficult to read but get general impressions. Also site is “water”, not land. Of limited practical significance as will be little interaction with surrounding population during development Limited general Of no practical significance information Limited but adequate Limited but adequate
20
Of limited practical significance as there will be little interaction with surrounding population during development Of limited practical significance
Checklist item
annual revenues, ownership patterns) ii) description of unique features of business community (e.g. high seasonality of trade, high outflow of profit, declining of trade or downtown revitalization) iii) consideration of interplay among economic activity, capacity of public services and fiscal ability of community to respond to capacity needs d. Community Services and Public Finances i) description of interplay among economic activity, capacity of public services and fiscal ability of community to respond to capacity needs e. Transportation i) description of all relevant forms of transportation for facility ii) current traffic volumes iii) current traffic capacity
Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents Limited but adequate
Of limited practical significance
Not relevant
There is no information about the role of each local business groups and their relationship with public services available.
Limited but adequate
In Updated RKL / RPL
Adequate
Identifies immediate land and sea routes to site. More distant routs to be addressed by JUFMP
OK Mostly OK Mostly OK Limited discussion Limited discussion
Old (2004) data presented, Old (2004) data presented, but adequate to highlight congestion during peak hours. Limited relevance Identifies potential constraints; responsibility for JUFMP AMDALs to address
iv) provision of public transportation v) assessment of the adequacy of the systems for meeting peak demands 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 AMDAL and Updated RKL / RPL documents Limited discussion
i) identification of emission sources and project emission rates and comparison to ii) comparison of predicted atmospheric Not discussed levels with national, state or local ambient levels 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 degraded by various factors
Comments by reviewers. Further description of discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ assessments. Limited relevance; issues mainly site based and effects (if any) limited to workforce Very difficult; non-point source of variable emission. For several parameters standards often exceeded in Jakarta airshed.
Addressed; but do not put in reasonable context given regional conditions of existing polluted urban drains flowing uncontrolled into and polluting Jakarta Bay Addressed, basis of assessment uncertain.
ii) prediction of pollutant concentrations in OK 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 site preparation activities to alter critical habitats ii) consideration of potential for secondary changes in habitats following construction iii) assessment of possible permanent loss or displacement of vegetation iv) identification of changes in local species composition, diversity and abundances v) identification of best mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts 3. Waste Management and Pollution Prevention a. description of facility waste management plan with procedures for treatment and handling
OK
Identified; non-critical nature identified by inference as modified / polluted nearshore environment.
Limited /No discussion No discussed Inferred Inferred
OK
Considered of limited significance considering surrounding habitats. Very limited relevance; only (mostly marine) vegetation disturbance / destruction will be of very low conservation significance. Total loss of polluted marine habitat Confinement. In overall context by confinement rather than (existing) uncontrolled transport of sediment to Jakarta Bay overall improvement. Construction waste management probably inadequately covered, but of little significance Briefly discussed; not put into context
22
Checklist item
b. discussion of projected facility waste characteristics c. identification of best mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts 4 Socioeconomic Impacts
Coverage in AMDAL and Updated RKL / RPL documents OK OK
Comments by reviewers. Further description of discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ assessments. Briefly discussed; not put into context Methods identified
1 identification of existing or planned land use areas lost to site preparation
Discussed
Almost no relevance
2 determination of conflicting zoning requirements and land uses with site
Discussed
In conformity with spatial plans
3 description of anticipated changes in nearby land as a result of the facility
Discussed
Of limited relevance
4 identification of the best mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts b) Economic Activity 1 address changes in employment patterns 2 address ability of available labour pool to meet project-related employment needs 3 identification of economic multipliers used in analysis and their source 4 discussion in potential change in overall economic activity in the region 5 identification of the best mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts c) Population and Housing
Limited discussion Probably adequate, considering context.
Discussed Limited / No discussion
Hypothetical, as will depend on contractor preferences. General acceptance that encouragement of local employment beneficial.
Limited discussion Of limited relevance during construction Limited / No discussion
Of limited relevance during construction
Limited discussion. Of limited relevance during construction
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 community services and infrastructure during project preparation 2 identification of shortfalls in transportation capacity due to either primary or secondary impacts 3 identification of best mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts
Limited discussion Limited relevance Discussed
Limited relevance
Limited discussion Limited relevance
23
Checklist item
e) Transportation
Coverage in Comments by reviewers. Further description of AMDAL and discussion in documents and / or reviewers’ Updated RKL / assessments. RPL documents 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 traffic on affected pavement and bridges
Limited / No discussion
Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in JUFMP AMDALs
4 description of mitigation measures to offset adverse impacts on structural integrity f) Healthy and Safety
Limited / No discussion
Limited relevance; as JUFMP trucks to be addressed in JUFMP AMDALs
1 evaluation of whether construction, 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 noise levels on workers and local communities 3 analysis of potential long-term contaminant bio accumulative within the food chain 4 identification of best mitigation measures to avoid or minimize adverse impact g) Environmental Equity
Limited discussion Limited relevance off-site;
Limited discussion Limited relevance off-site; Limited discussion Requires addressing Limited discussion ok
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 community structure changes caused by the project construction and operation 3 identification of the best mitigation measures to avoid for minimize adverse impacts 5 Cultural Resources a) Identification of any historical or cultural resources in close proximity to the site following correspondence with appropriate authorities b) Discussion in the mitigation measures necessary to preserve item of archaeological, historical or cultural interest c) Determination of the extent to which construction, operation and maintenance activities disrupt the aesthetic or sensory attributes of the site d) Determination of whether the facility components are designed with consideration given to human factors
Limited discussion Limited relevance as off-site effects will be minimal Limited discussion Limited relevance as off-site effects will be minimal
Limited / No discussion
Limited relevance as construction in a near-shore location
Limited / No discussion
Limited relevance as construction in a near-shore location
Limited / No discussion
Some relevance but little significance
Limited / No discussion
Limited relevance as project focus on reclamation of essentially flat reclaimed area
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 all significant impacts to both the natural and the human (socioeconomic) environments b) Description of mitigation measures with adequate information to evaluate environmental consequence and residential (??residual) impacts c) Identification to the best mitigation measures avoid or minimize potential impacts during all stages of the project, including sitting and design, facility operation and post facility closure d) Support of the following types of mitigation measures, in the following decreasing order of preference: avoidance or prevention minimization reduction or elimination over time correction compensation e) Implementation plan (schedule) and criteria for performance for all mitigation measures f) Responsible entity assigned to carrying out each mitigation measures g) Measures are socially an culturally acceptable h) Adequate financial and non-financial resources to implement measures
Limited discussion Limited mitigation opportunities given context but mostly OK Limited discussion Impractical to determine quantitative residual effects
Limited but mostly Scope does not include operation (i.e. postadequate reclamation)and post facility closure
Limited but mostly By inference, identified measures follow this order. adequate
Some inferred
Done
Mostly adequate Done Mostly adequate Mostly do not directly interact with local communities; but local communities have (sometimes unrealistic) expectations for employment etc Not specifically Mostly part of “good practice” engineering construction. 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 text items
Management 1
Description
Responsibility
3.2.1 Integration of 1 Provide Ancol construction progress updates and cooperate JUFMP and Ancol CDF with JUFMP reviews of the adequacy of confined facility for activities dredge material disposal.
Description
Monitoring 1 1 Responsibility Cost
PT. PJA
PT. PJA; Review Report PMU
PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; PMU
PT. PJA; PMU (assisted by the SC)
PT. PJA; Meeting Reports PMU; verified as correct SC
PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; PMU
SC
SC
ACC
ACC
Ensure approved Work PT. PJA; SC Plans / ESMP’s / Monitor implementation
PMU / PIU (through the SC)
SC
Ensure records collected and maintained
2 Ensure that material (other than JUFMP dredge material) delivered to Ancol CDF (fill and covering material) has appropriate environmental clearances.
PT. PJA (through ACC)
PT. PJA; Review and confirm ACC ACC-supplied certification
PT. PJA; SC
3 Implement program for post-disposal sampling and testing at Ancol CDF of JUFMP sediment 18 months after start, and 1 month after completion of JUFMP dredged sludge disposal to
SC
SC
PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; PMU
2 Meet and coordinate activities
3 Produce integrated detailed schedule, expanding on that of Appendix 2 3.2.2 “Good practice” construction and supervision
1
Cost
1 Draw up work plans and associated ESM Plans for all contractors working at Ancol CDF, tailored to scale of activity / extent of contract
3.2.3 Sediment and 1 Provide information of results and status of prior dredge other fill / cover material sampling and testing at JUFMP sites to PT. PJA.
27
Schedules approved at PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; meetings PMU
Laboratory analysis reports
PT. PJA; SC
PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA; (DKI BPLHD kept PMU informed) PT. PJA; SC
Reference to main text items
Management 1
Description
Responsibility
1
Cost
Description
Monitoring 1 1 Responsibility Cost
Ancol CDF. 3.2.4 Traffic management
Notes: 1: Responsibility PT. PJA = ACC = PMU = CC = SC = DKI BPLHD =
1 JUFMP projected sediment delivery truck numbers and times to be advised to PT. PJA
SC (through information from CC)
SC
2 Implement Ancol Updated RKL / RPL requirements, especially in relation to orderly movement of vehicles to / from Ancol CDF site and to vehicle washing before vehicles leave Ancol CDF site
PT. PJA (some through ACC)
PT. PJA Quarterly report
PT. Pembangunan Ancol Jaya Ancol CDF Construction Contractors Project Management Unit for JUFMP Construction Contractor for JUFMP Supervision Consultant for JUFMP Environmental Management Agency Government
of
Jakarta
Provincial
28
Records of information PT. PJA and PMU PT. PJA; being handed over. PMU Monthly reports of past movements (vs. prior projections) and future projections PT. PJA; SC
PT. PJA; SC
Technical Assistance for Environmental dan Social Impact Assessment (EIA / SIA) Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP) – Grant TF#054683-IND
Update RKL/RPL Ancol (Dokumen: Updating Pengembangan Kawasan Ancol Barat Bagian Timur seluas ± 119 ha)
Laporan Tambahan
SEPTEMBER 2011
Daftar Isi Glosarium ............................................................................................................................. 1 Ringkasan............................................................................................................................. 4 1 Pendahuluan.................................................................................................................. 6 1.1 Konteks................................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Tujuan dan ruang lingkup Laporan Status............................................................... 7 2 Kecukupan RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 yang Telah Dimutakhirkan............................... 8 2.1 Tinjauan khusus atas Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009...................................... 9 2.1.1 Persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia .................................................................. 9 2.1.2 Pertimbangan lebih luas ................................................................................ 11 2.2 Informasi tambahan dan perkembangan............................................................... 12 2.2.1 Persetujuan atas AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 dan Laporan Tambahan................ 13 2.2.2 Informasi tambahan rona awal lingkungan..................................................... 13 2.2.3 Kualitas sedimen ........................................................................................... 14 2.2.4 Konsultasi Masyarakat................................................................................... 14 2.2.5 Dimulainya Pembangunan CDF Ancol ........................................................... 15 2.2.6 Dampak di luar lokasi dari CDF Ancol............................................................ 15 2.3 Penilaian menyeluruh ........................................................................................... 15 3 Pengaman-Pengaman CDF Ancol ............................................................................... 17 3.1 Pengaturan institusional........................................................................................ 17 3.1.1 PT. PJA ......................................................................................................... 17 3.1.2 Kontraktor Konstruksi Ancol (Ancol Construction Contractors/ACC) .............. 18 3.1.3 Konsultan Pengawasan (Supervision Consultant/SC) JUFMP ....................... 19 3.1.4 PIU ................................................................................................................ 19 3.1.5 PMU .............................................................................................................. 19 3.1.6 Kontraktor Konstruksi (Construction Contractors/CC) .................................... 19 3.1.7 BPLHD DKI.................................................................................................... 20 3.2 Pengaman yang diperkuat .................................................................................... 20 3.2.1 Integrasi JUFMP dan kegiatan-kegiatan CDF Ancol ...................................... 20 3.2.2 “Praktik yang baik” dalam pembangunan dan pengawasan ........................... 21 3.2.3 Sedimen dan material penimbunan/pelapisan lainnya ................................... 22 3.2.4 Pengelolaan lalu lintas ................................................................................... 23 Lampiran 1 Tinjauan terperinci atas AMDAL Ancol dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol........... 25 Lampiran 2 Pengembangan CDF Ancol dan interaksi dengan JUFMP ......................... 35 Lampiran 3 Matriks Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan terpadu Ancol ............. 36
Daftar Tabel Tabel A - 1 : Tinjauan terperinci atas AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 ................................................................................................................ 25 Tabel A - 2 : Pengembangan CDF Ancol dan interaksi dengan JUFMP (Jadwal dapat mengalami penyesuaian berkala)........................................................................................ 35 Tabel A - 3 :Matriks EMP Tambahan CDF Ancol ............................................................. 36
i
Glosarium Nama-nama Institusi – Fungsional BBWS – CC BPLHD DKI DGCK DGWR DKI Jakarta PMU PIU PT. PJA Dokumen terkait lingkungan: AMDAL ANDAL RKL RPL Update RKL/RPL
Istilah khusus Proyek JUFMP Limbah B3 (atau B3) JUFMP
Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai CiliwungCisadane Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah Pemerintah DKI Jakarta Directorate General Human Settlements (Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya), Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Directorate General Water Resources (Direktorat Jenderal Sumber Daya Air), Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta Project Management Unit (Unit Pengelola Proyek) Project Implementation Unit (Unit Pelaksana Proyek) PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol, pemegang hak dan pelaksana proyek reklamasi Ancol Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan, yang mencakup ANDAL dan RKL/RPL Analisis Dampak Lingkungan Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan Update terhadap RKL/RPL sebagai konsekuensi dari perubahan ruang lingkup pekerjaan proyek dari sebuah AMDAL yang telah disetujui. Perubahan tersebut akan tetapi tidak secara signifikan, yang mengharuskan dibuatnya sebuah AMDAL baru. Pendekatan ini telah diambil oleh oleh BPLHD DKI dan Komisi AMDAL untuk memungkinkan dilakukannya pembuangan material kerukan JUFMP di lokasi reklamasi Ancol yang AMDAL nya telah disetujui. Update RKL/RPL ini menggantikan AMDAL sebelumnya, tetapi tidak membahas kembali isu-isu yang dianggap telah cukup dipertimbangkan dalam AMDAL sebelumnya dan isu-isu yang tidak akan mengalami dampak perubahan yang substantif. Limbah Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta). [dalam berbagai dokumen proyek, 1
Fase 1 (Phase 1)
Fase 2 (Phase 2) RPF
Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek
digunakan dengan arti yang sama dengan istilah ‘Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative (JEDI)’] Serangkaian lokasi proyek JUFMP yang mendapat prioritas untuk diimplementasi di tahap awal proyek. Lokasi-lokasi Fase 1 dipilih karena dinilai penting dalam upaya pemulihan banjir, dan juga karena tidak diperlukannya pemukiman kembali. Sebuah AMDAL telah disiapkan untuk rangkaian kegiatan-kegiatan Fase 1 ini Lokasi-lokasi proyek lainnya yang akan dikerjakan dalam JUFMP. Resettlement Policy Framework (Kerangka Kerja Kebijakan Pemukiman Kembali); sebuah dokumen kebijakan yang harus diikuti oleh JUFMP untuk kegiatan-kegiatan pemukiman kembali yang terkait dengan proyek tersebut. Pemukiman kembali tidak akan dilakukan untuk lokasi-lokasi proyek Fase 1. RPF disusun berdasarkan kebijakan/praktik Bank Dunia dan undangundang Indonesia Komponen proyek yang telah diidentifikasi dalam JUFMP; baik berupa sebuah saluran air/sungai/kanal banjir dengan panjang yang ditentukan, atau sebuah waduk dengan ukuran yang ditentukan. Rancangan-rancangan teknik telah dibuat berdasarkan masing-masing lokasi; penyusunan AMDAL telah dilakukan atau akan dilakukan untuk lokasi proyek secara tersendiri.
Istilah yang muncul dari aspek-aspek Kontrak dan pelaksanaan JUFMP Kontraktor Konstruksi
Kontraktor yang memiliki Kontrak di bawah PIU yang akan melaksanakan pekerjaan pengerukan, pembuatan tanggul, pengangkutan material hasil kerukan, dan kegiatan-kegiatan yang terkait untuk pembangunan JUFMP
ESMP Kontraktor yang Terperinci
Sebuah Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (Environmental and Social Management Plan/ESMP) yang akan disusun oleh Kontraktor Konstruksi setelah diberikannya Kontrak, dengan informasi secara terperinci tentang praktik-praktik Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial 2
(Environmental and Social Management/ESM) yang harus diikuti. Rencana tersebut harus dibuat berdasarkan syarat-syarat Kontrak Konstruksi, AMDAL, Laporan Tambahan ini, dan laporan-laporan lainnya yang disebutkan dalam dokumendokumen tender. Rencana tersebut juga harus mematuhi semua peraturan perundang-undangan yang terkait. Konsultasi dengan masyarakat sebelum diserahkannya ESMP untuk mendapatkan persetujuan resmi Konsultan Pengawasan wajib dilakukan Rencana ESM Kontraktor
Istilah umum yang digunakan untuk mencakup “ESMP Kontraktor Umum” dan “Rencana ESM Kontraktor yang Terperinci”
ESMP Kontraktor Pendahuluan
Sebuah Rencana ESM yang harus disusun sebagai bagian dari Penawaran Teknis. Rencana tersebut harus memuat isi yang serupa dengan ESMP Kontraktor yang Terperinci, tetapi dengan tingkat perincian yang lebih rendah. Konsultasi dengan masyarakat “disarankan” untuk dilakukan sebagai bagian dari penyusunannya
ESM
Environmental and Social Management/Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (termasuk pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial, sesuai keadaan)
Konsultan Pengawasan
Konsultan yang dikontrak untuk PMU. Konsultan Pengawasan akan melaksanakan pengawasan sehari-hari atas Kontrak-Kontrak Konstruksi – peran yang biasanya dikenal sebagai “Ahli Teknik” (sebagai perwakilan dari prinsipal). Konsultan Pengawasan juga akan memiliki peran yang substantif dalam pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial, dengan fokus utama pada ESM Kontraktor Konstruksi, tetapi juga mencakup tugastugas spesifik yang terkait dengan komunikasi/pengaduan masyarakat, dengan pemukiman kembali (untuk beberapa kegiatan lokasi Fase 2), dan dengan pemantauan serta pelaporan kepada BPLHD DKI atas nama para pemilik proyek (yakni PIU) 3
Ringkasan PT. PJA telah memiliki sebuah AMDAL yang disusun dan disetujui pada tahun 2006 untuk reklamasi sebuah area dekat pantai di Teluk Jakarta dengan menggunakan urukan pasir yang didapatkan dari sumber-sumber dari kawasan sekitar (AMDAL Ancol). Menindak-lanjuti diumumkannya Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta (Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project/JUFMP) dan ditunjuknya lokasi reklamasi milik PT PJA sebagai tempat penempatan akhir material hasil kerukan JUFMP, sebuah Update RKL/RPL Ancol telah disusun dan disetujui pada tahun 2009, update ini untuk memungkinkan dilakukannya penimbunan atas sebagian area reklamasi tersebut dengan material kerukan JUFMP. Perubahan-perubahan lain dalam rancangan teknis berupa penambahan lebar saluran yang memisahkan area reklamasi dengan garis pantai utama (yang ada saat ini) dari sekitar 80 m menjadi 200m dan perubahan-perubahan kecil pada bentuk dan area secara keseluruhan. Yang tetap walaupun tidak secara tegas disebutkan dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol adalah bahwa fasilitas yang akan menampung hasil kerukan akan dirancang, dibangun, dan dioperasikan sebagai sebuah Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup/Confined Disposal Facility (oleh karena itu istilah ‘CDF Ancol’ biasa digunakan untuk mengacu kepada failitas tersebut). Sebuah review independen atas AMDAL Ancol dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol, yang sebagian besar didasarkan pada sebuah checklist dari Bank Dunia, telah dilaksanakan pada tahun 2009 oleh PT ERM Indonesia (sebuah perusahaan konsultan). Laporan tambahan terbaru ini melakukan tinjauan lebih lanjut atas Update RKL/RPL Ancol, dan membahas perkembangan dalam perencanaan dan perancangan JUFMP serta dalam faktor-faktor lainnya yang telah terjadi selama ini. AMDAL Ancol awal dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol telah mengikuti prosedur yang sesuai berdasarkan standar di Indonesia, hail ini seperti penyusunannya oleh para spesialis AMDAL independen bersertifikat, dilakukannya konsultasi-konsultasi yang ditentukan selama penyusunan dan penilaian oleh Komisi AMDAL. Kesimpulan terpenting dari review dan pertimbangan atas perkembangan dalam perencanaan dan perancangan JUFMP adalah bahwa lokasi CDF Ancol dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol terintegrasi dengan baik dengan proyek JUFMP. Beberapa aspek yang mungkin diharapkan akan dibahas dalam sebuah analisis dampak lingkungan jika tidak ditemukan atau hanya dibahas dengan sangat ringkas dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol dan/atau AMDAL sebelumnya – hal ini mungkin terjadi dikarenakan selama penentuan ruang lingkup, aspek-aspek tersebut dianggap tidak terlalu relevan atau tidak relevan sama sekali mengingat situasi proyek yang spesifik. Laporan ini mengidentifikasi aspek-aspek tersebut dan dapat menyetujui bahwa aspek-aspek tersebut tidak terlalu relevan atau tidak relevan sama sekali. Selain itu, argumen bahwa pertimbangan yang lebih besar seharusnya diberikan kepada dampak penggunaan lahan di masa depan di lokasi CDF Ancol. Untuk ini, dapat dikatakan bahwa Update RKL/RPL Ancol sifatnya spesifik pada kegiatan penimbunan/reklamasi, dan untuk setiap penggunan lahan di masa depan akan memerlukan analisis mengenai dampak lingkungan tersendiri pada waktu tersebut. Terlebih lagi, semua indikasi menunjukkan bahwa penimbunan dengan material hasil kerukan JUFMP tidak akan membatasi penggunaan lahan di masa depan. 4
Laporan tambahan ini menyimpulkan bahwa pengelolaan dan pemantauan tambahan tertentu akan menjadi penting untuk memperkuat pelaksanaan langkahlangkah pengamanan. Berdasarkan analisis ini, sebuah EMP tambahan disajikan dalam laporan tambahan ini, yang melengkapi Update RKL/RPL Ancol dan terutama berfokus pada pada pengelolaan dan pemantauan atas isu-isu lingkungan dan sosial selama pengembangan CDF Ancol. Biaya-biaya sebagian besar terkait dengan pengawasan teknik/pengelolaan lokasi, kebutuhan untuk mengintegrasikan kegiatan dengan Konsultan Pengawasan JUFMP, dan untuk beberapa analisis kimia tanah pasca penimbunan.
5
1
Pendahuluan 1.1
Konteks
Pihak “pemilik”/“pengusul” lokasi reklamasi Ancol di area dekat pantai Teluk Jakarta adalah PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT. PJA). Persetujuan-persetujuan lingkungan untuk melakukan reklamasi atas area tersebut diberikan pada tahun 2006 setelah dipenuhinya persyaratan AMDAL standar Indonesia, dengan material timbunan sebagian besar berdasarkan pasir. Setelah terjadinya banjir besar yang merendam Jakarta pada bulan Februari 2007, konsep tentang Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta (Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project/JUFMP) pun bergulir dan persiapan untuk pengimplementasian proyek tersebut pun mulai disusun sejak saat itu. JUFMP mencakup pengerukan timbunan sedimen di beberapa kanal banjir, kanal, dan waduk utama tertentu dalam area perkotaan Jakarta dan mengangkut material hasil kerukan ke sebuah lokasi pembuangan yang sesuai. Analisis terhadap beberapa pilihan lokasi penempatan pun dilakukan sebelum diputuskan bahwa lokasi reklamasi Ancol merupakan fasilitas yang paling sesuai untuk pembuangan material hasil kerukan JUFMP1, hal ini dikarenakan: Lokasi tersebut berada di tengah antara lokasi-lokasi proyek JUFMP; Lokasi tersebut telah memperoleh persetujuan-persetujuan lingkungan untuk dikembangkan; Dengan berada di sebuah area dekat pantai, dampak sosialnya akan minimal (tidak akan ada pemukiman kembali); dan Lokasi tersebut mencerminkan penggunaan sumber daya secara bijaksana, menggantikan pasir dengan material hasil kerukan sebagai material penimbunan sebagian untuk reklamasi. Interaksi dengan Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Pemerintah DKI Jakarta (BPLHD DKI) dan Komisi AMDAL yang terkait menentukan bahwa perubahan material timbunan akan mengharuskan adanya sebuah Update RKL/RPL Ancol sebagai bentuk mitigasi atas isu-isu yang terkait dengan perubahan material timbunan. Update RKL/RPL Ancol tersebut disusun sesuai dengan persyaratan setempat termasuk penentuan ruang lingkup, persiapan, konsultasi-konsultasi, pertimbangan khusus atas isu-isu sosial dan dengar pendapat Komisi AMDAL. Update RKL/RPL Ancol telah disetujui oleh BPLHD DKI pada tahun 2009. Area yang disetujui adalah lokasi selulas ± 119 ha, dan mengakibatkan perubahan-perubahan kecil pada batas-batas fisik, terutama yang terkait dengan pelebaran jarak antara garis pantai yang ada (yang juga direklamasi) dengan lokasi reklamasi CDF Ancol. Dengan mempertimbangkan “kepemilikan” yang berbeda tetapi juga adanya kebutuhan akan integrasi, Update RKL/RPL Ancol yang disetujui tersebut secara
1
Dengan pengecualian limbah-limbah padat (yang akan dipisahkan dan dibuang ke lahan penimbunan Bantar Gebang yang sudah ada), dan material berbahaya apabila ditemukan (yang direncanakan akan dibuang pada sebuah penimbunan material berbahaya komersial berizin yang sudah ada, yakni PPLi)
6
spesifik mengidentifikasi batas-batas fisik dan administrative antara CDF Ancol dengan proyek JUFMP. Sejak disetujuinya Update RKL/RPL Ancol: Persiapan proyek JUFMP telah mengalami kemajuan yang signifikan, terutama yang terkait dengan: o Dipilihnya serangkaian subproyek JUFMP untuk kegiatan-kegiatan JUFMP Fase 1, dengan perancangan terperinci serta persiapan dan persetujuan yang terkait atas sebuah AMDAL untuk subproyeksubproyek tersebut. o Penyempurnaan design teknis (DED, Detailed Enginering Design) dan kajian-kajian untuk diperolehnya persetujuan-persetujuan lingkungan untuk subproyek-subproyek JUFMP lainnya dan kajian-kajian tentang pemukiman kembali yang diperlukan di beberapa lokasi subproyeksubproyek tersebut. o Penetapkan institusi proyek terkait proyek dan pengaturan-pengaturan pelaksanaan. Review atas Update RKL/RPL Ancol, terutama dalam kaitannya dengan kebutuhan JUFMP. Perubahan lebih lanjut yang diusulkan terhadap design tanggul utara CDF Ancol telah di-review dan disetujui oleh BPLHD DKI. Perubahan design yang diusulkan ini juga di-review oleh Bank Dunia, dan rekomendasi dari review tersebut telah diterima dan dipertimbangkan oleh PT PJA sebelum dokumen yang terkait disampaikan ke BPLHD DKI untuk mendapatkan persetujuan. Perlu ditekankan bahwa AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 secara spesifik difokuskan pada kegiatan reklamasi itu sendiri di lokasi Ancol sesuai dengan persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia. Fakta bahwa lokasi reklamasi itu sendiri telah sesuai dengan rencana tata ruang jangka panjang menyebabkan tidak diperlukannya lagi evaluasi secara terperinci atas isu-isu “penggunaan lahan”, terutama karena lokasi tersebut saat ini merupakan sebuah area dekat pantai. Batas-batas telah dibuat terkait dengan kegiatan-kegiatan JUFMP. Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 telah menyertakan evaluasi secara terperinci atas dampak dari pengangkutan material kerukan JUFMP ke lokasi CDF Ancol. Kegiatan-kegiatan pengerukan sebenarnya itu sendiri dan pengangkutan material hasil kerukan JUFMP ke lokasi CDF Ancol telah dibahas dalam berbagai AMDAL khusus JUFMP. Evaluasi atas kegiatan-kegiatan penggunaan lahan di masa depan seluruhnya dialokasikan untuk berbagai AMDAL pascareklamasi atau perizinan lingkungan serupa yang hanya akan diketahui ketika terdapat usulanusulan spesifik untuk penggunaan area tersebut. 1.2
Tujuan dan ruang lingkup Laporan Status
Laporan tambahan ini: Menganalisis apakah isu-isu sosial dan lingkungan yang terkait dengan penggunaan lokasi tersebut untuk pembuangan material kerukan JUFMP (Bagian 0) telah cukup dibahas dalam AMDAL Ancol (2006) dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol (2009), adapun analisis ini disajikan dengan:
7
o Mempertimbangkan Update RKL/RPL Ancol sebagai suatu dokumen tersendiri (Bagian 0) o Membicarakan informasi baru dan mutakhir (Bagian 0) o Melakukan suatu penilaian menyeluruh, mengintegrasikan Update RKL/RPL Ancol sebelumnya dengan informasi baru dan terkini (Bagian 0) o Kesimpulan-kesimpulan secara keseluruhan Mengidentifikasikan status saat ini dari penggunaan lokasi Ancol untuk pembuangan material kerukan JUFMP (Bagian 0) dengan membahas: o Pengaturan-pengaturan institusional (Bagian 0) o Konstruksi awal o Pengaman-pengaman yang diperkuat (Bagian 0)
Lampiran-lampiran menyajikan: Jadwal pengembangan CDF Ancol dan interaksinya dengan JUFMP (Lampiran 1) EMP tambahan untuk CDF Ancol. (Lampiran 2) 2
Kecukupan RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 yang Telah Dimutakhirkan
Review atas sebuah dokumen seperti Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 dilaksanakan untuk salah satu atau lebih alasan berikut ini: 1. Untuk memeriksa kesesuaiannya dengan pedoman tertentu, perundangundangan, dan lain-lain. 2. Untuk menilai “kualitas” dokumen dan informasi yang terdapat di dalamnya. 3. Untuk menentukan persyaratan RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 yang akan memiliki konsekuensi terhadap pelaksanaan proyek JUFMP. 4. Untuk menilai apakah kondisi-kondisi telah berubah sejak Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 disusun dan disetujui, yang dapat mengakibatkan dokumen dan RKL/RPL yang terkait setidak-tidaknya menjadi “tidak valid” sebagian. Alasan-alasan tersebut tidaklah terlepas satu sama lain dan nilai penting relatif dari alasan-alasan yang berbeda tersebut ditentukan berdasarkan penilaian. Dalam laporan ini, fokusnya adalah pada alasan-alasan yang disebutkan dalam nomor 1, 3, dan 4 di atas. Bank Dunia secara khusus mengharuskan dilakukannya penilaian terhadap checklist yang telah disampaikan. Ini dilakukan untuk menangani Alasan 1 secara sebagian. Pemeriksaan lain yang dilakukan terkait dengan Alasan 1 adalah untuk memeriksa apakah dokumen tesebut telah memenuhi persyaratan dari Pemerintah Indonesia. Terkait dengan Alasan 2, Para Konsultan2 meyakini bahwa tidak banyak yang bias, yang didapat dari apa yang seharusnya merupakan sebuah pandangan yang bersifat menilai atas “kualitas” dokumen tersebut dan cara penyajian informasinya. Akan tetapi, kualitas dan kelengkapan informasi tersebut dapat dan memang dipertimbangkan sebagiannya terkait dengan kesesuaian dengan checklist Bank Dunia. Laporan ini tidak akan membahas Alasan 2 lagi secara khusus. 2
Para konsultan yang dipertahankan oleh PMU untuk menyusun laporan tambahan ini.
8
Pada tahap proyek ini, penting untuk diperjelas tentang bagaimana cara Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 akan “memungkinkan” proyek JUFMP untuk berjalan, dan pembatasan-pembatasan apa saja yang mungkin ditetapkannya terhadap pelaksanaan proyek JUFMP. Hal ini memerlukan adanya fokus pada Alasan 3 dan 4 di atas. 2.1
Tinjauan khusus atas Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009
Bagian ini berfokus pada Alasan 1 yang disebutkan di awal bagian ini, dengan memfokuskan pada apakah Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 telah sesuai dengan peraturan-peraturan, kebijakan-kebijakan, dan lain-lain. 2.1.1 Persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia Sementara Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 secara efektif menggantikan AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006, baik dokumen-dokumen maupun proses-proses harus dipertimbangkan secara bersama-sama. Keputusan untuk mengharuskan dibuatnya suatu update RKL/RPL dan bukan sebuah AMDAL baru dibuat berdasarkan pertimbangan atas apakah dokumen sebelumnya telah cukup membahas aspekaspek yang mungkin memiliki pengaruh mendasar atas keputusan apakah proyek tersebut harus dilanjutkan atau tidak. Dengan melanjutkan pendekatan up-dating RKL/RPL, BPLHD DKI dan Komisi AMDAL secara tegas menentukan bahwa aspekaspek tersebut telah cukup dibahas dan yang diperlukan adalah sebuah fokus untuk memastikan bahwa pengelolaan lingkungan yang memadai akan dilakukan untuk lokasi Ancol yang akan menerima material hasil kerukan JUFMP. Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 disusun atas nama “pemilik”, PT. PJA: Nama Pengusul : PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol, Tbk. Alamat Kantor : Jl. Pasir Putih Raya Kav. 5 Ancol, Jakarta Utara Nomor Telepon : (021) 6453456 Nomor faksimile : (021) 64710502 Penanggung Jawab : Ir. Maleakhi John Jabatan : Kepala Departemen Perizinan dan Proyek-Proyek Khusus Nama Proyek : Pengembangan Ancol Barat Bagian Timur seluas ±119Ha. Persiapan dilaksanakan oleh para konsultan bersertifikat AMDAL, dengan informasi dari: AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006; kajian-kajian teknik khusus yang terkait dengan pembentukan tanggul penahan bagian luar, kajian-kajian yang sedang berjalan, serta penelitianpenelitian tanah; dan kajian tentang kualitas sediment (sedimen) oleh ERM pada tahun 2008 yang dilakukan di saluran-saluran air dan waduk-waduk JUFMP; apa yang akan terlibat dengan proyek JUFMP. Penilaian atas Update RKL/RPL Ancol dilakukan oleh BPLHD DKI/Komisi AMDAL, yang mencakup serangkaian pertemuan pada bulan Februari/Maret 2009 sebelum 9
diberikannya persetujuan akhir. Laporan-laporan dari pertemuan-pertemuan tersebut menunjukkan pertimbangan secara luas oleh BPLHD DKI/Komisi AMDAL atas serangkaian masalah sosial dan lingkungan, yang mana telah ditanggapi dan dimasukan dalam dokumen akhir Update RKL/RPL Ancol yang telah mendapat persetujuan. Sebuah aspek yang penting dari Update RKL/RPL Ancol adalah dampak dari reklamasi yang dikembangkan sebagai sebuah Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (Confined Disposal Facility/CDF), akan tetapi istilah spesifik ini tidak digunakan dalam dokumen tersebut. Selain itu, gambar-gambar “khusus” menunjukkan urutan pengembangan tanggul-tanggul pembatas bagian luar, meskipun tidak terdapat penjelasan tertulis secara terperinci atas keseluruhan urutan dan waktu pengembangan mulai dari pembangunan awal tanggul bagian luar, penimbunan dengan sedimen kerukan dan pelapisan akhir. Disimpulkan bahwa proses tersebut telah dilaksanakan dengan sebagaimana mestinya sesuai dengan persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia, bahwa BPLHD DKI dan Komisi AMDAL telah melakukan penilaian mereka dengan terperinci dan memastikan pengaman-pengaman dan bahwa masalah-masalah sosial telah dibahas dengan terperinci. Update RKL/RPL Ancol telah sangat jelas dan spesifik tentang ruang lingkup dan pembagian tanggung jawab antara PT. PJA dan JUFMP. Terutama pada Bagian 2.5.d dokumen tersebut yang menyatakan: Dalam konteks kegiatan-kegiatan JUFMP, lokasi proyek Ancol adalah sebuah lokasi pembuangan. JUFMP adalah pihak yang bertanggung jawab: o Untuk memastikan bahwa material kerukan tidak mengandung B3 (limbah bahan berbahaya dan beracun) menurut Peraturan Pemerintah No. 85/19993. (Butir ini selanjutnya menyatakan bahwa berdasarkan kajian kualitas sedimen oleh ERM pada tahun 2008, sedimen-sedimen memang memenuhi kriteria tersebut dan dapat diterima di lokasi reklamasi Ancol) o Untuk pengerukan dan pengangkutan material ke lokasi Ancol. o Untuk memilih rute pengangkutan dan pengaturan lalu lintas pengangkut. Tanggung jawab PT. PJA dimulai pada saat sebuah kendaraan masuk dari Jl. RE Martadinata ke area Ancol. Kewajiban PT. PJA adalah untuk: o Menyediakan jalan akses masuk dari Jl. RE Martadinata ke lokasi pembuangan o Menyediakan alat pencuci pengangkut (pencucian kendaraan) pada saat pengangkut tersebut meninggalkan area Ancol
3
Perhatikan bahwa istilah “B3” dalam RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 yang Telah Dimutakhirkan mengacu kepada limbah-limbah bahan berbahaya sebagaimana dikategorikan dan didefinisikan dalam standar yang ditetapkan dalam Peraturan Pemerintah no 85/1999 tentang Pengelolaan Limbah Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun.
10
2.1.2 Pertimbangan lebih luas Sub-bagian ini disusun berdasarkan review independen oleh dua konsultan yang berbeda (ERM pada tahun 2009, PPA pada tahun 2010) atas Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 dengan beberapa acuan kemballi kepada AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006. Kedua tinjauan tersebut dilakukan dengan bantuan checklist dari Bank Dunia, pemeriksaan atas dokumen-dokumen Ancol termasuk catatan-catatan yang dibuat pada pertemuan-pertemuan BPLHD DKI/Komisi AMDAL dan dengan kunjungankunjungan lokasi. Review terkonsolidasi dan terperinci ini terdapat pada Lampiran 1. Penilaian-penilaian dan komentar-komentar tertentu dari tinjauan-tinjauan tersebut memerlukan pembahasan-pembahasan dan pertimbangan-pertimbangan lebih lanjut. Pembahasan-pembahasan dan pertimbangan-pertimbangan tambahan tersebut dibahas secara lebih terperinci dalam sub-bagian ini dan sub-bagian-subbagian berikutnya. Kebutuhan atas penilaian/pertimbangan tambahan timbul karena salah satu atau lebih dari hal-hal berikut ini: Aspek-aspek kontekstual. Hal ini terkait dengan butir-butir checklist standar yang kurang relevan dengan proyek tersebut mengingat konteks dari lokasi itu sendiri, atau terkait dengan hal-hal yang sebenarnya dibahas oleh AMDAL Ancol dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol (“perizinan Ancol”). Dokumen tersebut tidak membahas aspek-aspek penting tertentu secara spesifik, terutama yang terkait dengan penyelenggaraan kegiatan-kegiatan reklamasi dan benar-benar menentukan kegiatan tersebut sebagai sebuah Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup. Terbatasnya evaluasi atas isu-isu potensial yang terkait dengan penggunaan material hasil kerukan JUFMP. Langkah-langkah penanggulangan tidak sepenuhnya mempertimbangkan konteks lokasi tersebut dan tidak sepenuhnya sejalan dengan cara pengaturan atas pengelolaan lokasi. Konteks lokasi Lokasi reklamasi Ancol adalah sebuah lokasi dekat pantai, yang berada di tengah Teluk Jakarta daerah provinsi DKI Jakarta. Fasilitas CDF Ancol akan dipisahkan oleh sebuah saluran selebar kira-kira 200m dari sebuah garis pantai yang sebelumnya juga merupakan hasil reklamasi dan sedimentasi. Selain itu, berdasarkan perencanaan tata ruang saat ini, reklamasi atas lokasi tersebut telah ditentukan secara resmi sejak dikeluarkannya sebuah peraturan pemerintah pada tahun 1995. Dengan mempertimbangkan konteks ini: Isu-isu perencanaan jangka panjang telah ditentukan sebelumnya. Interaksi dengan komunitas pemukiman terdekat (dengan jarak minimum 200 m) akan terbatas selama jangka waktu reklamasi. Karakteristik lokasi sekitar (CDF) yang telah terpolusi mengurangi kualitas lingkungan “alami” (air dan biologis) dan tidak terdapat area-area dengan nilai biologis di dekatnya seperti hutan bakau. Akan tetapi hal ini tidaklah dianggap sebagai alasan untuk tidak melaksanakan langkah-langkah penangggulangan sebagaimana mestinya. Konteks perizinan Ancol Sebagaimana dinyatakan sebelumnya, ruang lingkup dari perizinan lingkungan terbatas pada tahap reklamasi Ancol itu sendiri, yang secara jelas mengecualikan kegiatan-kegiatan pascareklamasi (yang akan dibahas melalui perizinan lingkungan 11
di masa mendatang, yang akan diketahui hanya apabila terdapat proposal-proposal spesifik untuk penggunaan area tersebut apabila) dan kegiatan-kegiatan pengerukan dan pengangkutan sedimen JUFMP (yang dibahas dalam AMDAL-AMDAL khusus JUFMP). Selain itu, pengadaan pasir dan tanah penutup (topsoil) mengasumsikan bahwa penyedia material – material tersebut memiliki izin lingkungan yang sesuai, tetapi kepastian-kepastian akan hal tersebut tidak disebutkan dalam langkahlangkah mitigasi lingkungan Ancol. Penyelenggaraan kegiatan-kegiatan reklamasi Gambar-gambar dan pembahasan-pembahasan dalam update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 menyimpulkan bahwa lokasi tersebut akan dikembangkan sebagai sebuah Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (Confined Disposal Facility/CDF), dengan tanggul-tanggul penutup yang dilapisi oleh geotekstil pada sisi bagian dalam untuk menghindari aliran material halus keluar dari CDF saat proses penempatan hasil kerukan dilakukan. Waktu pengembangan lapisan pasir dan tanah atas tidak ditentukan. Isu-isu potensial yang timbul dari penggunaan material kerukan JUFMP Terdapat asumsi yang tetap bahwa persyaratan sedimen yang diangkut dari lokasi JUFMP harus “bukan B3” telah cukup menanggapi isu-isu potensial yang timbul dari penggunaan material kerukan JUFMP sebagai material uruk. Sementara hal tersebut mungkin wajar dalam banyak keadaan, evaluasi tambahan dan langkahlangkah penanggulangan yang lebih spesifik akan meningkatkan pengaman lingkungan. Langkah-langkah penanggulangan Langkah-langkah penanggulangan (termasuk pemantauan) sebagaimana diusulkan tidak selalu mempertimbangkan konteks lokasi dan tidak sealu sejalan dengan cara pengaturan pengelolaan lokasi. Sementara kemungkinan pencemaran dari, misalnya, sanitasi para pekerja mungkin terjadi, hal tersebut tidak dibahas sehubungan dengan konteks bahwa jumlah pekerja akan terbatas, bahwa Teluk Jakarta telah tercemar, dan bahwa pengujian kualitas air yang sesaat di area sekitarnya tidak akan dapat membedakan apakah sanitasi para pekerja dikeola dengan memadai. Sebagai contoh lain, untuk sebuah kegiatan pembangunan, sebagian besar penanggulangan dan pemantauannya harus difokuskan pada penyesuaian dengan syarat-syarat Kontrak Konstruksi dan pengawasan oleh ahli teknik pengawas. Hal-hal tersebut dibahas kemudian dalam Laporan Tambahan ini. 2.2
Informasi tambahan dan perkembangan
Sejak disusunnya Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009, telah terdapat: Persetujuan atas AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 dari Komisi AMDAL pada bulan Maret 2010. Penyusunan Laporan Tambahan JUFMP Fase 1, yang mencakup rekomendasi-rekomendasi lebih lanjut terkait pengaman di luar AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1, dan yang juga akan dapat diterapkan pada proyek JUFMP.
12
Pengumpulan data dasar terperinci untuk AMDAL JUFMP Fase 2 yang dilakukan selama tahun 2010. Pertimbangan tambahan untuk isu-isu kualitas sedimen, terutama untuk menyertakan informasi tambahan dari pengumpulan data primer JUFMP Fase 2 dan untuk mempertimbangkan cara yang paling sesuai untuk memenuhi persyaratan BPLHD DKI untuk JUFMP Fase 1 terkait dengan pemantauan sedimen secara terus-menerus. Konsultasi-konsultasi tambahan dengan pihak yang kepentingan. Dimulainya pembangunan dinding pembatas luar Ancol (yang akan membentuk fasilitas pembuangan tertutup) Pertimbangan lebih lanjut atas potensi dampak-dampak di luar lokasi dari pengadaan pasir dan material laterit (selain material kerukan JUFMP) untuk pembangunan CDF Ancol.
2.2.1 Persetujuan atas AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 dan Laporan Tambahan AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 dibuat untuk 5 lokasi JUFMP yang pembangunannya diharapkan akan dimulai segera setelah disetujuinya proyek tersebut. AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1 ini telah disetujui secara resmi oleh BPLHD DKI pada bulan Maret 2010. Isu yang paling signifikan dalam laporan ini yang terkait dengan lokasi Ancol adalah persyaratan untuk pemantauan B3 tambahan di lokasi-lokasi JUFMP sebelum dan setelah pengerukan dilakukan. Sebuah Laporan Tambahan JUFMP Fase 1 telah disusun dan laporan tersebut memberikan informasi baru yang diperoleh dari rancangan JUFMP terperinci, yang membahas isu-isu kualitas sedimen yang timbul dari syarat-syarat persetujuan AMDAL JUFMP, volume-volume lalu lintas pengangkutan yang diperkirakan ulang, dan menghasilkan sebuah EMP tambahan yang dibuat berdasarkan pengaturanpengaturan institusional JUFMP dengan penekanan pada pengaturan-pengaturan Kontraktor Konstruksi dan Konsultan Pengawasan (yang belim ditentukan secara rinci pada saat AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1). 2.2.2 Informasi tambahan rona awal lingkungan Informasi dasar lingkungan tambahan telah dikumpulkan untuk area-area subproyek JUFMP Fase 1 dan Fase 2, di mana informasi yang paling relevan dengan Ancol adalah: Konfirmasi bahwa rona awal untuk berbagai parameter lingkungan (terutama kebisingan, beberapa kualitas udara dan banyak kualitas air) telah melampaui standar lingkungan dari waktu ke waktu. Sampel-sampel sedimen tambahan telah dikumpulkan4 dan kualitasnya telah diuji – lihat subbagian berikutnya. Pengamatan-pengamatan atas keadaan lumpur kerukan dalam pilot proyek terdahulu yang dibiayai oleh Belanda5 di waktu-waktu yang berbeda setelah pembuangan. 4
Selian dari studi kualitas endapan sebelulmnya (yang dilakukan oleh para konslutan ERM pada tahun 2008) yang merupakan studi kualitas endapan primer pertama yang komprehensif dan terperinci untuk saluran-saluran air dan waduk-waduk di Jakarta, dan yang mendukung sebagian besar perencaan tata ruang untuk proyek JUFMP termasuk RKL/RPL ANCOL yang Telah Dimutakhirkan dan AMDAL JUFMP Fase 1.
13
2.2.3 Kualitas sedimen Penilaian-penilaian tambahan dan pertimbangan atas isu-isu kualitas sedimen yang dilakukan sejak dibuatnya update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009: Menunjukkan bahwa hasil-hasil dari analisis sampel sedimen tambahan (yang dilakukan untuk lokasi-lokasi JUFMP Fase 2) semuanya mendukung pengambilan sampel dan analisis sebelumnya bahwa tidak ada material yang digolongkan sebagai B3 (yakni limbah bahan berbahaya dan beracun)6. Mengidentifikasi sebuah protokoI pengujian yang harus digunakan untuk memeriksa kualitas sedimen sebelum pengerukan dan pada penyelesaian proyek JUFMP di saluran-saluran air dan waduk-waduk JUFMP. Mengidentifikasi perlunya untuk memastikan bahwa truk-truk pengangkutan JUFMP tidak dapat digunakan untuk pengangkutan secara ilegal atas setiap material non-JUFMP (baik yang B3 atau selainnya) ke Ancol. Menilai semua hasil kualitas sedimen terkait dengan penggunaan lahan dengan menggunakan standar setempat yang sesuai dan menyimpulkan bahwa untuk sebuah fasilitas pembuangan tertutup, semua pengambilan sampel dan pengujian sampai saat ini telah mendukung kesimpulan bahwa tidak akan terdapat batasan untuk penggunaan lahan di masa depan. Beberapa pemantauan untuk penegasan di Ancol selama dan setelah penimbunan sedimen JUFMP diidentifikasi. Melaksanakan sebuah penilaian kesehatan dan menyimpulkan bahwa risikorisiko terkait kesehatan dari material kerukan JUFMP tingkatnya rendah untuk para pekerja pembangunan Ancol dan untuk setiap penghuni lokasi Ancol di masa depan. 2.2.4 Konsultasi Masyarakat Konsultasi-konsultasi masyarakat telah terus dilakukan di lokasi-lokasi JUFMP, terutama sebagai bagian dari penyusunan AMDAL JUFMP dan instrumen-instrumen pengaman sosial JUFMP. Topik-topik yang jelas dan dominant serta selalu muncul dalam konsultasi-konsultasi tersebut adalah: Dukungan luas untuk proyek JUFMP, dengan menyadari manfaat-manfaat dari penanggulangan banjir, menyadari bahwa akan terdapat sedikit gangguan, tetapi menekankan bahwa masyarakat menginginkan pengelolaan lingkungan yang lebih baik dibandingkan dengan pengelolaan lingkungan dalam banyak proyek sebelumnya di sekitar Jakarta. Harapan untuk konsultasi berkesinambungan dan bermakna antara “proyek” dengan masyarakat setempat. Harapan yang sangat besar untuk penggunaan tenaga kerja setempat.
5
Sebuah proyek percontohan yang dilaksanakan oleh Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dengan dukungan pendanaan dari pemerintah Belanda untuk melakukan pengerukan percontohan atas sebuah saluran air kecil di Jakarta (bukan bagian dari proyek JUFMP). 6 Dengan mengacu kepada standar Indonesia, yang ditentukan berdasarkan praktik internasional.
14
2.2.5 Dimulainya Pembangunan CDF Ancol Pembangunan dinding-dinding pembatas luar dari fasilitas CDF Ancol telah dimulai pada triwulan kedua tahun 2010. Terjadi banyak diskusi penting termasuk oleh para ahli teknik dan spesialis lingkungan proyek JUFMP tentang pembangunan dinding pembatas luar, termasuk sebuah perubahan yang terjadi kemudian dalam design tanggul utara CDF, di mana rekomendasi-rekomendasi dari review Bank Dunia atas proposal tersebut telah diberikan dan diterima sebelum diperolehnya persetujuan dari BPLHD DKI. Inspeksi-inspeksi pemantauan atas pekerjaan tersebut juga telah dilaksanakan oleh BPLHD DKI7. 2.2.6 Dampak di luar lokasi dari CDF Ancol Selain dari material kerukan JUFMP, pembangunan dinding-dinding pembatas dan penimbunan CDF Ancol akan membutuhkan pasir (sekitar 8,6 juta m3). Berdasarkan update RKL/RPL Ancol yang telah disetujui, pasir tersebut akan diperoleh dari sebuah sumber di laut, di Daerah Banten di lepas pantai Jakarta Utara. Lokasi tempat pengambilan pasir ini telah memiliki Izin Lingkungan yang disetujui8. Rancangan teknik menunjukkan bahwa material sedimen akan membentuk lapisan terbawah dari area yang ditimbun, yang kemudian akan dilapisi dengan lapisan pasir yang kemudian akan ditutup dengan material tanah laterit. Volume dari material laterit yang dibutuhkan diperkirakan sebanyak 400.000m3 yang akan didapatkan dari sumber-sumber tanah di dekat Bekasi, Jawa Barat, yang juga beroperasi dengan izin lingkungan. Dampak-dampak lingkungan di sumber-sumber pasir di laut dan sumber laterit di tanah tidak disebutkan dalam ANDAL, RKL dan RPL Ancol 9. Yang disebutkan hanyalah bahwa lokasi-lokasi tersebut memiliki AMDAL yang telah disetujui dan beroperasi dengan izin lingkungan. PT. PJA telah sepakat bahwa Konsultan Pengawasan JUFMP akan mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan-kegiatan di lokasi-lokasi di luar lokasi proyek tersebut (untuk pengadaan pasir dan laterit). 2.3 Penilaian menyeluruh Dengan mempertimbangkan pembahasan-pembahasan di atas dalam bagian ini, penilaian menyeluruh dan keseimpulan-kesimpulan berikut ini telah dibuat: Kebutuhan proyek telah ditetapkan dengan cukup. Meskipun proyek JUFMP telah mempertimbangkan berbagai pilihan untuk pembuangan material hasil kerukan, pertimbangan ini tidak memiliki pengaruh apakah reklamasi Ancol dilanjutkan atau tidak. Lokasi reklamasi telah direncanakan dan disetujui sebelum diusulkannya JUFMP dan memiliki tujuan yang sama sekali berbeda dengan tujuan JUFMP. Penggunaan material kerukan JUFMP untuk menimbun sebagian lokasi CDF Ancol merupakan suatu pemanfaatan sumber daya secara efisien (mengurangi kebutuhan pasir
7
Pada bulan November 2010, dengan partisipasi Bank Dunia selama pelaksanaan inspeksi. Berdasarkan RKL dan RPL yang telah disetujui, izin lingkungan untuk area laut Banten yang akan menyediakan pasir adalah (i) izin dari Kabupaten Serang Nomor 666/750/LKH tanggal 13 April 2005 yang diberikan untuk PT. Gora Gahana dan (ii) izin dair Komisi Amdal Pusat Pertambangan dan Energi Nomor 5038/0115/SJ.T/199 tanggal 5 Desember 1994 yang diberikan kepada PT. SAC Nusantara. Izin tersebut memperbolehkan perusahaan untuk mengeksploitasi pasir sebanyak sekitar 10 juta m3 dari suatu area seluas 1.056 ha di posisi 5o 54’ 47’2’’ – 5o 56’ 12.2’’ Selatan dan 106o 11’ 39.9’’ – 106o 17’ 36.3’’ Timur. 9 Meskipun isu ini telah ditinjau oleh BPLHD DKI pada saat diberikannya persetujuan atas perubahan dalam rancangan batas (tanggul) utara CDF. 8
15
di CDF Ancol) dan merupakan suatu situasi yang saling menguntungkan untuk PT. PJA serta JUFMP. Manfaat-manfaat positifnya semakin meningkat dengan berkurangnya sedimen dari jalan-jalan air JUFMP dari tempat-tempat di mana sedimen tersebut tadinya mengalir ke Teluk Jakarta dan menyumbang pada muatan pencemaran yang telah meningkat. Pembedaan tanggung jawab antara JUFMP dengan PT. PJA dalam hal jangka waktu pengembangan/reklamasi telah ditentukan dengan jelas dan sesuai. Pembedaan antara Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 dengan persetujuan-persetujuan lingkungan (AMDAL) di masa depan yang diperlukan untuk setiap penggunaan lahan di masa mendatang tidak dinyatakan, akan tetapi penting untuk diketahui bahwa terdapat pembedaan tersebut dan bahwa Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 memadai untuk tujuan-tujuannya. Pengembangan secara jelas atas lokasi reklamasi sebagai sebuah Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (CDF) sangatlah penting dalam penilaian lingkungan dan penanggulangan. Pengumpulan dan analisis serta penilaian sedimen tambahan menegaskan penilaian sebelumnya bahwa sedimen JUFMP sangat kecil kemungkinannya untuk digolongkan sebagai B3; pemantauan di masa mendatang oleh Komisi AMDAL akan memberikan pengaman-pengaman tambahan; risiko kesehatan dari sedimen terhadap para pekerja dan masarakat umum tingkatnya rendah; dan dengan pelapisan pascareklamasi yang diwajibkan oleh AMDAL menggunakan pasir dan tanah atas, kecil kemungkinan akan terdapat dampak merugikan jangka panjang. Pembangunan fasilitas CDF Ancol akan mengakibatkan kehilangan fisik yang terkait atas habitat laut dekat pantai yang tercemar, yang tidak memiliki nilai konservasi yang besar. Tidak terdapat area-area dengan habitat/ekosistem yang berarti di dekat lokasi tersebut. Kemungkinan akan terdapat penurunan marginal dalam kualitas air laut setempat dari waktu ke waktu, bahkan dengan dilakukannya langkah-langkah penanggulangan yang didasarkan pada memelihara pembatas dan sanitasi lokasi secara normal. Hal tersebut tidak memiliki signifikansi yang besar dikarenakan statusnya yang sudah tercemar; pemantauan kualitas air laut sesaat (walaupun regular) tidak akan dapat mendeteksi selain dari pencemaran kasar dari pembangunan CDF Ancol dan kegiatan-kegiatan penimbunan. Pengawasan dan pengamatan lokasi secara memadai akan menghasilkan pemantauan yang sesuai dan hemat biaya. Dampak-dampak yang terkait dengan kualitas udara besifat lokal dan sementara, potensi tersebut meliputi peningkatan debu dan plastik yang tertiup angin, apabila pengelolaan lokasinya tidak memadai. Melihat kegiatankegiatan pengerukan lainnya di Jakarta, kemungkinan terjadinya masalah bau adalah kecil karena sedimen hampir tidak berbau setelah beberapa jam setelah dikeruk dan ditiriskan. Lokasi masyarakat setempat yang dipisahkan dari lokasi reklamasi oleh sebuah saluran selebar ± 200 m sehingga kecil kemungkinan akan terdapat gangguan yang berarti terhadap masyarakat tersebut, meskipun dalam kondisi-kondisi tertentu mereka akan mendengar bunyi kegiatan operasional di lokasi dan apabila pengelolaan lokasinya buruk, mereka dapat terganggu oleh debu dan sampah yang tertiup angin. 16
Hasil-hasil lingkungan dan sosial yang optimal dari tahap reklamasi/pengembangan akan diperoleh dengan fokus pada o praktik teknik yang baik oleh PT. PJA dan kontraktornya di CDF Ancol dan lokasi-lokasi yang terkait. o kepatuhan terhadap prinsip-prinsip fasilitas pembuangan tertutup (“CDF”) o pengawasan ketat oleh PT. PJA dan ahli teknik dan konsultan pengawasnya untuk memastikan bahwa pengaman-pengaman lingkungan dan sosial telah diikuti, dan o konsultasi dan integrasi erat dengan pelaksanaan proyek JUFMP.
Bagian 0 menbahas pengmaan-pengmaan secara lebih rinci, dengan fokus khusus pada isu-isu yang tidak dijelaskan secara terperinci dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol 3
Pengaman-Pengaman CDF Ancol
Bagian ini membahas pengaman-pengaman yang terkait dengan pengembangan dan penimbunan CDF Ancol selama jangka waktu di mana material hasil kerukan JUFMP akan diangkut ke CDF Ancol. Banyak langkah pengamanan yang sudah disyaratkan dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 dan langkah-langkah tersebut tidak akan dibahas lebih lanjut. Dengan demikian fokusnya adalah pada langkahlangkah tambahan, dan pengaturan-pengaturan institusional untuk memastikan bahwa langkah-langkah tersebut dilaksanakan. 3.1 Pengaturan institusional Pengaturan-pengaturan dan tanggung jawab-tanggung jawab institusional untuk sub-proyek JUFMP telah ditentukan dengan jelas. Sub-bagian-sub-bagian berikut ini mengidentifikasi pengaturan-pengaturan institusional serupa untuk kegiatan reklamasi CDF Ancol dan interaksi-interaksi yang diperlukan antara berbagai pihak. 3.1.1 PT. PJA PT. PJA adalah pemegang hak untuk lokasi reklamasi CDF Ancol. Pihaknya juga merupakan pengusul Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. PT. PJA memiliki: Tanggung jawab hukum khusus untuk melaksanakan Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. Tanggung jawab secara umum untuk memastikan dilakukannya pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang baik di lokasi CDF Ancol, terlepas dari persyaratan khusus dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. Sepakat untuk melaksanakan setiap langkah tambahan yang ditentukan dalam laporan tambahan ini dan menyertakan laporan-laporan pelaksanaan atas langkah-langkah tambahan tersebut dalam laporan-laporan pelaksanaan RKL dan RPL triwulanan kepada BPLHD DKI. Kepentingan-kepentingan dalam penggunaan lokasi Ancol secara jangka panjang. Entitas yang setara untuk proyek JUFMP adalah PIU – PIU (Bagian 0), meskipun PMU JUFMP (Bagian 0) memiliki peran koordinasi atas nama PIU-PIU. 17
Meskipun tanggung jawab hukum tetap berada pada PT. PJA untuk pelaksanaan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial secara khusus dan umum di lokasi Ancol, hal ini tidaklah membatasi kemungkinan bahwa pelaksanaan atas aspek-aspek khusus dapat dialihkan melalui kontrak kepada entitas-entitas lainnya. Perlu diingat bahwa untuk memastikan lebih lanjut kepatuhannya terhadap Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009: “tidak ada keberatan” dari Bank Dunia terhadap setiap kontrak JUFMP yang ditentukan akan diberikan dengan ketentuan bahwa Bank Dunia dapat menerima kememadaian CDF Ancol (termasuk telah memperoleh bukti yang dapat diterima atas kepatuhan PT. PJA terhadap persyaratan AMDAL Ancol dan Laporan Tambahan Update RKL/RPL Ancol ini, serta kepatuhan terhadap Gambar-Gambar Teknik Terperinci yang telah disetujui untuk pembangunan CDF Ancol), dan perjanjian-perjanjian hukum JUFMP akan mencakup ketentuan yang mensyaratkan Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta untuk menggunakan hakhaknya sebagai pemegang saham, untuk memerintahkan PT. PJA untuk melaksanakan persyaratan (termasuk langkah-langkah penanggulangan) yang dinyatakan dalam persyaratan AMDAL Ancol dan Laporan Tambahan Update RKL/RPL Ancol ini. 3.1.2 Kontraktor Konstruksi Ancol (Ancol Construction Contractors/ACC) Istilah kontraktor konstruksi merupakan istilah umum yang digunakan dalam Laporan Tambahan ini yang mencakup setiap Kontraktor, subkontraktor, dan lain-lain, yang digunakan oleh PT. PJA di lokasi CDF Ancol untuk pekerjaan-pekerjaan tertentu seperti, tetapi tidak harus terbatas pada: Pembangunan dan/atau pemeliharaan tanggul-tanggul pembatas eksternal Pembangunan dan/atau pemeliharaan tanggul-tanggul pemisah internal atau pembatas sementara, apabila tanggul-tanggul tersebut dibutuhkan Pengembangan dan/atau pemeliharaan jalan-jalan atau jalur-jalur internal untuk memudahkan pergerakan truk-truk pengangkut sedimen JUFMP Para pemasok pasir, tanah atas, dan lain-lain, yang mungkin digunakan sebagai lapisan akhir yang ditentukan atau untuk setiap tujuan lainnya. Para pemasok tersebut termasuk entitas-entitas selain JUFMP yang dapat digunakan untuk mengangkut material timbunan ke lokasi CDF Ancol. Drainase internal atau yang serupa Para penyedia dan operator fasilitas pencucian kendaraan sebagaimana disyaratkan dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. PT. PJA sendiri pada saat pihaknya melaksanakan setiap pekerjaan dengan menggunakan sumber dayanya sendiri atau, sebagai contoh, buruh kontrak harian. Entitas yang setara untuk proyek JUFMP adalah Kontraktor Konstruksi (JUFMP) (Bagian 0) yang digunakan oleh PIU. Pengawasan atas ACC dilaksanakan oleh PT. PJA melalui Unit Pengembangan Propertinya (termasuk mengawasi aspek-aspek lingkungan dari kontrak-kontrak 18
ACC). Selain itu, PT. PJA telah merekrut sebuah perusahaan konsultan untuk melaksanakan pemantauan kepatuhan triwulanan atas pekerjaan-pekerjaan pembangunan yang sedang berlangsung. PT. PJA, sesuai dengan persyaratan AMDAL Indonesia, menyusun laporan-laporan pelaksanaan triwulanan atas RKL dan RPL serta menyerahkannya kepada BPLHD DKI. 3.1.3 Konsultan Pengawasan (Supervision Consultant/SC) JUFMP PT. PJA telah setuju untuk mengizinkan SC JUFMP memiliki akses ke CDF Ancol dan ke semua lokasi di luar lokasi proyeknya (termasuk lokasi-lokasi sumber material timbunan pasir dan laterit) untuk tujuan pelaksanaan pengawasan atas RKL dan RPL yang telah disetujui, Laporan Tambahan Update RKL/RPL Ancol, laporanlaporan Perkembangan RKL dan RPL triwulanan PT. PJA, dan setiap tugas lainnya sebagaimana ditentukan dalam Terms of Reference (TOR) dari SC. TOR untuk SC akan termasuk tanggung jawab-tanggung jawab tersebut. 3.1.4 PIU PIU (Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, DGCK, dan DGWR) secara nyata merupakan para “pemilik” saat ini dari saluran-saluran air dan waduk-waduk JUFMP yang berada dalam tanggung jawab mereka masing-masing. Oleh karena itu, mereka memegang kepemilikan khusus atas AMDAL JUFMP yang terkait dan dengan demikian tanggung jawab untuk pelaksanaan AMDAL JUFMP, dan secara efektif akan mempertahankan penguasaan tunggal atas saluran-saluran air dan waduk-waduk JUFMP setelah proyek JUFMP diakhiri setelah diselesaikannya kontrak-kontrak pembangunan. 3.1.5 PMU PMU dalam DGWR telah ditentukan sebagai unit utama dengan tangggung jawab menyeluruh Pemerintah Indonesia untuk pelaksanaan proyek JUFMP. PMU memiliki tanggung jawab pengelolaan untuk Konsultan Pengawasan (SC) JUFMP, dan tanggung jawab koordinasi melalui SC untuk pelaksanaan Kontrak Pembangunan untuk subproyek-subproyek JUFMP dan untuk melaksanakan AMDAL-AMDAL yang terkait dan menyerahkan laporan-laporan pemantauan lingkungan kepada BPLHD DKI. PMU juga terkait erat dengan menentukan persyaratan untuk Kontrak-Kontrak Pembangunan JUFMP dan untuk Terms of Reference SC. 3.1.6 Kontraktor Konstruksi (Construction Contractors/CC) Para Kontraktor Konstruksi akan bertanggung jawab untuk pengerukan saluransaluran air dan waduk-waduk JUFMP dan pengangkutan material kerukan dari lokasi-lokasi pengerukan ke CDF Ancol sesuai dengan Kontrak-Kontrak Konstruksi. Syarat-syarat dalam kontrak-kontrak tersebut antara lain membahas pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial.
19
Para Kontraktor Konstruksi akan memiliki tanggung jawab khusus terkait dengan pencegahan pengangkutan dan pembuangan limbah B3 (yakni berbahaya) secara ilegal (apabila ditemukan) ke lokasi CDF Ancol. 3.1.7 BPLHD DKI BPLHD DKI terlibat secara langsung dalam penilaian dan persetujuan atas AMDALAMDAL (termasuk RKL/RPL) dan akan memiliki peran berkelanjutan dalam memantau pelaksanaan RKL/RPL. Laporan-laporan pemantauan untuk pelaksanaan RKL/RPL (termasuk Update RKL/RPL Ancol yang diserahkan oleh PT. PJA) akan dinilai oleh BPLHD DKI. Terkait dengan CDF Ancol, BPLHD DKI telah mulai memantau pekerjaan-pekerjaan pembangunan yang sedang berlangsung dan mengundang Bank Dunia untuk berpartisipasi dalam pengawasan dan pemantauan. Diperkirakan bahwa pengawasan dan pemantauan bersama tersebut akan berlanjut. Di masa mendatang, BPLHD DKI juga akan menjadi otoritas yang terlibat dalam penilaian dan persetujuan atas setiap AMDAL yang terkait dengan setiap usulan penggunaan lahan di lokasi CDF Ancol. 3.2 Pengaman yang diperkuat Dengan mempertimbangkan tinjauan dan penilaian-penilaian di atas, subbagian ini menyajikan pengaman-pengaman yang diperkuat untuk lokasi CDF Ancol yang akan diimplementasikan selama jangka waktu pembangunan (pembangunan dindingdinding pembatas CDF dan penimbunan reklamasi termasuk pelapisan pasir dan tanah atas) yang akan: Melengkapi pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial yang disyaratkan dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. Terintegrasi dengan ESM (Environmental Social Management) untuk proyek JUFMP, sebagaimana ditetapkan oleh AMDAL-AMDAL dan/atau oleh kontrak atau persyaratan selanjutnya. Membahas beberapa isu yang tidak diidentifikasikan secara jelas atau secara spesifik dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. Memberikan jaminan tambahan untuk memastikan bahwa semua material penimbunan, material pelapis, dan lain-lain, mematuhi persyaratan bahwa tidak ada limbah B3 yang dibuang di lokasi CDF Ancol, dan untuk memastikan bahwa tidak ada pembatasan atas penggunaan lahan di masa depan. Untuk setiap kegiatan penanggulangan/pemantauan, tanggung jawab-tanggung jawabnya dialokasikan. Tabel dalam Lampiran 3 merangkum informasi ini. 3.2.1 Integrasi JUFMP dan kegiatan-kegiatan CDF Ancol Kegiatan
20
PT. PJA akan memberikan laporan-laporan terbaru kepada Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dan PMU tentang perkembangan pembangunan fasilitas CDF Ancol, dan memberikan dokumen-dokumen yang menegaskan diselesaikannya tanggul-tanggul pembatas. PT. PJA akan bekerja sama dengan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, PMU, atau Bank Dunia dalam meninjau kesiapan fasilitas tertutup tersebut untuk pembuangan material hasil kerukan (termasuk memberikan bukti yang dapat diterima atas kepatuhan kepada persyaratan AMDAL Ancol dan Laporan Tambahan Update RKL/RPL Ancol, dan kesesuaian dengan Gambar-Gambar Teknik Terperinci yang telah disetujui untuk pembangunan CDF Ancol). Tanggung Jawab PT. PJA memberikan informasi dan dokumen kepada Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, PMU, dan Bank Dunia untuk melaksanakan tinjauan dan penilaian-penilaian Kegiatan PT. PJA mengadakan pertemuan secara rutin sebagaimana diperlukan dengan PMU dan/atau SC untuk memungkinkan dilakukannya pemaduan secara lancar antara JUFMP dengan kegiatan-kegiatan CDF Ancol. Sebuah alat yang harus digunakan adalah pengembangan (dan tinjauan serta pemutakhiran sebagaiman diperlukan) sebuah jadwal terperinci (garis besarnya diberikan dalam Tabel A - 2) dari kegiatankegiatan operasional yang terpadu Tanggung Jawab Utama Tambahan
PT. PJA dan PMU melakukan pertemuan-pertemuan koordinasi secara reguler SC, ACC, dan CC harus ikut serta dalam pertemuan-pertemuan koordinasi tersebut sebagaiman diperlukan
3.2.2 “Praktik yang baik” dalam pembangunan dan pengawasan Kegiatan PT. PJA memastikan bahwa semua Kontraktor Konstruksi Ancol (ACC) menyusun rencana-rencana kerja yang mencakup rencana-rencana pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial. Rencana-rencana tersebut harus mencakup aspek-aspek seperti penyediaan pengaturan-pengaturan sanitasi untuk para pekerja, kesehatan dan keselamatan, identifikasi dan pengelolaan yang diusulkan atas lingkungan dan sosial spesifik lokasi, pelatihan untuk para pekerja dalam pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang relevan. Rincian dari setiap Rencana Kerja dan ESMP harus disesuaikan dengan kegiatan tertentu; sebagai contoh, meskipun sebuah kontrak jangka panjang untuk pembuangan dan perataan sedimen yang ditimbun mensyaratkan adanya sebuah ESMP yang terperinci secara wajar, sebuah ESMP untuk kegiatan terbatas seperti pencucian kendaraan untuk truk-truk sebelulm meninggalkan lokasi dapat berupa sebuah dokumen sepanjang 1-2 halaman. Beberapa kegiatan kemungkinan tidak akan membutuhkan rencana spesifik seperti itu. PT. PJA akan mengawasi para ACC-nya (melalui Unit Pengembangan Propertinya). Dengan adanya kepentingan-kepentingan JUFMP dalam CDF Ancol, kegiatankegiatan pengawasan dan pemantauan SC di CDF Ancol akan mencakup tinjauantinjauan atas pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial oleh ACC atas kegiatan-kegiatan mereka. 21
Tanggung Jawab ACC untuk kegiatan harian di lokasi Ancol PT. PJA (melalui Unit Pengembangan Properti-nya) untuk pengawasan langsung atas ACC SC untuk mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan-kegiatan Ancol untuk JUFMP PMU untuk mengawasi kegiatan SC dan menerima laporan-laporan SC 3.2.3 Sedimen dan material penimbunan/pelapisan lainnya Kegiatan PMU (dengan bantuan SC) harus memberikan informasi kepada PT. PJA segera setelah tersedia, tentang hasil-hasil dari pengujian pengerukan sebelumnya di lokasi-lokasi/bagian-bagian JUFMP (lihat bagian 2.2.1). Untuk bagian-bagian di mana sedimennya telah diizinkan dengan sebagaimana mestinya untuk pengangkutan dan pembuangan ke CDF Ancol, PT. PJA akan mengizinkan material tersebut diangkut dan dibuang ke CDF Ancol. Untuk bagian-bagian di mana sedimennya belum diizinkan dengan sebagaimana mestinya untuk pengangkutan ke CDF Ancol (misalnya, apabila sedimen tersebut ditentukan sebagai limbah B3, atau ditentukan membutuhkan pengujian dan interpretasi tambahan lebih lanjut), PMU (dengan bantuan SC) harus memastikan bahwa material tersebut tidak diangkut ke CDF Ancol. PMU (dengan bantuan SC) harus terus memberitahu PT. PJA tentang penanganan setiap limbah B3 yang ditemukan di lokasi-lokasi JUFMP. PT. PJA dapat meninjau dan memantau proses pengujian di JUFMP. Tanggung Jawab PMU (melalui SC) untuk memberikan informasi dan dokumen, serta bekerja sama dengan setiap tinjauan PT. PJA PT. PJA untuk mengizinkan material tidak berbahaya, yang telah diizinkan, untuk diangkut ke CDF Ancol Kegiatan PT. PJA memastikan bahwa material (selain material kerukan JUFMP) yang akan diangkut dan dibuang ke atau digunakan di CDF Ancol oleh setiap ACC telah menerima izin lingkungan yang sesuai dan telah mematuhi Update RKL/RPL Ancol yang membatasi material non-JUFMP hanya pada pasir (yang diperoleh dari suatu lokasi yang ditentukan) dan laterit. Sebagai contoh, hal ini akan mensyaratkan diterimanya salinan-salinan dari surat izin AMDAL yang dibuat untuk kegiatan pengambilan pasir atau tanah, atau sebuah izin material yang bersertifikasi laboratorium. Penilaian ahli yang memenuhi syarat akan digunakan sesuai jenis izinnya dengan mempertimbangkan sifat material dan kuantitas yang dapat diangkut. Dengan adanya kepentingan-kepentingan JUFMP dalam CDF Ancol, kegiatankegiatan pengawasan dan pemantauan SC di CDF Ancol akan termasuk tinjauantinjauan atas pengadaan dan pengangkutan material tersebut, termasuk tinjauantinjauan atas potensi dampak-dampak di luar lokasi di lokasi-lokasi sumber material tersebut. Tanggung jawab 22
ACC untuk kegiatan harian di lokasi Ancol PT. PJA (melalui Unit Pengembangan Properti-nya) untuk pengawasan langsung atas ACC SC untuk mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan-kegiatan Ancol untuk JUFMP PMU untuk mengawasi kegiatan SC dan menerima laporan-laporan SC Kegiatan PT. PJA dengan bekerja sama dengan PMU yang dibantu oleh SC akan melaksanakan sebuah program pengambilan sampel dan analisis pascapembuangan di area material penimbunan JUFMP di CDF Ancol. Dua kegiatan telah ditentukan (pemeriksaan menengah yang dilakukan 18 bulan setelah material JUFMP pertama kali ditimbun di lokasi CDF Ancol pada 10 lokasi sampel, dan sekitar 1 bulan setelah material kerukan JUFMP terakhir ditimbun di lokasi CDF Ancol pada 10 lokasi yang sama sebagaimana untuk pemeriksaan menengah ditambah dengan 10 lokasi lainnya yang ditimbun dengan material yang lebih akhir) dengan dua sampel gabungan, 1 “dangkal”; 1 “dalam” dikumpulkan di setiap lokasi pengambilan sampel. Biayanya diperkirakan sebesar sekitar US$8.000 untuk pengambilan sampel dalam pemeriksaan menengah dan pelaksanaan analisis, dan US$16.000 untuk pengambilan sampel setelah “penyelesaian”. Tanggung jawab PT. PJA untuk mengizinkan pengambilan sampel pascapembuangan di CDF Ancol SC untuk melaksanakan pengambilan sampel pascapembuangan di CDF Ancol PMU untuk mengawasi kegiatan SC dan menerima laporan-laporan SC 3.2.4 Pengelolaan lalu lintas Kegiatan PT. PJA harus memastikan bahwa pengelolaan lalu lintas dalam wilayah tanggung jawabnya sebagaimana ditentukan dalam Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009. Hal ini mencakup pengaturan untuk truk-truk pengangkutan sedimen JUFMP yang akan masuk, pengaturan dalam lokasi CDF, dan keberangkatan truk-truk dari CDF Ancol. Sedangkan PMU berkewajiban untuk memberitahu PT. PJA jadwal-jadwal tentative truk-truk dari lokasi-lokasi pengerukan JUFMP, sehingga PT PJA dapat memberikan alokasi waktu bagi truk-truk sebagaimana mestinya untuk waktu-waktu puncak, hal ini akan dilakukan oleh PT. PJA dengan terlebih dahulu meminta jadwal-jadwal kemungkinan pergerakan truk-truk dari ACC utama yang juga bekerja di, atau melakukan pengangkutan ke CDF Ancol dan berkoordinasi dengan semua pihak sebagaimana diperlukan untuk mengembangkan dan mengimplementasikan sebuah rencana pengelolaan lalu lintas Ancol untuk menghindari kemacetan. Kemungkinankemungkinan halangan seperti pencucian kendaraan harus diidentifikasi dan fasilitas-fasilitas yang harus dipenuhi untuk memungkinkan pergerakan kendaraankendaraan secara tepat waktu dan kepatuhan terhadap persyaratan untuk pengelolaan lingkungan. Tanggung jawab PT. PJA untuk mengembangkan dan mengimplementasikan rencana pengelolaan lalu lintas di dalam wilayah CDF Ancol
23
PMU (melalui SC) untuk memberikan jadwal pengangkutan material JUFMP ke PT. PJA
24
Lampiran 1 Tinjauan terperinci atas AMDAL Ancol dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol Tabel berikut ini menyajikan perincian tinjauan, terutama, Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009, juga dengan mengacu kembali kepada AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006. Tabel tersebut dibuat berdasarkan pada item-item dalam checklist yang diberikan oleh Bank Dunia (Kolom 1) dengan Kolom 2 yang mengidentifikasi tingkat cakupan dalam kedua dokumen tersebut sebagaimana diidentifikasikan oleh para peninjau. Kolom 3 menyajikan komentar-komentar dari para peninjau yang mempertimbangkan ikhtisar singkat pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen, dan penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau tentang signifikansi dan relevansi dari item dalam Checklist. Dua tinjauan independen telah dilaksanakan – oleh para konsultan ERM pada tahun 2009 dan (melalui laporan pelengkap ini) oleh PPA pada tahun 2010. Hasil-hasilnya kemudian digabungkan oleh PPA untuk menghasilkan tabel gabungan yang ditunjukkan di bawah ini. Tabel A - 1 : Tinjauan terperinci atas AMDAL Ancol tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 Item checklist
TUJUAN DAN KEBUTUHAN 1. Uraian yang jelas tentang kebutuhan yang mendasari proyek yang diusulkan
2. Uraian yang jelas tentang tujuan dari proyek yang diusulkan 3. Uraian secara memadai dari proyek yang diusulkan ALTERNATIF-ALTERNATIF PROYEK 1. Pertimbangan atas semua jenis alternatif yang relevan a. Tidak ada tindakan
b. lokasi-lokasi alternatif
c. Rancangan alternatif d. Kendali alternatif e. Alternatif-alternatif struktural f. Alternatif-alternatif nonstruktural 2. Semua alternatif memenuhi tujuan yang dinyatakan dan kebutuhan akan
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL Baik
Reklamasi garis pantai utara Jakarta telah direncanakan sejak tahun 1995, yang didukung oleh peraturan resmi Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, dokumen-dokumen perencanaan, dan lain-lain. Penggunaan spesifik lokasi Ancol untuk pembuangan sedimen JUFMP berdasarkan keputusan Gubernur DKI Jakarta tahun 2008 Tercakup dalam AMDAL dan Update RKL/RPL
Baik Sebagian besar sudah baik
Baik
Terbatas/Tidak Tidak ada pembahasan; pilihan tanpa pengerukan tidak ada pembahasan merupakan suatu alternatif. Reklamasi lahan telah ditentukan sebelumnya oleh kebijakan dan perencanaan pemerintah terdahulu Terbatas/Tidak Tidak ada pembahasan; tetapi lokasi-lokasi alternatif ada pembahasan telah diketahui dan dikesampingkan sebelum melanjutkan ke penyusunan Update RKL/RPL karena isu-isu sosial/pemukiman kembali atau karena dekat dengan daerah-daerah konservasi Terbatas/Tidak Tidak ada pembahasan, tetapi rancangan dibuat ada pembahasan berdasarkan pengalaman luas PT. PJA dalam hal reklamasi Terbatas/Tidak Tidak ada pembahasan ada pembahasan Baik Terdapat beberapa pembahasan. Teknik-teknik ditentukan berdasarkan pengalaman yang telah terbukti secara lokal. Terbatas/Tidak ada pembahasan Terbatas/Tidak Tidak ada alternatif untuk reklamasi maupun ada pembahasan pengerukan yang akan memenuhi tujuan-tujuan dan
25
Item checklist
proyek 3. Uraian dari semua tindakan atau proyek alternatif yang telah dipertimbangkan atau sedang dipertimbangkan a. Ukuran dan lokasi reklamasi b. persyaratan lahan c. persyaratan operasional dan pengelolaan d. Struktur-struktur pendukung e. Jadwal-jadwal pembangunan
4. Uraian dari proses-proses dan hasilhasil awal penilaian dampak lingkungan hidup URAIAN LATAR BELAKANG LINGKUNGAN 1. Daerah bersangkutan yang ditentukan, termasuk area-area perbatasan 2. Lingkungan fisik-kimia a. Sumber daya udara i) data meteorologi (seperti suhu, angin)
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL kebutuhan-kebutuhan yang dinyatakan dari kedua proyek tersebut. Terbatas/Tidak Teridentifikasi secara jelas untuk pengendalian banjir. ada pembahasan Pengerukan JUFMP merupakan bagian dari suatu program yang terpadu.
Baik Baik
Terbatas/Tidak ada pembahasan Terbatas/Tidak Dua aspek yang saling terkait yang perlu ada pembahasan dipertimbangkan: penjadwalan JUFMP dan penjadwalan pengembangan Ancol. Signifikansi lingkungan nyata yang terbatas selain pemastian pembatasan tanggul eksternal mendahului dimulainya pengiriman sedimen JUFMP, dan pentahapan pelapisan akhir. Baik Diumumkannya RKL-RPL yang Telah Dimutakhirkan menjelaskan proses AMDAL terdahulu dan alasan diperlukannya Pemutakhiran tersebut.
Baik
Bab 2 memberikan: praktik standar dalam sistem AMDAL.
Baik
Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009
ii) kualitas udara ambien (seperti partikulat, ozon) iii) data kebisingan
Baik
iv) sumber-sumber emisi bergerak (seperti mobil dan truk) b. Air laut
Baik
c. Air Permukaan i) lokasi dan jenis (seperti muara, sungai, danau, dan posisinya terhadap lokasi) ii) informasi kualitas air (seperti oksigen terlarut, suhu, hara) iii) sumber-sumber pencemar yang ada (lokasi dan jumlah pelepasan)
iv) penggunaan-penggunaan di masa mendatang v) pembahasan tentang peristiwa kebanjiran d. Air Tanah vi) uraian faktor-faktor utama
Kegiatan “pembentukan” lahan
Baik
Baik
Baik
Muara Sungai Ancol di dekat lokasi proyek merupakan satu-satunya kumpulan air permukaan yang penting di dekat lokasi. Baik Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 Terbatas/Tidak Penyebab-penyebab dari tingkat pelampauan di atas ada pembahasan standar dalam kualitas air yang diukur tidak diidentifikasi, tetapi diketahui secara umum bahwa sumber-sumber tersebut banyak terdapat (terutama) di dekat pesisir Teluk Jakarta yang diakibatkan oleh dampak-dampak gabungan polusi pemukiman dan industri dari Jakarta. Baik Diuraikan Baik
Terkait dengan tinggi gelombang rancangan. Pembuatan model tambahan menunjukkan perubahanperubahan air laut yang sangat sedikit yang diakibatkan oleh pengembangan.
Baik
Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006
26
Item checklist
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL
(seperti kedalaman muka air tanah, tanah lapisan atas, sifatsifat geologis) vii) informasi kualitas air (seperti Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas dalam lingkungan laut pH zat-zat padat) ada pembahasan e. Tanah dan Geologi i) fisiografi dan geomorfologi Baik Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 ii) struktur tanah Baik Dalam AMDAL tahun 2006 dan Update RKL/RPL tahun 2009 iii) pergerakan air tanah Tidak ada Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas dalam lingkungan laut pembahasan iv) potensi erosi Baik Dalam RKL/RPL yang Telah Dimutakhirkan. Diberikan perkiraan-perkiraan. v) penurunan permukaan tanah Sebagian besar Dibahas dalam hal penyelesaian rancangan, tanpa sudah baik menyebutkan penurunan permukaan tanah keseluruhan/regional yang diketahui. vi) aktivitas seismik (misalnya kedekatan Tidak ada Diketahui di Jakarta dengan adanya rancangan untuk dengan sesaran, riwayat gempa dan pembahasan dibahas. letusan gunung berapi) vii) sumber daya mineral (misalnya Tidak ada Dianggap sebagai sangat tidak mungkin lokasi-lokasi sedimen, jenis dan pembahasan kuantitas, kepemilikan hak penambangan) 3. Kondisi-Kondisi Biologis a. Satwa Liar dan Tumbuh-tumbuhan i) uraian dan daftar flora dan fauna air, lahan basah, dan darat (seperti daftar spesies, kelimpahan) ii) uraian dan daftar spesies satwa liar dan tumbuhan setempat yang ada iii) uraian dan daftar spesies satwa liar dan tumbuhan asing eksotik yang invasif b. Karakterisasi Komunitas dan Habitat
Lingkungan yang sangat terganggu oleh manusia. Tidak ditemukan spesies yang terancam punah atau langka.
Baik Baik Tidak ada pembahasan Baik
Flora dan fauna darat serta plankton dan bentos dimasukkan ke dalam daftar. Tidak signifikan.
Sangat terbatas dan sebagian besar habitat alami yang terganggu oleh manusia. Uraian-uraian yang Dianggap tidak penting. Lokasi itu sendiri merupakan terbatas, tidak ada lingkungan yang terganggu peta Kemungkinan besar tidak ada.
i) peta dan uraian komunitas air, lahan basah, dan darat yang ditemukan di dalam dan di sekitar lokasi proyek c. Fitur-Fitur yang Signifikan Secara Ekologis i) dukungan ekosistem-ekosistem yang Terbatas/Tidak Kemungkinan besar tidak penting; bagian dari Teluk lebih luas di dekat lokasi proyek (seperti ada pembahasan Jakarta yang tercemar apabila terletak di sepanjang jalur terbang atau koridor biologi lainnya) ii) fungsi-fungsi ekologis penting dari Terbatas/Tidak Kemungkinan besar tidak penting; bagian dari Teluk lokasi proyek (seperti sumber hara ada pembahasan Jakarta yang tercemar melalui banjir, retensi air hujan badai) iii) karakterisasi rezim-rezim gangguan Baik Diidentifikasikan sebagai bagian dari lingkungan yang yang terkait, yang ditimbulkan secara terganggu oleh manusia yang timbul dari pencemaran alami dan oleh proyek (seperti banjir, Jakarta melalui air. kebakaran, potensi dampak pembalakan) iv) uraian proses-proses hidrologis Terbatas Arus-arus permukaan dibahas; signifikansi yang terbatas (misalnya aliran-aliran dan durasi air tanah dan air permukaan) v) uraian interaksi-interaksi biotik penting Terbatas Kemungkinan besar tidak penting; bagian dari Teluk (seperti saling ketergantungan antara Jakarta yang tercemar tanaman dan hewan di lokasi dan dengan lokasi-lokasi lain)
27
Item checklist
4. Pengelolaan Limbah dan Pencegahan Polusi a. Lokasi-lokasi pembuangan atau pelepasan limbah yang diperkirakan b. Uraian teknik-teknik pengelolaan limbah (seperti penanganan, penyimpanan, pengangkutan, daur ulang) c. Proyeksi karakteristik limbah (seperti jenis, kuantitas, toksisitas) 5. Lingkungan Sosial Ekonomi a. Penggunaan lahan
i) uraian penggunaan lahan pada saat ini dan pada masa lalu ii) peta penggunaan lahan pada saat ini dan pada masa lalu b. Populasi dan pemukiman i) informasi demografis (seperti rata-rata ukuran rumah tangga, umur, pembagian umur/jenis kelamin, komposisi etnis dan kohesi masyarakat) c. Kegiatan ekonomi i) uraian kegiatan ekonomi saat ini (seperti jumlah dan jenis usaha, pendapatan tahunan, pola kepemilikan) ii) uraian atas sifat-sifat khas dari komunitas usaha (seperti tingginya tingkat perubahan musim dalam perdagangan, aliran laba ke luar yang tinggi, kemerosotan perdagangan, atau revitalisasi pusat kota) iii) pertimbangan pengaruh silang antara kegiatan ekonomi, kapasitas layanan umum, dan kemampuan fiskal masyarakat untuk memenuhi kebutuhankebutuhan kapasitas d. Layanan Masyarakat dan Keuangan Publik i) uraian pengaruh silang antara kegiatan ekonomi, kapasitas layanan umum, dan kemampuan fiskal masyarakat untuk memenuhi kebutuhan-kebutuhan kapasitas e. Transportasi i) uraian dari semua bentuk transportasi yang relevan untuk fasilitas
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL
Terbatas
Terbatas Baik
Lokasi itu sendiri menjadi lokasi pembuangan lumpur kerukan yang tertutup dibandingkan dengan keadaan material saat ini yang hanyut ke dalam Teluk tanpa kendali. Menguraikan rincian tentang penempatan lumpur; khususnya lapisan atas yang tertutup dan final Karakteristik lumpur kerukan teridentifikasi.
Memiliki signifikansi praktis yang sangat kecil sebagai perairan dekat pantai di lokasi saat ini dan akan memiliki sedikit interaksi dengan penggunaan lahan selama masa pengembangan. Pengembangan-pengembangan penggunaan lahan baru pascapenimbunan akan memerlukan penilaian tersendiri.. Terbatas Lokasi itu sendiri pada saat ini berdekatan dengan pantai dan hanya sekali-sekali digunakan untuk transit manusia (dengan perahu) dan tempat rekreasi pemancingan ikan tidak resmi Sebagian besar Tersedia peta-peta yang sulit dibaca tetapi dapat sudah baik memberikan gambaran umum. Lokasi tersebut juga berada di “air”, bukan di tanah. Memiliki signifikansi praktis yang kecil karena hanya akan ada sedikit interaksi dengan penduduk sekitar selama masa pengembangan Informasi umum Tidak memiliki signifikansi praktis yang terbatas Terbatas tetapi memadai
Memiliki signifikansi praktis yang kecil karena hanya akan ada sedikit interaksi dengan penduduk sekitar selama masa pengembangan Terbatas tetapi Memiliki signifikansi praktis yang kecil memadai Terbatas tetapi Memiliki signifikansi praktis yang kecil memadai
Tidak relevan
Terbatas tetapi memadai
Memadai Baik
28
Tidak terdapat informasi tentang peran dari masingmasing kelompok usaha setempat dan hubungan mereka dengan layanan-layanan umum yang tersedia.
Dalam Update RKL/RPL
Mengidentifikasi lahan sekitar dan rute laut ke lokasi. Rute-rute yang lebih jauh akan dibahas dalam JUFMP
Item checklist
ii) volume lalu lintas saat ini iii) kapasitas lalu lintas saat ini
Cakupan dalam dokumendokumen AMDAL dan Update RKL/RPL Sebagian besar sudah baik Sebagian besar sudah baik
iv) penyediaan transportasi umum
Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih lanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. Data lama (tahun 2004) disajikan, Data lama (tahun 2004) disajikan, tetapi memadai untuk menyoroti kemacetan selama jam-jam sibuk.
Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang kecil terbatas v) penilaian kecukupan dari sistem-sistem Pembahasan yang Mengidentifikasi potensi kendala; merupakan tanggung untuk memenuhi permintaan-permintaan terbatas jawab pembahasan berbagai AMDAL dalam JUFMP tertinggi selama masa pembangunan dan kegiatan operasi f. Kesehatan dan Keselamatan i) uraian isu-isu kesehatan dan Pembahasan yang Memiliki signifikansi yang kecil untuk masyarakat umum. keselamatan saat ini (seperti data statistik terbatas Tidak dibahas dalam kaitannya dengan tenaga kerja kecelakaan industri, data emisi dari lokasi Ancol fasilitas sebelumnya dan fasilitas yang ada, tingkat kebisingan) ii) identifikasi penduduk atau daerah Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki signifikansi yang kecil untuk masyarakat umum. khusus yang kemungkinan besar akan ada pembahasan Tidak dibahas dalam kaitannya dengan tenaga kerja terpapar dampak-dampak yang lokasi Ancol merugikan 6. Sumber Daya Kebudayaan a. Situs-situs arkeologi yang terkait Terbatas/Tidak Sangat tidak mungkin karena lokasi berdekatan dengan dengan proyek ada pembahasan pantai b. Situs-situs paleontologi yang terkait Terbatas/Tidak Sangat tidak mungkin karena lokasi berdekatan dengan dengan proyek ada pembahasan pantai c. Situs-situs sejarah yang terkait dengan Terbatas/Tidak Sangat tidak mungkin karena lokasi berdekatan dengan proyek ada pembahasan pantai d. Situs-situs pendidikan, keagamaan, Pembahasan yang Terdapat beberapa pembahasan; tetapi memiliki ilmiah, atau kebudayaan yang terkait terbatas signifikansi yang sangat kecil karena lokasi aktual dengan proyek berdekatan dengan pantai PENILAIAN POTENSI DAMPAK LINGKUNGAN AMDAL membahas dampak-dampak Baik Memadai untuk ruang lingkup dan konteks: AMDAL utama, tambahan, dan kumulatif selama Ancol tahun 2006 untuk reklamasi dan integrasi dengan semua tahap, termasuk persiapan awal perencanaan tata ruang induk; Update RKL/RPL tahun lokasi dan pembangunan; kegiatan 2009 akan secara khusus membahas penggunaan operasi fasilitas dan pascafasilitas atau sedimen kerukan JUFMP sebagai material penimbunan penutupan lokasi berikut ini: utama; AMDAL JUFMP akan membahas pengerukan di luar lokasi, pengangkutan, dan lain-lain; pengembangan khusus pascareklamasi akan dibahas AMDAL terpisah di tahap tersebut tetapi hal tersebut tidak dibahas. 1. Pembangkit, Penyebar, dan Penerima Pencemar a. Sumber daya udara Pengaruh-pengaruh kualitas udara dianggap memiliki signifikansi yang rendah karena tidak memerlukan pengelolaan dan pemantauan. i) identifikasi sumber emisi dan tingkat Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas; isu-isu yang ada emisi proyek dan perbandingan terhadap terbatas sebagian besar berdasarkan pada lokasi and pengaruhpengaruhnya (apabila ada) terbatas pada tenaga kerja ii) perbandingan tingkat udara yang Tidak dibahas Sangat sulit; sumber emisi variabel yang tidak pasti. diperkirakan dengan tingkat-tingkat Untuk beberapa parameter, standar-standarnya sering ambien nasional, negara, atau daerah kali terlampaui di daerah aliran udara Jakarta. iii) uraian emisi cerobong selama Tidak relevan kegiatan operasi dan kegiatan pemeliharaan iv) identifikasi langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah terbatas
29
Item checklist
atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak merugikan b. Sumber daya air i) pembahasan potensi penurunan kualitas air oleh berbagai faktor
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL
Baik
ii) perkiraan konsentrasi pencemar pada Baik kumpulan-kumpulan air dan perbandingan dengan yang ada iii) identifikasi langkah-langkah Sebagian besar penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah sudah baik atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak merugikan c. Sumber daya geologis i) penentuan potensi kehilangan tanah Tidak relevan dan kegiatan penanggulangan ii) identifikasi potensi sumber Sebagian besar pencemaran dan langkah-langkah sudah baik penanggulangan d. Sumber daya biologis i) pertimbangan potensi kehilangan Baik sumber daya biologis dalam batas-batas lokasi ii) uraian konsentrasi efluen dan emisi Relevansi yang serta potensi dampaknya terhadap terbatas sumber daya biologis iii) pembahasan dampak-dampak bioPembahasan yang akumulatif dari emisi fasilitas dan yang terbatas dilepaskan iv) identifikasi langkah-langkah Disimpulkan penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan 2. Perubahan habitat
Dibahas; tetapi tidak dimasukkan dalam konteks yang wajar dengan mempertimbangkan kondisi regional dari saluran air perkotaan tercemar yang ada yang mengalir secara tidak terkendali ke dalam dan mencemari Teluk Jakarta Dibahas, dasar penilaian tidak jelas.
Dibahas, tetapi fokus pembahasan memiliki relevansi yang terbatas.
Jumlah kehilangan habitat laut dangkal yang tercemar dalam wilayah seluas ±119 ha Lintasan-lintasan/pengaruh-pengaruh teoretis diidentifikasi; tetapi konteks dan signifikansinya tidak dibahas dengan sebagaimana mestinya. Dengan membatasi, lintasan yang terbatas. Uji-uji pelindian menunjukkan potensi pencemaran yang sangat terbatas dari sedimen kerukan. Dengan membatasi
a. Sumber daya biologis i) pembahasan potensi kegiatan-kegiatan Baik pembangunan dan persiapan lokasi untuk mengubah habitat-habitat yang kritis ii) pertimbangan potensi perubahan Terbatas/Tidak tambahan atas habitat setelah ada pembahasan pembangunan iii) penilaian kemungkinan kehilangan Tidak dibahas secara permanen atau pemindahan tumbuh-tumbuhan iv) identifikasi perubahan atas komposisi, keanekaragaman, dan kelimpahan spesies setempat v) identifikasi langkah-langkah penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan 3. Pengelolaan Limbah dan Pencegahan Polusi
Disimpulkan Disimpulkan
Diidentifikasi; sifat tidak kritis yang diidentifikasi melalui kesimpulan sebagai lingkungan dekat pantai yang diubah/tercemar. Dianggap memiliki signifikansi yang kecil dengan mempertimbangkan habitat-habitat di sekitar. Memiliki relevansi yang sangat terbatas; gangguan/kehancuran tumbuh-tumbuhan (sebagian besar laut) hanya akan memiliki signifikansi konservasi yang sangat rendah. Punahnya habitat laut yang tercemar Penutupan. Dalam konteks keseluruhan, dengan cara penutupan daripada pengangkutan sedimen secara tidak terkendali (yang terjadi) ke Teluk Jakarta. Pengelolaan limbah pembangunan mungkin tidak tercakup secara memadai, tetapi memiliki signifikansi yang kecil
30
Item checklist
a. uraian rencana pengelolaan limbah fasilitas dengan prosedur perlakuan dan penanganan b. pembahasan proyeksi karakteristik limbah fasilitas c. identifikasi langkah-langkah penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan 4 Dampak-Dampak Sosial Ekonomi
Cakupan dalam dokumendokumen AMDAL dan Update RKL/RPL Baik
Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih lanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. Dibahas secara singkat; tidak dimasukkan ke dalam konteks
Baik
Dibahas secara singkat; tidak dimasukkan ke dalam konteks
Baik
Metode-metode diidentifikasi
1 identifikasi area-area penggunaan Dibahas lahan yang ada atau direncanakan yang hilang karena persiapan lokasi 2 penentuan persyaratan penetapan Dibahas daerah dan penggunaan lahan yang bertentangan dengan lokasi 3 uraian perubahan yang diperkirakan Dibahas atas lahan di dekat proyek sebagai akibat dari fasilitas 4 identifikasi langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah terbatas atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan b) Kegiatan Ekonomi
Hampir tidak memiliki relevansi
1 pembahasan perubahan pola pekerjaan
Bersifat hipotesis, karena akan bergantung pada pilihanpilihan kontraktor.
2 pembahasan kemampuan kelompok tenaga kerja yang tersedia untuk memenuhi kebutuhan-kebutuhan tenaga kerja yang terkait dengan proyek 3 identifikasi pengganda ekonomi yang digunakan dalam analisis dan sumbersumbernya 4 pembahasan potensi perubahan dalam kegiatan ekonomi keseluruhan di wilayah tersebut 5 identifikasi langkah-langkah penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan c) Populasi dan Pemukiman
Dibahas
Sesuai dengan rencana-rencana tata ruang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas Kemungkinan memadai, dengan mempertimbangkan konteks.
Terbatas/Tidak Penerimaan umum bahwa pengutamaan tenaga kerja ada pembahasan lokal akan menguntungkan. Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas selama pembangunan terbatas Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas selama pembangunan ada pembahasan Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas selama pembangunan terbatas.
1 pembahasan hubungan antara Terbatas/tidak ada Memadai dengan mempertimbangkan konteks peningkatan lapangan kerja dan pembahasan pertambahan jumlah penduduk 2 identifikasi kekurangan pemukiman Baik Diidentifikasi yang tersedia untuk potensi peningkatan workface 3 identifikasi langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang Sebagian besar memadai dengan mempertimbangkan penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah terbatas konteks atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan d) Layanan Masyarakat dan Keuangan Publik
31
Item checklist
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas terbatas
1 identifikasi kekurangan dalam layanan masyarakat dan infrastruktur selama persiapan proyek 2 identifikasi kekurangan dalam kapasitas Dibahas Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas transportasi karena dampak utama atau dampak tambahan 3 identifikasi langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah terbatas atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan e) Transportasi Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas; karena truk-truk JUFMP akan dibahas dalam AMDAL JUFMP 1 penilaian atas konsistensi proyek yang diusulkan dengan rencana-rencana transportasi lokal dan/atau regional 2 evaluasi perubahan LOS yang diakibatkan dari proyek yang diusulkan
Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas; karena truk-truk JUFMP terbatas akan dibahas dalam AMDAL JUFMP
3 evaluasi dampak lalu lintas kendaraan berat terhadap jalan aspal dan jembatan yang terkena dampak 4 uraian langkah-langkah penanggulangan untuk mengimbangi dampak-dampak yang merugikan terhadap keutuhan struktural f) Kesehatan dan Keselamatan
Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas; karena truk-truk ada pembahasan JUFMP akan dibahas dalam AMDAL JUFMP
1 evaluasi atas apakah kegiatan-kegiatan pembangunan, operasional, dan pemeliharaan menimbulkan bahayabahaya kesehatan dan keselamatan terhadap orang-orang yang bekerja atau tinggal di lokasi proyek atau di dekat lokasi proyek 2 pembahasan potensi dampak tingkat kebisingan fasilitas terhadap para pekerja dan masyarakat setempat 3 analisis potensi bahan pencemar bioakumulatif jangka panjang dalam rantai makanan 4 identifikasi langkah-langkah penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan g) Kesetaraan Lingkungan
Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas di luar lokasi; terbatas
Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas; karena truk-truk ada pembahasan JUFMP akan dibahas dalam AMDAL JUFMP
Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas; karena truk-truk ada pembahasan JUFMP akan dibahas dalam AMDAL JUFMP
Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas di luar lokasi; terbatas Pembahasan yang Memerlukan pembahasan terbatas Pembahasan yang baik terbatas
1 penentuan kesetaraan dalam Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas karena pengaruhperubahan-perubahan pola tenaga kerja terbatas pengaruh di luar lokasi sangat sedikit yang disebabkan oleh lokasi 2 penentuan kesetaraan dalam Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas karena pengaruhperubahan-perubahan struktur terbatas pengaruh di luar lokasi sangat sedikit masyarakat yang disebabkan oleh pembangunan dan kegiatan operasional proyek 3 identifikasi langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas karena pengaruhpenanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah terbatas pengaruh di luar lokasi sangat sedikit atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan
32
Item checklist
Cakupan dalam Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih dokumenlanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dokumen AMDAL dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. dan Update RKL/RPL
5 Sumber Daya Kebudayaan a) identifikasi atas setiap sumber daya sejarah atau kebudayaan yang berdekatan dengan lokasi setelah dilakukannya surat-menyurat dengan otoritas-otoritas yang berwenang b) Pembahasan langkah-langkah penanggulangan yang diperlukan untuk melestarikan benda yang memiliki nilai arkeologis, sejarah, atau kebudayaan c) Penentuan taraf di mana kegiatankegiatan pembangunan, operasional, dan pemeliharaan mengganggu atribut-atribut keindahan atau pemandangan lokasi d) Penentuan atas apakah komponenkomponen fasilitas dirancang dengan mempertimbangkan faktor-faktor manusia LANGKAH-LANGKAH PENANGGULANGAN
Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas karena pembangunan ada pembahasan dilakukan di lokasi dekat pantai
Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas karena pembangunan ada pembahasan dilakukan di lokasi dekat pantai Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki beberapa relevansi tetapi tingkat signifikansinya ada pembahasan kecil Terbatas/Tidak Memiliki relevansi yang terbatas karena proyek berfokus ada pembahasan pada reklamasi area yang sebagian besar datar
1 Langkah-Langkah Penanggulangan a) Uraian langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang Memiliki peluang-peluang penanggulangan yang penanggulangan untuk semua dampak terbatas tetapi terbatas dengan mempertimbangkan konteks signifikan terhadap lingkungan alami dan sebagian besar lingkungan manusia (sosial ekonomi) sudah baik b) Uraian langkah-langkah Pembahasan yang Penentuan pengaruh-pengaruh sisa kualitatif tidak terbatas praktis penanggulangan dengan informasi yang memadai untuk mengevaluasi konsekuensi lingkungan dan dampakdampak pemukiman (??sisa) Terbatas tetapi Ruang lingkup tidak mencakup kegiatan operasional c) Identifikasi langkah-langkah penanggulangan terbaik untuk mencegah sebagian besar (yakni pascareklamasi) dan penutupan pascafasilitas sudah cukup atau meminimalkan dampak-dampak yang merugikan selama semua tahap proyek, termasuk rapat dan rancangan, kegiatan operasional fasilitas dan penutupan pascafasilitas d) Dukungan jenis-jenia langkah Terbatas tetapi Melalui kesimpulan, langkah-langkah diidentifikasi penanggulangan berikut ini, dalam urutan sebagian besar dengan mengikuti urutan tersebut. pilihan menurun sebagai berikut: sudah cukup penghindaran atau pencegahan minimalisasi pengurangan atau penyisihan seiring waktu perbaikan ganti rugi e) Rencana (jadwal) pelaksanaan dan Beberapa Sudah dilakukan kriteria kinerja untuk semua langkah disimpulkan penanggulangan f) Entitas yang bertanggung jawab yang Sebagian besar Sudah dilakukan ditugaskan untuk melaksanakan setiap sudah memadai upaya penanggulangan g) Langkah-langkah dapat diterima Sebagian besar Sebagian besar tidak secara langsung berinteraksi secara sosial dan kebudayaan sudah memadai dengan masyarakat setempat; tetapi masyarakat setempat memiliki harapan-harapan untuk dipekerjakan (yang kadang-kadang tidak realistis), dan lain-lain
33
Item checklist
h) Sumber daya keuangan dan nonkeuangan yang memadai untuk melaksanakan langkah-langkah
Cakupan dalam dokumendokumen AMDAL dan Update RKL/RPL Tidak dibahas secara khusus
34
Komentar-komentar dari para peninjau. Uraian lebih lanjut dari pembahasan dalam dokumen-dokumen dan/atau penilaian-penilaian oleh para peninjau. Sebagian besar merupakan bagian dari “praktik yang baik” dari pembangunan teknis.
Lampiran 2
Pengembangan CDF Ancol dan interaksi dengan JUFMP
Tabel A - 2 : Pengembangan CDF Ancol dan interaksi dengan JUFMP (Jadwal dapat mengalami penyesuaian berkala) Seb elum 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 3 2 0 1 4 2 0 1 5 tahu 2010 n T4 T1 T2 T3 T4 T1 T2 T3 T4 T1 T2 T3 T4 T1 T2 T3 T4 T1 T2 T3 T4
Konsultasi secara terus-menerus antara JUFMP dan PT. PJA
Penyelesaian pengaturan-pengaturan PMU/DKI Jakarta & PT. PJA
Konsultasi-konsultasi berkala secara terus-menerus
Pengakhiran resmi atas pembuangan PT. PJA - JUFMP
terperinci
antara
pengaturan-pengaturan
Pembangunan Tanggul Pembatas Bagian Luar
Pembatasan Fasilitas
Pemeliharaan secara berkelanjutan Jangka waktu penimbunan menggunakan Sedimen Kerukan JUFMP
Penimbunan secara terus-menerus
Pelapisan akhir dengan pasir atas area-area penimbunan
Penutupan akhir dengan laterit/tanah merah Area-area penimbunan JUFMP – sampel/pengujian awal Area-area penimbunan JUFMP – sampel/pengujian akhir
Pengambilan Pengambilan
35
Lampiran 3 Tabel A - 3
Matriks Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan terpadu Ancol :Matriks EMP Tambahan CDF Ancol
Matriks berikut ini merangkum pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dan sosial tambahan untuk lokasi AMDAL Ancol untuk memberikan rincian lebih lanjut atas langkah-langkah pengamanan dari langkah-langkah yang diidentifikasi dalam update RKL/RPL Ancol tahun 2009 ditambah beberapa pengaman tambahan. Matriks ini melengkapi Update RPL/RKL Ancol yang disetujui secara resmi oleh BPLHD DKI/Komisi AMDAL. Acuan kepada itemitem teks utama 3.2.1 Integrasi JUFMP dan kegiatan-kegiatan CDF Ancol
Pengelolaan Keterangan
Tanggung 1 Jawab
1 Memberikan informasi perkembangan pembangunan Ancol PT. PJA dan bekerjasama dengan JUFMP untuk meninjau kecukupan fasilitas tertutup pembuangan material kerukan. 2 Mengadakan rapat dan mengkoordinasikan kegiatan-kegiatan PT. PJA; PMU (dibantu oleh SC)
1
Biaya
Keterangan
Pemantauan Tanggung 1 Jawab
PT. PJA; Meninjau laporan PMU
PT. PJA; Menyusun laporanPMU; laporan rapat SC Menyetujui jadwal3 Membuat jadwal rincian terpadu, yang dikembangkan dari SC SC jadwal dalam Lampiran 2 jadwal dalam rapat 3.2.2 “Praktik yang baik” 1 Menyusun rencana-rencana kerja dan rencana-rencana ESM ACC ACC Memastikan dalam pembangunan yang terkait untuk semua kontraktor yang bekerja di CDF Ancol, pelaksanaan Rencana dan pengawasan yang disesuaikan dengan skala kegiatan/cakupan kontrak Kerja/ESMP/Pemanta uan yang disetujui 3.2.3 Sedimen dan 1 Memberikan informasi tentang hasil dan status dari PMU/PIU (melalui SC Memastikan bahwa material pengambilan sampel dan pengujian kerukan sebelumnya di SC) catatan-catatan penimbunan/pelapisan lokasi-lokasi JUFMP kepada PT. PJA. dikumpulkan dan lainnya disimpan 2 Memastikan bahwa material (selain material kerukan JUFMP) PT. PJA (melalui PT. PJA; Meninjau dan yang dikirimkan ke CDF Ancol (material penimbunan dan ACC) ACC mengkonfirmasikan pelapisan) memiliki izin lingkungan yang sesuai. sertifikasi yang diberikan oleh ACC 3 Melaksanakan program pengambilan sampel dan pengujian SC SC Laporan-laporan pascapembuangan di CDF Ancol atas sedimen JUFMP, 18 analisis laboratorium bulan setelah permulaan, dan 1 bulan setelah penyelesaian pembuangan lumpur kerukan JUFMP ke CDF Ancol. 3.2.4 Pengelolaan lalu 1 Memberitahukan proyeksi jumlah truk dan frekuensi SC (melalui SC Menyerahkan catatanlintas pengiriman sedimen JUFMP kepada PT. PJA informasi dari CC) catatan informasi. Laporan-laporan bulanan tentang
36
1
Biaya
PT. PJA dan PMU PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA dan PMU PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA dan PMU PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA; SC PT. PJA; SC PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA; (BPLHD DKI tetap PMU diberitahu) PT. PJA; SC
PT. PJA; SC
PT. PJA dan PMU PT. PJA; PMU PT. PJA dan PMU PT. PJA; PMU
Acuan kepada itemitem teks utama
Pengelolaan Keterangan
Tanggung 1 Jawab
1
Biaya
Keterangan
Pemantauan Tanggung 1 Jawab
pergerakan di periode sebelumnya (dibandingkan dengan proyeksi sebelumnya) dan proyeksi di masa mendatang 2 Menerapkan persyaratan Update RKL/RPL Ancol, khususnya PT. PJA PT. PJA Memberikan laporan PT. PJA; SC yang terkait dengan pergerakan kendaraan secara tertib ke/dari (beberapa melalui triwulanan lokasi CDF Ancol dan ke lokasi pencucian kendaraan sebelum ACC) kendaraan-kendaraan meninggalkan lokasi CDF Ancol Catatan: 1: Tanggung Jawab PT. PJA = ACC = PMU = CC = SC = BPLHD DKI =
PT. Pembangunan Ancol Jaya Para Kontraktor Konstruksi CDF Ancol Unit Pengelola Proyek untuk JUFMP Kontraktor Konstruksi untuk JUFMP Konsultan Pengawas untuk JUFMP Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah DKI Jakarta
37
1
Biaya
PT. PJA; SC
REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP)
Environmental and Social Management Framework September 2011
TABLE OF CONTENT 1
2
3
4
5 6 7 8
Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background.................................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Project Development Objective................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Purpose and Scope of Environmental Management Framework (ESMF) .................................. 1 Project Description.............................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Project Component ...................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Project Activities ......................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Project Implementation................................................................................................................ 4 2.4 Potential Impact........................................................................................................................... 5 Role and Institutional Responsibilities.............................................................................................. 7 3.1 Institutional Arrangement............................................................................................................ 7 3.2 Institutional Roles and Responsibilities ...................................................................................... 7 3.2.1 Joint Steering Committee................................................................................................... 7 3.2.2 Project Management Unit (PMU) ...................................................................................... 8 3.2.3 Project Implementation Unit (PIU) ................................................................................... 9 3.2.4 DKI Jakarta Municipalities Administration (Kotamadya) ............................................... 10 3.2.5 Regional Environmental Agency (BPLHD) ..................................................................... 10 3.2.6 Contractors....................................................................................................................... 10 3.2.7 World Bank (WB)............................................................................................................ 11 3.3 Project Processing ..................................................................................................................... 11 3.3.1 Phase 1 Project................................................................................................................. 11 3.3.2 Phase 2 Project Sites and Linked Sites ............................................................................ 11 Applicable Environmental and Social Policies, Laws and Regulations ....................................... 17 4.1 Environmental ........................................................................................................................... 17 4.1.1 Government of Indonesia................................................................................................. 17 4.1.2 World Bank Policies ......................................................................................................... 17 4.2 Social ......................................................................................................................................... 18 4.2.1 Government of Indonesia................................................................................................. 18 4.2.2 World Bank Policies ......................................................................................................... 19 Environmental Setting...................................................................................................................... 19 Public Consultation and Disclosure................................................................................................. 22 Environmental and Social mitigation plans.................................................................................... 23 7.1 Environmental and Social Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting............................................ 23 7.2 Inclusion in Contract Documents /Specifications...................................................................... 32 Budget for ESMF Implementation .................................................................................................. 32
i
LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Ponds under Project ....................................... 3 Table 6-1 Critical Success Factors for Public Involvement in AMDAL Process.................................... 22 Table 7-1 Environmental and Social Mitigation and Monitoring Plan....................................................... 24
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3-1 Project Implementation Institutional Arrangement..................................................................... 7 Figure 3-2 JUFMP Project Screening and Processing ................................................................................ 13 Figure 3-3 Flowchart of EA process during project preparation ................................................................ 16
LIST OF ANNEXES: Annex 1 : Ancol CDF Processing and Environmental Due Diligence Annex 2 : Hazardous wastes screening as per requirement of Ancol CDF AMDAL
ii
ACRONYM AND ABBREVIATION AMDAL ANDAL BAPEDAL BAPPENAS BAPPEDA BBWSCC BPLHD CDF DGCK DGWR DKI Jakarta or DKI EA EIA EMP ESMF ESWG GoI JABODETABEK JEDI JUFMP KA-ANDAL MENLH MoE MoF MPW NCEA NGO OP PAP PI PIP PIU PMU PP PPC PT PJA PU-MPW RP RKL RPF RPL SIA USACE WASAP WBC WJEMP
Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan – Process of environmental impact assessments Analisis Dampak Lingkungan – environmental impact assessment/statement Badan Pengendalian Dampak Lingkungan - Environmental Impact Management Agency Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional – National Development Planning Board Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah – Regional Development Planning Board Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane – Regional Office of Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin (under DGWR) Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Hidup Daerah (Regional Environmental Management Agency) Confined Disposal Facility Directorate General for Human Settlements, Ministry of Public Works Directorate General for Water Resources, Ministry of Public Works Daerah Khusus Istimewa Jakarta (Provincial government of DKI Jakarta) Environmental Assessment Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental Management Plan Environmental and Social Management Framework Environmental and Social Working Group Government of Indonesia Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project Kerangka Acuan – ANDAL (Term of Agreement of EIA) Menteri Lingkungan Hidup – MoE Ministry of Environment Ministry of Finance Ministry of Public Works The Netherlands Commission on Environmental Assessment Non-Governmental Organization Operational Policy Project Affected Person Public Involvement Project Implementation Plan Project Implementation Unit Project Management Unit Peraturan Pemerintahan – Government Regulation Project Preparation Consultants Pembangunan Jaya Ancol Ltd. (Ancol Authorities) Ministry of Public Works (Departemen Pekerjaan Umum) Resettlement Plan Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan – Environmental Management Plan Resettlement Policy Framework Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan – Environmental Monitoring Plan Social Impact Assessment United States Army Corps of Engineers Indonesia Water and Sanitation Program Trust Fund West Banjir Kanal Western Java Environmental Management Project
iii
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
The severity of floods in the capital has become a national issue given the huge financial losses it incurs and the impact it has on communities in the Greater Jakarta area. Based on the results of several flood studies and simulation, the Government of Indonesia (GoI) has identified a series of floodways, drains and retention basins that need an urgent rehabilitation. The rehabilitation of these flood control infrastructures will decrease the risk of flooding and is expected to bring benefit to more than one million beneficiaries living in flood-prone areas. 1.2 Project Development Objective The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to contribute to the improvement of the operations and maintenance of a priority part of the flood management system in Jakarta. The PDO will be achieved through: a) Dredging sections of selected key floodways, canals and retention basins to improve their flow capacities, and disposing the dredge material in proper facilities; b) Rehabilitating and constructing embankment in sections of, and repairing or replacing mechanical equipment in, the same selected key floodways, canals and retention basins to sustain and improve their operations; c) Establishing institutional coordination between the three responsible agencies to encourage coordinated development, and operations and maintenance (O&M) of Jakarta's flood management system, and d) Strengthening the capability of the responsible agencies to improve the operations, maintenance and management of Jakarta's flood management system.
The project is aimed to support the dredging of the key floodways, canals and retention basins of Jakarta's flood management system and dispose the sludge material in a proper facility, using sustainable best practices (focusing on institutional coordination, and environment and social sustainability). These activities are expected to introduce improved Operations and Maintenance (O&M) practices in four pilot areas: (i) Dredging modern technology and best practice; (ii) Environmental - responsible sludge disposal; (iii) Social - equitable resettlement practices; and (iv) Institutional - coordinated routine maintenance planning and practice. 1.3
Purpose and Scope of Environmental Management Framework (ESMF)
The project will be implemented in two sequenced batches. Phase 1 works, consisting of 4 sites are expected to commence during the first year of project implementation. As such, all the engineering designs, environmental impact assessments (AMDALs) and management plans have all been completed, appraised and cleared during preparation of the project. Phase 1 sites do not involve involuntary resettlement. However, Phase 2 works, which will consist of 11 sites are at the time of project preparation in the various stages of preparation of the detailed engineering designs, environmental impact assessments (AMDALs) and management plans, and resettlement plans (where involuntary resettlement is identified). In addition other works may be carried out by the government at 10 sites that have been 1
identified to be hydraulically and/or directly connected with the canals/waduks sections under JUFMP. In the event that the government carries out any works activities related to floods management (e.g., dredging and/or canal rehabilitation) in these 10 sites during the JUFMP project period, these will be deemed project linked activities and the requirement of the World Bank’s policy on Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12 will apply on such activities. The rationale for preparing and adopting this Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), consistent with the requirements of the World Bank’s policy on Environmental Assessment OP4.01 is twofold: 1. To guide and ensure compliance with both Government of Indonesia (GoI) and World Bank requirements with respect to the Phase 2 works and, 2. To guide and ensure compliance with both GoI and World Bank requirements with respect to the project linked sites. The ESMF defines the laws, policies, guidelines, roles and responsibilities of the institutions for management of environmental impacts, project processing, relevant environmental setting; identifies potential environmental and social impacts, describes measures to avoid or minimize adverse impacts and measures to mitigate any unavoidable adverse impacts. Consultation and disclosure requirements and procedures are also set out in the ESMF. The ESMF also covers social and urban environmental issues associated with the Project. However, the details on the assessment of social impacts involve involuntary resettlement, the number of project affected people (PAP), compensation procedures, categories of PAPs and their entitlements are presented in the project’s Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) which will guide the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs). Finally, the ESMF will be disclosed at the concerned offices and websites of the local and central government agencies, as well as in the Public Information Center (PIC) of the World Bank office, Jakarta and in the World Bank’s InfoShop in Washington. The RPF document will also be
similarly disclosed. 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Component The Project consists of two components which are summarized as followed: Component 1. Dredging and rehabilitation of selected key floodways, canals and retention basins. This component will support the dredging and rehabilitation of 11 floodways / canals and four retention basins which have been identified as priority sections of the Jakarta flood management system in need of urgent rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities. The 11 floodways / canals are estimated to have a total length of 67.5 km, while the four retention basins estimated to cover a total area of 65.1 hectares (see summary details in Table 2.2 below). About 42.2 km of embankments are expected to be rehabilitated or constructed within these floodways, canals and retention ponds. Where necessary, mechanical equipment (pumps, gates, etc) will be replaced or repaired. Component 2. Technical assistance for project management, social safeguards, and capacity building. This component will support contracts management, engineering design reviews, construction supervision engineers for the dredging and rehabilitation works and technical
2
assistance. Technical assistance includes support to improve institutional coordination for operations and maintenance of Jakarta’s flood management system as well as the establishment of a Floods Management Information System (FMIS). Provision has been made for the cost of implementing required Resettlement Action Plans, as well as the establishment and operations of a project Grievance Redress System and a Panel of Experts. Fifteen priority floodways, canals and retention ponds were identified to be included in the scope of the project works (see Table 2-1 for detailed descriptions). These were identified by the Government as in priority need of rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities. Table 2-1 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Ponds under Project Location Contract Works Package 1 (DKI) 2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
Description of Drains (Estimated) Length (m) Width (m) Area (m2 or ha.)
Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side) Lower Sunter Floodway Note 1 Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain)
5,100 (2,004) (1,260) 7,840 (540)
38.00 ~ 87.00
171,870 m2 4.90 ha. 490,000 m2
9,980
20.20 ~ 47.40
338,320 m2
3,840 (1,960)
10.00 ~ 19.00
55,680 m2
21.50 ~ 45.90
161,240 m2 33.00 ha. 19.20 ha. 8.00 ha. 5 600 9.20 ~ 26.00 10,560 m2 (DGCK) 4,050 31.00 ~ 51.00 166,050 m2 6 3,060 (590) 33.00 ~ 141.00 266,220 m2 (DGWR) 5,150 15.00 ~ 36.00 131,320 m2 7 2,970 21.00 ~ 51.00 106,920 m2 (DKI) 4,910 13.00 ~ 31.00 108,020 m2 3,250 15.00 ~ 29.00 71,500 m2 3,490 7.00 ~ 29.00 62,820 m2 67,514 2,140,520 m2 65 ha. Note 1 For contracting purposes, the Sunter Floodways has been divided into two sub-packages – Upper Sunter Floodway and Lower Sunter Floodway. Note 2 For contracting purposes, the Krukut Drain has been divided into two sub-packages – Krukut Cideng Drain and Krukut Lama Drain Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain West Banjir Canal (sea side) Upper Sunter Floodway Note 1 Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain Krukut Cideng Drain Note 2 Krukut Lama Drain Note 2
5,950 (400) (570)
16.10 ~ 31.20
Linked sites. Ten sites were identified as project linked sites. These sites are:
Kali Item, Kalibaru and Sunter Kemayoran (linked to the Sentiong Sunter Drain);
Ancol Kp. Bandan and Ancol Long Storage (linked to the Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway);
Canal along Jalan Kayu Putih Timur (linked to the Upper Sunter River Drain); and
Ciliwung-Kota, the canal along Jalan Tubagus Angke, PHB Bandengan Utara; and Waduk Pluit (linked to the Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain).
3
The above-mentioned ten sites were identified as hydraulically and directly connected with the canals/waduks under JUFMP. The government currently has no specific plans for rehabilitation works at these linked sites. However, the government will apply the RPF (and all associated provisions) in the event that activities that satisfy the criteria for project linked sites1 are carried out in these sites. Disposal sites. The disposal sites are not financed by the project, however, they are considered an integral part of the project and therefore their design, construction and operation are subject to World Bank requirements as well as Indonesia's own requirements. The approximately 3.4 million m3 of sediment material and the approximately 95,000 m3 of solid waste that will be removed from the floodways, canals and retention ponds that are being dredged by this project will be disposed of in the following manner (see Fig 2-2 for an illustration of the disposal arrangements).
Non Hazardous Sediment Material - will be transported and disposed of at the Ancol Sea Reclamation Works, known as the Ancol CDF. Hazardous Sediment Material (if any are found) - will be disposed of at the PPLi
Hazardous Waste Facility in Bogor, West Java2.
Solid Waste - will be transported and disposed of at City of Jakarta's landfill in Bekasi, West Java, known as the Bantar Gebang Landfill.
2.2 Project Activities Dredging, Transporting and Disposing. The dredging will concentrate on 15 selected sections of key floodways, canals and retention basins of Jakarta's flood management system. Volume to be dredged is estimated at about 3.4 million m3, including about 95 000 m3 of solid wastes to be taken out from the floodways, drains and waduks. Mechanical dredging will be employed, this method operates using a combination of equipments, i.e. floating bulldozer, backhoe dredge on a floating platform, long-arm backhoe and water jet. All dredged material will be transported to the disposal site using watertight dump truck during night-hours. Embankment Rehabilitation and Maintenance Works. Rehabilitation of the embankment will include stone masonry, parapet work and sheet pilling for unprotected earthen riverbank while maintenance works include pump repair and trash-rack installation. 2.3 Project Implementation Project implementation. The construction works funded by the project are proposed to be carried out in two sequenced phases (see Table 2-2). A sequenced implementation design has been adopted as a key implementation risk management mechanism for the project. Phase 1 works (proposed 4 sites / 3 works contracts) are expected to commence during the first year of the project. Phase 2 works (proposed 11 sites / 5 contracts) are expected to follow subsequently. This sequencing will avoid the PMU/PIUs and their supervision consultant from being overburdened during the first year when detailed actual implementation processes, procedures and routines are established and operationalized. The sequencing will also allow time for the local government of Jakarta (DKI Jakarta) to complete the necessary resettlement instruments and arrangements for Phase 2 sites,
1
Per OP 4.12, the criteria for identifying linked sites are: (1) directly and significantly related to JUFMP; (2) necessary to achieve JUFMP objectives; and (3) contemporaneous to JUFMP. Study on defining the linked sites was done during the preparation of the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and linked sites were mainly defined as hydraulically linked in the context of the first linkage criteria as specified in OP 4.12, but do not fulfill all the three criteria altogether. 2 Note that specific proposed method to treat/dispose of any hazardous waste will follow national regulations on hazardous waste treatment and disposal and subject to the approval of the Ministry of Environment (MoE).
4
including the establishment of a grievance redress system and the appointment of a panel of experts. Two project linked sites i.e., Ancol Kp. Bandan and Ancol Long Storage are linked to
Phase 1 work sites3, and the remaining are linked to Phase 2 work sites. 2.4 Potential Impact Specific Project Impact. The result of AMDAL for the Phase 1 showed among potential significant impacts of the project implementation, impacts due to dredged material transportation from the dredging site to the Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) via roadways will be the most critical issue to mitigate. These impacts include the potential of an increase of traffic congestion and potential spillages of dredged material along the road corridor. To mitigate this issue, a transport management plan (TMP) will be developed for each project site, in which transportation of dredged material will only be allowed during off-peak hours (e.g., from 22:00 to 05:00 hrs4) and using watertight dump truck. And to minimize the spillage, dredged material will be first placed into containers (2x2x1m) before they are loaded into the truck. During transportation to Ancol CDF, the material will be covered by tarpaulin. All dump trucks will be washed by PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA) before leaving the disposal site. Sediment Quality. The World Bank retained a consultant (PT. ERM Indonesia, ERM) in 2008 and later, the GoI appointed another independent consultant in 2009 (i.e. PT PPA – EIA/SIA Consultant) to carry out detailed analysis of sediment samples from JUFMP sites. All the chemical analyses results were assessed according to established national and international standards. ERM result was further reviewed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as well as PT PPA. Based on all results, the GoI concluded that the dredged material is unlikely to contain hazardous wastes and thus can be disposed of at Ancol CDF as per Ancol EIA requirement. Impact due to Non-Hazardous Dredged Material Disposal. The non-hazardous dredged material will be disposed of at the Ancol CDF. The Project requires confined disposal5 principles in order to minimize environmental impacts. The Project will thus carry out an environmental due diligence to ascertain that the facility fulfilled the requirement as stated in its environmental permit, i.e. a confined facility is to be built in advance before material dumping can commence (Annex 1: Ancol CDF Processing and Approval). In addition, Ancol EIA requires the project to identify and ascertain that the sediment to be placed into CDF is not hazardous wastes. For this, the JUFMP project has developed a provision to be applied during project implementation for testing of sections prior to dredging. (see Annex 2: Identification of Hazardous Waste as per Ancol EIA Requirement) Impact due to Solid Wastes Disposal (95 000 m3) and Hazardous Waste (if any are found). Similar to Ancol CDF, the Bantar Gebang Sanitary Landfill where the solid waste material would be taken and the PPLI secure landfill where hazardous waste (or locally term as B3 waste) will be taken if found, are both existing and operating facilities before the project. Thus, the project will carry out
3 Rapid assessments carried out during project preparation indicated that no involuntary resettlement is expected in the event that linked activities are carried out at these two sites. 4 Or in accordance with prevailing DKI Jakarta transport and traffic regulations.
5 Construction of the Ancol CDF will be self-financed by the PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA). The planned Ancol CDF
will have sufficient capacity to receive the dredge material from all 15 sites. The Regional Environmental Agency (BPLHD) of DKI Jakarta has already approved the AMDAL for the CDF. The Ancol CDF AMDAL which covers a 119 ha disposal areas (12 million m3 capacity) that was initially approved on the basis that sand as filling material, has now been revised to include JUFMP dredged material.
5
environmental due diligence to ensure that those facilities are operating under valid environmental permit and in compliance with local regulation.
6
3
ROLE AND INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
3.1 Institutional Arrangement The overall institutional arrangements for the project are summarized in Fig. 3_1:
Figure 3-1 Project Implementation Institutional Arrangement
PIU-DGWR will be represented by the Regional Office for the Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin (Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane, BBWS-CC); PIU-DGHS will be represented by the Working Unit of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Infrastructure and Sanitation Development for Jabodetabek (Satuan Kerja Pengembangan Infrastruktur Persampahan dan Sanitasi Jabodetabek); and PIU-DKI will be represented by the Public Work Agency (Dinas PU DKI Jakarta) of the Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta. 3.2
Institutional Roles and Responsibilities
3.2.1 Joint Steering Committee A high level advisory committee, the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) has been formed to oversee the preparation and implementation for the project and to provide coordination and advisory support
7
at the policy level. The JSC is led by Bappenas and comprises representatives from Ministry of Finance, MoPW, and DKI Jakarta. The JSC will continue to provide high level oversight during the implementation of the project. 3.2.2 Project Management Unit (PMU) The Directorate General of Water Resources (DGWR) of Ministry of Public Works (MPW) is the JUFMP project executing agency. A PMU has been established by DGWR for the purposes of preparing and overseeing the implementation of the project. The PMU comprises three staff from DGWR, three staff from the Directorate General of Human Settlements (Cipta Karya) (DGCK) of MPW, three staff from the Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta (DKI Jakarta), and one staff from MPW’s Office of Planning and Overseas Cooperation. The PMU is supported by a secretariat of five staff from DGWR. The PMU is responsible for overall project coordination. During project preparation, the PMU has retained two major consultancies to support project preparation:
Project Preparation Consultant (PPC). The consultant is responsible (i) to provide engineering design for dredging, and embankment in coordination with the EIA/SIA Consultant; (ii) to prepare bidding documents for all works within the project and to work together with the EIA/SIA consultant for the inclusion of EMPs into the bidding documents and the construction contracts; (iii) to provide advisory services to the Project Management Unit (PMU). The PPC works closely with the EIA/SIA consultant to prepare designs that will minimize adverse environmental and social impact.
EIA/SIA Consultant. The consultant is responsible for (i) preparation of EIA documents and RPs that comply with the requirements of both the Government of Indonesia and the World Bank; (ii) preparation of EMPs to be included in the bidding documents and construction contracts; and (iii) providing assistance to the PMU with documents disclosure and public consultation.
During project implementation, the PMU will oversee and coordinate the overall implementation of the project by the three PIUs. The PMU will also implement support activities that are common across the project. These include (i) the overall construction supervisions consultancy, (ii) the Panel of Experts, (iii) the Floods Management Information Systems (FMIS) and (iv) support to DKIJakarta related to involuntary resettlement and the project’s grievance redress system.
Supervision Consultant (SC). This is the key consultancy contract that will be instrumental in supporting the PMU’s overall management, oversight and monitoring of the project. Where there are assessed weaknesses in capacity, particularly in the areas of the supervision of project environmental plans, the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) and the Grievance Redress System (GRS), the SC has been tasked to provide the necessary expertise to support the PMU during project implementation. The scope of this technical assistance services include (i) supervising the implementation of the various dredging and construction works contracts under the project including at all disposal sites (ii) supervising the implementation of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/RPL) by the works contractors, (iii) supporting the PMU and DKI in the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs), and (iv) developing and implementing the grievance / complaint handling mechanism of the project with DKI.
Panel of Experts (PoE). A Panel of Experts (PoE) consisting of three independent, internationally recognized specialists will be mobilized to provide advice on all aspects of
8
the project. It is expected that the POE will be mobilized at the start of project implementation6 and fully operating especially before the Phase 2 period begins. The specialists are expected to comprise an environmental expert, an engineer experienced in dredging and dredge disposal, and an urban resettlement expert. The POE's main responsibilities will include monitoring and evaluating the preparation and implementation of various safeguards instruments (RPF, RPs, EMPs and the grievance redress procedures) and advising the PMU on actions to be taken to improve compliance. If required, the POE may be enlarged on a temporary or permanent basis by the addition of specialists to provide expertise for specific, unplanned or critical issues or needs, which may arise during project implementation. These additional experts, if any, may be mobilized with terms of reference agreed among the PMU, the Bank, and the three initial experts that will comprise of the POE. The POE will convene at regular intervals to review the status of work in progress. However, special extraordinary meetings may also be called to review particular critical stages of technical, environmental, and social activities.
Floods Management Information Systems (FMIS). The FMIS, when established as a Government-owned and managed system, is expected to become an instrumental monitoring and assessment tool for the Government with respect to floods management in Jakarta. As the project is implemented, the works, changes, and upgrades to the floods management system will be input into the FMIS. The FMIS will thereafter simulate and analyze the levels of success of JUFMP structural works and to determine levels of achievement in flood mitigation. This will provide the capability to analyze and document reductions in estimated annual costs.
3.2.3 Project Implementation Unit (PIU) There are three Project Implementing Units (PIUs) at both central and local government levels, under DGWR, DGHS and DKI Jakarta:
PIU-DGWR will be represented by the Regional Office for the Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin (Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane, BBWS-CC);
PIU-DGHS will be represented by the Working Unit of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Infrastructure and Sanitation Development for Jabodetabek (Satuan Kerja Pengembangan Infrastruktur Persampahan dan Sanitasi Jabodetabek); and
PIU-DKI will be represented by the Public Work Agency (Dinas PU DKI Jakarta) of the Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta.
Each PIU will be responsible for carrying out the dredging and rehabilitation works in the selected key floodways, canals and retention basins that come under their respective responsibility Each PIU will establish its own procurement committee for the selection of contractors. However, each committee will be composed of representative from all three PIUs. Since DKI Jakarta is the institution responsible for social issues in the Jakarta municipal area, it will be responsible for all social safeguards aspects of the project including project related involuntary resettlement activities and the project grievance redress mechanisms. The implementation of the
6
Soon after the project loan agreement becomes effective.
9
social plans under JUFMP will be carried out by the appropriate agencies of DKI Jakarta. Within the PIU of DKI Jakarta (PIU-DKI) there will be several working groups7 (Pokjas): (i) Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG), (ii) Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group, (iii) Monitoring and Reporting Working Group, and (iv) other Pokjas as necessary to cover all activities required for JUFMP implementation. The ESWG will be responsible for the preparation of RPs and ensure that they are implemented. The Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group will be responsible for reviewing the RPs and ensuring consistency with the RPF. The Monitoring and Reporting Working Group will prepare the monthly reports on the status of preparation and implementation of RPs to the Governor. For any project site that requires resettlement, the PIU will ensure that no contract commences unless the RP(s) has been implemented (except elements in the RP related to post-resettlement activities). 3.2.4 DKI Jakarta Municipalities Administration (Kotamadya) Administratively, DKI Jakarta is subdivided into five urban municipalities (Kotamadya). Each is headed by a Walikota (Mayor). Four DKI Jakarta municipalities will be affected by the project, i.e. North, West, Central and East Jakarta. The Walikotas will mainly be involved in the mitigation of social impacts; they will be responsible for coordinating activities at kelurahan level during the preparation and implementation of RPs. The Walikotas will be assisted by the heads of the subdistricts (Kecamatan) and the head of the neighborhoods (kelurahans). The Walikotas with their apparatus at the sub-district and kelurahan levels are the front-line officials responsible for the operational activities during the preparation and implementation of RPs. This includes activities for determining the cut-off date and for actually implementing the resettlement, and for handling any grievances and complaints. In addition, the municipality office is also responsible for the appraisal of dwellings and other buildings affected by the project. The roles of the municipalities are further discussed in the RPF. 3.2.5 Regional Environmental Agency (BPLHD) The Regional Environmental Agency (BPLHD) of DKI Jakarta province was established in 1968 (http://bplhd.jakarta.go.id/index.php). During project preparation stage, BPLHD is the agency responsible for reviewing and providing clearance and approval for EIA documents. As per the GOI legislation, the agency forms an AMDAL Commission, i.e. an ad-hoc commission to evaluate EIA documents. The AMDAL Commission consists of representatives from BPLHD (2-3 persons), university experts (or known as Technical Team, 5-7 persons from different areas expertise), representatives from sub-district (Kecamatan) and neighborhood (Kelurahan), and representatives from NGOs. During the construction stage, BPLHD has a supervision role for the EMP implementation by the various contractors and will conduct regular checks or audits. The agency will review the implementation of EMPs submitted by PMU and decide if any corrective action is required. 3.2.6 Contractors Works contractors will be selected by the procurement committee in each PIU. All dredging and embankment works packages will follow International Competitive Bidding (ICB) process and will 7
The Pokjas and their membership are established through Governor’s Decree.
10
require pre-qualification. Contractors will be requested to include a preliminary environmental and social management plan in their technical proposal during bidding process. The action plan should outline their proposed efforts to minimize social and environmental impacts. During construction, the contractor is responsible to carry out the EMP embedded in the contract. Supervision of the environmental and social management plan implementation will be carried out by Supervision Consultant (SC). 3.2.7 World Bank (WB) The WB maintains an oversight role in the JUFMP, to ensure compliance with the World Bank safeguards policies, review and provide clearance and approval for the EMPs and RPs of each project site. The WB will maintain an oversight role of the supervision of the EMPs implementation by contractors, and may conduct spot checks or audits as necessary. The WB will conduct regular supervision missions throughout the project implementation, and local specialists at the World Bank Office in Jakarta (WBOJ) will monitor the progress of the project construction. 3.3
Project Processing
3.3.1 Phase 1 Project Review and approval by the World Bank. There are two works packages (contracts) in the Phase 1, i.e. contracts packages 1, 2a and 2b in Table 2-1. The AMDAL for Phase 1 works has been prepared by the Project Management Unit (PMU). This AMDAL was consulted upon, reviewed and approved in March 2010 by the provincial environmental agency (known as the BPLHD) as required by national and sub-national regulations of Indonesia. The World Bank has also reviewed the AMDAL and has provided extensive comments resulting in the PMU preparing a JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report. This supplementary report includes further recommendations which will also be applicable to the project. This ensured that the AMDAL and supplementary report for Phase 1, combined, complied with the World Bank environmental safeguards policy requirements. EMP Implementation during Construction, Supervision and Monitoring. Compliance with the EMP during project construction will depend upon (i) the implementation of EMP by the contractor, (ii) supervision and monitoring of EMP implementation by SC, and (iii) oversight of EMP implementation by the PIU, PMU, WB and BPLHD. Supervision by the SC is the day-to-day process whereby the SC supervises contractors to ensure that environmental commitments and EMP provisions as stipulated the contract are complied with. Reporting. The SC will provide the PMU with reports (at a minimum on a quarterly basis) of the results of the EMP implementation by the contractor. The PMU will review the reports for any noncompliance and may request the PIU to undertake spot checks or audits as necessary. The SC will also provide the PMU with a formal quarterly RKL/RPL implementation report. The PMU will review this report for any non-conformances and then submit it to BPLHD and the World Bank. The BPLHD and the World Bank will review the quarterly RKL/RPL implementation report and will decide whether a spot check, field visit or audit is necessary. 3.3.2 Phase 2 Project Sites and Linked Sites Phase 2 project sites processing begins with a screening if the proposed project site is included in the project scope (Fig. 3-2), the screening will be first carried out by PMU and PIUs and finally decided by Joint Steering Committee. When project is confirmed as included in the project scope, the PMU will prepare the DED. The DED will take into account considerations to avoid and
11
minimize environmental and social impacts, particularly impact related to involuntary resettlement. As the DED is prepared, environmental and social screening will be performed, this screening includes if the proposed Phase 2 activities require RP, full EA or Mini EA. All necessary Phase 2 environmental (Full EA or Mini EA) and social (RPs) documents will be prepared. Once the documents have been approved by authorized agencies (i.e. EA by BPLHD and RPs by DKI Jakarta), they will be submitted to the World Bank for review and approval. In case that the World Bank considers the documents have not met the safeguard policies requirement, it can request supplemental EA (or info) to fulfill the OP 4.01 requirement or revision of the RP to satisfy the OP 4.12. Any activities in the ten sites identified as project linked sites are not financed by the JUFMP project. However, the government will apply the RPF (and all associated provisions) in the event that activities that satisfy the criteria for project linked sites are carried out in these sites. For these project linked activities, the DEDs will take into account considerations to avoid and minimize environmental and social impacts, particularly impact related to involuntary resettlement. In the event that involuntary resettlement is unavoidable, an RP will be prepared. Once the RP document has been approved by DKI Jakarta, they will be submitted to the World Bank for review and approval. In case that the World Bank considers the documents have not met the safeguard policies requirement, it can revision of the RP to satisfy the OP 4.12. Construction works will not begin at any project or project linked activities before the EA and RP associated to the works have been found satisfactory by the World Bank.
12
JUFMP - Projects Processing and Screening
DEDs, EIAs (AMDAL), Bidding Documents
Phase 1
Is the proposed project site of the 15 sites of JUFMP ?
Phase 2
Appraise
Yes
Procure
Is the proposed structure work defined in Component A?
No
Phase 1 Project Construction
No
Is the proposed structure work related to flood mitigation?
Yes
Yes
Supervision and Monitoring
No
Not Financed (e.g. Beautification along canal/waduk)
Not Financed Prepare DED
Need AMDAL (full EA) as per PP no.27/ 1999?
Environmental Social Screening
If involuntary resettlement needed
No
Need UKL/ UPL(Mini EA)?
Yes
Yes
Prepare AMDAL
Prepare UKL/UPK No
SOP
No
Approval from BPLHD?
Approval from BPLHD?
WB issue NOL?
Yes
Yes
Yes
WB NOL?
Prepare RP
No
No
RP Implementation by DKI
Yes
No
Supplemental EA
WB NOL?
Yes Project implementation by Contractor
Project implementation by Contractor
Supervision and Monitoring (WB, GOI (Supervision Consultant), and Independent Advisory Team)
Figure 3-2 JUFMP Project Screening and Processing
13
No
Supplemental EA
EA Process. The PMU is responsible to notify the BPLHD regarding the proposed Phase 2 project activities. The PMU (with assistance of its consultants) will advertise a Public Notice in local media, e.g. newspaper. After the notification, the BPLHD forms an AMDAL Commission (Fig. 3-3). The PMU (with assistance of its consultant) will prepare the EIA Term of Agreement (KA-ANDAL) and submit the KA-ANDAL to the AMDAL Commission for review before the first public consultation is held. BPLHD will invite all relevant stakeholders to provide input and comment on the KA-ANDAL. BPLHD will take minutes of meeting for the first public consultation and request the consultant to incorporate input agreed during the consultation. The PMU will re-submit the KA-ANDAL to the Commission for clearance, once it is cleared, the PMU’s consultant will proceed with the preparation of EIA documents, i.e. ANDAL (i.e. environmental impact assessment) and RKL/RPL (i.e. environmental management and monitoring plans). Once the EIA documents are prepared, the PMU will submit it to the AMDAL Commission. Then the AMDAL Commission will request the PMU’s consultant to present the results of the EIA in which all members of the AMDAL Commission and public are given an opportunity to comment on the results. BPLHD will prepare minutes of the meeting and request the consultant (on behalf of PMU) to incorporate the comments and revise the EIA documents and re-submit it to the AMDAL Commission. Final clearance and approval with specific conditions/recommendations (or rejection) of the EIA documents by the head of BPLHD will be based on the AMDAL Commission recommendation. EA Public Consultation. Stakeholders such as local people, NGOs, academic institutions, etc. are represented in the AMDAL Commission and are therefore, given the opportunity to make comments during the preparation and review of the KA-ANDAL as well as during the review of the ANDAL and RKL/RPL. The existing Indonesian EA process requires at least two public consultations, and the results of the consultations are to be attached to the EIA. A public consultation is conducted to address both environmental and social aspects of the project activities. A public consultation should introduce the project activities to the local residents and determine if there are any particular concerns with proposed activities. The first public consultation is conducted at the earliest 30 calendar days after the Public Notification in the national or local media, e.g. newspaper, radio. During this period of time, people who would like to respond to the proposed activities can submit their comments to BPLHD or the PMU. Comments will be addressed and attached in the KA-ANDAL. The second public consultation takes place after the final draft of EIA has been submitted to BPLHD. Minutes of the public consultation and other documentation (e.g. photos, presentation materials, attendee list, etc.) will be attached to the EIA as an appendix. The documentation reflects all comments, whether or not the PMU agrees or disagrees. The minutes will also have signatures (name, title) of the chairperson of the consultation. EMP Implementation during Construction, Supervision and Monitoring and Reporting. Supervision, monitoring and reporting of EMP implementation during project construction of Phase 2 activities will follow the same process as the Phase 1 (see section 3.3.1) RP Preparation, Review, Approval and Disclosure. Preparation of the RPs will be responsibility of the Provincial Government of DKI-Jakarta, i.e. the municipalities concerned. All RPs will be prepared based on the RPF. Once prepared, RPs - full or abbreviated - for each project requiring RP will be reviewed by the PMU and the PIU – DKI before they are submitted to the World Bank for review and approval. A version in Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia) of the approved RPs will be made available at the respective municipal office of DKI and will also be disclosed on the associated project website, as well as in the field project offices (kelurahan). Versions in English and Bahasa
14
Indonesia will be disclosed in the Public Information Center (PIC) of the World Bank Office in Jakarta. RP Implementation, Reporting and Supervision. Each RP will be implemented in accordance with the description in section 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 above. For monitoring purposes, the SC will work together with the Kelurahan and Walikota offices to assist them in documenting complaints from the PAPs, and in following up on any complaints. The SC will also assist the municipalities and PIUDKI in the preparation of a consolidated report on complaints and the manner in which they were followed up. The consolidated report will be submitted to the PMU. This report will become part of the project monthly progress report to be submitted to the World Bank. Details of each institution role in the RPs implementation are provided in the RPF.
15
PMU
Environmen tal Agency (BPLHD)
World Bank (WB)
Project Preparation Consultant (PPC)
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (EIA/SIA) Consultant
Document, Tools, Instruments
TOR Prepared by Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG)
PPC Consultant PMU
PMU to hire
EIA/SIA Consultant
PPC produces bidding documents, detailed engineering design (DED), supervision and monitoring plan for: Dredging Embankment Rehabilitation
BPLHD to form AMDAL Commission (AC)
EIA/SIA (AMDAL) Clearance and Approval
Project Preparation
EIA/SIA and PPC Consultants
Parties/ Agency
AC to provide input and review EIA Term of Agreement
EIA/SIA Consultant to (i) prepare EIA Term of Agreement (KA ANDAL) and (ii) carry out public consultation
PMU to submit to the AC
Issue clearance?
No
Preparing EIA documents Environmental Impact Statement (ANDAL) Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/ RPL)
Yes
AC to review EIA documents and provide input
PMU to submit to the AC
Issue clearance?
No
EIA documents (ANDAL, RKL/RPL)
Yes
Review
PMU to submit to the Bank
Figure 3-3 Flowchart of EA process during project preparation
16
4
APPLICABLE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL POLICIES, LAWS AND REGULATIONS
4.1
Environmental
4.1.1 Government of Indonesia Indonesia has a plethora of national and sub-national environmental laws and regulations that govern the Environmental Planning process for works of this kind. The overarching regulation for the AMDAL process in Indonesia for any activity or project with potential significant environmental impacts is the Environmental Management Act No 23/1997, and specifically Article 15 on the environmental impact assessment requirements. A new environmental management and protection law, Act No. 32 of 2009, was issued on 2009 and substitutes Act No. 23/1997. Government Regulation (PP) No: 27/1999 provides detailed guideline of the AMDAL system. Furthermore, the Ministry of Environment (MoE) Decree No. 11/2006 lists specific activities that require AMDAL and the MoE Decree No.8/2006 provides guidelines for AMDAL preparation. With regard to the dredging work, the MoE Decree No. 11/2006 specifies that any maintenance dredging activity in the metropolitan city will require AMDAL if the dredge volume exceed 500,000 m3, this requirement is also in line with the regional law (i.e. Governor of Jakarta Decree No 2863/2001 on type and list of specific business and activities in Jakarta that require AMDAL), which states that any dredging with volume more than 50,000 m3 must have AMDAL approved by the Regional Environmental Agency (BPLHD) of DKI Jakarta . A representative sample of other relevant national and regional legislations considered when preparing the AMDAL is: MoE Decree No. 2/2000: Guidance on the evaluation of the AMDAL document. MoE Decree No.40/2000: Guidance on the working procedure of the AMDAL commission. MoE Decree No.42/2000: Guidance on the formation of evaluation team and technical team members for the AMDAL. Head of Bapedal (Environmental Impact Management Agency) Decree No. 8/2000: Guidance on public participation and information disclosure during the AMDAL. Governor of Jakarta Decree No 76/2001: Operative guidance on public involvement and information disclosure during the AMDAL. 4.1.2 World Bank Policies Environmental Assessment (OP. 4.01): JUFMP is a Category A project as both embankment rehabilitation and dredging activities may have significant positive and adverse impact on environmental and social. The impacts are most likely prevalent at i) locations where embankment rehabilitation is to be carried out, ii) locations close to and along dredging sites, iii) along transportation corridors, and iv) at disposal sites (and vicinity). The purpose of environmental assessment is to improve decision making, to ensure that project
17
options under consideration are sound and sustainable, and that potentially affected people have been adequately consulted. 4.2
Social
4.2.1 Government of Indonesia The Government of Indonesia has several main Laws and Regulations pertaining to land rights and acquisition for development activities in the public interests. The major important Law that assures and regulates land rights is the Basic Agrarian Law No. 5 of 1960. Other relevant national regulations pertaining land and land acquisition are:
Law No. 20 of 1961 on the Revocation of Land Rights; Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997 on Land Registration; Presidential Regulation No. 36 of 2005 on Land Provision for Development Activities in the Public Interest; Presidential Regulation No. 65 of 2006, which revises the Presidential Regulation No. 36/2005; and, Implementation Guidelines No. 3 of 2007 for Presidential Regulations No. 36/2005 and No. 65 of 2006, issued by the National Land Agency.
Another regulation relevant to the project is Law No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources, which intends to protect water resources to maintain their functions. Presidential Regulation No. 36/2005 and No. 65/2007 regulates the procedures and processes of land acquisition (and assets attach to it) for development activities that are in the public interests. These include such development activities under the responsibility of the local government, such as roads/toll roads/railways/sanitation/water distribution; retention basins/dams; ports/airports/train station/terminals; public health facility; telecommunication and post; sport facilities; government buildings; police and security facility; solid wastes disposal facility; protection of natural habitat; and power generation, transmission and distribution for electricity. These regulations also stipulate the entitlements and procedures and criteria for compensation, appraisal for compensation, and consultations and negotiations, as well as complaints and dispute settlements and land revocation. It categorizes the procedures and process for land acquisition for more than 1 hectare, and for less than one hectare. The Implementation Guidelines No. 3 of 2007 for Presidential Regulations No. 36/2005 and No. 65 of 2006, outlines in more detail the procedures, processes and criteria for land acquisition as stipulated in the two Presidential Regulations. The three mentioned regulations do not explicitly regulate assistance and do not cover income restorations. They stipulate that the compensation level for land should be made based on the assessment of the independent land appraisal team. DKI Jakarta also has regulations that regulate compensation of assets, i.e., Implementation Guidelines for the Assessment of Compensation for Buildings, which is issued regularly by the DKI Jakarta Agency for Housing and Government Buildings. This regulation is used as a basis for determining compensation level for assets (buildings and ancillary attached to the buildings). In addition, DKI Jakarta has a Local Regulation No. 8 of 2007 pertaining to Public Order, which has been used as a basis for repossessing public land that have been used without permits from DKI Jakarta government or other land/public space that have been used for the purposes that are not in line with the land use plan.
18
4.2.2 World Bank Policies Involuntary Resettlement (OP4.12): The safeguard policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP4.12) is triggered by this project. While no major land acquisition is required to undertake the proposed physical works, the project would result in loss of land, residences and businesses. This would necessitate resettling those affected by project interventions. To address this issue, the DKI has prepared an RPF (for details, see the draft of the RPF). The RPF is to ensure that PAPs are treated in accordance with the World Bank’s OP 4.12. The RPF will be used to guide RPs for any project site that requires involuntary resettlement. In addition to the JUFMP sites that result in involuntary resettlement, the RPF also applies to other activities resulting in involuntary resettlement that in the judgment of the World Bank, are (a) directly and significantly related to the World Bank-assisted project, (b) necessary to achieve its objectives as set forth in the project documents; and (c) carried out, or planned to be carried out, contemporaneously with the project.
5
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING DKI Jakarta is located at the coastal plain of northern Java which has been formed by a delta of rivers flowing from the southern mountainous area into Jakarta Bay. The low lying area of DKI has suffered from flooding since Dutch period (1800s to 1940s). The intensity and severity of floods have considerably increased recently and have resulted in serious social and economic costs. The construction of the West Banjir Canal (WBC) in 1920 showed that the flooding has occurred frequently in Jakarta since that time. Sedimentation. A study conducted through the West Java Environmental Management Project (WJEMP) showed sediment deposits in the downstream reaches were up to 2-3 m thick while average sediment deposit in the waduk varies from 0.9 to 1.9 m thick. Based on the sedimentation assessment, a series of hydraulic simulation showed that the level of protection for all rivers has dropped far from the initial design of 25 year of protection, which in most of cases for within the areas of DKI Jakarta, the level of protection dropped to 2-5 years. Water quality. With only about 2% coverage of integrated wastewater treatment system, rivers and retention basins in DKI Jakarta have served for decades as open-sewer for domestic wastes and wastewater generated from local communities. As a result, studies8-9 have shown that water in the rivers and retention basin are polluted with domestic wastes, accounting for more than 70% of the pollution. In these studies, water quality in all sampling stations was classified as Class 4, i.e. water that can only be used for greening purposes. Sediment Quality. As project preparation evolved, three independent baseline studies of the quality of the sediment material in the drains and canals in Jakarta were carried out at different time horizons assessing various aspects including the adequacy of sampling and testing methodologies used, the test results, and the adequacy of Indonesian requirements against various other international standards. The reviews were as follows
Djadjadilaga, M., Sigit, H., Tejalaksana, A. From Data to Policy (Ciliwung River Water Quality Management), The Ministry of Environment, Jakarta. Monitoring data: 2004-2006. http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/0810forum/paper22.pdf 9 MoPW (2005) Outline Plan for Major Drainage and Small lakes management in JABODETABEK Area, WJEMP Pusat 3-10, Report no. 10. Directorate General of Cipta Karya, Ministry of Public Works. 8
19
ERM10 2008 The ERM 2008 sediment quality study represents the first comprehensive and detailed primary sediment quality study for Jakarta’s drains and waduks, and supported much of the initial planning for the JUFMP project including the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL and the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL. Sampling covered all the Project sites (i.e. 15 sites) plus three others that were originally in the long list of potential JUFMP projects but have subsequently been removed. The total number of analyzed composite samples was 36 obtained from 180 sampling stations plus duplicate samples for quality assurance and quality control. Collected samples were sent to an international accredited laboratory (i.e. ALS Bogor, Indonesia) for physical and chemical analyses. Chemical parameters analyses were based on international best practices technical guideline for dredged material characterization (London Convention 1972 ; OSPAR 2004), covering heavy metals, total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), organo-chlorine pesticide (OCP), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and total organic matter (TOM). In addition, toxicity characteristics leaching procedures (TCLP) based on USEPA SW 846 was also performed to determine the toxicity characteristic of the sediment.
DHV 2008 In 2008 DKI Jakarta in association with DHV (with Dutch government donor funding undertook some pilot dredging in Kali Mati, a minor drain within Jakarta (not part of the project). As part of this study, a total of eight composite samples from nine sampling stations was sent out to an international accredited laboratory (i.e. ALS Bogor) and were analyzed for all tests required under Indonesian regulation for B3 (hazardous) waste identification, i.e. (i) physical test and screening (i.e. flammable, corrosive, explosive, infectious (only for medical wastes), reactive) (ii) chemical test (total content analyses and TCLP for both inorganic and organic pollutants); and (iii) biological test (Lethal dose 50 - LD50). In addition, a composite sample from Kali Mati was also sent abroad to an international accredited laboratory in the Netherlands (i.e. Eurofins) for the purpose of cross-check.
AMDAL for Phase 2 activities, sampling and analysis 2010 In 2010 a further set of primary sediment quality studies in proposed Phase 2 works was undertaken as part of preparation of AMDALs for these Phase 2 works. The areas sampled also included the 3 sites now excluded from the project. Composite samples (9 sub-samples each composite – 3 rows about 100-200m apart, 3 samples across each row) were collected considering both the location of the ERM sampling and the current (as at time of sampling) physical limits of each sub-project area. Analysis was by an accredited laboratory using local standard methodologies, concentrating on (i) physical characteristics, (ii) total metals, (iii) TCLP metals and (iv) TCLP organics. Thus sediment quality studies specific to Jakarta’s drains and waduks were undertaken in 2008 and 2010 involving more than 350 sub-samples compiled into a total of 70 samples for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) and total metals and organics analysis.
10
The World Bank in 2008 commissioned ERM to carry out these tests.
20
These reviews concluded that the sampling and testing methodologies meet international standards and test results show that the samples lay within international standards, except the following:
Arsenic levels in all samples exceed the screening level standards for one EPA standards used to screen pollutants in environmental media11, although all samples comply with other international screening levels of arsenic12. Further assessments revealed that the US EPA standards is an unsuitable comparator as it is derived based on health risks specifically of inorganic arsenic, while the sample tests and the other international screening levels for arsenic were based on total arsenic levels. Comparisons with an earlier Jakarta Bay-wide sediment study also indicates that the sample tests indicate arsenic levels occur naturally throughout the area and do not have anthropogenic origins. Forty percent of samples exceeded the interim Australian and New Zealand sediment screening levels for zinc for ocean disposal, although all samples were below other soil screening levels for zinc. This risk is mitigated by the disposal of the project dredge material in a confined disposal facility, i.e. the Ancol CDF. About 2% of samples exceeds the screening level for one or two (but not all) of the international standards for either one of chromium, cadmium or copper. This risk will be mitigated by the introduction of a protocol for testing canal and drain sections prior to dredging of that section as an added precaution13.
The results and interpretation from all three studies were similar and are discussed in terms of: TCLP testing. This is the definitive chemical test in Indonesia and elsewhere to establish whether waste material is deemed hazardous or otherwise in terms of whether the extract contains levels of organics and metals above specified “Regulatory Limit”. All samples from the three studies met the standards. TCLP organics. Again all samples from the three studies met Indonesian standards Total metal analysis showed almost all samples met international “soil quality” screening levels for almost all metals. Results are presented and discussed in more detail below. Acute toxicity testing (conducted on the DHV samples) demonstrated that in terms of lethal dose 50 (LD50) the dredged sediment had a low toxicity, lower than the acute toxicity of table salt (NaCl). The review of sediment quality assessments also considered the health risks posed by the arsenic levels in the sediment. Results of acute toxicity level identified the sediment material as relatively harmless (i.e. very high amount of sediment required to be ingested to produce a lethal dose). Assessments of likely exposure pathways of construction workers to the sediment during the project as well as likely exposure due to the future usage of the disposal site also concluded that the health risks are low, particularly given the requirement
11
US EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) levels used to estimate contaminant concentrations in environmental media (soil, air and water) that the EPA considers protective of humans (including sensitive groups), over a lifetime. 12 Soil Standard in South Korea stipulated in the Soil Environment Preservation Act (SEPA), DIV (Dutch Intervention Values), and Australia-New Zealand National Ocean Disposal Guidelines for Dredged Material standards 13 Such tests have not been previously practiced in Jakarta and a successful implementation of this protocol could serve to improve dredge material management in the future. An outline of the protocol can be found in the “JEDI Sediment Quality Consolidated Report”
21
in the AMDAL for the disposal site i.e., Ancol CDF, for the capping of the disposed material with sand and clay.
6
PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE Both GOI and WB have clearly defined principles and objectives for public involvement (PI) in the AMDAL (i.e. EA process). The implied expectations are that meaningful PI will help in smooth project implementation, transparency and active participation by the stakeholders. Good PI throughout all stages will improve project implementation effectiveness and lead to achieve intended outcomes. The National Environment Management Agency (BAPEDAL) Decree 08/2000 serves as a guideline for the improved and strengthened PI. The decree clearly spells out the rights of the public to: (a) receive all relevant information about a proposed project, (b) seek relevant information about the proposed project, and (c) have a representative of the directly affected public sit as a member of the AMDAL Commission that reviews the draft EA. Usually, the emphasis for PI is at the preliminary, i.e. the scoping stage of the EA process, but for this project PI will be ensured throughout the project preparation and implementation. This approach is based on a recent study of PI in the AMDAL process in Indonesia (QIPRA 2005) study which found that there are a number of critical success factors throughout the AMDAL process (Table 6-1). Table 6-1 Critical Success Factors for Public Involvement in AMDAL Process Process Stage Announcement In Various Media Newspaper Announcements
Critical Success Factors
Placement in more than one paper, preferably all local papers and also national newspapers Notice board near project site Posters located in strategic locations and many public places frequented by community Multiple posters that present information in different manners Radio and local television Effective for announcing invitations to public consultation events Internet Notices on website of proponent and environment agency Public Consultations In Preparation Of Tor (Ka-Andal) Representations Scoping or pre-survey of affected communities is conducted to understand social structure, formal and informal leaders, and the different interests and concerns in the community Use focused group discussions and small group meetings for community consultation on scoping Encourage the support and involvement of local NGOs All levels of local government are consulted in the planning stage Dialogue during public consultations
Local government authorities are present and active in dialogue Proponent is directly involved in dialogue (instead of being only represented by his AMDAL consultants
EA-Andal Study During study preparation In-depth interviews with affected informed community members Representation & Discussion In Amdal Commission Representation The “Affected Community” is clearly defined and can easily select a representative who knows, and can speak, for their concerns Discussion in AMDAL Commission Key findings and draft EA-ANDAL study (with summary) are provided to community representatives Community representative(s) have discussed issues to be raised in AMDAL Commission prior to the review meeting Community representatives participate in EA-ANDAL study review Other Considerations Access to information Delivered to community members close to location of activities Presented in easy-to-digest format, also using pictures and graphs Decision & Clearance By Environmental Agency Prior to decision Environmental agency visits community for review of all comments
22
Clearance
received during prior stages Community representative meets with environmental agency for final consultation and feedback
7
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MITIGATION PLANS
7.1
Environmental and Social Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting
The site specific EMPs (and RPs where necessary) for Phase 2 project activities will provide detail set of mitigation, monitoring, and institutional measures to be taken during the project implementation in order to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them, or reduce them to acceptable levels. Example of mitigation and monitoring effort is presented in Table 7-1. Mitigation and monitoring are carried out to protect the natural environment and people’s health and wellbeing. Although complaints may a times be due to subjective perceptions of a nuisance or problem caused by project activities, they usually arise because a mitigation action is not complied with or a threshold is exceeded, such as a blocked access, loud equipment noise, excessive dust, or local flooding. Therefore, the complaints and grievance mechanism will also be part of the monitoring program (See GRS system in RPF for details). It is essential that the affected communities and the public in general have adequate opportunities for recourse if they are impacted by the project in a significant way.
23
Table 7-1 Environmental and Social Mitigation and Monitoring Plan Phase / Operation Pre-construction Displacement of PAPs occupying areas required for the project
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget Monitoring Statutory requirement: RPF embedded in the Loan Agreement
Component : Social Issue: Permanent or temporary displacement of persons occupying area required for project activities Potential impacts: Loss or disturbance of income sources and/or livelihoods Loss of full or partly dwellings and commercial structures
Performance criteria: PAPs living standard Object: Temporary or permanent displaced PAPs Parameter, method and frequency: to be specified in RPs Reporting: Details are provided in RPF
Consideration: Although implementation of JUFMP is expected to have immediate positive impacts for over one million people living in flood prone areas, there will also be adverse social impacts that require mitigation. The main adverse impacts of JUFMP may be the displacement of people occupying areas required for JUFMP dredging and construction work. A rapid survey by the World Bank social team revealed an overwhelming proportion of potentially affected people to be informal occupants on public land. Mitigation: (i) consider alternative design that will avoid and minimize the number of people need to be resettlement, (ii) if not avoided, Resettlement Plans (RPs) will be prepared based on agreed RPF. (see RPF)
24
Timing: Before construction period and monitor throughout the project until the objective is achieved. Responsibility: Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta Budget: Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta has allocated budget to provide compensation in cash (see Project Cost for latest figure) or in-kind (e.g. rental housing) for the PAPs
Construction Dredging
Component : Natural Environment Issue: Water quality (TSS, turbidity, odor, DO, BOD) Potential impact: (i) Dredging causes temporary increase of TSS in the water column and release of oxygen depleting substances (organic or anaerobic sediments), nutrients and contaminants, (ii) Removal of biota at dredge site and smothering benthic of adjacent site, (iii) temporary disturbance of aquatic life due to the drop of DO level (notably fish), Consideration: (i) Increase of TSS and BOD levels are unavoidable. The extent depends much on method and magnitude of dredging and hydrodynamics. However condition of the baseline is already turbid, eutrophic and high in BOD, thus such increases of TSS and BOD will be only temporary and localized. (ii) Benthic organism removal is inevitable; however most of the drains and retention basins are in polluted condition (mostly by domestic waste) that creates unfavorable condition for benthic ecosystem. The condition of benthic community may improve after the dredging. Mitigation: (i) Select appropriate equipment and dredging method, (ii) Install silt curtain when necessary, (iii) Monitor the benthic species diversity before and after dredging.
Monitoring Statutory requirement: PP 82/1999 on Water Quality Management and Water Pollution Control; Governor Decree Kep. Gub KDKI Jakarta No. 582/1995 on Standards for River, Surface water, and Wastewater Performance criteria: Background level Location: Near-field (e.g. within radius 100 m) and far-field (e.g. radius 1000 m) of the dredging activity and dredged material processing. The definition and near-field and far-field to be determined in EIA. Parameter, method and frequency: Parameter
Method
Total suspended solid (TSS) Biological oxygen demand (BOD) Turbidity
Laboratory
Dissolved oxygen (DO) Benthos Nekton (e.g. fish)
Laboratory Field Measurement Field Measurement In-situ and laboratory In-situ and laboratory
Standa rds < 80 mg/L < 20 mg/L NA
Frequency
>3 mg/L NA
Weekly
NA
Quarterly
Monthly Monthly Weekly
Quarterly
Reporting: Monthly reporting to PIUs and every six months reporting from PIUs to BPLHD for review Timing: Before construction period and monitor throughout the project until the background level is achieved. Responsibility: Contractor (for implementation) and Supervision Consultant (SC) for supervision and monitoring (taking samples) Budget: Contractor (included into contract), SC (from Loan)
25
Phase / Operation Construction Dredging
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget
Component: Urban Environment
Monitoring
Issue: Temporary increase level of noise, odor, dust, vibration
Statutory requirement: Government Regulation PP No. 41/1999 on Air Pollution Control; MoE Decrees Kep50/MenLH/11/1996 and Governor Decree SK Gub. KDKI Jakarta no 551/2001on Air Quality, Noise, Odor, and Vibration. Performance criteria: Background level Location: Near-field and far-field of the dredging activity and dredged material processing. The definition and near-field and far-field to be determined in EIA. Parameter, method and frequency:
Potential impact: dredging will general impact on urban environment, such as noise, odor, dust, and vibrations Consideration: Traffic within DKI Jakarta is highly congested, alternative mean of transport via water or railroad will be investigated in the EIA. Mitigation: Monitor regularly the equipments’ integrity, modify work practice as required, e.g. avoid operating high noise generating equipment during night time.
Parameter Dust Noise Vibration Odor
Method In-situ and laboratory Field measurement Field measurement Field measurement
Standards 230 µg/m3
Frequency Monthly
70 dBA
Weekly
Normal
Weekly
Normal*
Daily
* Require more than 50% of the minimum eight respondents to confirm normal odor Reporting: Monthly reporting to PIUs and every six months reporting from PIUs to BPLHD for review Timing: Before the activity and then monitor throughout the project until the background level is achieved. Responsibility: Contractor (for implementation) and SC for supervision and monitoring Budget: Contractor (included into contract), SC (from Loan) Issue: Temporary disturbance of access/livelihood Phase / Operation
See embankment work section in this table for detail mitigation
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget
26
Construction Transport (overland using watertight dump truck)
Component : Urban environment Issue: Traffic disruption, leakage and spill of material during transport
. Monitoring Statutory requirement: Prevailing DKI traffic and transportation regulations
Potential impact: Transportation of dredged materials to the disposal site, if carried out day- hours will worsen the traffic which is already congested. In addition, leakage or spill of sediment during transportation will cause increase of particulate matter, i.e. after the sediment dries.
Performance criteria: public complaint, number of spill, traffic congestion and travel time
Mitigation: (i) Only transport the material during night hours (i.e. from 22:00 – 05:00), (ii) Load dredged material into steel containers before loaded to the watertight dump truck, (iii) dredged material will be transported using GPS-tracking dump truck, (iv) integrity of the vehicles will be checked regularly, (v) maximum speed limit will set at 30 km per hour.
Parameter, method and frequency:
Location: from dredging site to disposal site, for both disposal of municipal solid waste and sediment.
Parameter
Method
Standards
Traveling time Spill (number)
Recording Visual
NA NA
Frequenc y Daily Weekly
Reporting: Monthly reporting to PIUs and every six months reporting from PIUs to BPLHD for review Timing monitor throughout the project. Responsibility: Contractor for the implementation, SC for supervision and monitoring Budget: Contractor (included into contract), SC (from Loan)
27
Phase / Operation Construction Disposal (Ancol CDF)
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget
Component : Natural environment Issue: Smothering of benthic habitat in 120 ha, reduce of seawater quality (TSS, turbidity, nutrients), and algae blooming. Potential impact: Dredged material disposal at the Ancol CDF causes smothering of benthic communities at the site due to an increase of TSS. Consideration: The Project introduces and requires confined disposal principles in order to minimize environmental impacts due to dredged material disposal. More importantly however, introduction of CDF principles will help restoring the ecosystem of Jakarta Bay considering all the sediment (polluted by domestic activities and solid waste) from the rivers and waduks will eventually end up in the Jakarta Bay. Smothering is inevitable at disposal site however, considering that (i) the size of CDF (120 ha) is minuscule compared with the whole Jakarta Bay (200 km2), (ii) the ecosystem of the area is already “dead”, impact on benthic is likely low. Although the material is predominantly clay and silt based, the energy (current) at the disposal site is low based on Ancol’s study, therefore it is less likely that TSS to disperse to larger area. However, considering the source of filling material which is likely contaminated by the human wastes as well as the proximity of the reclamation site to the receptor i.e. public beach, pathogens contamination will be monitored. Mitigation: Early construction of the dike and breakwater, lined with an appropriate geo-textile fabric will contain the TSS within the disposal area. Close the public beach when pathogen contamination is detected. Close the public beach when harmful algae blooming occur.
28
Monitoring Statutory requirement: PP No 19/1999 on Marine Pollution Control and MoE Decree No. 51/MENLH/2004 on seawater quality for marine biota Performance criteria: Background level Location: Near-field (e.g. within radius 100 m) and far-field (e.g. radius 1000 m) of the CDF. Parameter, method and frequency: Parameter Turbidity Dissolved oxygen (DO) Total suspended solid (TSS) Biological oxygen demand (BOD) Total coliform Fecal coliform Total ammonia nitrogen (T-NH3) Total phosphorus (TP) Benthos Nekton (e.g. fish)
Test type Field Measurement Field Measurement
Standards <5 NTU >5 mg/L
Frequency Weekly Weekly
Laboratory
20 mg/L
Monthly
Laboratory
< 20 mg/L
Monthly
Laboratory Laboratory Laboratory
0 0 0.3 mg/L
Weekly Weekly Monthly
Laboratory
< 0.015 mg/L NA NA
Monthly
In-situ and laboratory In-situ and laboratory
Quarterly Quarterly
Reporting: Monthly reporting to PIUs and every six months reporting from PIUs to BPLHD for review Timing: Before the activity and monitor throughout the project until the reference/background level is achieved. Responsibility: : PT PJA (Ancol) as part of RKL/RPL implementation and SC for supervision and monitoring Budget: Contractor (included into contract), SC (from Loan)
Phase / Operation Construction Embankment Work (assuming the major will include concrete/steel sheet piling while the minor work will only involve masonry stone, parapet work)
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget
Component : Urban environment
Monitoring
Issue: noise, vibration
Statutory requirement: MoE Decrees on air quality, noise, and vibration.
Potential impact: Short-term localized increase level of noise and vibration during the operation of construction equipments. Sensitive receptors in the project area include people living adjacent to the project area Mitigation: (i) inform local communities regarding type of embankment work and for how long the construction will take place, (ii) concrete sheet-piling work will only be allowed during day-hours and shall stop temporary during praying time.
Performance criteria: community complaint Location: project site involving embankment rehabilitation. Parameter, method and frequency: Parameter
Method
Noise Vibration
Field measurement Field measurement
Frequenc y Weekly Monthly
Reporting: Monthly reporting to PIUs and every six months reporting from PIUs to BPLHD for review Timing: Before the activity and then monitor throughout the project until the background level is achieved. Responsibility: Contractor for implementation, SC for supervision and monitoring Budget: Contractor (included into contract), SC (from Loan)
29
Phase / Operation
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget
Construction
Component : Social
Monitoring
Embankment Work (assuming the major will include concrete sheet piling while the minor work will only involve stone masonry or parapet work)
Issue: Livelihood of people who rely on river or waduk
Statutory requirement: ESMF and RPF
Potential impact: Temporary disturbance of livelihood; Social conflict between the PAPs and the project labor
Performance criteria: number of PAP employed and complaint from PAP
Consideration: There are small number of PAPs (rapid survey: about 30 people); who rely on the river and waduk for their source of income. During the project construction (dredging and embankment work), temporary disturbance may occur to those who operate Eretan (i.e. boats tied to metal cables that can carry around a dozen of people, or a few motorcycles and a few people, across the city’s rivers). Other potential impact include livelihood disturbance to scavengers who operate in the river and waduk. Mitigation: In addition to management measure outlined in the Community Complaint Management Section, contractors (dredging and embankment work) will give priority to the PAPs when recruiting non-skilled labor prior to the construction work in the areas where those PAPs are located. An alternative to the non-skilled labor job opportunities, in case of eretan the contractor may also help to shift the PAP eretan to slightly upstream or downstream so that the eretan can still operate during dredging and embankment work
30
Location: Embankment work and dredging locations. Parameter, method and frequency: Parameter Complaint/conflict
Method Survey/interview
Frequency Monthly
Reporting: SC to PMU and PIUs, DKI to PMU to World Bank Timing: Before the activity (non-skilled labor hiring) and after the work in the PAPs area is completed (termination) Responsibility: DKI (Monitoring and Reporting Pokja) and SC Budget: Provincial Government of DKI and Contractor
Phase / Operation Post-construction Disposal ( Ancol CDF disposal)
Issue, Potential Impact
Monitoring, Responsibility and Budget
Issue: Changes in hydrodynamics and geomorphology at disposal sites Potential impact: Change of longshore current, and subsequently alter abrasion and sedimentation pattern in the adjacent areas. The existence of reclaimed land is also vulnerable to abrasion. Consideration: Simulation of longshore current carried out by PT PJA’s consultant showed that the longshore current pattern will not change after the reclamation, it will however slow down from 1.52 m/s to 1.42 m/s. Furthermore, the TSS will increase slightly while the bathymetry showed insignificant changes. Mitigation: Monitor the longshore current and TSS level to understand the dispersion pattern. Consider other beneficial use schemes such as habitat restoration.
Monitoring Statutory requirement: PP No 19/1999 on Marine Pollution Control Performance criteria: longshore current, sedimentation pattern and abrasion Location: Ancol CDF Parameter, method and frequency: Parameter
Method
Longshore current Sedimentation pattern Bathymetry
Field measurement Field measurement Field measurement
Frequenc y Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly
Reporting: Monthly reporting to PIUs and every six months reporting from PIUs to BPLHD for review Timing: Before the activity and monitor throughout the project until stable Responsibility: PT PJA (Ancol) as part of RKL/RPL implementation, SC to supervise and monitor Budget: PT PJA as part of it RKL/RPL implementation
31
7.2 Inclusion in Contract Documents /Specifications Environmental and social management plan (EMPs and GRS) will be embedded into construction contract. Likewise, management and monitoring plan (EMPs, GRS, RPs) will also be incorporated into the supervision consultant (SC) contract. This ensures that the SC and contractors have a contractual obligation and can be held accountable.
8 BUDGET FOR ESMF IMPLEMENTATION The Government of Indonesia (GOI) has obtained a US$ 5 million grant (TF#054683) (Indonesia Water and Sanitation Program – WASAP) from the Netherlands Government through the World Bank and has applied a portion of this grant for the preparation of environmental and social safeguards instrument during the project preparation period (e.g., AMDALs, RPF, draft RPs). The cost for implementation of the environmental management requirements have been embedded into the construction contracts which is being financed by the Loan. The cost of implementing the RPs will be borned by DKI Jakarta. The cost for the supervision and monitoring of the environmental and social management requirements has been embedded into the Supervision Consultant contract which is being financed by the Loan.
32
Annex 1: Ancol CDF Processing and Environmental Due Diligent
Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (CDF)
Construction of the Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) by PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA) based on (i) DED and Approved AMDAL documents from BPLHD and (iii) Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) between Provincial Government of DKI with PT PJA for the construction of CDF
Completed CDF
Environmental Due Diligence by PMU and WB
Is the CDF acceptable ?
Yes
Contractor to start dumping
33
No
BPLHD
Annex 2 : Hazardous wastes screening as per requirement of Ancol CDF AMDAL Parameters
TCLP Screening Level (mg/kg dry-weight)
Arsenic
100
TCLP Standard (mg/L) Gov. Reg. PP No. 85/ 1999 5
Barium
2000
100
Boron
10000
500
Cadmium
20
1
Chromium
100
5
Copper
200
10
Lead
100
5
Mercury
4
0.2
Selenium
20
1
Silver
100
5
Zinc
1000
50
if no metals level exceeds the Toxicity Characteristic of Leaching Procedure (TCLP) screening level, TCLP (USEPA SW 846 ) will not be carried out
34
REPUBLIK INDONESIA Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta (JUFMP)
Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial September 2011
DAFTAR ISI 1
Pendahuluan...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Latar Belakang ........................................................................................................................1 1.2 Tujuan Pengembangan Proyek ............................................................................................1 1.3 Tujuan dan Ruang Lingkup Kerangka Kerja Pengelolaan Lingkungan (Environmental Management Framework atau ESMF) ............................................................................................2 2 URAIAN PROYEK .............................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Komponen Proyek ..................................................................................................................3 2.3 Pelaksanaan Proyek ..............................................................................................................6 2.4 Dampak Potensial...................................................................................................................6 3. Peran dan Tanggung Jawab Institusional ....................................................................... 8 3.1 Pengaturan Institusional ........................................................................................................8 3.2 Peran dan Tanggung Jawab Institusional...........................................................................8 3.2.1 Komite Pengarah Bersama ................................................................................. 8 3.2.2 Unit Pengelola Proyek (Project Management Unit atau PMU)............................. 9 3.2.3 Unit Pelaksana Proyek (Project Implementation Unit atau PIU)......................... 11 3.2.4 Pemerintah Kotamadya DKI Jakarta ................................................................. 12 3.2.5 Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah (BPLHD).................................. 12 3.2.6 Para Kontraktor................................................................................................. 13 3.2.7 Bank Dunia (World Bank/WB) ........................................................................... 13 3.3 Proses Proyek .......................................................................................................................13 3.3.1 Fase 1 Proyek................................................................................................... 13 3.3.2 Fase 2 Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek dan Lokasi-Lokasi yang Saling Terhubung ......... 14 4 KEBIJAKAN-KEBIJAKAN, PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN YANG BERLAKU TENTANG LINGKUNGAN HIDUP DAN SOSIAL .................................................................... 19 4.1 Lingkungan Hidup.................................................................................................................19 4.1.1 Pemerintah Indonesia ....................................................................................... 19 4.1.2 Kebijakan-Kebijakan Bank Dunia ...................................................................... 20 4.2 Sosial ......................................................................................................................................20 4.2.1 Pemerintah Indonesia ....................................................................................... 20 4.2.2 Kebijakan-Kebijakan Bank Dunia ...................................................................... 21 5 RONA AWAL LINGKUNGAN ........................................................................................... 22 6 KONSULTASI PUBLIK DAN PENGUNGKAPAN............................................................. 25 7 RENCANA PENGENDALIAN LINGKUNGAN DAN SOSIAL ........................................... 27 7.1 Pengendalian, Pemantauan, dan Pelaporan Lingkungan dan Sosial ..........................27 7.2 Penyertaan dalam Dokumen-Dokumen Kontrak/Spesifikasi .........................................38 8 ANGGARAN UNTUK PELAKSANAAN ESMF ................................................................. 38
i
DAFTAR TABEL Tabel 2-1 Uraian tentang Kanal-Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal, dan Kolam-Kolam Penampungan dalam Proyek ............................................................................................................................. 4 Tabel 6-1 Faktor-Faktor Keberhasilan Penting untuk Keterlibatan Publik dalam Proses AMDAL ................................................................................................................................................. 26 Tabel 7-1 Rencana Pengendalian dan Pemantauan Lingkungan dan Sosial............................ 29 DAFTAR GAMBAR Gambar 3-1 Pengaturan Institusional Pelaksanaan Proyek........................................................ 8 Gambar 3-2 Penyaringan dan Pemrosesan Proyek JUFMP..................................................... 15 Gambar 3-3 Diagram Alur proses EA selama persiapan proyek............................................... 18 DAFTAR LAMPIRAN: Lampiran1 : Proses CDF Ancol dan Uji Tuntas Lingkungan Lampiran 2 : Penyaringan limbah bahan berbahaya sesuai persyaratan AMDAL CDF Ancol
ii
AKRONIM DAN SINGKATAN AMDAL ANDAL BAPEDAL BAPPENAS BAPPEDA BBWSCC BPLHD CDF DGCK DGWR
Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan Analisis Dampak Lingkungan Badan Pengendalian Dampak Lingkungan Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Hidup Daerah Confined Disposal Facility (Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup) Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Direktorat Jenderal Sumber Daya Air, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
DKI Jakarta atau DKI EA EIA EMP ESMF ESWG GoI JABODETABEK JEDI JUFMP KA-ANDAL MENLH MoE MoF MPW NCEA NGO OP PAP PI PIP PIU PMU PP PPC
Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta Environmental Assessment (Penilaian Lingkungan) Environmental Impact Assessment (Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan) Environmental Management Plan (Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan) Environmental and Social Management Framework (Kerangka Kerja Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial) Environmental and Social Working Group (Kelompok Kerja Lingkungan dan Sosial) Government of Indonesia (Pemerintah Indonesia) Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative (Inisiatif Pengerukan Darurat Jakarta) Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta) Kerangka Acuan – ANDAL (Term of Agreement of EIA) Menteri Lingkungan Hidup – MoE Ministry of Environment (Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup) Ministry of Finance (Kementerian Keuangan) Ministry of Public Works (Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum) The Netherlands Commission on Environmental Assessment (Komisi Belanda untuk Penilaian Lingkungan) Non-Governmental Organization (Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat) Operational Policy (Kebijakan Operasional) Project Affected Person (Warga yang Terkena Dampak Proyek) Public Involvement (Keterlibatan Publik) Project Implementation Plan (Rencana Pelaksanaan Proyek) Project Implementation Unit (Unit Pelaksana Proyek) Project Management Unit (Unit Pengelola Proyek) Peraturan Pemerintah Konsultan Persiapan Proyek iii
PT PJA PU-MPW RP RKL RPF RPL SIA USACE WASAP WBC WJEMP
PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (Otoritas Ancol) Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Rencana Permukiman Kembali Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan Resettlement Policy Framework (Kerangka Kerja Kebijakan Permukiman Kembali) Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan Social Impact Assessment (Analisis Dampak Sosial) United States Army Corps of Engineers (Korps Ahli Teknik Angkatan Darat Amerika Serikat) Indonesia Water and Sanitation Program Trust Fund (Dana Perwalian Program Air Bersih dan Sanitasi Indonesia) West Banjir Kanal (Kanal Banjir Barat) Western Java Environmental Management Project (Proyek Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Jawa Barat)
iv
1
KERANGKA PENGELOLAAN LINGKUNGAN DAN SOSIAL Proyek Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta Pendahuluan 1.1
Latar Belakang
Besarnya dampak banjir di ibukota telah menjadi masalah nasional dikarenakan besarnya kerugian keuangan yang ditimbulkan dan dampaknya terhadap masyarakat di wilayah DKI Jakarta. Berdasarkan hasil dari beberapa kajian tentang banjir dan simulasi banjir, Pemerintah Indonesia (Government of Indonesia atau GoI) telah mengidentifikasikan serangkaian kanal banjir, saluran air dan waduk yang memerlukan rehabilitasi mendesak. Rehabilitasi atas infrastruktur-infrastruktur pengendali banjir tersebut, akan mengurangi risiko banjir dan diharapkan untuk memberikan manfaat bagi lebih dari satu juta orang yang tinggal di wilayah-wilayah rawan banjir. 1.2
Tujuan Pengembangan Proyek
Tujuan Pengembangan Proyek (Project Development Objective atau PDO) adalah untuk memberikan kontribusi bagi peningkatan dalam pengoperasian dan pemeliharaan atas suatu bagian utama dari sistem pengelolaan banjir di Jakarta. PDO tersebut akan dicapai dengan: a) Melakukan pengerukan kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk utama yang telah dipilih untuk memperbaiki kapasitas alirannya dan membuang material hasil kerukan tersebut di fasilitas-fasilitas yang sesuai; b) Melakukan rehabilitasi dan konstruksi tanggul pada bagian-bagian dari kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk tersebut, serta memperbaiki atau mengganti peralatan mekanis yang telah rusak untuk mempertahankan dan meningkatkan operasi kanal dan waduk tersebut; c) Membangun koordinasi institutional antara ketiga badan yang bertanggungjawab dalam rangka mendorong pengembangan yang terkoordinasi, serta pengoperasian dan pemeliharaan (Operations and Maintenance O&M) atas sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta, dan d) Memperkuat kemampuan badan-badan yang bertanggungjawab tersebut untuk meningkatkan pengoperasian, pemeliharaan, dan atas sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta. Proyek ini bertujuan untuk mendukung pengerukan atas kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk utama dalam sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta dan membuang material lumpur di fasilitas yang sesuai, dengan menggunakan praktik-praktik terbaik yang berkelanjutan (dengan fokus pada koordinasi institusional, serta kelestarian lingkungan dan sosial). Kegiatan-Kegiatan ini diharapkan akan memperkenalkan praktik Pengoperasian dan Pemeliharaan (O&M) yang lebih baik di empat bidang: (i) Pengerukan – teknologi modern dan praktik terbaik; (ii) Lingkungan – pembuangan lumpur secara bertanggung jawab; (iii) Sosial – praktik-praktik permukiman kembali yang adil; dan (iv) Institusional – perencanaan dan praktik pemeliharaan rutin yang terkoordinasi.
1
1.3
Tujuan dan Ruang Lingkup Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan (Environmental Management Framework atau ESMF)
Proyek ini akan dilaksanakan dalam dua batch secara berurutan. Pekerjaan Fase 1, terdiri atas 4 lokasi, diharapkan untuk dimulai pada tahun pertama pelaksanaan proyek. Dengan demikian, semua desain teknik, analisis mengenai dampak lingkungan (AMDAL) dan rencana pengelolaan lingkungan telah diselesaikan, dinilai, dan disetujui selama persiapan proyek tersebut. LokasiLokasi Fase 1 tidak melibatkan permukiman kembali. Namun demikian, pekerjaan-pekerjaan Fase 2, yang terdiri atas 11 lokasi, yang pada saat ini masih dalam persiapan proyek untuk berbagai tahapan persiapan design teknis, analisis mengenai dampak lingkungan (AMDAL) dan rencana pengelolaan lingkungan, serta rencana permukiman kembali (apabila teridentifikasikan lokasi yang memerlukan permukiman kembali). Selain itu, pemerintah mungkin akan melakukan pekerjaan-pekerjaan pada 10 lokasi yang telah diidentifikasikan sebagai terhubung secara hidraulik dan/atau secara langsung dengan bagian dari kanal-kanal/waduk-waduk dalam JUFMP. Apabila pemerintah melaksanakan setiap kegiatan pekerjaan terkait dengan pengendalian banjir (misalnya, pengerukan dan/atau rehabilitasi kanal) di 10 lokasi tersebut selama jangka waktu proyek JUFMP, kegiatan-kegiatan tersebut akan dianggap sebagai kegiatan-kegiatan yang terkait dengan proyek dan persyaratan kebijakan Bank Dunia OP 4.12 tentang Permukiman Kembali secara Terpaksa (Involuntary Resettlement) akan diterapkan atas kegiatan-kegiatan tersebut. Adapun latar belakang dan alasan penyusunan Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (Environmental and Social Management Framework atau ESMF), yang sesuai dengan persyaratan kebijakan Bank Dunia OP4.01 tentang Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan (Environmental Assessment) terbagi menjadi dua bagian: 1. Untuk memberikan pedoman dan memastikan kesesuaian dengan persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia (Government of Indonesia atau GoI) dan Bank Dunia terkait dengan pekerjaan-pekerjaan dalam Fase 2, dan, 2. Untuk memberikan pedoman dan memastikan kesesuaian dengan persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia (Government of Indonesia atau GoI) dan Bank Dunia terkait dengan lokasi yang terhubungan secara hydraulic dengan proyek, yakni 10 lokasi. ESMF memberikan penjelasan mengenai undang-undang, kebijakan-kebijakan, pedoman-pedoman ,dan tanggung jawab dari institusi-institusi untuk pengelolaan dampak lingkungan hidup, proses proyek, rona awal lingkungan yang relevan; mengidentifikasikan dampak-dampak potensial lingkungan dan sosial, menguraikan langkah-langkah untuk menghindari atau meminimalkan dampak yang merugikan dan langkah-langkah untuk menanggulangi setiap dampak merugikan yang tidak dapat dihindari. Persyaratan dan prosedur untuk konsultasi dan pengumunan ke publik juga tercantum dalam ESMF. ESMF juga mencakup isu-isu sosial dan lingkungan perkotaan terkait dengan 2
Proyek. Namun, rincian dari penilaian atas dampak sosial melibatkan permukiman kembali, jumlah warga yang terkena dampak proyek (project affected people atau PAP), prosedur ganti rugi, kategori PAP dan hak-hak mereka disajikan dalam Kerangka Kebijakan Permukiman Kembali (Resettlement Policy Framework atau RPF) proyek tersebut yang akan memberikan pedoman untuk penyusunan Rencana Permukiman Kembali (Resettlement Plans atau RP). Pada akhirnya, ESMF akan diumumkan di kantor-kantor dan situs-situs web yang berkepentingan dari badan-badan pemerintah daerah dan pemerintah pusat, serta di Pusat Informasi Publik (Public Information Center atau PIC) kantor Bank Dunia, Jakarta dan di InfoShop Bank Dunia di Washington. Demikian juga, Dokumen RPF akan diumumkan dengan cara yang sama. 2
URAIAN PROYEK
2.1
Komponen Proyek
Proyek ini terdiri atas dua komponen yang dirangkum sebagai berikut: Komponen 1. Pengerukan dan rehabilitasi atas kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk utama yang telah ditentukan. Komponen ini akan mendukung pengerukan dan rehabilitasi atas 11 kanal banjir/kanal dan empat buah waduk yang telah diidentifikasikan sebagai bagian utama yang penting dari sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta yang membutuhkan rehabilitasi mendesak dan peningkatan dalam kapasitas alirannya. Terdapat 11 kanal banjir/kanal tersebut diperkirakan memiliki panjang total 67,5 km, sedangkan empat waduk tersebut diperkirakan mencakup wilayah total seluas 65,1 hektar (lihat rincian rangkuman pada Tabel 2.2 di bawah). Tanggul sepanjang lokasi proyek (dengan total panjang sekitar 42,2 km) akan direhabilitasi dan dibangun pada kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk tersebut. Apabila diperlu, peralatan mekanis (pompa, pagar-pagar, dll) juga akan diganti atau diperbaiki. Komponen 2. Bantuan teknis untuk pengelolaan proyek, pengaman sosial, dan pengembangan kapasitas. Komponen ini akan mendukung pengelolaan kontrak, tinjauan desain teknik, ahli teknik pengawasan konstruksi untuk pekerjaan pengerukan dan rehabilitasi dan bantuan teknis. Bantuan teknis termasuk dukungan untuk peningkatan koordinasi institusional untuk pengoperasian dan pemeliharaan sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta serta pembuatan sebuah Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (Floods Management Information System atau FMIS). Ketentuan pendanaan telah disusun untuk pelaksanaan Rencana Permukiman Kembali, serta pembuatan dan pengoperasian suatu Sistem Penanganan Pengaduan proyek dan Panel Tenaga Ahli. Lima belas kanal banjir, kanal, dan waduk prioritas telah diidentifikasikan untuk dimasukan ke dalam ruang lingkup pekerjaan proyek (lihat Tabel 2-1 untuk uraian yang terperinci). Kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk-waduk tersebut telah diidentifikasikan oleh Pemerintah sebagai sangat membutuhkan rehabilitasi dan peningkatan kapasitas aliran. 3
Tabel 0-1 Uraian tentang Kanal-Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal, dan KolamKolam Penampungan dalam Proyek Paket Pekerjaan Kontrak
Lokasi
1 (DKI)
Kanal Banjir Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu)
2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR)
Kanal Banjir Cengkareng (termasuk pinggiran pantai) Catatan 1 Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah Saluran Air Cideng Thamrin (Saluran Air Jalan Lingkar) Saluran Air Sentiong-Sunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (Saluran Air Pembuangan) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Saluran Air Tanjungan Saluran Air Angke Bawah Kanal Banjir Barat (tepi laut) Catatan1
Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas Grogol – Saluran Air Sekretaris Saluran Air Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Catatan 2 Saluran Air Krukut Cideng Catatan 2 Saluran Air Krukut Lama
Uraian tentang Saluran Air (Perkiraan) Panjang (m) Lebar (m) Luas 2 Wilayah (m atau ha.) 2 5.100 21,50 ~ 45,90 171.870 m (2.004) 4,90 ha. (1.260) 2 7.840 (540) 38,00 ~ 87,00 490.000 m 9.980
20,20 ~ 47,40
338.320 m
3.840 (1.960)
10,00 ~ 19,00
55.680 m
5.950 (400)
16,10 ~ 31,20
161.240 m
2
2 2
(570)
33,00 ha.
600 4.050 3.060 (590)
19,20 ha. 8,00 ha. 2 10.560 m 2 166.050 m 2 266.220 m
5.150 2.970 4.910 3.250 3.490 67.514
9,20 ~ 26,00 31,00 ~ 51,00 33,00 ~ 141,00 15,00 ~ 36,00 21,00 ~ 51,00 13,00 ~ 31,00 15,00 ~ 29,00 7,00 ~ 29,00
2
131.320 m 2 7 106.920 m 2 (DKI) 108.020 m 2 71.500 m 2 62.820 m 2 2.140.520 m 65 ha. Catatan 1 Untuk tujuan-tujuan kontrak, Kanal Banjir Sunter telah dibagi menjadi dua subpaket – Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas dan Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah. Catatan 2 Untuk tujuan-tujuan kontrak, Saluran Air Krukut telah dibagi menjadi dua subpaket – Saluran Air Krukut Cideng dan Saluran Air Krukut Lama
Lokasi-Lokasi yang saling terhubung. Sepuluh lokasi telah diidentifikasikan sebagai lokasi-lokasi yang terkait proyek. Lokasi-lokasi tersebut adalah: Kali Item, Kalibaru, dan Sunter Kemayoran (terhubung dengan Saluran Air Sentiong Sunter); Saluran Ancol Kampung Bandan dan Ancol Long-Storage (terhubungan dengan Kanal Banjir Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari) Kanal sepanjang Jl. Kayu Putih Timur (terhubung dengan Saluran Air Sungai Sunter Atas); Ciliwung Kota, kanal sepanjang Jl Tubagus Angke, PHB Bandengan Utara; dan Waduk Pluit (terhubung dengan Saluran Air Pakin–Kali Besar– Jelakeng). Sepuluh lokasi yang disebutkan di atas telah diidentifikasikan sebagai terhubung secara hidraulik dan secara langsung dengan kanal-kanal/waduk-waduk dalam JUFMP. Pada saat ini, pemerintah tidak memiliki rencana khusus untuk pekerjaan rehabilitasi pada lokasi-lokasi yang saling terhubung tersebut. Namun, pemerintah akan menerapkan RPF (and semua ketentuan terkait) apabila 4
aktivitas-akitivitas yang memenuhi kriteria untuk lokasi-lokasi yang terhubung dengan proyek dilaksanakan dalam lokasi-lokasi1 tersebut. Lokasi-Lokasi pembuangan. Lokasi-Lokasi pembuangan tidak dibiayai oleh proyek, namun, lokasi-lokasi tersebut dianggap sebagai bagian dari proyek JUFMP dan oleh sebab itu, rancangan, konstruksi, dan pengoperasiannya akan mengikuti persyaratan Bank Dunia serta persyaratan Pemerintah Indonesia sendiri. Sekitar 3,4 juta m3 material endapan dan sekitar 95.000 m3 limbah padat yang akan dikeruk dari kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, dan waduk melalui proyek ini, akan dibuang dengan cara berikut ini (lihat Gambar 2-2 untuk gambaran tentang pengaturan pembuangan). Material endapan yang tidak berbahaya – akan diangkut dan dibuang ke lokasi Pekerjaan Reklamasi Laut Ancol, yang dikenal sebagai CDF Ancol. Material endapan yang berbahaya (apabila ditemukan) – akan dibuang ke fasilitas pengelolaan limbah berbahaya PPLi di Bogor, Jawa Barat2. Limbah padat – akan diangkut dan dibuang di tempat pembuangan akhir (TPA) Jakarta di Bekasi, Jawa Barat, dikenal sebagai TPA Bantar Gebang. 2.2 Kegiatan-kegiatan Proyek Pengerukan, Pengangkutan, dan Pembuangan. Pengerukan akan terpusat pada 15 bagian yang ditentukan dari kanal banjir, kanal dan waduk utama dalam sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta. Volume material yang akan dikeruk diperkirakan sebesar 3,4 juta m3, termasuk 95.000 m3 limbah padat yang akan dipindahkan dari kanal-kanal banjir, saluran-saluran air, dan waduk-waduk. Pengerukan secara mekanis akan digunakan, metode ini bekerja dengan menggunakan kombinasi dari berbagai peralatan, yakni buldoser apung, backhoe pengeruk di atas landasan apung, long-arm backhoe, dan water jet. Semua material hasil kerukan akan diangkut ke lokasi pembuangan dengan menggunakan truk pembuangan kedap air pada malam hari. Rehabilitasi Tanggul dan Pekerjaan Pemeliharaan. Rehabilitasi tanggul akan mencakup pekerjaan Stone masonry, parapet dan pemasangan sheet-pile pada tanggul sungai yang belum terproteksi, sedangkan pekerjaan pemeliharaan termasuk perbaikan pompa dan pemasangan saringan sampah.
1
Berdasarkan OP 4.12, kriteria untuk mengidentifikasikan lokasi-lokasi yang terhubung adalah: (1) secara langsung dan secara signifikan terkait dengan JUFMP; (2) diperlukan untuk mencapai tujuan-tujuan JUFMP; dan (3) bersamaan dengan JUFMP. Studi untuk mendefinisikan lokasi-lokasi terkait telah dilakukan selama penyusunan Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman Kembali (Resettlement Policy Framework atau RPF) dan lokasi-lokasi yang terhubung pada pokoknya didefinisikan sebagai terhubung secara hidraulik dalam konteks kriteria keterhubungan pertama sebagaimana disebutkan dalam OP 4.12, namun tidak memenuhi ketiga kriteria tersebut secara keseluruhan. 2
Sebagai catatan bahwa metode spesific yang diajukan untuk mengolah/membuang limbah bahan berbahaya dan beracun (B3) akan mengikuti ketentuan perundangan mengenai limbah B3 dan persetujuan dari Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup akan merupakan prasyarat.
5
2.3
Pelaksanaan Proyek
Pelaksanaan Proyek. Pelaksaanan pekerjaan yang dibiayai oleh proyek diusulkan untuk dilakukan dalam dua tahap secara berurutan (lihat Tabel 2-2). Rancangan pelaksanaan yang bertahap ini diadopsi sebagai mekanisme pengelolaan risiko pelaksanaan proyek tersebut. Pekerjaan Fase 1 (4 lokasi yang diusulkan/ 3 kontrak pekerjaan) diharapkan untuk dimulai pada tahun pertama proyek. Pekerjaan Fase 2 (11 lokasi yang diusulkan/5 kontrak) diharapkan untuk dilaksanakan selanjutnya. Pengtahapan tersebut akan mengindari terbebaninya PMU/PIU dan konsultan pengawasan mereka secara berlebihan pada tahun pertama saat proses, prosedur, dan rutinitas pelaksanaan aktual terperinci ditetapkan dan dioperasionalisasikan. Pengtahapan tersebut juga akan memberikan waktu kepada Pemerintah Daerah Jakarta (DKI Jakarta) untuk menyelesaikan instrumen-instrumen dan pengaturan untuk lokasi-lokasi Fase 2 yang mana permukiman kembali diperlukan, termasuk pembuatan sistem penanganan pengaduan dan penunjukan sebuah panel tenaga ahli. Dua lokasi terkait dengan proyek yaitu Ancol Kampung Bandan dan Ancol Long Storage merupakan lokasi yang terkait dengan pekerjaan Fase 13, dan lokasi terkait lain nya terkait dengan Fase 2 2.4
Dampak Potensial
Dampak Proyek Spesifik. Hasil AMDAL untuk Fase 1 menunjukan bahwa di antara dampak signifikan potensial dari pelaksanaan proyek, dampak yang timbul akibat pengangkutan material kerukan dari lokasi pengerukan ke Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (CDF) Ancol melalui jalan-jalan menjadi masalah paling penting untuk ditanggulangi. Adapun dampak yang timbul termasuk peningkatan potensi kemacetan lalu lintas dan potensi tumpahan dari material kerukan sepanjang koridor jalan. Untuk menanggulangi permasalahan ini, rencana pengelolaan pengangkutan (TMP) telah dikembangkan untuk setiap lokasi proyek, di mana pengangkutan dari material kerukan hanya akan dizinkan pada waktu di luar waktu puncak (off-peak hours) (yaitu dari pukul 22:00 sampai pukul 05:004) dan dengan menggunakan truk pembuangan kedap air. Untuk meminimalkan tumpahan tersebut, material kerukan pertama-tama akan ditempatkan ke dalam kontainer (2x2x1m) sebelum material kerukan tersebut diangkut ke dalam truk. Selama pengangkutannya ke CDF Ancol, material tersebut akan ditutup dengan terpal. Semua truk pengangkut akan dibersihkan oleh PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA) sebelum meninggalkan lokasi pembuangan. Kualitas Sedimen. Bank Dunia mempekerjakan konsultan (PT. ERM Indonesia, ERM) pada tahun 2008 dan selanjutnya, Pemerintah Indonesia (GoI) mengangkat konsultan independen lainnya pada tahun 2009 (yaitu, Konsultan PT PPA – EIA/SIA) untuk melaksanakan analisis mendalam atas sampel sedimen dari lokasi-lokasi JUFMP. Semua hasil analisa kimia telah dikaji sesuai standard nasional dan internasional yang telah ada. Hasil ERM lebih jauh dikaji 3
Analisis praduga dampak menunjukan bahwa kalaupun pada kedua lokasi terkait ini akan dilakukan kegiatan, tidak diperlukan proses pemindahan warga terkena proyek 4 Atau sesuai dengan peraturan pengangkutan dan lalu lintas DKI Jakarta yang berlaku.
6
oleh Korps Ahli Teknik Angkatan Darat Amerika Serikat (the United States Army Corps of Engineers atau USACE) serta PT PPA. Berdasarkan semua hasil tersebut, Pemerintah Indonesia (GoI) menyimpulkan bahwa sangat kecil kemungkinan bahwa material kerukan adalah limbah B3 dan material kerukan dapat dibuang pada CDF Ancol sesuai dengan persyaratan EIA Ancol. Dampak Pembuangan Material hasil kerukan yang Tidak Berbahaya. Material kerukan yang bukan limbah B3 akan dibuang di CDF Ancol. Proyek mensyaratkan prinsip-prinsip pembuangan tertutup5 untuk meminimalkan dampaknya terhadap lingkungan. Oleh sebab itu, Proyek akan melaksanakan due dilligence untuk memastikan bahwa fasilitas pembuangan memenuhi persyaratan sebagaimana dinyatakan dalam izin lingkungan, yaitu fasilitas yang tertutup dibangun sebelum pembuangan material mulai dilaksanakan (Lampiran 1: Proses dan Persetujuan CDF Ancol). Selain itu, AMDAL Ancol mensyaratkan proyek untuk melakukan identifikasi dan memastikan bahwa sedimen yang akan ditempatkan pada CDF tidak merupakan limbah B3. Oleh sebab itu, proyek JUFMP telah mengembangkan prosedur yang akan digunakan selama pelaksanaan proyek untuk menguji setiap bagian sebelum pengerukan dilakukan. (lihat Lampiran 2: Identifikasi dari Limbah B3 sebagai mana disyaratkan dalam AMDAL Ancol) Dampak Pembuangan Limbah Padat (95.000 m3) dan Limbah B3 (apabila ditemukan). Sebagaimana dengan CDF Ancol, Tempat Penimbunan Akhir (TPA) Bantar Gebang akan menerima limbah padat (sampah ukuran besar) dari proyek dan Secure Landfill PPLI akan menampung limbah B3, apabila ditemukan, keduanya merupakan fasilitas yang telah ada dan beroperasi sebelum proyek JUFMP dipersiapkan. Oleh sebab itu, pihak proyek JUFMP akan melaksanakan due dilligence lingkungan untuk memastikan bahwa fasilitas-fasilitas tersebut beroperasi berdasarkan izin lingkungan yang sah dan sesuai dengan peraturan setempat.
5 Pembangunan CDF Ancol akan dibiayai sendiri oleh PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA). CDF Ancol yang direncanakan akan memiliki kapasitas yang memadai untuk menerima material kerukan dari semua 15 lokasi. Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Daerah (BPLHD) DKI Jakarta telah menyetujui AMDAL untuk CDF tersebut. AMDAL CDF Ancol yang mencakup 119 ha wilayah pembuangan (kapasitas 12 juta m3) yang pada awalnya disetujui atas dasar bahwa pasir merupakan material pengisian, yang telah direvisi untuk memasukan material kerukan JUFMP.
7
3.
Peran dan Tanggung Jawab Institusional
3.1
Pengaturan Institusional
Pengaturan-Pengaturan institusional secara keseluruhan untuk proyek ini, dirangkum dalam Gambar 3_1:
Gambar 3-1 Pengaturan Institusional Pelaksanaan Proyek PIU-DGWR akan diwakili oleh Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane (Regional Office for the Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin atau BBWS-CC); PIU-DGHS akan diwakili oleh Satuan Kerja Pengembangan Infrastruktur Persampahan dan Sanitasi Jabodetabek (Working Unit of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Infrastructure and Sanitation Development for Jabodetabek); dan PIU-DKI akan diwakili oleh Dinas PU DKI Jakarta (Public Work Agency) dari Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta. 3.2
Peran dan Tanggung Jawab Institusional
3.2.1 Komite Pengarah Bersama Sebuah komite penasihat tingkat tinggi yaitu Komite Pengarah Bersama (Joint Steering Committee atau JSC) telah dibentuk untuk mengawasi persiapan dan pelaksanaan proyek, dan untuk memberikan koordinasi dan dukungan nasihat pada tingkat kebijakan. JSC dipimpin oleh Bappenas dan terdiri atas para perwakilan dari Kementerian Keuangan, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum, dan Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta. JSC akan tetap memberikan pengawasan tingkat tinggi selama pelaksanaan proyek. 8
3.2.2 Unit Pengelola Proyek (Project Management Unit atau PMU) Direktorat Jenderal Sumber Daya Air (Directorate General of Water Resources atau DGWR) Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum (Ministry of Public Works atau MPW) adalah PMU JUFMP. PMU telah dibuat oleh DGWR untuk mempersiapakan dan mengawasi pelaksanaan proyek. PMU terdiri atas tiga orang staf dari DGWR, tiga orang staf dari Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya (Directorate General of Human Settlements atau DGCK), tiga orang staf dari Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta, dan satu orang staf Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum dari bagian Kerjasama Perencanaan dan Luar Negeri (Planning and Overseas Cooperation). PMU didukung pula oleh sekretariat, lima orang staf dari DGWR. PMU bertanggung jawab atas koordinasi proyek secara keseluruhan. Selama persiapan proyek, PMU telah mempekerjakan dua konsultan utama untuk mendukung persiapan proyek: Konsultan Persiapan Proyek (Project Preparation Consultant atau PPC). Konsultan bertanggung jawab (i) untuk memberikan desain teknik untuk pengerukan, dan tanggul sesuai dengan konsultan EIA/SIA; (ii) untuk mempersiapkan dokumen tender untuk semua pekerjaan dalam waktu proyek tersebut dan untuk bekerja sama dengan konsultan EIA/SIA untuk penyertaan EMP ke dalam dokumen tender dan kontrak konstruksi; (iii) untuk memberikan jasa-jasa konsultasi kepada Unit Pengelola Proyek (Project Management Unit atau PMU). PPC bekerja sama dengan konsultan EIA/SIA utnuk membuat desain yang akan meminimalkan dampak negatif terhadap lingkungan dan sosial. Konsultan EIA/SIA. Konsultan bertanggung jawab (i) untuk pembuatan dokumen AMDAL dan rencana pemukiman kembali (Resettlement Plan, RP) yang memenuhi persyaratan, baik dari Pemerintah Indonesia dan Bank Dunia; (ii) untuk persiapan rencana pengelolaan lingkungan (enviromental management plan, EMP) untuk disertakan dalam dokumen tender dan kontrak-kontrak konstruksi; dan (iii) membantu PMU dalam mempublikasikan dokumen yang telah disetujui dan konsultasi publik. Selama pelaksanaan proyek, PMU akan mengawasi dan melakukan koordinasi pelaksanaan proyek secara menyeluruh melalui tiga PIU. PMU juga akan melaksanakan kegiatan-kegiatan pendukung yang umum selama proyek tersebut. Kegiatan-kegiatan tersebut, termasuk (i) konsultasi pengawasan konstruksi secara menyeluruh, (ii) Panel Tenaga Ahli, (iii) Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (Floods Management Information Systems atau FMIS) dan (iv) mendukung DKI-Jakarta terkait dengan permukiman kembali dan sistem penanganan pengaduan proyek.
Konsultan Pengawasan (Supervision Consultant atau SC). Kontrak dengan Konsultan Pengawasan merupakan kontrak konsultan utama yang terpenting dalam mendukung pengelolaan menyeluruh PMU, pengawasan dan pemantauan proyek. Apabila terdapat 9
6
penilaian kekurangan dalam kapasitas, secara khusus dalam area pengawasan dari rencana lingkungan proyek, pelaksanaan Rencana Permukiman Kembali (Resettlement Plans atau RP) dan Sistem Penanganan Keluhan (Grievance Redress System atau GRS), SC telah ditugaskan untuk memberikan tenaga ahli yang diperlukan untuk mendukung PMU selama pelaksanaan proyek. Ruang lingkup dari jasa-jasa bantuan teknis ini termasuk (i) mengawasi pelaksanaan dari berbagai pengerukan dan kontrak pekerjaan pembangungan berdasarkan proyek, termasuk pada semua lokasi pembuangan (ii) mengawasi pelaksanaan Rencana Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan (Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan atau RKL/RPL) oleh kontraktorkontraktor pekerjaan, (iii) mendukung PMU dan DKI dalam pelaksanaan Rencana Permukiman Kembali (Resettlement Plans atau RP), dan (iv) meningkatkan dan melaksanakan mekanisme penanganan keluhan/pengaduan proyek dengan DKI. Panel Tenaga Ahli (Panel of Experts atau PoE). Panel Tenaga Ahli (PoE) terdiri atas tiga orang spesialis independen, yang diakui secara internasional akan diminta untuk memberikan saran atas semua aspek proyek. POE direncanakan akan dimobilisasi pada saat implementasi proyek6 dimulai dan akan beroperasi secara penuh sebelum Fase 2 dimulai. Para spesialis diharapkan terdiri atas ahli lingkungan, ahli yang berpengalaman dalam pengerukan dan pembuangan kerukan, dan ahli tentang permukiman kembali pekotaan. Tanggung jawab utama dari POE akan mencakup pemantauan dan pengevaluasian atas persiapan dan pelaksanaan berbagai instrumen-instrumen pengaman (RPF, RP, EMP, dan prosedur penanganan pengaduan) dan memberikan saran kepada PMU atas tindakan-tindakan yang akan diambil untuk memperbaiki kepatuhan. Apabila diperlukan, jumlah anggota POE dapat ditambah baik untuk waktu sementara atau permanen melalui penambahan spesialis untuk memberikan tenaga ahli untuk isu-isu atau kebutuhan spesifik, yang tidak direncanakan atau yang penting, yang dapat timbul selama pelaksaan proyek. Tenagatenaga ahli ini, apabila ada, dapat dimobilisasikan dengan kerangka acuan yang disepakati antara PMU, Bank, dan tiga orang tenaga ahli awal yang terdiri atas POE. POE akan mengadakan rapat rutin pada interval waktu tertentu untuk mengkaji status pekerjaan yang sedang berlangsung (work in progress). Namun, rapat luar biasa yang sebelumnya tidak terjadwal dapat juga digelar untuk mengkaji tahapan penting dari kegiatan teknis, lingkungan, dan sosial. Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (Floods Management Information Systems atau FMIS). FMIS, yang saat selesai akan
Secepatnya setelah Loan Agreement efektif
10
menjadi milik dan dikelola oleh Pemerintah, diharapkan untuk menjadi alat pemantauan dan penilaian yang penting bagi Pemerintah terkait dengan pengelolaan banjir di Jakarta. Sebagaimana proyek JUFMP ini dilaksanakan, hasil pekerjaan fisik, perubahan yang terjadi, dan peningkatan sistem pengelolaan banjir tersebut akan menjadi input dalam FMIS. Setelah itu, FMIS akan mensimulasi dan menganalisa tingkat kesuksesan dari pekerjaan struktural JUFMP dan menentukan tingkat kesuksesan nya dalam penanggulangan banjir. Hal ini akan memberikan kemampuan untuk menganalisa dan mengdokumentasikan penurunan estimasi biaya tahunan. 3.2.3 Unit Pelaksana Proyek (Project Implementation Unit atau PIU) Terdapat tiga Unit Pelaksana Proyek (PIU) pada tingkat pemerintahan pusat dan daerah, di bawah DGWR, DGHS, dan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta:
PIU-DGWR akan diwakili oleh Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane (BBWS-CC); PIU-DGHS akan diwakili oleh Satuan Kerja Pengembangan Infrastruktur Persampahan dan Sanitasi Jabodetabek (Working Unit of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Infrastructure and Sanitation Development for Jabodetabek); dan PIU-DKI akan diwakili oleh Dinas PU Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta.
PIU akan bertanggung jawab atas pelaksanaan pekerjaan pengerukan dan rehabilitasi pada kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk utama yang ditentukan yang berdasarkan tanggung jawab masing-masing dari setiap PIU akan membuat komite pengadaannya sendiri untuk penentuan kontraktor. Namun, setiap komite akan terdiri atas para perwakilan dari semua tiga PIU. Karena DKI Jakarta merupakan institusi yang bertanggung jawab atas isu-isu sosial di wilayah kota Jakarta, DKI akan bertanggung jawab atas semua aspek pengaman sosial dari proyek, termasuk proyek yang terkait dengan kegiatan permukiman kembali dan mekanisme penanganan keluhan tentang proyek. Pelaksanaan rencana pengelolaan dampak sosial JUFMP akan dilaksanakan oleh dinas-dinas dibawah provinsi DKI Jakarta. Dalam PIU DKI Jakarta (PIUDKI), terdapat beberapa kelompok kerja7 (Pokja): (i) Kelompok Kerja Lingkungan dan Sosial (Environmental and Social Working Group atau ESWG), (ii) Kelompok Kerja Penjamin Pengelolaan dan Kualitas Proyek (Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group), (iii) Kelompok Kerja Pemantauan dan Pelaporan (Monitoring and Reporting Working Group), dan (iv) Pokja lain sebagaimana diperlukan untuk menangani semua kegiatan yang diperlukan dalam pelaksanaan JUFMP. ESWG akan bertanggung jawab atas persiapan RP dan menjamin bahwa RP tersebut dilaksanakan. Kelompok Kerja Penjamin 7
Pokja dan keanggotaannya dibentuk berdasarkan keputusan Gubernur.
11
Pengelolaan dan Kualitas Proyek akan bertanggung jawab atas pengujian RP dan memastikan kepatuhannya terhadap RPF. Kelompok Kerja Pemantauan dan Pelaporan akan mempersiapkan laporan bulanan mengenai status persiapan dan pelaksanaan RP kepada Gubernur. Untuk setiap lokasi proyek yang membutuhkan permukiman kembali, PIU akan memastikan bahwa tidak ada permulaan kontrak kecuali apabila RP telah dilaksanakan (kecuali, unsur-unsur dalam RP terkait dengan kegiatan, setelah permukiman kembali dilakukan). 3.2.4 Pemerintah Kotamadya DKI Jakarta Secara administratif, DKI Jakarta dibagi menjadi lima kotamadya. Masing-masing dikepalai oleh seorang Walikota (Mayor). Empat kotamadya DKI Jakarta yang akan terkena oleh proyek, yaitu, Jakarta Utara, Barat, Pusat dan Timur. Para Walikota terutama akan terlibat dalam penanggulangan dampak sosial; mereka akan bertanggung jawab untuk melakukan koordinasi atas kegiatan-kegiatan tingkat kelurahan selama persiapan dan pelaksanaan RP. Para Walikota akan dibantu oleh kepala kecamatan dan kepala kelurahan. Walikota dengan aparatnya pada tingkat kecamatan dan kelurahan merupakan pejabat garis depan yang bertanggung jawab atas kegiatan-kegiatan operasional selama persiapan dan pelaksanaan RP. Hal ini termasuk kegiatan-kegiatan untuk menentukan tanggal cut-off dan untuk pelaksanaan aktual atas permukiman kembali, dan untuk penanganan keluhan dan pengaduan. Selain itu, kantor kotamadya juga bertanggung jawab untuk penilaian bangunan tempat tinggal dan bangunan lain yang terkena oleh proyek JUFMP. Peranan dari kotamadya dibahas lebih lanjut dalam RPF. 3.2.5 Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah (BPLHD) Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Hidup Daerah (BPLHD) provinsi DKI Jakarta dibentuk pada tahun 1968 (http://bplhd.jakarta.go.id/index.php). Selama tahap persiapan proyek, BPLHD merupakan badan yang bertanggung jawab untuk menguji dan memberikan izin dan persetujuan atas dokumendokumen EIA. Sesuai dengan perundang-undangan GOI, badan tersebut membentuk Komisi AMDAL, yaitu komisi ad-hoc untuk mengevaluasi dokumendokumen EIA. Komisi AMDAL terdiri atas para perwakilan BPLHD (2-3 orang), para ahli universitas (atau dikenal sebagai Tim Teknis, 5-7 orang dari wilayah keahlian yang berbeda), para perwakilan dari kecamatan dan kelurahan, dan para perwakilan dari NGO. Selama tahap konstruksi, BPLHD memiliki peran pengawasan untuk pelaksanaan EMP oleh berbagai kontraktor dan akan melaksanakan pemeriksaan yang teratur atau audit. Badan tersebut akan menguji pelaksanaan dari EMP yang diserahkan oleh PMU dan memutuskan apabila tindakan korektif perlu dilakukan. 12
3.2.6 Para Kontraktor Kontraktor pekerjaan akan ditentukan oleh komite pengadaan dalam setiap PIU. Semua paket pekerjaan pengerukan dan tanggul akan mengikuti proses Tender Kompetitif Internasional (International Competitive Bidding atau ICB) dan akan mensyaratkan pra-kualifikasi. Para Kontraktor akan diminta untuk memasukan rencana pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial awal dalam pengajuan teknis selama proses tender. Rencana aksi harus merangkum upaya yang kontraktor ajukan untuk meminimalkan dampak lingkungan hidup dan sosial. Selama konstruksi, kontraktor bertanggung jawab untuk melaksanakan EMP yang terdapat dalam kontrak. Pengawasan pelaksanaan rencana pengelolaan lingkungan hidup dan sosial akan dilaksanakan oleh Konsultan Pengawasan (Supervision Consultant atau SC). 3.2.7 Bank Dunia (World Bank/WB) WB menjaga peran pengawasan dalam JUFMP, untuk memastikan kepatuhannya terhadap kebijakan pengaman Bank Dunia, pengujian, dan memberikan izin dan persetujuan kepada EMP dan RP dari masing-masing lokasi proyek. WB akan memelihara peran pengawasan dari supervisi pelaksanaan EMP oleh para kontraktor, dan dapat melakukan uji petik atau audit sebagaimana diperlukan. WB akan melaksanakan misi pengawasan yang teratur selama pelaksanaan proyek, dan spesialis setempat pada Kantor Bank Dunia di Jakarta (WBOJ) akan memantau perkembangan proyek. 3.3
Proses Proyek
3.3.1 Fase 1 Proyek Pengujian dan persetujuan dari Bank Dunia. Terdapat dua paket pekerjaan (kontrak) dalam Fase 1, yaitu paket kontrak 1, 2a, dan 2b dalam Tabel 2-1. AMDAL untuk pekerjaan dalam Fase 1 tersebut, telah dipersiapkan oleh Unit Pengelola Proyek (Project Management Unit atau PMU). AMDAL ini telah dikonsultasikan, diuji, dan disetujui pada bulan Maret 2010 oleh badan lingkungan hidup provinsi (dikenal sebagai BPLHD) sebagaimana diwajibkan oleh peraturan nasional dan daerah Indonesia. Bank Dunia juga telah mengkaji AMDAL dan telah memberikan komentar yang ekstensif, yang pada akhirnya ditanggapi oleh PMU dengan mempersiapakan Laporan Tambahan untuk JUFMP Fase 1. Laporan Tambahan ini termasuk rekomendasi lebih lanjut yang juga akan berlaku terhadap proyek tersebut. Hal ini memastikan bahwa AMDAL dan Laporan Tambahan untuk Fase 1 dikombinasikan, patuh terhadap persyaratan kebijakan pengaman lingkungan hidup Bank Dunia. Pelaksanaan EMP selama Konstruksi, Pengawasan dan Pemantauan. Kepatuhan terhadap EMP selama pembagunan proyek akan bergantung pada (i) pelaksanaan EMP oleh kontraktor, (ii) pengawasan dan pemantauan pelaksanaan EMP oleh SC, dan (iii) pengawasan pelaksanaan EMP oleh PIU, PMU, WB dan BPLHD. Pengawasan oleh SC merupakan proses harian yang mana SC mengawasi para kontraktor untuk memastikan bahwa komitmen lingkungan hidup dan ketentuan EMP yang ditetapkan dalam kontrak tersebut dipatuhi. 13
Pelaporan. SC akan memberikan PMU laporan-laporan dari hasil pelaksanaan EMP oleh kontraktor (pada jangka waktu minimal tiga bulan). PMU akan menguji laporan-laporan untuk setiap ketidakpatuhan dan dapat meminta PIU untuk melakukan sidak secara tiba-tiba atau audit apabila diperlukan. SC juga akan memberikan laporan pelaksaan RKL/RPL secara formal setiap tiga bulan. PMU akan mengkaji laporan ini untuk setiap ketidaksesuaian dan menyerahkannya kepada BPLHD dan Bank Dunia. BPLHD dan Bank Dunia akan mengkaji laporan pelaksanaan RKL/RPL setiap tiga bulan dan akan memutuskan mengenai perlunya pemeriksaan tiba-tiba, kunjungan lapangan atau audit. 3.3.2 Fase 2 Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek dan Lokasi-Lokasi yang Saling Terhubung Fase 2 pemrosesan lokasi-lokasi proyek dimulai dengan suatu penyaringan apabila lokasi proyek yang diajukan termasuk dalam ruang lingkup proyek (Gambar. 3-2), penyaringan tersebut pertama-tama akan dilakukan oleh PMU dan PIU dan pada akhirnya diputuskan oleh Komite Pengarah Bersama. Apabila proyek dikonfirmasikan sebagaimana dimasukan dalam ruang lingkup proyek, PMU akan mempersiapkan DED. DED tersebut akan memperhitungkan kemungkinan-kemungkinan untuk menghindari dan meminimalkan dampak lingkungan hidup dan sosial, secara khusus dampak terkait dengan permukiman kembali. Sebagaimana DED dipersiapkan, penyaringan lingkungan hidup dan sosial akan dilakkukan, penyaringan ini termasuk kegiatan-kegiatan Fase 2 yang diajukan yang memerlukan RP, AMDAL (Full EA) atau UKL/UPL (EA Mini). Semua dokumen yang diperlukan untuk Fase 2 dari lingkungan hidup (EA FULL atau EA Mini) dan dokumen sosial (RP) akan dipersiapkan. Apabila dokumen tersebut telah disetujui oleh badan yang berwenang (yaitu, EA oleh BPLHD dan RP oleh DKI Jakarta), dokumen tersebut akan diserahkan kepada Bank Dunia untuk pengujian dan persetujuan. Apabila Bank Dunia menganggap dokumen tersebut belum memenuhi persyaratan kebijakan pengaman, tambahan EA (atau info) dapat diminta untuk memenuhi persyaratan OP 4.01 atau revisi dari RP untuk memenuhi OP 4.12. Setiap kegiatan-kegiatan pada sepuluh lokasi yang diidentifikasikan sebagai lokasi-lokasi terkait proyek tidak dibiayai oleh proyek JUFMP. Namun, pemerintah akan menerapkan RPF (dan semua ketentuan terkait) apabila aktivitas yang memenuhi kriteria lokasi-lokasi terkait proyek dilakukan dalam lokasi-lokasi ini. Untuk kegiatan-kegiatan terkait proyek ini, DED akan memperhitungkan pertimbangan untuk menghindari dan meminimalkan dampak lingkungan hidup dan sosial, khususnya dampak terkait dengan permukiman kembali. Apabila permukiman kembali secara terpaksa tidak dapat dihindari, RP akan dipersiapkan. Apabila dokumen RP telah disetujui oleh DKI Jakarta, dokumen tersebut akan diserahkan kepada Bank Dunia untuk pengujian dan persetujuan. Apabila Bank Dunia menganggap dokumen tersebut belum memenuhi persyaratan kebijakan pengaman, revisi RP dapat digunakan untuk memenuhi OP 4.12. 14
Pelaksanaan konstruksi tidak akan dimulai pada semua lokasi sebelum AMDAL dan Rencana Pemukiman Kembali (RP) mendapatkan persetujuan dari Bank Dunia JUFMP - Projects Processing and Screening
DEDs, EIAs (AMDAL), Bidding Documents
Phase 1
Is the proposed project site of the 15 sites of JUFMP ?
Phase 2
Appraise
Yes
Procure
Is the proposed structure work defined in Component A?
No
Phase 1 Project Construction
No
Is the proposed structure work related to flood mitigation?
Yes
Yes
Supervision and Monitoring
No
Not Financed (e.g. Beautification along canal/waduk)
Not Financed Prepare DED
Need AMDAL (full EA) as per PP no.27/ 1999?
Environmental Social Screening
If involuntary resettlement needed
No
Need UKL/ UPL(Mini EA)?
Yes
Yes
Prepare AMDAL
Prepare UKL/UPK No
SOP
No
Approval from BPLHD?
Approval from BPLHD?
WB issue NOL?
Yes
Yes
Yes
WB NOL?
Prepare RP
No
No
RP Implementation by DKI
Yes
No
Supplemental EA
WB NOL?
Yes
No
Supplemental EA
Project implementation by Contractor
Project implementation by Contractor
Supervision and Monitoring (WB, GOI (Supervision Consultant), and Independent Advisory Team)
Gambar 3-2 Penyaringan dan Pemrosesan Proyek JUFMP
15
Proses EA. PMU bertanggung jawab untuk memberitahu BPLHD tentang kegiatan-kegiatan proyek dalam Fase 2 yang diajukan. PMU (dengan bantuan dari para konsultannya) akan mengiklankan sebuah Pemberitahuan Publik di media lokal, misalnya surat kabar. Setelah pemberitahuan tersebut, BPLHD membentuk Komisi AMDAL (Gambar 3-3). PMU (dengan bantuan dari konsultannya) akan mempersiapkan Kerangka Acuan Andal (KA-ANDAL) dan menyerahkan KA-ANDAL kepada Komisi AMDAL untuk dilakukan pengujian sebelum konsultasi publik pertama dapat dilakukan. BPLHD akan mengundang semua pemegang saham yang bersangkutan untuk memberikan masukan dan komentar atas ANDAL. BPLHD akan membuat berita acara rapat untuk konsultasi publik pertama dan meminta konsultan untuk menggabungkan masukan yang disepakati selama konsultasi tersebut. PMU akan menyerahkan kembali KA-ANDAL tersebut kepada Komisi untuk izin, apabila disetujui, konsultan PMU akan meneruskannya dengan persiapan dokumen-dokumen EIA, yaitu ANDAL (yaitu, penilaian dampak lingkungan hidup) dan RKL/RPL (yaitu, rencana pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan hidup). Apabila dokumendokumen EIA telah dibuat, PMU akan mengumpulkannya kepada Komisi AMDAL. Kemudian, Komisi AMDAL akan meminta konsultan PMU untuk mempresentasikan hasil-hasil dari EIA di mana semua anggota dari Komisi AMDAL dan publik diberikan kesempatan untuk memberikan komentar mengenai hasil-hasil tersebut. BPLHD akan membuat berita acara rapat dan meminta konsultan (atas kepentingan PMU) untuk menggabungkan komentar-komentar tersebut dan merevisi dokumen-dokumen EIA dan menyerahkan ulang dokumen-dokumen tersebut kepada Komisi AMDAL. Izin dan persetujuan akhir dengan persyaratan/rekomendasi yang spesifik (atau penolakan) atas dokumendokumen EIA dari kepala BPLHD akan didasarkan pada rekomendasi Komisi AMDAL. Konsultasi Publik EA. Para pihak yang berkepentingan seperti penduduk lokal, LSM-LSM, institusi akademi, dan lain-lain, terwakili dalam Komisi AMDAL dan oleh sebab itu, diberikan kesempatan untuk memberikan komentar selama pembuatan dan pengujian dari KA-ANDAL serta selama pengujian dari ANDAL dan RKL/RPL. Proses EA Indonesia yang ada memerlukan paling sedikit dua kali konsultasi publik, dan hasil-hasil dari konsultasi akan dilampirkan pada EIA. Konsultasi publik akan dilakukan untuk membahas aspek-aspek lingkungan hidup maupun sosial dari kegiatan-kegiatan proyek. Konsultasi publik harus mengumumkan kegiatan-kegiatan proyek kepada penduduk setempat dan menentukan apabila terdapat kekhawatiran-kekhawatiran secara khusus terkait dengan kegiatan yang diajukan. Konsultasi publik pertama dilakukan paling cepat 30 hari kalender setelah Pemberitahuan Publik di media nasional atau lokal, misalnya koran, radio. Dalam jangka waktu tersebut, penduduk yang ingin memberikan tanggapan untuk kegiatan-kegiatan yang diajukan dapat menyampaikan komentar mereka kepada BPLHD atau PMU. Komentarkomentar tersebut akan dibahas dan dilampirkan dalam KA-ANDAL. Konsultasi publik kedua akan dilaksanakan sesudah penyerahan rancangan akhir EIA 16
kepada BPLHD. Berita acara dari konsultasi publik dan dokumentasi lainnya (misalnya, foto-foto, bahan-bahan presentasi, daftar hadir, dan lain-lain) akan dilampirkan pada EIA sebagai lampiran. Dokumen tersebut mencerminkan semua komentar-komentar, baik disepakati atau tidak disepakati oleh PMU. Berita acara tersebut juga akan ditandatangani (dengan nama, jabatan) oleh ketua konsultasi. Pelaksanaan EMP selama Konstruksi, Pengawasan serta Pemantauan, dan Pelaporan. Pengawasan, pemantauan, dan pelaporan pelaksanaan EMP selama kegiatan Fase 2 dari konstruksi proyek akan mengikuti proses yang sama seperti Fase 1 (lihat bagian 3.3.1) Penyusunan, Peninjauan, Persetujuan, dan Pengumuman RP. Penyusunan RP akan menjadi tanggung jawab Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta, yaitu kotamadya-kotamadya yang terkait. Semua RP akan dibuat berdasarkan RPF. Setelah dibuat, RP – lengkap atau yang sederhana – untuk setiap proyek yang mensyaratkan RP akan diuji oleh PMU dan PIU –DKI sebelum diserahkan kepada Bank Dunia untuk peninjauan dan persetujuan. Versi bahasa Indonesia dari RP yang telah disetujui akan tersedia di masing-masing kantor kotamadya DKI dan juga akan diumumkan di situs proyek yang terkait, serta di kantor proyek lapangan (kelurahan). Versi dalam bahasa Inggris dan bahasa Indonesia akan diumumkan di Pusat Informasi Publik (Public Information Center atau PIC) Kantor Bank Dunia di Jakarta. Pelaksanaan, Pelaporan, dan Pengawasan RP. Setiap RP akan dilaksanakan sesuai dengan uraian dalam bagian 3.2.3 dan 3.2.4 di atas. Untuk tujuan-tujuan pemantauan, SC akan bekerja sama dengan Kelurahan dan kantor Walikota untuk membantu mereka dalam mendokumentasikan keluhan dari PAP, dan dalam penindaklanjutan atas setiap pengaduan. SC juga akan membantu kotamadya dalam mempersiapkan laporan konsolidasi pengaduan dan tata cara di mana laporan tersebut ditindaklanjuti. Laporan konsolidasi akan diserahkan kepada PMU. Laporan ini akan menjadi bagian dari laporan perkembangan bulanan proyek, yang akan diserahkan kepada Bank Dunia. Rincian dari peran institusi dalam pelaksanaan RP diatur dalam RPF.
17
PMU
Environmen tal Agency (BPLHD)
World Bank (WB)
Project Preparation Consultant (PPC)
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (EIA/SIA) Consultant
Document, Tools, Instruments
TOR Prepared by Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG)
PPC Consultant PMU
PMU to hire
EIA/SIA Consultant
PPC produces bidding documents, detailed engineering design (DED), supervision and monitoring plan for: Dredging Embankment Rehabilitation
BPLHD to form AMDAL Commission (AC)
EIA/SIA (AMDAL) Clearance and Approval
Project Preparation
EIA/SIA and PPC Consultants
Parties/ Agency
AC to provide input and review EIA Term of Agreement
EIA/SIA Consultant to (i) prepare EIA Term of Agreement (KA ANDAL) and (ii) carry out public consultation
PMU to submit to the AC
Issue clearance?
No
Preparing EIA documents Environmental Impact Statement (ANDAL) Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/ RPL)
Yes
AC to review EIA documents and provide input
PMU to submit to the AC
Issue clearance?
No
EIA documents (ANDAL, RKL/RPL)
Yes
Review
PMU to submit to the Bank
Gambar 3-3 Diagram Alur proses EA selama persiapan proyek
18
4 4.1
KEBIJAKAN-KEBIJAKAN, PERATURAN PERUNDANGUNDANGAN YANG BERLAKU TENTANG LINGKUNGAN HIDUP DAN SOSIAL Lingkungan Hidup
4.1.1 Pemerintah Indonesia Indonesia memiliki banyak peraturan perundang-undangan mengenai lingkungan hidup nasional dan daerah yang mengatur proses Perencanaan Lingkungan Hidup untuk pekerjaan-pekerjaan semacam ini. Peraturan yang melingkupi untuk proses AMDAL di Indonesia untuk setiap kegiatan dan proyek dengan potensial dampak lingkungan hidup yang signifikan adalah Undang-Undang Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup No 23/1997, dan secara khusus, pada Pasal 15 mengenai persyaratan penilaian dampak lingkungan hidup. Sebuah undang-undang baru tentang pengelolaan dan perlindungan lingkungan hidup, Undang-Undang 32 tahun 2009, yang dikeluarkan pada tahun 2009 dan menggantikan UndangUndang No. 23/1997. Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) No: 27/1999 memberikan pedoman yang terperinci terhadap sistem AMDAL. Selanjutnya, Keputusan Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup No. 11/2006 menyebutkan kegiatan-kegiatan spesifik yang mensyaratkan AMDAL dan Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No.8/2006 memberikan pedoman untuk persiapan AMDAL Terkait dengan pekerjaan pengerukan, Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 11/2006 menentukan bahwa setiap kegiatan pengerukan pemeliharaan di kota metropolitan akan memerlukan AMDAL apabila volume kerukan melampaui 500.000 m3, persyaratan ini juga sesuai dengan peraturan daerah (yaitu Keputusan Gubernur Jakarta No 2863/2001 tentang jenis dan daftar usaha dan kegiatan yang spesifik yang mensyaratkan AMDAL), yang menyatakan bahwa setiap pengerukan dengan volume yang lebih dari 50.000 m3 harus memiliki AMDAL yang disetujui oleh Badan Lingkungan Hidup Daerah (BPLHD) DKI Jakarta. Adapun perundang-undangan nasional dan daerah dipertimbangkan pada saat pembuatan AMDAL adalah:
lainnya
yang
Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 2/2000: Pedoman mengenai evaluasi dari dokumen AMDAL. Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No.40/2000: Pedoman mengenai prosedur kerja komisi AMDAL . Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No.42/2000: Pedoman mengenai pembentukan tim evaluasi dan anggota tim teknis untuk AMDAL. Keputusan Kepala Bapedal (Badan Pengendalian Dampak Lingkungan Hidup) No. 8/2000: Pedoman mengenai peran serta publik dan pengungkapan informasi selama pelaksanaan AMDAL. Keputusan Gubernur Jakarta No 76/2001: Pedoman operasional mengenai keterlibatan publik dan pengungkapan informasi selama pelaksanaan AMDAL. 19
4.1.2 Kebijakan-Kebijakan Bank Dunia Penilaian Lingkungan Hidup (OP. 4.01): JUFMP merupakan suatu proyek Kategori A, baik rehabilitasi tanggul maupun kegiatan pengerukan dapat berdampak positif dan negatif yang signifikan pada lingkungan hidup dan sosial. Dampak yang paling lazim i) pada lokasi di mana rehabilitasi tanggul dilaksanakan, ii) lokasi-lokasi dekat lokasi pengerukan dan sepanjang lokasi pengerukan, iii) sepanjang koridor pengangkutan, dan iv) pada lokasi pembuangan (dan daerah sekitarnya). Tujuan dari analisis dampak lingkungan adalah untuk membantu pengambilan keputusan, untuk memastikan bahwa pilihan-pilihan proyek berdasarkan pertimbangan yang logis dan berkelanjutan, dan orang-orang yang berpotensi terkena dampak proyek tersebut telah terinformasikan dengan baik dengan melalui konsultasi yang memadai. 4.2
Sosial
4.2.1 Pemerintah Indonesia Pemerintah Indonesia memiliki beberapa peraturan perundang-undangan pokok terkait dengan hak-hak atas tanah dan perolehan untuk kegiatan konstruksi dalam rangka kepentingan publik. Adapun landasan hukum paling penting yang memastikan dan mengatur hak-hak atas tanah adalah Undang-Undang Pokok Agraria No. 5 tahun 1960. Peraturan-peraturan nasional yang bersangkutan lainnya, terkait dengan tanah dan perolehan tanah adalah: Undang-Undang No. 20 tahun 1961 tentang Pencabutan Hak-Hak atas Tanah; Peraturan Pemerintah No. 24 tahun 1997 tentang Registrasi atas Tanah; Peraturan Presiden No. 36 tahun 2005 tentang Pengadaan Tanah Bagi Pelaksanaan Pembangunan Untuk Kepentingan Umum; Peraturan Presiden No. 65 tahun 2006 Tentang Perubahan Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005; dan, Peraturan Kepala Badan Pertanahan Nasional No. 3 tahun 2007 tentang Ketentuan Pelaksanaan Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005 dan No. 65 tahun 2006. Peraturan lain yang terkait dengan proyek adalah Undang-Undang No. 7 tahun 2004 tentang Sumber Daya Air, yang dimaksudkan untuk melindungi sumber daya air untuk pemeliharaan fungsi-fungsinya. Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005 dan No. 65/2007 yang mengatur prosedur dan proses perolehan tanah (dan kekayaan yang melekat padanya) untuk kegiatankegiatan konstruksi yang dilakukan atas kepentingan publik. Peraturan ini termasuk kegiatan-kegiatan pembangungan dibawah tanggung jawab pemerintah setempat, seperti jalan raya/jalan tol/ jalur kereta api/sanitasi/distribusi air; waduk-waduk/bendungan; pelabuhan/bandara/stasiun kereta api/terminal; fasilitas kesehatan publik; telekomunikasi dan pos; fasilitas olahraga; bangunan pemerintah; fasilitas polisi dan pengamanan; fasilitas pembuangan limbah padat; perlindungan dari habitat alami; dan pembangkit 20
tenaga listrik, transmisi dan distribusi listrik. Peraturan-Peraturan ini juga menetapkan hak-hak dan prosedur-prosedur serta kriteria untuk ganti rugi, penilaian untuk ganti rugi dan konsultasi dan negosiasi, serta pengaduan dan penyelesaian perselisihan dan pencabutan hak atas tanah. Peraturan ini menggolongkan prosedur dan proses untuk perolehan atas tanah untuk lebih dari 1 hektar dan kurang dari satu hektar. Pedoman Pelaksanaan No. 3 tahun 2007 untuk Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005 dan No. 65 tahun 2006, merangkum prosedur, proses dan kriteria dengan lebih terperinci untuk perolehan tanah sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam kedua Peraturan Presiden. Ketiga peraturan yang disebutkan tidak secara tegas mengatur bantuan dan tidak termasuk pemulihan pendapatan. Peraturan tersebut menetapkan bahwa tingkat ganti rugi atas tanah harus dibuat berdasarkan penilaian dari tim penilaian atas tanah yang independen. DKI Jakarta juga memiliki peraturan yang mengatur tentang ganti rugi aset, yaitu, Pedoman Pelaksanaan untuk Penilaian Ganti Rugi Bangungan, yang dikeluarkan secara teratur oleh Dinas Perumahan dan Gedung Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Peraturan ini digunakan sebagai dasar untuk menentukan tingkat ganti rugi aset (bangunan dan tambahannya yang melekat pada bangunan). Selain itu, DKI Jakarta memiliki Peraturan Daerah No. 8 tahun 2007 tentang Ketertiban Umum, yang digunakan sebagai dasar untuk pemilikan kembali atas tanah publik yang digunakan tanpa seizin pemerintah DKI Jakarta, atau tanah lain/tempat publik yang telah digunakan untuk tujuan yang tidak sesuai dengan rencana penggunaan tanah tersebut. 4.2.2 Kebijakan-Kebijakan Bank Dunia Permukiman Kembali Secara Terpaksa (OP4.12): Kebijakan pengaman Bank Dunia atas Permukiman Kembali (OP4.12) akan diterapkan dalam proyek ini. Sementara tidak akan ada pengadaan tanah yang luas untuk pelaksanaan pekerjaan fisik dalam proyek JUFMP, proyek ini kemungkinan akan mengakibatkan hilangnya tanah, tempat tinggal, dan usaha-usaha. Hal ini mengharuskan dilakukannya permukiman kembali bagi mereka yang terkena dampak dari intervensi proyek ini. Untuk mengatasi masalah ini, DKI telah mempersiapkan RPF (untuk rincian, lihat rancangan RPF). RPF dibuat untuk memastikan bahwa PAP ditangani sesuai dengan OP 4.12 Bank Dunia. RPF akan digunakan untuk menjadi pedoman RP untuk setiap lokasi proyek yang memerlukan permukiman kembali. Selain itu, lokasi-lokasi JUFMP yang mengakibatkan permukiman kembali, RPF tersebut juga berlaku untuk setiap kegiatan lain yang mengakibatkan permukiman kembali sesuai dengan penilaian dari Bank Dunia, (a) secara langsung atau pun signifikan terkait dengan proyek bantuan dari Bank Dunia, (b) perlu untuk mencapai tujuan sebagaimana tercantum dalam dokumen-dokumen proyek; dan (c) dilaksanakan, atau direncanakan untuk dilaksanakan secara bersamaan dengan proyek tersebut.
21
5 RONA AWAL LINGKUNGAN DKI Jakarta terletak pada pesisir pantai Jawa bagian utara yang telah dibentuk oleh delta sungai-sungai yang mengalir dari wilayah pegunungan bagian selatan sampai ke Teluk Jakarta. Wilayah dataran rendah di DKI telah mengalami banjir sejak zaman Belanda (pada tahun 1800-an sampai 1940-an). Intensitas dan keparahan banjir telah sangat meningkat belakangan ini dan telah menimbulkan biaya-biaya ekonomi dan sosial yang serius. Pembangunan Kanal Banjir Barat (WBC) pada tahun 1920 menunjukkan bahwa banjir telah cukup sering terjadi di Jakarta sejak waktu itu. Pengendapan. Suatu kajian yang dilakukan melalui Proyek Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup di Jawa bagian barat (Western Java Environmental Management Project atau WJEMP) menunjukkan lapisan sedimen dibagian hilir telah mencapai ketebalan 2-3 m, sedangkan lapisan sedimen rata-rata di waduk bervariasi dari setebal 0,9 sampai 1,9 m. Berdasarkan penilaian pengendapan tersebut, serangkaian simulasi hidraulik menunjukkan bahwa tingkatan perlindungan untuk semua sungai-sungai telah menurun jauh dari rancangan awal 25 tahun perlindungan, yang pada umumnya dalam wilayah-wilayah DKI Jakarta, tingkat perlindungannya menurun jauh menjadi 2-5 tahun. Kualitas Air. Hanya dengan 2% cakupan dari sistem pengolahan air limbah, sungai-sungai dan waduk terpadu di DKI Jakarta telah dipergunakan selama beberapa dekade sebagai saluran pembuangan terbuka untuk limbah-limbah rumah tangga dan air limbah yang berasal dari komunitas setempat. Sebagai hasilnya, kajian8-9 telah menunjukkan bahwa air di sungai-sungai dan waduk telah dicemarkan oleh air limbah rumah tangga, yang mewakili lebih dari 70% pencemaran. Dalam kajian-kajian ini, kualitas air dalam semua stasiun pengambilan sampel telah diklasifikasikan sebagai Kelas 4, yaitu air yang hanya dapat digunakan untuk tujuan pertamanan. Kualitas Sedimen. Sejalan dengan berjalannya persiapan proyek JUFMP, tiga buah kajian dasar independen atas kualitas material sedimen di saluran air dan kanal-kanal di Jakarta dilakukan pada waktu-waktu yang berbeda, yang menilai berbagai aspek, termasuk kecukupan pengambilan sampel dan metodologi pengujian yang digunakan, hasil-hasil pengujian, dan persyaratan di Indonesia terhadap berbagai standar internasional lainnya. Tinjauan-tinjauan tersebut adalah sebagai berikut
Djadjadilaga, M., Sigit, H., Tejalaksana, A.(Dari Data ke Kebijakan (Pengelolaan Kualitas Air Sungai Ciliwung) From Data to Policy (Ciliwung River Water Quality Management), Kementerian Lingkungan, Jakarta. Data pemantauan: 2004-2006. http://www.wepa-db.net/pdf/0810forum/paper22.pdf 9 MoPW (2005) Rencana Perancangan untuk pengelolaan danau-danau Kecil dan Saluran Air Besar di wilayah JABODETABEK, WJEMP Pusat 3-10, Laporan no. 10. Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum. 8
22
ERM10 2008 Kajian kualitas sedimen ERM 2008 mewakili kajian menyeluruh pertama dan kajian kualitas sedimen primer yang terperinci untuk saluran air dan waduk Jakarta, dan mendukung banyak dari perencanaan awal untuk proyek JUFMP, termasuk RKL/RPL Ancol yang diperbaharui dan AMDAL Fase 1 JUFMP. Pengambilan sampel mencakup semua lokasi-lokasi Proyek (yaitu, 15 lokasi) ditambah tiga lokasi lain yang pada awalnya ada dalam daftar panjang lokasi-lokasi proyek JUFMP yang potensial tetapi dalam perkembangan selanjutnya implementasi untuk tiga area ini ditunda. Jumlah total dari komposit sampel yang dianalisis adalah 36, yang didapat dari 180 stasiun pengambilan sampel ditambah sampelsampel duplikat untuk jaminan mutu dan pengendalian mutu. Sampelsampel yang tersebut telah dikirimkan ke laboraturium yang terakreditasi secara internasional (yaitu, ALS Bogor, Indonesia) untuk dianalisa fisik dan kimia. Parameter analisis kimia dilakukan berdasarkan pedoman teknis praktik terbaik internasional untuk karakterisasi material kerukan (Konvensi London 1972; OSPAR 2004), yang mencakup logam berat, total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), organo-chlorine pesticide (OCP), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dan total organic matter (TOM). Selain itu, toxicity characteristics leaching procedures (TCLP) berdasarkan USEPA SW 846 juga dilaksanakan untuk menentukan karakteristik toksisitas dari sedimen. DHV 2008 Pada tahun 2008, DKI Jakarta bekerja sama dengan DHV (dengan pendanaan hibah pemerintah Belanda mengadakan pengerukan percontohan di Kali Mati, sebuah saluran air di Jakarta (tidak merupakan bagian dari proyek). Sebagai bagian dari kajian ini, delapan sampel komposit dari sembilan stasiun pengambilan sampel telah dikirimkan ke laboratorium yang terakreditasi secara internasional (yaitu, ALS Bogor) dan telah dianalisa untuk semua pengujian yang diwajibkan berdasarkan peraturan Indonesia untuk identifikasi limbah B3 (yang berbahaya), yaitu (i) tes karakteristik fisik (yaitu, mudah terbakar, bersifat menghancurkan, bersifat eksplosif, menyebabkan infeksi (hanya untuk limbah medis), reaktif) (ii) tes kimia (analisis kandungan total dan TCLP untuk polutan, baik anorganik dan organik); dan (iii) tes biologis (tes toksisitas akut (Lethal dose) 50 - LD50). Selain itu, sampel gabungan dari Kali Mati juga dikirimkan ke luar negeri, laboratorium terakreditasi tingkat internasional di Belanda (yaitu, Eurofins) untuk tujuan pemeriksaan silang. AMDAL untuk kegiatan Fase 2, pengambilan sampel dan analisis 2010 Pada tahun 2010, untuk kajian lebih lanjut kualitas sedimen, maka dalam penyusunan AMDAL Fase 2 dilakukan kembali pengambilan sampel dari lokasi-lokasi Fase 2. Lokasi pengambilan sampel juga termasuk 3 lokasi yang tidak dimasukan dalam proyek tersebut. Sampel komposit (9 subsampel dari setiap gabungan – 3 baris dengan jarak antar baris sekitar 10
Bank Dunia pada tahun 2008 menugaskan ERM untuk melaksanakan pengujian-pengujian tersebut.
23
100-200m, 3 sampel untuk setiap baris) telah dikumpulkan dengan mempertimbangkan lokasi dari pengambilan sampel ERM dan batasan pekerjaan fisik terkini (pada saat pengambilan sampel) dari masingmasing wilayah lokasi sub-proyek. Analisis tersebut dilakukan oleh laboratorium yang terakreditasi dengan menggunkan metodologi standar lokal, yang berkonsentrasi pada (i) karakteristik fisik, (ii) kandungan total logam, (iii) logam TCLP dan (iv) organik TCLP. Dengan sedimen sampling ini maka kajian kualitas sedimen tersebut khusus untuk saluran air dan waduk di Jakarta yang dilakukan pada tahun 2008 dan 2010 dengan melibatkan lebih dari 350 sub-sampel yang digabungkan ke dalam jumlah 70 sampel untuk uji Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) dan analisis total logam dan organik. Telaah-telaah ini berkesimpulan bahwa metodologi pengambilan sampel dan pengujian telah memenuhi standar internasional dan hasil-hasil pengujian tersebut menunjukkan bahwa hasil analisis terhadap sampelsampel tidak melampaui standar internasional (atau tidak berbahaya), kecuali sebagai berikut: Logam arsenik dalam semua sampel melebihi standar US EPA yang digunakan untuk screening polutan di media lingkungan hidup 11, walaupun semua sampel masih dibawah ambang batas standar arsenik internasional lain 12. Telaah lebih lanjut menyatakan bahwa standar US EPA merupakan perbanding yang tidak sesuai, hal ini dikarenakan standar As tersebut ditetapkan bersadarkan risiko kesehatan arsenik anorganik, sementara hasil tes sampel dan tingkat penyaringan internasional untuk arsenik adalah berdasarkan tingkatan jumlah arsenic total (Organik dan anorganik). Perbandingan dengan penelitian sedimen di Teluk Jakarta yang dilakukan sebelumnya mengindikasikan bahwa level arsenik dalam sampel JUFMP merupakan level arsenik alami pada seluruh wilayah dan tidak memiliki asal-usul antropogenik. Empat puluh persen sampel melebihi standard sedimen interim Australia dan Selandia Baru (interim Australian and New Zealand sediment screening levels) untuk seng bagi pembuangan di laut, meskipun semua sampel berada di bawah standar tanah lain untuk seng. Risiko ini ditanggulangi dengan pembuangan material kerukan proyek kedalam fasilitas pembuangan tertutup, yaitu CDF Ancol. Sekitar 2% dari sampel-sampel yang melampaui standard untuk satu atau dua (namun tidak semua) standar internasional, baik untuk unsur logam chromium, cadmium, atau tembaga. Risiko ini akan ditangani dengan pengujian sedimen dari bagian kanal dan saluran 11 Tingkat-tingkat Sasaran Remediasi Pendahuluan (Preliminary Remediation Goals/PRG) EPA Amerika Serikat Wilayah 9 yang digunakan untuk memperkirakan konsentrasi pencemar di media lingkungan (tanah, udara, dan air) yang dipertimbangkan oleh EPA sebagai protektif terhadap manusia (termasuk kelompok sensitif), seumur hidup. 12 Standar Tanah di Korea Selatan ditetapkan dalam Soil Environment Preservation Act (SEPA), DIV (Dutch Intervention Values), dan Pedoman Pembuangan Australia-New Zealand National Ocean untuk Standard Material Kerukan
24
air JUFMP sebelum pengerukan di bagian tersebut dilakukan, prosedur pengujian telah disusun13. Hasil-hasil dan interpretasi dari ketiga kajian ini adalah serupa dan telah dibahas dalam kaitannya dengan:
Pengujian TCLP. Pengujian ini merupakan tes kimia definitif di Indonesia dan negara lainnya untuk menentukan apakah material limbah memiliki karakteriktik beracun. Level parameter organic dan logam dalam ekstrak TCLP dibandingkan “Standard TCLP yang telah ditetapkan”. Semua sampel JUFMP dari ketiga kajian ini telah memenuhi standar (dengan kata lain, tidak memiliki karakteristik beracun) Organik TCLP. Semua sampel dari ketiga kajian ini juga memenuhi standar di Indonesia. Analisis total logam menunjukkan hampir semua sampel memenuhi standar “kualitas tanah” internasional untuk hampir semua logam. Hasil-Hasilnya disajikan dan dibahas secara lebih terperinci di bawah ini. Pengujian Toksisitas Akut (Acute toxicity testing) (dilakukan pada sampel DHV) menunjukkan bahwa terkait dengan lethal dose 50 (LD50), sedimen kerukan memiliki toksisitas yang rendah, lebih rendah dari toksisitas akut garam dapur (table salt atau NaCl).
Penilaian kualitas sedimen juga mempertimbangkan risiko kesehatan yang ditimbulkan oleh kandungan arsenik dalam sedimen. Hasil dari tes toksisitas akut mengidentifikasikan material sedimen sebagai material yang relatif tidak berbahaya (yaitu, jumlah yang tinggi dari sedimen yang diperlukan untuk telan/digunakan untuk memproduksi dosis mematikan). Penilaian atas jalur paparan pekerja konstruksi terhadap sedimen selama proyek serta paparan akibat penggunaan berikutnya dari lokasi pembuangan juga menyimpulkan bahwa risiko kesehatan yang rendah, khususnya dengan persyaratkan yang terdapat dalam AMDAL untuk lokasi pembuangan, yaitu, CDF Ancol, untuk penutupan material kerukan dengan pasir dan tanah merah. 6 KONSULTASI PUBLIK DAN PENGUNGKAPAN Baik GOI dan WB telah secara jelas mendefinisikan prinsip dan tujuan keterlibatan publik (public involvement atau PI) dalam AMDAL (yaitu, proses EA). Harapan yang tersirat adalah PI yang baik dan bermakna dapat membantu kelancaran pelaksanaan proyek,transparansi dan partisipasi aktif oleh para pemegang kepentingan. PI yang baik selama semua tahapan, akan meningkatkan keefektifan pelaksanaan proyek dan menuntun kepada pencapaian hasil yang dimaksudkan. Keputusan Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Hidup (BAPEDAL) no: 08/2000 adalah pedoman untuk PI yang telah 13
Pengujian-pengujian tersebut belum pernah dipraktikan di Jakarta dan pelaksanaan yang sukses dari protokol ini dapat digunakan untuk memperbaiki pengelolaan material kerukan di masa mendatang. Rancangan dari protokol dapat ditemukan dalam “Laporan Konsolidasi Kualitas Sedimen JEDI/JEDI Sediment Quality Consolidated Report”
25
ditingkatkan dan diperkuat. Keputusan tersebut secara jelas menyatakan hak dari publik untuk: (a) menerima semua informasi yang relevan mengenai proyek yang diajukan, (b) meminta informasi yang relevan mengenai proyek yang diajukan, dan (c) memiliki perwakilan warga terkena dampak langsung untuk duduk sebagai anggota dari Komisi AMDAL yang menguji rancangan EA (AMDAL). Biasanya, penekanan untuk PI adalah pada pendahuluan, yaitu tahap pelingkupan dari proses EA, tetapi untuk Proyek JUFMP, PI akan pasti diterapkan selama persiapan dan pelaksanan proyek. Pendekatan ini adalah berdasarkan kajian terakhir dari PI dalam proses AMDAL di Indonesia (QIPRA 2005) yang menemukan bahwa terdapat sejumlah faktor-faktor keberhasilan penting selama proses AMDAL tersebut (Tabel 6-1). Tabel 0-1 Faktor-Faktor Keberhasilan Penting untuk Keterlibatan Publik dalam Proses AMDAL
Tahap Proses Faktor Keberhasilan Penting Pengumuman di Berbagai Media Pengumuman Koran Penempatan di lebih dari satu koran, terutama semua koran lokal dan juga koran nasional Pemberitahuan dengan Poster yang terletak pada lokasi yang strategis dan menggunakan papan, di banyak tempat publik yang sering dikunjungi oleh dekat lokasi proyek masyarakat Bermacam-macam poster yang mewakili informasi dalam tata cara yang berbeda Radio dan televisi lokal Efektif dalam undangan yang mengumumkan acaratelevis acara konsultasi publik Internet Pemberitahuan pada situs web dari pendukung dan badan lingkungan hidup Konsultasi Publik pada Persiapan Tor (Ka-Andal) Perwakilan Pelingkupan atau pra-survei dari komunitas yang terkena dampak dilakukan untuk memaham struktur sosial, pemimpin formal dan informal, dan kepentingan yang berbeda dan perhatian di masyarakat Gunakan diskusi kelompok yang terarah dan rapat kelompok kecil untuk konsultasi masyarakat pada pelingkupan Mendorong dukungan dan keterlibatan dari LSM lokal Semua tingkatan pemerintah setempat dikonsultasi pada tahap perencanaan Dialog selama konsultasi Otoritas pemerintah lokal hadir dan terlibat aktif publik dalam dialog Pendukung secara langsung dilibatkan dalam dialog (tidak hanya sekedar diwakilkan oleh konsultan AMDALnya) 26
Kajian EA-Andal Selama persiapan kajian
Wawancara secara mendalam dengan anggota masyarakat yang diinformasikan terkena dampak proyek Perwakilan & Diskusi dalam Komisi Amdal Perwakilan “Masyarakat yang terkena dampak proyek atau Affected Community” didefinisikan secara jelas dan dapat dengan mudah ditentukan yang mengetahui, dan yang dapat berbicara atas keprihatinan mereka. Diskusi dalam Komisi Temuan utama dan rancangan kajian EA-ANDAL AMDAL (dengan rangkuman) diberikan untuk perwakilan masyarakat (Para) perwakilan masyarakat telah membahas isuisu untuk diangkat dalam Komisi AMDAL sebelum rapat pengujian tersebut Para perwakilan masyarakat berperan dalam pengujian kajian EA-ANDAL Pertimbangan lain Akses untuk informasi Diberikan kepada anggota masyarakat yang dekat pada lokasi-lokasi dari kegiatan. Disajikan dalam format yang mudah dicerna, juga dengan menggunakan gambar dan grafik. Keputusan & Izin Oleh Badan Lingkungan Hidup Sebelum keputusan Badan Lingkungan hidup mengunjungi masyarakat untuk pengujian semua komentar yang diterima selama tahap-tahap sebelumnya Izin Para perwakilan masyarakat bertemu dengan badan lingkungan hidup untuk konsultasi akhir dan feedback 7 7.1
RENCANA PENGENDALIAN LINGKUNGAN DAN SOSIAL Pengendalian, Pemantauan, dan Pelaporan Lingkungan dan Sosial
Lokasi EMP spesifik (dan RP, apabila perlu) untuk Fase 2 dari kegiatan proyek akan memberikan rangkaian terperinci dari penanggulangan, pemantauan, dan langkah-langkah institusional yang akan diambil selama pelaksanaan proyek untuk mengurangi/menyingkirkan dampak lingkungan dan sosial yang merugikan, mengimbanginya, menguranginya sampai kepada tingkatan yang dapat diterima. Contoh usaha penanggulangan dan pemantauan disajikan pada Tabel 7-1. Penanggulangan dan pemantauan dilakukan untuk melindungi lingkungan dan kesehatan komunitas setempat. Meskipun pengaduan-pengaduan dapat setiap waktu diberikan karena persepsi yang subjektif dari gangguan atau masalah yang disebabkan oleh kegiatan proyek, pengaduan tersebut biasa timbul akibat 27
tindakan mitigasi yang tidak sesuai atau dampak nya telah melebihi batas, sepetri akses yang diblok, kebisingan peralatan yang besar, debu yang berlebihan atau banjir lokal. Oleh sebab itu, pengaduan dan mekanisma keluhan akan juga menjadi bagian dari program pemantauan (lihat sistem GRS dalam RPF untuk rincian). Merupakan hal yang penting bahwa masyarakat yang terkena dampak dari proyek dan publik secara umum untuk memiliki kesempatan yang memadai untuk meminta bantuan apabila mereka terkena dampak dari proyek tersebut dalam cara yang signifikan.
28
Tabel 0-1 Rencana Pengendalian dan Pemantauan Lingkungan dan Sosial Tahap / operasian Pra-konstruksi Pemindahan PAP yang mengunakan area yang diperlukan untuk proyek
Isu, Dampak Potensial Komponen : Sosial Isu: Pemindahan permanen atau sementara dari orang-orang yang berada pada wilayah yang diwajibkan untuk kegiatan proyek Dampak Potensial: Kehilangan atau gangguan dari sumber pendapatan dan/atau mata pencaharian Kehilangan dari seluruh atau sebagian tempat tinggal dan struktur komersial Pertimbangan: Meskipun pelaksanaan JUFMP akan berdampak positif untuk lebih dari satu juta orang yang tinggal di daerah rawan banjir, terdapat juga dampak sosial negatif yang memerlukan penanggulangan. Adapun dampak negatif penting dari JUFMP adalah adanya kemungkin pemindahan orang-orang yang tinggal di area yang diperlukan untuk kegiatan pengerukan dan pekerjaan konstruksi JUFMP. Survei yang cepat oleh tim sosial Bank Dunia menunjukkan proposi yang sangat besar dari orang-orang yang berpotensi terkena dampak proyek adalah penghuni informal yang tinggal pada lahan publik. Penanggulangan: (i) mempertimbangkan rancangan alternatif yang akan menghindari dan meminimalkan jumlah orang yang perlu dimukimkan kembali, (ii) apabila tidak dapat dihindari, Rencana Permukiman Kembali (Resettlement Plans atau RPs) akan dibuat berdasarkan RPF yang disepakati. (lihat RPF)
Konstruksi Pengerukan
Komponen : Lingkungan Hidup Isu: Kualitas Air (TSS, kekeruhan, bau, DO, BOD) Dampak Potensial: (i) Pengerukan mengakibatkan peningkatan yang sementara dari TSS dalam badan air dan resuspensi substansi yang akan mengkonsumsi oksigen terlarut dalam air (yaitu material organik atau anaerobik), unsur hara dan kontaminan, (ii) Hilangnya biota pada lokasi pengerukan dan tertutup nya organism bentik (benthic) di lokasi yang berdekatan, (iii) gangguan sementara dari kehidupan air karena turunnya tingkat dari DO (terutama bagi ikan).
29
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran Pemantauan Persyaratan berdasarkan Undang-Undang: RPF yang terdapat dalam Loan Agreement Kriteria pelaksanaan: standar hidup PAP Obyek: PAP yang dipindahkan secara permanen atau sementara Parameter, metode dan frekuensi: akan ditentukan dalam RP Pelaporan: Rincian diberikan dalam RPF Waktu : Sebelum jangka waktu konstruksi dan memantau proyek sampai tercapainya tujuan. Tanggung jawab: Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta Anggaran: Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta telah mengalokasikan anggaran untuk memberikan ganti rugi dalam bentuk tunai (lihat Biaya Proyek untuk gambaran terbaru) atau yang serupa (misalnya, penyewaan tempat tinggal) untuk PAP
Pemantauan Persyaratan berdasarkan Undang-Undang: PP 82/1999 tentang Pengelolaan Kualitas Air dan Pengendalian Polusi Air; Keputusan Gubernur: Kep. Gub KDKI Jakarta No. 582/1995 tentang Standar baku mutu Sungai, air permukaan dan Air Limbah Kriteria Pelaksanaan: Kondisi rona awal sebelum proyek JUFMP Lokasi: lokasi sekitar (misalnya, dalam radius 100 m) dan lokasi jauh (misalnya, radius 1000 m) dari kegiatan pengerukan dan pemrosesan material kerukan. Definisi dan lokasi sekitar serta jauh ditentukan dalam AMDAL.
Tahap / operasian
Isu, Dampak Potensial Pertimbangan : (i) Peningkatan tingkat TSS dan BOD tidak dapat dihindari. Batasannya tergantung pada metode dan besarnya pengerukan dan hidrodinamik. Namun, kondisi rona awal yang telah keruh, eutrophic dan memiliki BOD yang tinggi, oleh sebab itu tingkatan dari TSS dan BOD tersebut hanya akan bersifat sementara dan setempat. (ii) Hilangnya organisme benthic tidak dapat dihindari, namun kebanyakan dari saluran air dan waduk berada dalam kondisi yang tercemar (umumnya oleh limbah domestik yang menciptakan kondisi yang tidak baik untuk ekosistem benthic. Kondisi dari komunitas benthic dapat membaik setelah pengerukan dilakukan. Penanggulangan: (i) Menentukan peralatan yang sesuai dan metode pengerukan yang sesuai, (ii) Memasang silt curtain apabila diperlukan, (iii) memantau keragaman spesies benthic sebelum dan sesudah pengerukan.
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran Parameter, metode, dan frekuensi: Parameter
Metode
Total partikel tersuspensi (Total suspended solid atau TSS) Kebutuhan oxygen biologis (Biological oxygen demand atau BOD) Kekeruhan
Laboratorium
Dissolved oxygen (DO) Benthos Nekton (misalnya, ikan)
Stand ard < 80 mg/L
Frekuensi Bulanan
Laboratorium
< 20 mg/L
Bulanan
Pengukuran Lapangan
NA
Mingguan
Pengukuran Lapangan In-situ dan Laboratorium In-situ dan laboratorium
>3 mg/L NA
Mingguan
NA
Tiga bulanan Tiga bulanan
Pelaporan: setiap bulan melapor pada PIUs dan setiap enam bulan, pelaporan dari PIUs kepada BPLHD untuk pengujian Waktu: sebelum periode konstruksi dan pengawasan selama proyek sampai pencapaian tingkat dasar. Tanggung jawab: Kontraktor (untuk pelaksanaan) dan Konsultan Pengawasan (SC) utk supervisi dan pemantauan (mengambil sampel) Anggaran: Kontraktor (termasuk dalam kontrak), SC (dari Pinjaman)
30
Tahap / Pengoperasian Konstruksi Pengerukan
Isu, Dampak Potensial
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran
Komponen: Lingkungan Perkotaan
Pemantauan
Isu: tingkat peningkatan sementara dari kebisingan, bau, debu, dan getaran
Persyaratan berdasarkan undang-undang: Peraturan pemerintah PP No. 41/1999 tentang Pengendalian Polusi Udara; Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup Kep-50/MenLH/11/1996 dan Keputusan Gubernur SK Gub. KDKI Jakarta no 551/2001tentang Kualitas Udara, Kebisingan, Bau dan Getaran. Kriteria pelaksanaan: Kondisi rona awal sebelum JUFMP Lokasi: Lokasi sekitar dan jauh dari aktivitas pengerukan dan pemrosesan material. Definisi lokasi sekitar dan jauh ditentukan dalam EIA. Parameter, metode, dan frekuensi:
Dampak Potensial: pengerukan akan memberikan dampak pada lingkungan perkotaan, seperti , kebisingan, bau, debu dan getaran. Pertimbangan: Lalu lintas di DKI Jakarta semakin padat, alat transportasi alternatif adalah melalui air atau jalur kereta api yang akan diinvestigasikan dalam EIA. Penanggulangan: Memantau secara teratur integritas dari peralatan, memodifikasi praktik pekerjan, misalnya, menghindari kebisingan tinggi yang berasal dari peralatan pada waktu malam hari.
Isu: Gangguan sementara dari akses/kehidupan untuk mata pencaharian
31
Parameter Debu
Metode Standar Frekuensi 3 In-situ dan 230 µg/m Bulanan laboratorium Kebisingan Pengukuran 70 dBA Mingguan Lapangan Getaran Pengukuran Normal Mingguan Lapangan Bau Pengukuran Normal* Harian Lapangan * Membutuhkan lebih dari 50% delapan responden minimum untuk mengkonfirmasikan bau yang normal Pelaporan: Setiap bulannya melaporkan kepada PIUs dan setiap enam bulan pelaporan dari PIUs kepada BPLHD untuk pengujian Waktu: sebelum jangka waktu kegiatan dan pengawasan selama proyek sampai pencapaian rona awal. Tanggung jawab: Kontraktor (untuk pelaksanaan) dan Konsultan Pengawasan (SC) utk supervisi dan pemantauan (mengambil sampel) Anggaran: Kontraktor (termasuk dalam kontrak), SC (dari Pinjaman) Lihat bagian pekerjaan tanggul pada tabel ini untuk penanggulan yang terperinci
Tahap / Pengoperasian Konstruksi Transportasi (melalui darat dengan menggunakan dump truk kedap air)
Isu, Dampak Potensial
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran
Komponen : Lingkungan perkotaan Isu: kemacetan lalu lintas, kebocoran dan tumpahan material selama pengangkutan Dampak Potensial: Transportasi dari material pengerukan ke lokasi pembuangan, apabila dilakukan pada waktu siang akan memperburuk lalu lintas yang telah padat. Selain itu, kebocoran atau tumpahan dari sedimen selama pengangkutan akan meningkatkan partikulat di udara jika sedimen tersebut kering. Penanggulangan: (i) pengangkutan material kerukan pada malam hari (yaitu dari 22:00 – 05:00), (ii) material kerukan dimasukan kedalam kontainer baja sebelum dimasukan ke dalam truk pembuangan atau watertight dump truck, (iii) material kerukan akan diangkut dengan menggunakan GPS-tracking dump truck, (iv) integritas dari kendaraan bermotor akan diperiksa secara teratur, (v)batas kecepatan maksimum ditentukan hingga 30 km per jam.
. Pemantauan Persyaratan berdasarkan dengan undang-undang: Peraturan lalu lintas dan transportasi DKI yang berlaku Kriteria pelaksanaan: pengaduan publik, jumlah tumpahan, kepadatan lalu lintas dan waktu perjalanan Lokasi: dari lokasi pengerukan ke lokasi pembuangan, baik untuk limbah padat dan sedimen. Parameter, metode, dan frekuensi: Parameter Waktu perjalanan Tumpahan (jumlah)
Metode Pencatata n Visual
Standar NA
Frekuensi Harian
NA
Mingguan
Pelaporan: Setiap bulan melaporkan kepada PIUs dan setiap enam bulan melaporkan dari PIUs kepada BPLHD untuk pengujian Waktu : memantau selama proyek Tanggung jawab: Kontraktor untuk pelaksanaan, SC untuk Pengawasan dan Pemantauan Anggaran: Kontraktor (termasuk dalam kontrak), SC (dari Pinjaman)
32
Tahap / Pengoperasian Konstruksi Pembuan gan (CDF Ancol)
Isu, Dampak Potensial
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran
Komponen: Linkungan Alam Isu: Hilangnya habitat benthic dalam 120 ha, turunya kualitas air laut (TSS, kekeruhan, gizi), dan algae blooming. Dampak Potensial: Pembuangan material hasil kerukan pada CDF Ancol yang mengakibatkan hilangnya komunitas benthic pada lokasi akibat peningkatan TSS. Pertimbangan: Proyek memperkenalkan dan mensyaratkan prinsip pembuangan tertutup (CDF) untuk meminimalkan dampak lingkungan dari pembuangan material hasil kerukan. Namun, terlebih penting lagi, pengenalan prinsip CDF akan membantu pemulihan ekosistem Teluk Jakarta, hal ini didasarkan pada kenyataan bahwa semua sedimen (yang tercemar oleh kegiatan domestik dan limbah padat) dari sungai-sungai dan waduk-waduk yang pada akhirnya akan berakhir di Teluk Jakarta. Hilangnya benthos ini tidak dapat dihindari pada lokasi pembuangan. Namun dengan mempertimbangkan bahwa (i) ukuran CDF (120 ha) sangat kecil 2 dibandingkan dengan Teluk Jakarta secara keseluruhan (200 km ), (ii) ekosistem dalam wilayah tersebut telah mati, sehingga dampak atas benthos cenderung rendah. Meskipun material tersebut didominasi oleh tanah liat dan lanau (silt), gelombang dan arus pada lokasi pembuangan rendah berdasarkan kajian Ancol. Oleh sebab itu, penyebaran TTS ke wilayah yang lebih luas cenderung tidak ada. Namun, dengan mempertimbangkan sumber material pengisian yang cenderung terkontaminasi oleh limbah manusia serta kedekatan dari lokasi reklamasi dengan reseptor, yaitu pantai publik, kontaminasi patogen yang akan dipantau.
Pemantauan Persyaratan berdasarkan undang-undang: PP No 19/1999 tentang Pengendalian Polusi Laut dan Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup No. 51/MENLH/2004 tentang kualitas air laut untuk biota laut Kriteria Pelaksanaan: Kondisi rona awal sebelum JUFMP Lokasi: Lokasi sekitar (misalnya dalam radius 100 m) dan jauh (misalnya, radius 1000 m) dari CDF. Parameter, method and frequency: Parameter Tipe tes Standard Frekuensi Kekeruhan Pengukuran <5 NTU Mingguan Lapangan Dissolved oxygen Pengukuran >5 mg/L Mingguan (DO) Lapangan Total suspended Laboratorium 20 mg/L Bulanan solid (TSS) Biological oxygen Laboratorium < 20 mg/L Bulanan demand (BOD) Jumlah coliform Laboratorium 0 Mingguan Fecal coliform Laboratorium 0 Mingguan Laboratorium 0.3 mg/L Bulanan Jumlah ammonia nitrogen (T-NH3) Jumlah Labora < Bul
Penanggulangan: konstruksi fasilitas pembuangan (tanggul atau penahan ombak) diselesaikan sebelum material kerukan dibuang kedalam, pelapisan dengan geo-textile fabric yang sesuai akan menahan TSS dalam wilayah pembuangan. Menutup pantai publik saat terdektesinya kontaminasi patogen. Menutup pantai publik apabila algae blooming yang berbahaya terjadi. Benthos
33
In-situ dan laboratorium
NA
Tiga bulanan
Nekton (misalnya, ikan)
In-situ dan laboratorium
NA
Tiga bulanan
Pelaporan: setiap bulan melaporkan kepada PIU dan setiap enam bulan pelaporan dari PIU kepada BPLHD untuk pengujian Waktu: sebelum kegiatan dan pemantau selama proyek sampai acuan/tingkat dasar tercapai. Tanggung jawab: : PT PJA (Ancol) sebagai bagian dari pelaksanaan RKL/RPL dan SC untuk pengawasan dan pemantauan Anggaran: Kontraktor (termasuk dalam kontrak), SC (dari Pinjaman)
34
Tahap / Pengoperasian Konstruksi Pekerjaan tanggul (dengan asumsi sebagian besar akan menggunakan sheet-piling (turap) sedangkan pekerjaan yang kecil akan melibatkan pekerjaan pembuatan tembok dari batu atau pekerjaan tembok penahan)
Isu, Dampak Potensial
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran
Komponen: Lingkungan Perkotaan
Pemantauan
Isu: kebisingan, getaran
Persyaratan berdasarkan undang-undang: Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup tentang kualitas udara, kebisingan dan getaran.
Dampak Potensial: Meningkatanya tingkat lokalisasi jarak pendek dari kebisingan dan getaran selama pengoperasian dari peralatan konstruksi. Reseptor yang sensitive dalam wilayah proyek , termasuk orang-orang yang tinggal berdekatan dengan wilayah proyek. Penanggulangan: (i) memberitahukan masyarakat setempat mengenai tipe pekerjaan tanggul dan periode konstruksi tersebut akan berlangsung, (ii) pekerjaan sheet-piling (Turap) hanya akan izinkan pada waktu siang hari dan akan berhenti sementara pada waktu ibadah.
Kriteria pelaksanaan: pengaduan masyarakat Lokasi: lokasi proyek yang melibatkan rehabilitasi tanggul. Parameter, metode, dan frekuensi: Parameter Kebisingan Getaran
Metode Pengukuran Lahan Pengukuran Lahan
Frekuensi Mingguan Bulanan
Pelaporan: Setiap bulan melapor kepada PIUs dan setiap enam bulan pelaporan dari PIU kepada BPLHD untuk pengujian Waktu: Sebelum kegiatan dan pemantauan selama proyek berlangsung sampai pencapaian background level. Tanggung jawab: Kontraktor untuk pelaksanaan, SC untuk pengawasan dan pemantauan Anggaran: Kontraktor (termasuk dalam kontrak), SC (dari Pinjaman)
35
Tahap / Pengoperasian Konstruksi Pekerjaan tanggul (dengan asumsi sebagian besar akan menggunakan sheet-piling (turap) sedangkan pekerjaan yang kecil akan melibatkan pekerjaan pembuatan tembok dari batu atau pekerjaan tembok penahan)
Isu, Dampak Potensial
Pemantauan, Tanggung Jawab dan Anggaran
Komponen: Sosial
Pemantauan
Isu: Mata pencaharian orang-orang yang bergantung pada sungai atau waduk
Persyaratan berdasarkan undang-undang: ESMF dan RPF Kriteria pelaksanaan: jumlah dari PAP yang dipekerjakan dan pengaduan dari PAP
Dampak Potensial: Gangguan sementara atas mata pencaharian; Konflik sosial antara PAP dan pekerja proyek
Lokasi: Pekerjaan tanggul dan lokasi pengerukan.
Pertimbangan: Terdapat sejumlah kecil dari PAP (surve cepat: sekitar 30 orang) yang bergantung pada sungai dan waktu untuk sumber pendapatan mereka. Selama pelaksanaan proyek (pengerukan dan pekerjaan tanggul), gangguan sementara dapat terjadi untuk mereka yang mengoperasikan Eretan (yaitu, perahu yang terikat pada kabel logam yang dapat mengangkut belasan orang, atau beberapa motor dan beberapa orang, sepanjang sungaisungai). Dampak potensial lain termasuk gangguan mata pencaharian untuk pemulung yang beroperasi di sungai dan waduk. Penanggulangan: selain ukuran pengelolaan yang dirancangkan dalam Bagian Pengelolaan Pengaduan Masyarakat, kontraktor (pekerjaan pengerukan dan tanggul) akan memberikan prioritas kepada PAP pada saat perekrutan pekerja kasar sebelum pekerjaan konstruksi di wilayah-wilayah yang terletak pada PAP tersebut. Sebagai alternatif sebagai pekerjaan bagi pekerja kasar, kontraktor dapat membantu pemilik eretan untuk menggeser eretan nya ke hulu atau hilir sehingga eretan dapat tetap beroperasi selama pengerukan dan pekerjaan tanggul
36
Parameter, metode, dan frekuensi: Parameter Pengaduan/konfli k
Metode Survei/wawancara
Frekuensi Bulanan
Pelaporan: SC kepada PMU dan PIU, DKI kepada PMU kepada Bank Dunia Waktu: sebelum aktivitas (perekrutan pekerja kasar) dan setelah pekerjaan di wilayah PAP diselesaikan (pengakhiran) Tanggung jawab: DKI (Pemantauan dan Pelaporan Pokja) dan SC Anggaran: Pemerintah Provinsi DKI dan Kontraktor
Tahap/Pengopera sian Setelah Konstruksi Pembuan gan (Pembuangan CDF Ancol)
Isu, Dampak Potensial
Pemantauan, Tanggung jawab dan Anggaran
Isu: Perubahan hidrodinamik dan geomorfologi pada lokasi-lokasi pembuangan Dampak Potensial: Perubahan dari arus menyusur pantai (longshore current), dan selanjutnya perubahan pola abrasi dan sedimentasi di wilayah sekitar proyek. Keberadaan dari lahan hasil reklamasi juga rentan terhadap pengikisan.
Pemantauan Persyaratan terkait undang-undang: PP No 19/1999 on Pengendalian Polusi Laut Kriteria pelaksanaan: longshore current (arus menyusur pantai), pola sedimen dan pengikisan Lokasi: CDF Ancol
Pertimbangan: Simulasi longshore current yang dilakukan oleh konsultan PT PJA menunjukan pola arus menyusur pantai tidak akan berubah setelah reklamasi, namum akan melambat dari 1,52 m/s sampai 1,42 m/s. Selanjutnya, TSS akan sedikit meningkat, sedangkan batimetri tidak menunjukan perubahan-perubahan yang signifikan. Penanggulangan: Memantau arus menyusur pantai dan tingkat TSS untuk memahami pola penyebarannya. Mempertimbangkan skema pemanfaatan (sedimen kerukan) untuk restorasi habitat.
Parameter, metode dan frekuensi: Parameter Longshore current Pola Sedimentasi Batimetri
Metode Pengukuran lapangan Pengukuran lapangan Pengukuran lapangan
Frekuensi Tiga bulanan Tiga bulanan Tiga bulanan
Pelaporan: Setiap bulan memberikan laporan kepada PIUs dan enam bulan sekali memberikan laporan dari PIU kepada BPLHD untuk pengujian Waktu: Sebelum kegiatan dan pemantauan selama proyek berlangsung sampai mencapai kestabilan Tanggung jawab: PT PJA (Ancol) sebagai bagian dari pelaksanaan RKL/RPL, SC untuk mengawas dan memantau Anggaran: PT PJA sebagai bagian dari pelaksanaan RKL/RPL tersebut
37
7.2
Penyertaan dalam Dokumen-Dokumen Kontrak/Spesifikasi
Rencana pengelolaan lingkungan hidup dan sosial (Environmental and social management plan atau EMP dan GRS) akan merupakan bagian kontrak konstruksi. Demikian pula, rencana pengelolaan dan pemantauan (management and monitoring plan atau EMP, GRS, RP) juga akan dimasukkan ke dalam kontrak konsultan pengawasan (supervision consultant atau SC). Hal ini memastikan bahwa SC dan para kontraktor memiliki kewajiban kontraktual dan dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban. 8 ANGGARAN UNTUK PELAKSANAAN ESMF Pemerintah Indonesia telah mendapatkan hibah sebesar US$ 5 juta (TF#054683) (Indonesia Water and Sanitation Program – WASAP) dari Pemerintah Belanda melalui Bank Dunia dan telah menggunakan sebagian dari hibah ini untuk persiapan instrumen pengaman lingkungan hidup dan sosial selama jangka waktu persiapan proyek JUFMP (misalnya, AMDAL, RPF, rancangan RP). Biaya untuk pelaksanaan pengelolaan lingkungan hidup telah dimasukkan ke dalam kontrak konstruksi yang akan dibiayai oleh melalui pinjaman. Biaya pelaksanaan RP akan ditanggung oleh DKI Jakarta. Biaya untuk pengawasan dan pemantauan pengelolaan lingkungan hidup dan sosial telah termasuk dalam kontrak Konsultan Pengawasan yang sedang dibiayai oleh pinjaman.
38
Lampiran 1: Pemrosesan CDF Ancol dan Due Dilligence Lingkungan Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (CDF)
Construction of the Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) by PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA) based on (i) DED and Approved AMDAL documents from BPLHD and (iii) Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) between Provincial Government of DKI with PT PJA for the construction of CDF
Completed CDF
Environmental Due Diligence by PMU and WB
Is the CDF acceptable ?
Yes
Contractor to start dumping
39
No
BPLHD
Lampiran 2 : Penapisan limbah berbahaya dan beracun sesuai dengan persyaratan AMDAL CDF Ancol Parameter
Screening level TCLP (mg/kg berat kering)
Standar TCLP (mg/L) Peraturan Pemerintah. PP No. 85/ 1999
Arsenic
100
5
Barium
2000
100
Boron
10000
500
Cadmium
20
1
Chromium
100
5
Copper
200
10
Lead
100
5
Mercury
4
0,2
Selenium
20
1
Silver
100
5
Zinc
1000
50
Apabila tidak terdapat logam yang melebihi Screening Level Toxicity Characteristic of Leaching Procedure (TCLP), TCLP (USEPA SW 846 ) tidak akan dilaksanakan
40
JAKARTA URGENT FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT (JUFMP)
CONSOLIDATED SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
SEPTEMBER 2011
Government of the Republic of Indonesia Ministry of Public Works Directorate General of Water Resources
TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 1
2
1.3
Safeguards Policies Triggered ...................................................................................................... 2
1.4
Approach for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment....................................................... 3
1.5
Significant Environmental and Social Impacts ............................................................................. 5
1.6
Proposed Environmental and Social Impact Management ........................................................... 6
1.7
Consultations............................................................................................................................... 11
1.8
Project Communication............................................................................................................... 12
1.9
Reputational Risks ...................................................................................................................... 13
Project Description.............................................................................................................................. 14 2.1
Project Development Objective .................................................................................................. 14
2.2
Summary of Project Component................................................................................................. 15
2.3
Project Sites ................................................................................................................................ 15
2.4
Sequencing of Works .................................................................................................................. 16
2.5
Volume of Works........................................................................................................................ 17
2.6
Disposal Sites.............................................................................................................................. 18
2.6.1
Ancol confined disposal facility (CDF) .............................................................................. 19
2.6.2
Bantar Gebang landfill facility............................................................................................ 19
2.6.3
PPLi hazardous waste landfill............................................................................................. 20
3 Environmental and Social Legal Requirements and Project Institutional and Implementation Arrangements.............................................................................................................................................. 20 3.1
Government of Indonesia Environmental Impact Assessment ................................................... 20
3.2
Government of Indonesia Land Acquisition............................................................................... 21
3.3 The World Bank’s Triggered Environmental Safeguards Policies and Compliance Requirements. ......................................................................................................................................... 22 3.4
The World Bank’s Triggered Social Safeguards Policies and Compliance Requirements......... 23
3.5
Package of Environment and Social Safeguards Documents. .................................................... 23
3.5.1
Environmental safeguards documents................................................................................. 23
3.5.2
Social safeguards documents .............................................................................................. 27
3.5.3
Preparation and disclosure of safeguards documents.......................................................... 27
3.6
Institutional Arrangements.......................................................................................................... 29
3.6.1
Institutional Arrangements (Phase 1 and Phase 2).............................................................. 29
3.6.2
Institutional Arrangements (Disposal sites) ........................................................................ 32
i
3.7 3.7.1
For the Phase 1 and Phase 2 works ..................................................................................... 33
3.7.2
For the disposal sites (Ancol CDF, Bantar Gebang and PPLi) ........................................... 33
3.8 4
Implementation Arrangements (Social Safeguards) ................................................................... 36
Relevant Environment and Social Baseline Data................................................................................ 38 4.1
Sediment Quality in JUFMP Sites .............................................................................................. 38
4.1.1
ERM 2008........................................................................................................................... 38
4.1.2
DHV 2008........................................................................................................................... 39
4.1.3
AMDAL for Phase 2 activities, sampling and analysis 2010 ............................................. 39
4.1.4
Results and interpretation.................................................................................................... 39
4.2
Sediment Quality in Ancol.......................................................................................................... 41
4.3
Water Quality in JUFMP Sites.................................................................................................... 42
4.4
Ancol Sea Water Quality ............................................................................................................ 43
4.5
Ancol Marine Biota..................................................................................................................... 46
4.5.1
Plankton .............................................................................................................................. 46
4.5.2
Benthos ............................................................................................................................... 47
4.6
5
Implementation Arrangements (Environmental Safeguards)...................................................... 33
Social Economic Baseline........................................................................................................... 47
4.6.1
Population ........................................................................................................................... 47
4.6.2
Social-economic Characteristics of the Population............................................................. 47
Summary of Potential Significant Environmental and Social Impacts ............................................... 49 5.1
Environmental Impacts associated with the JUFMP project activities....................................... 49
5.1.1
Significant traffic disruption. .............................................................................................. 49
5.1.2
Reduced air quality and foul odors. .................................................................................... 50
5.1.3
Change of water discharge rate........................................................................................... 50
5.1.4
Change of surface water quality.......................................................................................... 50
5.1.5
Change of sea water quality ................................................................................................ 51
5.1.6
Increase of solid waste ........................................................................................................ 51
5.1.7
Impact on Biota................................................................................................................... 51
5.1.8
Impact on Public health and environmental sanitation ....................................................... 51
5.2
JUFMP Project Impacts on Ancol CDF...................................................................................... 52
5.3
Offsite Impacts from Ancol CDF................................................................................................ 53
5.4
JUFMP Project Impacts on Bantar Gebang and PPLi facility .................................................... 53
5.5
Social Impacts............................................................................................................................. 53
ii
6
7
8
9
5.5.1
PAPs Sites........................................................................................................................... 53
5.5.2
Non-PAPs sites ................................................................................................................... 56
5.5.3
Potential non-resettlement related social impacts. .............................................................. 56
5.5.4
Evictions during the period of JUFMP Project Preparation................................................ 57
Analysis of Alternatives...................................................................................................................... 58 6.1
The “do nothing” option ............................................................................................................. 58
6.2
Overall Alternative Analysis....................................................................................................... 58
6.3
Specific Alternative Analyses..................................................................................................... 60
6.3.1
Catchment wide vs. local flood management ..................................................................... 60
6.3.2
Engineering vs. non-engineering approach......................................................................... 60
6.3.3
Choice of dredging sites...................................................................................................... 60
6.3.4
Dredging technology: Mechanical vs. Hydraulic................................................................ 61
6.3.5
Solid Waste Separation ....................................................................................................... 61
6.3.6
Transport options: Land based (dump truck) vs. hydraulic ................................................ 61
Environmental Management Plans ..................................................................................................... 61 7.1
Overall Environmental Management and Monitoring Plans ...................................................... 61
7.2
Traffic Management Plans .......................................................................................................... 62
Resettlement Planning......................................................................................................................... 63 8.1
Approach for Social Impact Management .................................................................................. 63
8.2
Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) ...................................................................................... 64
8.3
Resettlement Plans (RPs)............................................................................................................ 67
8.3.1
Census Updates and Finalization of RPs ............................................................................ 67
8.3.2
Database for PAPs .............................................................................................................. 68
8.3.3
Funding for RPF and RPs ................................................................................................... 68
Consultations....................................................................................................................................... 68 9.1
Consultations during AMDAL.................................................................................................... 68
9.2
Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)............................................................................................... 72
9.3
Consultations on the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF)..................................................... 73
9.4
Consultations during the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) ............................................ 75
10
Grievance Redress System (GRS) .................................................................................................. 75
11
Project Communications ................................................................................................................. 77
12
Reputational Risks .......................................................................................................................... 79
iii
List of Tables Table 2-1 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Basins under Project..................................... 16 Table 2-2 Sequencing of Project Construction Works................................................................................ 17 Table 2-3 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Basins under the Project............................... 18 Table 3-1 Summary of due Diligence Process for Disposal Sites .............................................................. 26 Table 3-2 Summary of Environmental and Social Documents and Disclosure Status ............................... 28 Table 3-3 Summary of Processes and Conditions Governing Disposal of Project Material ...................... 35 Table 4-1 ERM 2008 data considering relevant soil use screening levels (in mg/kg)................................ 40 Table 4-2 Phase 2 AMDAL data (2010) considering relevant soil use screening levels (in mg/kg) .......... 41 Table 4-3 Result of Marine Sediment Quality Measurement (by TCLP, USEPA) around the Study Area42 Table 4-4 Water Quality Analysis Results: Cengkareng Drain .................................................................. 43 Table 4-5 Result of Seawater Quality Measurement in the Study Area ..................................................... 44 Table 4-6 Result of Seawater Monitoring in the 2005-2008 period in the Ancol Marine Waters.............. 45 Table 4-7 Populations of Areas where Project’s Floodways, Canals and Retention Basins are Located... 48 Table 5-1 Summary of Activities Causing Impact and Direct Impact........................................................ 49 Table 5-2 Estimated Affected Structures and Persons at Project Sites ....................................................... 55 Table 9-1 Issues raised with respect to the Phase 1 AMDAL and Ancol CDF consultation...................... 69 List of Figures Figure 2-1 Summary of the Disposal Arrangements................................................................................... 19 Figure 3-1 AMDAL Process....................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 3-2 Illustration of Project Implementation Arrangements (excluding disposal arrangements) ....... 29 Figure 4-1 Air Quality, Noise and Seawater Sampling Site ....................................................................... 46 Figure 11-1 Communications between agencies......................................................................................... 79 List of Annexes Annex 1: Project Map Annex 2: Tentative Plan for the Preparation of Phase 2 related EIAs and RPs Annex 3: Case Studies – Eviction in Kemiri, Tambora VI and Tambora VIII Sites Annex 4: List of Key Reference Documents in the Project Files
iv
ACRONYM AND ABBREVIATION
AMDAL ANDAL B3 Waste BAPEDAL BAPPENAS BAPPEDA BBWSCC BPLHD CDF DGCK DGWR DKI Jakarta or DKI EA EIA EIA/SIA Consultant EMP ESMF ESMP ESWG FGD GRS GoI JABODETABEK JEDI JSC JUFMP KA-ANDAL Kelurahan /Kecamatan MENLH MoE MoF MoPW NGO OP P2T PAP PI PIP PIU PMU POSKO
Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan – Process of environmental impact assessments Analisis Dampak Lingkungan – environmental impact assessment/statement Limbah Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun - Hazardous and Toxic Waste Badan Pengendalian Dampak Lingkungan - Environmental Impact Management Agency Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional – National Development Planning Board Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah – Provincial Development Planning Board Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane – Regional Office of Ciliwung-Cisadane River Basin Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Hidup Daerah – Local Level of Environmental Management Agency (including Provincial and Municipal Level) Confined Disposal Facility Directorate General for Human Settlements (Dirjen Cipta Karya – MoPW) Directorate General for Water Resources (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air– MoPW) Daerah Khusus Istimewa Jakarta (Provincial government of DKI Jakarta) Environmental Assessment Environmental Impact Assessment Environmental and Social Impact Assessment, a consultant hired by PMU Environmental Management Plan Environmental and Social Management Framework Environmental and Social Management Plan Environmental and Social Working Group Focus Group Discussion Grievance Redress System Government of Indonesia Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi – Metropolitan DKI Jakarta Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative Joint Steering Committee Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project Kerangka Acuan – ANDAL - Term of Agreement of EIA Urban Village/Sub-district Menteri Lingkungan Hidup – MoE Ministry of Environment Ministry of Finance Ministry of Public Works Non-Governmental Organization Operational Policy Panitia Pengadaan Tanah - Land Acquisition Committee Project Affected Person Public Involvement Project Implementation Plan Project Implementation Unit Project Management Unit Pos Komando - Site Office which also functions as, amongst others, public information
v
PP PPA PPC PT PJA PPLi PU-MoPW RP RKL RPF RPL SC SIA TMP USACE WASAP WBC WJEMP
center and site-based complaint handling unit Peraturan Pemerintahan – Government Regulation EIA/SIA consultant hired by PMU to prepare AMDAL and RP Project Preparation Consultants Pembangunan Jaya Ancol Ltd. (Ancol Authorities) Prasadha Pamunah Limbah Industri – A licensed of secure landfill operator Ministry of Public Works - Departemen Pekerjaan Umum Resettlement Plan Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan – Environmental Management Plan Resettlement Policy Framework Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan – Environmental Monitoring Plan Supervision Consultant Social Impact Assessment Traffic Management Plan United States Army Corps of Engineers Indonesia Water and Sanitation Program Trust Fund West Banjir Canal Western Java Environmental Management Project
vi
1
Executive Summary
1.1 Description of Project 1. The Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (JUFMP or “the project”) aims to contribute to the improvement of the operations and maintenance of a priority part of the flood management system in the city of Jakarta, through: Dredging sections of selected key floodways, canals and retention basins to improve their flow capacities, and disposing the dredge material in proper facilities; Rehabilitating and constructing embankment in sections of, and repairing or replacing mechanical equipment in, the same selected key floodways, canals and retention basins to sustain and improve their operations; Establishing institutional coordination between the three responsible agencies to encourage coordinated development, and operations and maintenance (O&M) of Jakarta's flood management system; and Strengthening the capability of the responsible agencies to improve the operations, maintenance and management of Jakarta's flood management system. 2. Eleven critical floodways and canals, as well as four retention basins (waduks) were identified to be included in the scope of the project works. These were identified by the Government of Indonesia (GoI) as in priority need of rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities to alleviate severe seasonal flooding. These floodways, canals and retention basins are located in areas where nearly 1.8 million people live1 (out of a total core city population of about 11 million). A project map is provided in Annex 1. 3. This dredging activity is expected to result in the removal of about 3.4 million m3 of sediment material and 95,000 m3 of solid waste. Non-hazardous sediment material is planned to be disposed at an ongoing sea reclamation project in a confined disposal facility (CDF) known as Ancol CDF, located off the north coast of Jakarta in the Jakarta Bay. Removed solid waste will be transported to the existing Bantar Gebang landfill in Bekasi, the main solid waste landfill serving Jakarta. Sampling tests at project sites indicate that the JUFMP dredge material is non-hazardous. However, pre-dredging testing will still be conducted during implementation and in the very unlikely event that hazardous sediment waste material is found, it will be disposed off at the existing secure landfill in Bogor owned by PT. Prasadha Pamunah Limbah Industri (PPLi), which is licensed to manage hazardous waste material. Both Bogor and Bekasi lie just outside Jakarta city, within the Jakarta metropolitan area.
1.2 Purpose and Content of this Consolidated Summary 4. The purpose of this report is to provide the summary of the environmental and social safeguards issues and arrangements of the JUFMP. This document also serves to provide both a consolidated picture as well as a summary of the environmental and social safeguards impact assessments and mitigation design for the JUFMP project as a whole. The JUFMP project includes works that come under the 1
See Table 4-7 in section 4.
1
responsibility of different agencies. At the same time, the project will also utilize disposal areas and facilities that are being constructed and/or operated by entities independent of the project implementation agencies. As such, the JUFMP project environmental and social safeguards designs and provisions as a whole consist of a set of different environmental and social impact assessments and mitigation plans underpinned by various key studies, reports and reviews processes. Each of these assessments and plans has been developed by different responsible agencies, approved for the different works or disposal sites, and at different times throughout the JUFMP project preparation period. These environmental and social safeguards designs and provisions have been assessed during the JUFMP project preparation. 5. It provides a summary of the safeguards requirements and policies2 applicable to the project. This document describes the principles and approaches for environmental and social impact assessments conducted during project preparation, including the preparation timing and disclosure of applicable documents that together make up the full safeguards instrument of the project. Further, the related due diligence, assessments, consultations and communications conducted during project preparation are discussed, including brief descriptions of key findings and conclusions of relevant reports and studies. The potential environmental and social impacts from the project, and mitigation measures adopted, are summarized. Finally, this report describes the various arrangements put in place to monitor and supervise the environmental and social impact mitigation plans related to project works and disposal activities, as well as to manage residual risks during implementation. A list of documents comprising the project safeguards instruments, and a list of other key reference documents is provided in Annex 4.
1.3
Safeguards Policies Triggered
6. The project is expected to yield positive environmental and social outcomes. Alleviating flooding will reduce the environmental impact and public health issues caused by overflowing and stagnant flood waters and reduce disruptions to communities in project areas – particularly to the predominantly poor communities living in flood-prone areas. Solid waste and sediments in the drains, if not removed, would be flushed uncontrolled into the estuary and bay area. Over the longer term, the flood information management system that is being introduced by the project would provide DKI Jakarta the information based planning tool needed to sustainably manage the network well beyond the life of the project and to continue to reduce the incidence of flooding in the area. However, adverse environmental impacts are also likely during the project implementation, e.g., from the sediment material and solid waste that would be generated, if they are not handled, stored, sorted, transported and disposed of properly. These impacts include potentially significant traffic disruption, reduction in air quality due to dust and foul odor emissions, increased noise levels, reduction in surface water and sea water quality, etc. Involuntary resettlement has also been identified as required in several project sites. Apart from Indonesian environmental and social safeguards requirements, the JUFMP project triggers the World Bank’s Environmental Assessment Operational Policy (OP4.01), and as per this policy’s requirements is assigned an EA category of A. The project also triggers the World Bank’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy (OP 4.12).
2
Including Indonesian and World Bank policies requirements.
2
1.4
Approach for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
Project Sequencing 7. Project funded construction works have been structured into two sequenced phases – Phase 1 and Phase 2. A sequenced implementation design has been adopted as a key implementation risk management mechanism for the project. Phase 1 works (proposed 4 sites / 3 works contracts) are expected to commence during the first year of project implementation. Phase 2 works (proposed 11 sites / 5 contracts) are expected to follow subsequently. This sequencing will help avoid the PMU/PIUs and their supervision consultant from being overburdened during the first year when detailed actual implementation processes, procedures and routines are operationalized. The sequencing will also allow time for DKI Jakarta to complete the necessary resettlement instruments and supporting arrangements ahead of works in sites involving involuntary resettlement3, including the establishment of a project Grievance Redress System (GRS) and the appointment of a Panel of Experts. Project Linked Sites 8. Technical assessments have identified 10 canals/waduks sections that are hydraulically and/or directly connected with the canals/waduks sections under JUFMP. The government currently has no specific plans for rehabilitation works in these sections. However, any such activities in these sections will be expected to impact the operations of the canals/waduks sections under JUFMP. Due to this reason, these 10 sections have been designated as project linked sites. Two of these project linked sites are linked to Phase 1 work sites, while the remaining eight are linked to Phase 2 work sites. In the event that the government carries out any works activities related to floods management (e.g., dredging and/or canal rehabilitation) in these 10 sections during the JUFMP project period, the RPF (and all associated provisions) will apply to such sites. Assessment and Disclosure Approaches 9. The environmental and social safeguards requirements for Phase 1 works and for project material disposal arrangements have been appraised. Phase 1 works are expected to be ready for implementation soon after the project is effective (provided also that certain other agreed upon operational conditions are met). The project is set in a dynamic and fluid environment. Jakarta’s flood management infrastructure is in a poor condition due to severe under implementation of operations and maintenance and inadequate local drainage management. These are apt to suffer further unpredictable damages from flood events (especially during the annual flooding season) and the continuous surrounding heavy urban activities. Hence, design changes in response to continuously changing conditions should be expected during implementation, requiring associated revisions to the safeguards documents. Given the sequencing of project implementation, the various Phase 2 works are only expected to begin from around 12 to 18 months after project approval. The quality of implementation and the environmental and social outcomes related to Phase 2 works may only be assured through a similar sequencing of the preparation, disclosure and implementation of their environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and (if needed) resettlement plans (RPs). For this reason and in line with the sequenced two-phase implementation approach, the EIAs and RPs for Phase 2 activities will be done during project implementation and will be reviewed by the Bank prior to finalization and public disclosure. Until the Bank is satisfied and provides the 'no objection' to the final EIAs and RPs for the site, no works will commence at the site. 3
Phase 1 sites do not involve involuntary resettlement.
3
10. All applicable environmental safeguards documents related to Phase 1 works (including related to the Ancol CDF, currently under construction) will be disclosed prior to project appraisal. with the sequenced two-phase implementation approach, an Environmental and Social Framework (ESMF) and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) will cover the environmental and management requirements of Phase 2 works, and will guide the preparation, finalization and implementation of Phase 2 related EIAs and RPs. The ESMF and RPF will be disclosed prior to appraisal. Phase 2 EIAs and RPs will be completed during project implementation (prior to any works commencing) and subject to World Bank review and no-objection prior to disclosure and implementation. Table 3-2 of this report provides a summary of the project’s environmental and social safeguards documents and their disclosure status. Safeguards Assessments for JUFMP Works 11. The environmental impact assessment process in Indonesia (referred to as the AMDAL) has also followed and is aligned with the JUFMP Phase 1 and Phase 2 works packaging structure. An AMDAL package consists of the (i) ANDAL, which is synonymous to the Environmental Impacts Assessment in the World Bank’s Environmental Policy OP 4.01, (i) RKL, which is the Environment Management Plan, and (iii) RPL, which is the Environment Monitoring Plan. The AMDAL for Phase 1 works has been prepared by the Project Management Unit (PMU). This AMDAL was consulted upon, reviewed and approved in March 2010 by the provincial level environmental agency (known as the BPLHD) as required by national and sub-national regulations of Indonesia. The World Bank has also reviewed the AMDAL and has provided extensive comments resulting in the PMU preparing a JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report. This supplementary report includes further recommendations which will also be applicable to the project. This ensured that the AMDAL and supplementary report for Phase 1, combined, complied with the World Bank environmental safeguards policy requirements. The PMU has also prepared the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) which has been reviewed by the World Bank. The ESMF will guide and manage the process for preparing the environmental safeguards documents required for the Phase 2 works. 12. Preliminary social assessment study has been carried out in 2008 (SA Study). In addition, social impact assessments were also carried out in 2009 – 2010 as part of the AMDAL processes. In addition to standard AMDAL consultation processes, specific Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were also carried out in each project site to obtain deeper information on the environmental and social impacts of the project and to obtain support from the communities. Both resettlement-related and non-resettlement related potential social impacts were identified in these assessments and processes. DKI Jakarta has prepared the project Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) to clarify the principles, procedures and organizational arrangements to be applied to the preparation of RPs for Phase 2 sites that involve involuntary resettlement. The RPF has been reviewed and found satisfactory by the World Bank. Safeguards Assessments for Ancol CDF 13. Non-hazardous sediment material from JUFMP will be disposed at the Ancol CDF. Construction of the boundary walls for the confined disposal facility (Ancol CDF) is ongoing at the time of project preparation. The confined facility is currently expected to be completed at the end of calendar year 2011. The first AMDAL for the Ancol reclamation works prepared by PT. PJA, was approved by BPLHD in
4
February 2006 where 12 million m3 of sand and 400,000 m3 of laterite were proposed as the fill material. This was prior to the proposal for the JUFMP project. The AMDAL was subsequently updated to provide for non-hazardous JUFMP dredge material to be utilized as part fill material for the Ancol CDF, reducing sand requirements to 8.6 million m3. The updated AMDAL was reviewed and approved by BPLHD in March 2009. It is worthy to note that the Ancol reclamation project was planned to be implemented irrespective and independent of whether JUFMP proceeds or not. The primary objective of PT. PJA as a concessionaire as stated in the AMDAL is not to receive JUFMP disposal material but to reclaim about 119 hectares of land in Jakarta Bay for future commercial residential developments (as is typical of this area of Jakarta Bay since 1964). This notwithstanding, Ancol CDF is an integral part of JUFMP. The World Bank has reviewed the Ancol AMDAL documents4. To address gaps found in the Ancol AMDAL documents, the PMU has prepared an Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report. This supplementary report contains the additional measures which will also be applicable to the project. This ensured that the AMDAL and supplementary report for Ancol CDF, combined, complied with the World Bank environmental safeguards policy requirements with regards to the disposal of JUFMP material. Safeguards Assessments for Bantar Gebang and PPLi 14. Solid waste material from JUFMP will be transported to the Bantar Gebang sanitary landfill, while hazardous sediment material (if any are found) is planned for disposal at the PPLi secure landfill in Bogor. Both these landfills already exist and are operating under national environmental permits and under the supervision of the respective jurisdictional BPLHD’s. Assessments have been carried out (including site visits by the World Bank) to ascertain that these facilities have adequate financial, technical and physical capacity to receive the type of waste material from the project and also that these facilities had the required and valid environmental permits.
1.5
Significant Environmental and Social Impacts
Environmental Impacts from JUFMP Works 15. As discussed in para. 6, the project is expected to generate positive environmental and social outcomes, by alleviating flooding caused by overflowing and stagnant flood waters. The project implementation, however, would also have potential negative impacts. These were identified in the AMDALs5 and summarized in this Section (Section 1.6 summarizes the associated mitigation measures). These impacts mainly stem from the dredging and embankment works, the significant quantities of dredge material and solid waste that would be generated, and how these dredge materials would be handled, temporarily stored, stockpiled, sorted, transported, and finally disposed in urban areas that are densely populated and that are surrounded by surface and sea water. Potential significant environmental impacts from these works include: (i) traffic disruption due to equipment mobilization and the transport of dredge material and solid wastes to their respective disposal sites, (ii) spillage of material along transportation routes, (iii) foul odors and reduced air quality from ongoing works, (iv) increased noise levels and vibration from ongoing works, and (v) reduction in surface water quality in canals and related estuaries during ongoing works. Hazardous material (if any are found) also poses potential environmental and health hazards if these are improperly handled. 4
The review included assessment of a proposed design change of the northern boundary (dyke) of the CDF in March 2011, for which the recommendations of the World Bank review of the proposal was acknowledged and adopted prior to the approval of the change by BPLHD. 5 The completed AMDALs for the Phase 1 works, as well as draft AMDALs for Phase 2 sites.
5
Environmental Impacts from Ancol CDF Works 16. At the Ancol CDF, the AMDAL identified the key potential environmental impacts on site from the construction and reclamation activities, including: (i) changes in longshore current patterns, (ii) increased sedimentation around the CDF, (iii) degradation of sea water quality from filling and reclamation activities, and (iv) disturbance to the sea biota. There is also the potential for adverse off site impact at the source locations and transport route of sand (8.6 million m3) and laterite (400,000 m3) required for the construction of the CDF (although the use of JUFMP dredge material to part replace sand material requirement – thus reducing sand requirement from 12 million m3 to 8.6 million m3 - is in itself a measure to reduce potential off site impacts). Environmental Impacts from Bantar Gebang and PPLi Operations 17. The potential environmental impacts from the project to the operations of the existing Bantar Gebang sanitary landfill and the PPLi secure landfill are expected to be small. The estimated 95,000 m3 of total solid waste generated from the project over its expected 4 year duration will make up an insignificant percentage of normal loads being received at Bantar Gebang6. Hazardous material is not expected from JUFMP (confirmed by sampling tests) and even if some are found, the amounts are well within the capacity and handling norms of the PPLi secure landfill. Social Impacts from JUFMP Works 18. The potential social impacts from the project were identified through the SA Study, AMDAL related consultations, and the FGD and other consultations carried out as part of the preparation of the RPF and preliminary RPs. The potential impacts include resettlement-related impacts and nonresettlement related impacts. The studies and consultations conducted during the earlier part of project preparation indicated that involuntary resettlement would be required at seven sites, affecting over 2,500 structures and more than 6,500 persons. However, efforts to minimize social impact7 over the last few months have reduced these numbers. At present, six of the 15 project sites are identified to include involuntary resettlement, affecting about 1,109 structures and 5,228 persons. Non-resettlement related impacts include “perception and concerns” of communities should they need to resettle without proper consultations and compensations. Communities were concerned that during construction their living environment will be disturbed and damaged by the improper management of works operations and handling of dredged materials, which could lead to inconvenience due to damage on local roads, dusts, bad odors, spilled dredged materials, increased traffic congestion and noise from the equipments and trucks. Another potential issue is the concerns of the impacted communities for not being able to participate during construction as workers/labors and lack of communications between them and the contractors and project management. Construction at project sites will also temporarily affect about 19 operators / owners of canal crossing boats.
1.6
Proposed Environmental and Social Impact Management
19. The project will be implemented through the appropriate existing institutions in line with the government institutional structure for floods management. There are three Project Implementing Units (PIUs) at both central and local government levels: (i) the Directorate General for Water Resources 6 7
Normal daily load is currently between 5,000 – 6,000 tons per day, or about 20,000 to 24,000 m3 per day. Based, amongst others, on adapting engineering designs and works methodology to minimize impact.
6
(DGWR), (ii) the Directorate General for Human Settlements (DGCK), and (iii) the local government of Jakarta (DKI Jakarta). Each will be responsible for carrying out the dredging and rehabilitation works in the selected key floodways, canals and retention basins that come under their respective institutional and legal responsibilities. In line with its responsibility mandate for social issues in the Jakarta municipalities8, DKI Jakarta will be responsible for all project social safeguards arrangements. A Project Management Unit (PMU) has been established by DGWR to oversee and coordinate the overall preparation and implementation of the project by the three PIUs. The PMU will also implement and manage common activities, including (i) the overall construction supervision consultancy i.e., the Supervision Consultant (SC), (ii) the appointment of the Panel of Experts (POE), and (iii) the Floods Management Information Systems (FMIS), and (iv) support to DKI Jakarta related to involuntary resettlement and the project’s grievance redress system. The three JUFMP dredge material disposal locations are operated by separate entities independent of the JUFMP. Ancol CDF is operated by the concessionaire and operator of the reclamation project, PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT. PJA). The Bantar Gebang landfill is managed by the Sanitary Agency of DKI Jakarta through a private operator, while PPLi secure landfill is a private commercial provider (i.e. PT. PPLi) of hazardous waste disposal services.
Environmental Impact Management for JUFMP Works 20. For JUFMP works, the respective AMDAL as well as the JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report requirements will be incorporated into the works bidding documents and contracts. This ensures that the works contractors will have primary responsibility for the implementation of the required environmental safeguards measures. Contractors are required to have specific staff with responsibility for environmental and social management. Bidders are required as part of their bid to submit preliminary contractor’s Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP), including a preliminary Traffic Management Plan (TMP). These will be developed into detailed plans by the winning contractor. Since the majority of potential effects relate to interactions with the local communities, a minimum number of contract required meetings with the community has also been included in the contracts. The inclusion of environmental and social provisions in the biddings documents also ensures that these provisions will be adequately priced in the contracts. These costs are being built into the unit costs for dredging and transport. Environmental and social costs built into the contract unit costs include, but are not limited to, workplace sanitation, safety, traffic management, vehicle emissions control, spillage prevention, noise management, and consultations with the community. 21. The quality of the sediment materials in the selected drains and canals has been extensively tested over time. The results of the tests are consistent in so far as they all confirmed that the sediment material is non-hazardous waste (per the standards stipulated in GoI Regulations on hazardous material and hazardous waste management9). Hence, hazardous material (referred to as B3 waste in the GoI Regulations) is not expected to be found during implementation. Nevertheless, to ensure that no hazardous material from JUFMP are disposed of in the Ancol CDF10, a strict regime has been developed 8
Jakarta is officially designated a province with special status as the capital of Indonesia i.e., DKI Jakarta ( or ‘Special Capital City District of Jakarta’). Administratively, DKI Jakarta is divided into five municipalities (i.e, North Jakarta, South Jakarta, West Jakarta, East Jakarta and Central Jakarta municipalities) and one regency (i.e., Kepulauan Seribu, a group of small islands located on the Java Sea). 9 Government Regulations no. 85/1999 on Hazardous and Toxic Waste Management. 10 This requirement is also a stipulation of the Ancol CDF AMDAL.
7
and adopted requiring pre-testing of sediment in sections immediately prior to dredging. In the highly unlikely event that the pre-dredge testing reveals the presence of B3 waste and material, the location will be marked off. Subject to the approval of the Minister of Environment (as required by Indonesian regulations) this material is expected to be dredged and transported only to the PPLi secure landfill facility. 22. For JUFMP works, the primary responsibility for implementing the environmental measures detailed in the AMDALs and the JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report lies with the civil works and dredging contractors. The requirements are embedded as contractual obligations of the contractors. The project Supervision Consultant (SC) will be responsible for the day-to-day supervision of the contractors (including adherence to required environmental measures). The SC will in turn report directly to the PMU. The PMU will hold both the SC and the contractors accountable for ensuring compliance with the required environmental measures. The Terms of Reference of the SC requires that the consultant team includes environmental expertise with the capacity in supervising activities that addresses environmental impacts. Also, given that the selected drains and canals lie in the province of Jakarta and run across subprovincial jurisdictional city boundaries, the local environmental agencies (the BPLHDs) at both the Provincial level (i.e. the office that reviewed and approved all the AMDALs) and the municipal level BPHLD (i.e. Walikota level) will also be undertaking their mandated routine direct monitoring of works. The World Bank will carry out regular supervision of the project implementation, primarily through the PMU. The PMU will also retain a Panel of Experts11, who will monitor and evaluate the preparation and implementation of the project safeguards instruments (including the EMPs, RPF, RPs, and the project grievance redress system) and advise the PMU on any actions to be taken to improve compliance. Environmental Impact Management for Ancol CDF Works, and the Bantar Gebang and PPLi Operations 23. For Ancol CDF works, the AMDAL requirements have been incorporated by PT. PJA into the contracts of the Ancol CDF contractors. Hydrodynamic simulations done as part of the AMDAL process for Ancol CDF indicated that the construction of the facility will likely lead to only slight changes to the pattern of longshore current around the facility location. To mitigate against the other identified impacts, the AMDAL for Ancol CDF requires that that the deposited material in the reclaimed area be confined on all sides by the construction of an outside wall along the entire length of the perimeter of the reclamation concession area (approx 119 ha). The perimeter walls are designed so as to retain only the solids from the fill material (which will include about 3.4 million m3 of dredged material from the JUFMP project) while allowing the discharge of cleaner/filtered water from the confined area via weir. The design of the facility has been reviewed and assessed as satisfactory during project preparation. This notwithstanding, to ensure that JUFMP dredge material is not disposed at Ancol CDF before the facility is ready, the World Bank’s ‘no objection’ to any given JUFMP dredging contract will only be given once the World Bank is satisfied with the adequacy of the confined facility and has received satisfactory evidence of PT. PJA‘s compliance with the requirements of the AMDAL for Ancol CDF, including all approved updates to the AMDAL. The AMDAL for Ancol CDF also requires transport vehicles to be washed down after unloading the dredge material in the Ancol CDF site in order to further prevent unacceptable transfer of dredge material onto the local roads. The Ancol CDF AMDAL process has also reviewed the potential 11
The specialists are expected to comprise an environmental expert, an engineer experienced in dredging and dredge disposal, and an urban resettlement expert.
8
off-site impact at the source locations and transport route of sand (8.6 million m3) and laterite (400,000 m3) required in addition to JUFMP dredge material for the construction of the CDF. The AMDAL stipulates the specific source location of the sand – a marine source in the Banten area off the west coast of West Java – which has been reviewed to already possess the approved environmental permit consistent with Indonesian laws and regulations on mining and quarry. The AMDAL also requires the laterite (required at the final stages of the reclamation process) be sources approved by the DKI BPLHD (Provincial Level). 24. For Ancol CDF works, the immediate responsibility for implementing the environmental measures detailed in the Ancol CDF AMDAL lies with PT. PJA’s contractors. The requirements are embedded as contractual obligations of the contractors. PT. PJA through its Property Development Unit is supervising all aspects (including environment) of the contracts. Additionally, PT. PJA has recruited a consulting firm that carries out quarterly compliance monitoring of the ongoing construction works. PT. PJA, in compliance with the AMDAL requirements, is preparing and submitting to the DKI BPLHD quarterly implementation reports of the RKL and RPL. These reports contain measures and actions taken by PT. PJA to implement the measures contained in their approved RKL and RPL. These reports will also include the implementation of the additional measures contained in the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report. 25. The primary responsibility for supervision and oversight monitoring of the works at the Ancol CDF will be with the BPLHD agencies at the Provincial and Municipal Levels. PT. PJA has also agreed for the JUFMP project Supervision Consultant (SC) to carry out supervision and oversight monitoring of the Ancol CDF works (including activities at off-site locations) during the life of the JUFMP project. BPLHD has already started monitoring the ongoing construction works at Ancol CDF and has recorded and reported its findings and issued its instructions to PT. PJA to undertake any required corrective measures. On their November 2010 site inspection, the DKI BPLHD invited the World Bank to undertake a joint monitoring inspection of the works and the World Bank participated in the process with the DKI BPLHD. The provincial BPLHD has indicated that it will continue to invite the World Bank to its routine monitoring inspections of the works at the Ancol CDF. PT. PJA’s quarterly implementation reports of the RKL and RPL will also be shared with the World Bank. The World Bank has appraised the technical and financial capacity of the provincial BPLHD to satisfactorily undertake their mandated monitoring responsibility. While there is no direct legal agreement between the World Bank and PT. PJA, the JUFMP legal agreements will include requirements for DKI Jakarta to exercise its rights (as a shareholder of PT. PJA) to cause PT. PJA to implement the requirements (including mitigation measures) of the AMDAL for Ancol CDF and the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report. 26. The primary responsibility for supervision and oversight monitoring of the ongoing operations of the existing Bantar Gebang and PPLi facilities lies with the respective city and provincial BPLHD. The project supervision consultant (SC) will also supervise and carry out oversight monitoring of project related activities at Bantar Gebang and PPLi. Social Impact Management 27. The project seeks to avoid or minimized (if avoidance is not possible) both resettlement and nonresettlement related social impacts. This is done through limiting works to priority sections, careful
9
selection of dredging approaches and equipment technology, and detailed engineering designs (DEDs) geared towards minimizing impact. As explained in Section 1.5, significant efforts over the project preparation period have reduced the expected number of project affected structures from an initial estimate of over 2,513 to the current 1,109 structures. These efforts will continue during project implementation. The sequencing of works will also allow sufficient time to prepare, consult and implement RPs, as well as provide for the establishment of a project grievance redress system and the appointment of a panel of experts ahead of major resettlement implementation. 28. A Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) has been developed by DKI Jakarta that addresses the entitlements of Project Affected Persons (PAPs), the rationale for compensation for lost assets at replacement cost, specific measures to address vulnerable groups, and assistance for livelihood restoration. The RPF will guide the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) in project sites where involuntary resettlements are required (including project linked sites). Given a checkered history of evictions practices in Jakarta, the RPF with key principle for equitable social safeguards practices represents a transformatory progress in DKI Jakarta’s approach to handling involuntary resettlement. However, DKI Jakarta has strong concerns that its policies should not risk being seen as against public interests by inadvertently reward illegal behavior but simultaneously fail to protect affected people who are at risk of losing their home and livelihoods. For this reason, the RPF makes a distinction between squatter landlords and encroachers and other PAPs12. The RPF clarifies that assistance provided to squatter landlords and encroachers would be determined in the RP on a case by case negotiated and mutually agreed basis, without any predetermined limiting criteria. This arrangement in the RPF serves to balance the DKI Jakarta’s stated concern on the one hand, and the conformance to the World Bank’s Involuntary Resettlement policy (by not excluding any particular category of affected people from assistance and/or compensation) on the other hand. 29. All project sites will be screened for PAPs and an RP prepared in accordance with the RPF where PAPs cannot be avoided. The RPs will identify affected people and lay out the framework for compensating and restoring the livelihoods of entitled households with a clear and agreed timeline between the PAPs and DKI Jakarta. All RPs will be reviewed by the World Bank13. The RP will require the World Bank’s ‘no objection’, be publicly disclosed and implemented (except any elements related to post-resettlement activities) prior to any works commencing at the associated site. DKI Jakarta will establish a project Grievance Redress System (GRS) that will function, amongst others, to receive and address / resolve resettlement-related complaints. 30. The implementation of the resettlement-related activities is the responsibility of the DKI Jakarta, particularly its Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG), Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group, and the Monitoring and Reporting Working Group. At the operational level, particularly in preparing and implementing the RPs, the ESWG will be teamed up with the staff of the relevant municipalities (resettlement team). The Supervision Consultant (SC) will monitor, supervise and advice the ESWG in preparing and implementing the RPs. Budgets for preparing and implementing the 12
Encroachers are property owners who have extended their property beyond its legal limits into adjacent state or government land, but who will not necessarily have their source of livelihoods adversely affected nor have to relocate as a result of the repossession of the state or government land, and squatter landlords are those have built structures on state or government land for the expressed purpose of profiting from rents, but who may not rely on these rents to sustain a reasonable livelihood. 13 The World Bank review of RPs will focus on ensuring that the RPs have been prepared in accordance with all the provisions of the RPF (including satisfactory position taken in the RP regarding squatter landlords and encroachers is adequate to support the restoration of livelihoods and standard of living) and the adequacy of implementation arrangements, e.g., implementation plans and budget.
10
RPs (except for the consultant) will be borne by DKI Jakarta. This would include operational costs for the ESWG and the resettlement team, compensation for assets, resettlement assistance and rehabilitation supports. This SC will also be responsible to ensure that DKI Jakarta implement the RPs consistently and in line with the RPF, and to support DKI Jakarta in establishing and managing the project Grievance Redress System (GRS). The SC will monitor project linked sites and areas adjacent to project sites and report any relevant activities - especially those that could involve resettlement. 31. The transformatory nature of the project approach to handling resettlement as embodied in the RPF also poses significant implementation challenges. While DKI Jakarta has committed to the RPF and associated RPs, their implementation (especially in the initial period) will inevitably have to contend with inconsistent and previously established practices, procedures, and regulations. In order to minimize this potential implementation bottleneck, DKI Jakarta is currently engaged in an intensive consultation and dissemination exercise specifically with the four relevant Jakarta municipalities who will carry out the day-to-day implementation of the RPF and RPs. These efforts are aimed to strengthening the understanding and support from these municipalities towards the completion and implementation of the RPF and RPs.
1.7
Consultations
32. The consultative process for the project has been widespread over the period of project preparation (mainly 2009 – 2011) and has occurred at multiple levels depending on the target stakeholders and issues being discussed. During project preparation, most of the consultations were related to the AMDAL process14 (for both JUFMP and Ancol CDF), and the preparation of the RPF and preliminary RPs. Broader consultations between DKI Jakarta, government agencies, academia, civil society, and other stakeholders on issues ranging from technical, engineering, environment, social, planning and implementation arrangements have also been conducted and are expected to continue. During project implementation, interactions with the local communities at and near the project sites are mandated with a minimum number of contract required periodic meetings with the community included in the works contracts. The project site offices (POSKOs) to be maintained at each project site will amongst others serve as public information centers. These site offices will also serve as an easily accessible venue to receive feedbacks (including complaints) about the project from the local community as well as to carry out consultation as required. 33. The various public consultations carried out during the project preparation covered issues related to the project objectives and scope / components, institutional and implementation arrangements, project timetables, environmental impacts and mitigation plans, social impacts (including resettlement), other community concerns, and plans for ongoing community consultations and involvement. Details of the AMDAL related consultations are recorded in each approved AMDAL. In addition to AMDAL mandated consultations, a series of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were also carried out covering all kelurahans (‘urban village’ administrative areas within the municipalities) in which the project sites are located. The purposes of the FGDs were to (i) update communities on the status of the project, and (ii) obtain community feedback and aspirations. Participants comprised representatives from the kelurahan 14
Public consultations (at least two rounds) of the project proposal are mandatory in the AMDAL process, and these form key pre-requisites for compliance with both Indonesian and World Bank requirements.
11
offices, Board of Trustees of the kelurahans, Community Guidance Officers (Babinsa), Head of the Family Welfare Program (PKK), community leaders, heads of community neighborhoods (RT and RW), and representatives of the communities of the project sites. Overall, there was broad support for the project from the potentially affected people and their communities given the project aim to alleviate seasonal flooding which causes them tremendous hardship and significant economic losses. But communities also expressed various concerns, mainly related to potential construction related impacts and nuisance (e.g., noise, odor, traffic congestions, spillages, etc.), as well as potential involuntary resettlement impacts. 34. The community consultations, in particular the FGDs, were instrumental to help DKI Jakarta prepare the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF). A series of workshops and dialogues were also carried out to inform the preparation of the RPF. In particular, two internal consultations and an external consultation were carried out to disseminate and obtain support and feedback from government and other stakeholders for the draft RPF. The internal consultations involved participants from DKI Jakarta province level to the lowest level (representatives of the mayors from all four DKI municipalities, relevant DKI agencies and bureaus, and sub-local governments down to the level of Kecamatan / Kelurahan). The external consultations were attended by DKI Jakarta representatives as well as NGOs, university representative and technical experts. The internal consultations are now being followed up with intensive consultation and dissemination exercise specifically with the four relevant Jakarta municipalities who will carry out the day-to-day implementation of the RPF and RPs. 35. DKI Jakarta has also carried out consultations during the preparation of initial draft RPs for the Phase 2 sites which have been identified to have PAPs15. These initial socialization activities were done with the local levels of government / community leaders (mainly kelurahan, RT / RW) with this in turn being done either by group meetings at the kelurahan offices or by multiple small meetings moving from RT / RW to RT / RW. More intensive consultations with PAPs are planned after cut-off dates are announced, among others to confirm the lists of the PAPs and the affected assets, to discuss and agree on compensation and assistance options, dismantling and relocation schedules, etc., as part of the RP preparation. Consultations with the PAPs are expected to be done either in groups or plenary, depending on the specific situation in each site.
1.8
Project Communication
36. During the project preparation period, the consultation processes related to the environmental and social safeguards of the project (to date, over a three year period of 2009-2011) have been one of the key avenues for information dissemination of the details of the project to the public and other stakeholders. Consultations have included the dissemination of the latest project design, scope and status, and have broadly garnered positive support for the project and its floods mitigation aims. DKI Jakarta has also publicly positioned JUFMP as a key piece of its near term floods mitigation strategy. Given the overwhelming effect of recent and worsening flood incidences on city life, the local media has generally picked up these dissemination efforts. Consequently, public awareness of the JUFMP project (both at the community level as well as the city level) has increased over the period of project preparation. Media monitoring and audits carried out for the period of January 2010 to January 2011 pointed to sustained and 15
Phase 1 sites do not involve involuntary resettlement, while some Phase 2 sites will involve involuntary resettlement.
12
increasing media exposure of the project16, mainly through online news portals, community blogs and the print media. The tone of media discussions on floods mitigation efforts have also evolved towards the positive over the audit period. The periodic Joint Steering Committee meetings have been instrumental in providing the platform for inter-agency communications and information sharing of the latest developments and status of the project. Within DKI Jakarta, the opportunity of the consultation processes related to the social safeguards of the project has been utilized to communicate details of the project to the lowest level of local government. 37. During project implementation, communication through the platform of environmental, social and contractors’ consultations will continue. At the community level, the public information center (located in the POSKO) at each JUFMP project site will play a critical role, where project information (including the latest implementation status) will be available and easily accessible to the public, in particular communities within or close to project sites. The Joint Steering Committee meetings are expected to continue. DKI Jakarta has also assigned its Bureau for Infrastructure Development (Biro Prasarkot) with the specific task of coordinating and communicating the project across the relevant DKI Jakarta and other government agencies. Apart from the project communications efforts of the Government and implementing agencies, the World Bank is preparing a project website on which the latest project information can be made available during implementation.
1.9
Reputational Risks
38. The JUFMP project preparation has undergone a fairly comprehensive and exhaustive environmental and social assessment process. This notwithstanding, there are three key areas of activities that are not directly in the responsibility of the project implementation entities that may pose a risk to the reputation of the JUFMP and/or the World Bank during the implementation. The first relates to nonproject activities that may occur in or close to project sites. The second concerns the activities within the Ancol CDF. The third concerns the long term reclamation activities in north Jakarta. Various measures will be undertaken during implementation to mitigate, reduce or otherwise manage these risks to acceptable levels. It should be noted that these measures will not completely remove these risks. 39. Given the highly dense urban setting, the occurrence of projects and other activities unrelated to the JUFMP project within or in close proximity to some JUFMP sites is likely unavoidable. These activities may have different objectives, standards and processes, but may be wrongly associated to JUFMP in the minds of the public and other stakeholders. This may lead to wrong expectations of the public on these activities, or the wrong attribution of any poor environmental and social management measures to the JUFMP project. Various actions will be undertaken to mitigate and reduce these risks, including the posting of project signage, temporary fencing where feasible, and the maintenance of a public information center (located in the POSKO) at each project site to disseminate project information and to serve as an immediate venue for the clarification of any misunderstanding that may arise. The Supervision Consultant (SC) will also monitor areas adjacent to JUFMP sites (and project linked sites) as a means to provide advance notice to the PIU, PMU and the World Bank to allow for coordination and actions to prevent any communications misunderstanding and inadvertent wrong associations to JUFMP.
16
Averaging over 10 media articles per month over the period.
13
40. The JUFMP will contribute a portion of the fill material required for the reclamation at Ancol CDF. The reclamation at the Ancol CDF is both part of a separate larger reclamation plan in Ancol that is outside the control of the JUFMP project implementing agencies and an integral part of JUFMP. Nevertheless, the public and other stakeholders may directly associate any problems (e.g., environmental, social, financial, commercial, etc.) that may arise at Ancol CDF with JUFMP. Given the JUFMP interests in the proper and successful implementation of the Ancol CDF activities, arrangements have been made for the Supervision Consultant (SC) to have access to Ancol CDF for the purposes of monitoring and supervision (including of the source locations for the sand and laterite fill material). During project implementation, the World Bank will also work with BPLHD to conduct joint supervision and site inspections of the Ancol CDF. These monitoring and supervision activities will allow for actions to be formulated and taken to address any implementation shortcomings, and is expected to reduce the potential reputational risk to the JUFMP and/or the World Bank. The project design will include provisions to limit the World Bank’s liability with respect to activities at Ancol CDF. 41. The Ancol CDF reclamation activity itself is a specific and relatively small reclamation set within a larger and ongoing long term reclamation process in the Ancol area of north Jakarta that started in the early 1960’s. While the JUFMP project is clearly unrelated to reclamation activities other than Ancol CDF specifically, the possibility exists that it may still be wrongly associated by the public and other stakeholders as being responsible over other reclamation projects e.g., those that have occurred in the past or potentially may occur in the future . The project documents and information dissemination efforts will aim to emphasize and make clear that the extent of JUFMP’s linkage in this regard is confined to the Ancol CDF.
2
Project Description
2.1
Project Development Objective
42. The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to contribute to the improvement of the operations and maintenance of a priority part of the flood management system in Jakarta. The PDO will be achieved through: Dredging sections of selected key floodways, canals and retention basins to improve their flow capacities, and disposing the dredge material in proper facilities; Rehabilitating and constructing embankment in sections of, and repairing or replacing mechanical equipment in, the same selected key floodways, canals and retention basins to sustain and improve their operations; Establishing institutional coordination between the three responsible agencies to encourage coordinated development, and operations and maintenance (O&M) of Jakarta's flood management system, and Strengthening the capability of the responsible agencies to improve the operations, maintenance and management of Jakarta's flood management system.
14
2.2
Summary of Project Component
43. The overall project cost is estimated at US$ 190.4 million, of which counterpart funding portion is US$ 38.9 million. The Project consists of two components which are summarized as followed: Component 1. Dredging and rehabilitation of selected key floodways, canals and retention basins. This component will support the dredging and rehabilitation of 11 floodways / canals and four retention basins which have been identified as priority sections of the Jakarta flood management system in need of urgent rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities. The 11 floodways / canals are estimated to have a total length of 67.5 km, while the four retention basins estimated to cover a total area of 65.1 hectares (see summary details in Table 2-1 below). About 42.2 km of embankments are expected to be rehabilitated or constructed within these floodways, canals and retention basins. Where necessary, mechanical equipment (pumps, gates, etc) will be replaced or repaired. Component 2. Technical assistance for project management, social safeguards, and capacity building. This component will support contracts management, engineering design reviews, construction supervision engineers for the dredging and rehabilitation works and technical assistance. Technical assistance includes support to improve institutional coordination for operations and maintenance of Jakarta’s flood management system as well as the establishment of a Floods Management Information System (FMIS). Provision has been made for the cost of implementing required Resettlement Plans (RPs), as well as the establishment and operations of a project Grievance Redress System and a Panel of Experts.
2.3
Project Sites
44. Fifteen priority floodways, canals and retention basins were identified to be included in the scope of the project works (see Table 2-1 for detailed descriptions and Project Map in Annex 1 for locations). These were identified by the Government as in priority need of rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities.
45.
Linked sites. Ten sites were identified as project linked sites17. These linked sites are: (i) Kali Item, Kalibaru and Sunter Kemayoran (linked to the Sentiong Sunter Drain); (ii) Ancol Kp. Bandan and Ancol Long Storage (linked to the Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway); (iii) Canal along Jalan Kayu Putih Timur (linked to the Upper Sunter River Drain); and (iv) Ciliwung-Kota, the canal along Jalan Tubagus Angke, PHB Bandengan Utara, and Waduk Pluit (linked to the Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain).
46. The above-mentioned ten linked sites were identified as hydraulically and directly connected with the canals/waduks under JUFMP. DKI Jakarta currently has no specific plans for rehabilitation works at
17
Per OP 4.12, the criteria for identifying linked sites are: (1) directly and significantly related to JUFMP; (2) necessary to achieve JUFMP objectives; and (3) contemporaneous to JUFMP. Study on defining the linked sites was done during the preparation of the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and linked sites were mainly defined as hydraulically linked in the context of the first linkage criteria as specified in OP 4.12, but do not fulfill all the three criteria altogether.
15
these linked sites. However, in the event that linked activities are carried out in these sites, the RPF (and all associated provisions) will apply to such sites.
Table 2-1 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Basins under Project Contract Works Package 1 (DKI) 2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR) 7 (DKI)
Location
Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side) Lower Sunter Floodway Note 1 Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain) Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain West Banjir Canal (sea side) Upper Sunter Floodway Note 1 Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain Krukut Cideng Drain Note 2 Krukut Lama Drain Note 2
Description of Drains (Estimated) Length (m) Width (m) Area (m2 or ha.) 5,100 21.50 ~ 45.90 171,870 m2 (2,004) (1,260) 4.90 ha. 7,840 (540) 38.00 ~ 87.00 490,000 m2 9,980
20.20 ~ 47.40
338,320 m2
3,840 (1,960)
10.00 ~ 19.00
55,680 m2
5,950 (400) (570)
16.10 ~ 31.20
600 4,050 3,060 (590) 5,150 2,970 4,910 3,250 3,490
9.20 ~ 26.00 31.00 ~ 51.00 33.00 ~ 141.00 15.00 ~ 36.00 21.00 ~ 51.00 13.00 ~ 31.00 15.00 ~ 29.00 7.00 ~ 29.00
161,240 m2 33.00 ha. 19.20 ha. 8.00 ha. 10,560 m2 166,050 m2 266,220 m2 131,320 m2 106,920 m2 108,020 m2 71,500 m2 62,820 m2
2,140,520 m2 65 ha. Note 1 For contracting purposes, the Sunter Floodways has been divided into two sub-packages – Upper Sunter Floodway and Lower Sunter Floodway. Note 2 For contracting purposes, the Krukut Drain has been divided into two sub-packages – Krukut Cideng Drain and Krukut Lama Drain 67,514
2.4
Sequencing of Works
47. The construction works funded by the project are proposed to be carried out in two sequenced phases (see Table 2-2). A sequenced implementation design has been adopted as a key implementation risk management mechanism for the project. Phase 1 works (proposed 4 sites / 3 works contracts) are expected to commence during the first year of the project. Phase 2 works (proposed 11 sites / 5 contracts) are expected to follow subsequently. This sequencing will avoid the PMU/PIUs and their supervision consultant from being overburdened during the first year when detailed actual implementation processes, procedures and routines are operationalized. The sequencing will also allow time for DKI Jakarta to complete the necessary resettlement instruments and supporting arrangements for Phase 2 sites19, including the establishment of a project grievance redress system and the appointment of a panel of 19
Phase 1 sites do not involve involuntary resettlement.
16
experts. Two project linked sites i.e., Ancol Kp. Bandan and Ancol Long Storage are linked to Phase 1 work sites20, and the remaining are linked to Phase 2 work sites. Table 2-2 Sequencing of Project Construction Works Sequencing Phase 1 Phase 2
2.5
1 2a 2b 3 4 5 6 7
Contract Package and Implementation Responsibility (DKI - Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta) (DGWR - Directorate General of Water Resource) (DGWR) (DGCK – Directorate General of Human Settlement) (DKI) (DGCK) (DGWR) (DKI)
Volume of Works
48. Surveys of the selected key floodways, canals and retention basins carried out during project preparation estimated the total volume of material to be dredged to be about 3.4 million m3 (of which about 95,000 m3 are estimated to be solid waste). About 42.2 km of embankments are expected to be rehabilitated or constructed within these floodways, canals and retention basins. Details are provided in Table 2-3.
20 Rapid assessments carried out during project preparation indicated that no involuntary resettlement is expected in the event that linked activities are carried out at these two sites.
17
Table 2-3 Description of Floodways, Canals and Retention Basins under the Project Package
1 (DKI) 2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR) 7 (DKI)
Location
Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side) Lower Sunter Floodway Note 1 Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain) Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain West Banjir Canal (sea side) Upper Sunter Floodway Note 1 Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain Krukut Cideng Drain Note 2 Krukut Lama Drain Note 2
Dredging Depth (m)
Dredging Estimates Volume Dredge Material (m3)
1.90 ~ 2.70
156,970
Volume of Solid Waste (m3) 3,140
Embankment Works (m)
2.20 ~ 3.10
99,490
1,250
1,905
1.50 ~ 3.50
1,225,500
22,510
4,600
1.60 ~ 2.30
399,250
19,970
1,800
0.60 ~ 2.30
33,230
810
2,570
0.50 ~ 2.10
140,150
7,010
3,865
1.30 ~ 2.10
413,400
10,340
5,000
1.00 ~ 2.10 0.70 ~ 3.30 1.10 ~ 1.90 2.00 ~ 3.60 1.70 ~ 2.50 1.80 ~ 3.40 0.70 ~ 2.30 0.60 ~ 1.60
48,200 51,000 11,500 248,000 350,080 82,000 40,500 100,000
1,210 1,280 290 6,200 8,760 4,100 1,020 5,000
3,057 305 1,092 821 1,190 1,850 2,391 2,882
4,832
28,700 1,440 1,658 14,900 750 2,400 3,441,870 95,080 42,218 Note 1 For contracting purposes, the Sunter Floodways has been divided into two sub-packages – Upper Sunter Floodway and Lower Sunter Floodway. Note 2 For contracting purposes, the Krukut Drain has been divided into two sub-packages – Krukut Cideng Drain and Krukut Lama Drain
2.6
0.70 ~ 0.80 0.50 ~ 0.80
Disposal Sites
49. The disposal sites are not financed by the project, however, they are considered an integral part of the project. The approximately 3.4 million m3 of sediment material21 and the approximately 95,000 m3 of solid waste that will be removed from the floodways, canals and retention basins that are being dredged by this project will be disposed of in the following manner (see Figure 2-1 for an illustration of the disposal arrangements). Non Hazardous Sediment Material – will be transported and disposed of at the Ancol Sea Reclamation Works, known as the Ancol CDF. Hazardous Sediment Material (if any are found) – will be disposed of at the PPLi Hazardous Waste Facility in Bogor, West Java22. Solid Waste – will be transported and disposed of at City of Jakarta’s landfill in Bekasi, West Java, known as the Bantar Gebang Landfill.
21 All sections of the project floodways, canals and retention basins will be tested for the presence of hazardous material (known as B3 material) prior to dredging. 22 Note that specific proposed method to treat/dispose of any hazardous waste will follow national regulations on hazardous waste treatment and disposal and subject to the approval of the Ministry of Environment (MoE).
18
Figure 2-1 Summary of the Disposal Arrangements
Dispose Hazardous
Material (if any)
Material
J akarta Provincial Environmental Ag ency (BPLHD)
environmental agency
provincial
Supervise (through
provincial
PPLi S ecure Landfill Facility environmental agency
Ope rate
Supervise (through
Prasadha Pamunah Limbah Industri (PPLi)
Bantar Gebang Landf ill Facility
provincial
Operate (outsource d)
environmental agency
DKI Sa nita ry Agency
Ancol Conf ined Disposal Facility
Supervise (through
Construct and Operate
Dispose Solid W aste Material
PT. Pembang unan Jaya A ncol (PT. PJA )
hazardous
Dispose Non-
ALL Project Works Contracts 7 contracts / 15 sites
West Jav a Provincial Environmental Agency
Project Supervision Consultancy
2.6.1 Ancol confined disposal facility (CDF) 50. Non-hazardous dredge material will be disposed of at the Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) and utilized as material for land reclamation purposes. The Ancol CDF is a specific reclamation area set within a larger and ongoing long term reclamation effort in the Ancol area of north Jakarta that started in the early 1960’s. The JUFMP does not finance nor is it related to the Ancol reclamation effort23. Instead, the Project is working cooperatively and in a mutually beneficial manner with the developer of the Ancol CDF (i.e., PT. PJA) to demonstrate safe disposal and utilization of dredge material.
2.6.2 Bantar Gebang landfill facility 51. The Bantar Gebang Landfill facility which has been operating since 1989 is the largest landfill in Indonesia, in terms of volume of solid waste received and disposed of. It is located just outside the city limits of Jakarta, in the City of Bekasi and is owned by the provincial Government of DKI Jakarta. It is managed by the Sanitary Agency of the DKI Jakarta (Dinas Kebersihan) through a private operator.
23
In relative terms, the project dredge material will contribute only a very small percentage of the total overall Ancol reclamation.
19
2.6.3 PPLi hazardous waste landfill 52. Extensive testing of the sediment in the project floodways, canals and retention basins as part of the Environmental Assessment of this project, and in surrounding drainage systems as well, have not shown the presence of any hazardous dredged material. In the unlikely event that any hazardous dredged material is found24, an existing hazardous waste landfill, known as the PPLi secure landfill, located in Bogor, West Java, has been identified to serve as the disposal site for these hazardous dredged materials. PPLi landfill is a private entity licensed to provide disposal and treatment services for hazardous waste and has been operating since 1994.
3
Environmental and Social Legal Requirements and Project Institutional and Implementation Arrangements
3.1
Government of Indonesia Environmental Impact Assessment
53. Indonesia has a plethora of national and sub-national environmental laws and regulations that govern the environmental planning process for works of this kind. The overarching regulation for the AMDAL process25 in Indonesia for any activity or project with potential significant environmental impacts is the Environmental Management Act No 23/1997, and specifically Article 15 on the environmental impact assessment requirements. A new environmental management and protection law, Act No. 32 of 2009, was issued on 2009 and substitutes Act No. 23/1997. Government Regulation (PP) No: 27/1999 provides detailed guidelines of the AMDAL system. Furthermore, the Ministry of Environment (MoE) Decree No. 11/2006 lists specific activities that require AMDAL and the MoE Decree No.8/2006 provides guidelines for AMDAL preparation. 54. With regard to the dredging work, the MoE Decree No. 11/2006 specifies that any maintenance dredging activity in the metropolitan city will require an AMDAL if the dredge volume exceeds 500,000 m3. This requirement is also in line with the regional law (i.e. Governor of Jakarta Decree No 2863/2001 on type and list of specific business and activities in Jakarta that require AMDAL), which states that any dredging with volume more than 50,000 m3 must have an AMDAL approved by the provincial level of environmental agency (i.e. BPLHD) of DKI Jakarta26. 55.
Other key relevant national and regional legislations considered when preparing the AMDAL are: MoE Decree No. 2/2000: Guidance on the evaluation of the AMDAL document. MoE Decree No.40/2000: Guidance on the working procedure of the AMDAL commission. MoE Decree No.42/2000: Guidance on the formation of evaluation team and technical team members for the AMDAL. Head of Bapedal (Environmental Impact Management Agency) Decree No. 8/2000: Guidance on public participation and information disclosure during the AMDAL.
24
During project implementation, sediments in each work site section will be tested again before dredging works is authorized – see Chapter 3. Under the Indonesian System – an ANDAL is synonymous to the Environmental Impacts Assessment in the World Bank’s Environmental Policy OP 4.01, RKL is the Environment Management Plan and RPL is the Environment Monitoring Plan. The ANDAL, RKL and RPL are collectively known as the AMDAL. 26 The regional law being stricter than the national MoE Decree No. 11/2006. 25
20
Governor of Jakarta Decree No 76/2001: Operative guidance on public involvement and information disclosure during the AMDAL.
56. Figure 3-1 presents the AMDAL process. This is a fairly robust process which involves public consultation and solicitation of feedbacks from the public and technical experts, and several levels of review prior to the final environmental clearance27.
Figure 3-1 AMDAL Process STEPS
AMDAL PROCESS
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS
RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
Screening and Initial Meeting with Government
Information Disclosure
Scoping
Determination of ANDAL Study Scope
Solicitation of Comments/Information
Proponent ANDAL Study
ANDAL Study Implementation
Socioeconomic Survey
Preparation of ANDAL, RKL/ RPL Documents (by Proponent)
ANDAL Review
AMDAL Clearance
3.2
Review of ANDAL, RKL/RPL Document
Information Disclosure Review or Solicitation of Comments/ Information
Decision on Environmental Clearance
Environmental Agency
Information Disclosure
Government of Indonesia Land Acquisition
57. The Government of Indonesia has several main laws and regulations pertaining to land rights and acquisition for development activities in the public interests. The major important law that assures and 27 The ANDAL review in Figure 3-1 is conducted by an AMDAL Commission formed by BPLHD. The AMDAL Commission consists of representatives from BPLHD (2-3 persons), university experts (or known as Technical Team, 5-7 persons from different areas expertise), representatives from sub-district (Kecamatan) and neighborhood (Kelurahan), and representatives from NGOs.
21
regulates land rights is the Basic Agrarian Law No. 5 of 1960. Other relevant national regulations pertaining to land and land acquisition are: Law No. 20 of 1961 on the Revocation of Land Rights; Government Regulation No. 24 of 1997 on Land Registration; Presidential Regulation No. 36 of 2005 on Land Provision for Development Activities in the Public Interest; Presidential Regulation No. 65 of 2006, which revises the Presidential Regulation No. 36/2005; and, Implementation Guidelines No. 3 of 2007 for Presidential Regulations No. 36/2005 and No. 65 of 2006, issued by the National Land Agency. Another regulation relevant to the project is Law No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources, which intends to protect water resources to maintain their functions. 58. Presidential Regulation No. 36/2005 and No. 65/2007 regulate the procedures and processes of land acquisition (and assets attached to the land) for development activities that are in the public interests. These include development activities under the responsibility of the local government, such as roads/toll roads/railways/sanitation/water distribution; retention basins/dams; ports/airports/train station/terminals; public health facility; telecommunication and post; sport facilities; government buildings; police and security facility; solid wastes disposal facility; protection of natural habitat; and power generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. These regulations also stipulate the entitlements and procedures and criteria for compensation, appraisal for compensation, and consultations and negotiations, as well as complaints and dispute settlements and land revocation. These regulations categorize the procedures and process for land acquisition for more than 1 hectare, and for less than one hectare. The Implementation Guideline No. 3 of 2007 for Presidential Regulations No. 36/2005 and No. 65 of 2006, outlines in more detail the procedures, processes and criteria for land acquisition as stipulated in the two Presidential Regulations. The three mentioned regulations do not explicitly regulate assistance and do not cover income restoration. They stipulate that the compensation level for land should be made based on the assessment of an independent land appraisal team formed in accordance with the regulations. 59. DKI Jakarta also has regulations that regulate compensation of assets, i.e., Implementation Guidelines for the Assessment of Compensation for Buildings, which are issued regularly by the DKI Jakarta Agency for Housing and Government Buildings. This regulation is used as a basis for determining compensation levels for assets (buildings and ancillary assets attached to the buildings). In addition, DKI Jakarta has a Local Regulation No. 8 of 2007 pertaining to Public Order, which has been used as a basis for repossessing public land that have been used without permits from DKI Jakarta government or other land/public space that have been used for the purposes that are not in line with DKI Jakarta’s land use plans.
3.3
The World Bank’s Triggered Environmental Safeguards Policies and Compliance Requirements.
60. The project is expected to yield positive environmental outcomes for the following reasons: (i) alleviating seasonal flooding in the densely populated area of Jakarta will reduce the environmental impact and public health issues caused by overflowing and stagnant flood waters, (ii) removal of solid
22
waste and sediments from the selected drains would also prevent these materials from being flushed uncontrolled into the estuary and bay area and out into the open sea, and (iii) over the longer term the flood information management system that is being introduced by the project would provide the Government of DKI Jakarta, (i.e. DKI Jakarta) with the information based planning tool they need to sustainably manage the network well beyond the life of the project to continue to reduce the incidence of flooding in the area. 61. Notwithstanding, significant negative environmental impacts are likely from the dredging and embankment works and the significant quantities of sediment material and solid waste that would be generated and how these dredged materials would be handled, temporarily stored, stockpiled, sorted, transported and finally disposed in urban areas that are densely populated and surrounded by surface and sea water would be managed. These impacts include potentially significant traffic disruption, reduction in air quality due to dust and foul odor emissions, increased noise levels, reduction in surface water and sea water quality, etc. (see Chapter 5 for a more detailed description of significant environmental impacts from the project). 62. The project will potentially have significant adverse impacts that may be sensitive and diverse and may thus affect areas that are widespread. Thus the project triggers the World Bank’s Environmental Assessment Operational Policy (OP4.01) and as per this policy’s requirements is assigned an EA category of A. The policy will apply to all project sites. In addition, all three disposal sites, namely the Ancol CDF, the Bantar Gebang Landfill and the PPLi facility are considered integral parts of the project.
3.4
The World Bank’s Triggered Social Safeguards Policies and Compliance Requirements.
63. The project is expected to have significant positive social impacts. In particular, the reduction of floods events will reduce the disruptions in communities in project areas. Beneficiaries will be predominantly poor communities living in flood-prone areas within the project scope. However, involuntary resettlement is currently identified as required in six project sites (see Chapter 5 for a more detailed description of potential significant adverse social impacts from the project). For this reason, the project triggers the World Bank’s Involuntary Resettlement Policy (OP 4.12). The policy will apply in all projects sites (including linked sites).
3.5
Package of Environment and Social Safeguards Documents.
3.5.1 Environmental safeguards documents 64. A comprehensive Environmental Assessment has been undertaken of the JUFMP in a process and manner that are aligned with the packaging and sequencing of the works as stated in Table 3-1 below. For Phase 1 works, the original AMDAL (i.e., ANDAL, RKL and RPL) was prepared by the PMU in 2009 to meet Government of Indonesia environmental requirements and was reviewed and approved by the Provincial BPLHD in March 2010 (following the AMDAL process outlined in Figure 3-1). During project preparation, the World Bank also reviewed the Phase 1 AMDAL for compliance with its own Environmental Assessment OP4.01 and found that there were gaps in the documents. Hence the PMU
23
prepared and have adopted a JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report (including recommendations of additional measures) to address the identified gaps with World Bank OP4.01 requirements. 65. The Phase 2 works have been identified and notwithstanding that they will be implemented in subsequent years after the Phase 1 works, the PMU has completed the full AMDAL and the first draft of these reports is currently being reviewed by BPLHD. The Phase 2 works are not being appraised by the World Bank during project preparation but instead will be appraised during project implementation. Therefore, the PMU has prepared the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) to cover the environmental and social management requirements of Phase 2 works. 66. The AMDAL for the Ancol Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) requires that any material that is deposited for reclamation purposes to be confined on all sides to prevent the deposited material from coming into contact with the open sea and thereby risks being washed away and contaminating the sea. Therefore, the engineering design for the Ancol site is for a confined facility. The AMDAL for the Ancol CDF was first prepared by PT. PJA, the concessionaire for the reclamation site in 2006. The design of the facility was subsequently changed when DKI Jakarta requested that the JUFMP dredge sediment material be deposited at the Ancol CDF, leading to an AMDAL revision carried out in December 2008. This updated AMDAL for the Ancol CDF was then submitted for review and approval to the Provincial BPLHD who approved it in March 2009. 67. During project preparation, the World Bank also reviewed the updated Ancol CDF RKL and 28 RPL . The review found a requirement for additional measures to further strengthen these documents and to meet the World Bank’s own requirements. These additional measures are recorded in the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report prepared by the PMU are (i) to review the permits and sources of sand and to record the potential off-site impacts associated with extracting 8.6 million m3 of sand, (ii) strengthening day to day environmental supervision and monitoring of the construction and filling of the Ancol CDF by allowing the use of the project Supervision Consultant access at the Ancol CDF and inclusion of detailed traffic management plans. PT. PJA has agreed with these additional requirements in the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report. Therefore, as per the Indonesian AMDAL requirements, PT. PJA will include these additional measures in their next quarterly RKL and RPL progress report, which is due in April 2011. Note that JUFMP dredging works will not start until a final satisfactory review has been carried out of the constructed Ancol CDF facility’s enclosing dykes (see Section 3.7.2). 68. The other disposal sites, i.e., the Bantar Gebang Landfill for solid waste and PPLi for hazardous waste are existing facilities that are already operating under environmental permits. As part of its due diligence review the World Bank visited these two facilities:
PPLi Landfill (for hazardous waste disposal, if any). A site visit was carried out by the World Bank team on October 19, 2010. PPLi a licensed hazardous waste management facility that has been in operation since 1994 is partly (5%) owned by the Government of Indonesia through Ministry of State Owned Enterprises while the rest of 95% is owned by Dowa Eco System Co. Ltd., Japan. PPLi is the first facility in Indonesia that provides a complete range of hazardous
28 The review included a further subsequent update related to the assessment of a proposed change in design change of the northern boundary (dyke) of the CDF in March 2011, for which the recommendations of the World Bank review of the proposal was acknowledged and adopted prior to the approval of the change by BPLHD.
24
69.
waste management services (payable tipping fee applied) including transportation, treatment processes, and disposal in a secure and modern landfill compliant with international waste management standards including those of the EU, and US-EPA. Situated at the Cileungsi subdistrict, Bogor, the company owns 50 ha landfill that has a total capacity of over 3 million tons (at the time of WB team visit, only 2 ha. has been used). A double composite liner, constructed of bentonite clay and high-density polyethylene (HDPE), lines the landfill's base, which prevents any leachate from contaminating the surrounding environment. New waste is covered with soil or a synthetic material on a daily basis. Once an area of the landfill fills to capacity, it is capped with clay and a HDPE liner to prevent water from seeping into the closed landfill cell. Based on rapid site assessment, it was confirmed that the PPLi facility meets the national and sub-national regulation and more importantly that it still has enough capacity to receive hazardous waste (if any are found during project implementation). The Project has allocated funds to ensure that in the unlikely event that the hazardous sediment waste is found and BPLHD decides that the waste has to be disposed of at the PPLi facility, funds are available for this purpose. Bantar Gebang Landfill (for Solid Waste Disposal). Bantar Gebang disposal site is located within vicinity of the satellite City of Bekasi, approximately 35km east of Jakarta. The landfill which is owned by the Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta has been in operation since 1989 and it covers an area of 110.3 hectares. The site exclusively receives domestic solid waste from DKI Jakarta which is approximately 5,000t/day, of the total of 6,000 ton solid wastes generated per day in DKI Jakarta. For each ton of garbage, the DKI pays Rp. 100 000 tipping fee to the site operator (based on Dec 2010 site visit). The facility was designed to handle 19 million m3 of waste and since its opening, approximately 10 million m3 of waste had been disposed of at Banter Gebang. The site is managed by a private company, i.e. a joint venture of PT Godang Tua Jaya and PT Navigat Organic Energy Indonesia () under the supervision of the DKI Jakarta Provincial Sanitary Agency (Dinas Kebersihan DKI Jakarta). Within two years of its 15 yrs contract (contract ends 2023), the site operator has added few new facilities, these include (i) Garbage-methane power generation plant (design for 23 megawatt), (ii) Composting facility (capacity of 500 ton garbage per day; and (iii) new sanitary landfills. With regards this Project, the PMU and WB have both visited the site and confirm that landfill has the capacity to receive 95 000 m3 of solid wastes to be removed from drains, canals and waduks during the Project implementation and that the site has a valid operating permit (West Java Governor Number 593.82/SK/282.P/AGK/DA/86 dated on 25 January 1986 jo. 593.82/ SK.116.P /AGK/DA/261987) and is in compliance with local regulations. Implementation of environmental management and monitoring is carried out by the site operator and reported regularly on a quarterly basis to BPLHD Jakarta and BPLHD Bekasi. The environmental due diligence carried out for the project disposal sites are summarized in
Table 3-1.
25
Table 3-1 Summary of due Diligence Process for Disposal Sites Name of Project Disposal Sites Ancol CDF Site (119 ha)
Category of Project waste to be disposed of at this facility Non Hazardous (non B3) dredge material
Operating Status during Project Preparation At time of project preparation, Ancol CDF engineering designs were being finalized and facility is being constructed, with completion target date of December 2011.
Project Environmental Requirements
Summary of World Bank (WB) Due Diligence Actions
Updated ANDAL, RKL and RPL approved in March 2009 (BPLHD)
Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report
Bantar Gebang Landfill
PPLi
Solid Waste removed from project sites
Existing facility, in operations since 1989
Hazardous, B3, dredged sediment material (if any are found).
Existing facility, in operations since 1994
Facilities construction based on West Java Governor Decree No: 593.82/SK/282. P/AGK/DA/86 dated on 25 January 1986 jo. 593.82/SK.116. P /AGK/DA/26198729. AMDAL approved in July 1993 (Head of Environmental Impact Management Agency Kep36/BAPEDAL/0 7/1993)30
Reviewing the AMDALs (including hiring independent consultant to carry out review) Reviewing the CDF design (and subsequent design changes) Conducting (with the Provincial BPLHD) joint environmental supervision missions of ongoing works (last joint visit: November 2010). Continued site visit during project preparation to review the ongoing construction of the CDF. Reviewing the supplemental EA. Reviewing and assessing the sediment quality of JUFMP location. Reviewing and assessing offsite impacts from sourcing of material for the CDF (i.e., sand and red clay) WB held various technical discussions with PT. PJA, DKI and other stakeholders on all aspects of the design and construction of the Ancol CDF. The owners of the Ancol CDF, PT. PJA have agreed for the project Supervision Consultant (SC), to also supervise and monitor the implementation of the EMP in Ancol. This is included in the SC’s TOR. Visited the landfill to review operations and environmental permits and assess capacity / adequacy. The SC will also supervise and monitor for compliance for these projects activities at the Banter Gebang facility.
Visited the facility to review operations and environmental permits and assess capacity / adequacy. The SC will also supervise and monitor for compliance of these projects activities at the PPLi facility. This is included in the SC’s TOR.
29 Then because of the requirement of the first Indonesia AMDAL regulation, i.e. Government Regulation No: 29 of 1986 regarding Environmental Impact Assessment. The Sanitary Agency of DKI carried out an AMDAL Study and the AMDAL was approved in 1989. 30 http://www.menlh.go.id/i/art/pdf_1067455998.pdf
26
3.5.2 Social safeguards documents 70. In order to address this safeguard policy issue and to ensure that implementation of project activities will be carried out in a socially sustainable manner, DKI Jakarta has prepared a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF). The policy framework addresses the entitlements of Project Affected Persons (PAPs) who are occupants of state or government land as well as entitlements of PAPs affected by the acquisition of privately owned land, the rationale for compensation for lost assets at replacement cost, specific measures to address vulnerable groups, and assistance for livelihood restoration. The RPF will guide the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) in project sites where involuntary resettlements are required (including linked sites). Chapter 8 provides a more detailed discussion of the project approach to resettlement and resettlement planning, including social impact management and key aspects of the RPF and RP processes, procedures and implementation.
3.5.3 Preparation and disclosure of safeguards documents 71. In compliance with Indonesia’s and the World Bank’s requirements, the environmental and social safeguards documents for the respective works and sites were / will be disclosed. Given the sequencing of project implementation into two phases, i.e. Phase 1 and Phase 2, it is expected that the various Phase 2 works will commence later - around 12 to 18 months after project approval (see Section 2.4 for a description of sequencing as a key implementation risk management mechanism). The project is set in a dynamic and fluid environment. Jakarta’s flood management infrastructure is in a poor condition due to severe under implementation of operations and maintenance and inadequate local drainage management. These are apt to suffer further unpredictable damages from flood events (especially during the annual flooding season)31 and the continuous surrounding heavy urban activities. Hence, design changes in response to continuously changing conditions should be expected during implementation, requiring associated revisions to the safeguards documents. Consequently, the quality of implementation and the environmental and social outcomes related to Phase 2 works may only be assured through a similar sequencing of their EIAs and RPs preparation, disclosure and implementation. The applicable environmental safeguards documents related to Phase 1 works will be disclosed prior to project appraisal32. The ESMF and RPF for the project will be disclosed prior to appraisal. The ESMF and RFP will cover the environmental and social management requirements of Phase 2 works, and will guide the preparation, finalization and implementation of Phase 2 related EIAs and RPs. Phase 2 EIAs and RPs will be completed during project implementation (prior to any related works commencing) and subject to World Bank review and ‘no-objection’ prior to disclosure and implementation. No works will commence at any site until the World Bank has provided the 'no objection' to the final EIAs and RPs for the site. The ESMF and RPF, as well as the EIA and RP of the relevant site, will also be made available at the project site offices (POSKOs) to be set up at each project site prior to construction works. 72.
31
In general, the annual rainy season occur from November to April. Flood incidences are perennial occurrences and flood events have been increasing in severity (and hence more damaging) during the past decade. 32 Phase 1 activities do not involve any involuntary resettlement.
27
Table 3-2 summarizes the disclosure status of the project environmental and social safeguards package of documents. A tentative plan for the preparation of Phase 2 related EIAs and RPs (linked to the planned timing of Phase 2 works) is provided in Annex 2. Table 3-2 Summary of Environmental and Social Documents and Disclosure Status Item
Document
Approval / Review
Project
Consolidated Summary of Environmental Impact Assessment
World Bank review: (June 2011) Draft
Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF)1
World Bank review: (Jan 2011) Draft (June 2011) Draft
Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF)2
World Bank review: (May 2011) Final
AMDAL3
Phase 1 Works
JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report
Ancol CDF
Revised AMDAL4
Language Documents Available in locally
Public Disclosure Date
Method/Venue for Disclosure
MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, 1818 H Street N.W., Washington DC 20043. (iii) World Bank website MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, 1818 H Street N.W., Washington DC 20043. (iii) World Bank website DKI: (i) DKI website (ii) Project-site Kelurahan offices MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank: (i) PIC in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) World Bank website BPLHD: Printed copies available at the BPLHD offices of DKI Jakarta, Nyi Ageng Serang Building, 10th floor, Jalan Rasuna Said, Kuningan, Jakarta MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank: (i) PIC in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) World Bank website MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank: (i) PIC in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) World Bank website
Bahasa Indonesia & English
29 Jul 2011
English
26 Jan 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & English
29 Jul 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & English
7 Jul 2011
BPLHD approval: (March 2010) Final
Bahasa Indonesia & English
30 Mar 2010
World Bank review: (Jan 2011) Final
Bahasa Indonesia & English
26 Jan 2011
English
26 Jan 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & English
29 Jul 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & English
30 Mar 2010
BPLHD: Printed copies available at the BPLHD offices of DKI Jakarta
Bahasa Indonesia
26 Jan 2011
MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank:
World Bank review: (Jan 2011) Draft (June 2011) Draft BPLHD approval: (March 2009) Final World Bank review: (Jan 2011)
28
Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report
Final
& English
World Bank review (June 2011) Draft
Bahasa Indonesia & English
29 Jul 2011
(i) PIC in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) World Bank website MoPW: (i) MoPW website. World Bank: (i) PIC in Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) World Bank website
1 The AMDAL for Phase 2 works, and any other required environmental safeguards documents, will be disclosed in a manner similar to Phase 1. 2 Resettlement Plans (RPs) where needed at Phase 2 sites, will be disclosed in a similar manner as the RPF. 3 AMDAL is a set of document that consists of ANDAL (Environmental Impact Statement) and RKL/RPL (Environmental Management and Monitoring Plans) 4 Under the Indonesian system, all revisions to the AMDAL are carried out through an updated RKL/RPL document, approved by BPLHD.
3.6
Institutional Arrangements
73. Out of the overall project institutional and implementation arrangements, the World Bank and the Government of Indonesia have carved out a more streamlined arrangement specifically for the environmental management of the project during implementation. These are described below.
3.6.1 Institutional Arrangements (Phase 1 and Phase 2) 74.
The overall institutional arrangements for the project are summarized in Figure 3-2 as follows:
Figure 3-2 Illustration of Project Implementation Arrangements (excluding disposal arrangements)
29
75. Joint Steering Committee. A high level advisory committee, the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) was formed early in project preparation to oversee the preparation and implementation for the project and to provide coordination and advisory support at the policy level. To date, the JSC has been effective in this role. The JSC is led by Bappenas33 and comprises representatives from Ministry of Finance, MoPW, and DKI Jakarta. The JSC will continue to provide high level oversight during the implementation of the project. 76. Project Implementation Units (PIUs) and Project Management Unit (PMU). There are three Project Implementing Units (PIUs) at both central and local government levels, under DGWR, DGCK and DKI Jakarta. The main role of each PIU is to carry out the dredging and rehabilitation works in the selected key floodways, canals and retention basins that come under their respective responsibility. The Project requires close coordination among these three implementing agencies. DGWR will play the role of the overall project Executing Agency. A PMU has been established by DGWR for the purposes of preparing and overseeing the implementation of the project. The PMU comprises three staff from DGWR, three from DGCK, three from DKI Jakarta and one from MoPW’s Office of Planning and Overseas Cooperation. The PMU is supported by a secretariat of five staff from DGWR. During project implementation, the PMU will oversee and coordinate the overall implementation of the project by the three PIUs. The PMU will also implement support activities that are common across the project. These include (i) the overall construction supervisions consultancy, (ii) the Panel of Experts, (iii) the Floods Management Information Systems (FMIS) and (iv) support to DKI-Jakarta related to involuntary resettlement and the project’s grievance redress system. i.
33
Supervision Consultant (SC). This is the key consultancy contract that will be instrumental in supporting the PMU’s overall management, oversight and monitoring of the project. Where there are assessed weaknesses in capacity, particularly in the areas of the supervision of project environmental plans, the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs) and the project Grievance Redress System (GRS), the SC has been tasked to provide the necessary expertise to support the PMU during project implementation. The scope of this technical assistance services include (i) supervising the implementation of the various dredging and construction works contracts under the project including at all disposal sites (ii) supervising the implementation of the Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/RPL) by the works contractors, (iii) supporting the PMU and DKI in the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs), and (iv) developing and implementing the grievance / complaint handling mechanism of the project with DKI. A summary of the detailed scope of activities of the SC is provided in the box below.
The National Development Planning Board (Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional)
30
Box: Key Scope of Activities of the Supervision Consultants Supervision of Construction Works 1.1 Review / check final contracts with contractors. 1.2 Review / check Detailed Engineering Designs and drawings, method statements, specifications, and activity schedules, carry out additional survey and investigation as required, as well as conduct any revisions deemed necessary and to obtain their approval by the PMU 1.3 Test all sections of each project site for hazardous material prior to dredging works. 1.4 Supervise the implementation of the works, including (but not limited to): Dredging (including the separation of solid waste from dredge material, and their transportation and disposal at approved landfill and Ancol CDF respectively), embankment and rehabilitation of canals, pumps, rack repairs and maintenance. Provide assistance to the PMU for processing of payment requests made by the contractors as required. Maintain site records and prepare detailed monthly progress reports. Prepare work as executed drawings and records, and operation manuals and hand over the completed works to the PMU. Prepare a Practical Completion and Outstanding Defects Report for each construction contract supervised. Prepare a Final Completion and Handover Report for each construction contract supervised. 1.5 Supervise and monitor the construction activities at the Ancol CDF site during project implementation, and at all its offsite locations such as the source locations for the sand and the laterite soils. 1.6 Provide PMU with technical assistance as needed from time to time. This may include the provision of support and advice to the PMU regarding implementation of Project works, particularly on the technical, overall planning and procurement aspects of the Project. Environmental Management 1.7 Monitor (including preparation of quarterly RKL/RPL implementation report) and supervise the environmental protection measures undertaken to mitigate environmental impairment due to construction and disposal activities, consistent with The Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (RKL/RPL) of each work site including all disposal sites. The Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) of the Project. Resettlement Plans (RPs) 1.8 Supervise and support the implementation of Resettlement Plans (RPs), consistent with The Resettlement Plan (RP) of each site where involuntary resettlement in required, including RPs for linked activities, if any. The Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) of the Project. 1.9 Provide technical and administration assistance in land acquisition and resettlement process Project Grievance Redress System (GRS) / Complaint Handling Mechanism 1.10 Develop and operate the project Grievance Redress System (GRS), which will include but will not be limited to administering complaints from Project Affected Persons (PAPs) in a systematic way on a day to day basis; 1.11 Update complaints on the website, informing those who complain on the status of their complaint as well as providing feedback or follow up actions; 1.12 Assist DKI in providing acceptable follow-up actions on complaints, ensuring that decisions are made based on transparent, fair, independent, and accountable processes through Grievance Redress or Complaint Handling Advisory; 1.13 Provide recommendations to DKI Jakarta authorities on status of complaints, from the on-site unit through the provincial level processes. Others 1.14 Monitor and report on any non-project activities at the project sites, and activities in project linked sites and sites adjacent to the project. 1.15 Design, develop, and operate a web-based project communications and reporting system.
31
ii.
iii.
iv.
Panel of Experts. A Panel of Experts (POE) consisting of three independent, internationally recognized specialists will be mobilized to provide advice on all aspects of the project. It is expected that the POE will be mobilized at the start of project implementation34 and fully operating especially before the Phase 2 period begins. The specialists are expected to comprise an environmental expert, an engineer experienced in dredging and dredge disposal, and an urban resettlement expert. The POE’s main responsibilities will include monitoring and evaluating the preparation and implementation of various safeguards instruments (RPF, RPs, EMPs and the grievance redress procedures) and advising the PMU on actions to be taken to improve compliance. If required, the POE may be enlarged on a temporary or permanent basis by the addition of specialists to provide expertise for specific, unplanned or critical issues or needs, which may arise during project implementation. These additional experts, if any, may be mobilized with terms of reference agreed among the PMU, the Bank, and the three initial experts that will comprise of the POE. The POE will convene at regular intervals to review the status of work in progress. However, special extraordinary meetings may also be called to review particular critical stages of technical, environmental, and social activities. All POE reports will be submitted to the PMU and through the PMU to the World Bank. Floods Management Information Systems (FMIS). The FMIS, when established as a Government-owned and managed system, is expected to become an instrumental monitoring and assessment tool for the Government with respect to floods management in Jakarta. As the project is implemented, the works, changes, and upgrades to the floods management system will be input into the FMIS. The FMIS will thereafter simulate and analyze the levels of success of JUFMP structural works and to determine levels of achievement in flood mitigation. This will provide the capability to analyze and document reductions in estimated annual costs. Support for DKI Jakarta. During the project preparation, the PMU has provided support by hiring an environmental and social impact assessment consultant to initiate delineation of PAPs, to carry out census and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and to assist DKI Jakarta in RPF consultation. During the project implementation stage, the PMU (through its SC) will support the DKI in the establishment of field site office (POSKO) as part of the project’s Grievance Redress System (GRS), and providing technical support for the POSKO.
77. DKI Jakarta. Since DKI Jakarta is the institution responsible for social issues in the Jakarta municipal area, it will be responsible for all social safeguards aspects of the project including project related involuntary resettlement activities and the project grievance redress mechanisms35. The implementation of the social plans under JUFMP will be carried out by the appropriate agencies of DKI Jakarta.
3.6.2 Institutional Arrangements (Disposal sites) 78. Due to the way the project has been structured and the legal arrangements entered into by each party, the institutional and implementation arrangements for environmental management and supervision are different for the project sites (i.e. the activities in Phase 1 and Phase 2) and for the Ancol CDF.
34 35
Soon after the project loan agreement becomes effective. The project grievance redress system in available for all project related complaints, including those related to involuntary resettlement.
32
79. The overall institutional arrangements for the project disposal sites have been summarized in Section 2.6 (see especially Figure 2-1). 80. PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PJA). PT. PJA is the developer and owner of the Ancol CDF. It is responsible for building and operating the CDF in compliance with, inter alia, all Indonesia environmental requirements. The Ancol CDF site is the fourth reclamation effort / phase for PT. PJA within the context of the overall long term reclamation effort in the Ancol area of north Jakarta that started in the early 1960’s (see Section 2.6 for further details). PT. PJA has obtained approval of their AMDAL and update RKL and RPL for the Ancol CDF from the provincial environmental agency (BPLHD). 81. Bantar Gebang landfill facility and PPLi hazardous waste landfill. arrangements for these facilities have been described in Section 2.6.
The institutional
BPLHD. The Provincial of DKI Jakarta Environment Management Agency (DKI BPLHD) is the 82. provincial environment agency of DKI Jakarta with the responsibility of approving and enforcing the AMDAL for all city wide (Jakarta) projects. Also, the Agency is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the associated management plans. In implementation of AMDAL, the DKI BPLHD is also supported by the city level (Municipal-Walikota). DKI BPLHD has already approved the AMDALs for Phase 1 of this project and for the Ancol CDF.
3.7
Implementation Arrangements (Environmental Safeguards)
3.7.1 For the Phase 1 and Phase 2 works 83. During project implementation (i.e. during construction/dredging) for the project sites, the primary responsibility for implementation of the RKL and RPLs as well as any additional environmental and social impacts management provided in the supplementary reports discussed in Section 3.5.1 will be that of the civil works and dredging contractors. The requirements of the RKLs and RPLs will be included as part of the civil works and dredging contracts to ensure they are fully funded and that they can be legally enforced. The civil works and dredging contractors would then be supervised for compliance implementation of the measures in the RKLs and RPLs by the Supervision Consultant. The Supervision Consultant will in turn report directly to the PMU. The PMU will hold both the Supervision Consultant and the Civil Works/Dredging Contractors accountable for ensuring compliance with the approved RKL and RPL requirements. 84. The World Bank will work through the PMU to undertake its own supervision for compliance with its own environmental safeguards requirements which are also contained in the RKLs and RPLs. The provincial level of environment agency BPLHD and the city level environmental agency, depending on which part of city of Jakarta the works are located in, will also do compliance monitoring of the works for compliance with national and sub national requirements.
3.7.2 For the disposal sites (Ancol CDF, Bantar Gebang and PPLi) 85. Ancol CDF. With regards the use by the project of the Ancol CDF as a dredge material disposal site, the arrangements are slightly different due to the fact that the World Bank will not have a
33
direct legal relationship with PT. PJA. The Ancol CDF already has its own separate and stand alone RKL and RPL approved by the provincial level environmental agency of DKI Jakarta (DKI BPLHD). These comply with the national and sub-national requirements and the Ancol CDF’s contractors are bound to implement the Ancol CDF RKL and RPL under already stringent national laws and requirements. These environmental requirements have been incorporated into the contracts of their civil works contractors who at the time of the preparation of this project have started construction of the perimeter walls of the CDF. PT. PJA through their Property Development Unit is supervising all aspects (including environment) of the contracts. Additionally, PT. PJA have recruited a consulting firm that does 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 RPL36. These reports contain measures and actions taken by PT. PJA to implement the measures contained in their approved RKL and RPL. These reports will also include the implementation of the additional measures contained in the Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report. The quarterly implementation reports will also be shared with the World Bank. 86. DKI BPLHD has already started monitoring the ongoing construction works at Ancol CDF and will continue to do so throughout the Ancol CDF project period. During project preparation (at the invitation of DKI BPLHD) the World Bank carried out joint supervision of ongoing works at the Ancol CDF at that time37. The World Bank will continue to work with the DKI BPLHD to do joint supervision and site inspections of the Ancol CDF when the reclamation works is being filled with sediment material from the project sites (works in Phase 1 and Phase 2). Any non-compliance issues that the World Bank wishes to raise will thus be channeled to PT. PJA through the DKI BPLHD. The World Bank has carried out a rapid assessment of the technical and financial capacity38 of the DKI BPLHD to adequately carry out their responsibility for oversight monitoring of the Ancol CDF and is satisfied that the DKI BPLHD has adequate technical and financial capacity and legal authority to enforce the RKL and RPL for the Ancol CDF. 87. The following key provisions will be put in place in order to manage, monitor and supervise the disposal of JUFMP dredge material at the Ancol CDF: the World Bank’s ‘no objection’ to any given JUFMP dredging contract will only be given once the World Bank is satisfied with the adequacy of the confined facility and has received satisfactory evidence of PT. PJA‘s compliance with the requirements of the AMDAL for Ancol CDF, including all approved updates to the AMDAL; DKI BPLHD will continue to include the Supervision Consultant (SC) and World Bank in its ongoing supervision and monitoring (including site inspections) of the Ancol AMDAL and Ancol Updated RKL and RPL, and share related supervision and monitoring reports with the SC and the World Bank. PT. PJA will allow the SC 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
36
As of the end October 2010, PT. PJA had submitted all but one of the updated RKLs and RPLs to the provincial BPLHD. The joint supervision with DKI BPLHD team took place on November 5, 2010. 38 The assessment includes a review of DKI BPLHD’s organizational arrangements, staffing complements and qualifications, procedure for document reviews and site inspections, as well as a review of the adequacy of its budget (which has increased steadily over the past five years). 37
34
quarterly RKL and RPL Progress reports and any other tasks related to the disposal of JUFMP dredge material at Ancol CDF as specified in the terms of reference of the SC. DKI Jakarta will exercise its rights as a shareholder to cause PT. PJA to implement the requirements (including mitigation measures) stated in the AMDAL for Ancol CDF and Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report.
88. Key implementation arrangements, including the processes and conditions governing the disposal of project material at Ancol CDF, Bantar Gebang landfill facility and PPLi hazardous waste landfill, are summarized in Table 3-3 below. Table 3-3 Summary of Processes and Conditions Governing Disposal of Project Material Name of Project disposal site Ancol CDF Site, 119ha
Category of Project waste to be disposed of at this facility (and expected volumes) Non Hazardous (non B3) dredge material (estimated total 3.4m3 over project period)
Process and conditions for disposal
Bantar Gebang Landfill
Solid Waste removed from project sites (estimated 95,000 m3 over project period)
PPLi
Hazardous, B3, dredged sediment material (no B3 material expected as indicated by sample
Prior to the signing of any dredging contracts, clearance (including World Bank ‘no-objection’) required. Clearance will be given subject to confirmation that the Ancol CDF site has been constructed with adequate capacity to receive the dredge material and in compliance with (i) the DKI BPHLD approved AMDAL, and (ii) the approved Detailed Engineering Drawings. Prior to dredging of any works section, samples will be obtained and tested by Supervision Consultant for hazardous material. Contractors are required to obtain Supervision Consultant’s (SC’s) approval prior to dredging any works section. Clearance will be given subject to confirmation from sample test on nonpresence of hazardous material. Contractors responsible for transporting dredge material (after separating solid waste – see below) to disposal site (transport plans to meet minimum traffic management plan requirements and subject to Supervision Consultant (SC) approval). Handover of material to PT. PJA for disposal at Ancol CDF governed by cooperation agreement between DKI Jakarta and PJA. SC will supervise and monitor activities at Ancol CDF Contractors responsible for separating solid wastes from dredge material, subject to minimum size. (separation methodology subject to Supervision Consultant approval) Contractors responsible for transporting and disposing material at disposal site (transport plans to meet minimum traffic management plan requirements and subject to Supervision Consultant approval). Handover of material to Bantar Gebang governed by disposal procedure prevailing for all solid waste tipping at landfill – necessary tipping fees to be paid by contractor. SC will supervise and monitor project related activities at Bantar Gebang Landfill. In the event that any section tested prior to dredging indicates the presence of hazardous material, the Supervision Consultant will not allow dredging to proceed and will inform relevant PIU and PMU. Subject to the approval of the provincial BPLHD, this material
35
testing during project preparation – site identification is precautionary in nature).
3.8
will be dredged and transported to PPLi for safe disposal. Dredging and transportation methods will be developed on a case-by-case basis according to specific requirements and subject to MoE, PMU and World Bank prior approval. SC will supervise and monitor disposal of JUFMP B3 material (if any are found) at PPLi facility.
Implementation Arrangements (Social Safeguards)
89. Within the PIU of DKI Jakarta (PIU-DKI) there will be several working groups39 (Pokjas): (i) Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG), (ii) Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group, (iii) Monitoring and Reporting Working Group, and (iv) other Pokjas as necessary to cover all activities required for JUFMP implementation. The ESWG will be responsible for the preparation of RPs and ensure that they are implemented. The Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group will be responsible for reviewing the RPs and ensuring consistency with the RPF. The Monitoring and Reporting Working Group will prepare the monthly reports on the status of preparation and implementation of RPs to the Governor. 90. The respective mayor40 will coordinate the preparation and implementation of the RPs in his/her respective area. Camats (heads of kecamatan) and lurahs (heads of villages) will be the main spearheads of the preparation and implementation of the RPs on the ground. DKI Jakarta’s Land Acquisition Team (P2T) will carry out the operational tasks as set out in the approved RPs. 91. Although the Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG) was formally established in late 2008, it has so far not been very active – in part due to the uncertainties presented by the fact that the institutional arrangements and roles and responsibilities of the PIU working groups are confirmed in the RPF, which until recently was itself under preparation. The preparations of the RPF and preliminary RPs thus far have been supported by project preparation consultants retained by the PMU. Given the finalization of the RPF (in May 2011), the ESWG and other PIU-DKI working groups are expected to become active in taking over the day-to-day implementation of the social safeguards activities of the project. Throughout the project implementation period, the Supervision Consultant will provide technical support to the ESWG and the Project Management and Quality Assurance Working Group in carrying out activities related to the preparation of RPs, resettlement management, quality assurance, etc. This Supervision Consultant will also be responsible to set up and manage the project Grievance Redress System (GRS)41.
39
The Pokjas and their membership are established through Governor’s Decree. The Governor Decree No. 1255/2008 (issued on September 5, 2008) on the establishment of PIU DKI Jakarta showed that there were three Working Groups (WGs) under it, i.e. WG for environment, WG for Social Impact, and WG for Planning. On November 13, 2008, DKI Jakarta issued another Governor Decree (No. 1626/2008) for the establishment of the Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG) with clearer tasks related to environmental and social aspects of the project. It was also meant to expedite the preparation of the RPF. DKI Jakarta is now drafting a new Decree on the re-establishment of PIU, which will include the WGs mentioned in the paragraph above, which among others has the task to implement RPF and RPs 40 Administratively, DKI Jakarta is subdivided into five municipalities each of which is headed by a mayor (walikota) 41 See description of the tasks and scope of the Supervision Consultant in section 3.6.1.
36
92. Chapter 8 provides a more detailed discussion of the project approach to resettlement and resettlement planning, further details of RPF and RP processes, procedures and implementation.
37
4
Relevant Environment and Social Baseline Data
93. The AMDALs for the project sites and for the Ancol CDF presented and analyzed extensive baseline data on numerous relevant physical parameters in these areas of influence which included the following:
Sediment Quality Surface Water Quality Biological Nutrients Air temperature Solar Radiation Wind and Speed Direction Air Quality Noise levels Topography Soil geology Flora and Fauna Bathymetry Socio-economic
94. The quantitative and qualitative impacts are determined from how and in what manner the project’s activities change the baseline conditions. Therefore, the summary of the extensive baseline data presented here below is limited to the data that is most relevant to the project’s most significant impacts which are associated with the management and disposal of the dredged material. As the project’s significant impacts are related to pollution of the receiving bodies of the dredge material, the data presented here below is limited therefore to the pollutant loads of the sediment material ( i.e. both soil and water quality components of the sediment material).
4.1
Sediment Quality in JUFMP Sites
95. As project preparation evolved, three independent baseline studies of the quality of the sediment material in the drains and canals in Jakarta were carried out at different time horizons assessing various aspects including the adequacy of sampling and testing methodologies used, the test results, and the adequacy of Indonesian requirements against various other international standards. The reviews were as follows:
4.1.1 ERM42 2008 96. The ERM 2008 sediment quality study represents the first comprehensive and detailed primary sediment quality study for Jakarta’s drains and waduks, and supported much of the initial planning for the JUFMP project including the Ancol Updated RKL / RPL and the JUFMP Phase 1 AMDAL. Sampling covered all the Project sites (i.e. 15 sites) plus three others that were originally in the long list of potential JUFMP projects but have subsequently been removed. The total number of analyzed composite samples was 36 obtained from 180 sampling stations plus duplicate samples for quality assurance and quality control. Collected samples were sent to an international accredited laboratory (i.e. ALS Bogor, Indonesia) for physical and chemical analyses. Chemical parameters analyses were based on international best 42
The World Bank in 2008 commissioned ERM to carry out these tests.
38
practices technical guideline for dredged material characterization (London Convention 197243; OSPAR 2004), covering heavy metals, total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), organo-chlorine pesticide (OCP), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and total organic matter (TOM). In addition, toxicity characteristics leaching procedures (TCLP) based on USEPA SW 84644 was also performed to determine the toxicity characteristic of the sediment. These results are summarized in Table 4-1.
4.1.2 DHV 2008 97. In 2008 DKI Jakarta in association with DHV (with Dutch government donor funding undertook some pilot dredging in Kali Mati, a minor drain within Jakarta (not part of the project). As part of this study, a total of eight composite samples from nine sampling stations was sent out to an international accredited laboratory (i.e. ALS Bogor) and were analyzed for all tests required under Indonesian regulation for B3 (hazardous) waste identification, i.e. (i) physical test and screening (i.e. flammable, corrosive, explosive, infectious (only for medical wastes), reactive) (ii) chemical test (total content analyses and TCLP for both inorganic and organic pollutants); and (iii) biological test (Lethal dose 50 LD50). In addition, a composite sample from Kali Mati was also sent abroad to an international accredited laboratory in the Netherlands (i.e. Eurofins) for the purpose of cross-check.
4.1.3 AMDAL for Phase 2 activities, sampling and analysis 2010 98. In 2010 a further set of primary sediment quality studies in proposed Phase 2 works was undertaken as part of preparation of AMDALs for these Phase 2 works. The areas sampled also included the three sites now excluded from the project. Composite samples (9 sub-samples each composite – 3 rows about 100-200m apart, three samples across each row) were collected considering both the location of the ERM sampling and the current (as at time of sampling) physical limits of each sub-project area. Analysis was by an accredited laboratory using local standard methodologies, concentrating on (i) physical characteristics, (ii) total metals, (iii) TCLP metals and (iv) TCLP organics. Thus sediment quality studies specific to Jakarta’s drains and waduks were undertaken in 2008 and 2010 involving more than 350 sub-samples compiled into a total of 70 samples for total content analyses (both metals and organics) and leaching test using the USEPA Toxicity Characteristics Leaching Procedure (TCLP). These results are summarized in Table 4-2.
4.1.4 Results and interpretation 99.
43 44
The results and interpretation from all three studies were similar and are discussed in terms of: TCLP testing. This is the definitive chemical test in Indonesia and elsewhere to establish whether waste material is deemed hazardous or otherwise in terms of whether the extract contains levels of organics and metals above specified “Regulatory Limit”. All samples from the three studies met the standards. TCLP organics. Again all samples from the three studies met Indonesian standards Total metal analysis showed almost all samples met international “soil quality” screening levels for almost all metals. Results are presented and discussed in more detail below.
http://www.imo.org/includes/blastDataOnly.asp/data_id%3D17020/1-DredgedMaterial.pdf http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/chap7.pdf
39
Acute toxicity testing (conducted on the DHV samples) demonstrated that in terms of lethal dose 50 (LD50) the dredged sediment had a low toxicity, lower than the acute toxicity of table salt (NaCl). Table 4-1 ERM 2008 data considering relevant soil use screening levels (in mg/kg) Parameter
Max
Min
US EPA PRGs, R9, Industrial Screening level
No§
US EPA PRGs, R9, Residential Screening level
Arsenic (As)
23
2
Barium (Ba)
246
9
67000
0
5400
Cadmium (Cd)
14
4
450
0
37
Copper (Cu)
1080
6
41000
0
Chromium (Cr) Mercury (Hg)
1260
27
450
1
3.17
0.02
310
Nickel (Ni)
161
6
20000
Lead (Pb)
268
0
Zinc (Zn)
701
38
No§
Dutch Intervention Values (DIV) Intervention level
No§
Korea (SEPA)
NODGDMa
No§
Screening Level
No§
50
0
70
0
Screening Level
55
0
0
625
0
0
12
1
30
0
10
2
3100
0
190
2
500
1
270
1
210
3
380
1
370
1
0
23
0
10
0
40
0
1
3
0
1600
0
210
0
400
0
52
4
800
0
400
0
530
0
1000
0
220
2
100000
0
23000
0
720
0
2000
0
410
16
a
Australian-New Zealand interim sediment screening levels for National Ocean Disposal Guidelines for Dredged Material (NODGDM). § Number of samples exceeding the standard
100. These reviews concluded that the sampling and testing methodologies meet international standards and test results show that the samples lay within international standards, except the following:
Arsenic levels in all samples exceed the screening level standards for one EPA standards used to screen pollutants in environmental media45, although all samples comply with other international screening levels of arsenic46. Further assessments revealed that the US EPA standards is an unsuitable comparator as it is derived based on health risks specifically of inorganic arsenic, while the sample tests and the other international screening levels for arsenic were based on total arsenic levels. Comparisons with an earlier Jakarta Bay-wide sediment study also indicates that the sample tests indicate arsenic levels occur naturally throughout the area and do not have anthropogenic origins. Forty percent of samples exceeded the interim Australian and New Zealand sediment screening levels for zinc for ocean disposal, although all samples were below other soil screening levels for zinc. This risk is mitigated by the disposal of the project dredge material in a confined disposal facility, i.e. the Ancol CDF. About 2% of samples exceeds the screening level for one or two (but not all) of the international standards for either one of chromium, cadmium or copper. This risk will be mitigated by the introduction of a protocol for testing canal and drain sections prior to dredging of that section as an added precaution47.
45
US EPA Region 9 Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) levels used to estimate contaminant concentrations in environmental media (soil, air and water) that the EPA considers protective of humans (including sensitive groups), over a lifetime. Soil Standard in South Korea stipulated in the Soil Environment Preservation Act (SEPA), DIV (Dutch Intervention Values), and AustraliaNew Zealand National Ocean Disposal Guidelines for Dredged Material standards 47 Such tests have not been previously practiced in Jakarta and a successful implementation of this protocol could serve to improve dredge material management in the future. An outline of the protocol can be found in the “JEDI Sediment Quality Consolidated Report” 46
40
Table 4-2 Phase 2 AMDAL data (2010) considering relevant soil use screening levels (in mg/kg) Parameter
Max
Min
US EPA PRGs, R9, Industrial Screening level
Arsenic (As) Silver (Ag) Boron (B) Barium (Ba)
No§
US EPA PRGs, R9, Residential Screening level
No§
11.32
0.84
0
0
5100
0
390
0
3.68
0
100000
0
16000
0
Dutch Intervention Values (DIV) Intervention level
No§
55
0
15
0
Korea (SEPA) Screening level
50
No§
0
NODGDMa
Screening Level
No§
70
0
3.7
0
68.3
2.14
67000
0
5400
0
625
0
Cadmium (Cd)
10.04
0
450
0
37
0
12
0
30
0
10
2
Copper (Cu)
78.31
1.75
41000
0
3100
0
190
0
500
0
270
0
Chromium (Cr)
64.21
0.03
450
0
210
0
380
0
370
0
Mercury (Hg) Nickel (Ni) Lead (Pb) Selenium (Se) Zinc (Zn)
0
0
310
0
23
0
10
0
40
0
1
0
16.5
0
20000
0
1600
0
210
0
400
0
52
0
96.35
1.2
800
0
400
0
530
0
1000
0
220
0
2000
0
410
0
0
0
5100
0
390
0
100
0
262.13
40.23
100000
0
23000
0
720
0
a
Australian-New Zealand interim sediment screening levels for National Ocean Disposal Guidelines for Dredged Material (NODGDM). § Number of samples exceeding the standard
101. The review of sediment quality assessments also considered the health risks posed by the arsenic levels in the sediment. Results of acute toxicity level identified the sediment material as relatively harmless (i.e. very high amount of sediment required to be ingested to produce a lethal dose). Assessments of likely exposure pathways of construction workers to the sediment during the project as well as likely exposure due to the future usage of the disposal site also concluded that the health risks are low, particularly given the requirement in the AMDAL for Ancol CDF for the capping of the disposed material with sand and clay.
4.2 102.
Sediment Quality in Ancol The result of the marine sediment quality measurement around the study area which was conducted by a national accredited laboratory, i.e. PT. Unilab Perdana is shown in
Table 4-3. The Table shows that the heavy metal content in the marine waters sediment around the Ancol study area is low and still far below the TCLP Regulatory Limit of Government Regulation No. 19 Year 1999 jo. 85 Year 1999.
41
Table 4-3 Result of Marine Sediment Quality Measurement (by TCLP, USEPA) around the Study Area Quality No. Parameter Unit Measurement Result Standard *) 1. Cadmium (Cd) mg/L 1.0 < 0.005 2. Total chromium (Cr) mg/L 5.0 < 0.05 3. Copper (Cu) mg/L 10.0 < 0.003 4. Iron (Fe) mg/L < 0.001 5. Lead (Pb) mg/L 5.0 < 0.001 6. Manganese (Mn) mg/L < 0.001 7. Mercury (Hg) mg/L 0.2 < 0.001 8. Nickel (Ni) mg/L < 0.001 9. Zinc (Zn) mg/L 50.0 0.07 - < 0.008 Source: PT. Unilab Perdana (2004)
103. Sediment quality at eastern wall of Ancol CDF. Part of the eastern wall of the CDF was started early in the construction phase to form part of a construction access/staging area for the construction of the CDF as a whole. Given that this relatively small part of the eastern wall was constructed with sediment material before the area was confined and given that this material will not be removed but will form part of the permanent works, the World Bank requested that the material be tested. Core samples were taken from the wall and tested and the results confirm that no hazardous substances are contained in this material. The test results show consistency with the sediment quality test results from the Phase 1 AMDAL, and confirm the absence of hazardous (B3) material.
4.3
Water Quality in JUFMP Sites
104. Summarized here below in Table 4-4 are the water quality data for one of the drains, Cengkareng, in the Phase 1 activities. Table 4-4 shows that, which is typical of the other drains in Phase 1 works as well (not presented here) shows measurements of a number of parameters i.e. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), oil and grease, detergent and organic substances at certain sampling locations exceeded the standards prescribed by DKI Jakarta Governor Decree No. 582 of 1995. 105. Measurements of pH in all sampling locations showed values within the standards. This indicated normal acidity levels. Microbiological analysis showed compliance with the standards by the 1995 Decree. The COD standard set by the 1995 Decree is 30 mg/L. The laboratory results showed that the
42
value in almost all sampling locations exceeded or was equal to the standard, except at the SCA48 1 Cengkareng Drain). The BOD values were still within the specified standards of 20 mg/L in almost all sampling locations except at Waduk Melati and SSA-3 (Sentiong-Sunter River)49. The analytical results of organic matter contents indicated that the permanganates value was higher than the standard of 25 mg/L in almost all sampling locations. The high organic content may be caused by the accumulation of domestic waste or other activities around the sampling location. The TSS (Total Suspended Solid) is one of the water quality indicators associated with the physical appearance and turbidity. The suspended material has adverse effects on water quality because it reduces the penetration of sunlight into the water body, increases water turbidity that limits organisms’ growth. Turbidity is closely related to the concentrations of suspended materials in the water. Suspended materials in the water are typically composed of silt, clay and mud as natural inorganic materials or in the form of organic material floating in the water as natural sources and waste resulted from human activities such as industrial activities, agriculture, or household activities. The TSS analysis results in all sampling sites showed compliance with the specified standards.
Table 4-4 Water Quality Analysis Results: Cengkareng Drain No A. 1 2 3 4 B. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
PARAMETERS Physical Temperature (in situ) **) Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) Total Suspended Solid (TSS) **) Conductivity (EC) Chemical Mercury (Hg) Arsenic (As) Boron (B) Cadmium (Cd) Cobalt (Co) Chromium VI (Cr 6+) Manganese (Mn) **) Sodium (Na) Dissolved Oxygen (DO) (in situ) pH (in situ) **) Selenium (Se) Zinc (Zn) Nickel (Ni) Sulphate (SO4) **) Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) Copper (Cu) **) Lead (Pb) Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) Oil and Grease Detergent (MBAS) Phosphate (PO4-P) **) Permanganates (KMnO4) **) BOD5 COD **)
UNITS
Standard *)
SCA 1
SCA 2
SCA 3
0C mg/L mg/L µmhos/cm
Normal 200 200 1000
30.6 90 56 187
30.0 107 23 223
28.2 179 30 371
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L % mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L me/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
0.0005 0.050 1.0 0.010 0.020 0.050 1.0 50.0 3.0 6.0-8.5 0.050 1.0 0.10 100 1.25-2.50 0.10 0.10 10.0-18.0 None 0.50 0.50 25.0 20 30
< 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.01 < 0.003 < 0.02 < 0.01 < 0.02 49.3 3.8 7.51 < 0.002 < 0.01 < 0.02 18.8 0.53 < 0.02 < 0.01 0.8 < 0.2 0.10 0.06 13.4 8 28
< 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.01 < 0.003 < 0.02 < 0.01 < 0.02 49.5 3.4 7.67 < 0.002 < 0.01 < 0.02 19.2 0.51 < 0.02 < 0.01 0.9 < 0.2 0.06 1.23 14.9 9 30
< 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.01 < 0.003 < 0.02 < 0.01 < 0.02 50.2 2.8 7.75 < 0.002 0.01 < 0.02 27.2 2.44 < 0.02 < 0.01 1.1 < 0.2 0.07 0.29 17.3 11 36
48
SCA are the locations along the drain or canal where the test samples were collected. Data from Waduk Melati and SSA-3 (Sentiong-Sunter River) are not presented here but the highest BOD values at these locations of the drains are 59mg/l at Waduk Melati and the highest value is 23mg/l.
49
43
C. MICROBIOLOGY 1 e. coli No./100ml 4,000 70 4,600 1,500 2 Total Coliform No./100ml 20,000 2,400 11,000 1,500 Note of PT. UNILAB PERDANA analytical result: *) = DKI Jakarta Governor Decree No. 582 of 1995 concerning Usage and Water Quality Standards for River/ Water Body and Wastewater in DKI Jakarta; **) = Parameter accredited by KAN No. LP-195-IDN; < = less than; Sample collected on 12 November 2009.
4.4
Ancol Sea Water Quality
106. Based on Table 4-5, overall the marine waters in the study area are currently in reasonably good condition. Nearly all of the measured physical, chemical and microbiological parameters are still below the quality standard and in line with Decree of the Minister of Environment No. Kep-51/MENLH/2004 for Marine Biota designation. Table 4-5 Result of Seawater Quality Measurement in the Study Area No. A. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. B. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. C. 1. 2.
Parameter
Unit
PHYSICAL Brightness (in Meter situ) Smell (in situ) Turbidity NTU Suspended solids mg/L (TSS) Temperature (in o C situ) Oil Film (in situ) Garbage (in situ) CHEMICAL pH (in situ) Salinity 0/00 Dissolved oxidants (OD) in mg/L situ BOD mg/L Total ammonia mg/L (NH3-N) Phosphate (PO4mg/L P) Nitrate (NO3-N) mg/L Cyanide (CN) mg/L Sulfide (N2S) mg/L Phenol mg/L Surfactant anion mg/L (MBAS) Oil & Grease mg/L Mercury (Hg) mg/L Chromium VI mg/L (Cr6+) Arsenic (As) mg/L Cadmium (Cd) mg/L Copper (Cu) mg/L Lead (Pb) mg/L Zinc (Zn) mg/L Nickel (Ni) mg/L MICRO-BIOLOGY Coliform (total) MPN/ 100ml Pathogenic Cell/ bacteria 100ml
Quality Standard *)
Measurement Result **) AL-1
AL-2
AL-3
AL-4
AL-5
AL-6
>6m
3.0
0.20
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.0
Natural <5m
Natural 4
Natural 4
Natural 4
Natural 3
Natural 2
Natural 3
20
12
16
8
8
6
8
Natural +3oC Nil Nil
32
32.9
32.0
31.8
31.7
31.8
Negative Negative
Negative Positive
Negative Positive
Negative Negative
Negative Negative
Negative Negative
7 - 8.5 Coral:34
8.2 32.0
8.2 33.1
8.4 33.2
7.9 33.2
8.0 33.2
7.9 33.2
>5
5.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.4
6.3
20
4.2
4.9
4.3
4.6
4.4
4.5
0.3
0.04
0.05
0.03
0.07
0.05
0.05
0.015
0.02
0.02
0.02
< 0.0.1
< 0.0.1
< 0.0.1
0.008 0.5 0.01 0.002
< 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001
< 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001
< 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001
< 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001
< 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001
< 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001
1.0
0.22
0.25
0.23
0.20
0.18
0.19
1.0 0.001
< 0.2 < 0.0005
< 0.2 < 0.0005
< 0.2 < 0.0005
< 0.2 < 0.0005
< 0.2 < 0.0005
< 0.2 < 0.0005
0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
< 0.005
0.012 0.001 0.008 0.008 0.05 0.05
< 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0326 < 0.002
< 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0331 < 0.002
< 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0329 < 0.002
< 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0334 < 0.002
< 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0330 < 0.002
< 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0331 < 0.002
Nil
0
0
0
0
0
0
Nil
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
No.
Parameter
Note:
*) **) AL1 AL2 AL3 AL4 AL5 AL6
= = = = = = = =
Quality Measurement Result **) Standard AL-1 AL-2 AL-3 AL-4 *) Kep-51/MENLH/2004 (Marine Biota) Laboratory of PT. Unilab Perdana (August 2005) Project Site Western Coastline Project Site Central Coastline Project Site Eastern Coastline Western Coastline (+ 1000 M from the Coastline) Central Coastline (+ 1000 M from the Coastline) Eastern Coastline (+ 1000 M from the Coastline)
Unit
AL-5
AL-6
107. The parameters that exceed the quality standard include solid waste material at the AL-2 location (project site Central coastline) and AL-3location (project site Eastern coastline) sites and phosphate at the AL-1, AL-2 and AL-3 sites (Western, Central and Eastern coastlines respectively) which are found to be slightly above the quality standard. The solid waste that is found in small quantity at the observation site was generally generated by visitors who occasionally throw out garbage from their food and drinks into the water. The phosphate may be generated by laundry that uses soap/ detergent. The result of the seawater quality monitoring in the 2007-2008 period in the Eastern West Ancol water territory is shown in Table 4-6 below. Table 4-6 Result of Seawater Monitoring in the 2005-2008 period in the Ancol Marine Waters Parameter Turbidity (NTU)
TSS (mg/L)
pH
Year Aug 2005 Aug 2007 Apr-08 Aug 2005 Aug 2007 Apr-08 Aug 2005 Aug 2007 Apr-08
AL1 4 13 14 12 7 14 8,2 7,6 7,9
AL2 4 16 11 16 5 10 8,2 7,49 7,92
AL3 4 13 10 8 5 9 8,4 7,7 7,93
AL4 3 14 9 8 5 12 7,9 7,53 7,99
AL5 2 16 8 6 6 8 8 7,53 7,93
AL6 3 13 8 8 4 10 7,9 7,62 7,97
108. Based on routine monitoring result in general it is evident that the current turbidity value of the waters around the project site has exceeded the available quality standard (Decree of the Minister of Environment No. Kep-51/MENLH/2004 (Marine Biota Quality Standard)). In the Ancol area, the fish death phenomenon has occurred several times due to the red algae (red tide) blooming at certain times. This is attributed to nutrient accumulation especially in the dry season. e 109. On the other hand, the result of seawater quality monitoring around the project site which was conducted by the DKI BPLHD in the 2003-2004 period reveals the following:
Temperature ranging from 28.82 to 30.09oC. Salinity ranging from 29.00 o/oo to 30.09 o/oo. Brightness ranging from 1.5 meter to 3.0 meter. Phenol ranging from < 0.001 mg/L to < 0.002 mg/L. Oil and Grease ranging from < 0.2 to < 0.3. Dissolved oxygen ranging from 3.5 mg/L to 4.5 mg/L. Detergent ranging from 0.21 to 0.32 mg/L.
45
BOD ranging from 6.8 to 25.0 mg/L. COD ranging from 33.7 to 46.3 mg/L. Mercury ranging from undetected to < 0.005 mg/L. Cadmium ranging from undetected to < 0.0005 mg/L. Lead ranging from < 0.003 to < 0.005 mg/L.
110. In general, the result of DKI BPLHD monitoring for the 2003-2004 period indicates that the seawater quality around the project site is still good. 111.
The Air Quality, Noise and Seawater sampling sites are shown on Figure 4.3.
Figure 4-1 Air Quality, Noise and Seawater Sampling Site
4.5
Ancol Marine Biota
4.5.1 Plankton 112. Plankton constitutes a microorganism group drifting in the water bodies and unable to move against the water current. Plankton is categorized into 2 groups, namely phytoplankton and zooplankton. Phytoplankton has a role in the waters as the primary producer for water ecosystem due to its major role as food (nutrient) provider for consumers (zooplankton, fish, etc.). Phytoplankton found in the study area consisted of 44 types from 4 classes, namely Cyanophyta, Chrysophyta,
46
Chlorophyta and Pyrophyta with the diversity index rate between 3.4 and 3.8. The rate of diversity index rate of phytoplankton in the study area was ranging from 0.82 to 0.90 indicating that it was spread quite evenly and there was no type which was highly dominant. This is in line with the result of examination of sea water quality in the study area which also indicated good condition. The composition of zooplankton types in the study area waters consisted of 4 classes, namely Arthropoda, Protozoa, Annelida and Protochordata. The diversity rate of Zooplankton types ranged between 3.0 and 3.3 with the rate of diversity index ranged between 0.90 and 0.94, indicating that it was spread quite evenly and there was no type which was highly dominant.
4.5.2 Benthos 113. Benthos comprises all organisms living on or in the seabed. The role of benthos in the waters is highly significant, among other things as decomposer of organic substances existing on or in the waters and as biological indicator in the event of decrease in the quality of water ecosystem. Based on the observation of benthos around the study area, there are two types of benthos, namely Annelida and Mollusca. The diversity of benthos in the study area was classified as low up to moderate, with the diversity index rate between 1.60 and 2.10, while the diversity index rate ranged between 0.70 and 0.85 (uneven and quite even spread).
4.6 Social Economic Baseline 4.6.1 Population 114. The Bank’s task team conducted rapid (preliminary) social assessment in 2008 through field visits, observations and unstructured interviews with selected community members along and nearby the project sites. A more structured social assessment including potential social impacts was then undertaken by the environmental and social impact assessment consultant teams hired by the PMU during 2009-2010 as part of the preparation of the AMDALs for Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites and RPs, respectively. The rapid social assessment study and AMDAL for Phase 1 sites were done in the situation where Detailed Engineering Designs (DEDs) were not yet prepared, and AMDAL of Phase 2 sites were carried out in parallel with the DEDs preparation. In any case, social impact assessment for all sites were carried out without confirmed project boundaries on the ground, and therefore the delineations of the impact areas of each project site were based on the best possible professional assessment of the consultant team. 115. Administratively, the project sites are located in 57 kelurahans (urban villages) as part of 19 kecamatans (subdistricts) in four municipalities, i.e. North Jakarta, East Jakarta, Central Jakarta, and West Jakarta. About 1.8 million people (Table 4-7) are living in these 57 kelurahans. Average density is 166 persons per Ha. Poor slum areas are mostly located in along West Banjir Canal, Pakin-Kali BesarJelakeng, Upper-Sunter, and Krukut-Cideng. The population in linked sites is estimated at about 173,000.
4.6.2 Social-economic Characteristics of the Population 116. During the AMDAL process, socio-economic survey was carried out using a random sampling method, as many as 487 peoples living in the administrative areas in which the 15 project sites are located were interviewed. Not all responded to all of the 29 questions, and some information was not available. However, the reports provide useful information on the social-economic characteristics of the people in the areas where the project sites are located. Around 86% of the interviewees said that the project would
47
overcome flood and the rest believed that the project would create a clean environment. Around 62% of the respondents have lived in the area for more than 10 years and more than 57% families consisted of 3-5 members. About 35% of families claimed that they are originally from DKI Jakarta, almost 90% of the interviewees hold DKI Jakarta identity cards, while 2.3% hold DKI Jakarta seasonal identity cards. More than 17% were renters and around 77% own their houses that they are occupying. About 80% of the interviewees claimed that they do not have other houses. About 20% of the interviewees admitted that they are living on government land. Further, slightly more than 70% of the structures are permanent. Only about 12% of the interviewees work in formal sectors such as government employees and private sectors’ employees. The remaining was working in primary sectors, labors, drivers, traders, etc. Some of them have side jobs. About 73% of the interviewees claimed that their families earned less than US$330 per month or about US$11 per day, or slightly more than US$2 per capita. About 11.5% earned less than US$56 per family per month, which is far below the minimum regional wage for DKI Jakarta (2010), i.e. USD130 per month. Table 4-7 Populations of Areas where Project’s Floodways, Canals and Retention Basins are Located Package 1 (DKI) 2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR) 7 (DKI)
Location Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side)
Number of Kecamatan 2 1 4
Administrative Areas Number of Area Kelurahan Population 6 156,663 2 39,650 7 251,312
Density (person/Ha) 100 201 91
Lower Sunter Floodway Note 1
2
6
230,742
204
Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain)
3
6
92,668
190
Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain West Banjir Canal (sea side) Upper Sunter Floodway Note 1 Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain Krukut Cideng Drain Note 2 Krukut Lama Drain Note 2 Total Total without overlapping kelurahans
4 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 2
9 2 2 2 2 5 2 4 6 8 5
277,610 78,383 119,283 70,696 64,842 184,345 65,027 130,630 160,174 153,709 80,470
192 282 108 305 90 140 390 215 125 476 201
2,156,202 1,794,096
166
Linked Sites Linked Sites Linked Sites Linked Sites
Sentiong-Sunter Drain: Kali Item, Sunter 1 3 21,445 184 Kemayoran Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari : Ancol Kp. 1 1 17,378 46 Bandan, Ancol Long Storage Upper Sunter : Canal Along Jalan Kayu Putih 1 1 No data No data Timur Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng : Anak K. 2 8 134,381 89 Ciliwung Utara, Jalan Tubagus Angke, PHB Bandengan Utara, Waduk Pluit Total 173,204 98 Note 1 For contracting purposes, the Sunter Floodways has been divided into two sub-packages – Upper Sunter Floodway and Lower Sunter Floodway. Note 2 For contracting purposes, the Krukut Drain has been divided into two sub-packages – Krukut Cideng Drain and Krukut Lama Drain
48
117. About 73 % of respondents admitted that they had experienced flooding in the area in the last 5 years; 16% claimed that they experience flooding each year. About 57% of the interviewees said that flood water went into their houses. Furthermore, 41% of the interviewees claimed that the height of water inside the house is about 20-50 cm; 50% said that water subsided more than 24 hours. Interestingly, about 68% of the respondents did not move out during the flooding. Only 6.2% of the interviewees claimed that family members got sick after the flooding. About 53% of the interviewees claimed that they have water supply from the PDAM (DKI Jakarta-owned water company), and 41% bought water from gallon and vendors. Only 0.8% of interviewees admitted that they dispose their garbage to canals/waduks, but most interviewees (64%) claimed that disposed their wastes into the garbage carts. Only 2.5% respondents said that they did waste separation prior to disposing their garbage. It is interesting to note that almost 74% of the interviewees claimed that the persons in charge of waste collection did not regularly collected the garbage.
5 Summary of Potential Significant Environmental and Social Impacts 5.1 Environmental Impacts associated with the JUFMP project activities 118. The project is expected to yield positive environmental outcomes, as discussed in Section 3.3. The project implementation however, would also have potential negative impacts. With respect to the assessment of these impacts, the AMDALs of Phase 1 (and Phase 2) has focused on (i) the dredging activities and the impacts these would cause in the drains and canals, and (ii) the impacts associated with removing, temporarily stockpiling, transporting to the entry points of the final disposal sites and any other type of handling of the removed sediment material. For these impacts, the issues are briefly outlined in Table 5-1 and discussed in subsequent subsections. Table 5-1 Summary of Activities Causing Impact and Direct Impact Location Canals and Drains
Activities Causing Impacts Dredging – removal of sediment and solid waste from polluted canals and drains.
Direct Impacts
Operating Dredging Plant in relatively confined and densely populated areas.
Handling, Placing and Transporting Dredged Material to Final Disposal Sites.
Final Disposal Sites (Specifically with regards Ancol CDF)
Handling and Placing of Large Quantities of Dredged Material at final Disposal Sites.
49
Significant Noise pollution. Significant Vibration Impacts. Reduction in Air Quality from emissions of dust particles and foul odors. Pollution of land and surface water receptors from leached material/pollutants from dredged material. Public Health concerns associated with water and air borne diseases. Disruption of Traffic flows and patterns in already congested and densely populated areas. Increased Direct discharge immediately following dredging into the estuary/North Jakarta bay from canals and drains due to increased flows and discharge rate increasing pollution of the bay area. Improper sanitation management of Construction Camps. Poor Air Quality from emissions of dust particles and foul odors affecting nearby communities. Pollution of water and land receptors from leached dredged material.
Public Health concerns affecting nearby communities Changes in tidal and current patterns. Sedimentation. Disturbance of Sea Biota. Degradation of Sea Water Quality
5.1.1 Significant traffic disruption. 119. The impacts on traffic are related to street closure due to mobilization of heavy equipment and transport of dredged materials (solid waste and sediment). Furthermore, equipment mobilization can cause disruption to road surface due to spillage and negligence. Serious traffic disruption resulting from increased heavy construction vehicles and large trucks transporting sediment and solid waste material to and from disposal sites, resulting in longer travel times for road users in already heavily congested roads in highly densely populated areas, resulting in increased ambient noise levels affecting public facilities like schools and places of worship, emission of exhaust pollutant gases and dust particles of including Carbon monoxide (CO) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) resulting in reduced air quality. For instance, the AMDAL for activities in the first year predicts that dredging activities at these sites will increase vehicle rotation per hour, for 360 days, by 2-8 trucks per hour. To mitigate as much as possible against traffic disruptions, appropriate Traffic Management Plans (TMPs) will be prepared and implemented, as discussed in Section 7.2.
5.1.2 Reduced air quality and foul odors. 120. The impacts on air quality are due to equipment mobilization and operations of machineries and heavy equipment, and the land transport using trucks from dredging locations to the Ancol CDF and other disposal sites. Dredging and separating bulk refuse materials in Phase 1 sites are predicted to reduce air quality and to increase odor level. Without proper management, the dredging materials may make the environment surrounding the project locations unhygienic and cause stench. As the dredging locations are mostly in densely populated areas (residential, trading, etc), the impacts on air quality and odor require particular attention. The impact is of high intensity, affecting a large number of people and other environmental components. However, the impacts are of short duration (during the dredging and separating of bulk material) and there will only be limited impacts that are cumulative in nature. 121. Disruptions from noise levels are due to equipment mobilization and operations of machineries and heavy equipment, and the land transport using trucks from dredging locations to the Ancol CDF and other disposal sites. Dredging activities (dredging, sorting and stockpiling) are to be carried out during day time, while transportation to the disposal sites will be done at night so as not to worsen the traffic congestion but this would exacerbate the effects of the increased in noise levels. Existing measured ambient noise levels during the day at the project levels already exceed acceptable standards and the dredging works will likely increase these levels further causing higher noise intensity in the project areas. The JUFMP contractors’ Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) will include provisions for consultations with the community to inform the community of works plans and discuss ways to minimize unavoidable impacts, such as the temporary impact from the reduction in air quality and construction noise.
5.1.3 Change of water discharge rate 122. The impacts on water discharge rate are due to dredging activities that will increase the capacities of floodways/drainage canals and waduks, which consequently increase the discharge rate and reduce the
50
risk of flooding – a positive impact. In the post-project period, maintenance dredging will maintain the holding capacities of floodways/drainage canals and waduks in order to continue reducing flood risk.
5.1.4 Change of surface water quality. 123. The impacts on water quality are due to dredging activities that will increase TSS content and consequently may disturb water biota. However, dredging will impact water discharge rate of the dredged floodways/drainage canals and waduks. The anticipated dredging volume of about 3.4 m3 will cause a minimum of about 50% increase in each of the water bodies’ capacity, which will consequently increase water flows by about 50%. Therefore, the risk of flooding will be reduced. This will be a high-intensity and long-term positive impact, and these positive impacts will not be limited to each project area.
5.1.5 Change of sea water quality 124. Changes to sea water quality are considered as a derivative impact of the change of water quality upstream during dredging activities. Due to the nature of dredging activities, the surface water quality at each location will be impacted in the form of TSS increase. Baseline TSS concentrations indicated achievements of prescribed standard and the dredging activities may increase the TSS concentrations. This could affect a large number of people and other environmental components. While this is unavoidable, the impact is expected to occur at low intensity with a distribution limited to each project location and is temporary and reversible.
5.1.6 Increase of solid waste 125. Potential impacts on solid waste are due to the dredging and transport of dredged materials which may cause sediment and solid waste spills around the project locations. This could consequently impact public health and lead to negative public perceptions of the dredging activities. Dredging and separating bulk refuse materials in Phase 1 are predicted to increase solid waste. Without proper management, the dredging materials may make the environment surrounding the project locations unhygienic and cause stench. As the dredging locations are mostly in densely populated areas (residential, trading, etc), the impacts on solid waste require particular attention. The impact is of high intensity, affecting a large number of people and other environmental components. However, the impacts are of short duration (during the dredging and separating of bulk material) and there will only be limited impacts that are cumulative in nature. Mitigation actions include consultations with the community and the proper transport of solid waste to disposal sites, adhering to the approved contractor’s TMP.
5.1.7 Impact on Biota 126. Terrestrial Biota. Impacts on terrestrial vegetation may occur during land clearing prior to the commencement of the dredging activities (to allow for workers and heavy equipment mobilization). Based on the environmental baseline study, the tree species found in the project sites include banana, mango, banyan, etc. No endemic or IUCN protected species was found. Once the dredging is completed the areas will be rehabilitated. 127. Aquatic Biota. Impacts to aquatic biota include the removal of benthic biota and disturbance to fish communities. However, the environmental baseline studies indicated that this impact is unlikely to be significant. The existing condition of rivers and drains was already polluted. The only macro-benthic organism found in the sites belonged to the Gastropod class (e.g. snails) which is known to survive in
51
polluted ecosystem. Meanwhile, the most dominant fish found in the sites was the suckermouth catfish that can survive in conditions with almost no dissolved oxygen.
5.1.8 Impact on Public health and environmental sanitation 128. Impact on public health and environmental sanitation are due to dredging activities and transport of dredged materials to the disposal sites. The impacts that will occur temporarily during the physical work include the possibility of worsening the air quality (due to an increase of dust and odor) in residential area within radius of ± 100m or dredging activities and along the transportation corridor. Mitigation actions have been discussed in Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 above.
5.2 JUFMP Project Impacts on Ancol CDF 129. Impacts associated with the disposal of the non hazardous sediment material once it enters the gate at the Ancol CDF and how that is managed from this entry point to how it is finally disposed of in a process which involves the final placing, compaction and capping of this material within the perimeters of the 119 ha Ancol CDF is the subject of a separate standalone AMDAL (ANDAL/RKL/RPL) for Ancol CDF prepared by PT. PJA the owner concessionaire of the Ancol CDF. The main impacts addressed in the AMDAL for the Ancol CDF, which are all inter-related, are: Changes in tidal and current patterns - The AMDAL estimates that the construction and operation of the Ancol CDF will likely lead to only slight changes to the pattern of longshore current around the project location. The result of hydrodynamic simulation conducted indicates that the filing/reclamation of project area will not significantly change the pattern of the current. In general, the dominant pattern of the current around the project location remains the same, namely from Westward-Northwestward to Eastward-Northeastward. However, the velocity of the current will decrease from 1.52 m/second to 1.45 m/second. In the eastern reclaimed island, the velocity of the current slightly increases, while in the northwestern side, the current reduces speed. The result of the hydrodynamic simulation of West Ancol Reclamation Plan conducted as part of the AMDAL indicates the following; (i) There is no significant change in the pattern and velocity of current before and after the reclamation. The current near the reclamation location slows down by + 5cm/second (insignificant). (ii) The sediment distribution modeling during the reclamation indicates an increase of sediment content by 33 mg/L (insignificant) and (iii) The bathymetry change modeling shows that the depth of water only changes a few centimeters (insignificant). Sedimentation - Reclamation activity will lead to sedimentation as a result of disturbed natural balance, particularly that related to the change in the pattern of longshore current. Meanwhile, the construction of sea dike/breakwater will function as barriers of sea waves and minimize potential abrasion and sedimentation in project area and its surroundings. The result of simulation of the pattern of current after the reclamation activity indicates an increase in the current velocity in the eastern reclaimed land. This means that abrasion potentially will occur in that location. Meanwhile, sedimentation will occur in the northwest reclaimed island as the current in the aforementioned location weakens. The impacts of abrasion and sedimentation will further affect sea water quality and marine biota. Degradation of Sea Water Quality - Filling/reclamation activity using sand, dredged sediment and laterite will increase the turbidity and TSS in the surrounding water, potentially by up to 5 times if compared to the pre-project (i.e. Ancol CDF) condition. There are also additional concerns that
52
the activities of the approximately 400 project construction workers will produce sewage that may not be adequately managed and contained. At the end, these conditions will also affect the life of marine biota, environmental esthetics, environmental sanitation and public perception of the project. Disturbance of Sea Biota - Reduction in water quality due to increased sedimentation, filling the reclamation area with sand and dredged sediment and construction camp solid waste and sewage will potentially have a significant impact on marine biota. The anticipated impacts on marine biota (plankton, benthos & nekton) constitute both direct and indirect impacts. The filling activity will not only directly lead to the smothering of the marine biota habitat in the reclaimed area, but also indirectly increase the turbidity and TSS in the water territory so as to hamper the penetration of sunlight into the water and obstruct the photosynthesis process of phytoplankton and reduce the content of dissolved oxygen in the water territory which will affect benthos and nekton life.
5.3
Offsite Impacts from Ancol CDF
130. In addition to the 3.4 million m3 of dredged sediment material from this project, the construction of the perimeter walls and the filling of Ancol CDF will require about 8.6 million m3 of sand. According to the approved RKL and RPL, this sand is to be obtained from a marine source, in the Banten Area of the coast from North Jakarta. This location where the sand will be obtained from already has an approved Environmental Permit50. 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 400,000m3 to be obtained from land based sources near Bekasi, West Java that is also operating under environmental permits.51 Thus, in order to manage reputational risk due to offsite impacts, it was agreed with the PT. PJA that the JUFMP Supervision Consultant will involve in supervision and monitoring of the activities at these offsite locations (for the sourcing of the sand and the laterite).
5.4 JUFMP Project Impacts on Bantar Gebang and PPLi facility 131. Impacts associated with the disposal of solid waste material in Bantar Gebang Landfill and hazardous B3 sediment material (if any are found) in the PPLi facility are not the subject of any recent AMDALs, as these sites are currently in existence and have been in use for many years and are deemed to be operating under environmental permits. Notwithstanding this, the project impacts at these facilities may include potentially and incrementally; leachate generation, uncontrolled methane generation and emission, increased traffic volumes and congestion, generation of foul odors and further reduction in air quality.
50 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 the 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 51 The Environmental Permits for the source of laterite soil will be reviewed by the Supervision Consultant.
53
5.5 Social Impacts 5.5.1 PAPs Sites 132. The project is expected to yield positive social outcomes, as discussed in Section 3.4. The project implementation however, would also have potential negative social impacts. Potential social impacts can be categorized into resettlement-related (hereafter called PAPs sites) and non-resettlement related issues (hereafter called non-PAPs sites). Preliminary census surveys were carried out at the project sites between April and October 201052. Since the detailed boundaries of the project work area had not yet been finalized at the time, the preliminary census and consultations considered the likely potential impacted areas. From the preliminary surveys, seven sites were identified to have potential resettlement that is related to activities of dredging and/or embankment works53. Initial data compilation from these preliminary census surveys recorded 2,513 units of potential affected structures (as per January 2011), which were occupied by 2,369 families, or 6,507 persons. 133. About 53% of families in the initially identified seven PAPs sites have lived there for more than 10 years, 66% held Jakarta identity cards, and 45% were living on non-permanent structures. About 82% of the families work in informal sectors (labors, drivers, farmers, farmers/fishermen, traders/small businesses and other jobs). About 13% families have built their structures on their own land, while the remaining are occupying government land. About 82% own their structures and 8.5% are renters. Information on the number of squatter landlords (both occupying and absentee), and encroachers are not yet available. These categories will be reconfirmed during the update of the survey census. Geographical distribution of affected structures and persons are concentrated in four of the seven sites, i.e., Upper Sunter and West Banjir Canal (WBC), Kali Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng and Krukut Cideng, representing 2,253 structures or almost 90% of the total affected structures involving close to 88% of PAPs. The mostly densely populated sites are Krukut-Cideng and Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng, while WBC and Upper Sunter are the two sites that have largest numbers of impacted structures and PAPs. Both consist of 1,360 structures or 54% of the total affected structures involving 3,828 PAPs or almost 52% or the total PAPs. 134. Minimization of impacts. Significant efforts have been made to minimize the number of PAPs, initially through careful selection of the scope of the project – balancing between selecting priority sections of canals and waduks for flood mitigation impact and minimizing the potential PAPs. Following the initial census surveys, further efforts have been made through an iterative process to adopt engineering designs and selection of works methodology to minimize impact. Based on the latest detailed engineering designs (DEDs) and field verification54 in April 2011, it is now estimated that six55 out of the 15 project sites will involve involuntary resettlement, and the number of affected structures have been reduced from 2,513 units (occupied by 6,507 persons) to 1,109 units (occupied by 5,228 persons) – as summarized in Table 5-2.
52 A further census was also carried out between November 2010 and January 2011 at an additional site (Sentiong-Sunter drains) after a design revision resulted in the identification of PAPs. 53 Sentiong-Sunter Drain, Waduk North Sunter, West Banjir Canal, Upper Sunter Floodway, Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng Drain, Lower Angke Drain, and Krukut-Cideng. 54 Carried out by the project preparation consultants hired by the PMU. 55 By avoiding involuntary resettlement at the Lower Angke Drain site (see footnote 53 for initial list).
54
Table 5-2 Estimated Affected Structures and Persons at Project Sites Package
Location
1 (DKI)
Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Floodway Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Cengkareng Floodway (including sea side) Lower Sunter Floodway Note 1
156,663
-
-
39,650
-
-
251,312
-
-
230,742
-
-
Cideng Thamrin Drain (Round Road drain) Sentiong-Sunter Drain (including Ancol Canal) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Lower Angke Drain West Banjir Canal (sea side) Upper Sunter Floodway Note 1 Grogol – Sekretaris Drain Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain Krukut Cideng Drain Note 2 Krukut Lama Drain Note 2 Total Total without overlapping kelurahans
92,668
-
-
277,610
104
547
78,383
42
165
119,283 70,696 64,842 184,345 65,027 130,630 160,174 153,709
593 63 127
2,838 368 481
80,470
180
829
2,156,202 1,794,096
1,109
5,228
2a (DGWR) 2b (DGWR) 3 (DGCK) 4 (DKI)
5 (DGCK) 6 (DGWR) 7 (DKI)
Area Population
Estimated affected structures (May 2011)
Estimated affected persons (May 2011)
135. Project linked sites. As discussed in Section 2.3, project linked sites were identified based on hydraulic and direct physical linkages to JUFMP sites. DKI Jakarta currently has no specific plans for rehabilitation works at these linked sites. However, DKI Jakarta will apply the requirements of OP 4.12 in the event that linked activities are carried out in the linked sites56. Since there are no specific plans for the linked sites, it is not possible to determine the number of affected persons at this time. Based on a rapid survey carried out in 200957, a rough estimate of the structures that could be affected is 8,150 (90% 56 57
Linked activities as defined by the criteria for identifying linked sites in OP 4.12. Two linked sites, i.e. Canal along Kayu Putih Timur and North Ciliwung were not covered in these surveys.
55
of which is in a single linked site i.e., Waduk Pluit). This should be considered a hypothetical maximum – the number of affected structures would be smaller once impact minimization consideration is taken into account in designs, and especially if Waduk Pluit is not included. 136. Maintenance works. It is understood that DKI Jakarta has done and will continue to have maintenance activities in the project linked sites, i.e., clean up garbage on the water bodies and fixing some parts of the embankments as necessary. So far, DKI Jakarta has always avoided damage or the need to relocate structures during the maintenance activities by using appropriate equipments and avoiding areas where structures are present. For example, it was reported that in 2010 that two linked sites, i.e., Tubagus Angke and Anak K. Ciliwung Utara, were maintenance dredged with backhoe and manual equipment in selected sections to avoid any impacts on overhanging structures.
5.5.2 Non-PAPs sites 137. Currently, nine out of the 15 project sites are designated non-PAP sites - as summarized in Table 5-2. However, at four sites, i.e. Cengkareng drain, Lower Sunter floodway, Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari floodway, and Grogol-Sekretaris drain, there would be impacts on the operators and owners of 19 crossing boats during the construction. Potential social impacts of dredging and embankment rehabilitation at the project sites would mostly occur during construction, such as disturbances during the mobilization of heavy equipments and transportation of the sludge materials to the disposal sites (including solid wastes); noise; odor; heavy traffic, and traffic accident; damage to local roads; potential temporary loss of income for boat scavengers who pick garbage from canals, and for operators and owners of crossing boats58. As the impact would be temporary on a relatively small number of boat operators/owners in each of the above-mentioned canals, DKI Jakarta will carry out intensive consultations with them to find practical solutions during construction so that they will be able to the extent possible continue their activities. Prior to the start of construction, DKI Jakarta will carry out verification field survey, to reconfirm that the non-PAPs sites remain free from PAPs within the subproject impact areas.
5.5.3 Potential non-resettlement related social impacts. 138. Potential social impacts that are not related to resettlement were identified during the AMDALs consultations and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) - see Chapter 9 for details of consultations. One of the main issue that arose during the consultations relates to the “perception and concerns” of communities on the project impacts. Communities were worried if the project required them to relocate, and if so, they were anxious to be properly compensated. This was perhaps because most of them are poor squatters, and DKI Jakarta has in the past relocated or evicted squatters without compensation or only with a small amount of social grants (see box at the end of this chapter for a discussion of recent eviction practices in Jakarta). Communities were also worried that they may not be properly consulted, well-informed prior to construction, and cannot communicate their complaints, aspirations and suggestions during construction to the project management and contractors. Communities expected that the project will employ them 58 Boat operators are not expected to require resettlement. Dredging contractors will enter into discussions to arrive at mutually agreeable arrangements for the dredging schedule to avoid as much as possible disturbance to the operators’ activities. Opportunities for employment at the dredging works will also be discussed.
56
during construction, to participate in the garbage selection activities to obtain wastes that have economic value. In almost all project sites, the AMDALs studies indicated that constructions would only be able to provide small number of jobs compared to the number of the potentially available workforce in the community. For instance, in the waduks of North Sunter, East Sunter III, and South Sunter, it was estimated that the project would provide 294 low-paying jobs (labor) for 12 months, which is about 6.5% of the workforce59. For Upper Sunter, it was estimated that the project would only increase the total available employment opportunities by 0.024%. The study anticipated that contractors would bring skilled workers from outside the area that will operate high-technology dredging equipment. Further, communities were concerned that during construction their living environment will be disturbed and damaged by the improper management of temporary disposal and transportation of dredged materials, causing inconvenience due to damaged local roads, dusts, bad odors, dredged materials spillages, increased traffic congestion, and noise from the equipments and trucks.
5.5.4 Evictions during the period of JUFMP Project Preparation. 139. During project preparation, at least five major evictions had taken place in areas adjacent to the JUFMP project sites, i.e. Taman BMW, Kemiri, Tambora VI and VIII, and Priok, for several reasons that were apparently not related to the project. Taman BMW was a potential candidate for the project’s disposal site but was not chosen due to technical considerations. Eviction in Taman BMW took place in 2008 due to DKI Jakarta’s plan to build a sport stadium. The Priok eviction, located about 1 km northwest of the mouth of Lower Sunter Floodway, was related to the relocation of a cemetery that was believed to have cultural and spiritual value. The Kemiri, Tambora VI and Tambora VIII locations are adjacent to the project sites. The evictions took place for traders conducting activities along the inspection road shoulder of Cengkareng drain nearby the Kemiri market, and along the shoulders of Tambora VI and VIII roads (associated with project’s Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng site). Evictions in these sites have been long planned by the Municipality of West Jakarta. Evictions were carried out after a lengthy consultation processes between the traders and the West Jakarta Municipal Government on the options of relocation sites, but unfortunately, failed to reach agreement on relocation. The forced eviction outside Kemiri market of informal traders who were doing businesses along the roads on the side of the riverbanks (initial plan was in 2007, actual eviction took place in December 2008) was due to traffic congestions and complains by tenants of the formal Kemiri market against the informal traders along the shoulder of the inspection road that were more easily accessible by customer. The eviction at Tambora VI (initial plan was in September 2007, actual eviction in December 2008) took place to enforce public order control for illegal businesses, and restore the function of the riverbanks and road shoulder to their original conditions. The eviction at Tambora VIII in February 2009 occurred after the annual permits for traders expired and for reducing traffic congestion. 140. Considering the proximity of the Kemiri, Tambora VI and Tambora VIII locations to JUFMP sites, the West Jakarta Municipality (with support from the Bank) undertook Tracer Studies60 to assess impacts of the evictions and potential linkages to the JUFMP. The Bank’s team made field visits and discussed the possible remedial actions with the West Jakarta Municipality for the returned evictees. They claimed that they had offered alternative relocation sites prior to eviction and the offers are still valid after 59 The report did not provide clear information whether the total workforce used in the analysis consisted only of fully unemployed workforce, or included partially unemployed workforce. 60 The tracer studies reports i.e., “Tracer Study at Tambora VI and Tambora VIII” and “Case Study Eviction Cengkareng Drain Inspection Road” are available in project files.
57
the eviction (when the tracer studies were carried out), but traders/vendors did not want to move to the offered sites. Based on documentary evidence and interviews carried out at these sites after the evictions, the studies confirmed that these eviction processes had started significantly before the commencement of the JUFMP discussions with the Government, and the reasons for eviction were unconnected to JUFMP. Annex 3 presents the more detailed summary of the tracer studies.
Box: Evictions in Jakarta Historical development of evictions Eviction has been a long-standing policy and practice of DKI Jakarta government in repossessing government land mainly for the development of projects in the public interests. The implementation of evictions has evolved over time with the trend that illegal occupiers are getting better treated with more humane approaches. During the New Order (Suharto) Era, evictions had been implemented in more violent ways, whereby consultations with the illegal occupiers were not done, and no compensation was provided. Even during the tenure of the former Jakarta Governor, heavy extortion and violent methods were prevalent. Today, instructions to evict are given on the grounds of public order by employing Local Government Regulation no. 8 of 2007. Evictions are requested by various actors, e.g. the Railway Corporation for clearing railroads, the Public Works Office for protecting roads and waterways, Governors or Mayor’s office seeking public order, public parks/spaces, greenings, better traffic management, or simply responding to community complaints. The Province approves an eviction and the Municipality is responsible for implementation, employing the Public Safety Office (Trantib) to carry out such public orders. Evolution of eviction practices Recent evictions have involved some degree of consultations, better warnings (at least three notifications prior to the date of the eviction), the promotion of self-dismantlement of structures (to salvage reusable components), some amount of compensation, and in some cases, resettlement packages. The packages offer a range of options depending on the location and characteristics of the community, e.g.: (i) subsidized relocation to a selection of formalized markets that include 6 months free rent for traders; (ii) ‘social grant’ (uang kerohiman) packages that cover resettlement costs, or transportation costs to return to home villages, or compensation for structures (ranging in between US$50-110); and in some cases, (iii) low cost subsidized public housing, as well as in some exceptional cases, (iv) skills training. If evictions were planned at locations that were previously cleared, forced evictions were conducted without any compensation. Concerns on evictions relate to the management and protection of the cleared sites from reoccupation, and DKI Jakarta has no data base system that can track those already compensated who may have moved to other public land.
58
6
Analysis of Alternatives
6.1
The “do nothing” option
141. At a strategic level, the “do nothing” option is to allow flooding and its adverse effects to continue and to worsen. Clearly this is not acceptable. Specifically in relation to the proposed JUFMP project, the “do nothing” alternative essentially means worsening the situation of clogged drainage channels and socio-economic effects of frequent flooding. This is not a situation favored by the GoI, DKI and by the affected communities. Additionally, the sediment in the waterways would continue to get flushed in an uncontrolled manner to Jakarta Bay.
6.2
Overall Alternative Analysis
142. In both AMDALs for the Phase 1 and for the Ancol CDF works, the analysis of alternatives focused on alternatives for mitigation or other impact management approaches. For example, with respect to the Phase 1 AMDAL, various mechanical dredging options and methodologies to reduce impacts associated with these types of activities were considered and with respect to the Ancol CDF AMDAL, various options for fill material and their sources were considered and evaluated. Whereas, with respect to the broader strategic options for disposal of the dredged sediment material, the World Bank, DKI Jakarta and PMU teams considered multiple options and alternatives based on sediment test results, past experiences, technical and financial reasons and opportunistic project development works, as part of the decision making process that led to the selection of the Ancol CDF as the final disposal site for non hazardous material. For instance, during past dredging operations, excavated material was usually dumped on any vacant land owned by DKI (Jakarta Provincial Government). In some cases sediments are placed on embankments and not otherwise disposed of, which results in sludge returning to waterways. The JUFMP provides the first opportunity for DKI Jakarta and the Government of Indonesia (GOI) to coordinate and dispose dredged materials in a defined and managed disposal area, and to introduce bestpractice management principles. GOI assessed several disposal sites and management alternatives. Initially DKI proposed several land based sites that were available, scattered throughout the city:
Taman BMW – large site with many informal communities that were evicted61; very visible along the toll road Under Toll Road (Pluit Karang) – located on the toll interchange, very visible and poses concerns about the aesthetic and odor aspects if utilized as a disposal site; many informal communities with fisheries and banana plantations Kamal Muara – very small location with nearby industry and housing (open lot) Kapuk Muara – already converted into a housing development Pluit – small location; next to fisheries Rorotan – being utilized as a temporary solid waste disposal area along the river and near industrial activities Cakung – next to Rorotan (above); a small lot next to industrial areas
143. The World Bank inspected and assessed the suitability of each proposed disposal site. These proposed sites were rejected due to their minimal disposal capacity, resettlement issues, aesthetic and 61
For reasons unrelated to the project – see box at the end of Chapter 5.
59
odor issues, and supervision difficulties. Three sea-based disposal locations were also considered at Muara Kali Adem (MKA), Marunda, and Ancol. The MKA is located next to the West Banjir Canal but the access road to the site is very limited and frequent traffic congestion is observed. Marunda which is located at the edge of East Jakarta was not selected because the spatial plan of the area. The site at Ancol was strategically chosen for its accelerated preparedness, size and capacity (capable of receiving almost three times the dredged materials of the Project, or approximately 12 million m3), and central location along the coast of Jakarta Bay. It is also important to note that the Ancol site also had the advantage that it was already an approved ongoing reclamation project. The utilization of the Ancol site is considered a ‘win-win’ scenario. The other two sea-based locations considered would have had to be constructed, at considerable costs and with the effect of displacing more near-shore area with additional environmental impacts. At the same time, the utilization of non-hazardous dredge material for the Ancol site reclamation will reduce the negative impact from use of other material (sand) to be sourced from quarries. 144. Developing the Ancol area is part of DKI’s greater spatial planning and the DKI BPLHD has approved the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA, or AMDAL). The site provides ease of access from the river mouths of the city. Plans for developing sea-based disposal facilities at MKA and Marunda were deemed unnecessary due to the large capacity inherent at Ancol. The Government also stated that the proposed disposal locations at MKA and Marunda potentially conflict with spatial plans on reclamation that would require review.
6.3
Specific Alternative Analyses
6.3.1 Catchment wide vs. local flood management 145. For the purposes of this subsection major flood management refers to very major activity such as construction of new major diversions to reduce flooding in the urban area from middle and upper catchment rainfall. Local flood management refers to actions that can be undertaken at the local level to enhance efficient delivery of local rainfall to local channels / drains and thence to the sea. While there may be debate on the relative priorities, there is common agreement that the two options are not mutually exclusive - both are required as part of an integrated package. JUFMP is based on the lower part of the catchment. While focusing mostly on local flood management, JUFMP project activities will increase the ability of already established but underperforming floodways to more effectively transfer upper catchment-derived floods to the sea.
6.3.2 Engineering vs. non-engineering approach 146. Engineering-works for the purposes of this subsection are defined as normal engineering construction and operation projects such as improving flow carrying capacity of drains, pumps, barriers / sea walls. The non-engineering approach by contrast addresses such aspects as changing people’s behavior (e.g., preventing deposition of solid waste into the waterways) and land use planning and implementation to move people away from flood-prone areas. JUFMP’s focus is on the engineering approach that will yield immediate benefits. However, this would support the much broader nonengineering approach and opportunities are being undertaken through JUFMP to highlight the broader issues. For example, management of solid waste at and immediately around the dredging sites will demonstrate the benefits of appropriate solid waste management, thereby setting practical examples of what can be achieved.
60
6.3.3 Choice of dredging sites 147. JUFMP hydraulic simulation studies have recommended the rehabilitation of the city’s floods management system to its original design capacity and a routine maintenance system as the most beneficial first step for flood mitigation in Jakarta. The sections of the Jakarta flood management system included in the project have been identified by the Government as in priority need of urgent rehabilitation and improvement in flow capacities. Prioritization was made based on previous studies under the Western Java Environmental Management Project62 (WJEMP) and various earlier studies on flood control and flood mitigation in Jakarta area. The Project scoping also took into account the inclusion of all responsible institutions as a means to encourage and establish the required long term sustained routine maintenance system. The Project is expected to have important beneficial demonstration effects in terms of institutional coordination, dredging technology and methods, disposal of dredge material, and sound environmental and equitable resettlement practices. As such, the technical, environmental and social complexities of works were also taken into account in project scoping and implementation sequencing in order to increase the likelihood of success.
6.3.4 Dredging technology: Mechanical vs. Hydraulic 148. Dredging technologies can be broadly grouped as the back-hoe / clam shell type and the suction dredging (with or without cutter heads). Suction dredging was not pursued as it is incompatible with the significant amount of solid waste in the sediment of the waterways. Pontoon-based back-hoes are the preferred technology as the majority of construction activity can be restricted to the waterway itself, rather than having to disturb a wide strip along the length of the waterway being dredged.
6.3.5 Solid Waste Separation 149. Separation of the solid wastes from the dredged sediment was considered in terms of the amount of material to be separated, use of mechanical or manual sorting and the location of any sorting. Only large sized waste item from the dredged sediment will be sorted and removed. Examination of previous filling of other areas with dredged sediment determined that this is adequate and the disposal methods and post-filling land use would not be constrained. Sorting at the dredging sites themselves is preferred as it limits the potential congestion at the Ancol CDF, offers the potential for temporary local employment and integrates with other activities to keep the dredging sites and immediate surroundings “clean and tidy” during dredging. 150. Mechanical separation was tested but would need to be located at the Ancol site. The nature of the material, need for supplementary water and operational difficulties demonstrated no advantage for mechanical separation. Thus the proposed method of manual separation of only large sized items (and possibly optional separation of smaller items that can be recycled) at the dredging sites has been adopted. Jakarta’s only currently operational general landfill at Bantar Gebang offers the only reasonable and secure disposal site for solid waste material.
6.3.6 Transport options: Land based (dump truck) vs. hydraulic 151. Transport considered three main options – hydraulic (pumping), barge and truck, integrating these with dredging technologies and with the chosen disposal site. Pumping was considered inappropriate since the amount of solid waste would likely cause blockages. This would significantly affect any 62
World Bank-financed Western Java Environmental Management Project (Project ID P040528), which closed June 30, 2006.
61
dredging program. Barge transport would not be feasible in most locations because of the bridges and bottlenecks over the drains preventing access to the sea; however, this may be a contractor-preferred method for the lower portions of the larger waterways. Truck transport is therefore the only alternative for the majority of sites and hence is chosen, with the assumption that it will be used everywhere representing a potential worst case situation with regard to traffic effects.
7
Environmental Management Plans
7.1 Overall Environmental Management and Monitoring Plans 152. The Environmental Management Plan (RKL) and the Environmental Monitoring Plan (RPL) under the Indonesian AMDAL (EIA) system, together constitute the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) requirement under the World Bank Environmental Assessment OP4.01 Annex C. The RKL and RPL for the Phase 1 project sites and for the Ancol CDF have been approved as part of the AMDAL approval process (see Section 3.5). Under the Indonesia AMDAL system, quarterly implementation reports of the RKL and RPL for both the Project sites (i.e. Phase 1 and Phase 2 works) and the Ancol CDF will be have to be prepared and submitted to the provincial BPLHD during the construction period. These reports form the basis for oversight monitoring of the works by the DKI BPLHD. They also offer a tangible opportunity to report back to the DKI BPLHD on any changes in the project scope and details since the AMDAL was reviewed and approved and also on compliance during construction with the implementation of the approved mitigation and monitoring measures in the works. 153. Under this project, the Phase 1 and Phase 2 RKLs and RPLs including additional environmental and social impact management provided in the supplementary reports discussed in Section 3.5.1 will be incorporated into the dredging and civil works bidding documents to ensure that all potential contractors are able to price for them63 and that the plans become part of the suite of legally binding civil works contract documents64. The RKLs and RPLs and the other contract documents such as the detailed design engineering drawings, technical specifications for works, etc., together contain all the required elements such as the corresponding mitigation measures for each of the identified impacts for each stage of the works, the responsibilities for implementing and for monitoring these, the monitoring indicators, and the costs for ensuring these are all implemented. Meanwhile, the responsibility for pre-dredge sediment testing (as part of the projects overall testing protocol for determining hazardous material and thereby ensuring that only non-hazardous material is transported and disposed of at the Ancol CDF) has been included in the Terms of Reference of the SC. 154. Once project construction works start, the quarterly implementation reports for the associated RKLs and RPLs will be prepared by the dredging and works contractors jointly with the SC. These will be reviewed and cleared by the PMU and the World Bank prior to submission to BPLHD. The preparation and submission of quarterly implementation reports for the RKL and RPL of Ancol CDF are ongoing (see Chapter 3, Section 3.7.2 for a description of the arrangements for Ancol CDF, including their preparation, review and submission).
63
The overall estimated project budget for the implementation of these environmental measures is about US$1.9 million. Note the similar arrangements for Ancol CDF where PT. PJA has incorporated the RKL and RPL requirements for Ancol CFD into their construction contracts – see Chapter 3, Section 3.7.2. 64
62
7.2 Traffic Management Plans 155. The dredging and construction contractors are also required to prepare and implement Traffic Management Plans (TMPs), which are subject to the approval and supervision of the SC65. Detailed contract specific TMPs is to be prepared by each contractor for their specific operating fleet. These contract specific TMPs, will be guided by the overall project level Generic Traffic Management Plan (GTMP) that has been prepared by the PMU during project preparation. The GTMP have been developed for the JUFMP Phase 1 sites taking into account the following66:
The project-required truck movement of dredged material from dredging sites to the Ancol (for the disposal of dredge material), the PPLi disposal sites (for the disposal of hazardous material if any are found), and to Bantar Gebang (for the disposal of solid waste). The identified possible routes and road networks (with GPS system attached). The standard city regulations associated with: o Transport truck movement around the city including route designation and restricted hours of operation. o Certification addressing emissions and safety of the vehicles. o Traffic management / safety / signage etc. at loading / unloading areas. The requirement for approval of the detailed implementation TMPs. The concerns expressed during current project community consultation related to “community disturbance” (an all encompassing term), “site access and congestion” and preventing “spillage of material” along transport routes and at loading points. The need for on-going community consultation and ANDAL, RKL and RPL requirements.
156. A separate detailed Ancol site TMP is being developed for the immediate area of the Ancol CDF site by PT. PJA and will be linked and coordinated into the specific Phase 1 site TMPs. The unloading of sediment material and solid waste all occur within the disposal sites. The Ancol updated RKL / RPL specifically requires vehicle washing of every truck before leaving the disposal site to prevent dirt being deposited onto public roads. Calculations indicate no traffic congestion on public roads associated with the Phase 1 truck movements. Moreover, it is noted that Ancol has experience of traffic management from other projects, including having a detailed system of “holding” trucks away from areas where congestion might be occurring under abnormal conditions.
8 Resettlement Planning 8.1 Approach for Social Impact Management 157. The key project social safeguards instruments consist of (i) a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), and (ii) specific Resettlement Plans (RPs) for each project site where Project Affected Persons (PAPs) are found. The rationale of this approach, including a sequenced approach for implementation risk management, adaptation to a constantly changing urban setting, and the timing of the disclosure of various social safeguards documents have been discussed earlier (see sections 3.5.2 and 3.5.3).
65 During bidding, bidders are required to prepare preliminary Traffic Management Plans as a part of their technical proposal. Final Traffic Management Plans are prepared by the winning contractors prior to the start of work. 66 These criteria are included in the JUFMP Phase 1 Supplementary Report, which in turn is included in the works bidding documents.
63
158.
8.2
The key principles adopted by the project for social impact management were as follows: First, both resettlement and non-resettlement related social impacts are avoided or minimized (if avoidance is not possible). This is done through limiting works to priority sections, careful selection of dredging approaches and equipment technology, and detailed engineering designs (DEDs) geared towards minimizing impact. The potential social impact of the project, including a discussion of the efforts to minimize impact, is described in Section 5.5. Second, the project will be implemented in two phases (see Section 2.4). It is designed to proceed first with construction in the sites that have no potential PAPs (refer to Table 4-7). The sequencing of works is a key implementation risk management mechanism for the project. Amongst others, it will allow DKI Jakarta sufficient time to prepare the RPs for the PAPs sites (particularly to have sufficient and meaningful consultations). Third, as a result of project phasing, a RPF has been developed by DKI Jakarta in close discussion with the Bank project task team since mid 2008. It will guide DKI Jakarta, particularly its RP team under the Environmental and Social Working Group (ESWG) of PIU DKI Jakarta in preparing the RPs. The institutional arrangements for the implementation of social safeguards requirements of the project, including arrangements and responsibilities for monitoring, have been described in Section 3.8. Fourth, the project carried out significant public consultations - during AMDALs preparations through standard consultations (twice for each AMDAL, prior to the finalization of the TOR and the AMDAL study itself), and through FGDs in all project sites. These consultations have been reported to be effective in increasing the communities’ awareness of the project, and in capturing the concerns, aspirations and expectations of the communities for the pre, during, and postconstruction stages. Chapter 9 provides a description of the consultations that have taken place during the project preparation period. Fifth, relevant concerns, aspirations and expectations of the communities identified during the AMDALs consultations and FGDs that should be addressed during construction have been included in the bidding documents of the civil works (later to become contracts for the winning contractors). In addition, the TOR of the SC includes assignments to ensure that activities addressing these issues to be carried out by contractors are well monitored and supervised. Lastly, in order to avoid uncertainty and unfair treatment of the PAPs that could lead to social unrest and conflicts between the PAPs and DKI Jakarta, the project will activate the project GRS facilities and services, and continuously carry out meaningful consultations with the communities, especially with the PAPs during RPs preparation and during construction. Chapter 10 provides a summary description of the project’s GRS.
Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF)
159. DKI Jakarta has prepared the RPF for this project in close coordination with the Bank’s task team. The RPF seeks to address the gaps between the current legal framework on land acquisition and resettlement of Indonesia and compliance with OP 4.12. The purpose of the RPF is to clarify principles, procedures and organizational arrangements to be applied to the preparation of the RPs. In particular, the policy framework (a) confirms that it applies for the project sites as well as linked sites; (b) identifies the likely categories of PAPs; (c) outlines the process of development of RPs including preparation, review,
64
approval, and disclosure; (d) addresses the entitlements of PAPs who are occupants of state or government land as well as entitlements of PAPs affected by the acquisition of privately owned land; (e) specifies the rationale for compensation for lost assets at replacement cost, specific measures to address vulnerable groups, and assistance for livelihood restoration; (f) specifies the organizational arrangements for the implementation of the RPF and RPs; (g) outlines the grievance mechanisms; and (h) monitoring and evaluation for RPs. The full RPF document is available in the project files. 160.
Key principles. The RPF applies the following key principles: Principle 1: minimization of resettlement. Involuntary resettlement should be avoided where feasible, or minimized, exploring all viable alternative project designs67; Principle 2: assistance to displaced persons. If resettlement is unavoidable, persons displaced by a JUFMP subproject should be supported in their efforts to gain access to adequate habitation. If the relocation affects their income sources and/or their livelihoods, displaced persons should be offered support for a transition period, based on a reasonable estimate of the time likely to be needed to restore their livelihood and standards of living; Principle 3: consultations on resettlement options and forms of support. Resettlement options and support will be designed in consultation with the displaced persons. The consultations should involve a two-way transfer of information between JUFMP staff and the displaced persons; Principle 4: legal resettlement sites. Occupants of state or government land who are displaced by JUFMP should be provided with opportunities to resettle at locations that can be legally occupied. Principle 5: public facilities and community infrastructure. In cases of group relocation, public facilities and community infrastructure affected by the Project will be rebuilt at the resettlement sites. Principle 6: transparent and accountable. Information on the budget to finance the implementation of this RPF will be announced.
161. Internal consultation. Apart from external consultations described in Section 8.1 above, internal discussions, consultation and information dissemination within DKI Jakarta have also been conducted. These have proven extremely important and relevant. In particular, it was noted during the preparation of the RPF (and initial preparation of RPs) that the approach on handling resettlement - particularly for squatters - introduced in the RPF is quite new for DKI Jakarta officials at all levels. Discussions between the Bank and DKI Jakarta to come to a shared understanding, awareness and agreement on the principles and procedures to address resettlement as specified in the RPF required significant efforts over an approximate three year period. Continuous socialization of the RPF amongst DKI, including to the lower levels officials of the province down to kelurahans (including the various land acquisition teams - P2T) are being and will be carried out (see further details in Chapter 9). Capacity building programs (such as awareness training, learning-by-doing training/coaching, etc) for all stakeholders involved in resettlement are very critical for the success of the project to consistently implement the RPF and RPs. Communication and coordination between DKI Jakarta and central agencies that could support the resettlement-related activities need to be strengthened.
67 For example, a change of methodology / technology allowing for dredging around some structures have avoided the necessity of involuntary resettlement in two locations – Waduk Sunter Selatan and Tanjungan Drains.
65
162. Categories of PAPs. The two general categories of PAPs are (i) persons affected by the repossession of state or government lands, and (ii) persons affected by the acquisitions of privately owned land. Both general categories are provided for in the RPF. However, it has been determined that the JUFMP activities will mainly require state or government owned land, and only a small portion of project areas are likely to be on privately owned land. The categories of entitlement for persons affected by the repossession of state or government lands are: Persons who own and occupy dwellings and other structures built on state or government land without any recognizable legal rights or claim to the land they occupy; Renters of dwellings and other structures built on state or government land without any recognizable legal rights or claim to the land they occupy; “Encroachers”, i.e., persons who aggrandize or extend their personal holdings (privately owned land and assets on the land) by encroaching adjacent state or government land; “Squatter Landlords”, i.e., persons who derive illegal rents from structures built on state or government land, but do not occupy such structures. 163. Categories of entitlement. Various resettlement entitlements have been provided for in the RPF. These include, amongst others, compensation for loss of assets, assistance for relocation, and assistance for rehabilitation. Specific compensation options will be determined through consultations with the PAPs and will be specified in the RPs. 164. Distinctions between categories of PAPs. Given the previous history of evictions practices (see the discussions in sections 5.5.3 and 5.5.4), the adoption of the RPF represents a step change and transformatory progress in DKI Jakarta’s approach to handling involuntary resettlement. Over the course of the preparation of the RPF and its related discussions, DKI Jakarta has come to adopt and accept the key principles of the RPF as described above, which are key to equitable social safeguards practices. However, it is noted that DKI Jakarta has strong concerns that any social safeguards policies and practices it adopts should not inadvertently result in rewarding illegal behavior and at the same time not protect vulnerable people who are at risk of losing their home and livelihoods. In particular, DKI Jakarta has reservations to compensate (i) encroachers who are property owners who have extended their property beyond its legal limits into adjacent state or government land, and who will not necessarily have their source of livelihoods adversely affected nor have to relocate as a result of the repossession of the state or government land, and (ii) squatter landlords, who have built structures on state or government land for the expressed purpose of profiting from rents, but who do not rely on these rents to sustain a reasonable livelihood. 165. Squatter landlords and encroachers. The RPF makes a distinction between squatter landlords and encroachers and other categories of PAPs, reflecting DKI Jakarta’s concerns described in the foregoing paragraph. However, the RPF does not absolutely exclude benefits to these two categories – the RPF clarifies that they would provided with assistance in the forms determined in the RP on a case by case negotiated and mutually agreed basis, without any predetermined limiting criteria. The RPF provisions for squatter landlords and encroachers reflect a balance between the various concerns of stakeholders. It reflects the concerns of DKI Jakarta that persons who purposely aggrandize or extend their personal holdings into adjacent state or government lands, or who utilize public lands as a source of enrichment by building structures on these lands and using them to derive rents (often exploiting poor and vulnerable
66
persons), should not be further enriched from public funds, but balances this concern by providing the avenue for individual consultations and assistance that are mutually agreeable and acceptable. It also serves to highlight the aim to protect public interests and signals the spirit of the Bank’s policy on involuntary resettlement to protect vulnerable people at risk of losing their homes or livelihoods, but balances this with conformance to the policy by not excluding any particular categories of affected people from assistance and/or compensation. 166. The distinction between squatter landlords and encroachers and other categories of PAPs in the RPF nevertheless represents an implementation risk. Under the RPF, (a) each RP is required to list all PAPs, and would have to show the solution for each PAP, including any squatter landlords and encroachers that may exist at the project site, and (b) each RP is required to go through a consultation process and as a result the information about and fairness of the solutions will be public knowledge. Each RP will require the World Bank’s review and no-objection, and the World Bank can and will review the process to arrive at individual assistance to PAPs, including to squatter landlords and encroachers where these categories exist.
8.3
Resettlement Plans (RPs)
167. All project sites will be screened for PAPs68. Works under the project is sequenced to allow for activities at sites without PAPs to proceed first. Efforts have been made, and are continuing to be made, to minimize the number of PAPs (see Section 5.5). Where PAPs are identified and cannot be avoided, an RP will be prepared in accordance with the provisions of the RPF. The RPs will identify affected people and lay out the framework for compensating and restoring the livelihoods of entitled households with a clear and agreed timeline between the PAPs and DKI Jakarta. All RPs must be approved by the Bank, publicly disclosed and must be implemented (except elements in the RPs related to post-resettlement activities) prior to any works commencing at the associated site. 168. Preliminary RPs. Preliminary censuses were carried out in parallel with the preparation of the RPF and the DEDs at the seven sites initially identified as PAP sites (see Section 5.5.1). As the first stage in the preparation of site specific RPs, or prior to entering the subproject site to carry out the census survey, initial socialization of the project was done with the local levels of government / community leaders (mainly kelurahan, RT / RW) either69 by group meetings at the kelurahan offices or by multiple small meetings moving from one RT / RW to other RT / RW. With the agreement of local leaders and communities, preliminary census surveys70 were carried out of the individuals / households that may, depending on proxy of the subproject impact areas (at that time DEDs were simultaneously being prepared), need to be resettled. In total, 2,369 persons were interviewed in these seven sites. Based on these preliminary censuses, preliminary drafts RPs have been prepared71.
68
Note that non-PAP sites were screened (including Phase 1 sites) in 2010. A repeat/update screening exercise is expected to be done around October 2011 to reconfirm the status of these sites. 69 After consulting the local government and taking into account the local situation. 70 Census survey obtained information on social-economic characteristics, impacted assets, perception and aspiration of PAPs. Records on each PAP include photographs of the individual, affected assets, and photocopy of ID card. The affected asset was numbered and associated with the individual owners. 71 Preparation of these census and preliminary RPs were supported by consultants retained by the PMU to assist DKI Jakarta.
67
8.3.1 Census Updates and Finalization of RPs 169. The preliminary census and consultations, while they provide valuable and necessary data, also provided feedback on expectations and concerns. The relevant concerns, aspirations and expectations of the communities that should be addressed during construction will be included in the bidding documents and works contracts. With the finalization and disclosure of the RPF, DKI Jakarta will proceed with the further development and preparation of the preliminary RPs in the currently identified PAP sites72. A draft guide of RP preparation processes and steps have been prepared73. The RPs will be completed74, subjected to World Bank review and no-objection, disclosed and implemented prior to the commencement of the associated (Phase 2) works.
8.3.2 Database for PAPs 170. DKI Jakarta intends to develop a database for PAPs, which will be gradually expanded to cover PAPs beyond the JUFMP. The information in the database will be used as a reference by DKI Jakarta in the case that in the future it has to resettle people from sites of other projects, to avoid giving compensation to the same individuals. DKI Jakarta expected that the project could facilitate and assist the establishment of the database.
8.3.3 Funding for RPF and RPs 171. The RPF and the stipulations set forth in this document will be funded jointly by DKI Jakarta and the project (managed by PMU):
DKI Jakarta will provide funding from their budget for financing the: (a) the Project Implementation Unit (PIU)75, (b) the resettlement compensation, resettlement assistance and rehabilitation support, (c) establishing and placing the project GRS, and (d) the mobileGovernment system and website hosting location. Budget for resettlement compensation, assistance, and rehabilitation support will be allocated in relevant provincial agencies. For instance, budget for compensation for structures and for building rental apartments will be provided under the Housing Agency; budget for rehabilitation support would be allocated by Social Agency, Trade and Cooperative Agency, etc., depending on the type activities. The Project will finance the independent consultant who will carry out the external monitoring and evaluation, supervision consultants who will oversee the implementation of this RPF, consultants and experts who will manage the project GRS.
172. The overall estimated budget for the implementation of project RPs is about US$2.8 million. DKI Jakarta’s financial capacity has been assessed to determine that it has the adequate financial
72
Which have been reduced from seven to six sites after further efforts to adopt engineering designs and selection of works methodology to minimize impact (see section 5.5.1 for details). 73 This is expected to be updated during implementation to take into account lessons learned. 74 This will be expected to require update censuses, announcements of cut-off dates, and full consultations with PAPs including on options for compensations, assistance and rehabilitation of livelihoods, timelines for implementation, etc. Consultations with civil society organizations are also planned. 75 Including the working groups described in Section 3.8.
68
resources to fund the RPs implementation. Trust funds grants (as and if available) will be used to complement the funding of the above activities.
9
Consultations
173. Overall, the project has been prepared adopting a process of meaningful and participatory consultations with potentially affected people, groups and other stakeholders. The process for consultations is also an integral part of the project’s communications, which is discussed in more detail in Chapter 10. The consultative process for this project has been exhaustive and widespread and has occurred at multiple levels depending on the target stakeholder group and on the issues being discussed. The discussion here will focus on the consultative process with respect to the AMDAL documents, the RPF and the RPs, and with the potentially affected communities in all the project sites.
9.1
Consultations during AMDAL
174. The project consultations occurred over a two year time horizon mostly in 2009 and 2010. They took the form of public meetings and were recorded as annexes in the respective AMDAL documents approved by the DKI BPLHD. Public consultations during AMDAL preparation for Phase 1 project sites were done before the completion of the DEDs. Focus Group Discussions were done for all project sites in parallel with the preparation of DEDs and AMDAL for Phase 2 sites, as well as in initial preparation of RPs for the PAPs sites. Interviews with samples of community members (up to 10% of households) were undertaken to complement the information on the environmental and social baseline, community aspirations and concerns on project implementation obtained in the consultations during the AMDAL preparation. The main aspirations, issues and concerns raised by the participants across all project sites obtained through consultations and interviews during AMDALs preparations were: (a) the support and recognition that the outcome of the project will reduce floods but there will be short to medium term disturbances during construction; (b) recognition that flow capacity of canals have been reduced due to sedimentation, improper garbage disposal, and encroachment and buildings on water bodies and surroundings; (c) the wish to have more details about the project, including the time table; (d) the wish that construction must be done properly, including handling of spillage of dredged materials during transportation, noise, dusts; (e) compensation types and levels that will be given if resettlement takes place; (f) opportunities for local employment and businesses; (g) the wish for having meaningful consultations, particularly during construction; and (h) the willingness to participate in solid waste management activities. 175. With respect to the Ancol CDF, consultations started in 2005/2006 when the first AMDAL for Ancol CDF was prepared. The first Ancol CDF AMDAL was approved in 2006 for reclamation using mainly sand as fill material and as it pre-dated JUFMP, it did not consider the JUFMP project at all. The public consultation in 2005 included several meetings to consider the draft AMDAL with minutes of the meeting highlighting issues raised, including those with social / community implications. The Updated RKL/RPL of Ancol CDF was based on the same general arrangement and principles as in the earlier AMDAL, but the update was done specifically to allow for the use of JUFMP dredged material as fill material and to increase the channel width between existing shoreline and the fill area from approximately
69
80m to approximately 200m. An additional public consultation process was held during the update process as per the statutory requirements of Government Regulation (PP) No: 27/199976. 176. Table 9-1 summarizes the key issues that arose during the AMDALs consultations processes and the action taken to address these issues. Table 9-1 Issues raised with respect to the Phase 1 AMDAL and Ancol CDF consultation Issues raised and Discussed (Thematically)
Summary of responses of those consulted
Summary of Action Taken by Project to address these concerns
Phase 1 AMDAL Consultation
76
Project Objectives, Components, Institutional and arrangements. Information about the sub-project areas
Generally supportive feedback for flood mitigation activities.
Project design to continue to maximize opportunities for flood alleviation through selection of key drains and waduks.
Providing history of area (general information) Resettlement and people moving back in Floods also occur from tidal intrusion Suggesting engineering requirements
Information on the Project
Timetables, boundaries, methods of construction, future consultation, etc.
Resettlement issues
Will I be resettled When will I know if am to be resettled When will resettlement occur What compensation / entitlements will I get Entitlements should be at market values If resettlement occurs, other people not move back in Proper compensation does not always occur After census no more property transfer for speculators One case of traders insisted that their legal representatives must be present for census A few said happy to move, most willing to move with appropriate compensation Some prefer to make their own arrangement for resettlement,
Provided useful technical information for project design. Methods instituted for ensuring resettled areas remain free Scope of project remains emergency dredging and tidal factors will be considered in design Accounted for by design engineers if appropriate FGDs in more than 60 villages undertaken and continued consultations to be conducted throughout. All points associated with resettlement are addressed in the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and considerations to the issues raised were integrated – people were made aware of the development of livelihoods compensation in the RPF On speculators, it was suggested that boundaries are fixed as soon as possible Census questions are not enforced on people in order to avoid conflict
See Chapter 3 for a discussion of the Indonesian environmental legislation.
70
Concerns about effects
Implementation arrangements
including housing Biggest concern is with spillage of material from trucks Minimize disturbances and noise Don’t leave dredged materials behind on the dredging site Community is confused about where complaints should be filed and addressed.
Common expression from the communities that they would like to continually be involved through consultation processes during project implementation as well Ancol CDF Consultation Wish for ongoing consultation and involvement
Project Objectives, Components, Institutional and arrangements.
Generally supportive (per Updated Ancol RKL/RPL 2009) as it is part of the JUFMP flood mitigation.
Information about the project
Timetables, boundaries, methods of construction, future consultation, etc Positive impact of the Ancol CDF project to community.
Social issue beyond the resettlement
General, all respondents expected that the implementation of project work could absorb manpower and open up business opportunities for the residents of Kelurahan Ancol and that the potential negative impacts would be managed well by PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol, Tbk. About 15% of respondents interviewed during the AMDAL process did not approve of the project because of negative impacts
71
RKL/RPL is embedded in the contract and enforces no spillage of trucks, reducing noise and odor concerns, and ensuring proper management and cleanliness of site Site-based POSKO will provide venue to encourage community involvement, participation, and integration of concerns. Additional project information, dissemination (e.g. brochures) will be provided. Site-based POSKO will provide venue to encourage community involvement, participation, and integration of concerns.
PT. PJA is ready to cooperate with the JUFMP to ensure that the construction and operation of confined disposal facility fulfills requirement that is applied in JUFMP project. Assigning Public Relations Division to liaise between PT. PJA and the community / agencies. Through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) program, two junior high schools (SMP) at Kelurahan Pademangan Barat and Kelurahan Ancol were constructed. PT. PJA and local kelurahan started and continues to support the “Ancol Loves the Environment” program. Disseminating plan to community / public agencies. Establishing communication forum and coordination with other activities / agencies in the area. Monitoring measures included reporting on frequency of communication forum meetings. PT. PJA has been in cooperation with the local community that keeps them informed with any labor recruitment that prioritizing the local workers. Fishing grounds at the vicinity of Ancol CDF area has been assessed to be not feasible as the water is continuously received pollutant from the urban drainages of Jakarta city.
Concerns about effects
they might suffer, such as the disturbance to the areas where they looked for fish, prawn and crabs. AMDAL Commission at the DKI BPLHD expressed their biggest concern if the sediment is found to be hazardous waste (B3 waste). Pollution of sea water. Disturbances and noise. Spillage of mud (from JUFMP trucks) at the surrounding Ancol area and road damage. Offsite impact (if the JUFMP dredged material is not enough to fill all the CDF space, where is the other filling material source?).
Implementation arrangements
Coordination with JUFMP (who doing what and responsibility). Implementation schedule (when the dike is ready).
Wish for ongoing consultation and involvement
Common expression as for Phase 1 AMDAL, in which the communities expects there are employment and business opportunities.
9.2
The PMU has developed set of testing procedure to prevent B3 waste entering Ancol CDF. Updated RKL/RPL requires PT. PJA to construct confined disposal facility, to be completed before disposal from the Project begins. RKL/RPL is embedded in the contract and enforces no spillage of trucks, reducing noise and odor concerns, and ensuring proper management and cleanliness of site. PT. PJA is required (as per the Memorandum of Agreement with DKI Jakarta) to provide car wash before the JUFMP trucks leave Ancol CDF. Contractor is also required to deposit some amount of cash that will be used if road damage due to its vehicle is nor repaired by the contractor. PT. PJA will ensure that the source of filling material other than the dredged material is to be from legitimate source that has an environmental permit (e.g. AMDAL). PT. PJA has been actively participating in any discussion related to JUFMP preparation. PT. PJA will ensure, and the World Bank will confirm, that the disposal facilities are properly confined prior to disposal of dredged material. Assigning Public Relations Division to liaise continuously between PT. PJA and the community / agencies. Establishing communication forum and coordination with other activities / agencies in the area. Monitoring measures included reporting on frequency of communication forum meetings.
Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)
177. In addition to public consultations carried out during the AMDALs preparation, the project has also conducted FGDs in 57 kelurahans (i.e. urban village) in four municipalities during June – September 2010 where the project sites are located. These further informed the preparation of the RPF and preliminary RPs. Each FGD was led and guided by a consultant team retained by the PMU. The purposes of the meetings were to (i) update communities on the current status of the project, particularly for Phase 1 sites where AMDAL-related consultations were completed prior to the of end 2009 and where there
72
have been some changes to project scope and timing since then as DEDs became available, and (ii) continue to obtain feedback from the communities and their aspirations. Participants comprised of representatives from the kelurahan offices, Board of Trustees of the kelurahans, Community Guidance Officers (Babinsa), Head of Family Welfare Program (PKK), community leaders, Heads of community neighborhoods (RT and RW), and representatives of the communities of the project sites. A total of 1,051 participants attended the various meetings (each meeting was attended by between 11-28 participants). Women participation across kelurahans ranged from 0 – 71% of the total participants. Information obtained from the FGDs in the PAPs sites, located in 31 out of these 57 kelurahans, were also taken into account in the preparation of preliminary RPs. The FGD meetings in these PAPs sites kelurahans were attended by 599 participants77. 178. The FGDs revealed that communities had several key concerns, i.e., that: (i) should they need to be resettled, they will be given improper compensations and provided relocation sites far from their employment; (ii) they cannot access job opportunities during construction; (iii) they will not have communication with the project and contractor; (iv) they will not be provided with accessible and nearby facilities to lodge any complaint; (v) they are not well-informed in advance of the project, prior the commencement of and during construction; and (vi) the construction would disturb their livelihoods. Further, communities were concerned (i) about the potential poor management of the dredged materials in the temporary sites located in their neighborhoods; (ii) of transportation for the dredged materials that would lead to increasing traffic congestion, odor and damage to local roads; and, (iii) about the dredging methodology that could damage plants and structures. Communities would like to (i) participate in the monitoring of construction activities, and solid waste management particularly in sorting garbage that have economic value prior to the transportation of the garbage to the final disposal site; (ii) have good communications with project management and contractors; and, (iii) have the Posko as close as possible in their neighborhood that will function as on-site complaint handling centers as well as a place to meet and coordinate with the project management and contractors. 179. The FGD report78 for each sub-project site will be made available with the AMDAL reports to the construction contractors and the Supervision Consultant. The bidding document for civil works specifies activities to address most of the above-mentioned communities’ concerns and suggestions as part of the construction activities. Meaningful public consultations will be continued throughout project implementation (including during the preparation of the final RPs) to ensure that the above concerns are addressed properly.
9.3
Consultations on the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF)
180. A series of workshops and dialogues were carried out with provincial and municipality government officials specifically to support the preparation of the RPF. These guided the preparation of the RPF. Two consultation sessions were carried out on the draft RPF, and were followed by a further consultation aimed to strengthen the capacity of relevant agencies and municipality local governments in implementing the RPF. A summary of these consultations are as follows:
77
It should be noted also that the FGD activities included ‘before’ and ‘after’ questionnaire surveys of the participants, which clearly demonstrated increased awareness and understanding of the project due to the FGD discussions. 78 FGD Report for each site is available in the project files.
73
79
An ‘internal’ consultation - comprising 126 participants, ranging from central government (Ministry of Public Works), and DKI Jakarta to the lowest level (representatives of the mayors from all four DKI municipalities, relevant DKI agencies and bureaus, and sub-local governments down to the level of kecamatan/kelurahan). The objective of this consultation was to disseminate and get support from wider DKI Jakarta officials for the draft RPF. Some participants conveyed their concerns or suggestions on the following main issues: (a) there is a need to socialize and consult the RPF to the wider public; (b) implementation of the RPF particularly with the current available legal basis that does not allow to compensate the PAPs who occupy the government land; (c) mechanisms to define the compensation level for illegal occupiers and financial accountability for the expenses for such compensation; (d) confirmation that the DKI Jakarta does not provide rent-to-own public housing but only rental public housing; (e) budget for compensation should be available in timely manner; (f) dissemination and disclosure of the RPF may create expectation and would lead to increased encroachers; (g) readiness of DKI Jakarta to implement the RPF because development in the field is quite dynamic and fast; (h) applicability of the RPF for PAPs who had been evicted and compensated prior to the project preparation given that DKI Jakarta does not have a data base for evictees, compensation provided to them under JUFMP would lead to audit problems; (i) compensation should be given directly to the PAPs to avoid potential distrust; and (j) should there be complaints, the site-based complaint handling unit - based in the project site offices (POSKO) - will have to follow-up them properly and timely. An ‘external‘ consultation – comprising 77 participants, including 26 participants from NGOs active on various issues in Jakarta, representatives from various Indonesian universities and technical experts. The summary of the questions, concerns and inputs from the participants of the meeting were as follows: (i) appreciation of the new thinking of DKI Jakarta on handling resettlement with the RPF which is in line with the expectation of the NGOs; however, there was a concern on its implementation process (including the time that is needed to complete the process) on the ground, and its potential to trigger the appearance of “middlemen” acting as brokers who would affect the resettlement process; (ii) DKI Jakarta to dredge canals without resettlement if possible, if not then minimize resettlement79; (iii) DKI Jakarta is expected to work with the community and/or NGOs who have experienced or are currently working with resettling squatters; (iv) RPF needs to be socialized more widely and down to the project affected persons (PAPs) using a better approach and not a one-way dissemination; (v) complaint handling mechanisms need to be clear and the RPF should also include the Law No. 2/2005 pertaining the rights of people on social, economic and cultural life. On other aspects not related to RPF, participants were concerned on why DKI Jakarta has to borrow for this project while it cannot spend its own budget in timely manner; and warning that the project needs to ensure that the Ancol CDF adheres to its AMDAL requirements (as NGOs are filing a class action on the reclamation of the sea along North Jakarta). Participants also stated that flood management should also be accompanied by the improvement of the drainage system and solid waste (not only through dredging), and transportation of sludge should be in the evening to avoid traffic. A third consultation was carried out in February 10, 2011 and attended by 60 representatives from all four DKI municipalities, sub-local governments (kecamatans) where the project sites
This is already one of the principles specified in the RPF.
74
are located, relevant DKI agencies and bureaus, the Ancol authority, head of PMU, PIU of Cipta Karya. The main purpose of this consultation was to get the same understanding among stakeholder officials in DKI on the RPF, and discuss the plan to proceed with the preparation of the Resettlement Plans (RPs). Discussion on the RP included understanding and implementation of the principles, eligibility and entitlements, the organizational arrangements of the preparation and implementation of the RP on the ground, as well as the approach in defining the value of the assets and availability of rental public housing/apartments. Funding needs for preparing RPs was also discussed. The discussion also raised the issue on the needs to set up a site-based complaint handling unit - based in the project site offices (POSKOs) and to have operational guidelines to implement the RPF and to prepare RPs on the ground. The progress of the RP consultants on the census survey, the need to update and verify the information prior to the cut-off date, and that need to decide quickly on the cut-off date were also discussed. 181. DKI Jakarta, led by the Office of the Assistant for Development and Environment, had incorporated relevant suggestions from the participants during the first two consultations in the RPF. Concerns from participants in the first consultation meetings were followed up in the third consultation through a more detailed explanation by the PIU DKI Jakarta and officials from DKI’s Assistant for Development and Environment. During the third consultation, some of the principles and policies of RPF were reiterated to confirm the new DKI Jakarta’s approach to handling resettlement and how it would be adopted in the preparation of the RPs.
9.4
Consultations during the preparation of Resettlement Plans (RPs)
182. The FGDs were carried out in parallel with the initial preparation of the RPs, and therefore information obtained from the discussions was used to improve the design of the census survey including questionnaires and field survey approach. The consultation process to prepare the preliminary RPs has been discussed in section 8.3. 183. As further development of site specific RPs progresses, DKI Jakarta now carrying out consultations of the RPF and preliminary RPs at the various municipalities where PAP sites are located i.e., West Jakarta, East Jakarta, North Jakarta and Central Jakarta. These consultations are aimed at strengthening the support of the municipalities towards the completion and implementation of the RPs80. 184. DKI Jakarta is planning to start carrying out consultations with the PAPs after the cut-off dates are announced, among others to confirm the lists of the PAPs and affected assets, discuss and agree on compensation options, dismantling and relocation schedules, etc., as part of the RP preparation. Consultations with the PAPs will be done either in groups or plenary, depending on the specific situation in each site, led by a DKI Jakarta RP team and assisted by the consultant team.
80 To date, consultations have been completed in West and East Jakarta in April 2011. Consultations with North and Central Jakarta are planned for May and June 2011.
75
10 Grievance Redress System (GRS) 185. DKI Jakarta will establish an integrated project Grievance Redress System (GRS) to ensure that complainants are provided a space to file complaints and convey their aspirations related to the project in a politically and psychologically free-speaking environment that ensures voices are heard, recorded and responded in a satisfactory, objective and timely manner agreed by complainant and DKI Jakarta. The details of the project GRS are included in the project RPF. It is expected that the project GRS will be set up at the start of project implementation and fully operating especially before the Phase 2 period begins. 186. The project GRS will apply for all complaints that are associated with the project (not only socialrelated issues, but also environmental, technical issues and others). The project GRS will follow the following key principles:
Complainants can file complaints at no costs, through different alternative media, addressed to complaint handling units set up at different levels and/or to a contact addresses and website dedicated specially for complaint handling for JUFMP; Complainants will be given an accessible, non-threatening, equal, and fair treatment for complaint follow-up and for dispute resolution, regardless of origins, religion, citizenship status, social and economic background; Complaints or disputes will be preferably resolved at the earliest time at the sub-project site. Only in the case that follow-up on complaints and disputes are unresolved at the lower level, the cases will be brought to the attention of the higher levels of the government structure; Follow-up on complaints and resolution of any disputes will be made based on agreements reached among all involved parties through a well-informed consultation processes with facilitation by a competent, trustworthy and credible team; The complaint handling system will maintain the objectivity, transparency, and fairness principles by having an Independent Advisory Team who will be available to assist the complainants at all complaint-handling units; Complaints and disputes, as well as follow-up actions and resolutions will be recorded in real time through a web-based system and disclosed to the public; Socialization, dissemination, and disclosure of the complaint handling system/procedures as well as of the complaints and follow-up actions and dispute resolution will be done continuously at the sub-project site, municipality and provincial levels.
187. A site-based Complaint Handling Unit is to be located on each site to manage and process complaints. This unit will be based in the project site offices (POSKOs). It is expected that the closer and easier the instruments for filing complaints, the more likely complaints could be solved on site in a relatively short time period. Socialization on the availability of the complaint services of the project to the communities, especially the PAPs, is the key to reduce potential social unrest and disappointment. There will be similar complaint handling units at the municipality and provincial levels, to receive and respond to complaints that cannot be solved at the POSKO level. The RPF socialization has included socialization of the project GRS. 188. The project GRS includes database and information systems management that will monitor and disseminate information on any complaints. The information generated by the project GRS will provide the ability to track common issues in project implementation. The system will use a real-time flow of information of complaints and follow-up. An Advisory Team will be set up as an alternative body to
76
provide services to complainants and to DKI Jakarta to come to agreed solutions or follow-up to complaints. The Supervision Consultant (SC) team is tasked with assisting DKI Jakarta in setting up the project GRS system, including the development of the Standard Operating Procedures, and supporting DKI Jakarta to manage the system during the project implementation period. 189. It should be noted that there are existing and well established complaints handling systems in DKI Jakarta, operating through various channels. In most cases81, persons or communities who felt disturbed, being treated unfairly or are unhappy about any project can file a complaint to the head of RT (neighborhood level) who will then put forward it to the head of RW (hamlet level). If the complaint cannot be solved at the RT/RW level, the heads of RT and RW will take the case to the kelurahan level (where the case is handled by the Section of Governance Affairs and Public Order). The case will be officially registered at the kelurahan level. The parties in disputes (e.g. citizen, communities, contractor or other government institutions), the kelurahan council and staff will discuss and try to resolve the case. If no resolution is agreed at the kelurahan level, the case is sent to the higher kecamatan level (sub subdistrict level), and finally to the kotamadya level (municipal level) if still unresolved at kecamatan level. 190. Complaints or feedbacks are also routinely submitted via SMS or call center, media (e.g. newspaper, radio) and the Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta official web-portals (i.e. www.jakarta.go.id and www.beritajakarta.com). Complaints or feedbacks received via these channels are forwarded by DKI Jakarta from the provincial level to the associated relevant offices (i.e., the kelurahan, kecamatan or dinas). These complaints and feedback will first be verified on the ground, and followed-up if confirmed to be resolved at the lowest possible institutional level.
11 Project Communications 191. Flood incidences are perennial occurrences in Jakarta and have been increasing in severity during the past decade. Disastrous floods in January 1996, February 2002, and February 2007 were especially devastating. The 2007 event inundated 235 km2 (about 36%) of the city82, by up to seven meters in some areas. The 2007 floods affected more than 2.6 million people and forced 340,000 people to flee their homes. Over 70 people died and outbreaks of disease affected over 200,000 people. The estimated financial and economic losses from the 2007 floods amounted to US$900 million83. In 2008, a flood event closed the airport toll road, cancelling over 1,000 flights and causing severe disruption for the city. Floods in 2009 also occurred at high intensity and have continued into 2010. Inundations continue to occur under any sustained rainfall condition. External communications 192. Throughout the project preparation period, the consultation processes related to the environmental and social safeguards of the project (to date, over a three year period of 2009-2011) have been one of the key avenue for information dissemination of the details of the project (these are described in Chapter 9) to the public, particularly to communities and in locations close to the project area. All the safeguards related consultation processes (and in particular consultations in project areas related to social safeguards) have included the dissemination of the latest project design, scope and status. It should be noted that 81
Information from site discussions with communities. Flood extent map, DKI Jakarta (Dinas-PU) 83 Estimated by Bappenas (the National Development Planning Agency) 82
77
consultation processes have generally recorded positive support for the project and its floods mitigation aims. 193. These safeguards related consultations have been coupled with information dissemination by DKI Jakarta through various channels84 positioning JUFMP as a key piece of its near term strategy to mitigate floods in Jakarta. Given the background of recent events, floods have become both an urgent and topical issue in the city. Thus, DKI’s dissemination efforts have generally been picked up by the local media. Consequently, public awareness of the JUFMP project (both at the community level as well as the city level) has increased over the period of project preparation. 194. Media monitoring and audits carried out for the period of January 2010 to January 2011 pointed to sustained and increasing media exposure of the project85, mainly through online news portals, community blogs and the print media, and to a lesser extent through electronic broadcast media and government and NGO websites. It should be noted that these media exposures highlighted not only the project’s plans and design to reduce the incidences of floods in Jakarta, but a majority of them discussed and reported on the more complex issues of environmental and social safeguards challenges faced during project preparation. The tone of media discussions on floods mitigation efforts in Jakarta runs the gamut of negative to neutral to positive, but significantly, this tone has evolved more and more towards the positive over the audit period. 195. External communications efforts are expected to continue during project implementation. Social safeguards related consultations will continue throughout the preparation and implementation of sitespecific RPs. At the community level, the public information center based in the project site offices (POSKO) which will be maintained at each JUFMP project site will play a critical role, where project information (including the latest implementation status) will be available and easily accessible to the public. Although as a whole external communications of DKI Jakarta will need improvements, the JUFMP has already provided momentum on coordinating the dissemination of DKI Jakarta’s flood mitigation plans that has been heavily covered by media. These efforts will continue into project implementation. The overall estimated budget for specific project communications is about US$155,000. Note this does not include DKI Jakarta’s general communications department budget. This department has been the channel for DKI Jakarta communications including on floods and JUFMP issues. Annual budget for this department (DKI’s Diskominfo) is over US$500m (FY11). On its own part, the World Bank is preparing a project website on which the latest project information can be made available during implementation. Internal communications 196. Inter-agency communications. The periodic Joint Steering Committee meetings (see section 3.6.1) have been instrumental in providing the platform for inter-agency communications and information sharing of the latest developments and status of the project. This is the only venue where all government agency stakeholders are represented simultaneously. 197. Internal DKI Jakarta communications. As the local government with the mandate for city development, management and administration, DKI Jakarta is naturally seen by the public as the main 84 85
Including prominent pronouncements from the Governor of DKI Averaging over 10 media articles per month spread out over the period
78
agency responsible for floods management in the city86. DKI Jakarta has made use of the opportunity of the consultation processes related to the social safeguards of the project as a key avenue for information dissemination of other details of the project (these are described in Chapter 9 – see especially Section 9.3) within DKI Jakarta to the lowest level (representatives of the mayors from all four DKI municipalities, relevant DKI agencies and bureaus, and sub-local governments down to the level of sub-district and kelurahan). The socialization across DKI offices at provincial government level has mainly been in the form of workshops, “mentoring” approach / transfer knowledge method which is considered the most appropriate approach for DKI officials at the sub-district and kelurahan level. 198. Internal communications efforts are expected to continue during project implementation. The Joint Steering Committee platform will remain, as the committee will continue to meet periodically during project implementation to provide high level oversight. DKI Jakarta has also assigned its Bureau for Infrastructure Development (Biro Prasarkot) with the task of coordinating and communicating the project across the relevant DKI Jakarta and other government agencies. The Biro Prasarkot will also form the communications bridge between the project institutional establishment and the DKI Jakarta institutional establishment – see Figure 11-1. Biro Prasarkot’s activities are directly reviewed by DKI Jakarta’s Assistant for Development and Environmental Affairs, who in turn reports to the Governor of DKI. The Assistant is also a member of the Joint Steering Committee. This setup will allow for coordination vertically through the DKI Jakarta chain of command as well as across all agencies and also connects the project institutional structure to the required coordination and communication to implement a sustainable flood mitigation program.
86 This is further confirmed by the media audits described above. Amongst the findings of these audits, the majority of media reports linked DKI Jakarta as the institution most closely associated with the floods.
79
Figure 11-1 Communications between agencies
12
Reputational Risks
199. This section summarizes two key areas related to the project’s environment and social management issues that may pose a risk to the reputation of the JUFMP and/or the World Bank during the implementation of the project, and describes the measures intended to be taken to manage and minimize these risks87. It should be noted that the measures taken by the project to address these reputational risks will not completely remove these risks. But they do present a tangible way of reducing them or otherwise managing them to acceptable levels. 200. As described in the earlier chapters this report, project preparation has undergone a fairly comprehensive and exhaustive environmental and social assessment process. This was aimed first at improving the sustainability of the project activities and outcomes, and second at ensuring compliance with the Government of Indonesia’s requirements and the World Bank’s own Environmental and Social Safeguards Policies. Notwithstanding all these actions, plans and implementation and institutional arrangements, environmental and social safeguards specific risks that can be associated with this project remain. These will be monitored, managed and minimized throughout project implementation. However, there are three key areas of activities that are not directly in the implementation responsibility of the project implementation entities that may nevertheless pose a risk to the reputation of the JUFMP and/or the World Bank during the implementation. These are discussed below.
87 This section does not summarize the Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) for the project as a whole. The ORAF [which forms part of the Project Appraisal Document (PAD)] presents the broader risk assessment framework for the project.
80
Risks associated with non-project activities in or close to project sites 201. The JUFMP project activities are taking place in very densely populated urban areas of Jakarta. The project has a clearly defined objective, scope and boundaries. Nevertheless, in the highly dense urban setting, it is very likely that development projects and other activities that are not related to the project will occur within or in close proximity to some project sites during the project implementation period88. Examples of these activities may include dredging and other works in canals that are not linked to the project, or greening activities which could involve hard and soft landscaping. 202. These non-project activities may have different standards and processes for due diligence for the works and for social benefits to potentially affected people compared to those applicable to the project. There is a risk that close physical proximity of any given non-JUFMP activities may be wrongly associated to JUFMP by the public and other stakeholders. On the one hand, this may lead to the wrong expectations of the application of project-specific environmental and social safeguards measures, including project-specific entitlements and benefits to affected people. On the other hand, any potentially poor environmental and social management measures being carried out in these non-project related activities may be wrongly attributed to JUFMP and/or the World Bank. 203.
Various actions will be undertaken to mitigate and reduce these risks: Effective communications will be put in place. In particular, a public information center based in the project site offices (POSKO) will be maintained at each project site. These will serve as a primary means to disseminate detailed project information to the local community; Signs (in Bahasa Indonesia) will be posted in appropriate locations at project sites detailing the project boundaries, project-related activities and contact information; Where feasible, temporary fencing and other methods will be put in place to delineate project boundaries; The site-based Complaint Handling Unit in the POSKO will serve as a front line of the project grievance redress system89, providing an on-site avenue for the public to lodge complaints, and if possible for any misunderstandings and/or grievances to be addressed quickly and locally; The SC is also tasked with regular monitoring of project linked sites as well as sites adjacent to JUFMP sites, and reporting any relevant signs of activities. These would provide prior / advance notice to the PIU, PMU and the World Bank to allow for coordination and actions to prevent any communications misunderstanding and inadvertent wrong associations to JUFMP.
Risks associated with activities at the Ancol CDF site 204. As the main dredge material disposal site, the Ancol CDF is an integral part of the JUFMP project. The responsibility for building and operating the Ancol CDF site lies with PT. PJA, which is not a JUFMP project implementation entity. Not all Ancol CDF activities are directly connected to the JUFMP. For example, while JUFMP works is expected to contribute about 3.4 million m3 of fill material for the Ancol CDF, a further approximately 8.6 million m3 of fill material and about 400,000 m3 of 88
It should be noted especially that DKI Jakarta’s mandates and priorities include the following: (i) expand its overall infrastructure development plans that may require the utilization of government and/or the acquisition of private land, (ii) enforce its land use plans consistently, which consequently could lead to the resettlement of informal occupiers of government land (including riverbanks) and those who do not have building permit, and (iii) expand Jakarta’s green space from the current 9% to achieve the minimum standards of 20% of its total administrative area. 89 The Supervision Consultant is tasked with developing, operating and administering the on-site complaint-handling unit (i.e., the Posko) in each works site. The provision of the Posko facilities (e.g., portable office space) is included into the contractors’ works contract.
81
laterite material will be obtained from non-JUFMP sources (see Section 5.3). Nevertheless, the public and other stakeholders may directly associate any problems that may arise at Ancol CDF with the JUFMP. Consequently, arrangements have been made for the Supervision Consultant 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 monitoring and supervision – see section 3.7.2 for a description of the institutional arrangements for the Ancol CDF site. During project implementation, the World Bank will also work with DKI BPLHD to conduct joint supervision and site inspections of the Ancol CDF. These monitoring and supervision activities will allow for actions to be formulated and taken to address any implementation shortcomings, and is expected to reduce the potential reputational risk to the PIU, PMU and/or the World Bank. 205. A specific consideration is the potential for adverse offsite impact at the non-JUFMP sources of fill material (sand and laterite), since any such impact would occur outside the confines of the Ancol CDF itself. With respect to the sand, the impacts associated with sea mining for sand could be disturbance of biota (particularly benthic organism) due to scouring of the sea floor, deterioration in water quality at these locations and disturbance of other marine species that may be present. With regards the land based sourcing of laterite soils, the impacts may be associated with removal of top soil vegetation, erosion and sediment transportation and deposition downstream, water logging in abandoned and unrehabilitated quarry areas leading to breeding ground for mosquito’s and other disease vectors, and slope stability safety concerns if sources are in hilly or high relief terrain. The risk is that if these impacts are severe enough, they may be associated with the project (when on the other hand, the JUFMP project itself has reduced the potential offsite impact by contributing the otherwise low value 3.4 million m3 of nonhazardous dredge material thus significantly reducing the amount of sand material otherwise needed for the filling of the Ancol CDF). The AMDAL process for the Ancol CDF includes consideration of potential offsite impact and the AMDAL documents confirm the location of sand source which already has the associated approved environmental permit (see Section 5.3). The laterite material required is stipulated to be obtained from land based sources near Bekasi, West Java that is also operating under environmental permits. The SC will play a key role to help mitigate risks against improper sourcing of fill material. The SC will review and confirm that fill material suppliers have the necessary approvals. In particular, the laterite material will only be utilized much later - at the time of the final capping of the Ancol CDF reclamation. The SC will ascertain at that time that the laterite source has the appropriate environmental permit. The SC will also monitor the sand and laterite mining locations that would supply the Ancol CDF, and develop a mechanism to verify these materials are actually coming from these locations. The project will work closely with the DKI BPLHD to address any issues that arise. Risks associated with the larger reclamation activities in Jakarta 206. As noted in Section 2.6.1, the Ancol CDF site is a specific and relatively small reclamation area set within a larger and ongoing long term reclamation process in the Ancol area of north Jakarta that started in the early 1960’s. PT. PJA has carried out some of these reclamation activities in the past (Ancol CDF the fourth phase PT. PJA reclamation effort in the Ancol area). Besides contributing dredge material to the specific Ancol CDF reclamation, the JUFMP does not finance nor is it related to any other reclamation efforts in the Ancol area. Apart from contributing to reducing the need for sand material as described in the foregoing paragraph, JUFMP in cooperation with PT. PJA is also introducing improved
82
environmental practices for the handling and disposal of dredge material for reclamation (e.g., through the use of a confined disposal facility) and has put in place appropriate monitoring and supervision arrangements for the Ancol CDF. There is a risk that JUFMP may be wrongly associated by the public and other stakeholders as being responsible over other reclamation projects e.g., those that have occurred in the past or potentially may occur in the future90. The project documents and information dissemination efforts will aim to emphasize and make clear that the extent of JUFMP’s linkage in this regard is confined to the Ancol CDF.
90
It is expected that any future projects will be subjected to their own AMDAL processes.
83
IBRD 38461 THAILAND
ANNEX 1: PROJECT MAP
South China MALAYSIA Sea
PHILIPPINES BRUNEI
PA C I F I C O C E A N
MALAYSIA
INDONESIA
SINGAPORE
PROJECT SITES:
INDONESIA
I
J a v a
N
MAJOR DRAINS (DKI JAKARTA): 3.1 Diversion Grogol-Sekretaris 3.2 Krukut - Cideng 3.3 Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng 3.4 Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari 3.5 Sentiong-Sunter WADUKS (DKI JAKARTA): 4.1 Waduk Melati 4.2 Waduk Sunter Utara 4.3 Waduk Sunter Selatan 4.4 Waduk Sunter Timur III
N
E
S
I
A
(Area of main map)
Java Sea
JAWA
S e a
LINKAGES: Sentiong-Sunter L.1 Kali Itam L.2 Kalibaru L.3 Sunter Kemayoran Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari L.4 Ancol Kp. Bandan L.5 Ancol Long Storage Upper Sunter L.6 Canal - Jl. Kayu Putih Timur Pakin-K. Besar-Jelakeng L.7 Anak K. Ciliwung utara L.8 Jl. Tubagus Angke L.9 PHB Bandengan Utara L.10 Waduk Pluit
FLOODWAYS (DGWR): 2.1 Cengkareng Drain 2.2 West Banjir Canal (WBC) 2.3 Sunter floodways
O
JAKARTA
DISPOSAL SITE: Ancol CDF
NATIONAL IMPORTANCE (DGCK): 1.1 Tanjungan 1.2 Lower Angke 1.3 Cideng-Thamrin
D
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
JAKARTA URGENT FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT (JUFMP)
TIMOR-LESTE
INDIAN OCEAN
AUSTRALIA
1.1
2.2
Ancol CDF
L.10
Highway
4.2
Main Road
L.7
2.1 1.2
L.9
4.4 L.4
3.3
L.1
L.5
3.5 L.8
SELECTED TOWNS AND BUILT-UP AREAS
D.K.I. JAKARTA BOUNDARY
KABUPATEN (REGENCY) HEADQUARTERS
Java
Sea
107°00'
L.3
Muara Gembong 6°00'
6°00'
3.2
Area of map Mauk
Kronjo Kresek
Teluk Naga
Rajeg Pasar Kemis
Balaraja
Cikupa
Tigakarsa
Kosambi
Seratan
Tanum Jaya
Curug Serpong
Parung Panjang
Bantar Gebang
DEPOK Parung
Citeureup
1.3
Cikarang Lemah Tambun Abang
4.1
Cibarusa Jonggol 6°30'
Ciempea
0
Semplak
Cibungbulang Leuwiliang
Jatiluhur Res.
BOGOR
0 106°30'
L.6
Setu
Cileungsi
Cibinong Jasinga
Tambelang Babelan
BEKASI
L.2
3.1
Cabang Bungin
JAKARTA
TANGERANG
Legok
2.3
4.3
JABOTABEK BOUNDARY
106°30'
6°30'
3.4
KABUPATEN BOUNDARIES
107°00'
5
10
15
20
25
1
2
3
KILOMETERS
This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other information shown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World Bank Group, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
KILOMETERS
APRIL 2011
Annex 2 Tentative Plan for the Preparation of Phase 2 related EIAs and RPs Resettlement Plan (RP)
Description
Planned Works Commencement
Expected EIA Disclosure
Jan 2011
Package 1 (Ciliwing-Gunung Sahari Drain, Waduk Melati)
Apr 2012
Package 2a (Cengkareng Floodway)
Apr 2012
Package 2b (Lower Sunter Floodway)
Apr 2012
Package 3 (Cideng Thamrin Drain)
Apr 2012
Jan 2012
Dec 2012
Jul 2012
Package 4 (Sentiong-Sunter Drain, Waduk Sunter Utara, Waduk Sunter Selatan, Waduk Sunter Package 5 (Tanjungan Drain, Lower Angke Drain) Package 6 (West Banjir Canal, Upper Sunter Floodway) Package 7 (Grogol – Sekretaris Drain, Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain, Krukut Cideng
Expected Expected Cut-off Date
RP Disclosure
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Sentiong-Sunter: Aug 2011
Jul 2012
(actual) Jan 2011 (actual) Jan 2011 (actual)
Waduk Sunter Utara: Mar 2012 Oct 2012
Jun 2012
NA
Apr 2013
Nov 2012
Jul 2012
Dec 2012
Jul 2012
Mar 2012
NA Nov 2012
Jul 2012
Note: Dates of the preparation of safeguards instruments are subject to change, to align with any changes in planned construction timing.
85
Annex 3 Case Studies Eviction in Kemiri, Tambora VI and Tambora VIII Sites. 1. Kemiri, Tambora VI and Tambora VIII are two locations adjacent to JUFMP sites. The evictions took place for traders conducting activities along the road shoulder in front of Cengkareng drain nearby the Kemiri market, and along the shoulders of Tambora VI and VIII roads (associated with Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng site). Evictions in these sites have been long requested by the Municipality of West Jakarta. Kemiri market forced eviction (initial plan was in 2007, eviction in December 2008) was due to traffic congestions and unhealthy competition among customers in the “formal” Kemiri market and informal traders who were doing businesses along the roads on the side of the riverbanks. The eviction at Tambora VI (initial plan was in September 2007, eviction in December 2008) took place to enforce public order control for illegal businesses, and restore the function of the riverbanks and road shoulder to their original conditions. The eviction at Tambora VIII in February 2009 occurred after the annual permits for traders were expired and for reducing traffic congestion. 2. Process and impacts of the eviction nearby the Kemiri Market. Before the eviction, there were a total of 250 structures including 80 street vendor stalls occupying the road shoulders / riverbanks in and along the inspection road for Cengkareng drain. Some had apparently occupied the riverbanks. These illegal structures and trading activities had developed from 25 structures in 2000, and become the competitors of the traders of the Kemiri Market located across from the evicted site. Since then, the West Jakarta Municipality has persuaded the traders to move out from the site to four alternative markets (with six months free rents), but the number of them had been growing through time. Traffic conditions along this road had been worsened, and traders of the Kemiri market had increasingly complained that they were losing customers who preferred to go to the informal market. Unmanaged solid waste entered the drainage system. Preparation for eviction started in 2007, and more than three notifications letters were issued during the process. After the consultative processes with the traders reached a deadlock situation, the eviction was finally undertaken in December 2008 by the Public Safety Officers (Satpol PP) and was assisted by the police. No compensation was provided. In many cases, vendors participated in dismantling their structures to salvage building materials. About two months after eviction, activities in front of the Kemiri Market returned to the pre-eviction conditions. Most of the evictees (about 80%) have returned to the site and gradually has become an informal market, selling goods without tents and stands. New vendors also join the evicted vendors. The activities were of similar nature as those before eviction but there has been increasing variety of goods sold in the informal market. This market was also open at night, as without tents trading activities cannot take place during the hottest part of the day. Despite this development, interviewed traders claimed that their income have been significantly declined after eviction. 3. Process and impacts of the evictions at Tambora VI and Tambora VIII roads. These sites, situated on the road shoulders/ riverbanks of Jelakeng canal, started to develop in 1974 when six people from Banten (Formerly in West Java province, now is belonged to Banten province) established wood-
86
packing businesses. Since then, more traders have come to these sites including those from other parts of West Java and Central Java. Until the eviction in December 2008 and February 2009, there were 125 wood packing and steel traders, chicken butchers, food stall, phone credits vendors, etc. in these two sites. Most traders, particularly those who occupied Tambora VIII, had permits that were expired in February 2009. Some traders also lived in the stalls. The West Jakarta Municipality has notified the traders since 2007 to move out from the sites for the purpose to return the function of the riverbanks, roads and rearrange the land use as mandated in the spatial development plan. Interviews with some of the evicted traders met in the sites revealed that prior to eviction they had been offered to relocate to two markets, of which they refused because these markets are not suitable for selling woods and steels, even though they are located in a relatively close distance to these sites. They were not given any compensation, and consultations were considered very limited. Field visits during post-eviction showed that around 35% of the traders continued doing businesses at Tambora VI road, but across their original sites. Turnover or income from business was significantly declined immediately after the eviction. Some interviewees claimed that turnovers dropped to 20% because of the loss of customers and not enough space to do businesses in the new site across the original site. Since then, more traders returned, although they built temporary tents/shacks to protect their merchandizes. Their businesses have been directed towards madeto-order sales due to limited space. New traders also joined the evicted traders in the new sites.
87
Annex 4 List of Key Reference Documents in the Project Files
Project Environmental and Social Safeguards Package of Documents 1. Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), June 2011 2. Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), December 2010 3. Environmental Impact Assessment, Management Plan and Monitoring Plan (together referred to as the AMDAL) for the Dredging of Floodways/Drainage Canals and Waduks Phase 1 JUFMP, February / March 2010 4. JUFMP Phase 1 Environmental and Social Management Supplementary Report, June 2011 5. Updated Environment Management Plan (RKL) and Environment Monitoring Plan (RPL) for the Development of West Ancol Eastern Side of ± 119 ha, March 2009 6. Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report, June 2011 Other Key Reference Documents 7. JEDI / JUFMP Sediment Quality Consolidated Report, August 2010 8. Preliminary Assessment of Sediment Quality (ERM), October 2008 9. Pilot Dredging Project: Technical Note on Evaluation of the sediment and water sampling result (DHV), May 2008 10. Metals and Trace Organic Compounds in Sediments and Waters of Jakarta Bay and the Pulau Seribu Complex, Indonesia, March 2000 11. Mission Report: JEDI Environmental Assessment (USACE), October 2008 12. Tracer Study at Tambora VI and Tambora VIII (for evictions in December 2008 and February 2009) 13. Case Study Eviction Cengkareng Drain Inspection Road 14. JEDI / JUFMP Community Consultation Consolidated Report, August 2010 15. Laporan Kegiatan Konsultasi Publik Kerangka Kebijakan Permukiman Kembali (KPPK) [Resettlement Policy Framework Public Consultations Report], December 2010. 16. Cooperation Agreement between DKI Jakarta and PT PJA on sludge disposal from the results of the dredging of rivers, retention basins and channels on the waters of the eastern part of West Ancol with an area of +/- 120 Ha (approximately one hundred twenty hectares) located in Kelurahan Ancol, Kecamatan Pademangan, North Jakarta, December 2010
88
PROYEK PENGENDALIAN BANJIR JAKARTA
RINGKASAN TERPADU ANALISIS DAMPAK LINGKUNGAN
SEPTEMBER 2011
KEMENTERIAN PEKERJAAN UMUM DIREKTORAT JENDERAL SUMBER DAYA AIR
1
DAFTAR ISI
Contents
Ringkasan Eksekutif ............................................................................................................................. 7 Deskripsi Proyek.................................................................................................................................21 2.3 Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek ...................................................................................................................22 Volume Pekerjaan.......................................................................................................................24 2.5 Lokasi-Lokasi Pembuangan........................................................................................................25 2.6 2.6.1 Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (CDF) Ancol..................................................................... 26 2.6.2 Fasilitas pembuangan sampah di Bantar Gebang................................................................27 2.6.3 Tempat pembuangan sampah berbahaya di PPLi ...............................................................27 3 Persyaratan Hukum Lingkungan dan Sosial dan Kelembagaan Proyek dan Rancangan Pelaksanaan27 3.1 Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan Pemerintah Indonesia ...............................................................27 Pembebasan Tanah Pemerintah Indonesia..................................................................................29 3.2 Kebijakan dan Persyaratan Perlindungan Lingkungan yang Sesuai dengan Bank Dunia ..........30 3.3 Kebijakan dan Persyaratan Perlindungan Sosial yang Sesuai dengan Bank Dunia....................31 3.4 Paket Dokumen Perlindungan Lingkungan dan Sosial...............................................................31 3.5 3.5.1 Dokumen perlindungan lingkungan....................................................................................31 3.5.2 Dokumen perlindungan sosial.............................................................................................35 3.5.3 Persiapan dan penyampaian dokumen-dokumen perlindungan ..........................................35 Rancangan Kelembagaan............................................................................................................37 3.6 3.6.1 Rancangan Kelembagaan (Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2)...............................................................37 3.6.2 Rancangan Kelembagaan (Lokasi-lokasi pembuangan) .....................................................41 Rancangan Pelaksanaan (Perlindungan Lingkungan) .................................................................42 3.7 3.7.1 Untuk Pekerjaan Tahap 1 dan Pekerjaan Tahap 2 ..............................................................42 3.7.2 Untuk lokasi-lokasi pembuangan (CDF Ancol, Bantar Gebang and PPLi)........................ 42 Rancangan Pelaksanaan (Perlindungan Sosial) ..........................................................................45 3.1 4 Rona Awal Lingkungan dan Sosial yang Relevan.............................................................................. 46 Mutu Sedimen di Lokasi JUFMP................................................................................................46 4.1 4.1.1 ERM 2008........................................................................................................................... 47 4.1.2 DHV 2008........................................................................................................................... 47 4.1.3 AMDAL untuk kegiatan Tahap 2, sampel dan analisa 2010 .............................................. 47 4.1.4 Hasil dan Interpretasi ..........................................................................................................48 Mutu Sedimen di Ancol ..............................................................................................................50 4.2 Mutu Air di Lokasi-lokasi JUFMP .............................................................................................50 4.3 Mutu Air Laut Ancol .................................................................................................................. 52 4.4 Biota Laut Ancol.........................................................................................................................55 4.5 4.5.1 Plankton ..............................................................................................................................55 4.5.2 Benthos ...............................................................................................................................56 Dasar Sosial Ekonomi................................................................................................................. 56 4.6 4.6.1 Populasi...............................................................................................................................56 4.6.2 Karakteristik Sosial-ekonomi Populasi ............................................................................... 56 5 Ringkasan Potensial Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial yang Signifikan ............................................. 58 Dampak Lingkungan sehubungan dengan kegiatan proyek JUFMP ..........................................58 5.1 5.1.1 Gangguan lalu lintas signifikan........................................................................................... 59 5.1.2 Menurunnya mutu udara dan bau busuk. ............................................................................59 5.1.3 Perubahan tingkat debit air .................................................................................................60 5.1.4 Perubahan mutu air permukaan........................................................................................... 60
1 2
2
5.1.5 Perubahan mutu air laut ...................................................................................................... 60 5.1.6 Pertambahan sampah padat.................................................................................................60 5.1.7 Dampak pada Biota.............................................................................................................61 5.1.8 Dampak pada Kesehatan Publik dan kebersihan lingkungan.............................................. 61 Dampak Proyek JUFMP pada CDF Ancol ................................................................................. 61 5.2 5.3 Dampak Offsite dari CDF Ancol ................................................................................................62 Dampak Proyek JUFMP pada fasilitas Bantar Gebang dan PPLi............................................... 63 5.4 Dampak-dampak Sosial ..............................................................................................................63 5.5 5.5.1 Lokasi-lokasi WTP (Warga Terkena Proyek)..................................................................... 63 5.5.2 Lokasi-lokasi non-WTP ...................................................................................................... 65 5.5.3 Dampak sosial non-pemukiman-ulang yang potensial........................................................65 5.5.4 Penggusuran selama periode Persiapan Proyek JUFMP.....................................................66 6 Analisa Alternatif................................................................................................................................68 Pilihan "tidak melakukan apa-apa" .............................................................................................68 6.1 Analisa Alternatif Keseluruhan...................................................................................................68 6.2 6.3 Analisa Alternatif Khusus...........................................................................................................69 6.3.1 Lebar cakupan vs. pengelolaan banjir lokal........................................................................69 6.3.2 Pendekatan teknik vs non-teknik ........................................................................................69 6.3.3 Pemilihan lokasi pengerukan ..............................................................................................70 6.3.4 Teknologi Pengerukan: Mekanis vs. Hidrolis..................................................................... 70 6.3.5 Pemisahan Sampah Padat.................................................................................................... 70 6.3.6 Pilihan transport: (Truk sampah) basis darat vs. hidrolik ...................................................71 7 Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan ...................................................................................................... 71 Rencana Keseluruhan Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan.............................................. 71 7.1 Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas ...............................................................................................72 7.2 8 Perencanaan Pemukiman kembali (Resettlement Planning)...............................................................73 Pendekatan bagi Pengelolaan Dampak Sosial.............................................................................73 8.1 Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF).......................................................................74 8.2 Rencana PemukimanUlang (RP) ................................................................................................76 8.3 8.3.1 Pembaharuan Sensus dan Finalisasi RP.............................................................................. 77 8.3.2 Databaseuntuk WTP ...........................................................................................................77 8.3.3 Pendanaan untuk RPF dan RP ............................................................................................ 78 9 Konsultasi ...........................................................................................................................................78 Konsultasi selama AMDAL........................................................................................................78 9.1 Diskusi Kelompok Fokus (FGD) ................................................................................................82 9.2 9.3 Konsultasi tentang Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF) ........................................83 Konsultasi selama persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP).............................................. 85 9.4 10 Sistim Penyelesaian Keluhan (GRS).................................................................................................85 11 Komunikasi Proyek.......................................................................................................................... 87 Risiko-risiko Reputasional..............................................................................................................89 12
3
Daftar Tabel Tabel 2-1 Penjelasan Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal dan Waduk di bawah Proyek.........................................23 Tabel 2-2 Rangkaian Proyek Pekerjaan Konstruksi.....................................................................................24 Tabel 2-3 Penjelasan Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal & Waduk-Waduk di bawah Proyek.................................. 25 Tabel 3-1 Ringkasan Proses Uji Tuntas Untuk Lokasi-Lokasi Pembuangan ................................................ 34 Tabel 3-2 Ringkasan Dokumen Lingkungan dan Sosial dan Status Pembukaan .........................................36 Tabel 3-3 Ringkasan Proses dan Syarat yang Mengatur Pembuangan Material Proyek ............................44 Tabel 4-1 Data ERM 2008 tentang tingkat pemeriksaan pemakaian tanah yang relevan (in mg/kg) ........48 Tabel 4-2 Data AMDAL Tahap 2 (2010) menimbang tingkat periksa pemakaian tanah (dalam mg/kg) .... 49 Tabel 4-3 Hasil Ukuran Mutu Sedimen Laut (oleh TCLP, USEPA) di sekitar Daerah Penelitian ..................50 Tabel 4-4 Mutu Air Hasil Analisa: Cengkareng Drain ..................................................................................52 Tabel 4-5 Hasil Pengukuran Mutu Air di Daerah Penelitian .......................................................................53 Tabel 4-6 Hasil Pemantauan Air Laut pada periode 2005-2008 di Air Laut Ancol......................................54 Tabel 4-7 Populasi di Daerah-Daerah di mana Proyek Kanal Banjir, Waduk Dilokasikan........................... 57 Tabel 5-1 Ringkasan Kegiatan yang Menyebabkan Dampak dan Dampak Langsung.................................58 Tabel 5-2 Perkiraan Bangunan dan Warga Terkena di Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek ............................................. 64 Tabel 9-1 Persoalan yang muncul pada konsultasi AMDAL Tahap 1 dan CDF Ancol.................................. 79
Daftar Gambar Gambar 2-1 Ringkasan Rancangan Pembuangan .......................................................................................26 Gambar 3-1 Proses AMDAL......................................................................................................................... 29 Gambar 3-2 Ilustrasi Rancangan Pelaksanaan Proyek (di luar rancangan pembuangan) .......................... 38 Gambar 4-1 Mutu Air, Kebisingan dan Lokasi Sampel Air Laut ..................................................................55 Gambar 11-1 Komunikasi antara instansi...................................................................................................89 Daftar Lampiran Lampiran 1: Peta Proyek Lampiran 2: Rencana (Tentative) Persiapan Fase 2 Terkait AMDAL dan Rencana Pemukiman Kembali Lampiran 3: Studi Kasus – Penggusuran di Lokasi Kemiri, Tambora VI dan Tambora VIII Lampiran 4: Daftar Dokumen Referensi Kunci dalam File Proyek
4
AKRONIM DAN SINGKATAN
AMDAL
Analisis Mengenai Dampak Lingkungan
ANDAL
Analisis Dampak Lingkungan
Limbah B3
Limbah Bahan Berbahaya dan Beracun
BAPEDAL
Badan Pengendalian Dampak Lingkungan
BAPPENAS
Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional
BAPPEDA
Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah
BBWSCC
Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai Ciliwung-Cisadane
BPLHD
Badan Pengendalian Lingkungan Hidup Daerah
CDF
Confined Disposal Facility (Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup)
Dirjen Cipta Karya
Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya (Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum)
Dirjen Sumberdaya Air
Direktorat Jenderal Sumberdaya Air (Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum)
DKI Jakarta atau DKI
Daerah Khusus Istimewa Jakarta (Pemerintahan Provinsi DKI Jakarta)
EA
Environmental Assessment (Penilaian Lingkungan)
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment (Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan)
Konsultan EIA/SIA
Konsultan Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan & Sosial yg disewa oleh PMU
EMP
Environmental Management Plan (atau setara Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan)
ESMF
Environmental and Social Management Framework (Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial
ESMP
Environmental and Social Management Plan (Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial)
ESWG
Environmental and Social Working Group (Kelompok Kerja Lingkungan dan Sosial)
FGD
Focus Group Discussion (Diskusi Kelompok Fokus)
GRS
Grievance Redress System (Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan)
JABODETABEK
Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi – Daerah Metropolitan DKI Jakarta
JEDI
Jakarta Emergency Dredging Initiative (Inisiatif Pengerukan Darurat Jakarta)
JSC
Joint Steering Committee (Panitia Pengarah Bersama)
JUFMP
Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project (Proyek Darurat Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta)
KA-ANDAL
Kerangka Acuan – ANDAL
MENLH
Menteri Lingkungan Hidup
NGO
Non-Governmental Organization (Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat)
5
OP
Operational Policy (Kebijakan Operasional)
P2T
Panitia Pembebasan Tanah
WTP
Warga Terkena Dampak
PI
Public Involvement (Keterlibatan Publik)
PIP
Project Implementation Plan (Rencana Implementasi Proyek)
PIU
Project Implementation Unit (Unit Implementasi Proyek)
PMU
Project Management Unit (Unit Pengelolaan Proyek)
POSKO
Pos Komando - Kantor Lokasi yang juga berfungsi sebagai pusat info publik dan satuan penanganan keluhan di lokasi, diantara fungsi-fungsi lainnya
PP
Peraturan Pemerintahan
PPA
Konsultan EIA/SIA yang disewa oleh PMU untuk menyiapkan AMDAL dan RP
PPC
Project Preparation Consultants (Konsultan Persiapan Proyek)
PT PJA
PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol
PPLi
Prasadha Pamunah Limbah Industri – Operator pemunah sampah berlisensi
RP
Resettlement Plan (Rencana Pemukiman kembali)
EMP
Environmental Management Plan (setara Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan)
RPF
Resettlement Policy Framework (Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali)
RPL
Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan
SC
Supervision Consultant (Konsultan Pengawasan)
SIA
Social Impact Assessment (Penilaian Dampak Sosial)
TMP
Transport Management Plan (Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas)
USACE
United States Army Corps of Engineers ( Korps Insinyur Tentara Amerika Serikat)
WASAP
Indonesia Water and Sanitation Program Trust Fund (Dana Program Kebersihan & Air Ind)
KBB
Kanal Banjir Barat
PPLJB
Proyek Pengelolaan Lingkungan Jawa Bagian Barat
6
1
Ringkasan Eksekutif Deskripsi Proyek
1.1
1. Proyek Darurat Pengendalian Banjir Jakarta (JUFMP - ‘Jakarta Urgent Flood Mitigation Project’ atau “proyek”) bertujuan membantu perbaikan operasi dan pemeliharaan bagian prioritas dari sistem pengelolaan banjir di kota Jakarta, melalui: •
•
•
•
Pengerukan bagian-bagian penting kanal banjir yang dipilih, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk penampung air untuk memperbaiki kapasitas alirannya, dan membuang material kerukan pada fasilitas yang layak; Merehabilitasi dan membangun tanggul di bagian-bagiannya, dan memperbaiki atau mengganti peralatan mekanis di, bagian penting kanal banjir yang terpilih yang sama, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk penampung air untuk mendukung dan memperbaiki operasinya; Menetapkan koordinasi kelembagaan antara tiga instansi yang bertanggungjawab untuk memajukan pembangunan yang terkoordinasi, dan operasi dan pemeliharaan (O&P) dari sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta; Memperkuat kemampuan intsansi-instansi yang bertanggungjawab untuk memperbaiki operasi, pemeliharaan dan manajemen dari sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta.
2. Sebelas kanal banjir dan kanal-kanal yang kritis, juga empat waduk penampung banjir (waduk) telah diidentifikasi untuk dimasukkan dalam ruang lingkup pekerjaan proyek ini. Ini semua telah diidentifikasi oleh Pemerintah Indonesia sebagai dalam kebutuhan prioritas untuk rehabilitasi dan perbaikan pada kapasitas aliran untuk menanggulangi banjir musiman yang parah. Kanal-kanal banjir, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk penampung banjir berlokasi di daerah-daerah di mana hampir 1,8 juta penduduk tinggal1 (di luar dari total penduduk kota yang kira-kira 11 juta orang). Peta proyek diberikan dalam Lampiran 1. 3. Kegiatan pengerukan ini diperkirakan akan menghasilkan pembuangan kira-kira 3,4 juta m3 material endapan dan 95.000 m3 sampah limbah padat. Material endapan tidak berbahaya direncanakan untuk dibuang pada proyek reklamasi laut yang sedang berlangsung di fasilitas pembuangan tertutup (CDF) yang dikenal sebagai CDF Ancol, yang terletak di pantai utara Jakarta di Teluk Jakarta. Sampah limbah padat yang diangkut akan dibawa ke TPA Bantar Gebang di Bekasi, tempat pembuangan utama sampah limbah padat yang melayani Jakarta. Uji sampel pada lokasi proyek menyatakan bahwa material kerukan pada JUFMP adalah tidak-berbahaya. Walaupun demikian, uji pra-pengerukan masih akan dilaksanakan selama pelaksanaan dan dalam kejadian yang sangat jarang jika material endapan sampah berbahaya ditemukan, itu akan dibuang pada tempat pembuangan sampah yang aman yang ada di Bogor yang dimiliki oleh PT. Prasadha Pamunah Limbah Industri (PPLi), yang memiliki ijin untuk mengelola material limbah sampah berbahaya. Baik Bogor maupun Bekasi terletak tepat di luar kota Jakarta, tapi di dalam wilayah metropolitan Jakarta
. 1
Lihat Tabel 4-7 di Bagian 4
7
1.2
Maksud dan Isi
4. Maksud dari laporan ini adalah untuk memberikan ringkasan dari rancangan dan pokok-pokok perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial dari JUFMP. Dokumen ini juga berguna untuk memberikan baik gambaran terpadu maupun ringkasan analisa dampak lingkungan dan sosial dan rencana pengendalian bagi proyek JUFMP secara utuh. Proyek JUFMP meliputi pekerjaan-pekerjaan yang datang di bawah tanggungjawab berbagai agen. Pada saat yang sama, proyek ini akan juga menggunakan daerah-daerah pembuangan yang sedang dibangun dan/atau dioperasikan oleh pihak-pihak yang independen dari agenagen pelaksana proyek. Dengan demikian, rancangan dan persediaan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial dari Proyek JUFMP secara utuh terdiri dari rangkaian berbagai penilaian dampak lingkungan dan sosial dan rencana pengendalian yang didukung oleh berbagai penelitian mendalam, laporan dan proses kajian. Masing-masing penilaian dan rencana ini telah dikembangkan oleh berbagai instansi yang bertanggungjawab, disetujui untuk berbagai pekerjaan atau lokasi pembuangan, dan pada berbagai waktu di seluruh periode persiapan proyek JUFMP. Rancangan dan persediaan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial ini telah dinilai selama persiapan proyek JUFMP. 5. Ini memberikan ringkasan tentang persyaratan dan kebijakan tentang perlindungan2 yang berlaku bagi proyek ini. Dokumen ini menjelaskan prinsip-prinsip dan pendekatan untuk penilaian dampak lingkungan dan sosial yang dilaksanakan selama persiapan proyek, meliputi saat persiapan dan penyampaian dokumen-dokumen yang layak hingga bersama menjadikan alat perlindungan sepenuhnya dari proyek ini. Selanjutnya, riset dan analisa terkait, penilaian, konsultasi dan komunikasi yang dilaksanakan selama persiapan proyek didiskusikan, termasuk penjelasan singkat atas temuan-temuan penting dan kesimpulan dari laporan dan penelitian yang relevan. Dampak potensial lingkungan dan sosial dari proyek ini, dan ukuran pengendalian yang dipakai, kemudian disimpulkan. Akhirnya, laporan ini menjelaskan berbagai rancangan yang ditaruh untuk memantau dan mengawasi rencana pengendalian dampak lingkungan dan sosial yang berhubungan dengan pekerjaan proyek dan kegiatan pembuangan, juga untuk mengelola risiko yang tertinggal selama pelaksanaan. Daftar dokumen yang merupakan alat perlindungan proyek, dan daftar dokumen rujukan kunci lainnya diberikan dalam Lampiran 4. 1.3
Kesesuaian dengan Kebijakan Perlindungan yang Ada
6. Proyek ini diharapkan memberikan hasil positif bagi lingkungan dan masyarakat. Pengurangan banjir akan meredakan dampak lingkungan dan persoalan kesehatan masyarakat yang disebabkan oleh luapan air dan air banjir yang tergenang dan mengurangi kekacauan pada masyarakat di daerah proyek -terutama pada masyarakat miskin yang tinggal di daerah rawan-banjir. Jika tidak disingkirkan, sampah padat dan endapan dalam saluran akan masuk secara tak terkendali ke dalam muara sungai dan daerah teluk. Dalam jangka panjang, sistem pengelolaan informasi banjir yang sedang diperkenalkan oleh proyek ini akan memberikan informasi berdasarkan alat perencanaan yang diperlukan kepada DKI Jakarta untuk secara berkelanjutan mengelola jaringan kerja dengan baik melampaui masa proyek ini dan untuk melanjutkan mengurangi kejadian banjir di wilayah ini. Walaupun demikian, dampak lingkungan yang buruk juga mungkin terjadi selama pelaksanaan proyek, misalnya, dari material endapan dan sampah padat yang akan dihasilkan, jika tidak ditangani, disimpan, disortir, dipindahkan dan dibuang dengan layak. Dampak-dampak ini secara potensial meliputi gangguan lalu lintas yang signifikan, kualitas air 2
Termasuk persyaratan kebijakan Bank Dunia dan Indonesia
8
berkurang karena debu dan keluarnya bau busuk, bertambahnya tingkat kebisingan, penurunan air permukaan dan kualitas air laut, dll. Pemukiman kembali (resettlement) secara tak sukarela juga telah diidentifikasi untuk diwajibkan di beberapa lokasi proyek. Terpisah dari persyaratan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial Indonesia, proyek JUFMP ini sesuai dengan Kebijakan Operasional Penilaian Lingkungan dari Bank Dunia (OP 4.01), dan sesuai dengan persyaratan kebijakannya, ini termasuk kategori Penilaian Lingkungan A. Proyek ini juga sesuai dengan Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali dari Bank Dunia (OP 4.12). 1.4
Pendekatan untuk Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial
Rangkaian Proyek 7. Pekerjaan konstruksi proyek yang didanai telah disusun ke dalam dua tahap rangkaian--Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2. Disain pelaksanaan yang dirangkaikan telah dipakai sebagai suatu kunci pelaksanaan dari mekanisme pengelolaaan risiko bagi proyek ini. Pekerjaan tahap 1 (diusulkan 4 lokasi / kontrak 3 pekerjaan) diharapkan untuk dimulai selama tahun pertama dari pelaksanaan proyek. Pekerjaan tahap 2 (diusulkan 11 lokasi / kontrak 5 pekerjaan) diharapkan mengikuti setelah itu. Rangkaian ini akan membantu untuk menghindari PMU/PIU dan konsultan pengawasnya dari beban berlebihan selama tahun pertama ketika rutinitas dan prosedur, dan proses pelaksanaan sebenarnya secara terperinci telah dioperasionalkan. Rangkaian ini juga akan memberikan waktu bagi DKI Jakarta untuk melengkapi instrumen-instrumen pemukiman kembali yang diperlukan dan rancangan pekerjaan di awal untuk lokasi yang memerlukan pemukiman kembali terpaksa3, termasuk pembentukan Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan (GRS) dan Panel Tenaga Ahli Lokasi-Lokasi Terkait Proyek 8. Penilaian teknis telah mengidentifikasi 10 bagian kanal/waduk yang secara hidrolik dan/atau secara langsung berhubungan dengan bagian-bagian kanal/waduk yang berada di bawah JUFMP. Pemerintah baru-baru ini tak mempunyai rencana khusus bagi pekerjaan rehabilitasi dalam bagian-bagian ini. Meskipun begitu, tiap kegiatan demikian pada bagian-bagian ini akan diharapkan berdampak pada operasi bagian-bagian kanal/waduk yang di bawah JUFMP. Karena alasan ini, 10 bagian ini telah didisain sebagai lokasi terkait proyek. Dua dari kesepuluh lokasi ini terkait dengan Tahap 1 sedangkan delapan lokasi lain nya terkait dengan Tahap 2. Dalam kejadian bahwa pemerintah melaksanakan kegiatan pekerjaan yang berhubungan dengan pengelolaan banjir (misalnya pengerukan dan/atau rehabilitasi kanal) pada 10 bagian ini selama periode proyek JUFMP, ini akan dianggap kegiatan terkait proyek dan pemerintah telah setuju untuk menerapkan Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman Kembali (RPF) (dan semua ketentuan terkait) pada kegiatan demikian. Pendekatan Penilaian dan Penyampaian 9. Persyaratan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial untuk pekerjaan Tahap 1 telah ditaksir. Pekerjaan Tahap 1 diharapkan akan siap untuk pelaksanaan segera setelah proyek efektif (asalkan juga bahwa halhal tertentu lain yang telah disetujui tentang syarat-syarat operasional dipenuhi). Proyek ini di-set dalam kondisi dinamis yang memungkinkan perubahan disain dalam menanggapi perubahan kondisi yang terus3
Tahap 1 tidak melibatkan pemukiman ulang terpaksa
9
menerus. Infrastruktur pengelolaan banjir di Jakarta berada dalam kondisi yang jelek akibat tidak adanya operasi pemeliharaan dan tidak optimalnya fungsi drainase setempat. Kondisi ini menjadikan dampak kerusakan akibat banjir menjadi tidak terprediksi (terutama selama musim banjir tahunan). Untuk itu, perubahan disain dalam merespon perubahan kondisi yang terus menerus selama implementasi proyek sangat mungkin terjadi, yang konsekuensi nya memerlukan revisi terhadap dokumen perlindungan. Berdasarkan rangkaian pelaksanaan proyek, berbagai pekerjaan Tahap 2 hanya diharapkan akan dimulai dari sekitar 12 sampai 18 bulan setelah persetujuan proyek. Kualitas pelaksanaan dan hasil pada lingkungan dan sosial terkait dengan pekerjaan Tahap 2 hanya dapat dijamin melalui rangkaian persiapan, penyampaian dan pelaksanaan dari analisis dampak lingkungannya (AMDAL) yang sama dan (jika diperlukan) rencana pemukiman kembali (RP). Atas alasan ini dan sesuai dengan pendekatan pelaksanaan dua-tahap rangkaian, persyaratan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial bagi pekerjaan Tahap 2 akan sepenuhnya dilakukan selama pelaksanaan proyek dan akan dievaluasi oleh Bank Dunia sebelum diselesaikan dan diumumkan ke khalayak umum. Pekerjaan Tahap 2 hanya akan dapat dimulai, jika pihak Bank Dunia menyatakan persyaratan telah dipenuhi dan memberikan “ketidak-beratan” pada AMDAL dan rencana pemukiman kembali (RP). 10. Semua dokumen perlindungan lingkungan yang berlaku terkait pekerjaan Tahap 1 (termasuk yang terkait CDF Ancol, yang kini sedang dibangun) akan dibuka sebelum penaksiran proyek. Sesuai dengan pendekatan pelaksanaan dua-tahap, Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (KPLS) dan Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (KKPK) akan mencakup persyaratan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial dari pekerjaan Tahap 2, dan akan menuntun persiapan, finalisasi, dan pelaksanaan dari Tahap 2 terkait Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan dan Rencana Pemukiman kembali. KPLS dan KKPK akan dibuka sebelum penaksiran. EIA dan RPF Tahap 2 akan dilengkapi selama pelaksanaan proyek (sebelum pekerjaan terkait dimulai) dan akan diperiksa oleh Bank Dunia dan jika tidak ada keberatan sebelum pembukaan dan pelaksanaan. Tabel 32 dari laporan ini memberikan satu ringkasan dari dokumen perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial dan status pembukaannya. Penilaian Perlindungan bagi Pekerjaan JUFMP 11. Proses penilaian dampak lingkungan di Indonesia (mengacu pada AMDAL) juga diikuti dan diluruskan dengan struktur paket pekerjaan Tahap 1 dan 2 JUFMP. Paket AMDAL terdiri dari (i) ANDAL, yang sama dengan EIA dalam Kebijakan Lingkungan Bank Dunia OP 4.01, (ii) RKL, yaitu Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan, dan (iii) RPL, yaitu Rencana Pemantauan Lingkungan. AMDAL bagi pekerjaan Tahap 1 telah disiapkan oleh Unit Pengelolaan Proyek (PMU). AMDAL ini telah dikonsultasikan, diperiksa dan disetujui pada bulan Maret 2010 oleh badan lingkungan tingkat provinsi (dikenal sebagai BPLHD) sebagaimana diharuskan oleh aturan nasional dan provinsi di Indonesia. Bank Dunia juga telah memeriksa AMDAL ini dan memberikan komentar sehingga PMU telah menyiapkan Laporan tambahan Tahap 1 JUFMP. Laporan tambahan ini meliputi rekomendasi lebih lanjut yang juga akan diterapkan pada proyek ini. Ini menjamin bahwa AMDAL dan laporan tambahan Tahap 1, yang dikombinasikan, sesuai dengan persyaratan kebijakan perlindungan lingkungan Bank Dunia. PMU juga menyiapkan Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMF) yang sudah diperiksa oleh Bank Dunia. ESMF akan menuntun dan mengelola proses bagi persiapan dokumen-dokumen perlindungan lingkungan yang diharuskan untuk pekerjaan Tahap 2.
10
12. Studi penilaian sosial (Studi SA – Social Assessment) pendahuluan telah dilaksanakan pada tahun 2008. Sebagai tambahan, penilaian dampak sosial juga dilaksanakan pada tahun 2009-2010 sebagai bagian dari proses AMDAL. Sebagai tambahan pada proses konsultasi AMDAL standar, Diskusi Kelompok Fokus spesifik juga dilaksanakan dalam tiap lokasi proyek untuk memperoleh informasi yang lebih mendalam mengenai dampak lingkungan dan sosial dari proyek ini dan untuk memperoleh dukungan dari masyarakat. Baik dampak sosial potensial yang berhubungan atau tidak dengan proses pemukiman kembali telah diidentifikasi dalam penilaian-penilaian dan proses-proses ini. DKI Jakarta telah menyiapkan proyek Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF) untuk menjelaskan prinsipprinsip, prosedur dan rancangan organisasional untuk diterapkan bagi persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) bagi lokasi-lokasi Tahap 2 yang melibatkan pemukiman kembali. Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali telah diperiksa dan disetujui oleh Bank Dunia. Penilaian Perlindungan untuk FPT Ancol 13. Material endapan tak-berbahaya dari JUFMP akan dibuang di CDF Ancol. Konstruksi dindingdinding pembatas untuk CDF Ancol sedang berlangsung pada saat persiapan proyek. Fasilitas tertutup ini kini diharapkan akan diselesaikan pada akhir tahun kalender 2011. AMDAL pertama untuk pekerjaan reklamasi Ancol yang disiapkan oleh PT PJA, telah disetujui oleh BPLHD pada Februari 2006 di mana 12 juta m3 pasir dan 400.000 m3 tanah merah diusulkan sebagai material pengisi. Ini sebelum proposal bagi proyek JUFMP. AMDAL kemudian diperbaiki untuk menyediakan material kerukan JUFMP yang tak berbahaya untuk dipakai sebagai bagian material pengisi untuk FPT Ancol, yang mengurangi permintaaan pasir hingga 8,6 juta m3. AMDAL yang diperbaiki telah diperiksa dan disetujui oleh BPLHD pada Maret 2009. Patut dicatat bahwa proyek reklamasi Ancol telah direncanakan untuk dilaksanakan, tak peduli dan tak tergantung apakah JUFMP berlanjut atau tidak. Tujuan utama dari PT PJA sebagai pemegang izin seperti dinyatakakan dalam AMDAL bukanlah untuk menerima material buangan JUFMP tapi untuk mereklamasi kira-kira 119 hektar tanah di Teluk Jakarta untuk pembangunan residensial komersil nanti (sebagaimana ini khas dari daerah ini di Teluk Jakarta sejak tahun 1964). Meskipun demikian, FPT Ancol adalah bagian integral dari JUFMP. Bank Dunia telah memeriksa dokuman AMDAL Ancol 4 . Untuk menjembatani kesenjangan yang ditemukan dalam dokumen AMDAL Ancol, PMU telah menyiapkan Laporan Tambahan RKL/RPL Ancol yang telah diperbaharui. Laporan tambahan ini berisi ukuran-ukuran tambahan yang mana akan juga dapat diterapkan untuk proyek ini. Ini menjamin bahwa AMDAL dan laporan tambahana untuk FPT Ancol, yang dikombinasikan, sesuai dengan persyaratan kebijakan perlindungan lingkungan Bank Dunia sehubungan dengan pembuangan material JUFMP. Penilaian Perlindungan untuk Bantar Gebang dan PPLi 14. Material sampah padat dari JUFMP akan dipindahkan ke TPA Bantar Gebang, sementara material sedimen yang berbahaya (jika ditemukan) direncanakan untuk dibuang di tempat pembuangan sampah PPLi di Bogor. Kedua tempat pembuangan limbah ini telah ada dan sedang beroperasi di bawah ijin lingkungan nasional dan di bawah pengawasan yurisdiksi BPLHD terkait. Penilaian telah dilaksanakan (meliputi kunjungan lokasi oleh Bank Dunia) untuk memastikan bahwa fasilitas ini
4
Termasuk pembaharuan lanjutn terhadap perubahan dalam disain batas utara (dyke) CDF, di mana rekomendasi tinjauan Bank Dunia terhadap proposal diimplementasikan sebelum adanya persetujuan BPLHD.
11
memiliki cukup kemampuan dana, teknis dan fisik untuk menerima jenis material limbah dari proyek ini dan juga agar fasilitas ini memiliki ijin lingkungan yang diharuskan dan sah. 1.5
Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial Yang Signifikan
Dampak Lingkungan dari Pekerjaan JUFMP 15. Sebagaimana mana didiskusikan dalam Paragraf 6, proyek ini diharapkan menberikan dampak positif terhadap lingkungan dan sosial dengan mengurangi banjir akibat dari meluapnya air kali dan waduk serta stagnasi air banjir. Walaupun demikian, implementasi proyek ini juga berpotensi menimbulkan dampak negative, dampak-dampak ini telah diidentifikasi dalam AMDAL5 dan dirangkum dalam bagian ini (Bagian 1.6 merangkum langkah-langkah mitigasi terhadap dampak terkait). Dampakdampak ini terutama berasal dari pekerjaan pengerukan dan tanggul, kuantitas signifikan dari material kerukan dan sampah padat yang akan dihasilkan, dan bagaimana material kerukan ini akan ditangani, disimpan sementara, disimpan, disortir, dipindahkan, dan akhirnya dibuang di daerah-daerah urban yang kurang berpenduduk dan yang dikelilingi oleh permukaan dan air laut. Dampak lingkungan yang berpotensi penting dari pekerjaan ini meliputi: (i) kemacetan lalu lintas karena mobilisasi peralatan dan transportasi material kerukan dan sampah padat ke lokasi pembuangan masing-masing, (ii) tumpahan dari material di sepanjang rute transportasi, (iii) bau busuk dan menurunnya kualitas air dari lokasi pekerjaan yang sedang berlangsung, (iv) bertambahnya tingkat kebisingan dan getaran dari pekerjaan yang sedang berlangsung, dan (v) reduksi dalam kualitas air permukaan pada kanal-kanal dan sungai-sungai terkait selama pekerjaan berlangsung. Material berbahaya (jika ada ditemukan) juga berpotensi membahayakan lingkungan dan kesehatan jika ini tidak ditangani secara layak. Dampak Lingkungan dari Pekerjaan CDF Ancol 16. Di CDF Ancol, studi AMDAL mengidentifikasi dampak lingkungan yang paling berpotensi di lokasi dari kegiatan konstruksi dan reklamasi, meliputi: (i) perubahan dalam pola arus mennyusur pantai (Longshore), (ii) bertambahnya sedimentasi di sekitar CDF, (iii) menurunnya kualitas air laut karena kegiatan reklamasi dan penimbunan, dan (iv) gangguan pada biota laut. Ada juga potensi dampak merugikan di tempat dari lokasi-lokasi sumber dan rute transport dari pasir (8,6 juta m3) dan tanah merah (400.000 m3) yang diharuskan untuk konstruksi CDF (walaupun penggunaan material kerukan JUFMP untuk menggantikan sebagian material pasir yg disyaratkan --dengan demikian mengurangi permintaan pasir dari 12 juta m3 hingga 8,6 million m3 - dengan sendirinya adalah suatu ukuran untuk mengurangi dampak-dampak potensial di lokasi). Dampak Lingkungan dari Operasi TPA Bantar Gebang dan PPLi 17. Dampak lingkungan potensial dari proyek ini terhadap operasi dari TPA Bantar Gebang dan PPLi diharapkan kecil. Diperkirakan 95.000 m3 dari total limbah padat yang dihasilkan dari proyek selama 4 tahun akan membuat prosentasi tak penting dari beban normal yang sedang diterima di Bantar Gebang6. Material berbahaya tidak diharapkan dari JUFMP (dikuatkan oleh uji-uji sampel) dan bahkan jika ada ditemukan, jumlahnya masih dalam batas-batas kapasitas dan penanganan dari tempat pembungan sampah aman PPLi. 5 6
AMDAL lengkap untuk Tahap 1 berfungsi, demikian juga draft AMDAL untuk lokasi-lokasi Tahap 2. Beban normal harian saat ini antara 5.000-6000 ton per hari, atau sekitar 20.000 – 24.000 m3 per hari.
12
Dampak Sosial dari Pekerjaan JUFMP 18. Dampak sosial potensial dari proyek ini diidentifikasi melalui Study SA, AMDAL terkait konsultasi, dan FGD dan konsultasi lain yang dilaksanakan sebagai bagian dari persiapan RPF dan pendahuluan RP. Dampak potensial meliputi dampak yang terkait atau tidak terkait dengan pemukiman kembali. Penelitian dan konsultasi yang dilaksanakan selama bagian awal dari persiapan proyek menyatakan bahwa pemukiman kembali secara sukarela akan diharuskan pada tujuh lokasi, yang mempengaruhi lebih dari 2.500 bangunan dan lebih dari 6.500 orang. Walaupun demikian, usaha-usaha untuk meminimalisir dampak sosial 7 selama beberapa bulan terakhir telah mengurangi jumlah ini. Sekarang ini, enam dari 15 lokasi proyek diidentifikasi akan meliputi pemukiman kembali secara sukarela, yang mempengaruhi kira-kira 1.109 bangunan dan 5.528 orang. Dampak yang tidak terkait pemukiman kembali meliputi "persepsi dan perhatian" dari masyarakat sekiranya mereka perlu untuk dimukimkan lagi tanpa konsultasi dan kompensasi yang layak. Masyarakat memperhatikan bahwa selama konstruksi lingkungan tempat tinggal mereka akan diganggu dan dirusak oleh pengelolaan tak layak dari operasi kerja dan penanganan material kerukan, yang dapat menuntun pada gangguan karena rusaknya jalan-jalan lokal, debu beterbangan, bau busuk, tumpahan material kerukan, bertambahnya kemacetan lalu lintas dan kebisingan dari peralatan dan truk. Persoalan potensial lain adalah menyangkut dampak pada masyarakat karena tak dapat berpartisipasi selama konstruksi sebagai pekerja dan kurangnya komunikasi antara mereka dan kontraktor dan manajemen proyek. Konstruksi di lokasi proyek akan juga secara sementara mempengaruhi kira-kira 19 operator/pemilik kapal yang melintasi kanal. 1.6
Usulan Pengelolaan Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial
19. Proyek akan dilaksanakan melalui institusi-institusi yang ada yang layak sesuai dengan struktur kelembagaan pemerintah untuk pengelolaan banjir. Ada tiga Unit Pelaksana Proyek pada tingkat pemerintah pusat maupun pemerintah lokal: (i) Dirjen Sumberdaya Air, (ii) Dirjen Cipta Karya, dan (iii) pemerintah lokal DKI Jakarta. Masing-masing akan bertanggungjawab untuk melaksanakan pekerjaan pengerukan dan rehabilitasi pada kanal-kanal banjir utama, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk terpilih yang datang di bawah lembaga masing-masing mereka dan tanggungjawab legal mereka. Sesuai dengan mandat tanggungjawabnya untuk persoalan sosial di kota Jakarta8, DKI Jakarta akan bertanggungjawab bagi semua rancangan proyek perlindungan sosial. Unit Pengelola Proyek telah didirikan oleh Dirjen Sumberdaya Air untuk mengawasi dan mengkoordinasikan semua persiapan dan pelaksanaan proyek oleh tiga Unit Pelaksana Proyek. Unit Pengelola Proyek juga akan melaksanakan dan mengelola kegiatan biasa, yang meliputi (i) konsultasi pengawasan seluruh konstruksi yaitu Konsultan Pengawas (SC), (ii) penunjukkan Panel Tenaga Ahli (PTA), dan (iii) Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (SIPB), dan (iv) mendukung DKI Jakarta terkait pemukiman kembali secara sukarela dan proyek sistem penyelesaian keluhan. Tiga lokasi pembuangan material kerukan JUFMP dioperasikan oleh badan independen yang terpisah dari JUFMP. CDF Ancol dioperasikan oleh pemegang ijin dan operator proyek reklamasi, PT Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PT PJA). TPA Bantar Gebang dikelola oleh Dinas Kebersihan DKI Jakarta
7
Di antara lainnya, berdasarkan pada disain teknik dan metodologi yang disesuaikan untuk meminimalkan dampak Jakarta adalah provinsi yang secara resmi dirancang dengan status khusus sebagai Ibu Kota Negara Indonesia, yaitu DKI Jakarta. Secara administrative, DKI Jakarta dibagi dalam 5 daerah kotamadia (yaitu Jakarta Utara, Jakarta Selatan, Jakarta Barat, Jakarta Timur dan Jakarta Pusat) dan satu kabupaten (yaitu Kepulauan Seribu, sekelompok pulau kecil di Laut Jawa). 8
13
melalui operator pribadi, sementara tempat buang limbah aman PPLi adalah penyedia layanan pembuangan sampah B3 (yaitu PT PPLi) yang komersial pribadi. Pengelolaan Dampak Lingkungan untuk Pekerjaan JUFMP 20. Untuk pekerjaan JUFMP, masing-masing AMDAL juga persyaratan Laporan tambahan Tahap 1 JUFMP akan dimasukkan ke dalam dokumen lelang pekerjaan dan kontrak. Ini menjamin agar kontraktor pekerjaan akan mempunyai tanggung jawab utama untuk pelaksanaan ukuran perlindungan lingkungan yang diharuskan. Kontraktor diminta untuk memiliki staf khusus dengan tanggungjawab pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial. Peserta lelang diminta sebagai bagian dari tawaran mereka untuk menyerahkan pendahuluan Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial dari kontraktor, termasuk pendahuluan dari Rencana Pengelolaan Transport (TMP). Ini akan dikembangkan ke dalam rencana terperinci oleh kontraktor pemenang. Karena mayoritas efek potensial berhubungan dengan interaksi dengan masyarakat lokal, maka jumlah minimum kontrak mengharuskan pertemuan dengan masyarakat yang juga dimasukkan dalam kontrak. Masuknya pasal-pasal lingkungan dan sosial dalam dokumen penawaran juga menjamin bahwa pasal-pasal ini akan cukup dihargai dalam kontrak. Biaya ini sedang dikembangkan ke dalam satuan biaya untuk pengerukan dan transport. Biaya lingkungan dan sosial yang dikembangkan ke dalam satuan biaya kontrak meliputi, tapi tidak dibatasi kepada, kebersihan tempat kerja, keamanan, manajemen lalu lintas, kendali buangan alat, pencegahan tumpahan, pengelolaan kebisingan, dan konsultasi dengan masyarakat. 21. Mutu material sedimen dalam sungai atau kanal terpilih telah diuji secara mendalam beberapa waktu. Hasil uji adalah konsisten sejauh semuanya dikonfirmasi bahwa material sedimen adalah limbah tidak berbahaya (per standar yang diminta dalam Aturan Pemerintah Indonesia mengenai material berbahaya dan pengelolaan limbah berbahaya 9 ). Oleh karena itu, material berbahaya (dirujuk sebagai limbah B3 dalam aturan Pemerintah Indonesia) tidak diharapkan untuk ditemukan selama pelaksanaan. Walaupun demikian, untuk menjamin material tak berbahaya dari JUFMP yang dibuang dalam CDF Ancol10, aturan ketat telah dikembangkan dan dipakai yang mengharuskan uji-awal sedimen pada bagian kanal segera sebelum pengerukan. Pada kejadian amat jarang sehingga uji sebelum-pengerukan menyatakan adanya material dan limbah B3, maka lokasi akan ditandai. Subyek pada persetujuan dari Menteri Lingkungan Hidup (mengacu pada aturan Indonesia) material ini diharapkan dikeruk dan dipindahkan hanya ke fasilitas pembuangan aman PPLi. 22. Untuk pekerjaan JUFMP, tanggungjawab utama untuk pelaksanaan perincian standar lingkungan dalam AMDAL dan Laporan tambahan Tahap 1 JUFMP terletak pada pekerjaan sipil dan kontraktor pengerukan. Persyaratan dilekatkan sebagai kewajiban kontrak dari kontraktor. Konsultan Pengawas proyek (SC) akan bertanggungjawab untuk pengawasan hari-demi-hari terhadap para kontraktor (termasuk berpegang kepada standar lingkungan yang disyaratkan). SC akan selanjutnya melapor secara langsung kepada PMU. PMU akan menganggap baik SC dan para kontraktor bertanggungjawab untuk menjamin kesesuaian dengan ukuran lingkungan yang disyaratkan. Syarat-syarat Rujukan dari Konsultan Pengawas mengharuskan agar tim konsultan melibatkan pakar lingkungan dengan kapasitas dalam kegiatan pengawasan yang mengetahui dampak lingkungan. Juga, diketahui bahwa kanal dan sungai terpilih terletak di propinsi DKI Jakarta dan mengalir melintas batas-batas yurisdiksi kota sub-provinsi, 9
PP no. 85/1999 tentang Manajemen Limbah Berbahaya dan Beracun. Persyaratan ini juga merupakan stipulasi dari AMDAL CDF Ancol
10
14
sehingga agen-agen lingkungan lokal (BPLHD) baik pada tingkat Propinsi (yaitu pejabat yang memeriksa dan menyetujui semua AMDAL) dan BPLHD tingkat kota (yaitu tingkat Walikota) akan juga menjalani pekerjaan pemantauan langsung yang ditugaskan pada mereka. Bank Dunia akan melaksanakan pengawasan reguler pada pelaksanaan proyek, terutama melalui PMU. PMU juga akan menyewa Panel Tenaga Ahli11, yang akan memantau dan mengevaluasi persiapan dan pelaksanaan instrumen-instrumen perlindungan proyek (yang meliputi EMP, RPF dan sistem penyelesaian keluhan) dan memberikan masukan kepada PMU mengenai tindakan apapun untuk diambil untuk memperbaiki pemenuhan. Pengelolaan Dampak Lingkungan untuk Pekerjaan CDF Ancol, dan operasi Bantar Gebang dan PPLi 23. Untuk pekerjaan CDF Ancol, persyaratan AMDAL telah dimasukkan oleh PT PJA ke dalam kontrak dari kontraktor CDF Ancol. Simulasi hidrodinamis yang dilakukan sebagai bagian dari proses AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol menyatakan bahwa konstruksi fasilitas akan mungkin menuntun kepada hanya perubahan sedikit pada pola arus laut di sekitar lokasi fasilitas. Untuk mengendalikan terhadap dampak yang teridentifikasi lainnya, AMDAL untuk CDF mengharuskan agar material yang diisi dalam daerah reklamasi ditutup pada semua sisi oleh konstruksi dinding luar sepanjang seluruh panjang perimeter dari daerah konsesi reklamasi (kira-kira 119 ha). Dinding-dinding pada garis keliling dirancang sehingga dapat menahan material padat dari material pengisi (yang akan meliputi kira-kira 3,4 juta m3 material kerukan dari proyek JUFMP) sementara membiarkan keluarnya air yang lebih bersih/difilter dari daerah tertutup lewat bendungan. Disain dari fasilitas ini telah diperiksa dan dinilai sebagai memuaskan selama persiapan proyek. Ini walaupun demikian, untuk menjamin agar material kerukan JUFMP tidak dibuang di CDF Ancol sebelum fasilitasnya siap, 'no obejction' dari Bank Dunia pada kontrak pengerukan JUFMP hanya akan diberikan jika Bank Dunia merasa puas dengan kecukupan fasilitas tertutup dan telah menerima bukti memuaskan atas pemenuhan PT PJA pada persyaratan AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol termasuk kedalamnya semua update AMDAL yang telah disetujui. AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol juga mengharuskan alat-alat transport untuk dibersihkan setelah mencurahkan material kerukan di CDF Ancol supaya selanjutnya mencegah perpindahan tak diperkenankan dari material kerukan ke jalan lokal. Proses AMDAL CDF Ancol juga telah memeriksa dampak potensial dari lokasi sumber dan rute transport pasir (8,6 juta m3) and tanah laterite (400.000 m3) sebagai tambahan material kerukan JUFMP untuk konstruksi CDF. AMDAL menetapkan lokasi sumber khusus dari pasir--sumber pantai di Banten di pantai barat Jawa Barat--yang telah diperiksa memiliki ijin lingkungan yang disetujui yang konsisten dengan aturan dan hukum di Indonesia mengenai pertambangan dan penggalian. AMDAL juga mengharuskan tanah laterit/merah (yang diharuskan pada tahap akhir dari proses reklamasi) berasal dari sumber-sumber yang disetujui oleh BPLHD DKI (Tingkat Propinsi). 24. Untuk pekerjaan CDF Ancol, tanggungjawab langsung untuk melaksanakan rincian tindakantindakan lingkungan pada AMDAL CDF Ancol terletak pada kontraktor-kontraktornya PT PJA. Persyaratan dilekatkan sebagai kewajiban kontrak dari para kontraktor. PT PJA melalui Unit Pembangunan Propertinya akan mengawasi semua aspek (termasuk lingkungan) dari kontrak. Sebagai tambahan, PT PJA telah merekrut satu perusahaan konsultan yang melaksanakan pemantauan pemenuhan kwartalan pada pekerjaan konstruksi yang sedang berlangsung. PT PJA, dalam pemenuhan pada persyaratan AMDAL, sedang menyiapkan dan menyerahkan kepada BPLHD DKI laporan pelaksanaan 11
Tim ahli diharapkan dapat terdiri dari seorang ahli lingkungan, seorang insinyur yang berpengalaman dalam pengerukan dan pembuangan kerukan, dan seorang ahli masalah pemukiman ulang.
15
kwartalan tentang RKL dan RPL. Laporan-laporan ini berisi ukuran dan tindakan yang diambil oleh PT PJA untuk melaksanakan ukuran yang terdapat dalam RKL dan RPL mereka yang telah disetujui. Laporan ini akan juga meliputi pelaksanaan tindakan-tindakan tambahan yang terdapat dalam Laporan Tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol. 25. Tanggungjawab utama untuk pengawasan dan pemantauan keseluruhan pekerjaan di CDF Ancol akan terletak pada agen-agen BPLHD tingkat Propinsi dan Kota. PT PJA juga setuju bagi Konsultan Pengawas (SC) proyek JUFMP untuk melaksanakan pengawasan dan pemantauan keseluruhan pada pekerjaan CDF Ancol (yang meliputi kegiatan di lokasi-lokasi terkait) selama berlangsungnya proyek JUFMP. BPLHD telah memulai pemantauan pada pekerjaan konstruksi yang sedang berlangsung di CDF Ancol dan telah mencatat dan melaporkan temuannya dan mengeluarkan petunjuknya kepada PT PJA untuk menjalani tindakan-tindakan perbaikan yang diminta. Pada pemeriksaan lokasi pada bulan November 2010 oleh mereka, BPLHD DKI mengundang Bank Dunia untuk mengikuti pekerjaan pemeriksaan pemantauan bersama dan Bank Dunia berpartisipasi dalam proses ini bersama BPLHD DKI. BPLHD propinsi menyatakan akan melanjutkan untuk mengundang Bank Dunia dalam pekerjaan inspeksi pemantauan rutinnya di CDF Ancol. Laporan pelaksanaan kwartal (per tiga bulan) atas RKL dan RPL dari PT PJA akan juga dibagi kepada Bank Dunia. Bank Dunia telah menaksir kapasitas teknis dan finansial BPLHD propinsi agar secara memuaskan melaksanakan tanggungjawab pemantauan yang dimandatkan pada mereka. Sementara tidak ada persetujuan legal langsung antara Bank Dunia dan PT PJA, persetujuan legal JUFMP akan meliputi persyaratan bagi DKI Jakarta untuk menggunakan hakhaknya (sebagai pemegang saham dari PT PJA) untuk menyebabkan PT PJA melaksanakan persyaratan (termasuk tindakan-tindakan pengendalian) dari AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol dan Laporan Tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol. 26. Tanggungjawab utama untuk pengawasan dan pemantauan keseluruhan dari operasi yang sedang berlangsung di TPA Bantar Gebang dan fasilitas PPLi terletak pada BPLHD kota dan propinsi masingmasing. Konsultan Pengawas (SC) proyek juga akan mengawasi dan melaksanakan pemantauan keseluruhan dari kegiatan proyek terkait di Bantar Gebang dan PPLi. Pengelolaan Dampak Sosial 27. Proyek ini berusaha untuk menghindari atau meminimalisir (jika penghindaran tak memungkinkan) baik dampak sosial yang terkait atau tidak terkait dengan pemukiman kembali. Ini dilakukan melalui pekerjaan terbatas pada bagian-bagian prioritas, pemilihan teliti pada pendekatan pengerukan dan teknologi peralatan, dan rancangan teknis terperinci (DED) diarahkan untuk meminimalisir dampak. Seperti dijelaskan dalam Bagian 1.5, usaha signifikan pada periode persiapan proyek diperkirakan telah mengurangi jumlah bangunan yang terkena proyek dari perkiraan awal 2.513 bangunan menjadi 1.109 bangunan kini. Usaha ini akan dilanjutkan selama pelaksanaan proyek. Rangkaian pekerjaan akan juga memberikan waktu yang cukup untuk menyiapkan, mengkonsultasikan dan melaksanakan Rencana Pemukiman kembali, juga menyediakan bagi pendirian sistem penyelesaian keluhan proyek dan penunjukan panel tenaga ahli di depan pelaksanaan pemukiman kembali yang besarbesaran. 28. Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF) telah dikembangkan oleh DKI Jakarta yang memperhatikan hak-hak tentang Warga Terkena Proyek (WTP), kompensasi rasional atas hilangnya asetaset di tempat pemindahan, ukuran khusus untuk memperhatikan kelompok-kelompok rentan, dan 16
bantuan untuk pemulihan kehidupan. RPF akan menuntun persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali di lokasi-lokasi proyek di mana pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa diharuskan (termasuk di lokasi-lokasi terkait proyek). Mengacu pada sejarah praktek penggusuran di Jakarta, RPF dengan prinsip utama untuk praktek perlindungan sosial yang adil menggambarkan kemajuan perubahan dalam pendekatan DKI Jakarta untuk menangani pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa. Meskipun demkian, DKI Jakarta juga mempunyai kekawatiran yang kuat agar kebijakannya tak dipandang olah khalayak umum sebagai kebijakan yang menentang kepentingan umum dengan menyetujui perilaku ilegal tapi pada saat yang sama gagal untuk melindungi orang-orang yang rentan yang berisiko kehilangan rumahnya dan penghidupannya. Atas alasan ini, RPF membuat perbedaan antara tuan tanah liar dan encroacher dan dengan WTP lainnya12. RPF menjelaskan bahwa bantuan disediakan untuk tuan tanah tanpa surat dan penghuni ilegal akan ditentukan dalam RPK atas dasar kasus per kasus yang dirundingkan dan kesepakatan bersama, tanpa kriteria yang ditentukan lebih dulu yang membatasi. Pengaturan dalam RPF ini merupakan langkah yang adil untuk menyikapi kekawatiran DKI Jakarta pada satu sisi dan kepatuhan kepada kebijakan Pemukiman kembali dari Bank Dunia dengan tidak mengeluarkan jenis tertentu apapun dari orang-orang yang terkena proyek untuk bantuan dan/atau kompensasi. 29. Semua lokasi proyek akan diperiksa untuk Warga Terkena Proyek dan Rencana Pemukiman kembali yang disiapkan sesuai dengan RPF di mana Warga Terkena Dampak tak dapat dihindari. RPK akan mengidentifikasi warga yang terkena proyek dan meletakkan kerangka untuk kompensasi dan pemulihan penghidupan rumah tangganya dengan batas waktu yang jelas dan disepakati antara Warga Terkena Proyek dan DKI Jakarta. Semua Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) akan diperiksa oleh Bank Dunia13. RP akan mengharuskan ‘tidak ada keberatan dari Bank Dunia, untuk dibuka kepada umum dan dilaksanakan (kecuali ada unsur-unsur terkait kegiatan paska-pemukiman kembali) sebelum pekerjaan apapun dimulai pada lokasi bersangkutan. DKI Jakarta akan mendirikan proyek Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan (GRS) yang akan berfungsi, diantara fungsi-fungsi lainnya, untuk menerima dan memperhatikan/menyelesaikan keluhan terkait pemukiman kembali. 30. Pelaksanaan kegiatan terkait pemukiman kembali adalah tanggungjawab DKI Jakarta, terutama Kelompok Kerja Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESWG), Kelompok Kerja Penjaminan Mutu dan Manajemen Proyek, dan Kelompok Kerja Pemantauan dan Pelaporan. Pada tingkat operasional, terutama dalam menyiapkan dan melaksanakan RP, Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial akan di-tim-kan dengan staf kota-kota yang relevan (tim pemukiman kembali). Konsultan Pengawas (SC) akan memantau, mengawasi dan menasehati Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial dalam menyiapkan dan melaksanakan RP. Anggaran untuk menyiapkan dan melaksanakan RP (kecuali untuk konsultan) akan ditanggung oleh DKI Jakarta. Ini akan meliputi ongkos operasional untuk Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial dan tim pemukiman kembali, kompensasi atas aset-aset, bantuan untuk pemukiman kembali dan dukungan rehabilitasi. Konsultan Pengawas (SC) ini akan juga bertanggungjawab untuk menjamin bahwa DKI Jakarta melaksanakan RP secara konsisten dan sesuai dengan RPF, dan untuk mendukung DKI Jakarta dalam mendirikan dan 12
Encroacher adalah pemilik lahan yang memperluas lahan mereka melewati batas legal dengan mengambil lahan di sekitarnya atau lahan Negara, dan tuan tanah liar adalah mereka yang mendirikan bangunan pada lahan Negara untuk mengambil keuntungan dari para penyewa, tetapi tidak bergantung pada lahan ini untuk penguhidupan layak yang berkelanjutan. 13 Bank Dunia mengevaluasi Rencana Pemukiman Kembali yang telah disusun dengan mengacu pada RPF yang telah disepakati(termasuk kedalamnya kesepakatan mengenai penanganan tuan tanah liar dan penyerobot telah cukup untuk memulihkan mata pencaharian dan standard hidup mereka) dan pengaturan pelaksanaan yaitu rencana implementasi dan anggaran
17
mengelola proyek Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan. SC akan memantau lokasi-lokasi terkait proyek dan daerah-daerah yang dekat dengan lokasi proyek dan melaporkan kegiatan yang relevan--khususnya yang dapat melibatkan pemukiman kembali. 31. Sifat perubahan dari pendekatan proyek untuk menangani pemukiman kembali seperti dinyatakan dalam Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF) juga menyatakan tantangan pelaksanaan yang signifikan. Sementara DKI Jakarta telah komit untuk RPF dan RP terkait, pelaksanaan mereka (terutama pada tahap awal) akan tak terhindarkan harus berjuang menghadapi praktek-praktek, prosedur, dan aturan tak konsisten dan telah dibuat sebelumnya. Untuk mengurangi potensi pelaksanaan leher botol, DKI Jakarta kini terlibat dalam konsultasi intensif dan pelatihan penyebaran informasi khususnya kepada empat kotamadya di Jakarta yang relevan yang akan melaksanakan pelaksanaan hari-demi-hari dari RPF dan RP. 1.7
Konsultasi
32. Proses konsultatif untuk proyek ini telah tersebar luas selama periode persiapan proyek (terutama tahun 2009 - 2011) dan terjadi pada berbagai tingkat tergantung pada target pemegang saham dan persoalan yang didiskusikan. Selama persiapan proyek, kebanyakan konsultasi berhubungan dengan proses AMDAL 14 (baik untuk JUFMP dan CDF Ancol), dan persiapan RPF dan pendahuluan RP. Konsultasi lebih luas antara DKI Jakarta, instansi-instansi pemerintah, akademisi, masyarakat sipil, dan pemegang saham lain mengenai persoalan yang bervariasi dari hal teknis, rekayasa, lingkungan, sosial, rancangan perencanaan dan pelaksanaan juga telah dilaksanakan dan diharapkan berlanjut. Selama pelaksanaan proyek, interaksi dengan masyarakat lokal di dan dekat lokasi proyek ada dimandatkan dengan jumlah minimum pertemuan periodik yang diharuskan kontrak dengan masyarakat yang dimasukkan dalam kontrak pekerjaan. Petugas lokasi proyek (POSKO) akan dipertahankan karena tiap lokasi proyek akan melayani sebagai pusat informasi publik diantara fungsi-fungsi lainnya. Petugaspetugas lokasi ini akan juga melayani sebagai tempat yang dapat dimasuki secara mudah untuk menerima umpan balik (termasuk keluhan-keluhan) mengenai proyek dari masyarakat lokal juga untuk melaksanakan konsultasi sebagaimana diharuskan. 33. Berbagai konsultasi publik yang dilaksanakan selama persiapan proyek meliputi persoalanpersoalan yang berhubungan dengan tujuan proyek dan ruang lingkup/komponen, rancangan kelembagaan dan pelaksanaan, jadwal waktu proyek, dampak lingkungan dan rencana pengendalian, dampak sosial (termasuk pemukiman kembali), perhatian masyarakat lainnya, dan rencana untuk konsultasi dan keterlibatan masyarakat. Rincian dari konsultasi terkait AMDAL dicatat dalam tiap persetujuan AMDAL. Sebagai tambahan pada konsultasi yang dimandatkan AMDAL, serangkaian Diskusi Kelompok Fokus (FGD) juga dilaksanakan yang meliputi semua kelurahan di mana lokasi-lokasi proyek ditempatkan. Tujuan dari FGD adalah untuk (i) memberitahu masyarakat mengenai status proyek, dan (ii) mendapatkan umpan balik dan aspirasi masyarakat. Para partisipan terdiri dari wakil-wakil dari kantor kelurahan, Dewan kelurahan, Babinsa, Ketua PKK, pemimpin masyarakat, kepala RT dan RW, dan wakil-wakil dari masyarakat di lokasi proyek. Secara keseluruhan, ada dukungan luas untuk proyek ini dari masyarakat yang berpotensi terkena proyek dan komunitasnya asalkan proyek bertujuan untuk 14
Konsultasi publik (paling tidak 2 tahapan) dari proposal proyek adalah wajib dalam proses AMDAL, dan ini membentuk persyaratan kunci dalam kesesuaian dengan persyaratan baik Pemerintah Indonesia maupun Bank Dunia.
18
mengendalikan banjir musiman yang menyebabkan mereka dalam kesulitan besar dan kerugian ekonomi yang signifikan. Tapi masyarakat juga menyatakan berbagai perhatian, terutama berhubungan dengan dampak potensial terkait konstruksi dan gangguan (misalnya, suara, bau, kemacetan lalu lintas, tumpahan, dll), juga dampak potensial pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa. 34. Konsultasi masyarakat, terutama dalam Diskusi Kelompok Fokus (FGD), adalah alat untuk membantu DKI Jakarta menyiapkan Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF). Serangkaian lokakarya dan dialog juga dilaksanakan untuk menginformasikan persiapan Kerangka Kerja Pemukiman kembali. Khususnya, dua konsultasi internal dan konsultasi eksternal dilaksanakan untuk menginformasikan dan memperoleh dukungan dan umpan balik dari pemerintah dari pemegang saham lain untuk draft RPF. Konsultasi internal melibatkan partisipan dari tingkat propinsi DKI hingga tingkat terendah (perwakilan dari walikota-walikota dari semua empat kotamadya DKI, dinas dan biro DKI yang relevan, dan pemerintah sub-lokal sampai tingkat Kecamatan / Kelurahan). Konsultasi eksternal dihadiri oleh perwakilan DKI Jakarta juga LSM, perwakilan universitas dan pakar-pakar teknik. Konsultasi internal kini ditindak lanjuti dengan konsultasi intensif dan penyebaran info khususnya pada empat kotamadya Jakarta yang relevan yang akan melakukan pelaksanaan hari RPF dan RP hari-demi hari. 35. DKI Jakarta juga melaksanakan konsultasi selama persiapan draft awal RP untuk lokasi-lokasi Tahap 2 yang telah diidentifikasi memiliki WTP 15 . Kegiatan sosialisasi awal ini dilakukan dengan pemerintah tingkat lokal / pemimpin masyarakat (terutama kelurahan, RT/RW) dan selanjutnya dilakukan oleh pertemuan kelompok di kantor kelurahan oleh banyak kelompok kecil yang bergerak dari RT/RW ke RT/RW. Konsultasi yang lebih intensif dengan Warga Terkena Proyek (WTP) direncanakan setelah tanggal batas diumumkan, diantaranya untuk menegaskan daftar WTP dan aset-aset yang terkena proyek, untuk mendiskusikan dan menyetujui tentang kompensasi/ganti rugi dan pilihan bantuan, jadwal berbenah dan pindah, dll., sebagai bagian dari Rencana Pemukiman kembali. Konsultasi dengan WTP diharapkan dilakukan baik dalam kelompok maupun pleno, bergantung pada situasi khusus di tiap lokasi. 1.8
Komunikasi Proyek
36. Selama periode persiapan proyek, proses konsultasi yang berhubungan dengan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial dari proyek (selama periode tiga tahun dari 2009-2011) telah menjadi salah satu jalan penting untuk penyebaran informasi tentang rincian proyek kepada publik dan pemegang saham lainnya. Konsultasi memasukkan penyebaran disain proyek terkini, ruang lingkup dan status, dan secara luas telah mendapat dukungan positif untuk proyek dan tujuan pengendalian banjirnya. DKI Jakarta juga memposisikan JUFMP sebagai bagian kunci dari strategi pengendalian banjir jangka pendek. Berdasarkan akibat tak terkendali kejadian banjir terkini yang buruk pada kehidupan kota, media lokal pada umumnya telah memuat usaha penyebaran info ini. Sebagai akibatnya, kesadaran publik pada JUFMP (baik pada tingkat masyarakat maupun pada tingkat kota) makin bertambah selama periode persiapan proyek dari Januari 2010 sampai Januari 2011 yang ditunjukkan melalui stabilnya dan bertambahnya paparan media atas proyek ini16, terutama melalui portal-portal berita online, blog-blog masyarakat dan media cetak. Nada dari diskusi media tentang usaha pengendalian banjir juga membuka ke arah positif setelah periode audit. Pertemuan Panitia Pengarah Bersama secara periodik telah menjadi alat dalam memberikan dasar 15
Lokasi Tahap 1 tidak melibatkan pemukiman ulang terpaksa, sedangkan sejumlah lokasi Tahap 2 melibatkan pemukiman ulang terpaksa. 16 Rata-rata lebih dari 10 artikel media per bulan selama periode tersebut
19
pijakan bagi komunikasi antar-agen dan tukar informasi terkini tentang perkembangan dan status proyek. Dalam DKI Jakarta, kesempatan dari proses konsultasi yang berhubungan dengan perlindungan sosial proyek telah dipakai untuk mengkomunikasikan rincian proyek hingga tingkat terendah dari pemerintah lokal. 37. Selama pelaksanaan proyek, komunikasi melalui program konsultasi lingkungan, sosial dan kontraktor akan berlanjut. Pada tingkat masyarakat, pusat informasi publik (yang terletak di POSKO) pada masing-masing proyek JUFMP akan memainkan satu peran kritis, di mana informasi proyek (termasuk status pelaksanaan terkini) akan tersedia dan gampang diakses publik, terutama masyarakat di dalam atau dekat dengan lokasi proyek. Pertemua Panitia Pengarah Bersama diharapkan berlanjut terus. DKI Jakarta juga menetapkan Biro Prasarkot dengan tugas khusus untuk mengkoordinasikan dan mengkomunikasikan proyek ini di seluruh DKI Jakarta dan agen pemerintah lainnya yang relevan. Terpisah dari upaya komunikasi proyek dari Pemerintah dan agen-agen pelaksana, Bank Dunia sedang menyiapkan website proyek di mana info proyek terkini dapat tersedia selama pelaksanaan. 1.9
Risiko-Risiko Reputasional
38. Persiapan proyek JUFMP telah menjalani proses penilaian lingkungan dan sosial yang cukup luas dan mendalam. Meskipun demikian, ada tiga wilayah penting kegiatan yang tidak secara langsung dalam tanggungjawab keadaan pelaksanaan proyek yang dapat memunculkan risiko pada reputasi JUFMP dan/atau Bank Dunia selama pelaksanaan. Yang pertama berhubungan dengan kegiatan non-proyek yang dapat terjadi di atau dekat dengan lokasi proyek. Yang kedua menyangkut kegiatan di dalam CDF Ancol. Yang ketiga menyangkut kegiatan reklamasi jangka panjang di utara Jakarta. Berbagai tindakan akan diambil selama pelaksanaan untuk mengendalikan, mengurangi atau mengelola risiko-risiko ini hingga tingkat dapat diterima. Harus dicatat bahwa tindakan-tindakan ini tak akan secara sempurna menyingkirkan risiko-risiko ini. 39. Berdasarkan lokasi penduduk yang sangat padat, terjadinya proyek dan kegiatan lain yang tak berhubungan dengan proyek JUFMP di dalam atau dalam jarak sangat dekat dengan beberapa lokasi JUFMP adalah mungkin tak terhindarkan. Kegiatan ini mungkin memiliki berbagai tujuan, standar dan proses, tapi dapat diasosiasikan secara keliru dengan JUFMP dalam pikiran publik dan pemegang saham lain. Ini dapat menuntun kepada harapan publik yang salah pada kegiatan ini, atau tindakan keliru atas ukuran pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang lemah padsa JUFMP. Berbagai tindakan akan diambil untuk mengendalikan dan mengurangi risiko-risiko ini, yang meliputi memposting penandatanganan proyek, pemagaran sementara di mana layak, dan pemeliharaan pusat informasi publik (yang terletak di POSKO) pada tiap lokasi proyek untuk menyebarkan informasi proyek dan untuk melayani sebagai jalan segera untuk penjelasan atas kesalahpahaman yang mungkin muncul. Konsultan Pengawas (SC) juga akan memantau wilayah-wilayah yang berdekatan di sekitar lokasi JUFMP (dan lokasi-lokasi terkait proyek) sebagai satu alat untuk memberikan pemberitahuan lebih dulu kepada PIU, PMU dan Bank Dunia untuk membolehkan koordinasi dan tindakan untuk mencegah kesalahpahaman komunikasi dan asosiasi keliru yang kurang hati-hati atas JUFMP. 40. Sementara JUFMP hanya akan menyumbang beberapa material isian untuk CDF Ancol, reklamasi pada CDF Ancol itu sendiri adalah suatu proyek terpisah dari rencana besar reklamasi di Ancol yang mana berada di luar tanggung jawab lembaga pelaksana proyek JUFMP dan teritegrasi dalam 20
JUFMP. Walaupun demikian, publik dan pemegang saham lainnya dapat secara langsung mengasosiasikan tiap masalah (misalnya lingkungan, sosial, keuangan, komersil, dll.) yang dapat muncul di CDF Ancol dengan JUFMP. Berdasarkan kepentingan JUFMP dalam pelaksanaan layak dan berhasil dari kegiatan CDF Ancol, rancangan telah dibuat agar Konsultan Pengawas (SC) akan memiliki akses ke CDF Ancol untuk maksud pemantauan dan pengawasan (termasuk pada lokasi sumber untuk pasir dan material isian tanah laterit). Selama pelaksanaan proyek, Bank Dunia juga akan bekerja dengan BPLHD untuk melaksanakan pengawasan bersama dan inspeksi lokasi di CDF Ancol. Kegiatan pemantauan dan pengawasan ini akan mengijinkan bagi tindakan-tindakan untuk dirumuskan dan diambil untuk memperbaiki tiap kesalahan pelaksanaan, dan diharapkan mengurangi risiko reputasional yang potensial kepada JUFMP dan/atau Bank Dunia. Disain proyek akan meliputi ketentuan untuk membatasi pertanggungjawaban Bank Dunia menyangkut kegiatan di CDF Ancol. 41. Kegiatan reklamasi CDF Ancol sendiri adalah satu kegiatan reklamasi skala relatif kecil di dalam proses reklamasi jangka panjang yang sedang berlangsung dan lebih besar di wilayah Ancol di utara Jakarta yang telah dimulai pada awal 1960-an. Sementara proyek JUFMP adalah jelas tak berhubungan dengan kegiatan reklamasi selain dengan CDF Ancol secara khusus. kemungkinan yang ada yang mungkin dapat salah diasosiasikan oleh publik dan pemegang saham lain sebagai bertanggungjawab atas proyek reklamasi lainnya misalnya, proyek-proyek yang telah terjadi di waktu lampau atau berpotensial dapat terjadi di masa yang akan datang. Dokuman proyek dan upaya penyebaran informasi akan bertujuan untuk menegaskan dan membuat jelas bahwa luas keterkaitan JUFMP dalam hal ini adalah dibatasi pada CDF Ancol.
2 2.1
Deskripsi Proyek Tujuan Pembangunan Proyek
42. Tujuan Pembangunan Proyek (TPP) adalah untuk berkontribusi bagi perbaikan operasi dan pemeliharaan bagian prioritas dari sistem pengelolaan banjir di Jakarta. TPP akan dicapai melalui: • Pengerukan bagian-bagian kanal banjir utama yang dipilih, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk untuk memperbaiki kapasitas alirannya, dan membuang material kerukan ke fasilitas yang layak; • Merehabilitasi dan membangun tanggul di bagian-bagian sungai, dan memperbaiki atau mengganti peralatan mekanis pada, kanal banjir terpilih, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk untuk mendukung dan memperbaiki operasinya; • Menetapkan koordinasi kelembagaan antara tiga instansi yang bertanggungjawab untuk memberanikan pembangunan yang terkoordinasi, dan operasi dan pemeliharaan (O&P) dari sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta, dan • Memperkuat kemampuan dari instansi-instansi yang bertanggung jawab untuk memperbaiki operasi, pemeliharaan dan pengelolaan sistem manajemen banjir Jakarta. 2.2
Ringkasan Komponen Proyek
43. Secara keseluruhan biaya untuk proyek ini mencapai US$ 190,4 Juta, yang mana pembiayaan dari counterpart mencapai US$ 38,9 juta. Proyek terdiri dari dua komponen yang diringkas sebagai berikut:
21
Komponen 1. Pengerukan dan rehabilitasi kanal banjir utama terpilih, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk. Komponen ini akan mendukung pengerukan dan rehab 11 kanal banjir/kanal-kanal dan empat waduk yang diidentifikasi sebagai bagian prioritas dari sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta yang amat membutuhkan rehab dan perbaikan dalam kapasitas aliran. 11 kanal banjir/kanal-kanal ini diperkirakan memiliki panjang total 67,5 km, sementara empat waduk diperkirakan memiliki luas total 65,1 hektar (lihat rincian ringkasan pada Tabel 2-1 di bawah). Kira-kira 42,2 km tanggul diharapkan direhabilitasi atau dibangun di dalam kanal-kanal banjir ini, dan waduk-waduk. Di mana diperlukan, peralatan mekanik (pompa, pintu air, dll) akan diganti atau diperbaiki. Komponen 2. Bantuan teknis untuk pengelolaan proyek, perlindungan sosial, dan pembangunan kapasitas. Komponen ini akan mendukung pengelolaan kontrak, pemeriksaan disain teknik, insinyur pengawas konstruksi untuk pengerukan dan pekerjaan rehab dan bantuan teknis. Bantuan teknis meliputi dukungan kepada perbaikan koordinasi kelembagaan untuk operasi dan pemeliharaaan sistem pengelolaan banjir Jakarta juga pendirian Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (FMIS). Ketentuan telah dibuat bagi ongkos untuk melaksanakana Rencana Pemukiman kembali, juga pembentukan dan operasi dari proyek Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan dan Panel Tenaga Ahli.
2.3 Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek 44. Lima belas kanal banjir, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk prioritas telah diidentifikasi untuk dimasukkan dalam ruang lingkup dari pekerjaan proyek (lihat Tabel 2-1 untuk rincian penjelasan dan Peta Proyek dalam Lampiran 1 untuk lokasi-lokasinya). Ini diidentifikasi oleh Pemerintah sebagai dalam prioritas kebutuhan untuk rehab dan perbaikan kapasitas aliran. Lokasi-lokasi terkait. Sepuluh lokasi diidentifikasi sebagai lokasi terkait proyek17. Lokasi-lokasi 45. terkait ini adalah: • K. Item, Kalibaru and Sunter Kemayoran (terkait ke Kali Sentiong); • Ancol Kp. Bandan and Ancol Aliran Panjang (terkait ke Kanal Banjir Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari); • Kanal sepanjang JL Kayu Putih Timur (terkait ke Kali Sunter Atas); • Ciliwung Kota, kanal sepanjang Jl Tubagus Angke, PHB Bandengan Utara; dan Waduk Pluit (terkait ke K. Pakin – K. Besar– Kanal Banjir Jelakeng). 46. Sepuluh lokasi terkait yang disebutkan di atas diidentifikasi secara hidrolika dan langsung berhubungan dengan kanal-kanal/waduk-waduk di bawah JUFMP. DKI Jakarta pada saat ini tak mempunyai rencana khusus untuk pekerjaan rehab pada lokasi-lokasi terkait ini. Walaupun demikian, jika DKI Jakarta akan melakukan pekerjaan pada lokasi terkait, maka DKI Jakarta akan menerapkan RPF jika lokasi terkait tersebut di atas memerlukan pemukiman kembali.
17
Menurut OP 4.12, criteria untuk mengidentifikasi lokasi terkait adalah: (1) secara langsung dan signifikan terkait dengan JUFMP; (2) dapat mencapai tujuan JUFMP; dan (3) bersamaan dengan JUFMP. Studi dalam mendefinisikan lokasi terkait dilakukan selama persiapan RPF dan lokasi terkait pada umumnya didefinisikan sebagai yang terkait secara hidrolik dalam konteks dari kriteria keterkaitan awal sebagaimana ditentukan dalam OP 4.12, tetapi tidak memenuhi ketiga kriteria secara bersamaan.
22
Tabel 2-1 Penjelasan Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal dan Waduk di bawah Proyek Paket Kontrak Kerja 1 (DKI) 2a (Dirjen Sumberdaya air) 2b (Dirjen Sumberdaya air) 3 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 4 (DKI)
Lokasi
Deskripsi Kali/Waduk (Diperkirakan) Panjang (m) Lebar (m) Luas (m2 or ha.) 5 .100 21,50 ~ 45,90 171 .870 m2 (2 .004) (1 .260) 4.90 ha.
Sungai Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Kanal Banjir Cengkareng (termasuk sisi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah Note 1 Sungai Cideng Thamrin (kali Lingkar Jalan) Kali Sentiong-Sunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain)
7 .840 (540)
38,00 ~ 87,00
490 .000 m2
9 .980
20,20 ~ 47,40
338 .320 m2
3 .840 (1 .960)
10,00 ~ 19,00
55 .680 m2
5 .950 (400)
16,10 ~ 31,20
161 .240 m2
(570)
33.00 ha.
Waduk Sunter Selatan
19.20 ha.
Waduk Sunter Timur III
8.00 ha.
10 .560 m2 166 .050 m2 266 .220 m2 131 .320 m2 106 .920 m2 108 .020 m2 71 .500 m2 62 .820 m2 2 .140 .520 m2 65 ha. Catatan 1 Untuk maksud kontrak, Kanal BanjirSunter telah dibagi dalam dua sub-paket– Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas dan Bawah. Catatan 2 Untuk maksud kontrak, Kali Krukut telah dibagi dalam dua sub-paket – Kali Krukut Cideng and Kali Krukut Lama 5 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 6 (Dirjen Sumberdaya air) 7 (DKI)
2.4
Kali Tanjungan Kali Angke Bawah Kanal Banjir Barat (sisi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas Note 1 Kali Grogol – Sekretaris Kali Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Kali Krukut Cideng Note 2 Kali Krukut Lama Note 2
600 4 .050 3 .060 (590) 5 .150 2 .970 4 .910 3 .250 3 .490 67 .514
9,20 ~ 26,00 31,00 ~ 51,00 33,00 ~ 141,00 15,00 ~ 36,00 21,00 ~ 51,00 13,00 ~ 31,00 15,00 ~ 29,00 7,00 ~ 29,00
Rangkaian Pekerjaan
47. Pekerjaan konstruksi yang didanai oleh proyek ini diusulkan untuk dilaksanakan dalam dua tahap rangkaian (lihat Tabel 2-2). Disain pelaksanaan rangkaian dipakai sebagai mekanisme pengelolaan risiko pelaksanaan utama untuk proyek. Pekerjaan Tahap 1 (diusulkan 4 lokasi / 3 kontrak kerja) diharapkan dimulai selama tahun pertama dari proyek. Pekerjaan Tahap 2 (diusulkan 11 lokasi / 5 kontrak) diharapkan mengikuti selanjutnya. Rangkaian ini akan mencegah agar PMU/PIU dan konsultan pengawasnya menjadi terlalu dibebani berlebihan selama tahun pertama ketika rincian proses, prosedur dan rutinitas pelaksanaan sebenarnya dioperasionalkan. Rangkaian ini juga akan membolehkan waktu bagi DKI Jakarta untuk melengkapi rancangan dan instrumen pemukiman kembali yang diperlukan untuk lokasi-lokasi pada Tahap 219, termasuk pembentukan sistem penyelesaian keluhan dan penunjukkan panel tenaga ahli. Dua lokasi terkait yaitu Ancol Kp. Bandan and Ancol Aliran Panjang terkait dalam pekerjaan Tahap 1 20 (Kanal Banjir Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari) sedangkan delapan lokasi terkait lain nya terkait dengan pelaksanaan Tahap 2;
19
Lokasi Tahap 1 tidak melibatkan pemukiman ulang terpaksa. Analisis praduga cepat menunjukan untuk kedua lokasi ini, tidak diperlukan pemukiman kembali warga terkena proyek.
20
23
Tabel 2-2 Rangkaian Proyek Pekerjaan Konstruksi Rangkaian Tahap 1
Tahap 2
2.5
1 2a 2b 3 4 5 6 7
Paket Kontrak & Tanggungjawab Pelaksanaan (DKI) (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) (Dirjen Cipta Karya) (DKI) (Dirjen Cipta Karya) (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) (DKI)
Volume Pekerjaan
48. Survey pada kanal banjir, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk utama terpilih yang dilaksanakan selama persiapan proyek memperkirakan total volume material yang akan dikeruk kira-kira 3,4 juta m3 (di mana kira-kira 95.000 m3 diperkirakan sampah padat). Kira-kira 42,2 km panjang sungai diharapkan untuk direhab atau dibangun di dalam kanal banjir, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk ini. Rincian diberikan dalam Tabel 2-3.
24
Tabel 2-3 Penjelasan Kanal Banjir, Kanal-Kanal & Waduk-Waduk di bawah Proyek Paket
1 (DKI) 2a (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 2b (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 3 (Dirjen Cipta Karya)
4 (DKI)
5 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 6 (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 7 (DKI)
Location
Ke dalaman Kerukan (m)
Kali Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Kanal Banjir Cengkareng (termasuk sisi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah Catatan 1
1,90 ~ 2,70
2.6
4.832
99.490
1.250
1.905
1,50 ~ 3,50
1.225.500
22.510
4.600
1,60 ~ 2,30
399.250
19.970
1.800
Kali Cideng Thamrin (Kali Lingkar Jalan) Kali Sentiong-Sunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (Outlet drain) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Tanjungan Drain Angke Bawah Drain Kanal Banjir Barat (sisi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah Note 1 Kali Grogol – Sekretaris Kali Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Kali Krukut Cideng
0,60 ~ 2,30
33.230
810
2.570
0,50 ~ 2,10
140.150
7.010
3.865
1,30 ~ 2,10
413.400
10.340
5.000
1,00 ~ 2,10 0,70 ~ 3,30
48.200 51.000
1.210 1.280
3.057 305
1,10 ~ 1,90 2,00 ~ 3,60 1,70 ~ 2,50
11.500 248.000 350.080
290 6.200 8.760
1.092 821 1.190
1,80 ~ 3,40
82.000
4.100
1.850
0,70 ~ 2,30
40.500
1.020
2.391
0,60 ~ 1,60
100.000
5.000
2.882
0,70 ~ 0,80
28.700
1.440
1.658
Kali Krukut Lama Catatan
0,50 ~ 0,80
14.900
750
2.400
3.441.870
95.080
42.218
2
Catatan 2
Tanggul (m)
2,20 ~ 3,10
Catatan 2
Catatan 1
Perkiraan Kerukan Volume Volume Sampah Material Padat / Limbah Kerukan (m3) (m3) 156.970 3.140
Untuk maksud kontrak , Kanal Banjir Sunter telah dibagi dalam 2 sub-paket – Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas & Bawah Untuk maksud kontrak, Kali Krukut Drain telah dibagi dalam 2 sub-paket – Kali Krukut Cideng dan Kali Krukut Lama
Lokasi-Lokasi Pembuangan
49. Walaupun tidak didanai oleh proyek, lokasi pembuangan dianggap bagian penting yang melengkapi proyek ini. Kira-kira 3,4 juta m3 material sedimen21 dan kira-kira 95.000 m3 sampah padat 21
Seluruh bagian aliran banjir, kanal, dan tanggul dari proyek akan diuji untuk mencari tahu akan adanya material berbahaya (B3) sebelum pengerukan.
25
yang akan disingkirkan dari kanal banjir, kanal-kanal dan waduk-waduk yang sedang dikeruk oleh proyek ini akan dibuang dengan cara berikut (lihat Gambar 2.1 untuk ilustrasi rancangan pembuangan). • Material Sedimen Tak Berbahaya – akan dibawa dan dibuang di Pekerjaan Reklamasi Laut Ancol, yang dikenal sebagai CDF Ancol. • Material Sedimen Berbahaya (jika ditemukan) – akan dikeruk, dibawa dan dibuang di fasilitas pembuangan Sampah Berbahaya PPLi di Bogor, Jawa Barat22. • Sampah/Limbah Padat – akan dibawa dan dibuang di tempat pembuangan sampah Kota Jakarta di Bekasi, Jawa Barat, yang dikenal sebagai TPA Bantar Gebang. Gambar 2-1 Ringkasan Rancangan Pembuangan
2.6.1 Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (CDF) Ancol 50. Material kerukan tak-berbahaya akan dibuang di Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup Ancol (CDF) dan digunakan sebagai material untuk maksud reklamasi tanah. CDF Ancol adalah wilayah reklamasi khusus yang terletak di dalam wilayah reklamasi jangka panjang dan lebih luas di Ancol di utara Jakarta yang dimulai pada awal 1960-an. JUFMP tidak mendanai juga tidak berhubungan dengan usaha reklamasi 22
Sebagai catatan, metode yang akan diusulkan untuk penanganan limbah B3 akan mengikuti peraturan nasional yang berlaku dan izin untuk penanganan tersebut akan disampai ke Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup untuk mendapatkan persetujuan
26
Ancol23. Gantinya, Proyek ini bekerjasama dan secara bersama menguntungkan pembangun CDF Ancol (yaitu PT PJA) untuk menunjukkan pembuangan yang aman dan penggunaan material kerukan.
2.6.2 Fasilitas pembuangan sampah di Bantar Gebang 51. Fasilitas TPA Bantar Gebang yang sudah beroperasi sejak 1989 adalah tempat pembuangan sampah terbesar di Indonesia, dalam hal volume sampah padat yang diterima dan dibuang. Daerah ini terletak tepat di luar batas kota Jakarta, di Kota Bekasi dan dimiliki oleh Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Tempat ini dikelola oleh Dinas Kebersihan DKI Jakarta melalui operator pribadi.
2.6.3 Tempat pembuangan sampah berbahaya di PPLi 52. Uji mendalam pada sedimen dalam proyek kanal banjir, kanal dan waduk sebagai bagian dari Penilaian Lingkungan dari proyek ini, dan pada sistem drainase sekeliling juga, tidak menunjukkan adanya material kerukan yang berbahaya. Dalam kejadian yang mungkin ada material kerukan berbahaya ditemukan24, ada tempat pembuangan sampah berbahaya, yang dikenal sebagai PPLi, terletak di Bogor, Jawa Barat, telah dikenal untuk melayani sebagai lokasi buangan bagi material kerukan yang berbahaya. Tempat pembuangan sampah PPLi adalah entitas pribadi yang berijin yang menyediakan jasa pembuangan dan perlakuan untuk sampah berbahaya dan telah beroperasi sejak tahun 1994.
3
Persyaratan Hukum Lingkungan dan Sosial dan Kelembagaan Proyek dan Rancangan Pelaksanaan
3.1
Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan Pemerintah Indonesia
53. Indonesia memiliki banyak sekali, bahkan berlebihan, undang-undang lingkungan dan aturan nasional dan sub-nasional yang mengatur proses perencanaan lingkungan bagi pekerjaan jenis ini. Aturan yang terlalu luas untuk proses AMDAL25 di Indonesia untuk tiap kegiatan atau proyek dengan potensi dampak lingkungan signifikan adalah Peraturan Pengelolaan Lingkungan No 23/1997, dan khususnya Pasal 15 tentang persyaratan penilaian dampak lingkungan. Undang-undang baru perlindungan dan pengelolaan lingkungan, UU no. 32 tahun 2009, dikeluarkan pada 2009 dan mengganti UU No. 23/1997. Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) No: 27/1999 memberikan rincian penuntun dari sistem AMDAL. Selanjutnya, Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan No. 11/2006 memberikan daftar kegiatan khusus yang mengharuskan AMDAL dan Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan No. 8/2006 memberikan penuntun bagi persiapan AMDAL.
23
Dalam kurun waktu relative, material urukan hanya akan berkontribusi dalam persentase kecil dari reklamasi Ancol secara keseluruhan. 24 Selama pelaksanaan proyek, sedimen pada tiap bagian lokasi pekerjaan akan diuji lagi sebelum pekerjaan pengerukan disahkan - lihat Pasal 3. 25 Dibawah sistim Indonesia - ANDAL adalah sinonim dengan Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan dalam Kebijakan Lingkungan Bank Dunia OP 4.01. RKL adalah Rencana Kelola Lingkungan dan RPL adalah Rencana Pantau Lingkungan. ANDAL, RKL dan RPL secara bersama-sama dikenal sebagai AMDAL.
27
54. Mengenai pekerjaan pengerukan, Keputusan Menteri No. 11/2006 mengkhususkan bahwa pemeliharaan kegiatan pengerukan di kota metropolitan akan mengharuskan AMDAL jika volume kerukan melebihi 500.000 m3. Persyaratan ini juga sesuai dengan hukum regional (yaitu Keputusan Gubernur Jakarta No. 2863/2001 mengenai jenis dan daftar kegiatan khusus dan kegiatan di Jakarta yang mengharuskan AMDAL), yang menyatakan bahwa tiap kerukan dengan volume lebih dari 50.000 m3 mesti memiliki AMDAL yang disetujui oleh instansi lingkungan tingkat provinsi (yaitu BPLHD) DKI Jakarta.26 55. Peraturan nasional dan regional yang terutama penting dipertimbangkan ketika menyiapkan AMDAL adalah: • Keputusan Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup No. 2/2000: Pedoman tentang evaluasi dokumen AMDAL. • Keputusan Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup No. 40/2000: Pedoman tentang prosedur kerja komisi AMDAL. • Keputusan Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup No. 42/2000: Pedoman tentang pembentukan tim evaluasi dan anggota tim teknis AMDAL. • Keputusan Kepala Bapedal No. 8/2000: Pedoman tentang partisipasi publik dan penyampaian informasi selama AMDAL. • Keputusan Gubernur Jakarta No 75/2001: Pedoman operatif tentang keterlibatan publik dan penyampaian informasi selama AMDAL. 56. Gambar 31 menunjukkan proses AMDAL. Ini proses yang cukup sehat yang melibatkan konsultasi publik dan sangat meminta masukan umpan balik dari publik dan pakar teknis, dan beberapa tingkat pemeriksaan sebelum ijin lingkungan final27.
26
Hukum regional lebih ketat daripada Keputusan Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup No. 11/2006. Pemeriksaan ANDAL dalam Gambar 3-1 dilakukan oleh Komisi AMDAL yang dibentuk oleh BPLHD. Komisi AMDAL terdiri dari perwakilan BPLHD (2-3 orang), pakar universitas (atau dikenal sebagai Tim Ahli, 5-7 orang dari berbagai bidang kepakaran), perwakilan dari Kecamatan dan Kelurahan, dan perwakilan dari LSM.
27
28
Gambar 3-1 Proses AMDAL
3.2
Pembebasan Tanah Pemerintah Indonesia
57. Pemerintah Indonesia mempunyai beberapa undang-undang dan aturan utama menyangkut hakhak atas tanah dan pembebasan tanah untuk kegiatan pembangunan demi kepentingan publik. Undangundang penting utama yang menjamin dan mengatur hak-hak atas tanah adalah Undang-Undang Agraria No. 5 tahun 1960. Regulasi nasional lain yang relevan menyangkut tanah dan pembebasan tanah adalah: • Undang-Undang No. 20 tahun 1961 tentang Pembatalan Hak-Hak Atas Tanah; • Peraturan Gubernur No. 24 tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah; • Peraturan Presiden No. 36 tahun 2005 tentang Ketentuan Tanah untuk Kegiatan Pembangunan untuk Kepentingan Publik. • Peraturan Presiden No. 65 tahun 2006, yang merevisi Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005; dan • Penuntun Pelaksanaan No. 3 tahun 2007 untuk Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005 dan No. 65 tahun 2006, yang dikeluarkan oleh Badan Pertanahan Nasional.
29
Aturan lain yang relevan dengan proyek ini adalah UU No. 7 tahun 2004 tentang Sumberdaya Air, yang bertujuan untuk melindungi sumberdaya air untuk memelihara fungsinya. 58. Peraturan Presiden No. 35/2005 dan No. 65/2007 mengatur prosedur dan proses pembebasan tanah (dan aset-aset yang melekat pada tanah) untuk kegiatan pembangunan yang ada dalam kepentingan publik. Ini meliputi kegiatan pembangunan di bawah tanggungjawab pemerintah lokal, seperti jalan/jalan tol/kereta api/kebersihan/distribusi air; waduk; pelabuhan/bandara/terminal kereta api/terminal; fasilitas kesehatan masyarakat; pos dan telekomunikasi; fasilitas olahraga; bangunan olahraga; bangunan pemerintah; fasilitas polisi dan keamanan; fasilitas pembuangan sampah padat; perlindungan habitat alam; dan pembangkit listrik, transmisi dan distribusi listrik. Aturan-aturan ini juga meminta jaminan dan prosedur dan kriteria untuk kompensasi, taksiran untuk kompensasi, dan konsultasi dan negosiasi, juga penyelesaian keluhan dan pertengkaran dan pembatalan hak atas tanah. Aturan-aturan ini mengkategorikan prosedur dan proses untuk pembebasan tanah untuk lebih dari 1 hektar, dan untuk kurang dari satu hektar. Penuntun Pelaksanaan No. 3 tahun 2007 untuk Peraturan Presiden No. 36/2005 dan No. 65 tahun 2006, menjelaskan lebih terperinci prosedur, proses dan kriteria untuk pembebasan tanah seperti diminta dalam dua Peraturan Presiden. Tiga aturan yang disebutkan tidak secara eksplisit mengatur bantuan dan tidak meliputi pemulihan pendapatan. Mereka meminta agar tingkat kompensasi bagi tanah harus dibuat berdasarkan pada penilaian tim penaksir tanah independen yang dibentuk sesuai dengan aturan. 59. DKI Jakarta juga mempunyai aturan yang mengatur kompensasi aset, yaitu, Pedoman Pelaksanaan, yang diterbitkan secara teratur oleh Dinas Perumahan dan Bangunan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta. Aturan ini dipakai sebagai basis untuk menentukan tingkat kompensasi atas aset (bangunan dan aset tambahan yang melekat pada bangunan). Sebagai tambahan, DKI Jakarta mempunyai Peraturan Daerah No. 8 tahun 2007 mengenai Aturan Publik, yang dipakai sebagai dasar untuk memiliki kembali tanah publik yang telah dipakai tanpa izin dari pemerintah DKI Jakarta atau ruang publik/tanah lain yang telah dipakai untuk maksud-maksud yang tak sesuai dengan rencana penggunaan tanah DKI Jakarta.
3.3
Kebijakan dan Persyaratan Perlindungan Lingkungan yang Sesuai dengan Bank Dunia
60. Proyek ini diharapkan memberikan hasil lingkungan yang positif dengan alasan-alasan sebagai berikut: (i) mengendalikan banjir musiman di wilayah berpenduduk padat di Jakarta akan mengurangi dampak lingkungan dan persoalan kesehatan publik yang disebabkan luapan dan air banjir yang menetap, (ii) penyingkiran sampah padat dan sedimen dari kali pilihan akan juga mencegah material ini keluar tak terkendali ke dalam muara sungai dan wilayah teluk dan keluar menuju laut terbuka, dan (iii) setelah jangka panjang sistem pengelolaan informasi banjir yang sedang diperkenalkan oleh proyek ini akan memberikan Pemerintah DKI Jakarta, (yaitu DKI Jakarta) dengan alat perencanaan berdasarkan informasi yang mereka perlukan untuk secara berkelanjutan mengelola jaringan dengan baik melampaui masa proyek untuk melanjutkan mengurangi kejadian banjir di wilayah itu. 61. Meskipun demikian, dampak lingkungan negatif yang signifikan mungkin ada dari pekerjaan pengerukan dan tanggul dan jumlah material sedimen dan sampah padat yang akan dihasilkan dan bagaimana material kerukan ini akan ditangani, disimpan sementara, disiapkan, disortir, dipindahkan dan akhirnya dibuang di daerah urban yang padat penduduk dan dikelilingi oleh air laut akan dikelola. 30
Dampak-dampak ini meliputi hal-hal yang signifikan seperti kemacetan lalulintas, pengurangan mutu air karena debu dan pengeluaran bau busuk, bertambahnya tingkat bising, reduksi air permukaan dan mutu air laut, dll. (lihat Bagian 5 untuk penjelasan lebih rinci tentang dampak lingkungan negatif dari proyek ini). 62. Proyek ini akan secara potensial memiliki dampak lingkungan yang buruk yang mungkin peka dan tak baik dan dengan demikian dapat mempengaruhi wilayah-wilayah yang tersebar. Dengan demikian proyek ini memicu Kebijakan Operasional Penilaian Lingkungan Bank Dunia (OP 4.01) dan mengenai persyaratan kebijakan ini ditentukan sebagai kategori EA jenis A. Kebijakan ini akan berlaku untuk semua lokasi proyek. Sebagai tambahan, semua tiga lokasi pembuangan, yaitu CDF Ancol, TPA Bantar Gebang dan fasilitas PPLi dianggap sebagai bagian integral dari proyek ini.
3.4
Kebijakan dan Persyaratan Perlindungan Sosial yang Sesuai dengan Bank Dunia.
63. Proyek ini diharapkan memiliki dampak sosial signifikan positif. Terutama, pengurangan peristiwa banjir akan mengurangi gangguan dalam masyarakat di wilayah proyek. Ahli waris penerima uang akan menjadi dominan dalam kehidupan masyarakat miskin yang tinggal di daerah rawan banjir dalam ruang lingkup proyek. Bagaimanapun juga, pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa kini diidentifikasi diharuskan dalam enam lokasi proyek (lihat Pasal 5 untuk penjelasan lebih rinci tentang dampak sosial yang berpotensi negatif penting dari proyek ini), Atas alasan ini, proyek memicu Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali dari Bank Dunia (OP 4.12). Kebijakan ini akan berlaku dalam semua lokasi proyek (termasuk lokasi-lokasi terkait).
3.5
Paket Dokumen Perlindungan Lingkungan dan Sosial.
3.5.1 Dokumen perlindungan lingkungan 64. Penilaian Lingkungan menyeluruh telah dilaksanakan JUFMP dalam proses dan cara yang sejajar dengan paket dan rangkaian pekerjaan seperti dinyatakan dalam Tabel 3-1 di bawah. Untuk pekerjaan Tahap 1, AMDAL orisinal (yaitu ANDAL, RKL dan RPL) disiapkan oleh PMU pada tahun 2009 untuk memenuhi persyaratan lingkungan Pemerintah Indonesia dan diperiksa dan disetujui oleh BPLHD Provinsi pada Maret 2010 (mengikuti proses AMDAL yang dijelaskan dalam Gambar 31). Selama persiapan proyek, Bank Dunia juga memeriksa AMDAL Tahap 1 untuk kesesuaian dengan Penilaian Lingkungannya sendiri OP 4.01 dan ditemukan ada kesenjangan dalam dokumen. Dari sini PMU menyiapkan dan memakai Laporan tambahan Tahap 1 JUFMP (meliputi rekomendasi tindakan tambahan) untuk menjembatani kesenjangan yang ditemukan dengan persyaratan OP 4.01 Bank Dunia. 65. Pekerjaan Tahap 2 telah diidentifikasi dan meskipun bahwa pekerjaan ini akan dilaksanakan pada tahun-tahun berikutnya setelah pekerjaan Tahap 1, PMU telah menyelesikan AMDAL lengkap dan draft pertama dari laporan ini kini sedang diperiksa oleh BPLHD. Pekerjaan Tahap 2 tidak akan ditaksir oleh Bank Dunia selama persiapan proyek tapi gantinya akan ditaksir selama pelaksanaan proyek. Oleh sebab itu, PMU telah menyiapkan Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMF) untuk memenuhi persyaratan lingkungan dan sosial dari pekerjaan Tahap 2.
31
66. AMDAL untuk Fasilitas Pembuangan Tertutup (CDF) Ancol mengharuskan agar tiap material yang ditimbun untuk maksud reklamasi ditutup pada semua sisi untuk mencegah material timbunan bersentuhan dengan laut terbuka dan dengan demikian berisiko ke laut dan mengkontaminasi laut. Oleh sebab itu, disain rekayasa untuk lokasi Ancol adalah untuk fasilitas tertutup. AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol pertama kali disiapkan oleh PT PJA, pemegang ijin untuk lokasi reklamasi pada 2006. Disain fasilitas selanjutnya diubah ketika DKI Jakarta meminta agar material endapan kerukan JUFMP ditimbun di CDF Ancol, hingga menuntun pada revisi AMDAL yang dilaksanakan pada Desember 2008. AMDAL perbaikan ini untuk CDF Ancol kemudian diserahkan untuk pemeriksaan dan persetujuan kepada BPLHD Provinsi yang menyetujuinya pada Maret 2009. 67. Selama persiapan proyek, Bank Dunia juga memeriksa perbaikan RKL dan RPL CDF Ancol28 dan menemukan persyaratan bagi tindakan tambahan untuk lebih menguatkan dokumen-dokumen ini dan untuk memenuhi persyaratan Bank Dunia sendiri. Tindakan tambahan ini yang dicatat dalam Laporan tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol disiapkan oleh PMU adalah (i) untuk memeriksa ijin-ijin dan sumber pasir dan untuk mencatat dampak potensial di lokasi yang berhubungan dengan ekstraksi 8,6 juta m3 pasir, (ii) memperkuat pengawasan dan pemantauan hari demi hari pada konstruksi dan pemenuhan CDF Ancol oleh membolehkan pemakaian akses Konsultan Pengawas Proyek pada CDF Ancol dan keterbukaan rincian rencana pengelolaan lalulintas. PT PJA setuju dengan persyaratan tambahan ini pada Laporan Tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol. Oleh sebab itu, menyangkut persyaratan AMDAL Indonesia, PT PJA akan memasukkan tindakan tambahan ini dalam laporan kemajuan RKL dan RPL pada kwartal berikutnya, yang berlaku pada April 2011. Sebagai catatan bahwa pekerjaan pengerukan JUFMP tidak akan dilakukan sampai evaluasi terhadap tempat pembuangan tertutup Ancol telah dilakukan dan dapat kualitas konstruksi termasuk kedalam nya tanggul penutup dapat diterima secara teknis (lihat Bagian 3.7.2) 68. Lokasi-lokasi pembuangan lain, yaitu, TPA Bantar Gebang untuk sampah padat dan PPLi untuk sampah berbahaya adalah fasilitas yang ada yang telah beroperasi di bawah ijin lingkungan. Sebagai bagian dari pemeriksaan riset dan analisa yang layak maka Bank Dunia telah mengunjungi dua fasilitas ini: •
Tempat Pembuangan Sampah PPLi (untuk bahan berbahaya, jika ada). Kunjungan lokasi dilaksanakan oleh tim Bank Dunia pada 19 Oktober, 2010. PPLi suatu fasilitas pengelolaan sampah berbahaya yang berijin yang beroperasi sejak tahun 1994, sahamnya 5 % dimiliki oleh Pemerintah Indonesia melalui Kementerian BUMN sementara sisa saham 95 % dimiliki oleh Dowa Eco System Co. Ltd., Jepang. PPLi adalah fasilitas pertama di Indonesia yang menyediakan pelayanan pengelolaan sampah berbahaya dalam rangkaian lengkap (berlaku pembayaran komisi tip) termasuk transportasi, proses perlakuan, dan pembuangan di tempat pembuangan sampah modern dan aman yang mematuhi standar pengelolaan sampah internasional termasuk standar Uni Eropa dan EPA-Amerika Serikat. Terletak di kecamatan Cileungsi, Bogor, perusahaan memiliki 50 ha tempat pembuangan sampah yang mempunyai kapasitas total lebih dari 3 juta ton (pada saat kunjungan tim Bank Dunia, hanya 2 ha yang telah dipakai). Lapisan gabungan ganda, dibangun dari tanah liat bentonit dan polietilen kepadatan tinggi (HDPE),
28
Review akan meliputi semua update termasuk kedalam nya usulan perubahan desain tanggul penutup utara (per Maret 2011), yang mana rekomendasi dari tim Bank Dunia telah dimasukan kedalan usulan tersebut sebelum diajukan Ancol ke BPLHD
32
membatasi dasar tanah tempat pembuangan sampah, yang mencegah lindi mengkontaminasi lingkungan sekitar. Sampah baru ditutup dengan tanah atau material sintetis setiap hari. Sekali daerah tempat buang sampah kapasitasnya penuh, kemudian ditutup dengan tanah liat dan HDPE untuk mencegah air merembes ke dalam sel tempat sampah tertutup. Berdasar pada penilaian cepat di lokasi, dikonfirmasi bahwa fasilitas PPLi memenuhi aturan nasional dan propinsi dan lebih penting lagi bahwa ia masih memiliki cukup kapasitas untuk menerima sampah berbahaya (jika ada ditemukan selama pelaksanaan proyek). Proyek mengalokasikan dana untuk menjamin agar dalam kejadian yang hampir tak mungkin sehingga sampah endapan berbahaya ditemukan dan BPLHD memutuskan agar sampah harus dibuang di fasilitas PPLi, maka dana tersedia untuk maksud ini. •
TPA Bantar Gebang (untuk Pembuangan Sampah Padat). Lokasi pembuangan Bantar Gebang terletak di daerah sekitar satelit Kota Bekasi, kira-kira 35 km di timur Jakarta. Tempat pembuangan sampah ini dimiliki oleh Pemerintah Propinsi DKI Jakarta dan telah beroperasi sejak 1989 dan meliputi luas 110,3 hektar. Lokasi ini secara eksklusif menerima sampah padat domestik dari DKI Jakarta yang kira-kira 5000 t/hari, dari total 6000 ton sampah padat yang dihasilkan per hari di DKI Jakarta. Untuk tiap ton sampah, DKI membayar komisi Rp. 100.000 untuk operator lokasi (berdasar pada kunjungan lokasi waktu Desember 2010). Fasilitas ini dirancang untuk menangani 19 juta m3 sampah dan sejak pembukaannya, kira-kira 10 juta m3 sampah telah dibuang di Bantar Gebang. Lokasi ini dikelola oleh perusahaan pribadi, yaitu kerjasama PT Gudang Tua Jaya dan PT Navigat Organis Energy Indonesia (di bawah pengawasan Dinas Kebersihan DKI Jakarta). Dalam dua tahun dari masa 15 tahun kontraknya (kontrak berakhir pada tahun 2023), operator lokasi telah menambahkan beberapa fasilitas baru, yang meliputi (i) Pembangkit listrik tenaga sampah-metan (disain untuk 23 megawatt), (ii) Fasilitas pupuk kompos (kapasitas 500 ton per hari); dan (iii) tempat pembuangan sampah sanitary baru. Mengenai Proyek ini, PMU dan Bank Dunia bersama-sama telah mengunjungi lokasi dan mengkonfirmasi bahwa TPA ini mempunyai kapasitas untuk menerima 95000 m3 sampah padat yang akan disingkirkan dari kali, kanal dan waduk-waduk selama pelaksanaan Proyek dan bahwa lokasi mempunyai ijin operasi yang sah (Surat Gubernur Jawa Barat Nomor 593.82/SK282.P/AGK/DA/86 tertanggal 25 Januari 1986 jo. 593.82/SK.116.P/AGK/DA/261987) dan sesuai dengan aturan lokal. Pelaksanaan pengelolaan dan pemantauan lingkungan dilaksanakan oleh operator lokasi dan dilaporkan secara teratur atas basis triwulan kepada BPLHD Jakarta dan BPLHD Bekasi.
69. Uji tuntas lingkungan yang dilaksanakan untuk lokasi proyek pembuangan diringkaskan dalam Tabel 3-1.
33
Tabel 3-1 Ringkasan Proses Uji Tuntas Untuk Lokasi-Lokasi Pembuangan Nama Proyek Lokasi Buang
Jenis Proyek sampah yang dibuang di fasilitas ini
Status Operasi selama Persiapan Proyek
Lokasi CDF Ancol (119 ha)
Material Kerukan Tak Bahaya (non B3)
Pada saat persiapan proyek, disain rekayasa CDF Ancol sedang difinalkan dan fasilitas sedang dibangun, dengan target selesai pada Desember 2011.
Persyaratan Lingkungan Proyek
Perbaikan ANDAL, RKL dan RPL disetujui pada Maret 2009 (BPLHD)
Ringkasan Tindakan Uji Tuntas dari Bank Dunia
• •
Laporan tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol
•
•
• • • •
•
TPA Bantar Gebang
PPLi
Sampah Padat yang dibuang dari lokasi proyek
Fasilitas yang berfungsi, beroperasi sejak tahun 1989
Material endapan kerukan yang Berbahaya, B3 (jika ditemukan).
Fasilitas berfungsi, beroperasi sejak 1994
Fasilitas konstruksi atas Keputusan Gubernur Jawa Barat No:593.82/SK/282.P/AGK/ DA/86 tertanggal 25 January 1986 jo. 593.82/SK.116.P /AGK/DA/26-198729. AMDAL disetujui pada bulan Juli 1993 (Kepala Badan Pengendalaian Dampak Lingkungan Kep36/BAPEDAL/07/1993)30
29
• •
Memeriksa AMDAL (termasuk menyewa konsultan independen untuk melakukan pemeriksaan) Memeriksa disain CDF (dan perubahan disain selanjutnya) Melakukan (dengan BPLHD provinsi) tugas pengawasan lingkungan bersama pada pekerjaan yang sedang berlangsung (kunjungan bersama terakhir: November 2010). Lanjutkan kunjung lokasi selama persiapan proyek untuk memeriksa konstruksi CDF yang sedang berlangsung. Memeriksa EA Suplemen. Memeriksa dan menilai mutu sedimen di lokasi JUFMP. Memeriksa dan menilai dampak di lokasi dari sumber material untuk CDF (yaitu pasir dan tanah liat merah) BD adakan diskusi teknis dengan PT. PJA, DKI dan pemegang saham lain tentang semua aspek disain dan konstruksi CDF Ancol. Pemilik CDF Ancol, PT PJA setuju proyek Konsultan Pengawas (SC), juga untuk mengawasi dan memantau pelaksanaan EMP di Ancol. Ini dimasukkan dalam TOR SC. Mengunjungi TPA untuk memeriksa ijin operasi dan lingkungan dan menilai kapasitas/kecukupan. SC juga akan mengawasi dan memantau kepatuhan kegiatan proyek ini di fasilitas Bantar Gebang.
•
Mengunjuni fasilitas untuk memeriksa operasi, izin-izin lingkungan dan memeriksa kapasitas/kemampuan. • SC akan mengawas dan memantau untuk kesesuaian kegiatan-kegiatan proyek pada fasilitas PPLi. Ini termasuk dalam TOR SC.
Kemudian karena persyaratan aturan AMDAL Indonesia pertama, yaitu Peraturan Pemerintah No: 29 tahun 1986 tentang Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan. Dinas Kebersihan DKI melakukan Studi AMDAL dan AMDAL disetujui pada 1989. 30 http://www.menlh.go.id/i/art/pdf_106745998.pdf
34
3.5.2 Dokumen perlindungan sosial 70. Untuk memenuhi persoalan kebijakan perlindungan ini dan untuk menjamin hal tersebut pelaksanaan kegiatan proyek yang akan dilaksanakan dengan cara bermasyarakat yang berkelanjutan, DKI Jakarta telah menyiapkan Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF). Kebijakan kerja menanggapi hak-hak WargaTerkena Proyek (WTP) yang adalah penghuni tanah negara atau pemerintah juga hak-hak WTP yang dipengaruhi oleh pembebasan tanah yang dimiliki pribadi, rasional untuk kompensasi bagi aset-aset yang hilang pada ongkos pemindahan, ketentuan khusus untuk menanggapi kelompok-kelompok rentan, dan bantuan untuk pemulihan penghidupan. RPF akan menuntun persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) di lokasi-lokasi proyek di mana pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa diharuskan (termasuk lokasi-lokasi terkait). Pasal 8 memberikan diskusi yang lebih rinci tentang pendekatan proyek untuk perencanaan pemukiman kembali dan pemukiman kembali, termasuk pengelolaan dampak sosial dan aspek-aspek penting dari proses, prosedur dan pelaksanaan RPF dan RP.
3.5.3 Persiapan dan penyampaian dokumen-dokumen perlindungan 71. Sesuai dengan persyaratan Indonesia dan Bank Dunia, dokumen perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial untuk masing-masing pekerjaan dan lokasi akan dibuka. Berdasarkan rangkaian pelaksanaan proyek dalam dua tahap, yaitu Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2, diperkirakan berbagai pekerjaan Tahap 2 akan dimulai -- kira-kira 12 sampai 18 bulan setelah persetujuan proyek (lihat Bagian 2.4 untuk penjelasan rangkaian sebagai mekanisme pengelolaan risiko pelaksanaan kunci). Infrastruktur pengelolaan banjir di Jakarta berada dalam kondisi yang jelek akibat tidak adanya operasi pemeliharaan dan tidak optimalnya fungsi drainase setempat. Kondisi ini menjadikan dampak kerusakan akibat banjir menjadi tidak terprediksi (terutama selama musim banjir tahunan) 31 . Untuk itu, perubahan disain dalam merespon perubahan kondisi yang terus menerus selama implementasi proyek sangat mungkin terjadi, yang konsekuensi nya memerlukan revisi terhadap dokumen perlindungan. Sebagai akibatnya, kualitas implementasi dan hasil lingkungan dan sosial terkait pekerjaan Tahap 2 hanya dapat dijamin melalui rangkaian persiapan, penyampaian, dan pelaksanaan AMDAL dan RP yang sama. Dokumen perlindungan lingkungan yang berlaku yang berhubungan dengan Tahap 1 pekerjaan akan dibuka sebelum penaksiran32. ESMF dan RPF akan meliputi persyaratan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial pekerjaan Tahap 2, dan akan menuntun persiapan, finalisasi dan pelaksanaan dari Tahap 2 terkait AMDAL dan RP. AMDAL dan RP Tahap 2 akan diselesaikan selama pelaksanaan proyek (sebelum pekerjaan terkait dimulai) dan akan melalui proses pemeriksaan dan ‘tidak ada keberatan’ dari Bank Dunia sebelum pembukaan dan pelaksanaan. Pelaksanaan pekerjaan pada suatu lokasi hanya akan dimulai jika Bank DUnia telah memberikan “ketidak-beratan” pada dokumen AMDAL dan RPK untuk lokasi tersebut. ESMF dan RPF, dan juga AMDAL dan RPK terkait akan disediakan di lapangan yakni POSKO, yang akan dibuat pada setiap lokasi sebelum pelaksanaan pekerjaan. 72. Tabel 3-2 meringkaskan status pembukaan paket dokumen proyek perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial. Rencana persiapan untuk Tahap 2 yang berhubungan dengan AMDAL dan RPK (serta waktu pelaksanaan Tahap 2) disajikan dalam Lampiran 2 31
Secara umum, musim hujan tahunan berlangsung pada bulan November sampai April, kejadian banjir adalah tahunan, namun selama satu dekade terakhir banjir yang terjadi semakin meningkat daya rusak nya 32 Kegiatan Tahap 1 tidak meliputi pemukiman ulang secara terpaksa.
35
Tabel 3-2 Ringkasan Dokumen Lingkungan dan Sosial dan Status Pembukaan Item
Proyek
Pekerjaan Tahap 1
Dokumen
Setuju / Periksa
Ringkasan Terpadu Analisis Dampak Lingkung an
Bank Dunia review: (Juni 2011) Draft
Kerangka Pengelola an Lingkung an dan Sosial (ESMF)1
World Bank periksa: (Jan 2011) Draft (Juni 2011) Draft
Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukima n kembali (RPF)2
World Bank periksa: (May 2011) Final
AMDAL3
BPLHD setuju: (March 2010) Final World Bank review: (Jan 2011) Final
Laporan Tambahan Tahap 1
World Bank review: (Jan 2011)
Bahasa Dokumen Tersedia secara lokal
Tanggal Pembukaa n pada publik
Bahasa Indonesia & Inggris
29 Jul 2011
English
26 Jan 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & English
29 Jul 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & English
7 Jul 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & Inggris
30 Mar 2010
Bahasa Indonesia & Inggris
26 Jan 2011
Bahasa Inggris
26 Jan 2011
36
Metode/Jalan untuk Pembukaan
Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, 1818 H Street N.W., Washington DC 20043. (iii) Website Bank Dunia Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, 1818 H Street N.W., Washington DC 20043. (iii) Website Bank Dunia DKI: (i) website DKI (ii) Lokasi Proyek (kantor kelurahan) Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) Website Bank Dunia BPLHD: Copy cetakan ada di kantor BPLHD DKI Jakarta, Nyi Ageng Serang Building, lantai 10 , Jalan Rasuna Said, Kuningan, Jakarta Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) Website Bank Dunia Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia:
JUFMP
CDF Ancol
Revisi AMDAL4
Laporan Tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol
Draft (Juni 2011) Draft BPLHD setuju: (March 2009) Final World Bank periksa: (Jan 2011) Final
World Bank periksa: (Juni 2011) Final
Bahasa Indonesia & English
29 Jul 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & Inggris
30 Mar 2010
Bahasa Indonesia & Inggris
26 Jan 2011
Bahasa Indonesia & Inggris
1
29 Jul 2011
(i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) Website Bank Dunia BPLHD: Copy cetakan ada di kantor BPLHD DKI Jakarta Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) Website Bank Dunia Kementerian PU: (i) Website Kementerian PU. Bank Dunia: (i) Public Information Center (PIC) di Jakarta, Indonesia, (ii) The Info Shop, Washington DC. (iii) Website Bank Dunia
AMDAL untuk pekerjaan Tahap 2, dan dokumen perlindungan yg diharuskan lainnya, akan dibuka dgn cara yg sama dgn Tahap 1. Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) jika diperlukan pada lokasi Tahap 2, akan dibuka dengan cara yang sama seperti RPF. 2 AMDALterdiri dari ANDAL, RKL dan RPL. 4 Di bawah sistem Indonesia, semua perbaikan pada AMDAL dilaksanakan melalui dokumen perbaikan RKL/RPL, yang disetujui oleh BPLHD. 2
3.6
Rancangan Kelembagaan
73. Di luar dari seluruh rancangan kelembagaan dan pelaksanaan proyek, Bank Dunia dan Pemerintah Indonesia telah membuat rancangan yang lebih singkat secara khusus untuk pengelolaan lingkungan dari proyek selama pelaksanaan. Ini dijelaskan di bawah ini.
3.6.1 Rancangan Kelembagaan (Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2) 74.
Seluruh rancangan kelembagaan untuk proyek diringkaskan sebagai berikut:
37
Gambar 3-2 Ilustrasi Rancangan Pelaksanaan Proyek (di luar rancangan pembuangan)
75. Panitia Pengarah Bersama. Panitia penasehat tingkat tinggi, Panitia Pengarah Bersama (JSC) dibentuk awal pada persiapan proyek untuk menjaga persiapan dan pelaksanaan proyek dan untuk menyediakan koordinasi dan bantuan nasehat pada tingkat kebijakan. Sampai saat ini, JSC telah efektif dalam peran ini. JSC dipimpin oleh Bappenas 33 dan terdiri dari perwakilan-perwakilan Kementerian Keuangan, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum, dan DKI Jakarta. JSC akan berlanjut untuk memberikan pengawasan tingkat tinggi selama pelaksanaan proyek.
33
Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional.
38
76. Unit Pelaksanaan Proyek (PIU) dan Unit Pengelolaan Proyek (PMU). Ada tiga Unit Pelaksana Proyek di baik tingkat pemerintah pusat maupun lokal, di bawah Dirjen Sumberdaya Air, Dirjen Cipta Karya, dan DKI Jakarta. Peran utama dari tiap PIU adalah untuk melaksanakan pekerjaan pengerukan dan rehabilitasi pada kanal banjir, kanal-kanal, waduk-waduk utama terpilih yang datang di bawah tanggungjawab mereka masing-masing. Proyek meminta koordinasi erat diantara tiga agen pelaksana ini. Dirjen Sumberdaya Air akan memainkan peran sebagai Agen Pengeksekusi proyek. PMU telah ditetapkan oleh Dirjen Sumberdaya Air untuk maksud menyiapkan dan mengawasi pelaksanaan proyek. PMU terdiri dari tiga staf dari Dirjen Sumberdaya Air, tiga dari Dirjen Cipta Karya, tiga dari DKI Jakarta dan satu dari Kantor Kerjasama dan Pengawasan Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum. PMU didukung oleh satu sekretariat yang terdiri dari lima staf dari Dirjen Sumberdaya Air. Selama pelaksanaan proyek, PMU akan mengawasi dan mengkoordinasikan seluruh pelaksanaan proyek oleh tiga PIU. PMU juga akan melaksanakan kegiatan dukungan yang biasa di sepanjang proyek ini. Ini meliputi (i) seluruh konsultasi pengawasan konstruksi, (ii) Panel Pakar/Panel Tenaga Ahli, (iii) Sistem Informasi Manajemen Banjir (FMIS) dan (iv) dukungan kepada DKI Jakarta sehubungan dengan pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa dan proyek sistem penyelesaian keluhan. i.
Konsultan Pengawasan (SC). Ini adalah kontrak konsultasi kunci yang akan menjadi alat dalam mendukung seluruh pengelolaan, pengawasan dan pemantauan proyek PMU. Di mana ada penilaian kelemahan dalam kapasitas, terutama di wilayah-wilayah pengawasan rencana lingkungan proyek, pelaksanaan Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) dan Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan (GRS), Konsultan Pengawasan ditugaskan untuk memberikan kepakaran yang diperlukan untuk mendukung PMU selama pelaksanaan proyek. Ruang lingkup dari pelayanan bantuan teknis ini meliputi (i) mengawasi pelaksanaan berbagai pengerukan dan kontrak kerja konstruksi di bawah proyek meliputi di semua lokasi pembuangan, (ii) mengawasi pelaksanaan Rencana Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan (RKL/RPL) oleh para kontraktor kerja, (iii) mendukung PMU dan DKI dalam pelaksanaan Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP), dan (iv) mengembangkan dan melaksanakan mekanisme penanganan keluhan atas proyek dengan DKI. Ringkasan rincian ruang lingkup kegiatan SC disediakan dalam kotak di bawah. Kotak: Ruang Lingkup Kunci Kegiatan Konsultan Pengawasan Pengawasan Kerja Konstruksi • Memeriksa/mengecek kontrak final dengan para kontraktor. • Memeriksa/mengecek Rincian Disain Teknis dan gambar, pernyataan, metode, spesifikasi, dan jadwal kegiatan, melaksanakan survey dan penyelidikan tambahan sebagaimana diharuskan, juga melakukan perbaikan yang dianggap perlu dan untuk memperoleh persetujuan mereka oleh PMU. • Menguji semua bagian di atas material berbahaya sebelum pekerjaan pengerukan. . • Mengawasi pelaksanaan pekerjaan, termasuk (tapi tak terbatas di bawah ini): • Pengerukan (termasuk pemisahan sampah padat dari material kerukan, dan transportasinya dan pembuangannya pada TPA BG dan CDF Ancol yang disetujui masing-masing), tanggul dan rehab kanal, pompa, perbaikan dan pemeliharaan rak. • Memberi bantuan kepada PMU untuk memproses permintaan pembayaran yang dibuat oleh kontraktor seperti diharuskan. • Memelihara catatan lokasi dan menyiapkan rincian laporan kemajuan bulanan. • Menyiapkan kerja seperti gambar dan catatan dan operasi manual yang sudah dilakukan, dan menyerahkan pekerjaan lengkap kepada PMU. • Menyiapkan Laporan Komplet Praktis dan Cacat Kentara bagi tiap kontrak konstruksi yang diawasi. • Menyiapkan Laporan Lengkap Akhir dan Penyerahan bagi tiap kontrak konstruksi yang diawasi. • Mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan konstruksi di lokasi CDF Ancol selama pelaksanaan proyek,
39
dan di semua lokasi sekitarnya seperti lokasi sumber untuk pasir dan tanah merah. Memberikan bantuan teknis kepada PMU sebagaimana diperlukan dari waktu ke waktu. Ini dapat meliputi dukungan dan advis kepada PMU tentang pelaksanaan pekerjaan Proyek, terutama tentang segi teknis, semua rencana dan pembelian untuk Proyek. Pengelolaan Lingkungan • Memantau (termasuk persiapan laporan pelaksanaan RKL/RPL kwartalan) dan mengawasi tindakan perlindungan lingkungan yang diambil untuk mengendalikan kerusakan lingkungan karena konstruksi dan kegiatan pembuangan, sesuai dengan • Rencana Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan (RKL/RPL) dari tiap lokasi pekerjaan termasuk di semua lokasi pembungan. • Kerangka Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMF) dari Proyek. Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) • Mengawasi dan mendukung pelaksanaan Rencana Pemukiman kembali, yang sesuai dengan • Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP) dari tiap lokasi di mana pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa diharuskan, termasuk RP dalam kegiatan terkait, jika ada. • Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF) dari Proyek. • Memberikan bantuan teknis dan administrasi dalam pembebasan tanah dan proses pemukiman kembali Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan/Mekanisme Penanganan Keluhan • Mengembangkan dan mengoperasikan Sistem Penyelesaian Keluhan (GRS), yang akan meliputi tapi tak akan terbatas pada melayani keluhan dari Warga Terkena Proyek (WTP) dengan cara sistematis atas dasar hari demi hari; • Menanggapi keluhan di situs internet, memberitahukan mereka yang mengeluh tentang status keluhan mereka juga memberikan umpan balik atau tindakan tindak lanjut; • Membantu DKI dalam memberikan tindakan tindak lanjut yang bisa diterima atas keluhan, menjamin bahwa keputusan yang diambil berdasar proses yang terbuka, adil, tak memihak, dan dapat dipertanggungjawabkan melalui Penyelesaian Keluhan atau Penasehat Tangani Keluhan; • Beri rekom kepada penguasa DKI tentang status keluhan, dari satuan di lokasi melalui proses tingkat propinsi. Yang lain-lainnya • Memantau dan melaporkan tentang tiap kegiatan non-proyek di lokasi proyek, dan kegiatan di proyek terkait lokasi dan lokasi-lokasi yang berdekatan dengan proyek. • Mendisain, mengembangkan, dan mengoperasikan proyek sistem komunikasi dan pelaporan berdasar web/situs internet. •
ii.
34
Panel Pakar/Tenaga Ahli. Panel Pakar (POE) terdiri dari tiga ahli independen, yang dikenal secara internasional yang akan digerakkan untuk memberikan advis pada semua aspek proyek. Diharapkan bahwa POE dapat dimobilisasi saat implementasi proyek dimulai34 dan beroperasi penuh sebelum Tahap 2 dimulai. Ahli-ahli ini diharapkan terdiri dari ahli lingkungan, seorang insinyur yang berpengalaman dalam pengerukan dan pembuangan sampah, dan pakar pemukiman kembali di perkotaan. Tanggungjawab utama POE akan meliputi pemantauan dan mengevaluasi persiapan dan pelaksanaan berbagai instrumen pelindung (RPF, RP, EMP dan prosedur penyelesaian keluhan) dan menasehati PMU atas tindakan-tindakan yang akan diambil untuk memperbaiki kesetujuan. Jika diminta, POE dapat diperluas atas dasar sementara atau permanen oleh tambahan pakar untuk memberikan kepakarannya atas persoalan atau keperluan khusus, tak direncanakan atau kritis, yang bisa muncul selama pelaksanaan proyek. Tambahan pakar ini, jika ada, dapat digerakkan dengan kerangka acuan yang disetujui antara PMU, Bank Dunia, dan tiga pakar awal yang akan merupakan POE. POE akan bersidang pada interval teratur untuk memeriksa status pekerjaan yang sedang berlangsung. Bagaimanapun juga, jumpa khusus luar biasa bisa juga diadakan untuk memeriksa terutama tahap-tahap kritis dalam kegiatan teknis, lingkungan dan sosial. Semua laporan POE akan diserahkan kepada PMU dan melalui PMU kepada Bank Dunia.
Segera setelah proyek Loan Agreement efektif
40
iii.
Sistem Informasi Pengelolaan Banjir (FMIS) Ketika ditetapkan sebagai sistem yang dikelola dan dimiliki-Pemerintah, FMIS diharapkan menjadi alat pemantau dan alat penilai bagi Pemerintah mengenai pengelolaan banjir di Jakarta. Ketika proyek ini dilaksanakan, pekerjaan, perubahan, dan perbaikan pada sistem pengelolaan banjir akan menjadi masukan ke dalam FMIS. FMIS selanjutnya akan mensimulasi dan menganalisa tingkat kesuksesan pekerjaan struktural JUFMP dan untuk menentukan tingkat pencapaian dalam pengendalian banjir. Ini akan memberikan kapabilitas untuk menganalisa pengendalian banjir di Jakarta.
iv.
Dukungan bagi DKI Jakarta. Selama persiapan proyek, PMU memberikan dukungan dengan menyewa konsutan penilai dampak lingkungan dan sosial untuk memulai menggambar Warga Terkena Proyek (WTP), untuk melaksanakan sensus dan Diskusi Kelompok Fokus (FGD), dan membantu DKI Jakarta dalam konsultasi RPF. Selama tahap pelaksanaan proyek, PMU (melalui SC-nya) akan mendukung DKI dalam pendirian kantor lokasi lapangan (POSKO) sebagai bagian dari proyek Sistem Penyelasian Keluhan (GRS), dan memberikan bantuan teknis untuk POSKO.
77. DKI Jakarta. Karena Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta adalah lembaga yang bertanggungjawab bagi persoalan sosial di wilayah kota Jakarta, maka ia akan bertanggungjawab untuk semua aspek perlindungan sosial dari proyek ini termasuk proyek terkait kegiatan pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa dan proyek mekanisme penyelesaian keluhan 35 . Pelaksanaan rencana sosial di bawah JUFMP akan dilaksanakan oleh agen-agen yang sesuai dari Pemerintah provinsi DKI Jakarta.
3.6.2 Rancangan Kelembagaan (Lokasi-lokasi pembuangan) 78. Karena cara proyek distrukturkan dan rancangan legal yang telah dimasuki oleh tiap pihak, rancangan kelembagaan dan pelaksanaan untuk pengelolaan dan pengawasan lingkungan adalah berbeda untuk lokasi-lokasi proyek (yaitu kegiatan di Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2) dan untuk CDF Ancol. 79. Seluruh rancangan kelembagaan untuk proyek lokasi pembuangan telah diringkaskan dalam Bagian 2.6 (lihat khususnya Gambar 21). PT. Pembangunan Jaya Ancol (PJA). PT. PJA adalah pembangun dan pemilik CDF Ancol. Ia 80. bertanggungjawab untuk pembangunan dan pengoperasian CDF sesuai dengan, antara lain, semua persyaratan lingkungan Indonesia. Lokasi CDF Ancol adalah usaha/tahap reklamasi keempat di dalam konteks seluruh usaha reklamasi jangka panjang di wilayah Ancol di utara Jakarta yang telah dimulai pada awal 1960-an (lihat Bagian 2.6 untuk rincian tambahan). PT PJA telah memperoleh persetujuan atas AMDAL-nya dan perbaikan RKL dan RPL untuk CDF Ancol dari agen lingkungan provinsi (BPLHD). 81. Fasilitas pembuangan sampah di Bantar Gebang dan tempat sampah berbahaya di PPLi Rancangan kelembagaan bagi fasilitas-fasilitas ini telah dijelaskan dalam Bagian 2.6.
35
Proyek sistim penyelesaian keluhan tersedia untuk semua keluhan terkait proyek, termasuk berhubungan dengan pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa.
41
82. BPLHD. BPLHD Provinsi DKI adalah instansi lingkungan wilayah DKI Jakarta dengan tanggungjawab menyetujui dan menegakkan AMDAL untuk semua proyek di kota Jakarta. Juga, Badan ini bertanggungjawab untuk memantau pelaksanaan rencana pengelolaan terkait. Dalam pelaksanaan AMDAL, BPLHD DKI juga didukung oleh tingkat kota (Pemerintahan-Walikota). BPLHD DKI telah menyetujui AMDAL untuk Tahap 1 proyek ini dan untuk CDF Ancol.
3.7
Rancangan Pelaksanaan (Perlindungan Lingkungan)
3.7.1 Untuk Pekerjaan Tahap 1 dan Pekerjaan Tahap 2 83. Selama pelaksanaan proyek (yaitu selama konstruksi/pengerukan) untuk lokasi-lokasi proyek, tanggungjawab primer bagi pelaksanaan RKL dan RPL serta langkah tambahan dalam pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial sebagaimana dijelaskan dalam laporan tambahan yang didiskusikan dalam Bagian 3.5.1 akan berasal dari kontraktor-kontraktor pengerukan dan pekerjaan sipil. Persyaratan RKL dan RPL akan dimasukkan sebagai bagian dari pekerjaan sipil dan kontrak pengerukan untuk menjamin mereka sepenuhnya didanai dan mereka dapat ditegakkan secara legal. Pekerjaan sipil danj kontraktor pengerukan akan kemudian diawasi agar pelaksanaannya sesuai dengan ketentuan dalam RKL dan RPL oleh Konsultan Pengawas. Konsultan Pengawas selanjutnya akan melapor secara langsung kepada PMU. PMU akan menganggap baik Konsultan Pengawasan maupun Kontraktor Pengerukan/Pekerjaan Sipil bertanggungjawab untuk menjamin kesesuaian dengan persyaratan RKL dan RPL yang telah disetujui. 84. Bank Dunia akan bekerja melalui PMU untuk melakukan pengawasannya sendiri demi kesesuaian dengan persyaratan perlindungan lingkungannya sendiri yang juga terkandung dalam RKL dan RPL. Agen lingkungan tingkat propinsi (BPLHD) dan agen lingkungan tingkat kotamadya, tergantung pada bagian mana di kota Jakarta pekerjaan berlokasi, akan juga melakukan pemantauan kesesuaian atas pekerjaan demi kesesuaian dengan persyaratan negara dan propinsi.
3.7.2 Untuk lokasi-lokasi pembuangan (CDF Ancol, Bantar Gebang and PPLi) 85. CDF Ancol. Mengenai pemakaian proyek CDF Ancol sebagai lokasi buangan material kerukan, rancangannya agak beda karena fakta bahwa Bank Dunia tak akan memiliki hubungan legal langsung dengan PT PJA. CDF Ancol telah mempunyai RKL dan RPL sendiri yang terpisah dan berdiri sendiri yang telah disetujui oleh BPLHD DKI. Ini sesuai dengan persyaratan negara dan propinsi dan kontraktor CDF Ancol terikat untuk melaksanakan RKL dan RPL CDF Ancol di bawah undang-undang dan persyaratan negara yang harus dipatuhi. Persyaratan lingkungan ini telah dimasukkan dalam kontrakkontrak dari kontraktor pekerjaan sipil mereka yang pada saat persiapan proyek ini telah memulai konstruksi dinding sekeliling pada CDF. PT PJA melalui Unit Pembangunan Properti sedang mengawasi semua aspek (termasuk lingkungan) dari kontrak-kontrak. Sebagai tambahan, PT PJA telah merekrut satu perusahaan konsultan yang melakukan pemantauan kesesuaian tiap tiga bulan pada pekerjaan konstruksi yang sedang berlangsung. PT PJA, sesuai dengan persyaratan AMDAL Indonesia, sedang menyiapkan dan menyerahkan kepada BPLHD DKI laporan pelaksanaan RKL dan RPL36 secara kwartalan. Laporan ini berisi tindakan dan ukuran yang diambil oleh PT PJA untuk melaksanakan ketentuan yang terkandung dalam RKL dan RPL mereka yang telah disetujui. Laporan ini akan juga meliputi pelaksanaan ketentuan 36
Pada akhir Oktober 2010, PT PJA menyerahkan semua kecuali satu perbaikan RKL dan RPL ke BPLHD propinsi.
42
tambahan yang terkandung dalam Laporan tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol. Laporan pelaksanaan triwulan ini akan juga dibagi kepada Bank Dunia. 86. BPLHD DKI telah memulai pemantauan pekerjaan konstruksi yang sedang berlangsung untuk CDF Ancol dan akan berlanjut sampai selesainya proyek CDF Ancol. Selama persiapan proyek (melalui undangan BPLHD DKI) Bank Dunia telah melakukan kerjasama supervisi untuk pekerjaan yang berlansung di CDF Ancol pada saat itu37. Bank Dunia akan menlanjutkan kerjasama dengan BPLHD DKI melakukan kerjasama supervise dan pengawasan lapangan untuk CDF Ancol pada saat pekerjaan reklamasi di mana material kerukan dimasukkan dari lokasi-lokasi proyek (pekerjaan tahap 1 dan 2). Isuisu ketidak taatan yang dapat dimunculkan oleh Bank Dunia akan disalurkan melalui BPLHD DKI ke PT PJA. Bank Dunai telah melakukan kajian cepat kapasitas teknis dan keuangan38 instansi BPLHD DKI untuk dapat melakukan pengawasan CDF Ancol dan merasa puas bahwa BPLHD DKI memiliki kapasitas teknis dan keuangan dan otoritas legal yang cukup untuk menjalankan RKL dan RPL CDF Ancol. 87. Ketentuan penting berikut akan ditaruh pada tempatnya untuk mengelola, memantau dan mengawasi pembuangan material kerukan JUFMP di CDF Ancol: • 'Tidak ada keberatan' dari Bank Dunia atas kontrak pengerukan JUFMP yang hanya akan diberikan jika Bank Dunia puas dengan kelengkapan fasilitas tertutup dan telah menerima bukti memuaskan atas kepatuhan PT PJA pada persyaratan AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol termasuk kedalamnya semua update AMDAL yang telah disetujui; • BPLHD DKI akan melanjutkan untuk melibatkan Konsultan Pengawas (SC) dan Bank Dunia dalam pengawasan dan pemantauannya pada (meliputi inspeksi lokasi) pada AMDAL Ancol dan Perbaikan RKL dan RPL, dan berbagi laporan pengawasan dan pemantauan terkait kepada SC dan Bank Dunia. • PT. PJA akan membolehkan SC mengakses ke CDF Ancol dan semua lokasi jauhnya (termasuk lokasi sumber untuk pasir dan material tanah merah) untuk maksud melakukan pengawasan RKL dan RPL yang telah disetujui, Laporan Tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol, laporan Kemajuan RKL dan RPL PT PJA kwartalan dan tugas lain yang terkait dengan pembungan material kerukan JUFMP di CDF Ancol sebagaimana dikhususkan dalam kerangka acuan SC. • DKI Jakarta akan menggunakan haknya sebagai pemegang saham untuk menyebabkan PT PJA melaksanakan persyaratan (meliputi tindakan pengendalian) seperti dinyatakan dalam AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol dan Laporan Tambahan Perbaikan RKL/RPL. 88. Rancangan pelaksanaan utama, termasuk proses dan kondisi-kondisi yang mengatur pembuangan material proyek ke CDF Ancol, fasilitas TPA Bantar Gebang dan tempat pembungana limbah berbahaya PPLi, dapat disimpulkan pada Tabel 3-3 di bawah ini:
37
Pengawasan bersama tim BPLHD DKI terjadi pada 5 November, 2010. Penilaian meliputi pemeriksaan rancangan organisasional BPLHD, kwalifikasi dan kelengkapan staf, prosedur pemeriksaan dokumen dan inspeksi lokasi, juga pemeriksaan kecukupan anggarannya (yang makin bertambah selama lima tahun terakhir). 38
43
Tabel 3-3 Ringkasan Proses dan Syarat yang Mengatur Pembuangan Material Proyek Name Proyek lokasi pembuangan Lokasi CDF Ancol , 119ha
Jenis Proyek sampah yg akan dibuang pd fasilitas ini (dan perkiraan volume) material kerukan Tak Bahaya (non B3) (kira2 total 3.4m3 pada periode proyek)
Proses dan syarat bagi pembuangan
•
•
•
•
•
• Tempat Buang Sampah Bantar Gebang
Limbah Padat yang disingkirkan dari lokasi proyek (diperkirakan 95.000 m3 selama periode proyek)
•
•
•
• PPLi
Material kerukan endapan yang berbahaya, B3, (bukan material B3 diharapkan seperti dinyatakan oleh uji
•
•
Sebelum tanda tangan kontrak pengerukan, harus ada persetujuan (termasuk tidak ada keberatan dari Bank Dunia). Persetujuan yang akan diberikan sesuai dengan konfirmasi bahwa CDF Ancol telah dibangun dengan kapasitas lengkap untuk menerima material kerukan dan patuh pada (i) AMDAL yang sudah disetujui BPLHD DKI, dan (ii) Rincian Gambar Teknis yang disetujui. Sebelum pengerukan bagian pekerjaan, sampel/contoh akan diperoleh dan diuji oleh Konsultan Pengawas untuk material berbahaya. Kontraktor diharuskan memperoleh persetujuan Konsultan Pengawas (SC) sebelum mengeruk bagian pekerjaan. Persetujuan yang akan diberikan mengacu pada konfirmasi dari uji sampel pada bahan tak berbahaya. Kontraktor bertanggungjawab mentranspor material kerukan (setelah memisahkan sampah padat - lihat bawah) ke lokasi pembuangan (rencana transport harus memenuhi syarat rencana pengelolaan lalu lintas dan tunduk pada persetujuan Konsultan Pengawas). Penyerahan material ke PT PJA untuk pembuangan di CDF Ancol diatur oleh persetujuan bersama antara DKI Jakarta dan PJA. SC akan mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan di CDF Ancol. Kontraktor bertanggungjawab untuk memisahkan limbah padat dari material kerukan, tunduk pada ukuran minimum. (cara pemisahan tunduk pada persetujuan Konsultan Pengawas) Kontraktor bertanggungjawab memindahkan dan membuang material di lokasi pembuangan (rencana transport harus memenuhi syarat minimum pengelolaan lalu lintas dan tunduk pada persetujuan Konsultan Pengawas). Penyerahan material ke Bantar Gebang diatur oleh tata cara pembuangan yang ada untuk semua sampah padat yg dibuang di TPA--komisi tip yg diperlukan dibayar oleh kontraktor. SC akan mengawasi dan memantau kegiatan terkait proyek di TPA Bantar Gebang. Jika ada bagian yang diuji sebelum pengerukan yang menunjukkan adanya material berbahaya, maka Konsultan Pengawas tak akan membolehkan pengerukan dilanjutkan dan akan menginfokan kepada PIU dan PMU. Setelah mendapatkan persetujuan BPLHD, material ini akan dikeruk dan dibawa ke PPLi untuk pembuangan aman.
44
sampel selama persiapan proyek -pengenalan lokasi adalah bersifat pencegahan)
•
•
Cara pengerukan dan transportasi akan dikembangkan atas kasus per kasus sesuai dengan persyaratan khusus dan tunduk pada persetujuan awal dari MoE, PMU dan Bank Dunia. SC akan mengawasi dan memantau pembuangan material B3 JUFMP (jika ditemukan) di fasilitas PPLi.
3.1 Rancangan Pelaksanaan (Perlindungan Sosial) 89. Dalam PIU DKI Jakarta akan ada beberapa Kelompok Kerja39 (Pokja): (1) Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESWG), (ii) Pokja Pengelolaan Proyek dan Jaminan Mutu,(iii) Pokja Pemantauan dan Pelaporan, dan (iv) Pokja-Pokja lain sebagaimana diperlukan untuk meliputi semua kegiatan yang diharuskan untuk pelaksanaan JUFMP. Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial akan bertanggungjawab untuk persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali dan menjamin bahwa rencana ini dilaksanakan. Pokja Pengelolaan Proyek dan Jaminan Mutu akan bertanggungjawab untuk memeriksa Rencana Pemukiman kembali dan menjamin konsistensi dengan Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali. Pokja Pemantauan dan Pelaporan akan menyiapkan laporan bulanan atas status persiapan dan pelaksanaan Rencana Pemukiman kembali kepada Gubernur. 90. Masing-masing Walikota 40 akan mengkoordinasikan persiapan dan pelaksanaan RPK di wilayahnya masing-masing. Camat dan lurah akan menjadi ujung tombak utama dalam persiapan dan pelaksanaan RPK di lapangan. Tim Pembebasan Tanah DKI Jakarta akan melaksanakana tugas operasional seperti ditentukan dalam RPK yang disetujui. 91. Walaupun Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial secara formal dibentuk pada akhir tahun 2008, sejauh ini ia sangat tidak aktif -- sebagian karena ketidakpastian yang disampaikan oleh fakta bahwa rancangan kelembagaan dan peran dan tanggungjawab pokja PIU seperti dikonfirmasi dalam RPF, yang hingga kini masih persiapan. Persiapan RPF dan pendahuluan RP sedemikian jauh telah didukung oleh konsultan persiapan proyek yang dipakai oleh PMU. Berdasarkan finalisasi RPF (pada Mei 2011), ESWG dan pokja PIU-DKI lain diharapkan menjadi aktif dalam mengambil alih pelaksanaan hari demi hari atas kegiatan perlindungan sosial dari proyek. Di sepanjang periode pelaksanaan proyek, Konsultan Pengawas akan memberikan bantuan teknis kepada ESWG dan Pokja Pengelolaan Proyek dan Jaminan Mutu dalam melaksanakan kegiatan terkait persiapan RP, pengelolaan pemukiman kembali, jaminan mutu, dll. Konsultan Pengawas ini akan juga bertanggungjawab untuk menyediakan dan mengelola Sistem Penyampaian Keluhan (GRS)41.
39
Pokja dan keanggotaannya ditetapkan melalui Keputusan Gubernur. Keputusan Gubernur No. 1255/2008 (dikeluarkan pada 5 September, 2008) tentang pembentukan PIU DKI Jakarta menunjukkan bahwa ada tiga Pokja di bawahnya, yaitu Pokja lingkungan, Pokja Dampak Sosial, dan Pokja Perencanaan. Pada 13 November, 2008, DKI Jakarta mengeluarkan Keputusan Gubernur lagi (No. 1626/2008) untuk pembentukan Pokja Lingkungan dan Sosial dengan tugas yang lebih jelas sehubungan segi lingkungan dan sosial dari proyek. Ini juga dimaksudkan untuk melancarkan persiapan RPF. DKI Jakarta kini mendraft Keputusan baru tentang pembentukan lagi PIU, yang akan meliputi Pokja yang disebutkan dalam paragraf diatas, yang mana diantaranya mempunyai tugas melaksanakan RPF dan RP. 40 Secara administratif, DKI Jakarta dibagi dalam lima kotamadya yang masing-masing dipimpin oleh Walikota. 41 Lihat penjelasan tentang tugas dan lingkup kerja Konsultan Pengawasan pada bagian 3.6.1.
45
92. Pasal 8 memberikan diskusi yang lebih rinci tentang pendekatan proyek bagi pemukiman kembali dan rencana pemukiman kembali, rincian selanjutnya dari proses RPF dan RP, prosedur dan pelaksanaannya.
4
Rona Awal Lingkungan dan Sosial yang Relevan
93. AMDAL untuk lokasi proyek dan untuk CDF Ancol menyampaikan dan menganalisa rona awal mendalam tentang banyak parameter fisik yang relevan di wilayah-wilayah berpengaruh yang meliputi hal berikut: • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Mutu Sedimen Mutu Air Permukaan Nutrient Biologis Suhu udara Radiasi Matahari Arah dan Kecepatan Angin Mutu Udara Tingkat kebisingan Topografi Geologi tanah Flora and Fauna Pengukuran ke dalaman Sosial-ekonomi
94. Kuantitas dan kualitas dampak ditentukan dari bagaimana dan dengan cara apa kegiatan proyek mengubah kondisi data awal. Oleh sebab itu, ringkasan data awal yang mendalam yang disampaikan di bawah ini dibatasi kepada data yang paling relevan dengan dampak yang paling penting dari proyek yang berhubungan dengan pengelolaan dan pembuangan material kerukan. Ketika dampak proyek yang penting dihubungkan dengan pencemaran dari diterimanya bagian-bagian dari material kerukan, data yang disampaikan di bawah ini dibatasi oleh sebab itu kepada beban polutan dari material kerukan (yaitu baik komponen mutur air dan tanah dari material endapan).
4.1
Mutu Sedimen di Lokasi JUFMP
95. Ketika persiapan proyek berkembang, tiga penelitian dasar independen tentang mutu material endapan dalam kanal banjir dan waduk di Jakarta dilaksanakan pada berbagai horison waktu yang menilai berbagai aspek termasuk kelengkapan sampel dan cara uji yang dipakai, hasil uji, dan kelengkapan persyaratan Indonesia terhadap berbagai standar internasional lainnya. Hasil pemeriksaan adalah sebagai berikut:
46
4.1.1 ERM42 2008 96. Penelitian mutu sedimen ERM 2008 menggambarkan penelitian mutu sedimen yang pertama dan mendalam dan utama terinci untuk kanal banjir dan waduk di Jakarta, dan banyak mendukung rncana awal bagi proyek JUFMP termasuk Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol dan AMDAL Tahap 1 JUFMP. Sampel meliputi semua lokasi proyek (yaitu 15 lokasi) tambah tiga lainnya awalnya dalam daftar panjang proyek JUFMP potensial tapi kemudian disingkirkan. Jumlah total sampel komposit yang dianalisa ada 36 dari 180 stasion sampel tambah sampel duplikat untuk jaminan mutu dan kendali mutu. Sampel-sampel yang dikumpulkan dikirim ke laboratorium yang diakui internasional (yaitu ALS di Bogor, Indonesia) untuk analisa fisika dan kimia. Analisa parameter kimiawi didasarkan pada penuntun teknis praktek terbaik internasional untuk karakterisasi material kerukan (Konvensi London 1972 43 ; OSPAR 2004), yang meliputi logam berat, total hidrokarbon minyak (TPH), hidrokarbon aromatik polisiklik (PAH), pestisida organo-klorida (OCP), bifenil poliklorinasi (PCB) dan total unsur organik. Sebagai tambahan, prosedur TCLP berdasarkan USEPA SW 846 44 juga dilaksanakan untuk menentukan karakteristik racun dari sedimen. Hasil-hasil ini disimpulkan dalam Tabel 4-1.
4.1.2 DHV 2008 97. Pada tahun 2008 DKI Jakarta bekerjasama dengan DHV (dengan bantuan dana pemerintah Belanda melakukan beberapa pengerukan rintisan di Kali Mati, kali kecil di Jakarta (bukan bagian dari proyek). Sebagai bagian dari penelitian ini, total 8 sampel komposit dari sembilan stasion sampel dikirim ke lab yang diakui internasional (yaitu ALS Bogor) dan dianalisa untuk semua uji yang diminta aturan Indonesia untuk identifikasi sampah berbahaya/B3, yaitu (i) pemeriksaan dan uji fisik (yaitu mudah terbakar, berkarat, meledak, infeksi (hanya untuk sampah medis), reaktif) (ii) tes kimiawi (analisa isi total dan TCLP untuk polutan organik dan non organik); dan (iii) uji biologi (dosis Lethal 50 - LD 50). Sebagai tambahan, sampel komposit dari Kali Mati juga dikirim ke lab yang diakui internasional di Belanda (yaitu Eurofin) untuk maksud cek-silang.
4.1.3 AMDAL untuk kegiatan Tahap 2, sampel dan analisa 2010 98. Pada tahun 2010 serangkaian penelitian mutu sedimen utama lanjutan pada pekerjaan Tahap 2 yang diusulkan dilakukan sebagai bagian persiapan AMDAL untuk pekerjaan Tahap 2 ini. Daerah-daerah yang disampel juga meliputi tiga lokasi yang sekarang dikeluarkan dari proyek. Sampel gabungan (9 subsampel tiap komposit -- 3 baris kira-kira 100-200 m jauhnya, tiga sampel melintasi tiap baris) dikumpulkan sambil mempertimbangkan kedua lokasi sampel ERM dan terkini (seperti pada waktu sampel) dari batas fisikal tiap wilayah sub-proyek. Analisa dengan lab diakui internasional menggunakan cara standar lokal, konsentrasi pada (i) karakteristik fisikal, (ii) total logam, (iii) logam TCLP dan (iv) organik TCLP. Dengan demikian penelitian mutu sedimen khusus pada kanal banjir dan waduk-waduk dilakukan pada tahun 2008 dan 2010 melibatkan lebih dari 350 sub-sampel yang dihimpun dalam total 70 sampel untuk Prosedur Pencucian Karakteristik Racun (USEPA) dan total logam dan analisa organik. Hasil-hasil ini diringkaskan dalam Tabel 4-2.
42
Bank Dunia pada tahun 2008 menugaskan ERM untuk melakukan uji ini. http://www.imo.org/includes/blastDataOnly.asp/data_id%3D17020/I-DredgedMaterial.pdf 44 http://www.epa.gov/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/chap7.pdf 43
47
4.1.4 Hasil dan Interpretasi 99.
Hasil dan interpretasi dari semua tiga penelitian adalah sama dan didiskusikan menyangkut: Uji TCLP. Ini adalah uji kimiawi definitif di Indonesia dan tempat lain untuk menetapkan apakah material sampah dianggap beracun atau dalam istilah lain apakah ekstrak mengandung tingkat organik dan logam di atas "Batas Aturan" yang ditentukan. Semua sampel dari tiga penelitian ini memenuhi standar. Organik TCLP. Kembali semua sampel dari tiga penelitian memenuhi standar Indonesia. Analisa logam total menunjukkan hampir semua sampel memenuhi tingkat pemeriksaan "mutu tanah" internasional untuk hampir semua logam. Hasil disampaikan dan didiskusikan lebih rinci di bawah. Uji racun akut (yang dilaksanakan pada sampel DHV) menunjukkan bahwa menyangkut dosis lethal (LD 50) sedimen kerukan mempunyai racun rendah, lebih rendah dari racun akut garam tablet (NaCl).
•
• •
•
Tabel 4-1 Data ERM 2008 tentang tingkat pemeriksaan pemakaian tanah yang relevan (in mg/kg) Parameter
Max
Min
US EPA PRGs, R9, Industri Tingkat periksa
a
No§
US EPA PRGs, R9, Perumahan No§
Tingkat periksa
Dutch Intervention Values (DIV) Tingkat intervensi
No§
Korea (SEPA)
NODGDMa
No§
Tingkat periksa
No§
50
0
70
0
Tingkat periksa
Arsenic (As)
23
2
55
0
Barium (Ba)
246
9
67000
0
5400
0
625
0
Cadmium (Cd)
14
4
450
0
37
0
12
1
30
0
10
2
500
1
270
1
370
1
1
3
Copper (Cu)
1080
6
41000
0
3100
0
190
2
Chromium (Cr) Mercury (Hg)
1260
27
450
1
210
3
380
1
3.17
0.02
310
0
23
0
10
0
Nickel (Ni)
161
6
20000
0
1600
0
210
Lead (Pb)
268
0
800
0
400
0
530
Zinc (Zn)
701
38
100000
0
23000
0
720
40
0
0
400
0
52
4
0
1000
0
220
2
0
2000
0
410
16
Tingkat pemeriksaan sedimen sementara Australia-Selandia Baru untuk Penuntun Pembuangan Laut Negara bagi Material Kerukan.
§ Jumlah sampel melebihi standar
100. Pemeriksaan ini menyimpulkan bahwa sampel dan cara uji memenuhi standar internasional dan hasil test menunjukkan bahwa sampel memenuhi standar internasional, kecuali yang berikut: •
Tingkat arsen dalam semua sampel melebihi standar tingkat pemeriksaan untuk satu standar EPA yang dipakai untuk menskrining polutan di media lingkungan45, walaupun semua sampel sesuai dengan tingkat pemeriksaan arsen internasional lainnya46. Penilaian lanjutan menyatakan bahwa standar EPA Amerika Serikat adalah pembanding tak cocok karena ia berasal diturunkan atas risiko kesehatan khususnya pada arsen anorganik, sementara uji sampel dan tingkat pemeriksaan internasional lain untuk arsen didasarkan pada tingkat arsen total. Perbandingan dengan penelitian
45
US EPA Wilayah 9 Tujuan Remediasi Awal (PRG) tingkat yang dipakai untuk memperkirakan konsentarsi kontaminan dalam media lingkungan (tanah, udara dan air) yang EPA anggap protektif pada manusia (termasuk kelompok peka), selama seumur hidup. 46 Standar Tanah di Korea Selatan ditentukan dalam Hukum Pemeliharaan Lingkungan Tanah (SEPA), DIV, dan Panduan Pembuangan Laut di Australia-Selandia Baru untuk standar Material Kerukan.
48
•
•
sedimen lebar-Teluk Jakarta lebih awal menyatakan juga bahwa sampel uji menyatakan tingkat arsen terjadi secara alamiah di seluruh wilayah dan tak mempunyai asal antropogenic. Empat puluh persen sampel melampaui tingkat pemeriksaan sedimen sementara Australia dan Selandia Baru untuk seng bagi pembuangan di laut, walaupun semua sampel di bawah tingkat pemeriksaan tanah lain untuk seng. Risiko ini dikendalikan oleh pembuangan material kerukan proyek pada fasilitas pembuangan tertutup, yaitu di CDF Ancol. Kira-kira 2 % sampel melampaui tingkat pemeriksaan bagi satu atau dua (tapi tak semua) standar internasional untuk salah satu dari krom, cadmium, atau tembaga. Risiko ini akan dikendalikan oleh pendahuluan protokol untuk uji kanal dan bagian waduk sebelum pengerukan pada bagian itu sebagai tambahan pencegahan47.
Tabel 4-2 Data AMDAL Tahap 2 (2010) menimbang tingkat periksa pemakaian tanah (dalam mg/kg) Parameter
Max
Min
US EPA PRGs, R9, Industri Tingkat Periksa
Tingkat Perika
No§
Arsen (As)
11,32
0,84
Perak (Ag)
0
0
5100
0
390
0
Boron (B)
3,68
0
100000
0
16000
0
Barium (Ba)
68,3
2,14
67000
0
5400
Cadmium (Cd)
10,04
0
450
0
Tembaga (Cu)
78,31
1,75
41000
Chromium (Cr)
64,21
0,03
450
0
0
16,5
0
96,35 0 262,13
Mercury (Hg) Nickel (Ni) Lead (Pb) Selenium (Se) Seng (Zn) a
No§
US EPA PRGs, R9, Perumahan
Nilai Intervensi Belanda (DIV) Tingkat Intervensi
No§
Korea (SEPA)
Tingkat Skrining
50
NODGDMa
No§
Tingkat Skrining
No§
0
70
0
3,7
0
55
0
15
0
0
625
0
37
0
12
0
30
0
10
2
0
3100
0
190
0
500
0
270
0
0
210
0
380
0
370
0
310
0
23
0
10
0
40
0
1
0
20000
0
1600
0
210
0
400
0
52
0
1,2
800
0
400
0
530
0
1000
0
220
0
0
5100
0
390
0
100
0
40,23
100000
0
23000
0
720
0
2000
0
410
0
Tingkat pemeriksaan sedimen sementara Australia-Selandia Baru untuk Penuntun Pembuangan di Laut Negara untuk Material Kerukan
§ Jumlah sampel melebihi standar
101. Pemeriksaan penilaian mutu sedimen juga mempertimbangkan risiko kesehatan yang diberikan oleh tingkat air raksa dalam sedimen. Hasil tingkat racun akut mengidentifikasi material sedimen sebagai relatif tak berbahaya (yaitu jumlah sedimen sangat tinggi untuk dicerna untuk menghasilkan dosis mematikan. Penilaian kemungkinan terpapar sedimen pada pekerja konstruksi juga kemungkinan terpapar karena pemakaian nanti atas lokasi pembuangan dapat juga menyimpulkan bahwa risiko kesehatan adalah rendah, terutama diberikan persyaratan dalam AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol untuk penutupan material pembuangan dengan pasir dan tanah liat.
47
Uji demikian sebelumnya tidak dipraktekkan di Jakarta dan pelaksanaan berhasil dasi protokol ini bisa berguna untuk memperbaiki pengelolaan material kerukan di masa yang akan datang. Ringkasan protokol dapat ditemukan dalam "Laporan Konsolidasi Mutu Sedimen JEDI"
49
4.2
Mutu Sedimen di Ancol
102. Hasil dari pengukuran mutu sedimen di laut sekitar daerah penelitian yang dilakukan oleh lab yang diakui nasional, yaitu PT Unilab Perdana ditunjukkan dalam Tabel 4-3. Tabel menunjukkan bahwa isi logam berat pada sedimen air laut sekitar daerah penelitian Ancol adalah rencah dan masih jauh di bawah Aturan Pemerintah tentang Batas Aturan TCLP No. 19 Tahun 1999 jo. 85 Tahun 1999. Tabel 4-3 Hasil Ukuran Mutu Sedimen Laut (oleh TCLP, USEPA) di sekitar Daerah Penelitian No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Parameter Cadmium (Cd) Total chromium (Cr) Copper (Cu) Iron (Fe) Lead (Pb) Manganese (Mn) Mercury (Hg) Nickel (Ni) Zinc (Zn)
Standar Mutu*) 1,0 5,0 10,0 5,0 0,2 50,0
Unit mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
Hasil Pengukuran < 0,005 < 0,05 < 0,003 < 0,001 < 0,001 < 0,001 < 0,001 < 0,001 0,07 - < 0,008
Sumber: PT. Unilab Perdana (2004)
103. Mutu sedimen di dinding timur CDF Ancol. Bagian dari dinding timur CDF dimulai awal dalam tahap konstruksi untuk membentuk bagian akses konstruksi/wilayah panggung untuk konstruksi CDF secara keseluruhan. Berdasarkan bahwa ini bagian relatif kecil dari dinding timur dibangun dengan material sedimen sebelum daerah ini ditutup dan berdasarkan bahwa material ini tak akan disingkirkan tapi akan membentuk bagian dari pekerjaan permanen, Bank Dunia meminta agar material ini diuji. Sampel inti diambil dari dinding dan diuji dan hasilnya menegaskan bahwa tidak ada substansi berbahaya yang terkandung dalam material ini. Test ini menunjukkan konsistensi dengan hasil uji mutu sedimen dari AMDAL Tahap 1, dan menegaskan absennya material berbahaya (B3).
4.3
Mutu Air di Lokasi-lokasi JUFMP
104. Diringkaskan di bawah ini pada Tabel 4-4 ada tabel mutu air untuk salah satu waduk, Cengkareng, dalam kegiatan Tahap 1. Tabel 4-4 menunjukkan bahwa, yang khas dari waduk-waduk lain dalam pekerjaan Tahap 1 juga (tidak disampaikan disini) menunjukkan pengukuran sejumlah parameter yaitu Permintaan Oksigen Kimiawi atau Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Permintaaan Oksigen Biokimia atau Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), minyak dan lemak, deterjen dan substansi organsik pada lokasi sampel tertentu yang melebihi standar-standar yang ditetapkan oleh Keputusan Gubernur DKI Jakarta No. 582 tahun 1995. 105. Pengukuran pH pada semua lokasi sampel menunjukkan nilai-nilai di dalam standar. Ini menyatakan tingkat keasaman normal. Analisa mikrobiologi menunjukkan kesesuaian dengan standar oleh Keputusan tahun 1995. Standar COD yang diatur oleh Keputusan 1995 adalah 30 mg/L. Hasil laboratorium menunjukkan bahwa nilai dalam hampir semua lokasi sampil melebihi atau sama dengan standar, kecuali 50
pada SCA48 1 (Saluran Cengkareng). Nilai BOD masih di dalam standar yang ditetapkan yaitu 20 mg/L dalam hampir semua lokasi sampel kecuali di Waduk Melati dan SSA-3 (Sungai Sunter-Sentiong49). Hasil analisa isi unsur organik menyatakan bahwa nilai permanganates lebih tinggi dari standar 25 mg/L dalam hampir semua lokasi sampel. Isi organik tinggi dapat disebabkan oleh akumulasi sampah rumah tangga atau kegiatan lain di sekitar lokasi sampel. Total Material Padat yang Disuspensi (Total Suspended Solid)/TSS adalah salah satu indikator mutu air yang berhubungan dengan penampilan fisik dan kekeruhan. Material yang disuspensi mempunyai efek buruk pada mutu air karena ia mengurangi penetrasi sinar matahari ke dalam badan air, menambah kekeruhan air yang membatasi pertumbuhan organisma. Kekeruhan erat berhubungan dengan konsentrasi material yang disuspensi dalam air. Material yang disuspensi dalam air secara khas terdiri dari endapan lumpur, tanah liat dan lumpur sebagai material anorganik alam atau dalam bentuk organik material yang mengambang dalam air sebagai sumber alamiah dan sampah yang dihasilkan dari kegiatan manusia seperti kegiatan industri, pertanian, atau kegiatan rumah tangga. Hasil analisa TSS pada semua sampel menunjukkan kesesuaian dengan standar yang ditetapkan.
48
SCA adalah lokasi-lokasi sepanjang kali atau kanal dimana uji sampel dikumpulkan. Data dari Waduk Melati dan SSA-3 (Sungai Sentiong-Sunter) tidak disampaikan disini tapi nilai BOD tertinggi pada lokasi disini adalah 59 mg/l di Waduk Melati dan nilai tertinggi adalah 23 mg/l.
49
51
Tabel 4-4 Mutu Air Hasil Analisa: Cengkareng Drain No A.
Fisik
PARAMETERS
UNITS
Standard *)
SCA 1
SCA 2
SCA 3
1 2 3 4 B.
Temperature (in situ) **) Total Dissolved Solid (TDS) Total Suspended Solid (TSS) **) Conductivity (EC) Kimiawi
0C mg/L mg/L µmhos/cm
Normal 200 200 1000
30,6 90 56 187
30,0 107 23 223
28,2 179 30 371
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 C.
Mercury (Hg) Arsenic (As) Boron (B) Cadmium (Cd) Cobalt (Co) Chromium VI (Cr 6+) Manganese (Mn) **) Sodium (Na) Dissolved Oxygen (DO) (in situ) pH (in situ) **) Selenium (Se) Zinc (Zn) Nickel (Ni) Sulphate (SO4) **) Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) Copper (Cu) **) Lead (Pb) Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) Minyak dan Lemak Detergent (MBAS) Phosphate (PO4-P) **) Permanganates (KMnO4) **) BOD5 COD **) MIKROBIOLOGI
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L % mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L me/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
0,0005 0,050 1,0 0,010 0,020 0,050 1,0 50,0 3,0 6,0-8,5 0,050 1,0 0,10 100 1,25-2,50 0,10 0,10 10,0-18,0 None 0,50 0,50 25,0 20 30
< 0,0005 < 0,005 < 0,01 < 0,003 < 0,02 < 0,01 < 0,02 49,3 3,8 7,51 < 0,002 < 0,01 < 0,02 18,8 0,53 < 0,02 < 0,01 0,8 < 0,2 0,10 0,06 13,4 8 28
< 0,0005 < 0,005 < 0,01 < 0,003 < 0,02 < 0,01 < 0,02 49,5 3,4 7,67 < 0,002 < 0,01 < 0,02 19,2 0,51 < 0,02 < 0,01 0,9 < 0,2 0,06 1,23 14,9 9 30
< 0,0005 < 0,005 < 0,01 < 0,003 < 0,02 < 0,01 < 0,02 50,2 2,8 7,75 < 0,002 0,01 < 0,02 27,2 2,44 < 0,02 < 0,01 1,1 < 0,2 0,07 0,29 17,3 11 36
1 e. coli No./100ml 4.000 70 4.600 1.500 2 Total Coliform No./100ml 20.000 2.400 11.000 1.500 Cat. dari hasil analisa PT. UNILAB PERDANA: *) = Keputusan Gubernur DKI Jakarta No. 582 thn 1995 tentang Pemakaian dan Standar Mutu Air untuk Sungai/Badan Air dan Air Sampah di DKI Jakarta; **) = Parameter diakui oleh KAN No. LP-195-IDN; < = kurang dari; Sampel dikumpulkan pada 12 November 2009.
4.4
Mutu Air Laut Ancol
106. Berdasar pada Tabel 4-5, semua air laut di daerah penelitian baru-baru ini ada dalam kondisi yang cukup baik. Hampir semua parameter fisik, kimiawi dan mikrobiologi yang diukur masih di bawah standar mutu dan sesuai dengan Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan No. Kep-51/MENLH/2004 untuk penunjukan Biota Laut.
52
Tabel 4-5 Hasil Pengukuran Mutu Air di Daerah Penelitian No.
Parameter
Unit
A.
FISIKAWI
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Kecerahan (di tempat) Bau (di tempat) Kekeruhan Padat tergantung (TSS) Suhu (di tempat)
Meter NTU mg/L
6. 7. B.
Minyak Film (di tempat) Sampah (di tmpt) KIMIAWI
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. C.
Standar Mutu *)
Hasil Pengukuran **) AL-3 AL-4
AL-1
AL-2
3.0 Natural 4 12
0.20 Natural 4 16
2.0 Natural 4 8
AL-5
AL-6
2.0 Natural 3 8
2.1 Natural 2 6
2.0 Natural 3 8
32
32.9
32.0
31.8
31.7
31.8
-
>6m Natural <5m 20 Natural +3oC Nil Nil
Negative Negative
Negative Positive
Negative Positive
Negative Negative
Negative Negative
Negative Negative
pH (di tempat) Salinitas Oksidan larut (OD) di tempat BOD Total ammonia (NH3-N) Phosphate (PO4-P) Nitrate (NO3-N) Cyanide (CN) Sulfide (N2S) Phenol Surfactant anion (MBAS) Oil & Grease Mercury (Hg) Chromium VI (Cr6+) Arsenic (As) Cadmium (Cd) Copper (Cu) Lead (Pb) Zinc (Zn) Nickel (Ni) MIKROBIOLOGI
0/00 mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
7 - 8.5 Coral:34 >5 20 0.3 0.015 0.008 0.5 0.01 0.002 1.0 1.0 0.001 0.005 0.012 0.001 0.008 0.008 0.05 0.05
8.2 32.0 5.1 4.2 0.04 0.02 < 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001 0.22 < 0.2 < 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0326 < 0.002
8.2 33.1 6.2 4.9 0.05 0.02 < 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001 0.25 < 0.2 < 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0331 < 0.002
8.4 33.2 6.3 4.3 0.03 0.02 < 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001 0.23 < 0.2 < 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0329 < 0.002
7.9 33.2 6.4 4.6 0.07 < 0.0.1 < 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001 0.20 < 0.2 < 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0334 < 0.002
8.0 33.2 6.4 4.4 0.05 < 0.0.1 < 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001 0.18 < 0.2 < 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0330 < 0.002
7.9 33.2 6.3 4.5 0.05 < 0.0.1 < 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.001 0.19 < 0.2 < 0.0005 < 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.005 0.0331 < 0.002
1.
Coliform (total)
Nil
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.
Bakteri patogen
MPN/ 100ml Cell/ 100ml
Nil
0
0
0
0
0
0
Catatan:
*) **) AL1 AL2 AL3 AL4 AL5 AL6
= = = = = = = =
o
C
Kep-51/MENLH/2004 (Marine Biota) Laboratorium PT. Unilab Perdana (August 2005) Lokasi Proyek di garis Pantai Barat Lokasi Proyek di garis Pantai Tengah Lokasi Proyek di garis Pantai Timur Garis Pantai Barat (+ 1000 M dari garis pantai) Garis Pantai Tengah (+ 1000 M dari garis pantai) Garis Pantai Timur (+ 1000 M dari garis pantai)
107. Parameter yang melebihi standar mutu meliputi material sampah padat pada lokasi AL-2 (lokasi proyek garis pantai Tengah) dan lokasi AL-3 (lokasi proyek garis pantai Timur) dan fosfat di lokasi AL-1, AL-2, dan AL-3 (masing-masing di garis pantai Barat, Tengah dan Timur) yang ditemukan sedikit di atas standar mutu. Sampah padat yang ditemukan dalam kuantitas kecil di lokasi observasi pada umumnya dihasilkan oleh para pengunjung yang kadang-kadang membuang sampah dari makanan dan minuman mereka ke dalam air. Fosfat dapat dihasilkan oleh binatu yang memakai sabun/deterjen. Hasil pemantauan mutu air pada periode 2007-2008 di teritori air Timur Barat Ancol ditunjukkan pada Table 4-6 .
53
Tabel 4-6 Hasil Pemantauan Air Laut pada periode 2005-2008 di Air Laut Ancol Parameter Kekeruhan (NTU)
TSS (mg/L)
pH
Tahun Agt 2005 Agt 2007 Apr-08 Agt 2005 Agt 2007 Apr-08 Agt 2005 Agt 2007 Apr-08
AL1 4
AL2 4
AL3 4
AL4 3
AL5 2
AL6 3
13 14 12 7 14 8,2 7,6 7,9
16 11 16 5 10 8,2 7,49 7,92
13 10 8 5 9 8,4 7,7 7,93
14 9 8 5 12 7,9 7,53 7,99
16 8 6 6 8 8 7,53 7,93
13 8 8 4 10 7,9 7,62 7,97
108. Berdasar pada hasil pemantauan rutin pada umumnya adalah terbukti bahwa nilai kekeruhan terkini di sekitar lokasi proyek telah melebihi standar mutu yang ada (Keputusan Menteri Lingkungan No. Kep-51/MENLH/2004 (Standar Mutu Biota Laut). Di wilayah Ancol, fenomena kematian ikan terjadi beberapa kali karena ledakan pertumbuhan populasi pada saat-saat tertentu. Ini disebabkan akumulasi nutrien khususnya pada musim kering. 109. Di pihak lain, hasil dari pemantauan mutu air laut di sekitar lokasi proyek yang dilaksanakan oleh BPLHD DKI pada periode 2003-2004 menyatakan hal berikut: • Suhu bervariasi dari 28,82 sampai 30,09oC. • Salinitas bervariasi dari 29,00 o/oo sampai 30,09 o/oo. • Kecerahan bervariasi dari 1,5 meter sampai 3,0 meter. • Phenol bervariasi dari < 0,001 mg/L sampai < 0,002 mg/L. • Minyak dan Lemak bervariasi dari < 0,2 sampai < 0,3. • Oksigen larut bervariasi dari 3,5 mg/L sampai 4,5 mg/L. • Detergent bervariasi dari 0,21 sampai 0,32 mg/L. • BOD bervariasi dari 6,8 sampai 25,0 mg/L. • COD bervariasi dari 33,7 sampai 46,3 mg/L. • Mercury bervariasi dari tak terdeteksi sampai < 0,005 mg/L. • Cadmium bervariasi dari tak terdeteksi sampai < 0,0005 mg/L. • Lead bervariasi dari < 0,003 sampai < 0,005 mg/L. 110. Pada umumnya, hasil pemantauan BPLHD DKI untuk periode 2003-2004 menyatakan bahwa mutu air laut di sekitar lokasi proyek masih baik. 111.
Mutu Air, Kebisingan dan lokasi sampel Air Laut ditunjukkan pada Gambar 4-3.
54
Gambar 4-1 Mutu Air, Kebisingan dan Lokasi Sampel Air Laut
4.5
Biota Laut Ancol
4.5.1 Plankton 112. Plankton merupakan sekelompok mikroorganisme yang hanyut di badan air dan tak mampu bergerak melawan arus air. Plankton dikategor dalam dua kelompok, yaitu fitoplankton dan zooplankton. Phytoplankton mempunyai peranan dalam air sebagai penghasil primer bagi ekosistem air karena peran utamanya sebagai penyedia makanan (gizi) bagi konsumen (zooplankton, ikan, dll.). Phytoplankton yang ditemukan di daerah penelitian terdiri dari 44 jenis dari 4 kelas, yaitu Cyanophyta, Chrysophyta, Chlorophyta dan Pyrophyta dengan tingkat indeks keragaman antara 3,4 dan 3,8. Perbandingan tingkat indeks keragaman phytoplankton dalam daerah penelitian bervariasi dari 0,82 sampai 0,90 yang menyatakan bahwa ia tersebar cukup merata dan tidak ada jenis yang amat dominan. Ini sesuai dengan hasil penelitian mutu air laut di daerah studi yang juga menyatakan kondisi baik. Komposisi jenis zooplankto di air daerah penelitian terdiri dari 4 kelask, yaitu Arthropoda , Protozoa, 55
Annelida dan Protochordata. Tingkat keragaman jenis Zooplankton bervariasi antara 0,90 dan 0,94, yang menyatakan bahwa ia tersebar cukup merata dan tak ada jenis yang sangat dominan.
4.5.2 Benthos 113. Benthos terdiri dari semua organisme yang hidup di atau di atas dasar laut. Peranan benthos di air adalah sangat penting, diantara hal lain sebagai dekomposer substansi organik yang ada di air dan sebagai indikator biologis dalam kejadian penurunan mutu air ekosistem. Berdasar pada pengamatan benthos di sekitar daerah penelitian, ada dua jenis benthos, yaitu Annelida dn Mollusca. Keragaman benthos di daerah penelitian digolongkan sebagai rendah ke sedang, dengan tingkat indeks keragaman antara 1,60 dan 2,10, sementara tingkat indeks keragaman antara 0,70 dan 0,85 (tak merata dan tersebar cukup merata).
4.6 Dasar Sosial Ekonomi 4.6.1 Populasi 114. Tim penugasan Bank melaksanakan penilaian sosial (pendahuluan) cepat pada tahun 2008 melalui kunjungan lapangan, pengamatan dan wawancara tak terstruktur dengan anggota masyarakat terpilih di sepanjang dan di dekat lokasi proyek. Penilaian sosial yang lebih terstruktur meliputi potensi dampak sosial kemudian dilakukan oleh tim konsultan penilaian dampak lingkungan dan sosial yang disewa oleh PMU selama 2009-2010 sebagai bagian persiapan AMDAL untuk lokasi Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2 dan Rencana Pemukiman kembali masing-masing. Studi penilaian sosial yang cepat dan AMDAL untuk lokasi Tahap 1 dilakukan dalam situasi di mana Rincian Disain Teknis (Detailed Engineering Design / DED) belum disiapkan, dan lokasi AMDAL Tahap 2 dilaksanakan paralel dengan persiapan DED. Dalam hal apapun, penilaian dampak sosial untuk semua lokasi dilaksanakan tanpa konfirmasi batas proyek di lapangan, dan oleh sebab itu penggambaran daerah dampak dari tiap lokasi proyek didasarkan pada penilaian profesional terbaik yang mungkin dari tim konsultan. 115. Secara administratif, lokasi proyek terletak di 57 kelurahan (desa kota) sebagai bagian dari 19 kecamatan di empat kotamadya, yaitu Jakarta Utara, Jakarta Timur, Jakarta Pusat, dan Jakarta Barat. Kira-kira 1,8 juta orang (Tabel 4-7) tinggal di 57 kelurahan. Kepadatan rata-rata adalah 166 orang per Ha. Daerah miskin kumuh kebanyakan terletak di sepanjang Kanal Banjir Barat, Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng, Sunter-Atas, dan Krukut-Cideng. Jumlah penduduk di lokasi terkait diperkirakan 173.000 orang.
4.6.2 Karakteristik Sosial-ekonomi Populasi 116. Selama proses AMDAL 487 orang di daerah administratif di mana 15 lokasi proyek terletak telah diwawancarai. Tidak semua menanggapi semua 29 pertanyaan, dan beberapa informasi tak tersedia. Walaupun demikian, laporan memberikan informasi berguna tentang karakteristik sosial-ekonomi orangorang di daerah di mana lokasi proyek terletak.. Kira-kira 86 % dari yang diwawancarai berkata bahwa proyek ini akan mengatasi banjir dan sisanya percaya bahwa proyek ini akan menciptakan lingkungan yang bersih. Kira-kira 62% responden telah tinggal di daerah ini selama lebih dari 10 tahun dan lebih dari 57% keluarga terdiri dari 3-5 anggota. Kira-kira 35% keluarga mengaku bahwa mereka awalnya dari DKI Jakarta, hampir 90% dari yang diwawancarai memiliki KTP DKI Jakarta, sementara 2,3% memegang kartu identitas DKI sementara. Lebih dari 17% adalah penyewa dan sekitar 77% memiliki rumah mereka 56
sendiri yang mereka sedang tinggali. Kira-kira 80% dari yang diwawancarai mengaku bahwa mereka tak punya rumah lain. Kira-kira 20% terwawancara mengaku bahwa mereka sedang tinggal di tanah pemerintah. Lebih lanjut, lebih dari 70% bangunan adalah permanen. Hanya kira-kira 12% terwawancara bekerja di sektor formal seperti pegawai pemerintah dan pegawai sektor swasta. Sisanya bekerja di sektor primer, buruh, sopir, pedagang, dll. Beberapa dari mereka mempunyai kerja sampingan. Kira-kira 73% terwawancara mengaku bahwa keluarga mereka berpenghasilan kurang dari 330 US$ per bulan atau kirakira 11 US$ per hari, atau sedikit lebih dari 2 US$ per orang. Kira-kira 11,5% berpenghasilan kurang dari 56 US$ per keluarga per bulan, yang mana ini jauh di bawah upah minimum provinsi DKI Jakarta (2010), yaitu 130 dollar Amerika per bulan. Tabel 4-7 Populasi di Daerah-Daerah di mana Proyek Kanal Banjir, Waduk Dilokasikan Paket 1 (DKI) 2a (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 2b (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 3 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 4 (DKI)
5 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 6 (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 7 (DKI)
Lokasi Terkait Lokasi Terkati Lokasi Terkait Lokasi Terkait
Note 1 Note 2
Lokasi Kanal Banjir Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Kanal Banjir Cengkareng (termasuk sisi laut)
Jumlah Kecamatan 2 1 4
Daerah Administratif Jumlah Populasi Kelurahan Daerah 6 156.663 2 39.650 7 251.312
Kepadatan(orang/Ha) 100 201 91
Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah Note 1
2
6
230.742
204
Kali Cideng Thamrin (kali Jalan Lingkar)
3
6
92.668
190
Kali Sentiong-Sunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (jalan keluar air waduk) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Waduk Tanjungan Kali Angke Bawah
4 1 1 1 2 3
9 2 2 2 2 5
277.610 78.383 119.283 70.696 64.842 184.345
192 282 108 305 90 140
Kanal Banjir Barat (sisi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas Note 1
1 1
2 4
65.027 130.630
390 215
Kali Grogol – Sekretaris Kali Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Kali Krukut Cideng Note 2 Kali Krukut Lama Note 2
2 3 2
6 8 5
160.174 153.709 80.470
125 476 201
Total
2.156.202
166
Total tanpa overlap kelurahan
1.794.096
Kali Sentiong-Sunter: Kali Item, Sunter Kemayoran Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari : Ancol-SC. Bandan, Ancol Gudang Panjang Sunter Atas: Kanal Sepanjang Jl. Kayu Putih Timur Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng : Anak K. Ciliwung Utara, Jl. Tubagus Angke, PHB Bandengan Utara, Waduk Pluit Total
1
3
21.445
184
1
1
17.378
46
1
1
Tidak ada data
2
8
Tidak ada data 134.381 173.204
98
Untuk maksud kontrak, Kanal Banjir Sunter dibagi dua sub-paket – Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas dan Bawah. Untuk maksud kontrak, Kali Krukut Drain dibagi dua sub-paket – Kali Krukut Cideng and Kali Krukut Lama
57
89
117. Kira-kira 73 % responden mengakui bahwa mereka telah mengalami banjir di wilayahnya dalam 5 tahun terakhir; 16 % mengaku bahwa mereka banjir tiap tahun. Kira-kira 57 % responden berkata bahwa air banjir masuk ke dalam rumah mereka. Lebih jauh lagi, 41 % terwawancara mengaku bahwa ketinggian air di dalam rumah kira-kira 20-50 cm; 50 % berkata bahwa air turun lebih dari 24 jam. Yang menarik, kira-kira 68% responden tidak pindah selama banjir. Hanya 6,2 % terwawancara mengaku bahwa anggota keluarga terkena sakit setelah banjir. Kira-kira 53% terwawancara mengaku bahwa mereka memiliki pasokan air dari PDAM (perusahaan air yang dimiliki DKI Jakarta), dan 41% membeli air dari galon dan penjual. Hanya 0,8% terwawancara mengaku bahwa mereka membuang sampah mereka ke dalam gerobak sampah. Hanya 2,5 % berkata bahwa mereka melakukan pemisahan sampah sebelum membuang sampah mereka. Menarik dicatat bahwa hampir 73% terwawancara mengaku bahwa orang-orang yang bertanggungjawab dalam pengumpulan sampah tidak secara teratur mengumpulkan sampah.
5 Ringkasan Potensial Dampak Lingkungan dan Sosial yang Signifikan 5.1 Dampak Lingkungan sehubungan dengan kegiatan proyek JUFMP 118. Sebagaimana disampaikan pada Bagian 3.3., proyek ini diharapkan memberikan dampak positive. Walaupun demikian, implementasi proyek berpotensi ula menimbulkan dampak negative. Sehubungan analisis dampak negative ini, AMDAL Tahap 1 telah memfokuskan pada (i) kegiatan pengerukan dan dampaknya di kanal dan waduk, dan (ii) dampak sehubungan dengan penyingkiran, simpan sementara, transport ke titik-titik masuk lokasi pembuangan akhir dan jenis lain penanganan material sedimen yang disingkirkan. Untuk dampak-dampak ini, pokok-pokoknya dijelaskan secara singkat dalam Tabel 5-1 dan didiskusikan dalam sub-bagian berikut. Tabel 5-1 Ringkasan Kegiatan yang Menyebabkan Dampak dan Dampak Langsung Lokasi Kanal dan Waduk
Akar Penyebab Dampak Hasil Kuantitas Penting Material Kerukan. Kirakira 3.4 juta m3 sedimen dan 95,000 m3 material sampah padat akan dikeruk. Disain teknis yang tak cukup potensi dan pengelolaan dan pengawasan lemah pada proses kerukan.
Kegiatan Penyebab Dampak •
Kerukan – penyingkiran sedimen dan sampah padat dari kanal dan waduk yg terpolusi.
Dampak Langsung
• • • • •
•
Operasi Alat Kerukan di daerah padat penduduk dan relatif tertutup.
58
• •
Polusi Kebisingan Signifikan Dampak Getaran Signifikan Reduksi Mutu Udara karena keluarnya partikel debu dan bau busuk. Polusi tanah dan penerima muka air dari polutan/material cucian dari material kerukan. Kesehatan Publik menyangkut air dan penyakit dibawa udara. Kemacetan arus dan pola Lalu lintas di daerah padat & berjejalan penduduk. Langsung segera bertambahnya aliran mengikuti kerukan ke muara/teluk Jakarta
•
Lokasi Buang Akhir
Khususnya menyangkut CDF Ancol
Kelola tak layak dan tak cukup di Lokasi Buang. Potensi disain teknis yang tak cukup di lokasi-lokasi ini.
Penanganan, Penempatan dan Pengangkutan Material Kerukan ke Lokasi Pembuangan Akhir. Penanganan dan Penempatan Kuantitas Besar Material Kerukan di Lokasi Pembuangan Akhir.
•
• • • • • •
Potensi tak cukup pengawasan operasi di lokasi.
•
Utara dari kanal dan waduk karena tambahan aliran dan laju luah menambah polusi di daerah teluk. Pengelolaan kebersihan yg tak layak di Kamp Konstruksi.
Mutu Udara Buruk karena keluarnya partikel debu dan bau busuk pada masyarakat terdekat. Polusi air dan reseptor tanah dari material kerukan cucian. Kesehatan Publik di masyarakat terdekat. Perubahan pasang surut & arus. Sedimentasi/Pengendapan. Gangguan Biota Laut. Menurunnya Mutu Air Laut.
5.1.1 Gangguan lalu lintas signifikan. 119. Dampak pada lalu lintas dihubungkan dengan pembukaan jalan karena mobilisasi alat berat dan transport kerukan material (sampah padat dan sedimen). Selanjutnya, mobilisasi peralatan dapat menyebabkan gangguan permukaan jalan karena tumpahan dan kelalaian. Gangguan lalu lintas serius yang dihasilkan dari bertambahnya alat konstruksi berat dan truk-truk besar yang mengangkut sedimen dan material sampah padat ke dan dari lokasi pembuangan, mengakibatkan waktu perjalanan yang lebih lama bagi pengguna jalan pada jalan yang telah sangat padat di daerah populasi amat berjejalan, menghasilkan pertambahan suasana tingkat kebisingan yang mempengaruhi fasilitas publik seperti sekolah dan tempat ibadah, pengeluaran gas polutan sisa pembakaran dan partikel debu termasuk Karbon Monoksida (CO) dan sulfur dioksida (SO2) berakibat pada menurunnya mutu udara. Sebagai contoh, AMDAL untuk kegiatan pada tahun pertama memperkirakan bahwa kegiatan pengerukan di lokasi-lokasi ini akan menambah rotasi kendaraan per jam, selama 360 hari, dengan 2-8 truk per jam. Untuk memitigasi dampak terhadap gangguan lalulintas, Rencana Pengelolaan Lalulintas akan disiapkan dan diimplementasikan, sebagaimana didiskusikan dalam Bagian 7.2.
5.1.2 Menurunnya mutu udara dan bau busuk. 120. Dampak pada mutu udara karena mobilisasi peralatan dan operasi mesin dan alat berat, dan transportasi darat menggunakan truk dari lokasi pengerukan ke CDF Ancol dan lokasi pembuangan lainnya. Pengerukan dan pemisahan material sampah besar pada lokasi Tahap 1 diperkirakan akan mengurangi mutu udara dan menambah tingkat bau. Tanpa pengelolaan yang layak, material kerukan dapat membuat lingkungan sekitar lokasi proyek menjadi tak bersih dan menyebabkan bau busuk. Ketika lokasi pengerukan kebanyakan di daerah berpenduduk padat (perumahan, perusahaan, dll.), dampaknya pada mutu udara dan bau meminta perhatian khusus. Dampak intensitas tinggi ini, mempengaruhi sejumlah besar orang dan komponen lingkungan lainnya. Meskipun demikian, dampaknya dalam waktu singkat (selama pengerukan dan pemisahan material kerukan besar) dan hanya akan menjadi dampak terbatas yang bersifat kumulatif. 121. Gangguan dari tingkat kebisingan karena mobilisasi peralatan dan operasi mesin-mesin dan alat-alat berat, dan transportasi darat menggunakan truk dari lokasi pengerukan ke CDF Ancol dan lokasi pembuangan lainnya. Kegiatan pengerukan (pengerukan, penyortiran dan pemisahan) akan dilaksanakan selama hari siang, sementara transportasi ke lokasi 59
pembuangan akan dilakukan pada malam hari sehingga tidak memperburuk kemacetan lalu lintas tapi ini akan memperburuk efek pertambahan tingkat kebisingan suara. Suasana tingkat kebisingan yang telah diukur selama siang hari di proyek tingkatnya telah melampaui standar yang dapat diperkenankan dan pekerjaan pengerukan mungkin akan menambah tingkat ini lebih tinggi yang menyebabkan intensitas kebisingan yang lebih tinggi di daerah proyek. Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan dan Sosial (ESMP) Kontraktor JUFMP akan memuat ketentuan mengenai konsultasi masyarakat untuk menginformasikan ke masyarakat mengenai rencana kerja dan mendikusikan langkah yang diambil untuk meminimalkan dampak yang tidak terhindari, seperti dampak sementara dari penurusan kualiats udara dan meningkat nya kebisingan.
5.1.3 Perubahan tingkat debit air 122. Dampak pada tingkat debit air karena kegiatan pengerukan akan menambah kapasitas kanal banjir dan waduk, yang sebagai akibatnya menambah tingkat debit dan mengurangi risiko banjir – dampak positif. Pada periode paska-proyek, pemeliharaan kerukan akan memelihara kapasitas kanal banjir dan waduk-waduk agar supaya melanjutkan mengurangi risiko banjir.
5.1.4 Perubahan mutu air permukaan. 123. Dampak pada mutu air karena kegiatan pengerukan sehingga akan menambah isi TSS dan sebagai akibatnya dapat mengganggu biota air. Meskipun demikian, pengerukan akan mempengaruhi tingkat debit air kanal banjir/kanal dan waduk yang dikeruk. Volume kerukan kira-kira 3,4 m3 diantisipasi akan menyebabkan paling kurang kira-kira 50% pertambahan di tiap kapasitas badan air, yang mana sebagai konsekwensinya akan menambah aliran air kira-kira 50%. Oleh sebab itu, risiko banjir akan dikurangi. Ini akan menjadi dampak positif jangka-panjang dan intensitas-tinggi, dan dampak positif ini tak akan terbatas pada tiap daerah proyek.
5.1.5 Perubahan mutu air laut 124. Perubahan pada mutu air laut dianggap sebagai dampak turunan dari perubahan mutu air hulu selama kegiatan pengerukan. Karena sifat kegiatan pengerukan, mutu air permukaan pada tiap lokasi akan terdampak dalam bentuk pertambahan TSS. Konsentrasi TSS dasar menyatakan pencapaian standar yang ditetapkan dan kegiatan pengerukan dapat menambah konsentrasi TSS. Dampak ini dapat mempengaruhi sejumlah besar orang dan komponen lingkungan lainnya. Sementara dampak ini merupakan dampak yang tidak dapat dihindari, dampak ini diprediksikan akan terjadi pada intensitas rendah dengan distribusi yang terbatas pada setiap lokasi, dan juga bersifat sementara dan reversible.
5.1.6 Pertambahan sampah padat 125. Dampak potensial pada sampah padat karena pengerukan dan transport material kerukan yang dapat menyebabkan tumpahan limbah padat dan endapan di sekitar lokasi proyek. Ini sebagai akibatnya dapat berdampak pada kesehatan publik dan memimpin pada persepsi publik yang negatif terhadap kegiatan pengerukan. Pengerukan dan pemisahan material sampah besar pada Tahap 1 diperkirakan akan menambah limpah padat. Tanpa pengelolaan yang wajar, material kerukan dapat membuat lingkungan sekitar lokasi proyek menjadi tak bersih dan menyebabkan bau busuk. Ketika lokasi pengerukan kebanyakan di daerah berpenduduk padat (perumahan, perdagangan, dll.), dampak limbah padat meminta perhatian khusus. Dampak ini berintensitas tinggi, mempengaruhi sejumlah besar orang dan komponen lingkungan lainnya. Akan tetapi, dampak-dampak ini berjangka waktu singkat (selama pengerukan dan 60
pemisahan material besar) dan hanya akan menjadi dampak terbatas yang bersifat kumulatif. Mitigasi dampak ini termasuk konsultasi dengan masyrakat dan transport limbah padat ke tempat pembuangan akhir yang baik, sebagaimana menurut pengelolaan lalulintas kontraktor yang disetujui.
5.1.7 Dampak pada Biota 126. Biota darat . Dampak pada tanaman di darat bisa terjadi pembersihan lahan sebelum pengerukan dimulai (untuk mobilisasi tenaga kerja dan alat berat). Berdasarkan studi rona awal, tiga species tanaman pohon utaman ditemukan dalam lokasi pengeruhan yaitu pisang, mangga dan beringin. TIdak terdapat species endemic ataupun species yang dilindungin berdasarkan IUCN. Sekali pengerukan diselesaikan daerah pengerukan akan direhabilitasi. 127. Biota Air. Dampak terhadap biota akuatik termasuk penghilangan biota benthos (yang terkena pengerukan) dan gangguan sementara terhadap komunitas ikan. Walaupun demikian, studi rona awal menunjukan bahwa kali dan waduk dalam lingkup proyek telah tercemar. Hanya terdapat satu macrobenthos, yakni kelas gastropoda (keong) yang diketahui hidup di ekosistem tercemar. Sementara itu, ikan yang paling sering ditemukan adalah ikan sapu-sapu yang dapat hidup dalam lingkungan hamper tak ada oksigen terlarut.
5.1.8 Dampak pada Kesehatan Publik dan kebersihan lingkungan 128. Dampak kesehatan publik dan sanitasi adalah karena kegiatan pengerukan dan transport material kerukan ke lokasi pembuangan. Dampak yang akan terjadi sesaat ini termasuk kemungkinan turunnya kualitas udara (karna meningkatnya debu dan bau) di area tinggal penduduk dalam radius kira-kira 100 m atau daerah pengerukan serta koridor jalur transport yang akan digunakan. Mitigasi yang diambil untuk mengurangi dampak ini disajikan di Bagian 5.1.1. dan 5.1.2. .
5.2 Dampak Proyek JUFMP pada CDF Ancol 129. Dampak sehubungan dengan pembuangan material sedimen tak berbahaya sekali ia memasuki pintu gerbaang CDF Ancol dan bagaimana ia dikelola dari titik point ini hingga bagaimana ia akhirnya dibuang dalam proses yang melibatkan penempatan akhir, pemadatan dan penutupan material ini ke dalam perimeter 119 ha di CDF Ancol adalah tunduk pada AMDAL (ANDAL/RKL/RPL) terpisah dan berdiri sendiri untuk CDF Ancol yang disiapkan oleh PT PJA sebagai pemilik ijin CDF Ancol. Dampak utama yang ditulis dalam AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol, yang semuanya saling-terkait, adalah: •
Perubahan pada pola pasang surut dan arus air - AMDAL memperkirakan bahwa konstruksi dan operasi CDF Ancol akan mungkin menuntun pada hanya perubahan kecil untuk pola arus pantai di sekitar lokasi proyek. Hasil dari simulasi hidrodinamik yang dilaksanakan menyatakan bahwa reklamasi/penimbunan di daerah proyek tak akan secara signifikan mengubah pola arus. Pada umumnya, pola dominan arus di sekitar lokasi proyek tetap sama, yaitu dari arah Barat-Baratlaut ke arah Timur-Timurlaut. Akan tetapi, kecepatan arus akan bertambah dari 1,52 m/detik menjadi 1,45 m/detik. Di pulau reklamasi sebelah barat, kecepatan arus agak bertambah, sementara di sisi baratlaut, arus mengurangi kecepatan. Hasil dari simulasi hidrodinamik pada Rencana Reklamasi Ancol Barat yang dilakukan sebagai bagian dari AMDAL menyatakan hal berikut: (i) Tak ada perubahan signifikan dalam pola dan kecepatan arus sebelum dan sesudah reklamasi. Arus di dekat lokasi reklamsi melambat kira-kira + 5cm/detik (tak penting). (ii) Distribusi sedimen yang dimodelkan selama reklamasi menyatakan pertambahan isi sedimen sebesar 33 mg/L (tak 61
penting), dan (iii) Perubahan ukuran ke dalaman yang dimodelkan menunjukkan bahwa ke dalaman air hanya berubah sedikit centimeter (tak penting). •
Kegiatan Sedimentasi - Reklamasi akan menuju kepada sedimentasi sebagai hasil dari keseimbangan alam yang terganggu, terutama sehubungan dengan perubahan dalam pola arus pantai. Sementara itu, konstruksi pemecah ombak akan berfungsi sebagai penghalang gelombang laut dan mengurangi potensi abrasi dan sedimentasi di lokasi proyek dan sekitarnya. Hasil simulasi pola arus setelah kegiatan reklamasi menyatakan pertambahan kecepatan arus di tanah reklamasi sebelah timur. Ini berarti bahwa pengikisan secara potensial akan terjadi pada pulau reklamasi baratlaut karena arus di lokasi yang disebutkan melemah. Dampak pengikisan dan sedimentasi akan selanjutnya mempengaruhi mutu air laut dan biota laut.
•
Degradasi Mutu Air Laut - Kegiatan penimbunan/reklamasi yang menggunakan pasir, endapan kerukan, dan tanah merah akan menambah kekeruhan dan TSS pada air sekeliling, yang berpotensi hingga 5 kali jika dibandingkan sebelum kondisi proyek (yaitu CDF Ancol). Ada juga keprihatinan tambahan bahwa kegiatan dari kira-kira 400 pekerja bangunan akan menghasilkan kotoran yang mungkin tak cukup dikelola dan ditampung. Pada akhirnya, kondisi-kondisi ini akan juga mempengaruhi kehidupan biota laut, keindahan lingkungan, kebersihan lingkungan dan persepsi publik pada proyek. Gangguan pada Biota Laut - Menurunnya Mutu Air karena bertambahnya pengendapan, penimbunan daerah reklamasi dengan pasir dan material kerukan dan konstruksi tenda limbah padat dan kotoran akan secara potensial mempunyai dampak penting pada biota laut. Antisipasi dampak pada biota laut (plankton, benthos dan nekton) merupakan dampak langsung dan tak langsung. Kegiatan penimbunan tak hanya akan secara langsung menuntun kepada pencekikan habitat biota laut di daerah reklamasi, tapi juga secara tak langsung menambah kekeruhan dan TSS di wilayah air sehingga menghalangi penetrasi sinar matahari ke dalam air dan menghambat proses fotosintesa fitoplankton dan mengurangi isi oksigen larut dalam wilayah air yang akan mempengaruhi kehidupan benthos dan nekton.
5.3 Dampak Offsite dari CDF Ancol 130. Sebagai tambahan dari 3,4 juta m3 material kerukan dari proyek ini, konstruksi dinding perimeter dan penimbunan di CDF Ancol akan meminta kira-kira 8,6 juta m3 pasir. Sesuai dengan RKL dan RPL yang telah disetujui, pasir ini akan diperoleh dari sumber laut, di Daerah Banten di pantai Utara Jakarta. Lokasi ini di mana pasir akan diperoleh telah mempunyai Ijin Lingkungan50. Disain teknis menunjukkan bahwa material sedimen akan membentuk lapisan paling dasar dari daerah timbunan, yang mana kemudian akan dilapisi oleh lapisan pasir yang akan ditutup dengan material tanah laterit/merah. Volume tanah merah yang diminta kira-kira 400.000 m3 yang akan diperoleh dari sumber tanah dekat Bekasi, Jawa Barat yang juga beroperasi di bawah ijin lingkungan51. Sehingga untuk pengelolaan resiko reputasi karena dampak diluar tapak proyek (Offsite impacts), telah disepakati dengan PT Pembangunan Jaya
50
Sesuai dengan RKL dan RPL yang disetujui, ijin lingkungan untuk daerah laut Banten untuk memberikan pasir adalah (i) Kabupaten Serang No 666/750/LKH tanggal 15 April 2005 dikeluarkan untuk PT Gora Gahana dan (ii) Komisi Amdal Pertambangan dan Energi Pusat Nomor 5038/0115/SJ.T/199 tanggal 5 Desember, 1994 dikeluarkan untuk PT SAC Nusantara. Ijin membolehkan perusahaan mengeksploitasi kira-kira 10 juta m3 pasir dari daerah 1056 ha. 51 Ijin Lingkungan untuk sumber tanah merah akan diperiksa oleh Konsultan Pengawas.
62
Ancol bahwa Konsultan Supervisi JUFMP akan melakukan pengawasan dan monitoring aktivitas yang terjadi di luar tapak proyek ( Yakni lokasi sumber pasir dan laterite)
5.4 Dampak Proyek JUFMP pada fasilitas Bantar Gebang dan PPLi 131. Dampak sehubungan dengan pembuangan material limbah padat di TPA Bantar Gebang dan material sedimen berbahaya/B3 (jika ditemukan) di fasilitas PPLi bukanlah subyek AMDAL terbaru, karena lokasi-lokasi ini kini telah ada dan sudah dipakai selama bertahun-tahun dan dianggap sedang beroperasi atas dasar ijin lingkungan. Meskipun ini, dampak proyek pada fasilitas-fasilitas ini dapat meliputi secara potensial dan secara bertahap; timbulnya lindi, hasilan dan pengeluaran metan yang tak terkendali, hasilan bau busuk dan reduksi lanjutan pada mutu udara.
5.5 Dampak-dampak Sosial 5.5.1 Lokasi-lokasi WTP (Warga Terkena Proyek) 132. Proyek ini diharapkan untuk menghasilkan dampak positif sebagaimana didiskusikan dalam Bagian 3.4. Walaupun demikian, implementasi proyek ini juga mungkin menimbulkan dampak sosial negative. Dampak sosial potensial dapat dikategorikan ke dalam terkait pemukiman-ulang (sejak kini disebut lokasi-lokasi WTP) dan persoalan sehubungan non-pemukiman-ulang (seterusnya disebut lokasilokasi non-WTP). Survey sensus pendahuluan dilaksanakan di lokasi proyek antara April sampai Oktober 201052. Karena rincian batas-batas wilayah pekerjaan proyek belum difinalisasi pada saat itu, sensus dan konsultasi pendahuluan mempertimbangkan daerah-daerah yang mungkin berpotensi terdampak. Dari survey pendahuluan, tujuh lokasi telah dikenali akan memiliki potensi pemukiman kembali sehubungan dengan kegiatan pengerukan dan/atau pekerjaan tanggul 53 . Himpunan data awal dari survey sensus pendahuluan mencatat 2513 unit bangunan berpotensi terkena proyek (per Januari 2011), yang mana dihuni oleh 2369 keluarga, atau 6507 orang. 133. Kira-kira 53% keluarga pada tujuh lokasi WTP di awal identifikasi telah tinggal disana selama lebih dari 10 tahun, 66% memiliki KTP Jakarta, dan 45% tinggal di bangunan tak permanen. Kira-kira 82% keluarga bekerja di sektor informal (buruh, sopir, petani, nelayan, pedagang kecil, dan pekerjaan lain). Kira-kira 13% keluarga membangun rumah mereka di tanah mereka sendiri, sementara sisanya menduduki tanah pemerintah. Kira-kira 82% bangunan mereka sendiri dan 8,5% adalah penyewa. Informasi tentang jumlah pemilik liar (baik yang menduduki tanah maupun tidak), dan perambah belum tersedia. Kategori ini akan dikonfirmasi lagi selama perbaikan sensus survey. Distribusi geografis tentang orang dan bangunan yang terkena proyek dipusatkan pada empat dari tujuh lokasi, yaitu Sunter Atas dan Kanal Banjir Barat, Kali Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng dan Krukut Cideng, yang mewakili 2253 bangunan atau hampir 90% dari total bangunan yang terkena yang meliputi hampir 88% WTP. Lokasi berpenduduk paling padat ada di Krukut-Cideng dan Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng, sementara WBC dan Sunter Atas adalah dua lokasi yang memiliki jumlah terbesar bangunan terkena dan WTP. Keduanya terdiri dari 1350 bangunan atau 54% dari total bangunan yang terkena dampak yang meliputi 3828 WTP atau hampir 52% dari total WTP. 52
Sensus lanjutan juga dilakukan antara November 2010 dan Januari 2011 di lokasi tambahan (Kali SentiongSunter) setelah revisi disain dihasilkan dalam identifikasi WTP. 53 Kali Sentiong-Sunter, Waduk Sunter Utara, Kanal Banjir Barat, Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas, Kali Pakin-Kali BesarJelakeng, Kali Angke Bawah, dan Krukut-Cakung.
63
134. Mengurangi dampak. Usaha-usaha signifikan telah dibuat untuk meminimalisir jumlah WTP, awalnya melalui pemilihan hati-hati pada ruang lingkup pekerjaan – menyeimbangkan antara memilih bagian prioritas pada kanal dan waduk untuk dampak pengendalian banjir dan mengurangi potensi WTP. Mengikuti survey sensus awal, usaha selanjutnya diadakan melalui proses iterasi/perulangan untuk mengadopsi disain teknis dan pemilihan metodologi pekerjaan untuk mengurangi dampak. Berdasar pada disain teknis terinci terbaru dan verifikasi lapangan 54 pada April 2011, sekarang diperkirakan bahwa enam55 dari 15 lokasi proyek akan meliputi pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa, dan jumlah bangunan yang terkena telah dikurangi dari 2513 unit (dihuni 6507 orang) menjadi 1109 unit (dihuni 5228 orang) – seperti diringkaskan dalam Tabel 5-2. Tabel 5-2 Perkiraan Bangunan dan Warga Terkena di Lokasi-Lokasi Proyek Paket
1 (DKI) 2a (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 2b (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 3 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 4 (DKI)
5 (Dirjen Cipta Karya) 6 (Dirjen Sumberdaya Air) 7 (DKI)
Lokasi
Populasi Wilaya
Kanal banjir Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari Waduk Melati (Kali Gresik & Cideng Hulu) Kanal Banjir Cengkareng Floodway (termasuk sisi laut)
156.663 39.650 251.312
Perkiraan bangunan yg terkena (May 2011) -
Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah.Note 1
230.742
-
-
92.668
-
-
277.610 78.383 119.283 70.696 64.842 184.345 65.027 130.630 160.174 153.709 80.470
104 42 593 63 127 180
547 165 2.838 368 481 829
Total
2.156.202
1.109
5.228
Total tanpa tumpang tindih kelurahan
1.794.096
Kali Cideng Thamrin(Kali lingkar jalan) Kali Sentiong-Sunter (termasuk Kanal Ancol) Waduk Sunter Utara (Jalan keluar Waduk) Waduk Sunter Selatan Waduk Sunter Timur III Kali Tanjungan Kali Angke Bawah Kanal Banjir Barat (sisi laut) Kanal Banjir Sunter Atas Note 1 Kali Grogol – Sekretaris Kali Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Kali Krukut Cideng Note 2 Kali Krukut Lama Note 2
54
Perkiraan orang yg terkena (Mei 2011) -
Dilakukan oleh konsultan persiapan proyek yang disewa oleh PMU. Dengan menghindari pemukiman ulang secara terpaksa di lokasi Kali Angke Bawah (lihat catatan kaki 47 untuk daftar awal).
55
64
135. Lokasi-lokasi terkait proyek. Seperti didiskusikan dalam Bagian 2.3, lokasi terkait proyek diidentifikasi berdasar pada keterkaitan hidrolika dan fisik langsung pada lokasi JUFMP. DKI Jakarta baru-baru ini tak mempunyai rencana khusus bagi pekerjaan rehabilitasi pada lokasi-lokasi terkait ini. Meskipun demikian, DKI Jakarta akan menerapkan persyaratan OP 4.12 dalam kejadian bahwa kegiatan terkait dilaksanakan di lokasi terkait56. Karena tak ada rencana khusus bagi lokasi terkait, tak mungkin menentukan jumlah orang yang terkena proyek pada saat ini. Berdasarkan survey cepat yang dilaksanakan pada 200957, perkiraan kasar bangunan yang dapat dipengaruhi adalah 8150 bangunan (90% ada di lokasi terkait tunggal, yaitu di Waduk Pluit). Ini harus dianggap hipotesa maksimum – jumlah bangunan yang terkena proyek akan menjadi lebih kecil sekali pertimbangan pengurangan dampak diperhitungkan dalam disain, dan khususnya jika Waduk Pluit tidak dimasukkan. 136. Pekerjaan pemeliharaan. Dimengerti bahwa DKI Jakarta telah melakukan dan akan melakukan kegiatan pemeliharaan di lokasi terkait proyek, yaitu, pembersihan sampah di badan air dan memperbaiki beberapa bagian waduk sebagaimana diperlukan. Sejauh ini, DKI Jakarta selalu menghindari kerusakan atau keperluan untuk memindahkan struktur selama kegiatan pemeliharaan dengan menggunakan peralatan yang layak dan menghindari daerah-daerah di mana ada struktur. Sebagai contoh, dilaporkan bahwa pada 2010 ada dua lokasi terkait, yaitu, Tubagus Angke dan Anak Kali Ciliwung Utara, ada pemeliharaan kerukan dengan loader backhoe dan peralatan manual pada bagian terpilih untuk menghindari dampak pada bangunan yang menggantung.
5.5.2 Lokasi-lokasi non-WTP 137. Baru-baru ini, sembilan dari 15 lokasi proyek didisain sebagai lokasi-lokasi non-WTP - seperti diringkaskan dalam Tabel 5-2. Meskipun demikian, di empat lokasi, yaitu Waduk Cengkareng, Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah, Kanal banjir Ciliwing-Gunung Sahari, dan Kali Grogol-Sekretaris, akan ada dampak pada operator58 dan pemilik 19 perahu lintas selama konstruksi. Dampak sosial potensial dari pengerukan dan rehabilitasi tanggul di lokasi proyek akan kebanyakan terjadi selama konstruksi. seperti gangguan selama mobilisasi alat berat dan transportasi material lumpur ke lokasi pembuangan (termasuk sampah padat); kebisingan; bau busuk; kemacetan lalu lintas, dan kecelakaan lalu lintas; kerusakan jalan lokal; kehilangan pendapatan sementara bagi perahu pemulung yang memuat sampah dari kanal, dan bagi operator dan pemilik perahu lintas. Karena dampak ini akan sementara pada sejumlah relatif kecil pemilik/operator perahu di tiap kanal yang disebutkan di atas, DKI Jakarta akan melaksanakan konsultasi intensif dengan mereka untuk mendapat solusi praktis selama konstruki sehingga mereka akan mampu selama mungkin melanjutkan kegiatan mereka. Sebelum mulai konstruksi, DKI Jakarta akan melakukan verifikasi survey lapangan, untuk menegaskan kembali bahwa lokasi-lokasi non-WTP tetap bebas dari WTP di dalam daerah dampak subproyek.
5.5.3 Dampak sosial non-pemukiman-ulang yang potensial. 138. Potensi dampak sosial yang tak berhubungan dengan pemukiman kembali dikenali selama konsultasi AMDAL dan Diskusi Kelompok Fokus (FGD) - lihat Pasal 9 untuk rincian konsultasi. Salah 56
Kegiatan terkait seperti diartikan oleh kriteria untuk mengenali lokasi terkait dalam OP 4.12. Dua lokasi terkait, yaitu Kanal sepanjang Kayu Putih Timur dan Ciliwung Utara tidak diliput dalam survey ini. 58 Operator perahu penyebrangan tidak memerlukan pemukiman kembali, kontraktor pengerukan akan mendiskusikan opsi terbaik yang menguntungan kedua belah pihak termasuk pengaturan jadwal pengerukan untuk menghindari gangguan pada operator. Kemungkinan kerjasama juga akan didiskusikan 57
65
satu isu utama yang muncul selama konsultasi sehubungan dengan "persepsi dan perhatian" masyarakat pada dampak proyek. Masyarakat khawatir jika proyek mengharuskan mereka untuk pindah, dan jika demikian, mereka ingin untuk dikompensasi secara layak. Ini mungkin karena kebanyakan mereka adalah penghuni liar yang miskin, dan DKI Jakarta di waktu lampau telah merelokasi atau menggusur penghuni liar tanpa kompensasi atau hanya dengan jumlah kecil hibah sosial (lihat kotak pada akhir pasal ini untuk diskusi praktek penggusuran terbaru di Jakarta). Masyarakat juga khawatir bahwa mereka tak bisa berkonsultasi secara patut, diberitahukan dengan baik sebelum konstruksi, dan tak bisa menyampaikan keluhan, aspirasi dan usulan mereka selama konstruksi kepada manajemen proyek dan kontraktor. Masyarakat mengharapkan bahwa proyek akan memakai mereka selama konstruksi, untuk berpartisipasi dalam kegiatan pemilihan sampah untuk memperoleh sampah yang bernilai ekonomis. Dalam hampir semua lokasi proyek, studi AMDAL menyatakan bahwa konstruksi hanya akan mampu menyediakan sejumlah kecil pekerjaan dibandingkan potensi jumlah tenaga kerja yang tersedia di masyarakat. Sebagai contoh, di waduk Sunter Utara, Sunter Timur III, dan Sunter Selatan, diperkirakan bahwa proyek akan menyediakan 294 pekerjaan gaji-rendah (buruh) selama 12 bulan, yang kira-kira 6,5% dari tenaga kerja59. Untuk Sunter Atas, diperkirakan bahwa proyek hanya akan menambah total kesempatan pekerjaan yang tersedia kira-kira 0,024% dari kesempatan pekerjaan yang tersedia. Studi mengantisipasi bahwa kontraktor akan membawa pekerja terlatih dari luar daerah yang akan mengoperasikan peralatan pengerukan teknologi tinggi. Selanjutnya, masyarakat memprihatinkan bahwa selama konstruksi lingkungan hidup mereka akan diganggu dan dirusak oleh pengelolaan tak wajar pada pembuangan sementara dan transportasi material kerukan, yang menyebabkan ketaknyamanan karena jalan lokal yang rusak, debu, bau busuk, tumpahan material kerukan, bertambahnya kemacetan jalan, dan kebisingan dari peralatan dan truk.
5.5.4 Penggusuran selama periode Persiapan Proyek JUFMP 139. Selama persiapan proyek, paling kurang lima penggusuran utama terjadi di wilayah-wilayah yang berdekatan dengan lokasi proyek JUFMP, yaitu Taman BMW, Kemiri, Tambora VI dan VIII, dan Priok, karena beberapa alasan yang kelihatannya tak berhubungan dengan proyek. Taman BMW adalah kandidat potensial untuk lokasi pembuangan proyek tapi tidak dipilih karena pertimbangan teknis. Penggusuran di Taman BMW terjadi pada 2008 karena rencana DKI Jakarta untuk membangun stadion olahraga. Penggusuran Priok, yang terletak kira-kira 1 km di barat laut mulut Kanal Banjir Sunter Bawah, dihubungkan dengan relokasi pekuburan yang dipercaya memiliki nilai budaya dan spiritual. Lokasi Kemiri, Tambora VI dan Tambora VIII berdekatan dengan lokasi proyek. Penggusuran terjadi bagi para pedagang yang melakukan kegiatan sepanjang bahu jalan inspeksi di kali Cengkareng dekat pasar Kemiri, dan sepanjang bahu jalan Tambora VI dan VIII (sehubungan dengan lokasi proyek Pakin-Kali BesarJelakeng). Penggusuran di lokasi-lokasi ini sudah lama direncanakan oleh Kotamadya Jakarta Barat. Penggusuran dilakukan setelah proses konsultasi panjang antara para pedagang dan Pemerintah Kotamadya Jakarta Barat tentang pilihan lokasi relokasi, tapi sayang sekali, gagal mencapai kesepakatan tentang relokasi. Penggusuran terpaksa di luar pasar Kemiri pada para pedagang informal yang berjualan sepanjang jalan pada sisi sungai (rencana awal pada 2007, penggusuran sebenarnya terjadi pada Desember 2008) karena kemacetan lalu lintas dan keluhan oleh penyewa pasar Kemiri formal terhadap pedagang informal sepanjang bahu jalan inspeksi yang lebih gampang dimasuki oleh pembeli. Penggusuran di Tambora VI (rencana awal September 2007, penggusuran sebenarnya pada Desember 59
Laporan tidak menyediakan informasi jelas apakah total tenaga kerja yang dipakai dalam analisa hanya terdiri dari tenaga kerja yang sepenuhnya menganggur, atau termasuk tenaga kerja pengangguran secara sebagian.
66
2008) terjadi untuk menegakkan kendali ketertiban publik atas bisnis ilegal, dan memulihkan fungsi sungai dan bahu jalan kembali pada kondisnya semula. Penggusuran di Tambora VIII pada February 2009 terjadi setelah ijin tahunan untuk para pedagang habis dan untuk mengurangi kemacetan lalu lintas. 140. Mempertimbangkan kedekatan lokasi Kemiri, Tambora VI dan Tambora VIII dengan lokasi JUFMP, maka Pemerintah Kotamadya Jakarta Barat (dengan dukungan dari Bank Dunia) melakukan Studi Investigasi60 (Tracer Studies) untuk menilai dampak penggusuran dan potensi keterkatian dengan JUFMP. Tim Bank mengadakan kunjungan lapangan dan mendiskusikan tindakan pemulihan yang mungkin dengan Pemkot Jakbar bagi orang-orang yang tergusur yang kembali. Mereka mengaku bahwa mereka telah menawarkan lokasi relokasi alternatif sebelum penggusuran dan tawaran ini masih berlaku setelah penggusuran (ketika studi penjejakan dilakukan), tapi para pedagang/penjual tak mau pindah ke lokasi yang ditawarkan. Berdasar pada bukti dokumen dan wawancara yang dilakukan di lokasi-lokasi ini setelah penggusuran, penelitian menegaskan bahwa proses penggusuran ini telah dimulai secara signifikan sebelum pemulaian diskusi JUFMP bersama Pemerintah, dan alasan-alasan bagi penggusuran tak dihubungkan dengan JUFMP. Lampiran 2 menunjukkan lebih rinci ringkasan studi penjejakan. Kotak: Penggusuran di Jakarta Sejarah perkembangan penggusuran Penggusuran telah menjadi kebijakan dan praktek yang sudah berjalan lama dari Pemerintah DKI Jakarta dalam memiliki kembali terutama tanah pemerintah untuk pembangunan proyek demi kepentingan umum. Pelaksanaan penggusuran telah berkembang dari waktu ke waktu dengan trend bahwa penghuni ilegal lebih baik diperlakukan dengan pendekatan yang lebih manusiawi. Selama Era (Soeharto) Orde Baru penggusuran dilakukan dengan cara yang lebih kasar, dimana konsultasi dengan penghuni ilegal tidak dilakukan, dan tidak ada kompensasi disediakan. Bahkan selama masa jabatan mantan Gubernur, pemerasan keras dan cara kasar merajalela. Hari ini, instruksi untuk menggusur diberikan atas dasar ketertiban masyarakat dengan memakai Aturan Pemerintah Lokal no. 9 tahun 2007. Penggusuran diharuskan oleh berbagai aktor, misalnya Perusahaan Kereta Api untuk membersihkan jalan kereta api, Kantor Pekerjaan Umum untuk melindungi jalan dan saluran air, kantor Gubernur atau Walikota demi ketertiban masyarakat, ruang/parkir publik, taman, kelancaran lalu lintas, atau hanya menanggapi keluhan masyarakat. Pemerintah menyetujui penggusuran dan Kotamadya bertanggungjawab atas pelaksanaan, menggunakan Trantib untuk melaksanakan perintah publik demikian. Evolusi praktek penggusuran Penggusuran terbaru melibatkan beberapa tingkat konsultasi, peringatan yang lebih baik (paling kurang 3 kali pemberitahuan sebelum tanggal penggusuran), promosi pembongkaran-sendiri bangunan (untuk penyelamatan harta yang dapat dipakai lagi), jumlah ganti rugi, dan dalam beberapa kasus, paket pemukiman kembali. Paket menawarkan rangkaian pilihan bergantung pada lokasi dan karakteristik masyarakat, misalnya: (i) subsidi relokasi dengan pemilihan pasar formal yang meliputi 6 bulan bebas sewa bagi pedagang; (ii) paket 'bantuan sosial' atau uang kerohiman yang meliputi ongkos pemukiman kembali, atau ongkos transportasi untuk kembali ke rumah di desa, atau ganti rugi bangunan (bervariasi antara 50-110 US$); dan dalam beberapa kasus, (iii) subsidi biaya rendah perumahan, juga dalam beberapa kasus pengecualian, (iv) pelatihan ketrampilan. Jika penggusuran direncanakan pada lokasi-lokasi yang sebelumnya dibersihkan, penggusuran paksaan dilakukan tanpa kompensasi. Perhatian terhadap penggusuran berhubungan dengan manajemen dan perlindungan lokasi yang telah dibersihkan dari pendudukan kembali, dan DKI Jakarta tak mempunyai sistim data dasar yang dapat menjejaki mereka yang sudah dapat ganti rugi yang mungkin telah pindah ke tanah publik lain.
60
Laporan studi penjejakan yaitu, "Studi Jejak di Tambora VI dan Tambora VIII" dan "Studi Kasus Penggusuran di Jalan Inspeksi Kali Cengkareng" tersedia dalam berkas proyek.
67
6
Analisa Alternatif
6.1
Pilihan "tidak melakukan apa-apa"
141. Pada tingkat strategis, pilihan "tidak melakukan apa-apa" adalah untuk membolehkan banjir dan akibat-akibatnya yang buruk untuk berlanjut dan makin buruk. Secara jelas ini tak dapat diterima. Secara khusus sehubungan usulan proyek JUFMP, alternatif "tak bikin apa-apa" pada hakekatnya berarti memperburuk situasi saluran drainase yang terhambat dan akibat sosial-ekonomi dari seringnya banjir. Ini bukan situasi yang disukai oleh Pemerintah Indonesia, DKI dan oleh masyakarta yang terkena banjir. Sebagai tambahan, sedimen pada saluran air akan terus menyembur secara tak terkontrol ke Teluk Jakarta.
6.2
Analisa Alternatif Keseluruhan
142. Baik pada AMDAL untuk Tahap 1 maupun pada pekerjaan CDF Ancol, analisa alternatif dipusatkan pada alternatif pengendalian atau dampak lain pendekatan pengelolaan. Sebagai contoh, sehubungan AMDAL Tahap 1, berbagai pilihan pengerukan mekanis dan metodologi untuk mengurangi dampak yang berhubungan dengan jenis kegiatan ini dipertimbangkan dan mengenai AMDAL CDF Ancol, berbagai pilihan untuk material pengisi dan sumbernya telah dipertimbangkan dan dievaluasi. Dimana, mengenai pilihan strategis yang lebih luas untuk pembuangan material sedimen kerukan, Bank Dunia, DKI Jakarta dan tim PMU mempertimbangkan banyak pilihan dan alternatif yang didasarkan pada hasil uji sedimen, pengalaman lalu, alasan teknis dan keuangan dan kesempatan pekerjaan pembangunan proyek, sebagai bagian dari proses pengambilan keputusan, yang menuntun pada pemilihan CDF Ancol sebagai lokasi pembuangan akhir untuk material tak berbahaya. Sebagai contoh, selama operasi pengerukan di waktu lalu, material galian biasanya dibuang di tempat kosong yang dimiliki oleh Pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Dalam beberapa kasus sedimen ditaruh pada waduk dengan kata lain tidak dibuang, yang menghasilkan kembalinya lumpur ke kali/saluran air. JUFMP menyediakan kesempatan pertama bagi DKI Jakarta dan Pemerintah Indonesia untuk mengkoordinasikan dan membuang material kerukan di daerah pembuangan yang ditentukan dan dikelola, dan untuk memperkenalkan prinsip-prinsip pengelolaan praktek-terbaik. Pemerintah Indonesia menilai beberapa lokasi pembuangan dan alternatif pengelolaan. Awalnya DKI mengusulkan beberapa lokasi tanah yang tersedia, yang tersebar di seluruh kota: • •
• • • • • 61
Taman BMW – lokasi besar dengan banyak masyarakat informal yang digusur61; dapat dilihat sepanjang jalan tol di bawah Jalan Tol (Pluit Karang) – terletak di pertukaran jalan tol, jelas dilihat dan memberikan perhatian pada keindahan dan aspek bau jika dipakai sebagai lokasi pembuangan; banyak masyarakat informal dengan perikanan dan tanaman pisang Kamal Muara – lokasi sangat kecil dengan industri dan perumahan terdekat (banyak terbuka) Kapuk Muara – telah berubah menjadi pembangunan perumahan Pluit – lokasi kecil; dekat perikanan Rorotan – sedang dipakai sebagai daerah pembuangan sementara sampah padat sepanjang sungai dan kegiatan industri terdekat Cakung – samping Rorotan (diatas); lokasi kecil dekat daerah industri
Atas alasan-alasan yang tak berhubungan dengan proyek - lihat kotak pada akhir Pasal 5.
68
143. Bank Dunia menginspeksi dan menilai kelayakan tiap lokasi pembuangan yang diusulkan. Lokasi-lokasi pembuangan ini ditolak karena kapasitas pembuangannya minimal, masalah pemukiman kembali, persoalan estetis dan bau, dan kesulitan pengawasan. Tiga lokasi pembuangan berbasis-laut juga dipertimbangkan di Muara Kali Adem (MKA), Marunda dan Ancol. Lokasi MKA terletak pada samping West Banjir Canal namum akses kendaraan sulit dan macet sering terlihat di sekitar lokasi. Marunda yang terletak pada ujung wilayak Jakarta Timur tidak dipilih karena perubahan tata ruang untuk peruntungan lokasi tersebut. Lokasi di Ancol secara strategis dipilih karena percepatan persiapannya, ukuran dan kapasitasnya (mampu menerima hampir tiga kali material kerukan dari Proyek, atau kira-kira 12 juta m3), dan lokasi pusat sepanjang pantai Teluk Jakarta. Juga penting dicatat bahwa lokasi Ancol juga mempunyai keuntungan yaitu ia sudah ada proyek reklamasi yang sedang berlangsung yang sudah disetuju. Penggunaan lokasi Ancol dianggap skenario 'win-win'. Dua lokasi lain berbasis-laut yang dipertimbangkan akan harus dibangun, dengan ongkos dipertimbangkan dan dengan efek memindahkan daerah pantai lebih dekat dengan tambahan dampak lingkungan. Pada saat yang sama, penggunaan material kerukan tak berbahaya untuk reklamasi lokasi Ancol akan mengurangi dampak negatif dari penggunaan material lain (pasir) untuk diambil dari tambang. 144. Membangun daerah Ancol adalah bagian dari rencana spasial yang lebih besar dari DKI dan BPLHD DKI telah menyetujui Penilaian Dampak Lingkungan (EIA, atau AMDAL). Lokasi ini memberikan kemudahan akses dari mulut sungai kota. Rencana bagi lokasi pembuangan berbasis-laut di MKA dan Marunda dianggap tak perlu karena melekat kapasitas besar di Ancol. Pemerintah juga menyatakan bahwa usulan lokasi pembuangan di MKA dan Marunda secara potensial bertentangan dengan rencana tata ruang tentang reklamasi yang akan mengharuskan pemeriksaan.
6.3
Analisa Alternatif Khusus
6.3.1 Lebar cakupan vs. pengelolaan banjir lokal 145. Untuk maksud subseksi ini, pengelolaan banjir utama merujuk kepada kegiatan sangat utama seperti konstruksi pengalihan besar baru untuk mengurangi banjir di daerah kota dari cakupan hujan menengah dan atas. Pengelolaan banjir lokal merujuk kepada tindakan yang dapat diambil pada tingkat lokal untuk menambah efisien penyerahan curah hujan lokal ke saluran-saluran lokal/kali dan kemudian ke laut. Sementara bisa terjadi debat tentang prioritas relatif, ada kesepakatan bersama bahwa dua pilihan tidak terpisah secara bersama - keduanya diharuskan sebagai bagian dari paket terpadu. JUFMP berdasar pada bagian cakupan yang lebih rendah. Sementara banyak berfokus pada pengelolaan banjir lokal, kegiatan proyek JUFMP akan menambah kemampuan yang telah didirikan tapi kanal banjir yang berkinerja lemah untuk menjadi lebih efektif dalam memindahkan banjir tangkapan-turunan atas ke laut.
6.3.2 Pendekatan teknik vs non-teknik 146. Pekerjaan-teknik untuk maksud dari subseksi ini diartikan sebagai konstruksi teknik normal dan operasi proyek seperti memperbaiki kapasitas aliran pembawa dari sungai, pompa ari, penghalang/dinding laut. Pendekatan non-teknik sebaliknya menyorot segi-segi seperti mengubah perilaku orang (misalnya mencegah membuang sampah padat ke saluran air) dan rencana pemakaian tanah dan pelaksanaan untuk memindahkan orang-orang menjauh dari daerah rawan banjir. Fokus JUFMP ada pada pendekatan teknik yang akan segera memberikan keuntungan. Meskipun demikian, ini akan mendukung pendekatan non69
teknik yang jauh lebih luas dan kesempatan sedang dilakukan melalui JUFMP untuk menyorot persoalan yang lebih luas. Sebagai contoh, pengelolaan sampah padat di dan segera di sekitar lokasi pengerukan akan menunjukkan keuntungan pengelolaan sampah padat yang layak, dengan demikian menetapkan contoh praktis tentang apa yang dapat dicapai.
6.3.3 Pemilihan lokasi pengerukan 147. Studi simulasi hidrolik JUFMP merekomendasikan rehabilitasi sistim pengelolaan banjir kota kepada kapasitas desain awal dan sistim pemeliharaan rutin sebagai langkah pertama paling menguntungkan untuk pengendalian banjir di Jakarta. Bagian-bagian dari sistim pengelolaan banjir Jakarta yang dimasukkan dalam proyek ini telah diidentifikasi oleh Pemerintah sebagai dalam kebutuhan prioritas mendesak untuk rehab dan perbaikan dalam kapasitas aliran. Prioritasi dibuat berdasar penelitian sebelumnya oleh Proyek Pengelolaan Lingkngan Jawa Barat 63 (WJEMP) dan berbagai penelitian sebelumnya tentang kendali banjir dan pengendalian banjir di wilayah Jakarta. Ruang lingkup Proyek juga memperhitungkan masuknya semua lembaga yang bertanggungjawab sebagai alat untuk menyemangati dan mendirikan sistim pemeliharaan rutin berkelanjutan jangka panjang. Proyek ini diharapkan memiliki efek demonstrasi keuntungan penting menyangkut koordinasi lembaga, teknologi dan metode pengerukan, pembuangan material kerukan, dan praktek pemukiman kembali yang layak dan lingkungan yang sehat. Dengan demikian, kompleksitas pekerjaan teknis, lingkungan, dan sosial juga diperhitungkan dalam lingkup proyek dan rangkaian pelaksanaan untuk supaya menambah kemungkinan sukses.
6.3.4 Teknologi Pengerukan: Mekanis vs. Hidrolis 148. Teknologi pengerukan dapat secara luas dikelompokkan sebagai jenis mencangkul / tempurung kerang dan pengerukan penyedotan (dengan atau tanpa kepala pemotong). Pengerukan penyedotan tidak dilakukan karena tak cocok dengan jumlah signifikan sampah padat dalam endapan kali. Cangkul berbasis-ponton adalah teknologi lebih cocok karena mayoritas kegiatan konstruksi dapat dibatasi ke saluran air itu sendiri, lebih daripada harus menggangu selebar sepanjang panjang kali yang sedang dikeruk.
6.3.5 Pemisahan Sampah Padat 149. Pemisahan sampah padat dari sedimen kerukan dipertimbangkan menyangkut jumlah material untuk dipisahkan, pemakaian mekanis atau sortir manual dan lokasi sortir. Hanya sampah ukuran besar dari sedimen kerukan yang akan disortir dan disingkirkan. Penelitian penimbunan sebelumnya di daerah lain dengan sedimen kerukan menentukan bahwa ini cukup dan metode pembuangan dan pemakaian tanah paska-penimbunan tak akan terkendala. Sortir di lokasi pengerukan sendiri lebih disukai karena ia membatasi potensi kepadatan di CDF Ancol, menawarkan potensi sementara tenaga kerja lokal dan memadukan dengan kegiatan lain untuk memelihara lokasi pengerukan dan lingkungan terdekat tetap "bersih dan rapi" selama pengerukan. . 150. Pemisahan mekanis telah diuji tapi akan perlu untuk ditempatkan di lokasi Ancol. Sifat dari material, keperluan akan air tambahan dan kesulitan operasional menunjukkan tidak ada keuntungan bagi 63
Proyek Pengelolaan Lingkungan Jawa Barat yang didanai Bank Dunia (Proyek ID PO40528), yang ditutup pada 30 Juni, 2006.
70
pemisahan mekanis. Jadi usulan metode pemisahan manual bagi hanya sampah-sampah berukuran besar (dan mungkin pilihan pemisahan sampah-sampah yang lebih kecil yang dapat didaur ulang) di lokasi pengerukan telah dipakai. TPA umum Bantar Gebang satu-satunya yang sedang beroperasi di Jakarta yang hanya menawarkan lokasi pembuangan material sampah padat yang aman dan masuk akal.
6.3.6 Pilihan transport: (Truk sampah) basis darat vs. hidrolik 151. Transport dipertimbangkan tiga pilihan utama -- hidrolik (pemompaan), truk dan tongkang, memadukan ini dengan teknologi pengerukan dan dengan pemilihan lokasi pembuangan. Pemompaan dipertimbangkan tak layak karena jumlah sampah padat akan mungkin menyebabkan blokade. Ini akan secara signifikan mempengaruhi tiap program pengerukan. Transport dengan tongkang akan menjadi tak layak di banyak tempat karena jembatan dan leher botol sepanjang sungai mencegah akses ke laut; akan tetapi, ini dapat menjadi metode yang lebih disukai kontraktor untuk bagian lebih rendah dari sungai yang lebih besar. Transport dengan truk oleh sebab itu adalah satu-satunya alternatif bagi mayoritas lokasi dan karena itu dipilih, dengan anggapan bahwa ia akan dipakai dimana saja mewakili potensi situasi kasus lebih buruk menyangkut efek lalu lintas.
7
Rencana Pengelolaan Lingkungan
7.1 Rencana Keseluruhan Pengelolaan dan Pemantauan Lingkungan 152. Rencana Kelola Lingkungan (RKL) dan Rencana Pantau Lingkungan (RPL) di bawah sistim AMDAL (EIA) Indonesia, secara bersama-sama merupakan persyaratan di bawah Penilaian Lingkungan Bank Dunia OP4.01 Annex C. RKL dan RPL untuk lokasi proyek Tahap 1 dan untuk CDF Ancol telah disetujui sebagai bagian proses persetujuan AMDAL (lihat bagian 3.5). di bawah sistim AMDAL Indonesia, laporan pelaksanana kwartalan dari RKL dan RPL untuk kedua lokasi Proyek (yaitu pekerjaan Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2) dan CDF Ancol akan harus disiapkan dan diserahkan ke BPLHD provinsi selama periode konstruksi. Laporan ini membentuk basis bagi pengawasan pemantauan pekerjaan oleh BPLHD DKI. Mereka juga menawarkan kesempatan nyata untuk melapor kembali ke BPLHD DKI tentang perubahan apa pun dalam lingkup dan rincian proyek sejak AMDAL diperiksa dan disetujui dan juga bersesuaian selama konstruksi dengan pelaksanaan tindakan pengendalian yang disetujui dan pemantauan dalam pekerjaan. 153. di bawah proyek ini, RKL dan RPL termasuk tambahan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang disampaikan dalam bentuk laporan tambahan sebagaimana didiskusikan pada Bagian 3.5.1 Tahap 1 dan Tahap 2 akan dimasukkan ke dalam dokumen penawaran pekerjaan pengerukan dan sipil untuk menjamin agar semua kontraktor potensial mampu menawar harga bagi mereka64 dan agar rencana menjadi bagian dokumen kontrak pekerjaan sipil yang mengikat secara hukum dan layak65. RKL dan RPL dan dokumen kontrak lainnya seperti gambar rincian disain teknis, spesifikasi teknis untuk pekerjaan, dll., secara bersama-sama mengandung semua unsur yang diharuskan seperti ukuran pengendalian yang sepadan bagi tiap dampak yang dikenali untuk tiap tahap pekerjaan, tanggungjawab untuk melaksanakan dan mengawasi ini semua, indikator-indikator pengawasan, dan ongkos untuk menjamin bahwa semua ini dilaksanakan. Sementara itu, tanggung jawab bagi uji sedimen pra-keruk (sebagai bagian dari protokol uji 64
Secara umum, biaya yang dialokasikan untuk pengelolaan lingkungan mencapai US$ 1.9 juta Lihat rancangan yang sama untuk CDF Ancol dimana PT PJA memasukkan persyaratan RKL dan RPL untuk CDF Ancol ke dalam kontrak konstruksi mereka - lihat Pasal 3, Bagian 3.7.2.
65
71
seluruh proyek untuk menentukan material berbahaya dan dengan demikian menjamin bahwa hanya material tak-berbahaya yang ditransportasikan dan dibuang di CDF Ancol) telah dimasukkan dalam Kerangka Acuan (TOR) dari SC. 154. Sekali pekerjaan konstruksi proyek dimulai, laporan pelaksanaan kwartalan sehubungan dengan RKL dan RPL akan disiapkan oleh kontraktor pengerukan dan pekerjaan secara bersama-sama dengan SC. Ini akan diperiksa dan dibersihkan oleh PMU dan Bank Dunia sebelum penyerahan kepada BPLHD. Persiapan dan penyerahan laporan pelaksanaan kwartalan untuk RKL dan RPL CDF Ancol sedang berlangsung (lihat Pasal 3, Bagian 3.7.2 untuk penjelasan rancangan bagi CDF Ancol, termasuk persiapan, pemeriksaan dan penyerahan mereka).
7.2 Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas 155. Kontraktor pengerukan dan konstruksi juga diharuskan menyiapkan dan melaksanakan Rencana Pengelolaan Lalu Lintas (TMP), yang tunduk pada persetujuan dan pengawasan SC66. Rincian khusus kontrak TMP harus disiapkan oleh tiap kontraktor untuk operasi pengangkutan khusus mereka. Kontrak khusus mereka (TMP), akan dituntun oleh seluruh Rencana Pengelolaan Transport Umum (GTMP) tingkat proyek yang disiapkan oleh PMU selama persiapan proyek. GTMP yang dikembangkan untuk lokasi JUFMP Tahap 1 memperhitungkan hal berikut67: •
• •
• •
•
Proyek-mengharuskan gerakan truk material kerukan dari lokasi pengerukan ke Ancol (untuk pembuangan material kerukan), ke lokasi pembuangan PPLi (untuk pembuangan material berbahaya jika ditemukan), dan ke Bantar Gebang (untuk pembuangan sampah padat). Rute dan jaringan jalan yang mungkin dikenali (dengan lampiran sistim GPS). Aturan kota standara sehubungan dengan: • Gerakan truk transport di sekitar kota meliputi rancaangan rute dan jam operasi yang dilarang. • Sertifikasi mengenai pengeluaran dan keamanan kendaraan angkutan. • Pengelolaan lalu lintas/ keamanan/ tanda tangan waktu loading/ daerah loading. Persyaratan bagi persetujuan rincian pelaksanaan TMP. Perhatian yang dinyatakan selama konsultasi proyek dengan warga sehubungan "gangguan masyarakat" (dalam semua istilah yang ada) "macet dan jalan masuk" dan mencegah "tumpahan material " di sepanjang rute transport dan di titik-titik pemuatan. Keperluan untuk konsultasi masyarakt terus-menerus dan persyaratan ANDAL, RKL, RPL.
156. Rincian terpisah RPT lokasi Ancol sedang dibangun untuk daerah lokasi dekat Ancol CDF oleh PT PJA dan akan dikaitkan dan dikoordinasikan kedalam RPT lokasi tahap 1. Pembuangan material sedimen dan sampah padat semuanya terjadi di dalam lokasi pembuangan. Perbaikan RKL/RPL secara khusus mengharuskan pembersihan alat setiap truk sebelum meninggalkan lokasi pembuangan untuk mencegah kotoran dibuang ke jalan umum. Perhitungan menyatakan tidak ada kemacetan di jalan umum sehubungan gerakan truk Tahap 1. Selanjutnya dicatat bahwa Ancol berpengalaman dalam pengelolaan 66
Selama penawaran, para penawar diharuskan menyiapkan Rencana Pengelolaan Transport awal sebagai bagian dari usulan teknis mereka. Rencana Pengelolaan Transport Final disiapkan oleh kontraktor pemenang sebelum memulai pekerjaan. 67 Adapun criteria-kriteria ini disampaikan dalam Laporan tambahan AMDAL Tahap 1, yang mana telah dimasukan kedalam dokumen tender
72
lalu lintas dari proyek-proyek lain, termasuk memiliki rincian sistim "menahan" truk menjauh dari daerah-daerah dimana kemacetan dapat terjadi selama kondisi abnormal.
8 Perencanaan Pemukiman kembali (Resettlement Planning) 8.1 Pendekatan bagi Pengelolaan Dampak Sosial 157. Alat kunci perlindungan sosial proyek terdiri dari (i) Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF), dan (ii) Rencana Pemukiman kembali khusus bagi tiap lokasi proyek dimana Warga Terkena Proyek ditemukan. Rasional dari pendekatan ini meliputi rangkaian pendekatan untuk pelaksanaan pengelolaan risiko, penyesuaian terus-menerus atas pengaturan kota yang berubah, dan waktu pembukaan berbagai dokumen perlindungan sosial telah didiskusikan lebih dulu (lihat bagian 3.5.2 dan 3.5.3). 158. Prinsip-prinsip kunci yang dipakai oleh proyek untuk pengelolaan dampak sosial adalah sebagai berikut: • Pertama, baik dampak sosial terkait pemukiman kembali maupun non-pemukiman kembali, dihindari atau diminimalisir (jika penghindara tak mungkin). Ini dilakukan melalui pekerjaan terbatas pada bagian prioritas, pemilihan teliti pada pendekatan pengerukan dan teknologi peralatan, dan rincian disain teknis yang diarahkan untuk meminimalkan dampak. Potensi dampak sosial dari proyek, meliputi diskusi usaha untuk meminimalkan dampak, dijelaskan dalam Bagian 5.5. • Kedua, proyek ini akan dilaksanakan dalam dua tahap (lihat Bagian). Dirancang untuk mulai pertama dengan konstruksi di lokasi yang tak mempunyai potensi WTP. Rangkaian pekerjaan adalah kunci pelaksanaan mekanisme pengelolaan risiko bagi proyek. Diantara lain-lainnya, ia akan membolehkan DKI Jakarta cukup waktu untuk menyiapkan Rencana Pemukiman kembali di lokasi-lokasi WTP (terutama untuk memiliki konsultasi yang cukup dan berarti). • Ketiga, sebagai hasil dari pentahapan proyek, RPF telah dikembangkan oleh DKI Jakarta dalam rapat diskusi dengan tim tugas proyek Bank Dunia sejak pertengahan 2008. Ini akan menuntun DKI Jakarta, terutama tim RP-nya di bawah Pokja Sosial Lingkungan dari PIU DKI Jakarta dalam menyiapkan RP. Rancangan kelembagaan untuk pelaksanaan persyaratan perlindungan sosial proyek, termasuk rancangan tanggungjawab bagi pemantauan, telah dijelaskan dalam Bagian 3.8. • Keempat, proyek ini melaksanakan signifikan konsultasi publik - selama persiapan AMDAL melalui konsultasi standar (dua kali untuk tiap AMDAL, sebelum finalisasi Kerangka Acuan dan studi AMDAL sendiri), dan melalui FGD di semua lokasi proyek. Konsultasi ini telah dilaporkan untuk menjadi efektif dalam menambah kesadaran masyarakat atas proyek, dan dalam menangkap perhatian, aspirasi dan harapan masyarakat selama tahap-tahap pra, selama, dan paska-konstruksi. Pasal 9 memberikan penjelasan tentang konsultasi yang telah terjadi selama periode persiapan proyek. • Kelima, perhatian, aspirasi, dan harapan yang relevan dari masyarakat dikenali selama konsultasi AMDAL dan FGD yang harus ditujukan selama konstruksi telah dimasukkan dalam dokumen penawaran pekerjaan sipil (kemudian akan menjadi kontrak bagi kontraktor pemenang). Sebagai tambahan, Kerangka Acuan dari KP meliputi penugasan untuk menjamin bahwa kegiatan yang ditujukan pada hal-hal ini akan dilaksanakan oleh kontraktor yang dipantau dan diawasi dengan baik. 73
•
8.2
Akhirnya, agar supaya menghindari ketidakpastian dan perlakuan tak adil pada WTP yang dapat menuntun kepada kerusuhan sosial dan konflik antara WTP dan DKI Jakarta, proyek ini akan mengaktifkan fasilitas dan pelayanan GRS, dan terus-menerus melaksanakan konsultasi bermakna dengan masyarakat, khususnya dengan WTP selama persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali dan selama konstruksi. Pasal 10 memberikan ringkasan penjelasan tentang proyek GRS.
Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF)
159. DKI Jakarta telah menyiapkan RPF bagi proyek ini dalam koordinasi erat dengan tim tugas Bank Dunia. RPF berusaha menjembatani kesenjangan yang ada antara kerangka hukum tentang pengadaan tanah dan pemukiman kembali di Indonesia dan kesesuaian dengan OP 4.12. Maksud dari RPF adalah untuk menjelaskan prinsip, prosedur dan rancangan organisasional untuk diterapkan pada persiapan RP. Terutama, kerangka kebijakan (a) menegaskan bahwa ia berlaku untuk lokasi proyek juga lokasi terkait; (b) mengenali kategori mungkin WTP; (c) menguraikan proses perkembangan RP termasuk persiapan, pemeriksaan, persetujuan dan pembukaan; (d) mengakomodasi hak WTP yang adalah penghuni tanah negara atau pemerintah juga hak WTP yang terkena pengadaan tanah milik pribadi; (e) menentukan rasional untuk ganti rugi atas aset yang hilang pada ongkos pemindahan, tindakan khusus untuk menanggapi kelompok rentan, dan bantuan untuk pemulihan penghidupan; (f) menentukan rancangan organisasional untuk pelaksanaan RPF dan RP; (g) menguraikan mekanisme sistim penyelesaian keluhan; dan (h) pemantauan dan evaluasi RP. Dokumen RPF lengkap tersedia dalam file proyek. 160. • •
•
•
•
Prinsip-prinsip kunci. RPF memberlakukan prinsip-prinsip kunci sebagai berikut: Prinsip 1: minimalisasi pemukiman kembali. Pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa harus dihindari dimana layak, atau diminimalisir, sambil menyelidiki semua disain proyek alternatif yang layak68; Prinsip 2: bantuan untuk orang-orang yang dipindahkan. Jika pemukiman kembali tak dapat dihindarkan, maka orang-orang yang dipindahkan oleh subproyek JUFMP harus didukung dalam usaha mereka untuk memperoleh akses ke tempat tinggal yang cukup. Jika relokasi mempengaruhi sumber pendapatan dan/atau penghidupan mereka, orang-orang yang dipindahkan harus ditawarkan bantuan selama periode transisi, didasarkan pada perkiraan adil waktu yang mungkin diperlukan untuk memulihkan penghidupan dan standar kehidupan mereka; Prinsip 3: konsultasi tentang pilihan pemukiman kembali dan bentuk bantuan. Pilihan pemukiman kembali dan dukungan akan didisain dalam konsultasi dengan orang-orang yang dipindahkan. Konsultasi harus melibatkan perpindahan informasi dua-arah antara staf JUFMP dan orang-orang yang dipindahkan; Prinsip 4: lokasi pemukiman kembali yang sah. Penghuni tanah negara atau pemerintah yang dipindahkan oleh JUFMP harus disediakan kesempatan untuk tinggal lagi di lokasi-lokasi yang dapat ditinggali secara sah. Prinsip 5: fasilitas publik dan infrastruktur masyarakat. Dalam kasus-kasus pemindahan kelompok, fasilitas publik dan infrastruktur masyarakat yang dipengaruhi oleh Proyek akan dibangun lagi di lokasi-lokasi pemukiman kembali.
68
Sebagai contoh, perubahan teknologi/metodologi yang membolehkan pengerukan di sekitar beberapa bangunan telah menghindari perlunya pemukiman ulang secara terpaksa di dua lokasi -Waduk Sunter Selatan dan Kali Tanjungan.
74
•
Prinsip 6: terbuka dan dapat dipertanggungjawabkan. Informasi tentang anggaran untuk mendanai pelaksanaan RPF ini akan diumumkan.
161. Konsultasi internal. Terpisah dari konsultasi eksternal seperti dijelaskan dalam Bagian diatas, diskusi internal, konsultasi dan penyebaran informasi di dalam DKI Jakarta juga dilakukan. Ini telah terbukti penting dan relevan. Khususnya, dicatat selama persiapan RPF (dan persiapan awal RPF) bahwa pendekatan dalam penanganan pemukiman kembali - terutama untuk para penghuni liar - dimasukkan dalam RPF yang cukup baru bagi pejabat DKI Jakarta di semua tingkatan. Diskusi antara Bank Dunia dan DKI Jakarta untuk datang kepada pengertian bersama , kesadaran bersama dan persetujuan pada prinsipprinsip dan prosedur untuk menanggapi pemukiman kembali seperti dikhususkan dalam RPF mengharuskan usaha signifikan selama periode hampir tiga tahun. Sosialisasi terus-menerus dari RPF diantara DKI, meliputi pejabat tingkat lebih rendah di provinsi hingga pejabat kelurahan (termasuk berbagai tim pengadaan tanah - P2T) sedang dan akan dilaksanakan (lihat rincian lanjutan pada Pasal 9). Program pembangunan kapasitas (seperti pelatihan penyadaran, pelatihan/pembekalan belajar sambil bikin, dll) untuk semua pemegang saham yang dilibatkan dalam pemukiman kembali adalah sangat kritis demi keberhasilan proyek untuk secara konsisten melaksanakan RPF dan RP. Komunikasi dan koordinasi antara DKI Jakarta dan instansi sentral yang dapat mendukung kegiatan sehubungan-pemukiman kembali perlu dikuatkan. 162. Jenis WTP. Dua jenis umum WTP yaitu (i) warga yang terkena oleh kepemilikan kembali tanah negara atau pemerintah, dan (ii) warga yang terkena oleh kepemilikan tanah yang dipunyai oleh pribadi. Kedua jenis umum ini disediakan dalam RFP. Meskipun demikian, telah ditentukan bahwa kegiatan JUFMP akan terutama meminta tanah yang dimiliki negara atau pemerintah, dan hanya bagian kecil dari wilayah proyek yang mungkin berada di tanah yang dimiliki pribadi. Jenis hak bagi orang-orang yang terkena kepemilikan kembali tanah negara atau pemerintah adalah: • Orang-orang yang memiliki dan menempati tempat tinggal dan bangunan lain yang dibangun diatas tanah negara atau pemerintah tanpa hak sah yang dapat diakui atau tuntutan atas tanah yang mereka duduki; • Penyewa tempat tinggal dan bangunan lain yang dibangun di atas tanah negara atau pemerintah tanpa hak sah yang dapat diakui atau tuntutan kepada tanah yang mereka duduki; • "Encroacher", yaitu, orang-orang yang memperluas atau memperbesar milik pribadi mereka (tanah milik pribadi dan aset diatas tanah) dengan menyerbu tanah terdekat atau tanah pemerintah; • "Tuan tanah liar", yaitu, orang-orang yang menerima sewa tak sah dari bangunan yang didirikan di atas tanah negara atau pemerintah, tapi tidak menghuni bangunan demikian. 163. Jenis hak. Berbagai hak pemukiman kembali telah disediakan dalam RPF. Ini meliputi, diantara lain-lainya, ganti rugi atas kerugian aset, bantuan untuk pindah, dan bantuan untuk rehabilitasi. Pilihan bantuan khusus akan ditentukan melalui konsultasi dengan WTP dan akan ditentukan dalam RP. 164. Perbedaan antara jenis-jenis WTP. Mengacu pada sejarah sebelumnya tentang praktek-praktek penggusuran (lihat diskusi dalam bagian 5.5.3 dan 5.5.4), pemakaian RPF menggambarkan langkah perubahan dan kemajuan transformasi dalam pendekatan DKI Jakarta untuk menangani pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa. Selama persiapan RPF dan diskusinya yang berhubungan, DKI Jakarta telah 75
datang untuk memakai dan menerima prinsip-prinsip kunci dari RPF seperti dijelaskan di atas, yang mana adalah kunci untuk praktek perlindungan sosial yang adil dan bijaksana. Meskipun demikian, dicatat bahwa DKI Jakarta mempunyai perhatian kuat agar tiap kebijakan dan praktek perlindungan sosial yang ia pakai tak boleh secara tanpa tahu menghasilkan hadiah bagi perilaku tak sah dan pada saat yang sama tak boleh tidak melindungi orang-orang rentan yang berisiko kehilangan rumah dan penghidupannya. Secara khusus, DKI mempunyai reservasi untuk mengkompensasi (i) para encroacher yang adalah pemilik tanah dan bangunan yang telah memperluas propertinya di luar batas sahnya ke tanah negara atau pemerintah terdekat, dan yang tak akan perlu sumber penghidupan mereka terkena secara buruk juga yang tidak harus dipindahkan sebagai hasil kepemilikan kembali tanah negara dan pemerintah, dan (ii) tuan tanah liar, yang telah mendirikan bangunan di atas tanah negara atau pemerintah dengan maksud yang dinyatakan untuk untung dari sewa, tapi yang tidak bergantung pada sewa ini untuk penghidupan yang patut. 165. Tuan tanah liar dan encroacher. RPF membuat perbedaan antara tuan tanah liar dan encroacher dan jenis lain WTP, yang menunjukkan perhatian DKI Jakarta seperti dijelaskan dalam paragraf sebelumnya. Meskipun demikian, RPF tidak secara mutlak memberikan keuntungan bagi dua jenis WTP ini - RPF mengklarifikasi bahwa mereka akan menerima bantuan dalam bentuk-bentuk yang ditentukan dalam RP atas kasus per kasus yang dirundingkan dan dasar kesepakatan bersama, tanpa kriteria yang membatasi yang ditentukan lebih dahulu. Ketentuan RPF untuk tuan tanah liar dan encroacher memantulkan keseimbangan antara berbagai kepentingan para pemegang saham. Ia memantulkan perhatian DKI Jakarta bahwa orang-orang yang sengaja meluaskan atau memperbesar kepemilikan pribadinya ke dalam tanah negara atau pemerintah, atau yang menggunakan tanah publik sebagai sumber kekayaan dengan membangun bangunan pada tanah-tanah ini dan menggunakannya untuk menghasilkan uang sewaan (sering mengeksploitasi orang-orang miskin dan rentan), tak boleh lagi diperkaya dari dana publik, tapi menyeimbangkan perhatian ini dengan menyediakan jalan bagi konsultasi perorangan dan bantuan perorangan yang disepakati dan diterima bersama. Ia juga berguna untuk menyorot tujuan untuk melindungi kepentingan publik dan menandai roh dari kebijakan Bank Dunia tentang pemukiman kembali secara terpaksa untuk melindungi warga yang rentan atas risiko kehilangan rumah atau penghidupan mereka, tapi menyeimbangkan ini dengan kesetujuan kepada kebijakan oleh tidak mengeluarkan terutama jenis orang-orang yang terkena proyek dari bantuan dan/atau kompensasi ganti rugi. 166. Perbedaan antara tuan tanah liar dan penduduk liar dan kategori lain WTP di dalam RPG mewakili implementasi risiko. Di bawah RPF, (a) setiap RP diwajibkan untuk mendaftar semua WTP, dan harus memberikan solusi untuk setiap WTP, termasuk tuan tanah liar dan encroacher yang mungkin ada di lokasi proyek, dan (b) setiap RP diwajibkan untuk mengikuti proses konsultasi dan kemudian informasi dan keadilan dari solusi yang diberikan akan diumumkan secara public. Setiap RP akan melalui tinjauan dan ‘tidak ada keberatan’ dari Bank Dunia, dan Bank Dunia dapat dan akan meninjau proses bantuan individual kepada WTP, termasuk kepada tuan tanah liar dan encroacher jika ada.
8.3
Rencana PemukimanUlang (RP)
167. Semua lokasi proyek akan diskrining untuk WTP69. Pekerjaan di bawah proyek dirangkaikan untuk membolehkan kegiatan di lokasi-lokasi tanpa WTP untuk dimulail pertama-tama. Usaha telah diadakan, dan sedang dilanjutkan, untuk meminimalisir jumlah WTP (lihat bagian 5.5). Di mana WTP 69
Data untuk lokasi non-WTP (termasuk lokasi Tahap 1) dilakukan pada tahun 2011, Pengulangan atau update data tersebut ntuk memastikankembali tidak ada nya WTP diharapkan dapat dilakukan pada Bulan Oktober 2010.
76
dikenali dan tak dapat dihindari, satu Rencana Pemukiman kembali akan disiapkan sesuai dengan ketentuan RPF. RP akan mengenali orang-orang yang terkena proyek dan meletakkan kerangka untuk mengkompensasi dan memulihkan penghidupan rumah tangga yang layak dengan batas waktu yang jelas dan disepakati antara WTP dan DKI Jakarta. Semua RP harus disetujui oleh Bank, bukan kepada publik dan harus dilaksanakan (kecuali unsur-unsur dalam RP sehubungan kegiatan paska-pemukiman kembali) sebelum pekerjaan apa pun dimulai di lokasi yang berhubungan. 168. Pendahuluan RP. Sensus pendahuluan dilakukan paralel dengan persiapan RPF dan DED pada tujuh lokasi yang awalnya dikenali sebagai lokasi WTP (lihat Bagian). Ketika tahap pertama dalam persiapan lokasi khusus RP, atau sebelum memasuki lokasi subproyek untuk melakukan sensus survey, sosialisasi awal atas proyek dilakukan pada tingkat lokal pemerintahan / pemimpin masyarakat (terutama kelurahan, RT/RW) baik oleh pertemuan kelompok di kantor kelurahan atau oleh banyak temu kecil dari satu RT/RW ke RT/RW lain 70 . Dengan persetujuan pemimpin dan masyarakat lokal, survey sensus pendahuluan71 dilaksanakan orang-orang/rumah tangga-rumah tangga yang bisa, bergantung pada kuasa dari daerah dampak subproyek (pada waktu itu DED sedang disiapkan secara serentak), yang perlu untuk dimukimkan kembali. Secara total, ada 2369 orang yang diwawancarai di tujuh lokasi. Berdasar pada sensus pendahuluan ini, draft awal RP telah disiapkan72.
8.3.1 Pembaharuan Sensus dan Finalisasi RP 169. Sensus dan konsultasi pendahuluan, sementara mereka memberikan data berharga dan diperlukan, juga diberikan umpan balik tentang harapan dan perhatian. Perhatian, aspirasi dan harapan yang relevan dari masyarakat yang harus diakomodasi selama konstruksi akan dimasukkan dalam dokumen penawaran dan kontrak pekerjaan. Dengan finalisasi dan pembukaan RPF, DKI Jakarta akan melanjutkan dengan pembangunan lebih lanjut dan persiapan pendahuluan RP pada lokasi-lokasi yang baru-baru dikenali sebagai lokasi WTP73. Sebuah panduan untuk proses penyusunan dan langkah lengkap yang ahrus diambil untuk RPK telah disiapkan 74 . RP akan diselesaikan 75 , yang tunduk pada pemeriksaan dan tidak ada keberatan dari Bank Dunia, dibuka dan dilaksanakan sebelum pekerjaan sehubungan (Tahap 2).
8.3.2 Databaseuntuk WTP 170. DKI Jakarta bermaksud mengembangkan data dasar untuk WTP, yang akan secara berangsurangsur diperluas untuk melingkupi WTP pada JUFMP. Informasi dalam data dasar akan dipakai sebagai 70
Setelah berkonsultasi dengan pemerintah lokal dan memperhitungkan situasi lokal. Survey sensus memperoleh informasi tentang karakteristik sosial-ekonomi, aset-aset yang terdampak, persepsi dan aspirasi WTP. Catatan tentang tiap WTP termasuk foto pribadi, aset terdampak, dan fotocopy KTP. Aset terdampak dihitung dan dihubungkan dengan individu pemilik. 72 Persiapan sensus ini dan pendahuluan RP didukung oleh konsultan PMU untuk membantu DKI Jakarta. 73 Yang mana telah direduksi dari tujuh menjadi 6 lokasi setelah usaha lanjutan untuk memakai disain teknis dan pemilihan cara kerja untuk meminimalisir dampak (lihat bagian 5.5.1 untuk rincian). 74 Dihaprakan untuk diupdate secara terus menerus dengan mempertimbangkan pengalaman yang didapat dari penyusunan RPK sebelumnya 75 Ini akan diharapkan untuk memperoleh sensus terkini, pengumuman tanggal penggusuran, dan konsultasi dengan WTP termasuk pilihan kompensasi, bantuan, dan rehabilitasi penghidupan, waktu pelaksanaan, dll. Konsultasi dengan lembaga masyarakat juga direncanakan. 71
77
rujukan oleh DKI Jakarta dalam kasus bahwa di masa depan ia harus memukimkan lagi orang-orang dari lokasi proyek lain, untuk menghindari memberikan kompensasi pada orang yang sama.
8.3.3 Pendanaan untuk RPF dan RP 171. RP dan ketentuan yang dikemukakan dalam dokumen ini akan didanai bersama oleh DKI Jakarta dan proyek (dikelola oleh PMU): •
•
DKI Jakarta akan memberikan dana dari anggaran mereka untuk mendanai: (a) Unit Pelaksanaan Proyek76 (PIU), (b) kompensasi pemukiman kembali, (c) menetapkan dan menempatkan GRS, dan (d) sistim Pemerintahan-mobil dan lokasi situs internet. Anggaran untuk kompensasi pemukiman, bantuan, dan dukungan rehabilitasi akan dialokasikan pada institusi pemerintah yang relevan. Sebagai contoh, anggaran untuk kompensasi bagi bangunan dan bangunan rumah sewa akan disediakan di bawah Departemen Perumahan; anggaran untuk dukungan rehabilitasi akan dialokasikan oleh Departemen Sosial, Departemen, Perdagangan dan Koperasi, dll., bergantung pada jenis kegiatan. Proyek akan mendanai konsultan independen yang akan melaksanakan pemantauan dan evaluasi eksternal, konsultan pengawasan yang akan mengawasi pelaksanaan RPF ini, konsultan dan tenaga ahli yang akan mengelola GRS.
172. Secara umum, biaya untuk implementasi RPK mencapai US$ 2,8 juta, kemampuan fiscal DKI Jakarta untuk mengimplementasikan RPK telah dievaluasi. Dana hibah (seperti dan jika ada) akan dipakai untuk melengkapi pendanaan kegiatan diatas.
9
Konsultasi
173. Secara keseluruhan, proyek disiapkan mengadopsi proses konsultasi yang bermakna dan partisipatif dengan orang-orang, kelompok, dan pemegang saham lain, yang berpotensi terkena proyek. Proses konsultasi juga adalah bagian integral dari komunikasi proyek, yang didikusikan lebih rinci dalam Pasal 10. Proses konsultatif bagi proyek ini telah mendalam dan tersebar luas dan terjadi pada banyak tingkat tergantung pada target kelompok pemegang saham dan persoalan yang sedang didiskusikan. Diskusi di sini akan berpusat pada proses konsultatif mengenai dokuman AMDAL, RPF dan RP, dan dengan masyarakat yang berpotensi terkena proyek di semua lokasi proyek.
9.1
Konsultasi selama AMDAL
174. Konsultasi proyek terjadi lebih dari horison dua tahun kebanyakan pada 2009 dan 2010. Mereka mengambil bentuk pertemuan umum dan dicatat sebagai lampiran dalam masing-masing dokumen AMDAL yang disetujui BPLHD DKI. Konsultasi publik selama persiapan AMDAL untuk lokasi proyek Tahap 1 dilakukan sebelum selesainya DED. Diskusi Kelompok Fokus dilakukan untuk semua lokasi proyek sejajar dengan persiapan DED dan AMDAL untuk lokasi Tahap 2, juga dalam persiapan awal RP untuk lokasi WTP. Wawancara dengan sampel anggota masyarakat (hingga 10% rumah tangga) dilakukan untuk melengkapi informasi dasar lingkungan dan sosial, aspirasi masyarat dan perhatian pada 76
Termasuk kelompok kerja yang dijelaskan dalam Bagian 3.8. 78
pelaksanaan proyek diperoleh dalam konsultasi selama persiapan AMDAL. Aspirasi utama, persoalan dan perhatian yang dimunculkan oleh para partisipan di sepanjang semua lokasi proyek diperoleh melalui konsultasi dan wawancara selama persiapan AMDAL adalah: (a) dukungan dan pengakuan bahwa hasil dari proyek akan mengurangi banjir tapi akan menjadi singkat untuk mengantarai gangguan selama konstruksi; (b) pengakuan bahwa kapasitas aliran kanal telah berkurang karena sedimentasi, pembuangan sampah yang tak layak, dan bangunan dan hunian liar di atas badan air dan sekelilingnya; (c) keinginan untuk memiliki rincian lebih tentang proyek, termasuk jadwal waktu; (d) keinginan agar konstruksi mesti dilakukan secara wajar, termasuk penanganan tumpahan material kerukan selama transportasi, kebisingan, debu; (e) jenis dan tingkat kompensasi yang akan diberikan jika pemukiman kembali terjadi; (f) kesempatan bagi bisnis dan tenaga kerja lokal; (g) keinginan memiliki konsultasi bermakna, terutama selama konstruksi; dan (h) kemauan untuk berpartisipasi dalam kegiatan pengelolaan sampah padat. 175. Mengenai CDF Ancol, konsultasi dimulai pada 2005/2006 ketika AMDAL pertama untuk CDF Ancol disiapkan. AMDAL CDF Ancol pertama disetujui pada 2006 untuk reklamasi menggunakan terutama pasir sebagai material pengisi dan karena itu sebelum pra-tanggal JUFMP, ia tak mempertimbangkan proyek JUFMP sama sekali. Konsultasi publik pada 2005 meliputi beberapa pertemuan untuk mempertimbangkan draft AMDAL dengan notulen pertemuan yang menyorot persoalan yang dimunculkan, termasuk dampak sosial/masyarakat. Perbaikan RKL/RPL CDF Ancol didasarkan pada rancangan umum yang sama dan prinsip-prinsip seperti dalam AMDAL terdahulu, tapi perbaikan dilakukan secara khusus untuk membolehkan bagi penggunaan material kerukan JUFMP sebagai material isian dan untuk menambah lebar saluran yang ada antara garis pantai yang ada dan daerah isian dari kirakira 80 m hingga kira-kira 200 m. Satu proses konsultasi publik tambahan diadakan selama proses perbaikan per persyaratan aturan dari Peraturan Pemerintah No: 27/199977. 176. Tabel 9-1 meringkaskan persoalan kunci yang muncul selama proses konsultasi AMDAL dan tindakan yang diambil untuk menjawab persoalan ini.
Tabel 9-1 Persoalan yang muncul pada konsultasi AMDAL Tahap 1 dan CDF Ancol Persoalan yang muncul dan
77
Ringkasan tanggapan dari yang dikonsultasikan
Lihat Pasal 3 untuk pembahasan legislasi lingkungan Indonesia.
79
Ringkasan Aksi yang Diambil oleh Proyek untuk menjawab keprihatinan ini
Diskusi (Tematis) Tahap 1 Konsultasi AMDAL Sasaran, Komponen, dan Rancangan Institusional Proyek Informasi tentang daerah sub-proyek
Umumnya umpan balik mendukung kegiatan pengendalian banjir.
Disain proyek untuk melanjutkan memaksimalkan kesempatan pengendalian banjir melalui pemilihan sungai dan waduk kunci.
• Memberikan sejarah wilayah (informasi umum) • Pemukiman kembali dan orang-orang yang kembali • Banjir juga terjadi karena datangnya air pasang • Usulan persyaratan teknik
Informasi tentang Proyek
Jadwal waktu, batas-batas, metode konstruksi, konsultasi nanti, dll.
Persoalan Pemukiman kembali
• Maukah saya dimukimkan lagi • Kapan saya akan tahu jika saya akan dimukimkan lagi • Kapan pemukiman lagi akan terjadi • Apa kompensasi/kelayakan yang saya akan dapat • Kompensasi/kelayakan harus pada nilai pasar • JIka pemukiman lagi terjadi, orang lain tak akan kembali masuk • Kompensasi yang layak tak selalu terjadi • Setelah sensus tak ada lagi perpindahan properti bagi spekulan • Satu kasus pedagang mendesak agar kuasa hukumnya mesti hadir waktu sensus • Sedikit berkata bahagia untuk pindah, kebanyakan mau pindah dengan kompensasi yang layak • Beberapa condong membuat rancangan mereka sendiri untuk pemukiman lagi, termasuk perumahan • Perhatian terbesar pada tumpahan material kerukan dari truk • Minimalisir gangguan dan kebisingan • Don’t leave dredged materials behind on the dredging site • Masyarakat bingung tentang kemana keluhan akan ditujukan.
• Diberikan informasi teknis yang berguna untuk disain proyek. • Metode dilembagakan untuk menjamin daerah pemukiman kembali tetap bebas. • Lingkup proyek tetap kerukan darurat dan faktor pasang surut akan ditimbang dalam disain. • Dipertanggungjawabkan oleh insinyur disain jika layak. FGD pada lebih dari 60 kelurahan dilakukan dan konsultasi berlanjut akan dilakukan di sepanjang proyek. • Semua point terhubung pemukiman lagi dijawab dalam Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF)dan pertimbangan untuk persoalan yang muncul dipadukan – orang-orang menyadari perkembangan kompensasi penghidupan dalam RPF • Tentang spekulan, dianjurkan agar batasbatasnya ditetapkan segera • Pertanyaan sensus tidak dipaksakan pada orang-orang untuk menghindari konflik.
Perhatian pada akibat
Rancangan Pelaksanaan
Ingin untuk konsultasi dan
• Pernyataan umum dari masyarakat agar mereka ingin terus dilibatkan melalui
80
• RKL/RPL ditempatkan dalam kontrak dan
mendesak tidak ada tumpahan dari truk, kurangi bising dan bau, dan menjamin pengelolaan yang layak dan kebersihan lokasi. • POSKO di lokasi-basis akan memberi jalan untuk memberanikan partisipasi masyarakat, keterlibatan dan perpaduan kepentingan. • Tambahan info proyek, penyebaran (misalnya brosur) akan disediakan. • POSKO di basis-lokasi akan menyediakan jalan untuk memberanikan keterlibatan dan
keterlibatan rutin
proses konsultasi selama pelaksanaan proyek juga.
partisipasi masyarakat , dan perpaduan kepentingan.
Konsultasi CDF Ancol Sasaran Proyek, Komponen, dan Rancangan Institusional Informasi tentang proyek
Umumnya suportif (per Perbaikan RKL/RPL Ancol 2009) karena ini adalah bagian dari pengendalian banjir JUFMP.
Persoalan sosial selain pemukiman kembali
• Umumnya, semua responden berharap agar pelaksanaan kerja proyek dapat menyerat tenaga kerja dan membuka kesempatan usaha warga kelurahan Ancol dan agar dampak negatif dapat dikelola dengan baik oleh PT PJA Ancol, Tbk. • Kira-kira 15% dari responden yang diwawancara selama proses AMDAL tak setuju proyek karena dampak negatif yang mungkin mereka derita, seperti gangguan ke daerah dimana mereka cari ikan, udang, dan kepiting dan cumi. • Komisi AMDAL di BPLHD DKI menyatakan perhatian terbesar mereka jika sedimen ditemukan sampah berbahaya (limbah B3). • Polusi air laut. • Gangguan dan kebisingan. • Tumpahan lumpur (dari truk JUFMP) di sekitar daerah Ancol dan jalan rusak. • Dampak di luar lokasi (jika kerukan JUFMP tak cukup memenuhi semua ruang CDF, darimana sumber material isian?).
Perhatian pada akibat.
• Jadwal waktu, batas-batas, cara konstruksi, konsultasi nanti, dll. • Dampak positif proyek CDF Ancol untuk masyarakat.
81
PT. PJA siap kerjasama dengan JUFMP untuk menjamin agar konstruksi dan operasi fasilitas pembuangan tertutup persyaratannya yang diterapkan dalam proyek JUFMP. • Menugaskan Divisi Humas untuk menjembatani antara PT PJA dan masyarakat. Melalui program Tanggungjawab Sosial Perusahaan, dua SMP di Pademangan Barat dan Kel. Ancol dibangun. PT PJA dan kelurahan lokal terus mendukung program "Ancol Cintal Lingkungan". • Menyebarkan rencana ke masyarakat umum. • Mendirikan forum komunikasi dan koordinasi dengan kegiatan lain di wilayahnya. • Tindakan pemantauan meliputi pelaporan tentang frekwensi temu forum komunikasi. • PT. PJA telah kerjasama dengan masyarakat lokal yang tetap diinfokan dengan rekrutan tenaga kerja yang memprioritaskan pekerja lokal. • Daerah tangkapan ikan di sekitar CDF Ancol telah ditaksir tak layak karena air terusmenerus menerima polutan dari kali-kali perkotaan kota Jakarta.
• PMU mengembangkan prosedur uji untuk mencegah sampah B3 memasuki CDF Ancol. • Perbaikan RKL/RPL mengharuskan PT PJA membangun fasilitas pembuangan tertutup, untuk dikompletkan sebelum pembuangan Proyek dimulai. • RKL/RPL ditaruh dalam kontrak dan menegakkan tidak ada tumpahan truk, mengurangi bising dan bau, dan menjamin pengelolaan dan kebersihan yang layak. • PT PJA diminta (per Kesepakatan dengan DKI Jakarta) untuk menyediakan pembersih truk sebelum truk-truk JUFMP meninggalkan CDF Ancol. Kontraktor juga diharuskan untuk mendeposit dana tunai yang akan dipakai untuk jalan rusak karena alat angkutnya tidak diperbaiki oleh kontraktor.
• PT. PJA akan menjamin agar sumber
Rancangan pelaksanaan
Ingin konsultasi dan keterlibatan terus-menerus.
• Koordinasi dengan JUFMP (yang melakukan apa dan tanggungjawab). • Jadwal Pelaksanaan (ketika tanggul siap).
•
• Pernyataan umum untuk AMDAL Tahap
•
1, dimana masyarakat mengharapkan ada pekerjaan dan kesempatan usaha.
•
•
•
9.2
material isian selain dari material kerukan akan berasal dari sumber yang sah yang ada ijin lingkungan (misalnya AMDAL). PT. PJA telah aktif berpartisipasi dalam diskusi sehubungan persiapan JUFMP. PT. PJA akan menjamin, dan Bank Dunia akan menegaskan, agar fasilitas pembuangan tertutup selayaknya sebelum pembuangan material kerukan. Menugaskan Divisi Humas PT PJA untuk terus menjembatani antara PT PJA dan masyarakat. Mendirikan forum komunikasi dan koordinasi dengan kegiatan/instansi lain di wilayah. Pemantauan tindakan meliputi pelaporan frekwensi temu forum komunikasi.
Diskusi Kelompok Fokus (FGD)
177. Sebagai tambahan kepada konsultasi publik yang dilaksanakan selama persiapan AMDAL, proyek juga melaksanakan DKF di 57 kelurahan (yaitu kelurahan perkotaan) di empat kotamadya selama Juni-September 2010 dimana lokasi proyek terletak. Ini selanjutnya diinformasikan persiapan RPF dan pendahuluan RP. Maksud pertemuan adalah untuk (i) menginformasikan masyarakat tentang status terkini dari proyek, terutama untuk lokasi Tahap 1 dimana AMDAL-sehubungan konsultasi diselesaikan sebelum akhir 2009 dan dimana ada beberapa perubahan pada lingkup proyek dan waktu proyek sejak saat itu ketika DED menjadi tersedia, dan (ii) melanjutkan memperoleh umpan balik dari masyarakat dan aspirasi mereka. Partisipan yang terdiri dari perwakilan dari kantor kelurahan, Dewan Kelurahan, Babinsa, Ketua PKK, pemimpin masyarakat, Ketua RT dan RW, dan perwakilan masyarakat dari lokasi proyek. Total 1051 partisipan menghadiri berbagai pertemuan (tiap pertemuan dihadiri antara 11-28 partisipan). Partisipasi wanita sepanjang kelurahan bervariasi dari 0-71% dari total partisipan. Informasi yang diperoleh dari DKF di lokasi-lokasi WTP, yang terletak dalam 31 dari 57 kelurahan, juga diperhitungkan dalam persiapan pendahuluan RP. Pertemuan DKF di lokasi kelurahan WTP dihadiri oleh 599 partisipan78. 178. DKF menyatakan bahwa masyarakat mempunyai beberapa perhatian utama, yaitu, tentang : (i) sekiranya mereka perlu dimukimkan lagi, mereka akan diberikan kompensasi tak wajar dan disediakan lokasi relokasi yang jauh dari pekerjaan mereka; (ii) mereka tak dapat mengakses kesempatan kerja selama konstruksi; (iii) mereka tak akan memiliki komunikasi dengan proyek dan kontraktor; (iv) mereka tak akan disediakan fasilitas terdekat dan dapat dijangkau untuk menumpahkan keluhan; (v) mereka tak diberitahukan dengan baik sebelumnya tentang proyek, sebelum pemulaian dan selama konstruksi; dan (vi) konstruksi akan mengganggu penghidupan mereka. Selanjutnya, masyarakat memperhatikan (i) tentang potensi manajemen yang buruk pada material kerukan di lokasi sementara yang terletak di sekitar 78
Sebagai catatan, diskusi grup terfokus (FGD) dilakukan baik sebelum dan sesudah, hasil evaluasi jawaban kuestioner yang diberikan menjelaskan bahwa terdapat perbedaan yang berarti bahwa setelah FGD dilakukan tigkat kesadaran dan pemahaman terhadapat proyek meningkat.
82
mereka; (ii) transportasi untuk material kerukan yang akan menambah kemacetan lalu lintas, bau dan kerusakan jalan lokal; dan, (iii) tentang cara pengerukan yang dapat merusak tanaman dan bangunan. Masyarakat ingin (i) berpartisipasi dalam pemantauan kegiatan konstruksi, dan pengelolaan sampah padat khususnya dalam menyortir sampah yang mempunyai nilai ekonomis sebelum transportasi sampah ke tempat pembuangan akhir; (ii) memiliki komunikasi yang baik dengan manajemen proyek dan kontraktor; dan , (iii) mempunyai POSKO sedekat mungkin di tetangga mereka yang akan berfungsi sebagai pusat penanganan keluhan di lokasi untuk bertemu dan berkoordinasi dengan manajemen proyek dan kontraktor. 179. Laporan FGD 79 untuk tiap lokasi sub-proyek akan dibuat tersedia bersama laporan AMDAL untuk kontraktor konstruksi dan Konsultan Pengawasan. Dokumen penawaran untuk pekerjaan sipil mengkhususkan kegiatan untuk menanggapi kebanyakan dari keprihatinan dan aspirasi masyarakat yang disebutkan diatas sebagai bagian dari kegiatan konstruksi. Konsultasi publik bermakna akan dilanjutkan di sepanjang pelaksanaan proyek (termasuk selama persiapan final RP) untuk menjamin agar keprihatinan diatas ditanggapi secara wajar. .
9.3
Konsultasi tentang Kerangka Kebijakan Pemukiman kembali (RPF)
180. Serangkaian lokakarya dan dialog dilaksanakan dengan pejabat pemerintah propinsi dan kotamadya secara khusus untuk mendukung persiapan RPF. Ini menuntun persiapan RPF. Dua sesi konsultasi dilaksanakan tentang draft RPF, dan diikuti oleh konsultasi lanjutan yang bertujuan memperkuat kapasitas instansi dan kotamadya yang relevan dalam melaksanakan RPF. Ringkasan konsultasi ini adalah sebagai berikut: • Konsultasi 'internal' - terdiri dari 126 partisipan, yang bervariasi dari pemerintah pusat (Kementerian PU), dan DKI Jakarta hingga tingkat terendah (perwakilan Walikota dari semua kotamadya DKI, biro dan institusi DKI yang relevan, dan pemerintah sub-local hingga tingkat kecamatan/kelurahan). Tujuan dari konsultasi ini adalah untuk menyebarkan dan mendapat dukungan dari pejabat DKI yang lebih luas untuk draft RPF. Beberapa partisipan menyampaikan perhatian atau sarannya tentang hal-hal utama sebagai berikut: (a) ada keperluan untuk mensosialisasikan dan mengkonsultasikan RPF kepada publik yang lebih luas; (b) pelaksanaan RPF terutama dengan dasar hukum terkini yang ada yang tidak membolehkan untuk mengkompensasi WTP yang menduduki tanah negara; (c) mekanisme untuk mendefinisikan tingkat kompensasi bagi penghuni ilegal dan tanggungjawab keuangan bagi pengeluaran untuk kompensasi demikian ; (d) konfirmasi bahwa DKI Jakarta tidak menyediakan sewa-untuk- perumahan umum sendiri tapi hanya sewa perumahan publik; (e) anggaran untuk kompensasi harus tersedia pada waktunya; (f) penyebaran dan pembukaan RPF bisa menciptakan harapan dan akan menuntun kepada pertambahan penghuni liar; (g) kesiapan DKI Jakarta untuk melaksanakan RPF karena pembangunan di lapangan cukup cepat dan dinamis; (h) RPF bisa diterapkan untuk WTP yang digusur dan dikompensasi sebelum persiapan proyek yang diberikan sehingga DKI Jakarta tak mempunyai data dasar untuk yang tergusur, kompensasi yang diberikan kepada mereka di bawah JUFMP akan menuntun kepada masalah audit; (i) kompensasi harus diberikan langsung kepada WTP untuk menghindari potensi ketidakpercayaan; dan (j) sekiranya ada keluhan, unit penanganan 79
Laporan FGD untuk tiap lokasi tersedia dalam berkas proyek.
83
•
•
80
keluhan berbasis-lokasi di lokasi kantor proyek (POSKO) - akan harus menindaklanjutinya secara wajar dan tepat waktu. Konsultasi 'eksternal' - terdiri dari 77 partisipan, meliputi 26 partisipan dari NGO aktif tentang berbagai persoalan di Jakarta, perwakilan dari berbagai universitas dan pakar teknik. Ringkasan dari pertanyaan, perhatian dan masukan dari para partisipan pertemuan adalah sebagai berikut: (i) apresiasi pada pikiran baru DKI Jakarta tentang penanganan pemukiman kembali dengan RPF yang sesuai dengan harapan NGO; namun, ada perhatian pada proses pelaksanaan (termasuk waktu yang diperlukan untuk melengkapi proses) di lapangan, dan potensinya untuk memicu kehadiran "orang tengah" yang bertindak seperti perantara yang akan mempengaruhi proses pemukiman kembali; (ii) DKI Jakarta akan mengeruk kanal tanpa pemukiman kembali jika memungkinkan, jika tidak kemudian meminimalisir pemukiman kembali 80 ; (iii) DKI Jakarta diharapkan bekerja dengan masyarakat dan/atau NGO yang memiliki pengalaman atau kini sedang bekerja dengan penghuni liar di tempat pemukiman kembali; (iv) RPF perlu disosialisasikan lebih luas dan ke bawah ke WTP menggunakan pendekatan yang lebih baik dan bukan penyebaran satu-arah; (v) mekanisme penanganan keluhan perlu menjadi jelas dan RPF harus juga meliputi Undang-Undang No. 2/2005 menyangkut hak-hak orang dalam kehidupoan sosial, ekonomi dan budaya. Tentang aspek lain yang tak berhubungan dengan RPF, partisipan memperhatikan tentang mengapa DKI Jakarta harus meminjam untuk proyek ini sementara ia tak dapat menghabiskan anggarannya sendiri pada cara yang tepat pada waktunya; dan amaran agar proyek perlu memastikan bahwa CDF Ancol berpegang pada persyaratan AMDAL-nya (karena NGO sedang mendaftar gugatan masyarakat atas reklamasi sepanjang pantai Utara Jakarta). Partisipan juga menyatakan bahwa pengelolaan banjir harus juga ditemani oleh perbaikan sistim drainase dan sampah padat (bukan hanya melalui kerukan), dan transportasi lumpur harus di malam hari untuk menghindari kemacetan lalu lintas. Konsultasi ketiga dilaksanakan pada 10 Februari, 2011 dan dihadiri oleh 60 perwakilan dari seluruh empat kotamadya DKI, pemerintah sub-lokal (kecamatan) dimana lokasi proyek terletak, dinas dan biro DKI yang relavan, otoritas Ancol, kepala PMU, PIU Cipta Karya. Tujuan utama dari konsultasi ini adalah untuk mencari pengertian yang sama diantara pejabat pemegang saham di DKI tentang RPF, dan mendiskusikan rencana untuk berlanjut dengan persiapan RP. Diskusi tentang RP termasuk pengertian dan pelaksanaan prinsip-prinsip, kelayakan dan hak-hak, rancangan organisasional atas persiapan dan pelaksanaan RP di lapangan, juga pendekatan dalam mengartikan nilai aset dan ketersediaan rumah umum sewaan. Dana yang diperlukan untuk menyiapkan RP juga didiskusikan. Diskusi juga memunculkan persoalan kebutuhan untuk mendirikan unit penanganan keluhan berbasislokasi - berbasis di kantor lokasi proyek (POSKO) - dan untuk memiliki penuntun operasional untuk melaksanakan RPF dan menyiapkan RP di lapangan. Kemajuan konsultan RP atas survey sensus, keperluan untuk memperbaiki dan memverifikasi informasi sebelum tanggal penggusuran, dan bahwa keperluan untuk memutuskan secara cepat tanggal penggusuran juga didiskusikan.
Ini adalah salah satu prinsip yang dikhususkan dalam RPF.
84
181. DKI Jakarta, dipimpin oleh Kantor Asisten Pembangunan dan Lingkungan, telah memasukkan saran-saran yang relevan dari para partisipan selama dua konsultasi pertama dalam RPF. Perhatian dari partisipan dalam pertemuan konsultasi pertama ditindaklanjuti dalam konsultasi ketiga melalui penjelasan yang lebih rinci oleh PIU DKI Jakarta dan pejabat ari Asisten DKI untuk Pembangunan dan Lingkungan. Selama konsultasi ketiga, beberapa prinsip dan kebijakan RPF diulangi lagi untuk menegaskan pendekatan baru DKI Jakarta untuk menangani pemukiman kembali dan bagaimana ia akan dipakai dalam persiapan RP.
9.4
Konsultasi selama persiapan Rencana Pemukiman kembali (RP)
182. The FGD dilaksanakan sejajar dengan persiapan awal RP, dan oleh sebab itu informasi yang diperoleh dari diskusi dipakai untuk memperbaiki disain survey sensus yang meliputi pertanyaanpertanyaan dan pendekatan survey lapangan. Proses konsultasi untuk menyiapkan pendahuluan RP telah didiskusikan dalam bagian 8.3. 183. Ketika perkembangan selanjutnya RP khusus lokasi semakin maju, DKI Jakarta kini melaksanakan konsultasi RPF dan pendahuluan RP di berbagai kotamadya dimana lokasi WTP terletak yaitu, di Jakarta Barat, Jakarta Timur, Jakarta Utara dan Jakarta Pusat. Konsultasi ini ditujukan untuk memperkuat dukungan kotamadanya kepada pelengkapan dan pelaksanaan RP81. 184. DKI Jakarta sedang berencana mulai melaksanakan konsultasi dengan WTP setelah tanggal penggusuran diumumkan, diantaranya untuk menegaskan daftar WTP dan aset yang terkena, mendiskusikan dan menyetujui pilihan kompensasi, jadwal pengosongan dan relokasi, dll., sebagai bagian dari persiapan RP. Konsultasi dengan WTP akan dilakukan dalam kelompok atau pleno, bergantung pada situasi khusus di tiap lokasi, dipimpin oleh tim RP DKI Jakarta dan dibantu oleh tim konsultan.
10 Sistim Penyelesaian Keluhan (GRS) 185. DKI Jakarta akan mendirikan Sistim Penyelesaian Keluhan terpadu untuk menjamin bahwa para pengadu disediakan ruang untuk mendaftarkan keluhan dan menyampaikan aspirasi mereka sehubungan proyek dalam lingkungan bebas bicara secara politis dan psikologis yang menjamin suara mereka didengar, dicatat dan ditanggapi secara memuaskan, obyektif dan tepat pada waktunya oleh teradu dan DKI Jakarta. Rincian GRS dimasukkan dalam proyek RPF. Diharapkan GRS ini akan di-setup saat mulainya implementasi proyek dan akan beroperasi penuh sebelum Tahap 2 dimulai. 186. GRS Proyek akan menanggapi semua keluhan yang berhubungan dengan proyek (bukan hanya sehubungan persoalan sosial, tapi juga lingkungan, teknis dn lain-lain). GRS Proyek akan mengikuti prinsip kunci sebagai berikut: •
Pengadu dapat memberkas keluhan gratis, melalui berbagai media alternatif, ditujukan kepada unit penanganan keluhan yang didirikan di berbagai tingkat dan/atau alamat kontak dan situs internet yang didedikasikan khusus untuk penanganan keluhan bagi JUFMP;
81
Sampai saat ini, konsultasi telah lengkap di Jakarta Barat dan Timur pada April 2011. Konsultasi dengan Jakarta Utara dan Pusat direncanakan pad Mei dan Juni 2011.
85
• •
• • • •
Pengadu akan diberikan perlakuan adil, tidak mengancam, dapat dijangkau, setara untuk tindak lanjut keluhan dan untuk penyelesaian pertengkaran, tak peduli asal mula, agama, status kewargaan, latar belakang sosial ekonomi; Keluhan atau aduan akan lebih disukai diselesaikan pada waktu terawal di lokasi sup-proyek. Hanya dalam kasus yang tindaklanjut keluhan dan aduan tidak diselesaikan di tingkat lebih rendah, maka kasus ini akan dibawa kepada perhatian tingkat lebih tinggi dari struktur pemerintahan; Tindak lanjut atas keluhan dan penyelesaian aduan akan dibuat berdasar kesepakatan yang dicapai diantara semua pihak yang terlibat melalui proses konsultasi yang diberitahukan dengan baik dengan fasilitasi tim yang kompeten, dapat dipercaya dan kredibel; Sistim penanganan keluhan akan memelihara obyektifitas, keterbukaan, dan prinsip keadilan oleh memiliki Tim Penasehat Independen yang akan tersedia untuk membantu pengadu di semua unit penanganan-pengaduan; Keluhan dan aduan; juga tindakan dan resolusi tindak lanjut akan dicatat pada waktunya melalui sistim berdasar situs internet dan dibuka kepada umum; Sosialisasi, penyebaran, dan pembukaan sistim/prosedur penanganan keluhan juga keluhan dan tindakan tindak lanjut dan penyelesaian konflik akan dilakukan secara terus-menerus di tingkat lokasi sub-proyek, kotamadya dan propinsi.
187. Unit penanganan keluhan berbasis-lokasi akan ditempatkan di tiap lokasi untuk mengelola dan memproses keluhan. Unit ini akan berbasis di kantor lokasi proyek (POSKO). Ia diharapkan agar lebih dekat dan lebih mudah instrumen untuk memberkas keluhan, lebih mungkin keluhan dapat diselesaikan di lokasi dalam periode waktu yang relatif singkat. Sosialisasi mengenai ketersediaan pelayanan keluhan atas proyek dari masyarakat, khususnya WTP, adalah kunci untuk mengurangi potensi kerusuhan sosial dan kekecewaan sosial. Akan ada unit penanganan keluhan yang sama di tingkat kotamadya dan provinsi, untuk menerima dan menanggapi keluhan yang tak dapat diselesikan di tingkat POSKO. Sosialisasi RPF meliputi sosialisasi GRS. 188. GRS Proyek meliputi manajemen sistim informasi dan data dasar yang akan memantau dan menyebarkan informasi atas semua keluhan. Informasi yang dihasilkan GRS Proyek akan menyediakan kemampuan untuk menjejaki persoalan umum dalam pelaksanaan proyek. Sistim akan menggunakan aliran waktu-nyata untuk informasi keluhan dan tindak lanjut. Satu Tim Penasehat akan dibentuk sebagai badan alternatif untuk memberikan pelayanan atas keluhan dan kepada DKI Jakarta untuk datang kepada solusi yang disepakati atau tindak lanjut atas keluhan. Tim Konsultan Pengawasan ditugaskan untuk membantu DKI Jakarta dalam mendirikan sistim GRS Proyek, termasuk pengembangan Prosedur Operasi Standar, dan mendukung DKI Jakarta untuk mengelola sistim selama periode pelaksanaan proyek. 189. Perlu diketahui bahwa system pengaduan yang telah ada di DKI Jakarta, yang berlangsung dalam berbagai bentuk. Pada kebanyakan kasus82, orang atau masyrakay yang merasa terganggu, diperlakukan tidak adil atau semena-mena dapat melakukan pengaduan kepada ketuan RT yang selanjutnya akan menyampaikan nya kepada ketua RW. Jika pengaduan tersebut tidak dapat diselesaikan pada tingkat RT/RW. Ketua RT and RW akan membawa kasus ini ke tingkat kelurahan (yang mana berada dalam wewenang Seksi Pemerintahan dan Ketertiban Umum). Pada tingkat ini, kasus akan didaftarkan secara formal. Pihak yang terkait dalam kasus ini (contoh masyarakat, kontraktor atau institusi pemerintah) 82
Informasi dari hasil diskusi dengan masyarakat.
86
akan berusaha memecahkan masalah nya bersama-sama dengan dewan kelurahan (LMK) dan staf kelurahan. Jika tidak ada resolusi, maka kasus ini akan dibawa ke tingkat kecamatan dan diteruskan ke tingkat kotamadya jika pada tingkat kecamatan juga tidak ada kesepakatan. 190. Pengaduan juga sering dilakukan melalui SMS dan call-center, media (seperti Koran dan radio) dan website resmi DKI Jakarta (yakni www.jakarta.go.id and www.beritajakarta.com). Pengaduan dan masukan yang didapat via website akan diteruskan oleh tingkat provinsi ke level di bawah seperti kelurahan, kecamatan or dinas. Pengaduan dan masukan ini oleh tingkat bawah akan diverifikasi, akan di-follow-up jika hasil verifikasi betul dan akan diselesaikan pada tingkat institusi serendah mungkin.
11 Komunikasi Proyek 191. Kejadian banjir adalah peristiwa sepanjang tahun di Jakarta dan makin bertambah dalam kedahsyatan selama sepuluh tahun terakhir. Bencana banjir di Jakarta pada Januari 1996, Februari 2002, dan Februari 2007, sangat merusak. Peristiwa 2007 menggenangi lebih dari 235 km2 (kira-kira 36%) dearah kota83, hingga 7 meter di beberapa tempat. Banjir 2007 mengenai lebih dari 2,6 juta orang dan memaksa 340.000 orang lari dari rumah mereka. Lebih dari 70 orang meninggal dan ledakan penyakit mengenai lebih dari 200.000 orang. Kerugian ekonomi dan finansial dari banjir 2007 kira-kira 99 juta US$ 84 . Pada tahun 2008, bencana banjir menutup jalan tol bandara, membatalkan lebih dari 1000 penerbangan dan menyebabkan gangguan berat di kota. Banjir pada 2009 juga terjadi intensitas tinggi dan berlanjut pada 2010. Genangan berlanjut terjadi di bawah kondidi curah hujan berkelanjutan. Komunikasi Eksternal 192. Di sepanjang periode persiapan proyek, proses konsultasi sehubungan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial dari proyek (selama periode tiga tahun 2009-2011) telah menjadi satu kunci jalan bagi penyebaran informasi tentang rincian proyek (ini dijelaskan dalam Pasal 0) kepada publik, terutama kepada masyarakat dan di lokasi-lokasi yang dekat dengan proyek. Semua perlindungan sehubungan proses konsultasi (dan terutama konsultasi di daerah proyek sehubungan perlindungan sosial) telah memasukkan penyebaran disain, ruang lingkup dan status proyek terakhir. Harus dicatat bahwa proses konsultasi pada umumnya mencatat dukungan positif untuk proyek in dan tujuan pengendalian banjirnya. 193. Perlindungan sehubungan konsultasi dipasangkan dengan penyebaran informasi oleh DKI Jakarta melalui berbagai saluran85 yang memposisikan JUFMP sebagai potongan penting dari strategi terdekat untuk mengendalikan banjir di Jakarta. Berdasarkan latar belakang kejadian terkini, banjir telah menjadi persoalan mendesak dan sedang dibicarakan di kota. Jadi, usaha penyebaran informasi oleh DKI pada umumnya diambil oleh media lokal. Sebagai akibatnya, kesadaran publik pada proyek JUFMP (baik pada tingkat masyarakat maupun tingkat kota) makin bertambah selama periode persiapan proyek.
83
Peta keluasan banjir, DKI Jakarta (Dinas PU). Diperkirakan oleh Bappenas. 85 Termasuk pengumuman penting dari Gubernur DKI. 84
87
194. Pemantauan media dan audit yang dilakukan selama periode Januari 2010 hingga Januari 2011 menunjukkan pada keberlanjutan dan pertambahan paparan media pada proyek86, terutama melalui portal media online, blog masyarakat dan media cetak, dan pada tingkat yang lebih sedikit melalui media penyiaran elektronik dan situs pemerintah dan NGO. Harus dicatat bahwa paparan media-media ini menyorot bukan hanya rencana proyek dan disainnya untuk mengurangi kejadian banjir di Jakarta, tapi mayoritas mereka mendiskusikan dan melaporkan persoalan yang lebih kompleks tentang tantangan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial yang dihadapi selama persiapan proyek. Nada dari media diskusi tentang usaha pengendalian banjir mengalir nada negatif ke netral hingga netral ke positif, tapi secara signifikan, nada ini telah makin berkembang menuju ke arah positif dan lebih positif selama periode audit. 195. Usaha komunikasi eksternal diharapkan berlanjut selama pelaksanaan proyek. Perlindungan sosial sehubungan konsultasi akan berlanjut di sepanjang persiapan dan pelaksanaan RP lokasi-khusus. Di tingkat masyarakat, pusat informasi publik berbasis di kantor lokasi proyek (POSKO) yang akan dipertahankan di tiap lokasi proyek akan memainkan peran kritis, dimana informasi proyek (termasuk status pelaksanaan terakhir) akan tersedia dan gampang dijangkau oleh publik. Walaupun secara keseluruhan komunikasi eksternal dari DKI Jakarta akan memerlukan perbaikan, JUFMP telah menyediakan momentum koordinasi penyebaran rencana pengendalian banjir Jakarta yang telah luas diliput media. Usaha ini akan berlanjut ke dalam pelaksanaan proyek. Di pihaknya sendiri, Bank Dunia sedang menyiapkan situs internet proyek dimana informasi proyek terakhir dapat tersedia selama pelaksanaan. Adapun budget DKI Jakarta untuk proyek komunikasi mencapai US$ 155.000. Catatan bahwa ini tidak termasuk budget dari Dinas Informasi dan Komunikasi DKI yang mencapai lebih dari US$ 500 juta per tahun (APBD 2011) Komunikasi internal 196. Komunikasi antar-instansi. Pertemuan Panitia Pengarah Bersama secara periodik(lihat bagian 3.6.1) telah menjadi alat dalam menyediakan panggung bagi komunikasi dan pembagian informasi antarinstansi tentang perkembangan terakhir dan status proyek. Inilah satu-satunya jalan dimana semua pemegang saham instansi pemerintah diwakili secara serentak. 197. Komunikasi internal DKI Jakarta. Ketika pemerintah lokal dengan mandat bagi pengembangan, pengelolaan dan administrasi kota, DKI Jakarta secara alamiah dilihat oleh publik sebagai instansi utama yang bertanggungjawab bagi pengelolaan banjir di kota87. DKI Jakarta telah menggunakan kesempatan proses konsultasi sehubungan perlindungan sosial proyek sebagai jalan penting bagi penyebaran informasi rincian lain dari proyek (ini dijelaskan dalam Pasal 9 - lihat khususnya Bagian 9.3) di dalam DKI Jakarta hingga tingkat terendah (perwakilan dari walikota dari semua 4 kotamadya di DKI, dinas dan biro DKI yang relevan, dan pemerintah sub-lokal hingga tingkat kecamatan dan kelurahan). Sosialisasi sepanjang kantor DKI di tingkat pemerintahan propinsi terutama dalam bentuk lokakarya metode pendekatan/transfer ilmu pengetahuan "mentoring" yang dianggap pendekatan paling layak di tingkat kecamatan dan kelurahan. 86
Rata-rata 10 media per bulan disebarkan selama periode ini. Hal ini selanjutnya dikonfirmasi oleh audit media seperti dijelaskan di atas. Diantara temuan audit, mayoritas media terkait melaporkan DKI Jakarta sebagai lembaga yang paling erat berurusan dengan banjir.
87
88
198. Usaha komunikasi internal diharapkan berlanjut selama pelaksanaan proyek. Panggung Panitia Pengarah Bersama akan tetap, karena komite akan melanjutkan bertemu secara periodik selama pelaksanaan proyek untuk menyediakan pengawasan tingkat tinggi. DKI Jakarta juga menugaskan Biro Prasarkot dengan tugas mengkoordinasikan dan mengkomunikasikan proyek sepanjang DKI Jakarta dan instansi pemerintah lainnya. Biro Prasarkot akan juga membentuk jembatan komunikasi antara pendirian institusi proyek dan pendirian institusi DKI. Kegiatan Biro Prasarkot secara langsung diperiksa oleh Asisten Pembangunan dan Lingkungan DKI, yang selanjutnya melapor ke Gubernur DKI. Asisten juga adalah anggota Panitia Pengarah Bersama. Susunan ini akan membolehkan bagi koordinasi vertikal melalui rantai komando juga lintas semua instansi dan juga menghubungkan struktur institusional proyek kepada koordinasi dan komunikasi yang diharuskan untuk melakukan pengendalian banjir secara berkelanjutan.
Gambar 11-1 Komunikasi antara instansi
12 Risiko-risiko Reputasional 199. Bagian ini meringkaskan dua daerah penting sehubungan persoalan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial proyek yang dapat menimbulkan risiko kepada reputasi JUFMP dan/atau Bank Dunia selama pelaksanaan proyek, dan menjelaskan tindakan yang dimaksud akan diambil untuk mengelolal dan
89
meminimalisir risiko-risiko ini 88 . Harus dicatat bahwa tindakan yang diambil oleh proyek untuk menanggapi resiko reputasional tak akan secara sempurna menyingkirkan risiko-risiko ini. Tapi mereka menyampaikan cara nyata dan jelas untuk mengurangi risiko atau mengelolanya hingga tingkat yang dapat diterima. 200.. Seperti dijelaskan dalam pasal-pasal lebih awal dari laporan ini, persiapan proyek telah menjalani proses penilaian lingkungan dan sosial yang mendalam dan cukup komprehensif. Ini ditujukan pertama untuk memperbaiki keberlanjutan kegiatan proyek dan hasil proyek, dan kedua menjamin kesesuaian dengan aturan pemerintah Indonesia dan Kebijakan Perlindungan Lingkungan dan Sosial Bank Dunia sendiri. Meskipun semua rencana, tindakan dan rancangan pelaksanaan dan institusional, perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial ada khusus, risiko-risiko yang dapat dihubungkan denga proyek tetap apa. Ini akan dipantau, dikelola dan diminimalisir di seluruh pelaksanaan proyek. Bagaimanapun juga, ada tiga kunci penting kegiatan yang tidak secara langsung dalam pelaksanaan tanggungjawab pelaksanaan proyek yang walaupun demikian dapat menimbulkan risiko pada reputasi JUFMP dan/atau Bank Dunia selama pelaksanaan. Ini didiskusikan di bawah. Risiko-risiko sehubungan dengan kegiatan non-proyek di atau dekat lokasi proyek. 201. Kegiatan proyek JUFMP berlangsung di daerah perkotaan Jakarta yang sangat padat penduduk. Proyek mempunyai tujuan, lingkup dan batas yang diartikan dengan jelas. Akan tetapi, di lokasi yang sangat padat penduduk, sangat mungkin pembangunan proyek dan kegiatan lain yang tak berhubungan dengan proyek akan terjadi di dalam atau dekat sekali dengan beberapa lokasi proyek selama periode pelaksanaan proyek 89 . Contoh-contoh kegiatan ini bisa meliputi kegiatan pengerukan dan pekerjaan lainnya di kanal-kanal yang tak terkait proyek, atau kegiatan penghijauan yang dapat melibatkan penanaman keras dan lembut. 202. Kegiatan bukan proyek bisa memiliki berbagai standar dan proses untuk uji tuntas bagi pekerjaan dan untuk keuntungan sosial kepada potensial orang-orang yang terkena proyek dibandingkan dengan yang dapat diterapkan untuk proyek. Ada risiko bahwa kedekatan fisik rapat pada kegiatan bukan-JUFMP dapat disalahasosiasikan dengan JUFMP oleh publik dan pemegang saham. Di satu pihak, ini dapat menuntun pada harapan yang keliru atas penerapan tindakan perlindungan lingkungan dan sosial khususproyek, termasuk hak khusus-proyek dan keuntungan kepada orang-orang yang terkena proyek. Di pihak lain, tiap potensi tindakan pengelolaan lingkungan dan sosial yang buruk yang sedang dilaksanakan di kegiatan sehubungan bukan-proyek dapat disalah-kenakan pada JUFMP dan/atau Bank Dunia. 203.
Berbagai tindakan akan diambil untuk mengendalikan dan mengurangi risiko-risiko ini:
88
Bagian ini tidak meringkaskan Kerangka Penilaian Risiko Operasional (ORAF) untuk proyek secara keseluruhan. ORAF yang membentuk bagian dari Dokumen Penaksiran Proyek (PAD) menyampaikan kerangka penilaian risiko yang lebih luas untuk proyek ini. 89 Harus dicatat secara khusus bahwa mandat dan prioritasnya DKI Jakarta meliputi hal berikut: (i) memperluas seluruh rencana pembangunan infrastrukturnya yang bisa meminta penggunaan tanah pemerintah dan/atau pengadaan tanah pribadi, (ii) menegakkan rencana pemakaian tanahnya secara konsisten, yang sebagai akibatnya dapat menuntun kepada pemukiman kembali penghuni informal di tanah pemerintah (termasuk di/sekitar kali) dan mereka yang tak ada ijin bangunan, dan (iii) memperluas ruang hijau Jakarta dari kini 9% hingga mencapai standar minimum 20% dari total wilayah administratifnya.
90
•
• • •
•
Komunikasi efektif akan diletakkan pada tempatnya. Terutama, pusat informasi publik yang berbasis di kantor lokasi proyek (POSKO) akan dipelihara pada tiap lokasi proyek. Ini akan berfungsi sebagai alat primer untuk menyebarkan rincian informasi proyek kepada masyarakat lokal; Tanda-tanda petunjuk (dalam Bahasa Indonesia) akan ditaruh di tempat-tempat yang layak di lokasi proyek yang merinci batas proyek, kegiatan terkait proyek dan informasi kontak; Di mana layak, pagar sementara dan cara lain akan dipakai untuk membuat batas proyek; Unit Penanganan Keluhan basis-lokasi di POSKO akan melayani sebagai garis depan proyek sistim penyelesaian keluhan90, yang memberikan jalan masuk lokasi bagi publik untuk memuat keluhan, dan jika mungkin tiap salah pengertian dan/atau keluhan ditanggapi secara cepat dan lokal; Konsultan Proyek juga ditugaskan dengan pemantauan reguler pada lokasi terkait proyek juga lokasi dengan lokasi JUFMP, dan melaporkan kegiatan tanda yang relevan. Ini akan menyediakan pemberitahuan sebelumnya kepada PIU, PMU dan Bank Dunia untuk membolehkan koordinasi dan tindakan untuk mencegah miskomunikasi dan salah asosiasi kepada JUFMP.
Risiko-risiko sehubungan dengan kegiatan di lokasi CDF Ancol 204. Sebagai tempat pembuangan material kerukan utama, CDF Ancol adalah bagian integral proyek JUFMP. Tanggungjawab pembangunan dan pengoperasian CDF Ancol terletak pada PT PJA, yang bukan entitas pelaksanaan proyek JUFMP. Tak semua kegiatan CDF Ancol secara langsung dihubungkan dengan JUFMP. Sebagai contoh, sementara pekerjaan JUFMP diharapkan menyumbang kira-kira 3,4 juta m3 material isian untuk CDF Ancol, selanjutnya kira-kira 8,6 juta m3 material isian dan kira-kira 400.000 m3 tanah laterit akan diperoleh dari sumber-sumber non-JUFMP (lihat Bagian 5.3). Meskipun demikian, pemegang saham publik dan lain dapat secara langsung menghubungkan tiap masalah yang mungkin muncul di CDF Ancol dengan JUFMP. Sebagai akibatnya, rancangan dibuat untuk Konsultan Pengawasan memiliki akses ke CDF Ancol dan semua lokasi jauhnya (termasuk lokasi sumber pasir dan tanah merah isian) untuk maksud pengawasan dan pemantauan - lihat bagian 3.7.2 bagi penjelasan rancangan institusional untuk lokasi CDF Ancol. Kegiatan pemantauan dan pengawasan akan membolehkan bagi tindakan dirumuskan dan diambil untuk menanggapi kesalahan pelaksanaan, dan diharapkan mengurangi potensi risiko nama baik PIU, PMU dan/atau Bank Dunia. 205. Pertimbangan khusus adalah potensial untuk dampak buruk di lokasi jauh di bukan sumber materi isian JUFMP (pasir dan tanah merah), karena dampak demikian akan terjadi diluar pembatas CDF Ancol sendiri. Menyangkut pasir, dampak sehubungan penambangan di laut pada pasir bisa mengganggu biota (terutama organisme benthic) karena penggalian dasar laut, menurunnya mutu air lait di lokasi dan gangguan spesies laut lain yang bisa hadir. Mengenai sumber tanah merah, dampaknya bisa diasosiasikan dengan penyingkiran tanaman puncak tanah, erosi dan transportasi sedimen dan aliran deposito, genangan air di wilayah lubang galian yang ditinggalkan dan tidak direhabilitasi yang menuntun menjadi ladang pembiakan bagi nyamuk dan vektor penyakit lain, dan keamanan stabilitas lereng jika sumber di bukit atau tempat tinggi. Risiko adalah bahwa jika dampak ini cukup keras, mereka dapati diasosiasikan dengan proyek (ketika di pihak lain, proyek JUFMP sendiri telah mengurangi dampak potensial di lokasi jauh oleh menyumbang nilai rendah 3,4 juta m3 material kerukan tak berbahaya, jadi secara signifikan 90
Konsultan Pengawasan ditugaskan untuk mengembangkan, mengoperasikan dan melaksanakan unit penanganan keluhan di lokasi (yaitu POSKO) di tiap lokasi pekerjaan. Ketentuan fasilitas POSKO (yaitu ruang kantor portabel) dimasukkan ke dalam kontrak kerja kontraktor.
91
mengurangi jumlah material pasir yang sebaliknya dibutuhkan untuk isian CDF Ancol. Proses AMDAL untuk CDF Ancol meliputi pertimbangan potensi dampak di lokasi jauh dan dokumen AMDAL menegaskan lokasi sumber pasir yang telah memiliki ijin lingkungan yang disetujui (lihat Bagian 5.3). Tanah merah yang diharuskan ditetapkan diperoleh dari sumber tanah dekat Bekasi, Jawa Barat yang juga beroperasi di bawah ijin lingkungan. SC akan memainkan peran kunci untuk menolong risiko pengendalian terhadap sumber materi isian yang tak patut. SC akan memeriksa dan menegaskan bahwa penyalur tanah isian memiliki ijin yang diperlukan. Terutama, tanah laterit hanya akan dipakai agak lamapada saat penutupan akhir reklamasi CDF Ancol. SD akan memastikan pada waktu itu bahwa tanah merah mempunyai ijin lingkungan yang patut. SC juga akan memantau pasir dan lokasi tambah tanah merah yang akan disuplai ke CDF Ancol, dan membangun mekanisme untuk memverifikasi material ini yang betul-betul datang dari lokasi ini. Proyek akan bekerja erat dengan BPLHD DKI untuk menanggapi tiap persoalan yang muncul. Risiko sehubungan dengan kegiatan reklamasi yang lebih besar di Jakarta 206. Seperti dicatat dalam Bagian 2.6.1, lokasi CDF Ancol adalah daerah reklamasi yang relatif kecil dan khusus di dalam proses reklamasi jangka panjang dan lebih besar di daerah Ancol Jakarta Utara yang dimulai pada awal tahun 1960-an. PT PJA telah melaksanakan beberapa kegiatan reklamasi ini di waktu lampau (CDF Ancol adalah tahap keempat usaha reklamasi PT PJA di daerah Ancol). Di samping menyumbang material kerukan untuk reklamasi khusus CDF Ancol, JUFMP tidak mendanai juga tak terhubung dengan usaha reklamasi lain di wilayah Ancol. Terpisah dari menyumbang untuk mengurangi keperluan atas material pasir seperti dijelaskan dalam paragraf sebelumnya, JUFMP dalam kerjasama dengan PT PJA juga memperkenalkan praktek perbaikan lingkungan untuk penanganan dan pembuangan material kerukan untuk reklamasi (misalnya melalui pemakaian fasilitas pembuangan tertutup) dan harus menaruh pada tempatnya pemantauan dan pengawasan terancang untuk CDF Ancol. Ada risiko bahwa JUFMP bisa secara salah diasosiasikan oleh publik dan pemegang saham lain sebagai yang bertanggungjawab atas proyek reklamasi lain misalnya yang terjadi di waktu lampau atau hal potensial yang bisa terjadi di masa yang akan datang91. Dokumen proyek dan penyebaran informasi akan bertujuan menegaskan dan menjelaskan bahwa keluasan keterkatian JUFMP dalam hal ini adalah dibatasi untuk CDF Ancol.
91
Diharapkan agar tiap proyek nanti akan mengikuti ketentuan dalam proses AMDAL mereka sendiri.
92
IBRD 38461 THAILAND
ANNEX 1: PROJECT MAP
South China MALAYSIA Sea
PHILIPPINES BRUNEI
PA C I F I C O C E A N
MALAYSIA
INDONESIA
SINGAPORE
PROJECT SITES:
INDONESIA
I
J a v a
N
MAJOR DRAINS (DKI JAKARTA): 3.1 Diversion Grogol-Sekretaris 3.2 Krukut - Cideng 3.3 Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng 3.4 Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari 3.5 Sentiong-Sunter WADUKS (DKI JAKARTA): 4.1 Waduk Melati 4.2 Waduk Sunter Utara 4.3 Waduk Sunter Selatan 4.4 Waduk Sunter Timur III
N
E
S
I
A
(Area of main map)
Java Sea
JAWA
S e a
LINKAGES: Sentiong-Sunter L.1 Kali Itam L.2 Kalibaru L.3 Sunter Kemayoran Ciliwung-Gunung Sahari L.4 Ancol Kp. Bandan L.5 Ancol Long Storage Upper Sunter L.6 Canal - Jl. Kayu Putih Timur Pakin-K. Besar-Jelakeng L.7 Anak K. Ciliwung utara L.8 Jl. Tubagus Angke L.9 PHB Bandengan Utara L.10 Waduk Pluit
FLOODWAYS (DGWR): 2.1 Cengkareng Drain 2.2 West Banjir Canal (WBC) 2.3 Sunter floodways
O
JAKARTA
DISPOSAL SITE: Ancol CDF
NATIONAL IMPORTANCE (DGCK): 1.1 Tanjungan 1.2 Lower Angke 1.3 Cideng-Thamrin
D
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
JAKARTA URGENT FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT (JUFMP)
TIMOR-LESTE
INDIAN OCEAN
AUSTRALIA
1.1
2.2
Ancol CDF
L.10
Highway
4.2
Main Road
L.7
2.1 1.2
L.9
4.4 L.4
3.3
L.1
L.5
3.5 L.8
SELECTED TOWNS AND BUILT-UP AREAS
D.K.I. JAKARTA BOUNDARY
KABUPATEN (REGENCY) HEADQUARTERS
Java
Sea
107°00'
L.3
Muara Gembong 6°00'
6°00'
3.2
Area of map Mauk
Kronjo Kresek
Teluk Naga
Rajeg Pasar Kemis
Balaraja
Cikupa
Tigakarsa
Kosambi
Seratan
Tanum Jaya
Curug Serpong
Parung Panjang
Bantar Gebang
DEPOK Parung
Citeureup
1.3
Cikarang Lemah Tambun Abang
4.1
Cibarusa Jonggol 6°30'
Ciempea
0
Semplak
Cibungbulang Leuwiliang
Jatiluhur Res.
BOGOR
0 106°30'
L.6
Setu
Cileungsi
Cibinong Jasinga
Tambelang Babelan
BEKASI
L.2
3.1
Cabang Bungin
JAKARTA
TANGERANG
Legok
2.3
4.3
JABOTABEK BOUNDARY
106°30'
6°30'
3.4
KABUPATEN BOUNDARIES
107°00'
5
10
15
20
25
1
2
3
KILOMETERS
This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other information shown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World Bank Group, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
KILOMETERS
APRIL 2011
Lampiran 2 Tentative Rencana Persiapan Tahap 2 terkait dengan AMDAL dan RPK Resettlement Plan (RP)
Description
Planned Works Commencement
Expected EIA Disclosure
Jan 2011
Package 1 (Ciliwing-Gunung Sahari Drain, Waduk Melati)
Apr 2012
Package 2a (Cengkareng Floodway)
Apr 2012
Package 2b (Lower Sunter Floodway)
Apr 2012
Package 3 (Cideng Thamrin Drain)
Apr 2012
Jan 2012
Dec 2012
Jul 2012
Package 4 (Sentiong-Sunter Drain, Waduk Sunter Utara, Waduk Sunter Selatan, Waduk Sunter Package 5 (Tanjungan Drain, Lower Angke Drain) Package 6 (West Banjir Canal, Upper Sunter Floodway) Package 7 (Grogol – Sekretaris Drain, Pakin – Kali Besar – Jelakeng Drain, Krukut Cideng Drain, Krukut
(actual) Jan 2011 (actual) Jan 2011
Expected Expected Cut-off Date
RP Disclosure
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Sentiong-Sunter: Aug 2011
Jul 2012
(actual)
Waduk Sunter Utara: Mar 2012 Oct 2012
Jun 2012
NA
Apr 2013
Nov 2012
Jul 2012
Dec 2012
Jul 2012
Mar 2012
NA Nov 2012
Jul 2012
Note: Dates of the preparation of safeguards instruments are subject to change, to align with any changes in planned construction timing.
94
Lampiran 3 Studi Kasus Penggusuran di Lokasi Kemiri, Tambora VI dan Tambora VII. • Kemiri, Tambora VI dan Tambora VIII adalah dua lokasi yang berdekatan dengan lokasi JUFMP. Penggusuran terjadi pada para pedagang yang melakukan kegiatan sepanjang bahu jalan di depan Kali Cengkareng dekat pasar Kemiri, dan sepanjang bahu jalan Tambora VI dan VIII (diasosiasikan dengan lokasi Pakin-Kali Besar-Jelakeng). Penggusuran di lokasi ini sudah lama diminta oleh Kotamadya Jakarta Barat. Penggusuran terpaksa pasar Kemiri (rencana awal pada 2007, penggusuran pada Desember 2008) adalah karena kemacetan jalan dan kompetisi tak sehat antara konsumen pasar Kemiri "formal" dan pedagang informal yang melakukan usaha sepanjang jalan di sisi sungai. Penggusuran di Tambora VI terjadi untuk menegakkan kendali aturan publik atas usaha ilegal, dan memulihkan fungsi sungai dan bahu jalan ke kondisinya semula. Penggusuran Tambora VIII pada Februari 2009 terjadi setelah ijin tahunan bagi pedagang kadaluwarsa dan untuk mengurangi kemacetan jalan. • Proses dan dampak penggusuran di dekat Pasar Kemiri. Sebelum penggusuran, ada total 250 bangunan termasuk 80 kios penjual yang menduduki bahu jalan/kali di dan sepanjang jalan inspeksi untuk kali Cengkareng. Beberapa kelihatannya menduduki diatas sungai. Bangunan ilegal ini dan kegiatan perdagangan telah berkembang dari 25 struktur pada tahun 2000, dan menjadi pesaing pada para pedagang di Pasar Kemiri yang terletak melintasi lokasi gusuran. Sejak saat itu, Kotamadya Jakarta Barat membujuk para pedagang untuk keluar dari lokasi ke empat pasar alternatif (dengan 6 bulan sewa gratis), tapi banyak dari mereka telah berkembang sepanjang waktu. Kondisi lalu lintas sepanjang jalan ini makin buruk, dan pedang di pasar Kemiri makin mengeluh karena mereka kehilangan pembeli yang lebih suka pergi ke pasar informal. Sampah padat yang tak dikelola memasuki sistim drainase. Persiapan untuk penggusuran dimulai pada 2007, dan lebih dari tiga surat pemberitahuan dikeluarkan selama proses. Setelah proses konsultatif dengan pedagang mencapai jalan buntu, penggusuran akhirnya diambil pada Desember 2008 oleh Satpol PP dan dibantu oleh polisi. Tidak ada kompensasi yang diberikan. Dalam banyak kasus, penjual berpartisipasi dalam mengangkat bangunan mereka untuk menyeleamtakan material bangunan. Kira-kira dua bulan setelah penggusuran, kegiatan di depan Pasar Kemiri kembali ke kondisi pra-penggusuran. Kebanyakan yang tergusur (80%) telah kembali ke lokasi dan berangsur-angsur menjadi pasar informal lagi, menjual barang tanpa tenda dan kios. Penjual baru juga bergabung dengan pedagang yang digusur. Kegiatan bersifat sama seperti sebelum penggusuran tapi ada pertambahan berbagai barang yang dijual di pasar informal. Pasar ini juga buka di malam hari, karena tanpa tenda kegiatan perdagangan tak bisa terjadi selama hari terpanas di siang hari. Walaupun ada perkembangan ini, pedagang yang diwawancarai mengaku pendapatan mereka sangat berkurang setelah penggusuran. Proses dan dampak penggusuran di jalan Tambora VI dan Tambora VIII. Lokasi ini terletak di bahu jalan/sungai kanal Jelakeng, dimulai dibangun pada 1974 ketika enam orang dari Banten (Dulu di Propinsi Jabar, sekarang menjadi Propinsi Banten) mendirikan bisnis pengepakan kayu. SEjak saat itu, lebih banyak pedagang datang ke lokasi ini termasuk mereka yang dari bagian lain Jawa Barat dan Jawa Tengah. Hingga penggusuran pada Desember 2008 dan Februari 2009, ada 125 pedagang baja dan pengepakan kayu, penjagal ayam, stall makanan, penjual kredit telepon, dll., di dua lokasi ini. Kebanyakan pedagang, terutama mereka yang menduduki Tambora VIII, mempunyai ijin yang telah 95
kadaluwarsa pada Februari 2009. Beberapa pedagang juga tinggal di stall. Kotamadya Jakarta Barat telah memberitahukan para pedagang untuk pindah sejak 2007 untuk keluar dari lokasi ini untuk maksud kembali pada fungsi sungai, jalan dan mengatur lagi pemakaian tanah sebagai dimandatkan dalam rencana tata ruang. Percakapan dengan beberapa pedagang tergusur yang ditemui di lokasi menyatakan bahwa sebelum penggusuran mereka ditawarkan relokasi ke dua pasar, dimana mereka menolak karena pasar-pasar ini tak cocok untuk penjualan kayu dan besi, walaupun mereka dilokasi di jarak yang cukup jauh dari lokasi ini. Mereka tidak diberikan kompensasi, dan konsultasi dianggap sangat terbatas. Kunjungan lapangan selama paska-penggusuran menunjukkan bahwa sekitar 35% pedagang melanjutkan berjualan di jalan Tambora VI, tapi melintasi lokasi awal mereka. Pendapatan usaha sangat turun segera setelah penggusuran. Beberapa pedagang mengaku pendapatan turun sampai 20% karena kehilangan konsumen dan tak cukup ruang untuk berjualan di lokasi baru yang melintasi lokasi lama. Sejak saat itu, lebih banyak pedagang kembali, walaupun mereka membangun tenda sementara untuk mencegah dagangan mereka. Usaha mereka diarahkan dijual-menurut-pesanan karena ruang terbatas. Pedagang baru juga bergabung bersama pedagang gusuran di lokasi baru.
96
Lampiran 4 Daftar Dokumen Rujukan Kunci dalam Berkas Proyek
Paket Dokumen Perlindungan Lingkungan dan Sosial Proyek •
Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), June 2011
•
Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), December 2010
•
Environmental Impact Assessment, Management Plan and Monitoring Plan (together referred to as the AMDAL) for the Dredging of Floodways/Drainage Canals and Waduks Phase 1 JUFMP, February / March 2010
•
JUFMP Phase 1 Environmental and Social Management Supplementary Report, June 2011
•
Updated Environment Management Plan (RKL) and Environment Monitoring Plan (RPL) for the Development of West Ancol Eastern Side of ± 119 ha, March 2009
•
Ancol Updated RKL/RPL Supplementary Report, June 2011
Dokumen Rujukan Kunci Lainnya •
JEDI / JUFMP Sediment Quality Consolidated Report, August 2010
•
Preliminary Assessment of Sediment Quality (ERM), October 2008
•
Pilot Dredging Project: Technical Note on Evaluation of the sediment and water sampling result (DHV), May 2008
•
Metals and Trace Organic Compounds in Sediments and Waters of Jakarta Bay and the Pulau Seribu Complex, Indonesia, March 2000
•
Mission Report: JEDI Environmental Assessment (USACE), October 2008
•
Tracer Study at Tambora VI and Tambora VIII (for evictions in December 2008 and February 2009)
•
Case Study Eviction Cengkareng Drain Inspection Road
•
JEDI / JUFMP Community Consultation Consolidated Report, August 2010
•
Cooperation Agreement between DKI Jakarta and PT PJA on sludge disposal from the results of the dredging of rivers, retention basins and channels on the waters of the eastern part of West Ancol with an area of +/- 120 Ha (approximately one hundred twenty hectares) located in Kelurahan Ancol, Kecamatan Pademangan, North Jakarta, December 2010
97
