Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Social Monitoring Report
Project Number: 42916-014
January 2020
Sarulla Geothermal Power Generation Project (Republic of Indonesia)
Prepared by Sarulla Operations Limited for the Asian Development Bank
The Social Monitoring Report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. Your attention is directed to the “Terms of Use” section of this website.
In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
Resettlement Completion Report
Sarulla Geothermal Field and Power Plant
330 MW Capacity
North Tapanuli Regency
North Sumatera Province
Indonesia
Prepared by:
SARULLA OPERATIONS Ltd
December 2019
1
Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................... 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 8
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 12
1.1. OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................... 13
1.2. RESOURCES ....................................................................................................... 13
1.3. METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................. 14
1.4. LEGAL FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................... 15
1.4.1. National Regulations ...................................................................................... 15
1.4.2. International Standards .................................................................................. 16
1.5. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT .......................................................................... 17
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... 19
2.1. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................... 19
2.2. PROJECT LAND REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................... 20
2.3. PROJECT LAND ACQUISITION STATUS ............................................................ 21
2.4. LAND ACQUISITION FOR POWER PLANT ......................................................... 22
2.5. LAND ACQUISITION FOR TRANSMISSION LINE ............................................... 24
3. RESETTLEMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION .................................................... 26
3.1. LAND SELECTION PROCESS ............................................................................. 26
3.2. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA ........................................................................................ 26
3.3. AFFECTED PEOPLE ............................................................................................ 28
3.4. VALUE OF COMPENSATION .............................................................................. 29
3.5. CUT-OFF DATE ................................................................................................... 30
3.6. RESETTLEMENT BUDGET AND FINANCING PLAN .......................................... 30
4. LIVELIHOOD RESTORATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ................................ 31
4.1. SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF AFFECTED PEOPLE ..................................... 32
4.2. VULNERABLE GROUPS AND LIVELIHOOD RESTORATION ............................. 36
4.3. EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY .......................................................................... 47
4.4. INTEGRATED SOCIAL PROGRAM ..................................................................... 49
4.5. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGAMENT ......................................................................... 61
4.5.1. Identification of Stakeholders ......................................................................... 61
4.5.2. Stakeholder Consultation ............................................................................... 61
4.5.3. Women Participation ...................................................................................... 62
4.6. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ....................................................................... 64
4.7. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM ................................................................ 65
5. MONITORING PROCESS ................................................................................... 68
5.1. INTERNAL MONITORING .................................................................................... 68
5.2. EXTERNAL MONITORING ................................................................................... 68
2
6. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION ................................................................... 74
7. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION ............................................................. 80
3
List of Tables
Table 1 Summary of land acquired for Project facilities in SIL & NIL ................................... 23
Table 2 Summary of Land Acquired for 150 kV Transmission Line ..................................... 25
Table 3 Entitlements Matrix ................................................................................................. 27
Table 4 Affected Land Owners ............................................................................................ 29
Table 5 Local Worker Hired in Construction Period 2015 - 2017 ......................................... 32
Table 6 Total Respondents Involved in USU Social Survey ................................................ 33
Table 7 Minimum wage in North Tapanuli Regency and inflation rate in 2014 -2017 ........... 34
Table 8 Income comparison of 17 most vulnerable land owners based on 2014-2017 inflation
........................................................................................................................................... 34
Table 9 BPS Standard of Living Indicators .......................................................................... 38
Table 10 Assistance Program for the 17 Most Vulnerable Households ............................... 41
Table 11 Verification Matrix for BPS Standard of Living of the 17 Most Vulnerable Group .. 46
Table 12 Respondents’ Employment Status ........................................................................ 48
Table 13 Summary of ISP implementation in 2015 – 2018 .................................................. 51
Table 14 Farmers' groups and type of activities ................................................................. 57
Table 15 Agricultural and livelihood restoration activities with number of land owners and non-
land owners ........................................................................................................................ 58
Table 16 Infrastructure Improvement Program (2015-2018) ................................................ 60
Table 17 Community Participation in Village Meeting 2015 – 2018 ..................................... 62
Table 18 ADB Environmental & Social Team Site Visit in 2015 -2019 ................................. 70
Table 19 SOL RP/LRP Commitments Evaluation Status ..................................................... 80
Table 20 Recommended Actions for Improvement .............................................................. 83
4
List of Figures
Figure 1 Sarulla Project Location ........................................................................................ 20
Figure 2 SOL land acquisition process ................................................................................ 26
Figure 3 Workers employed by SOL and its contractors ...................................................... 47
Figure 4 Employment Position for Locals ............................................................................ 47
Figure 5 Unskilled workers by gender (2014-2018) ............................................................. 48
Figure 6 Program Planning Process .................................................................................... 50
Figure 7 Fish farming initial harvest in Pardamean Nainggolan village ................................ 58
Figure 8 Clean water piping in Lumban Jaean village, 2016................................................ 60
Figure 9 Female Participation in LRP Implementation ......................................................... 63
Figure 10 Female Participation in LRP (Percentage)........................................................... 64
Figure 11 SOL Grievance Redress Mechanism .................................................................. 66
Figure 12 SOL Grievance Log 2015 – 2018 ........................................................................ 67
5
Appendices
Appendix A. Land acquisition process in photographs ........................................................ 86
Appendix B. Budget and Total spending for T-line, WJP 1, Road 5 & NIL E-1 .................... 88
Appendix C. ISP implementation 2015-2016 ....................................................................... 89
Appendix D. ISP implementation 2016-2018 ....................................................................... 90
Appendix E. Summary of consultation/socialization on land acquisition (2015 – 2018) ....... 95
Appendix F. Communication Media used by SOL .............................................................. 97
Appendix G. Consultation and participation meeting on RP and LRP ................................ 100
Appendix H. Sample Report to External Parties ................................................................ 103
Appendix I. Spot checks in 2015-2018 .............................................................................. 104
6
ABBREVIATIONS
ADB : Asian Development Bank
BPN : Badan Pertanahan Negara - National Land Agency
BPS : Badan Pusat Statistik – Central Bureau of Statistic
CAP : Corrective Action Plan
COI : Corridor of Impact
CSR : Corporate Social Responsibility
DOA : Deed of Assignment
DPRD : Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah – Local Legislative
EBTKE : Energi Baru Terbarukan dan Konservasi Energi – Renewable Energy and
Energy Conservation
ER : External Relation
ESC : Energy Sales Contract
ESDM : Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral – Energy and Mineral Resources
EPFI : Equator Principles Financing Institution
ERM : Environmental Resources Management
FGD : Focus Group Discussion
ha : Hectare
IEC : Information Education Consultation
IFC : International Finance Corporation
IP : Indigenous Peoples
IPP : Indigenous Peoples Plan
ISP : Integrated Social Program
JBIC : Japan Bank for International Cooperation
JOC : Joint Operation Contract
km : Kilometre
kV : Kilo Volt
LO : Land owner
LRP : Livelihood Restoration Program
m : Metre
m2 : Square meter
MW : Mega Watt
NGO : Non-Government Organization
7
NIL : Namora I Langit
PAH : Project Affected Household
PAP : Project Affected People
PAV : Project Affected Village
Pemda : Pemerintah Daerah – Local Authority
PGE : PT Pertamina Geothermal Energy
PKK : Pembinaan Kesejahteraan Keluarga – Family Welfare Empowerment
PLN : PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara – State-owned Electricity Enterprise
Posyandu : Pos Pelayanan Terpadu (Integrated Health service Post)
PR : Presidential Regulation
PRA : Participatory Rural Appraisal
PS : Performance Standard
RCA : Resettlement Completion Audit
RCR : Resettlement Completion Report
RoW : Right of Way
RP : Resettlement Plan
SIL : Silangkitang
SOL : Sarulla Operations Ltd
SPS : Safeguard Policy Statement
SS : Social Survey
SSCAR : Social Safeguard Compliance Audit Report
SSMR : Safeguard and Social Monitoring Report
T/L : Transmission Line
UNSG : UNOCAL North Sumatera Geothermal
USU : Universitas Sumatera Utara - North Sumatera University
WJP : West JEC Production Well
WJR : West JEC Re-injection Well
8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sarulla Operations Ltd (SOL) developed a geothermal field and power plant at 330 MW
capacity in Pahae Jae and Pahae Julu Districts, North Tapanuli Regency, North Sumatera
Province. The Project is funded by Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), Asian
Development Bank (ADB) and a group of Equator Principles Financing Institutions (EPFIs).
SOL is committed to implement the Project in compliance with Indonesian regulations and
lenders’ requirements on environmental, social and health policies. As part of maintaining the
compliance to applicable standards, SOL established this Resettlement Completion Report
(RCR).
The RCR focuses on capturing the overall process and outcome of land acquisition activities
undertaken by the Project between 2014 and 2018; and presents the implementation of the
Resettlement Plan (RP) and the Livelihood Restoration Program (LRP) as part of Integrated
Social Program (ISP) embedded in Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP).
Along the Project development, there are two major milestones of land acquisition process:
Prior land acquisition by UNOCAL in 1994-1995 was reported in Social Safeguard
Compliance Audit Report (SSCAR) 2014. The document was submitted to and
approved by ADB. No outstanding issues related to the UNOCAL land acquisition that
require corrective actions.
Land acquisition completed by SOL was largely settled in October 2013. Payment and
compensation for land and plants were completely paid.
The land acquisition data (2012 – 2018) records 268 land owners impacted by Transmission
Lines (T/L) facilities and 21 owners affected by the development of Access Road 5 and West
JEC Production Well (WJP) 1N. The actual land acquired for Project facilities was 127.38 ha.
All payment for lands and plants were completed.
The University of North Sumatra (USU) and the consulting firm Environment Resources
management (ERM) reported that land acquisition has no major adverse impact to land
owners’ livelihood. Most of land owners were able to continue their farming activities as their
major source of livelihood. No physical displacement was taken place, but economic
displacement was observed. This triggered SOL to develop an LRP, which was prepared in
the year 2014.
As part of the LRP implementation, SOL established ISP to focus on five main social concerns
covering agricultural/livelihood, education, health, culture, art and religion, and infrastructure.
The social concerns were selected based on social assessment, mapping and consultation
conducted with the local indigenous communities of the affected villages in 2014. The ISP
targets the most vulnerable beneficiaries including land owners, non-land owners, women,
children, elderly people and poor families.
SOL introduces multiple programs and initiatives to ensure the main social concerns are
equally covered, well monitored and evaluated.
Based on the RP/LRP implementation and management of ISP, SOL confirmed that:
Land acquisition process for power plant facilities and T/L were completed.
9
Payment of compensation for lost assets were properly settled and completely paid.
Completion of resettlement entitlements and livelihood restoration were adequately
described.
No outstanding claims, disputes or grievances related to RP/LRP implementation are
left unattended and unresolved.
No physical displacement was undertaken. Instead, SOL developed an LRP following
the economic displacement and carefully identified the most vulnerable group.
Restoration of social networks and evidence of integration with the host communities
are adequately presented in the IPP/ISP.
Land acquisition process was conducted through Location Permit mechanism via
direct negotiation and an agreed price with land owners. The entire process of land
acquisition was conducted by SOL while the local government’s role was to facilitate
and to monitor the process. With regards to disclosure of information, SOL followed
the requirements as defined in the IPP.
The internal monitoring is conducted intensively by SOL through multiple monitoring
systems and intrinsically linked to the progress of ISP. The monitoring results also
reported to concerned parties on a regular basis.
The external monitoring was conducted by USU in 2017 resulting in Social Survey
report. Referring to ADB, a Resettlement Completion Audit (RCA) to be conducted
following the receipt of this RCR. The audit schedule will be defined by ADB.
SOL also observed some opportunities for improvement to ensure continuation and
sustainable RP/LRP implementation related to:
The most vulnerable group: SOL is considering to further evaluate 5 out of 12 people
who are not employed by or do not work for SOL to be included in the ISP/LRP
program.
The poor land owners (based on USU Social Survey): SOL is also considering to
further evaluate 11 out of 163 land owners who are considered poor based on income.
Based on the evaluation result, it will be determined whether they will be included in
the ISP/LRP program for the most vulnerable group and whether the assessment on
the type of program most suitable to their condition will be conducted.
SOL commitments and conclusion of the RP/LRP evaluation status are shown in below table.
No. Commitments Details of Commitments Achievement
Rating Remarks (Gaps identified)
1 Compensation &
Benefits
o Replacement cost paid;
o Lost assets replaced;
o Payment to be done prior to
manifestation of impact;
o Shifting allowance/other benefits
paid.
√ Fully Met
Compensation amount
adequate and at
replacement value, and
payment was done prior to
the manifestation of impact.
All required payment
completed. No outstanding
issues
10
No. Commitments Details of Commitments Achievement
Rating Remarks (Gaps identified)
2 Livelihood/Income
Restoration
o Income restored to 100% of
immediate pre-Project level;
o Secure employment for impacted
persons;
o Training/Skill Building;
o Loans/Micro-credits;
o Help with small enterprise
development;
√ Fully Met
Income of affected people
has been restored. LRP
program implemented. To
sustain the program
particularly the income
restoration, SOL is
considering including the
remaining most vulnerable
group and poor land owners
(based on USU SS) in the
mid-term and long-term ISP
Programs. No outstanding
issues.
3 Assets
o Legal titles issued for houses;
o Other assets like cowsheds,
house furniture, farm equipment’s
(as relevant) given to eligible
families;
√ Fully Met
No physical displacement
taken place; so, no need for
issuing a legal title for
houses. Compensation
payment with total amount of
IDR ± 400,020,300 for
temporary structures were
completed. No outstanding
issues
3
Resettlement Site
and Social
Infrastructure
o Improved Housing;
o All common Infrastructure &
amenities in place;
o Reasonable integration with host
community.
√ Fully Met
No new resettlement site
created; so, no need for
improved housing. ISP well
implemented in close
consultation with host
communities. No outstanding
issues
4 Grievance
Mechanism
o Functional GM system
implemented;
o Online tracking system for
grievances available.
√ Fully Met
Grievance Redress
Mechanism established and
was well functioned. No
outstanding grievances
related to RP/LRP. No
outstanding issues
5 Monitoring &
Documentation
o Established monitoring
mechanism in place and duly
implemented;
o Results on internal as well as
external monitoring disclosed
o Documentation unit established.
√ Fully Met
Internal monitoring
conducted intensively (ref.
Section 5.1). As part of
regular monitoring,
implementation of RP/LRP
was reported in the SSMRs
2015-2018, which were
disclosed on the web.
External monitoring was
conducted by USU. This
RCR will be disclosed on
11
No. Commitments Details of Commitments Achievement
Rating Remarks (Gaps identified)
the web. An RCA is
expected following the
receipt of the RCR. No
outstanding issues found
6 Institutional
Support
o Establish Resettlement
Implementation Unit to
support/facilitate R&R;
o Provide adequate infrastructure
and resources to the unit;
√ Fully Met
A Resettlement Unit was
established, supported by
the ER Team and CSR
Team. Budget for
institutional support was
provided adequately.
IPP/ISP program well
implemented and monitored.
No outstanding issues
7 RP/LRP Budget
o Set aside the budget as
estimated in the RP/LRP;
o Provision for additional budget to
complete any pending actions
√ Fully Met
RP/LRP budget allocated as
part of ISP in 2015-2019 with
total amount of ± IDR
6,900,000,000. Total
spending is monitored,
evaluated and reported (ref.
Appendix B), No outstanding
issues
12
1. INTRODUCTION
SOL or “Sarulla Operations Limited” is the operation company established by the
Consortium of Itochu Corporation, Kyushu Electric Power Co., Inc., Ormat International,
Inc. and PT. Medco Energi International Tbk. SOL developed a geothermal field and
power plant at 330 MW capacity in Pahae Jae and Pahae Julu Districts, North Tapanuli
Regency, North Sumatera Province.
In the development, the Consortium and SOL signed a Deed of Assignment (DOA) with
PT. Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN) Persero; a Joint Operation Contract (JOC) with PT.
Pertamina Geothermal Energy (PGE); and an ESC (Energy Sales Contract) with
Pertamina Geothermal Energy - and PT. PLN. The Project is funded by Japan Bank for
International Cooperation (JBIC), Asian Development Bank (ADB) and a group of Equator
Principles Financing Institutions (EPFIs).
The Project required land for power plant siting and transmission land to include the
following allocation:
Power Plant: power generation facilities, geothermal wells with relevant equipment,
access roads, steam and brine pipelines, quarry areas, temporary storage and
temporary worker camps (during construction phase)
Transmission Line: tower footprints, RoW (Right of Way) and restricted use of land
within the T/L corridor of impact
Along the Project development, there are two major milestones of land acquisition process:
Land acquisition by UNOCAL
UNOCAL conducted a land acquisition process between 1994 and 1995 with total land
acquired ± 422,922 m2 (42,2 ha) within the scope of SOL project area. The lands
belong to PT PGE whereby SOL is leasing the land for the Project activities over the
next 30 years.
Land acquisition by SOL
Land acquisition process carried out by SOL for the additional land required for the
project was in the period of 2012 -2018 with total width of land acquired ± 1,273,872 m2 (127 ha).
The project is required to comply with JBIC, ADB and EPFIs applicable environmental,
social and health policies, developed for managing the environmental and social risks
associated with project finance. As part of the requirements for ADB Safeguard Policy
Statement 2009 on Involuntary Resettlement, SOL has prepared land
acquisition/resettlement plan (RP) in 2014 covering the remaining land needed for project
facilities in NIL and transmission line.
Upon the completion of 127 ha land acquisition process as elaborated in the RP, SOL is
obliged to prepare resettlement completion report (RCR) as stated in the RP document.
The resettlement completion report captures the overall process and outcome of land
acquisition activities undertaken and as planned in the RP to determine whether the
Resettlement Plan (RP)/Livelihood Restoration Program (LRP) have been properly
13
conceived and executed and have succeeded in restoring or improving of the livelihoods
of persons physically or economically displaced by the project.
1.1. OBJECTIVES
RP draft report was prepared and submitted to ADB in 2014. Several revisions processes
were done to accommodate inputs and updates on the plan. Final report was approved in
February 2015 and posted on ABD website. To assess the implementation of land
acquisition against the RP document and as part of maintaining the compliance to
applicable standards, in particularly the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) on
involuntary resettlement, SOL established this Resettlement Completion Report (RCR).
The RCR objectives are:
to determine whether the Resettlement Plan (RP) or Livelihood Restoration
Program (LRP) is properly conceived and executed
to assess whether RP/LRP is succeeded in restoring or improving the livelihood of
person physically or economically displaced by the Project
to report the LRP implementation status for land owners identified both in Social
Safeguard Compliance Audit Report (SSCAR) and RP through Integrated Social
Program (ISP)
The RCR focuses on capturing the overall process and outcome of land acquisition
activities undertaken by the Project between 2014 and 2018. This report also presents the
program implemented by SOL regarding the Resettlement Plan (RP) and the Livelihood
Restoration Program (LRP) as part of Integrated Social Program (ISP) embedded in
Indigenous People Plan (IPP).
The land acquisition process conducted before 2014 and the purchased of land for power
plant area are discussed in SSCAR document of the year 2014. This SSCAR was
submitted to and approved by ADB. There were no outstanding issues related to the pre-
2014 land acquisition process.
1.2. RESOURCES
The RCR is developed based on the implementation of multiple programs related to RP
and LRP. There were nine people in External Relation (ER) Team and three people in
CSR team in 20142018 who majorly contributed to this RCR through their daily activities
report in approaching the communities, monitoring and evaluating the RP and LRP
program. All those inputs were analysed, verified and formulated in this RCR by an
independent consultant, Miss Adis Noer Rachmi Prima Dewi with consultation and
intensive discussion with SOL’s team:
Ms. Melva Samosir- CSR and External Relation Manager, six years with SOL
Ms. Fella Situmorang- CSR Supervisor, six months with SOL
14
1.3. METHODOLOGY
To maintain compliance with ADB requirements and for ease of review, SOL uses the ADB
Preliminary Guidance for RP/LRP Completion Report (Draft, 21 February 2018) as
reference. The report structure is developed in such a way to ensure that the critical points
defined in the guideline are discussed and well presented.
The methodology applied in developing this report include:
a. Desktop review
Relevant documents of land acquisition process including the compensation
mechanism, grievance mechanism and public consultation conducted were internally
reviewed in alignment with relevant international standards and national regulations.
Reference documents for this RCR are taken from the reports, records and other
materials related to RP, LRP and SOL socio-economic program. The main sources
include (but not limited to) the following documents:
Social Safeguard Compliance Audit Report (SSCAR) - The report was created in
2013 and was approved in February 2015.
The report aimed to explain the successes and challenges of the ± 48 ha land
acquisition previously done by UNOCAL. The report includes the social
components of the IPP such as progress on land acquisition, grievances related to
RP/LRP and SSCAR close out actions.
Resettlement Plan (RP) - Developed in 2014 and approved in 2015.
RP describes the land acquisition process for approximately 22 ha of land mainly
for the transmission line between SIL and NIL and additional acquisition for Access
Road 5 and WJP 1N.
Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) – Developed in 2013, updated and approved in
2015.
The document aimed to evaluate and assess the potential project impacts on the
Indigenous Peoples (IP) living in the surrounding Project area and affected villages
based on the project data and socio-economic information and Integrated Social
Program activities that sets out the social mitigation measures and community
development required for implementation by the project.
Supplementary Land Acquisition Plan (NIL-E1) – Developed in August 2016 and
approved in November 2016.
This document elaborated land acquisition plan for additional well pad, NIL -E1 and
its supporting facilities with total ± 5 ha of land which was required for the project
due to the insufficient capacity of proposed re-injection wells on the existing well
pads in 2016.
Safeguard and Social Monitoring Report (SSMR) – submitted every semester for
the period of 2015 – 2018
15
SSMR reports the implementation of project environmental and social program
activities which included the progress and completion of land acquisition process
every semester. For the period of 2015-2018, there are 8 (eight) reports submitted
to the lenders.
Integrated Social Program (ISP) report - presented during the site visit conducted
by ADB for the period of 2015-1st semester of 2019
SOL reports the ISP monitoring to ADB since the construction phase in 2015. The
program is developed based on mutual efforts and partnership: SOL initiatives and
communities proposed inputs to avoid duplication or overlapping with program
development initiated by local government. Communities’ contribution increases
the ownership of the program and sustains the implementation.
The program implementation addresses five main community concerns related to
agricultural/livelihood, education, health, culture, art and religion, and
infrastructure. The ISP also includes program focusing on most vulnerable group
as part of the LRP implementation. The ISP implementation is monitored through
community consultation.
There are 7 (seven) reports presented during the period of 2015- 1st semester of
2019. The report discussed the updates on the implementation of SOL’s ISP for
the communities since 2015 focussing on (i) agricultural/livelihood, (ii) education,
(iii) health, (iv) culture, art and religion, (v) infrastructure.
b. Social survey
SOL engaged North Sumatera University (USU) to conduct a Social Survey (SS) in
December 2017 – January 2018. The survey aimed to review and examine the SOL
socio-economic programs implementation at the affected communities including the
affected land owners.
c. Stakeholders engagement and land owners’ interview
SOL External Relations Team actively engages with the affected communities, in
particularly to maintain communication, foster better relations and ensure that any
community grievances are addressed. In doing their daily activities, ER Team builds
up dialogues and collects information, comments and inputs from the communities.
This type of information is formulated and included in this report.
d. Project involvement
SOL ER Team has considerable Project experience and involvement in Sarulla
Development (2-11 years). Their familiarity to the Project and intense exposure to
communities are taken into account as existing strengths to be utilized in preparing the
RCR.
1.4. LEGAL FRAMEWORK
1.4.1. National Regulations
The land acquisition related regulations are as follow:
16
Head of National Land Agency Regulation No. 2 of 1999 regarding Land
procurement by private business entity. This regulation sets out the location permit
(Izin Lokasi) procedure for private business entities in acquiring land.
Presidential Regulation No. 36 of 2005 is the legal basis for implementation of land
acquisition through the location designation (Penetapan Lokasi) mechanism.
Penetapan Lokasi regulates the process of land procurement for development in
the public’s interest (which means Projects undertaken and initiated by
governmental institutions or entities using the state or local government budget).
1.4.2. International Standards
The applicable international standards in land acquisition process are:
ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2009 governs the environmental and social
safeguards of ADB’s operations and articulates the safeguard policy principles for
three key safeguard areas:
- Environmental safeguards (SPS, Appendix 1);
- Involuntary resettlement safeguards (SPS, Appendix 2); and
- Indigenous Peoples safeguards (SPS, Appendix 3).
The ADB Safeguard Policy Statement 2009 applies to losses due to both to physical
and economic displacement caused by involuntary acquisition of land. The Project
follows and applies the principles embedded in the safeguard policy 2009 for
Involuntary resettlement.
JBIC’s Social Requirements
JBIC’s Guidelines state the following of relevance for consideration for the Project:
- Involuntary resettlement and loss of means of livelihood are to be avoided where
feasible, exploring all viable alternatives. When, after such examination, it is
proved unfeasible, effective measures to minimize impact and to compensate for
losses must be agreed upon with the people who will be affected;
- People to be resettled involuntarily and people whose means of livelihood will be
hindered or lost must be sufficiently compensated and supported by the project
proponents, etc. in a timely manner. Prior compensation, at full replacement cost,
must be provided as much as possible;
- The project proponents must make efforts to enable the people affected by the
project, to improve their standard of living, income opportunities and production
levels, or at least to restore them to pre-project levels; and
- Appropriate participation by the people affected and their communities must be
promoted in planning, implementation and monitoring of involuntary resettlement
plans and measures against the loss of their means of livelihood. In addition,
17
appropriate and accessible grievance mechanisms must be established for the
people affected and their communities.
IFC Performance Standard 5 (PS 5): Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement
- IFC Performance Standard (PS) 5 refers to Land Acquisition and Involuntary
Resettlement. Under PS 5, physical and/or economic displacement resulting from
land-related transactions are defined as resulting from the following transactions:
- Land rights or land use rights acquired through expropriation or other compulsory
procedures in accordance with the legal system of the host country;
- Land rights or land use rights acquired through negotiated settlements with
property owners or those with legal rights to the land if failure to reach settlement
would have resulted in expropriation or other compulsory procedures;
- Project situations where involuntary restrictions on land use and access to natural
resources cause a community or groups within a community to lose access to
resource usage where they have traditional or recognizable usage rights;
- Certain project situations requiring evictions of people occupying land without
formal, traditional, or recognizable usage rights; or
- Restriction on access to land or use of other resources including communal
property and natural resources such as marine and aquatic resources, timber and
non-timber forest products, freshwater, medicinal plants, hunting and gathering
grounds and grazing and cropping areas.
PS 5 states that where project impacts on land, assets, or access to assets become
significantly adverse at any stage of the project IFC advises on the application of the
standard. There is no physical resettlement associated with the Project but land
acquisition due to the Project may result in the economic displacement (loss of access
to resources necessary for income generation or as means of livelihood) of individuals
or communities, including those considered of vulnerable status. The IFC requires the
avoidance of economic displacement or to minimise impacts on individuals or
communities through appropriate measures such as fair compensation and improving
livelihoods and living conditions.
1.5. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT
This RCR is structured as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction- overview of Project Sponsors, RCR objectives, methodologies
applied and the legal framework as reference.
Chapter 2: Project Description- background of land acquisition and overall status of land
acquired by SOL.
Chapter 3: RP Implementation- review on the overall RP implementation.
Chapter 4: LRP Implementation- review on the overall LRP implementation.
Chapter 5: Monitoring- description of monitoring conducted by SOL and external parties.
18
Chapter 6: Assessment and evaluation- self-assessment towards the RP/LRP
implementation to fulfil the RCR objectives.
Chapter 7: Conclusion- current status of RP/LRP implementation against ADB SPS
requirements.
19
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1. BACKGROUND
The Project area is located approximately 40 km to the south of Tarutung at the side of
the Trans Sumatera Highway (Tarutung – Sipirok); administratively located in Pahae Jae
and Pahae Julu districts, North Tapanuli Regency, North Sumatera Province.
The Project was initiated by UNOCAL North Sumatera Geothermal (UNSG), after the
Energy Sales Contract (ESC) and Joint Operation Contract (JOC) were signed in 1993.
Extensive exploration activities were conducted to include geo-scientific, geology,
geochemistry and geophysics investigations, and the development of certain infrastructure
such as well pads and access roads. Total land acquired by UNOCAL within the scope of
SOL project area was ± 422,922 m2 (42 ha). Drilling activities were conducted between
1994 and 1998. After receiving the Right to Develop the Project, the Consortium re-
evaluated the Sarulla exploration data to undertake the next strategy for the field
development stage of the Sarulla Contract Area. The new development plan, including
drilling by utilizing reservoir forecast simulation was established in 2011.
The need for additional land for the development conducted by SOL was estimated at ±
1,270,000 m2 (127 ha) as discussed in the RP in 2014. The actual land acquired by the
Project is ± 1,273,872 m2 (127,3 Ha). The development of Sarulla geothermal field covers
the main following activities:
The development of Silangkitang (SIL) field located in Pahae Jae district and
Namora I Langit (NIL) field located in Pahae Julu district;
The construction and operation of 330 MW geothermal power plant, one unit at SIL
and two units at NIL each with a nominal capacity of 110 MW; and
The construction of a combined length of approximately 14 km of 150 kV (high
voltage) overhead transmission line from Silangkitang field (SIL1) and Namora I
Langit field (NIL1) to PLN substation.
The Project location covering both SIL and NIL is shown in Figure 1.
20
Figure 1 Sarulla Project Location
2.2. PROJECT LAND REQUIREMENTS
The power plant locations for both SIL and NIL are located at mixed plantation areas. SIL
is situated approximately 500 metres (m) from the nearest residential area, while NIL is
located at least 1 km from the residential area.
The land acquired for Project components and facilities in SIL was mainly rice paddy fields
while NIL was largely for rubber & cacao plantations, all of which is customarily used or
owned by the families in the villages. The acquired land is known as family land (Tanah
Keluarga) similar to most of the land in the Pahae Jae and Pahae Julu districts. Acquired
21
land that is privately owned by individual families (heritage land) is neither formally
registered nor legally certified by the National Land Agency (BPN) but it is acknowledged
by the surrounding communities by maintaining and confirming the nature sign boundaries.
This refers to customary land which is also acknowledged under the Law in Indonesia
where land is cultivated from generations to generations and customarily inherited to the
family.
Land required for the Project was procured for the following allocation:
Power Plant: power generation facilities, geothermal wells with relevant equipment,
access roads, steam and brine pipelines, quarry areas, temporary storage and
temporary worker camps (during construction phase)
Transmission Line: tower footprints, RoW (Right of Way) and restricted use of land
within the T/L corridor of impact
PLN requirement for a typical 150 kV T/L is that the width of T/L RoW has a corridor of
impact of 18 m (9 m on each side). The minimum clearance to the ground is 12 m from the
main road, 9 m from the normal ground, 5.5 m from any trees.
ESDM (ref. Decree No. 38/2013) stipulates that land owners are not allowed to plant trees
of a certain height nor can they erect structure of a certain height under the TL RoW. In
this regard, SOL determined the corridor of impact (COI) for the T/L. The land under T/L
is not to be purchased, instead an easement fee for the towers is paid.
PLN has acquired land for connecting T/L to the substation after obtaining a location permit
(Izin Lokasi). No further information received from PLN related to land area, land
ownership and land use type of affected land owners.
2.3. PROJECT LAND ACQUISITION STATUS
SOL land acquisition complies with the Head of National Land Agency Regulation No. 2
of 1999. The Project applied the “Izin Lokasi”, or location permit mechanism because the
Project is executed by a Project entity funded by private financing. Under this Izin Lokasi
mechanism, the Project holds no right to expropriate land owners from their land. As such,
land acquisition is done through a direct negotiation to achieve a mutually agreed price
with land owners.
The land procurement process was undertaken in stages as the Project progresses. The
entire process of land acquisition was conducted by SOL while the local government’s role
was to facilitate and to monitor the process.
Along the Project development, there are two major milestones of land acquisition process:
Prior land acquisition by UNOCAL
UNOCAL conducted a land acquisition process between 1994 and 1995 with total 42
ha of land acquired. The acquired lands belong to PT Pertamina Geothermal Energy
(PGE) from which SOL is leasing the land for the Project activities over the next 30
years. The SSCAR 2014 reports that there were no outstanding issues related to the
UNOCAL land acquisition that require corrective actions.
22
Land acquisition completed by SOL
SSCAR 2014 reports that as of October 2013, SOL has largely completed the land
acquisition process in SIL and NIL areas with compensation payment made to land
owners for land and plants.
SOL uses forestry land and obtained Borrow-Use Permit (Izin Pinjam Pakai) over 295
Ha of land area however SOL only opened and utilize ± 30 Ha of land out the 295 Ha.
SOL also paid land compensation to the land owners as their land located within the
forestry area with customary land status where land ownership for generations passed
down through heritage. Clans and village leaders confirmed the existence of such
customary ownership over the area, including the forestry area.
Few corrective actions were raised following the Social Safeguard Compliance Audit
Report (SSCAR 2014). SSMR Semester 2 2018 reports that there were no outstanding
corrective actions (CA) related to land acquisition.
Monitoring on the implementation of the corrective actions was conducted by SOL team
internally and external parties such as ADB and LESC to ensure that SOL is in adherence
to lenders’ social safeguard policy in land acquisition. This has helped to smoothen the
process of land acquisition.
RP 2015 reported that as of August 2014, there were 262 land owners identified for the
towers, Access Road 5 and WJP 1N (a well pad in NIL). The land acquisition data (2012
– 2018) recorded 268 land owners impacted by T/L facilities and 21 owners affected by
the development of Access Road 5 and WJP 1N. However, as the Project was
progressing, there were changes to the number, from 262 number of landowners to 268
number.
2.4. LAND ACQUISITION FOR POWER PLANT
The RP 2015 reports that a total of 127 ha of land was required for the SIL and NIL.
However as of 2018, the actual land acquired for Project facilities is 127.38 ha. This
difference was due to additional land required for the following facilities:
Additional well pad and supporting facilities in NIL E-1 location in 2016, land was
required due to the insufficient capacity of proposed re-injection wells on the
existing well pads in 2016
Technical solution in some of NIL location (2015 – 2018), land acquired due to
technical solution related to community grievances. The land acquired is not
intended for Project facility, only as part of technical solution to avoid recurring
grievances.
Table 1 presents the actual land acquired by SOL as of 2018.
23
Table 1 Summary of land acquired for Project facilities in SIL & NIL
Project Component Estimated Required Area (m2)
Acquired by
UNOCAL (m2)
Acquired by SOL as of
Dec 2018 (m2)
Total Land Owners (as acquired by
SOL)
Month/Year
SIL
Brine Injection Line
(SIL1 - SIL2) 18,498 - 32,968 43
Feb 2012; Oct
2014; Feb 2016
Brine Injection Line
(SIL1 - SIL3) - - 22,021 30 Nov 2015
Disposal for Power
Plant 71,348 59,008 12,340 1 July 2013
Borrow Area 25,105 3,995 21,110 5 July 2013
Well Pad SIL1 71,348 59,008 12,488 6 July 2013
Power Plant 196,946 131,339 66,433 13 July 2013
SIL2 Expansion &
Access Road 5,311 23,110 24,610 19 Oct 2013
Laydown 1 28,000 - 13,332 10 July 2013
Laydown 2 40,454 20,454 12,795 8 Oct 2013
Drilling Disposal - - 3,771 3 Oct 2013
NIL
Main Access Road
(Road 1 & 1A) 131,711 95,476 35,348 80 Sept 2013
Well Pad NIL 2N &
Access Road 3B 57,231 - 57,231 12 Sept 2013
Disposal & Access
Road 3A 17,605 - 176,050 26 Sept 2013
Borrow Area
(Borrow Pit) 93,923 - 90,819 25 Sept 2013
WJR 1N & Access
Road 6B 66,045 30,532 37,710 23
Sept 2013;
Jan 2014
Power Plant &
Access Road (Road
2, 3)
228,113 - 228,113 25 Sept 2013
Laydown 80,000 - 61,497 13 Oct 2013
WJP & Road 5 &
Additional Land 200,000 - 186,182 21
Oct 2013; Dec
2014; Jan 2015
NIL – E1 - - 50,647 30 Nov 2016
WJR 2N & Access
Road 40,000 - 32,967 19
Oct 2013; Nov
2013
NIL1N & Road 4B - - 76,796 8 Oct 2013
24
Project Component Estimated Required Area (m2)
Acquired by
UNOCAL (m2)
Acquired by SOL as of
Dec 2018 (m2)
Total Land Owners (as acquired by
SOL)
Month/Year
Technical Solution for grievances – NIL
Drainage expansion
in Aek Accimun - - 3,307 12
Dec 2015; Feb
2016
Grievance
Remediation Plant - - 3,232 3 July 2016
Sediment Pond in
Simataniari - - 1,590 2 June 2017
Drainage & Damage
Land at Nahumarpe - - 1,932 8 Dec 2017
Grievance
Nahumarpe
Fumarole
- - 8,583 5 March 2018
TOTAL 1,371,638 422,922 1,273,872 450
The land acquisition process allocated for power plant was largely completed and reported
in SSCAR 2014, except the land acquired for Access Road 5 and WJP 1 N.
The majority of the land owners for Access Road 5 and WJP 1N resided in Sibaganding
and Lumban Jaean village in Pahae Julu district. The land has been identified and
surveyed in consultation with the affected land owners and the surrounding land owners.
Payment was also settled satisfactorily.
2.5. LAND ACQUISITION FOR TRANSMISSION LINE
For the 150 kV T/L, the land purchased is used as platforms for the tower footing (not for
transmission lines). Approximately 38 towers were built with a distance of 400 m between
each of the tower. SOL maximized the use of forestry land where possible. Where land
owners are unwilling to sell their lands, SOL looked for alternative to reroute of the tower
footing so as to avoid involuntary land acquisition.
Land procurement and compensation for T/L was settled and paid to the land owners. The
compensation paid to land owners whose lands are within T/L ROW were in the following
forms:
a. Easement fee of 10% land value (without plants) of the land value of land for tower
bases during the land acquisition without deduction for taxes and administration cost.
It was cash compensation 10% of IDR 65,000 per m2 for the loss of the use of land at
replacement cost.
Compensation cost for plants (trees, crops, etc) below T/L ROW which is based on the
rates issued by agricultural agency. The price is based on the age of plants reflecting
the type/category (seeds, unproductive and productive); the compensation rate is
25
based on the age of plants (current/actual condition/type of land) as agreed with the
land owners.
RP reports the estimated total area of land required for T/L is as follows:
T/L RoW: 165,000 m2 (16,5 ha) with easement fee
Tower footing: 4 ha
The transmission line passes through villages which are:
SIL- Silangkitang and Sigurung-gurung
NIL- Sitolu Ama, Hutabarat, Sibaganding, Lumban Jaean, Simanampang,
Simataniari, Onang Hasang and Lontung Dolok
As reported in the SSMR December 2019, the land acquired for the T/L facility is divided
into land for tower foundation ± 4 ha and RoW where payment was only done for easement
fee for ± 20 ha of land. The detail is presented in Table 2.
Table 2 Summary of Land Acquired for 150 kV Transmission Line
Project Component Acquired as
per Dec 2018 (m2)
Total Land
Owners
Compensation payment for land
(IDR) Month/Year
Tower Foundation - land
purchased 40,835 58
± 2,678,840,000 Feb 2014; Dec 2015;
April 2017
ROW - land
compensation/easement
fee
207,091 210
± 2,030,966,250
Oct 2014; Dec 2015;
Feb 2016; June 2016;
July 2016; May 2017;
July 2017; Aug 2017
Total 247,926 268 ± 4,709,806,250
26
3. RESETTLEMENT PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
3.1. LAND SELECTION PROCESS
The land acquisition process conducted by SOL follows steps described in Figure 2.
Appendix A shows sample of land acquisition process in photographs.
With regards to land allocated for T/L, SOL maximized the use of forestry land where
possible. Where land owners are unwilling to sell their lands, SOL looked for alternative to
reroute. The line routing was determined considering technical and economic factors as
well as environmental and social aspects including:
avoiding traversing or passing closely by urban areas, densely populated areas,
settlement, schools, public buildings and market places;
avoiding traversing or passing closely by shrines, historical places, national parks
and protected areas;
avoiding traversing in forest and water catchment zones;
keeping the electrical field, magnetic field, audible noise and TV interference as far
as possible below national or international accepted levels;
keeping the impacts on flora, fauna, nesting places, animal trails, migration zones
and sensitive ecological areas to a minimum; and
applying selected bush clearing that minimise access tracks.
3.2. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Eligibility criteria applied in the land acquisition process includes:
Compensation to land owners who have lost access to land as a result of Project land
acquisitions, whether or not they have legal title to the land including those with
heritage land claims to the affected land.
Figure 2 SOL land acquisition process
27
Compensation to land owners who have lost plants and structures or any built assets
on land lost as a result of Project land acquisitions, including those with heritage land
claims to the affected land.
Compensation and Resettlement Assistance to land owners who have lost housing
as a result of Project land acquisition, including those with heritage land claims to the
affected land.
Income Restoration to land owners whose incomes have been significantly affected
by loss of access to land as a result of Project land acquisition, whether or not they
have legal title to the land, including with heritage land claims to the affected land.
Transition Assistance to land owners who are of special social categories which
render them more vulnerable to social and economic displacement and also who has
lost of access to land as a result of Project land acquisition.
Table 3 presents the entitlement matrix followed by SOL.
Table 3 Entitlements Matrix
No Type of Loss Types of Land
Owners Entitlement Details
1 Loss of land Legal owners
Land owners with heritage land rights
Compensation at
replacement cost
Appropriate price/compensation as mutually agreed with the land owners
This value is all inclusive of the market price land value plus additional transaction costs.
60 days’ notice for agricultural lands to harvest standing seasonal crops. If notice cannot be given, compensation for share of crops will be provided
Additional compensation for vulnerable households or support to find and negotiate for replacement land
Payment of all taxes and administrative costs will be borne by SOL
2 Loss of trees, crops, perennials
Owners and beneficiaries of land use
Compensation based on agriculture agency. (agriculture agency issues rates on an annual basis.
The price is based on the age of plants reflecting the type/category (seeds, unproductive and productive); the compensation rate is based on the age of plants (current/actual condition/type of land)
Cash compensation for the loss of trees, crops, perennials
60 days advance notice to land owners to harvest fruits, standing crops, and remove trees, if desired
28
No Type of Loss Types of Land
Owners Entitlement Details
as agreed with the land owners.
3 Loss of structure and business
Property owners Compensation at replacement value, including lost assets
Moving assistance
Appropriate price/compensation as mutually agreed with the land owners
Moving assistance in lump sum payment
4 Significant loss of income
Land owners with significant loss of income due to loss of land use
Priority for vocational training and BDS, and Project employment
Prioritize employment offer from SOL (or Project contractor) Agriculture and livelihood restoration are components of the ISP
5 Moderate loss of income
Land owners with moderate loss of income due to loss of land use
Priority for Project employment
Prioritize employment offer from SOL (or Project contractor)
6 Losses experienced by vulnerable groups
Vulnerable house-holds including households headed by women, elderly, very poor or those with disabled or many children
Additional assistance to households according to vulnerability levels
Employment offer from SOL (or Project contractor) for 24 months
Priority for CDP Health and Education components
Priority for CDP components agriculture and livelihood restoration
7 Non-land economic displacement
Households at risk of income loss
Priority for Agriculture and livelihood restoration
Agriculture and livelihood restoration are components of the Community Development Plan
SOL will give employment preferences to these land owners households, if appropriate
8 Land Owners whose lands within T/L ROW
Legal owners
Land owners with heritage land rights
Structure owners
Compensation at easement fee of 10% current land value of land for tower bases without deductions for taxes and administration cost.
Compensation at easement fee of 15% of current structure value.
Cash compensation 10% of IDR 65,000 per m2 for the loss of the use of land at replacement cost.
Cash compensation 15% of structure value based on list of structure value from appraisal team.
3.3. AFFECTED PEOPLE
As the identification of affected people was conducted along the Project progress, SOL
anticipated any changes in the actual total number of affected land owners.
29
The RP reported the changes in the number of affected land owners. Table 4 presents the
land owners identified and updated by SOL.
Table 4 Affected Land Owners
Project Component Updated total number of LO
Apr 2014 Aug 2014 Dec 2018
Land acquisition
a. Tower footing 27 55 58
b. Access Road 5 & WJP
1N 12 19 21
Total 39 74 79
Easement fee
c. T/L RoW 138 188 210
Referring to the eligibility criteria, SOL identification of affected people was based on the
following categories:
Significantly affected: Those losing 10% or more of their productive assets
(income-generating assets) and/or requiring physical displacement of housing
Most vulnerable: Those losing more than 50% of their total land holding or those
whose remaining land will be unviable, that equals to or less than 400 m2 with the
following criteria:
a. below the poverty line
b. the elderly
c. household headed by women and have many children
3.4. VALUE OF COMPENSATION
Based on iterative consultations with the land owners, the final compensation offered by
SOL for land alone was IDR 65,000 per m2.
In addition to the land, there is also compensation for plants. The valuation for plants was
based on applicable rates issued by the Agriculture Agency in the North Tapanuli Regency
rates that based on:
o Type of plants
o Age of plants
o Productivity
30
The compensation payment by SOL apparently was way beyond the then existing market rate
and practice. The valuation methodology for the land and plants compensation was based on
sub-district office reference for PLN which was only IDR 50,000 per m2 in 2010. In the
meantime, the land market prices in 2013 -2014 in the Pahae area was only (IDR 35,000
per m2) including for crops or plants. In case of SOL, the payment offered for land and
crops/plants was IDR 125,000 per m2, which is definitely considered above the market
replacement value. Based on interviews conducted with some of the land owners, the
replacement cost paid enabled them to purchase new land of similar type and value, hence
improved their economy. Highlights of interview are briefly discussed below.
1. Mr Simbolon (Silangkitang village): The replacement cost was used to purchase land
in Riau (Pekan Baru).
2. Mr. Rudi Sitompul (Simataniari village): It was used to purchase land in NIL area,
starting his own business and renovate his house.
3. Mr. Rojakat (Simataniari village): The replacement cost was utilized for his children’s
education and renovated his house.
4. Mr. Saul Sitompul (Sigurung-gurung village): The replacement cost was for renovating
his house and starting new business as local vendor.
5. Mr. Jaldi Siregar (Onan Hasang village): Replacement cost was used to expand his
existing small vehicle repair workshop and renovating his house.
During the land acquisition, there was no permanent structure (house/building) relocation
took place. However, there were six temporary structures in SIL and five in NIL that were
compensated. Mostly were small huts and pig pens in the paddy field with average width
of 2 m2. Regulation in Indonesia does not specify the compensation for temporary
structure. SOL paid compensation IDR 1,000,000 for each temporary structure based on
mutual agreement with the affected land owner.
3.5. CUT-OFF DATE
Establishing a cut-off date ensures PAP understand the date of completion of the census
and eligibility. The cut-off dates that established for the implementation of RP were:
21 February 2014 only applied for tower footprints land owners
22, 23 & 24 October 2014 for T-line RoW
3 October 2013 for WJP1 and 9 Dec 2014 for Road 5 land owners
SOL informed the AP about cut-off date through meetings and consultations.
3.6. RESETTLEMENT BUDGET AND FINANCING PLAN
The RP 2015 reports that an estimated budget of IDR 33,800,000,000 was allocated for the
procurement of land through negotiated settlement for T/L and additional Access Road 5 and
WJP 1N. This amount excluded the easement fee for the COI, budget for trees (fruit-bearing
31
and timber) and crops (rice paddy, perennial and standing) which were determined following
a detailed census and asset inventory.
The actual amount of budget as per the total land acquired as reported in SSMR 2018 is ± IDR
34,214,244,350. This change was due to:
Additional land required during the process which also affected the number of land
owners.
The inclusion of easement fee for COI, compensation for trees and crops based on
the census and asset inventory conducted.
Compensation for temporary structures.
Income restoration activities and transition assistance for vulnerable groups were provided
within the scope of the IPP budget for which a budget of ± IDR 200,000,000 was allocated.
During implementation, SOL identified the need for new well. As such, supplementary Land Acquisition Plan for NIL-E1 was prepared with estimated budget of ± IDR 6,483,898,900 for land and crop compensation. Total spending for land acquisition (RP & Supplementary Land Acquisition Plan) is ± IDR
40,432,718,250. Detail budget allocated, and total spending are presented in Appendix B.
4. LIVELIHOOD RESTORATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
This chapter discusses briefs on the socio-economic of the affected people and the
implementation of livelihood restoration program activities for the affected people. The
components of the livelihood restoration are consisting of the following program:
1. Livelihood restoration program for the most vulnerable land owners
2. Employment opportunity
3. Integrated social program
SOL incorporates the LRP implementation and monitoring into the ISP as part of the IPP.
To measure achievement and progress, SOL sets out a timeline base on the Project
phases for the implementation to include:
Short term: social program implemented in 2015 – 2017
Mid-term: social program implemented in 2018 – 2023
Long term: social program implemented in 2023 onwards
In 2015 - 2018 the Project was at construction phase where around ± 867 (42%) of locals
including land owners were recruited to work in the Project as unskilled, semi- skilled and
skilled labour.
32
Table 5 Local Worker Hired in Construction Period 2015 - 2017
Year Period Unskilled Semi-
skilled - Skilled
Total Local
Labour
% of Local
Labour
Total All Labour
2015 Semester - 1 402 429 831 47% 1.772
Semester - 2 603 662 1.265 42% 3.045
2016 Semester - 1 726 579 1.305 45% 2.885
Semester - 2 603 565 1.168 35% 3.300
2017 Semester - 1 418 1.092 1.510 41% 3.664
Semester - 2 174 266 440 40% 1.100
2018 Semester - 1 81 166 247 39% 626
Semester - 2 52 121 173 43% 404
Total 3.059 3.880 6.939 16.796
Average 382 485 867 42% 2.100
Currently ISP implementation is still in the mid-term phase where year 2018-2024 is
transition to operation phase where local communities returned back to their farming
activities.
In this chapter, the focus is on the implementation of short-term program and the
implementation of early phase of mid-term phase (2015-2018).
4.1. SOCIO-ECONOMIC PROFILE OF AFFECTED PEOPLE
Surveys and consultations were conducted for this RCR. This section will elaborate the
socio-economic profile of the affected people based on the surveys and consultations
carried out by ERM in 2014-2015 as baseline study which was discussed in RP document
and socio-economic survey conducted by USU in Dec -2017 – Jan 2018.
RP 2015 includes discussion about baseline survey on socio-economic condition of the
affected people conducted by ERM in April 2014. There were 150 land owners selected
as respondents through purposive sampling methods. The respondents who were
interviewed representing each of Project Affected Villages (PAVs). Majority of respondents
owned the land acquired for the tower footing, T/L RoW, Access Road 5 and WJP 1N.
Reportedly, there were labour shortages in agricultural sector due to the increased number
of people migrating away from the area (especially the younger generations). Females
played significant role to fulfil the manpower needs while still having a key role in
maintaining the household.
ERM identified that most affected households (90.67%) worked as farmers with majority
of vulnerable household heads were elderly people and females. Most vulnerable
households had more difficulty to access employment opportunities; while for women, their
multiple roles causing more difficulty to maintain a full-time occupation.
ERM also reported that:
33
Majority of PAHs lost a significant portion (>10%) of the land used for income
generating purpose. However, they have another source of income (such as cacao
planting, cultivating their remaining land for paddy, rubber, corn and other types of
plant, raising livestock, remittance from their children who live outside of North
Tapanuli, small businesses or working in the project) so that they could maintain
the same level of income.
There were eight structural assets (permanent and semi-permanent) compensated
due to affected by Project; but no physical displacement undertaken.
No PAHs were identified to have lost of business
The ERM survey is used as a baseline to assess progress. In the survey conducted by
USU 2018, USU applied multiple methods to include in-depth interviews, Focus Group
Discussions and Participatory Rural Appraisal. 457 respondents were involved in the
survey: land owners (344) and non-land owners selected across 11 villages (113). The
respondents’ category is presented in Table 5.
Table 6 Total Respondents Involved in USU Social Survey
No Type Respondent Percentage (%)
1 Main Facilities 136 29.76
2 Tower Site 28 39.39
3 Right of Way 180 6.13
4 Non-land owners 113 24.73
Total 457 100.00
USU generally discussed the following aspects in the survey report:
Socio-economic profile
Employment opportunities
Impact on livelihood
Data collection by USU using questionnaires reported that land acquisition has no major
impact to land owners because they have other source of income, such as from their small
warung (coffee shop), renting out housing, cultivating remaining land either paddy or
perennial plants and also working in the project. Only small numbers reported that land
acquisition process had impacts on livelihoods: land owners (4.3%) and non-land owners
(2%). This is generally aligned with ERM survey in 2014 (see 4.1.1).
On the livelihood /income restoration, based on the survey conducted by USU in 2017
and ERM in 2014, data shows that some of the land owners’ income were better off after
their land was acquired by the Project, while most of land owners have the same level of
34
income before and after the Project. Table 6 presents the minimum wage and inflation
rate in North Tapanuli over the period of 2014-2017.
Table 7 Minimum wage in North Tapanuli Regency and inflation rate in 2014 -2017
Year Minimum Wage of North
Tapanuli Regency Inflation Rate*
2014 Rp 1.325.000 As baseline value
2015 Rp 1.653.225 5,90%
2016 Rp 1.843.346 5,95%
2017 Rp 1.995.422 4,30%
Total 16,5%
Average 5,38%
*Source: Kajian Ekonomi dan Keuangan Regional Prov. Sumatera Utara oleh Bank Indonesia, 2017
Table 8 Income comparison of 17 most vulnerable land owners based on 2014-2017 inflation
No. Land Owner Village
Income in 2014 (ERM social
Survey) IDR
Income in 2014
converses to 2017
(inflation rate 16,5%)
IDR
Income in 2017
(USU social survey)
IDR
Remarks
1
MV 1 Silangkitang N/A N/A N/A
LO did not disclose her income during the interview/survey. The LO was considered most vulnerable because she and her husband are elderly and look after their 2 disabled children. LO appeared to be maintaining the same level of income as their housing condition did not change much. They still lived in the same house as before.
2 MV 2 Silangkitang 425.000 495.125 3.225.001
3 MV 3 Silangkitang 375.000 436.875 3.840.000
4 MV 4 Sigurung-gurung 490.000 570.850 9.600.000
5 MV 5 Sigurung-gurung 525.000 611.625 2.400.000
6 MV 6 Sigurung-gurung 408.330 475.704 4.000.000
7 MV 7 Janji Natogu 283.000 329.695 6.720.000
8 MV 8 Sibaganding 265.000 308.725 4.096.000
9 MV 9 Lumban Jaean 498.333 580.558 2.400.000
10 MV 10 Lumban Jaean 600.000 699.000 4.800.000
35
No. Land Owner Village
Income in 2014 (ERM social
Survey) IDR
Income in 2014
converses to 2017
(inflation rate 16,5%)
IDR
Income in 2017
(USU social survey)
IDR
Remarks
11 MV 11 Lumban Jaean 630.000 733.950 4.320.000
12
MV 12 Simataniari N/A N/A N/A
In 2014, LO was sick and passed away in 2016. So, it was the wife who received the assistance because she is a widow and elderly and lives by herself. In 2017, LO was not available during USU survey because she was visiting her children outside of Tapanuli. The fact that the she was visiting her children outside Tapanuli during the USU survey may positively indicate that she has some spare money to be able to afford the travel outside Tapanuli and/or she was taken care of well by her children.
13 MV 13 Janji Natogu 275.000 320.375 7.680.000
14
MV 14 Simataniari N/A N/A 3.482.500
LO did not disclose her income during the interview/survey in 2014 but considered most vulnerable due to the LO condition, poor, widow and elderly based on confirmation from Head of Village.
15
MV 15 Simataniari N/A N/A 7.680.000
LO did not disclose her income during the interview/survey in 2014 but considered most vulnerable due to the LO condition, poor, widow and elderly based on confirmation from Head of Village.
16 MV 16 Sibaganding 450.833 525.220 5.766.000
17
MV 17 Lumban Jaean 490.000 570.850 N/A
LO did not disclose her income during the interview/survey. However, she appeared to be maintaining the same level of income and
36
No. Land Owner Village
Income in 2014 (ERM social
Survey) IDR
Income in 2014
converses to 2017
(inflation rate 16,5%)
IDR
Income in 2017
(USU social survey)
IDR
Remarks
she also receives monthly support from his son who works as security in SOL from 2016 to date.
The analysis for the level of income before and after the land acquisition was
considering the average inflation rate of 5,3% from 2014-2017. Table 8 shows that
generally the actual income of the 17 most vulnerable people in 2017 is more or less
the same with, or even higher from, the actual pre-project level income of 2014. This
is still the case when compared to the projected 16.5% inflated income. The conclusion
is justifiable even though two of the surveyed respondents did not disclose their
income, and one respondent could not be reached at the time of survey. Therefore, it
is concluded that income restoration to 100% of immediate pre-Project level was
achieved.
The USU Social Survey was intended to verify whether the Project social impacts were
managed and complied with applicable standards. However, in the 2018 report USU
did not further elaborate the data analysis and had limited and very narrow explanation
to support the findings.
In filling the gaps, the results of the USU Social Survey were further strengthened and
clarified by conducting a qualitative assessment through internal review and
verification using the more comprehensive BPS poverty key indicators, while keep
monitoring the actual ISP implementation results on the ground. The review against
USU Social Survey report is presented in below Sections.
4.2. VULNERABLE GROUPS AND LIVELIHOOD RESTORATION
Livelihood restoration program for the most vulnerable land owners were implemented
through the provision of employment in the project and distribution of assistance program
which was provided based on the consultation with the most vulnerable group undertaken
by SOL CSR team. RP and SSCAR categorize the most vulnerable group based on the
following criteria:
remaining land holding
below the poverty line
the elderly
household headed by women and have many children
In 2013, ERM reported that 98 out of 191 land owners were significantly affected or losing
more than 10% of their productive or income-generating assets because of land
acquisition.
37
Based on field verification, SOL confirmed that amongst those 98 losing more than 10%
of their productive land, 68 were not categorized as vulnerable because they were
recognized as middle-income earners such as civil servants, local contractors, and small
business/shops owners (ref. IPP document section 5.11.2); but 30 land owners were
grouped as vulnerable people.
Of these 30 vulnerable people, 13 were employed by SOL (either by main contractors or
subcontractors), earning additional income, while 17 were identified as most the vulnerable
affected people. The most vulnerable is entitled to have assistance program and
employment opportunities.
SOL selected the 17 most vulnerable families as the beneficiaries of its assistance
program outlined in the LRP based on the following criteria:
Household experiencing more than 50% of productive land being acquired
Household whose remaining land has not yet been productive after the acquisition
Household affected by land acquisition and living in poverty
Household headed by widow or elderly
The LRP considered the most vulnerable group (17 people) eligible for assistance based
on the criteria outlined in the RP.
The validation of the potential beneficiaries was done by SOL ER team, including the
member originating from the same village. The ER Team validated the vulnerability status
by directly visiting their houses and interviewed the household members. SOL also
collected information from the staff who has a kinship relation with or who is part of the
extended family member of the land owners. The information from the field was taken into
account to validate the appropriateness of the vulnerability status of the potential
beneficiaries.
The assistance program delivered to the 17 land owners were based on the consultation
conducted with the land owners. They proposed the assistance program which they
deemed most suitable to their condition and has potential to help improving their economy
as follows:
Twelve (12) land owners proposed to have assistance on livestock breeding such
as pigs, ducks and chickens.
One (1) land owner proposed the assistance for a hand tractor so that he can do
his farming activities more effectively.
Four (4) land owners proposed for the assistance and support for opening small
coffee shops
SOL Team reviewed the proposed programs against the potentiality of the programs to
improve the land owners’ livelihood and reduce their level of vulnerability.
Since the program started, SOL CSR Team conducted a periodic monitoring of the
assistance program for the 17 land owners. Based on the monitoring conducted in January
2019 as presented in table 10 below, it is reported that:
38
Seven (7) people have managed to run the assistance well and experienced
positive impacts on their income. Out of the seven (7) people, only four (4) people
are still running the assistance;
One (1) person moved to another city, Batam, to live with her son;
Twelve (12) people did not manage to continue the assistance, but their standard
of living is improved. These land owners did not manage to run the assistance due
to the following condition:
For land owners with livestock assistance program: there was lack of consistency and
commitment in running the program. Some of the livestock were not maintained and
treated based on the technical advice provided by SOL’s CSR team in the beginning of
the program and during monitoring.
Land owners with assistance for small coffee shop (warung): the coffee shop was mostly
opened during construction within the Project area, thus at that time there were still many
customers. However, upon the completion of the construction phase, there were less
customers and some land owners opted to close the coffee shop. There was one land
owner who, from the very beginning, was not very serious in running his coffee shop and
did not follow the advices provided by SOL. As a result, the land owner did not gain much
benefits from the assistance.
Of the-12-not successful people, SOL employed seven (7) people, four (4) of whom
already worked for 24-36 months, while three (3) people for less than 24 months. The
remaining five (5) people were not employed or did not work for the SOL Project. SOL
considered this group of five people to be evaluated for further program recommendation
in the next phase of the ISP.
Measuring poverty only based on income does not really reflect the actual condition of
affected people in the context of the region. In Indonesia, besides income, the Indonesian
government’s Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS) also has established the standard of living
indicators to assess the poverty line in the country.
The Indonesia standard of living consists of 14 indicators set by the BPS to measure the
household economic profile.
Table 9 BPS Standard of Living Indicators
No Standard of Living Indicator
K 1 Width of flooring area of housing is less than 8 m2 per person
K 2 The type of housing floor made of soil/bamboo/wood
K 3 Type of housing wall made of from bamboo/thatch/low quality of wood/wall without plastering
K 4 No toilet facility/joint facility with other households
K 5 Household lighting sources do not use electricity
K 6 The source of drinking water is from wells/unprotected springs/rivers/rainwater
39
No Standard of Living Indicator
K 7 Daily cooking fuel is wood/charcoal/kerosene
K 8 Consume meat/milk/chicken only once a week
K 9 Only buy one set of new clothes in a year
K 10 Meal consumption only one/two times a day
K 11 Unable to pay for medical expenses at the Puskesmas/Policlinic
K 12 The source of income of the head of the household is: farmers with a land area of 500m2, farm
laborers, fishermen, construction workers, plantation workers and/or other jobs with income
below Rp 600,000 per month
K 13 The highest education is the head of the household: Do not have formal education / not
completing elementary school/ finishing elementary school
K 14 Does not have savings/goods that are easily sold with a minimum of Rp 500,000, - such as
credit/non-credit motorcycles, gold, livestock, motorized boats, or other capital goods
Source: BPS
If a household embraces at least nine of the 14 standards of living indicators defined by the
BPS, such household will be categorized as living below poverty line. Referring to the BPS
standard of living indicators, SOL confirmed that the 17 most vulnerable land owners are
not categorized as poor nor living under poverty line. Table 11 presents SOL verification
matrix.
The 41 considered poor households by the USU SS, which merely used ‘income” as the
basis for measurement, were further verified and double-checked against the BPS standard
of living indicators. Such verification of the 41 poor households against the BPS indicators
did not actually find any single household embracing nine BPS indicators at once. On the
contrary, the verification results using BPS indicators are as follows:
5 households embrace 1 BPS indicator
18 households embrace 2 BPS indicators
14 households embrace 3 BPS indicators
2 households embrace 4 BPS indicators
2 households embrace 5 BPS indicators
Moreover, a further verification was conducted on the 41 land owners, looking at both their
income and expenses. This follow-up verification is necessary since the USU SS was
limited by the fact that only 21 out of 41 respondent households had given answers to the
question about their main income. When the investigative lens being used is then changed
to ‘income and expenses’ the result shows that basically there are only 11 land owners
that are considered poor or living below the poverty line.
40
Assessment needs to be conducted for the remaining 11 land owners living below the
poverty to further evaluate these people so that they can be included in a meaningful way
in the LRP program and the future ISP.
41
Tab
le 1
0 A
ssis
tan
ce P
rog
ram
fo
r th
e 17
Mo
st V
uln
erab
le H
ou
seh
old
s
No
L
and
ow
ne
r V
illag
e
Typ
e o
f a
ssi
sta
nc
e
Ass
ista
nc
e d
eliv
ere
d
Up
da
te a
s o
f Ju
ne
201
9
1
MV
1
Sila
ngkita
ng
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
27 F
eb
20
16
4 li
vesto
ck d
ied
due to
seasona
l dis
ease a
nd 1
liv
esto
ck
has b
ee
n s
old
. T
here
is n
o liv
esto
ck r
em
ain
ing
. L
and
ow
ners
did
no
t fo
llow
SO
L’s
te
chn
ical a
dvic
e a
nd
lack o
f con
sis
tency in
run
nin
g th
e p
rogra
m.
2
MV
2
Sila
ngkita
ng
Mate
rials
to c
onstr
uct
ad
ditio
na
l bu
ildin
g t
o t
he e
xis
tin
g s
ma
ll coffee s
hop t
hat sh
e o
wne
d a
nd
als
o t
he
fund t
o c
onstr
uct th
e
bu
ildin
g,
ad
ditio
na
l w
are
s f
or
the c
off
ee s
ho
p. It
is loca
ted a
t th
e left s
ide
of
SIL
PP
the
en
tra
nce
19 F
eb -
10 M
ar
2016
Th
e w
aru
ng
(coff
ee s
hop)
was b
ig a
nd
div
ide
d i
n t
wo
part
s,
on
e u
sed f
or
lan
d o
wner’s w
aru
ng
and
th
e o
the
r p
art
was r
en
ted t
o b
e u
se
d a
s w
aru
ng a
s w
ell.
Both
w
aru
ng
w
as ru
nn
ing w
ell
an
d m
ost
custo
me
rs w
ere
constr
uction
work
ers
. It
ran w
ell
for
abo
ut 1 y
ear a
nd s
he
has e
xperi
ence
d p
ositiv
e im
pact on
her in
com
e fro
m th
is
pro
gra
m.
How
ever,
sin
ce t
he c
onstr
uction p
ha
se in S
IL h
as b
ee
n
com
ple
ted,
cu
sto
mers
were
decre
asin
g.
Curr
ently t
he
lan
d o
wne
r is
ren
ting
ou
t th
e c
offe
e s
ho
p b
uild
ing
to
he
r re
lative.
3
MV
3
Sila
ngkita
ng
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
27 F
eb
20
16
3 l
ivesto
ck d
ied d
ue t
o s
easo
na
l d
ise
ase,
and
2 le
ft.
CS
R t
eam
has g
iven s
om
e a
dvic
e o
n h
ow
to
eff
ective
ly
tre
at th
e r
em
ain
ing
ones.
H
ow
ever,
land o
wn
er
did
not
follo
w t
he a
dvic
e w
ell
an
d
coup
le
mo
nth
s
late
r th
e
rem
ain
ing
2
livesto
ck
die
d.
Curr
ently,
Lan
d o
wne
r h
as m
oved t
o B
ata
m a
nd l
ive
s
with
he
r son
.
42
No
L
and
ow
ne
r V
illag
e
Typ
e o
f a
ssi
sta
nc
e
Ass
ista
nc
e d
eliv
ere
d
Up
da
te a
s o
f Ju
ne
201
9
4
MV
4
Sig
uru
ng-
gu
run
g
Co
okin
g e
quip
ment
and
mate
rials
/ware
s for
her
sm
all
coffee s
hop
1
9 F
eb
20
16
Th
e
assis
tance
giv
en
used
to
make
va
rietie
s
of
tra
ditio
nal
snacks in
h
er
sm
all
wa
rung
/ coff
ee sh
op.
Durin
g t
he c
onstr
uctio
n p
eri
od,
so
me
of
her
custo
mers
w
ere
th
e w
ork
ers
an
d th
e c
offe
e s
ho
p w
ere
run
nin
g w
ell.
C
urr
ently,
the c
off
ee
shop
is s
till
run
nin
g e
ven t
ho
ug
h
now
cu
sto
mer
is le
sser
sin
ce constr
uctio
n w
ork
s are
com
ple
ted a
nd
als
o b
ecau
se
ma
ny n
ew
coff
ee
sho
ps
are
op
en
ed in th
e a
rea.
5
MV
5
S
iguru
ng-
gu
run
g
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
27 F
eb
20
16
2
live
sto
ck
die
d
du
e
to
seasona
l d
isease
, and
3
rem
ain
ing. C
SR
tea
m h
as g
iven s
om
e a
dvic
e o
n h
ow
to
e
ffective
ly t
rea
t th
e r
em
ain
ing
ones.
Th
e l
ive
sto
ck h
as
pro
du
ce
d p
ig b
ree
ds,
and
so
me
has b
een s
old
to h
elp
th
e
lan
d
ow
ner’
s
da
ughte
r education
. H
ow
eve
r,
last
year
all
rem
ain
ing liv
esto
ck h
as b
een s
old
to s
up
po
rt h
is
me
dic
al tr
ea
tme
nt. C
urr
en
tly, he
has r
ecovere
d fro
m h
is
illne
ss a
nd g
radu
ally
be
ing a
ctive in
farm
ing
.
6
MV
6
Sig
uru
ng-
gu
run
g
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
27 F
eb
20
16
All
livesto
ck d
ied d
ue t
o c
ho
lera
. T
his
conditio
n
wa
s
du
e
to
lack
of
se
riousn
ess
and
consis
tency i
n m
ain
tain
ing a
nd t
reating t
he l
ivesto
ck i
n
accord
ance
with
th
e g
uid
an
ce g
ive
n in t
he
be
gin
nin
g o
f th
e p
rogra
m.
7
MV
7
Janji
Nato
gu
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
27 F
eb
20
16
Due t
o a
sudd
en o
utb
reak,
all
livesto
ck d
ied
. In
201
8,
lan
d o
wn
er
passed a
way,
and
his
wife t
ook c
are
of
2
pig
lets
she
bo
ught
to
repla
ce
the
death
liv
esto
ck.
How
ever,
those
pig
lets
als
o d
ied.
Th
is
conditio
n
wa
s
du
e
to
lack
of
se
riousn
ess
and
consis
tency i
n m
ain
tain
ing
and t
reating t
he l
ivesto
ck i
n
accord
ance
with
th
e g
uid
an
ce g
ive
n in t
he
be
gin
nin
g o
f th
e p
rogra
m.
43
No
L
and
ow
ne
r V
illag
e
Typ
e o
f a
ssi
sta
nc
e
Ass
ista
nc
e d
eliv
ere
d
Up
da
te a
s o
f Ju
ne
201
9
8
MV
8
Sib
ag
and
ing
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
8 M
ar
201
6
4
livesto
ck
die
d,
an
d
1
rem
ain
ing
h
as
pro
duce
d
4
pig
lets
. C
SR
ha
d a
dvis
ed
him
to c
lean
th
e s
urr
ound
ing
pig
pen
to
avoid
m
osqu
itos,
flie
s
that
ma
y
ca
use
dis
ea
ses to
th
e liv
esto
ck.
Du
ring 2
01
8,
1 sw
ine
ha
s
pro
du
ce
d p
igle
ts t
wic
e.
Th
ere
are
re
ma
inin
g 5
pig
lets
m
ain
tain
ed.
Th
ose
liv
esto
ck h
ave
he
lped
th
eir c
hild
ren
educatio
n, as r
eve
ale
d b
y h
is w
ife.
9
MV
9
Lum
ban
Jaean
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
8 M
ar
201
6
Th
e lan
d o
wn
er
ha
s g
ood
und
ers
tan
din
g o
f pig
fa
rmin
g
me
tho
ds. 1 li
vesto
ck h
as b
een s
old
with
50
kg o
f w
eig
ht,
1
w
as
so
ld
and
re
pla
ced
w
ith
anoth
er
2
pig
lets
, 2
livesto
ck d
ied of
dis
ea
se
. D
urin
g 2
018,
livesto
ck ha
s
pro
du
ce
d p
igle
ts 3
tim
es;
with
to
tal
of
16 p
igle
ts,
so
me
were
sold
and r
em
ain
ing 5
pig
s a
re m
ain
tain
ed
.
10
M
V 1
0
Lum
ban
Jaean
Liv
esto
ck (
5 p
igs),
an
ima
l fe
ed
& v
ita
min
s, vaccin
es a
nd z
inc
roof fo
r pig
pe
n
8 M
ar
201
6
3 li
vesto
ck w
ere
so
ld, 1
wa
s m
ade
as s
ire
. B
y th
e e
nd
of
2018
, th
e r
em
ain
ing
1 l
ive
sto
ck d
ied,
an
d h
e d
oes n
ot
repla
ce w
ith a
ny n
ew
pig
lets
. T
his
conditio
n
wa
s
du
e
to
lack
of
se
riousn
ess
and
consis
tency i
n m
ain
tain
ing a
nd t
reating t
he l
ivesto
ck i
n
accord
ance
with
th
e g
uid
an
ce g
ive
n in t
he
be
gin
nin
g o
f th
e p
rogra
m.
11
M
V 1
1
Lum
ban
Jaean
Liv
esto
ck s
eed (
200
du
ck),
vitam
in &
an
imal fe
ed, n
et
3 M
ar
201
6
Mo
st
of
the
liv
esto
ck d
ied,
on
ly 1
5%
le
ft.
One
of
the
reasons
is
that
the
la
nd
o
wners
did
n
ot
follo
w
the
instr
uctio
ns/a
dvic
e giv
en b
y C
SR
te
am
. S
om
e o
f th
e
livesto
ck w
ere
con
sum
ed
an
d th
e r
em
ain
ing w
as d
ied.
Th
is
conditio
n
wa
s
du
e
to
lack
of
se
riousn
ess
and
consis
tency i
n m
ain
tain
ing a
nd t
reating t
he l
ivesto
ck i
n
accord
ance
with
th
e g
uid
an
ce g
ive
n in t
he
be
gin
nin
g o
f th
e p
rogra
m. S
om
etim
es th
e la
nd o
wn
ers
left
th
e v
illa
ge
to v
isit h
er
ch
ildre
n in o
ther
tow
n f
or
a few
days a
nd left
th
e liv
esto
ck u
na
tte
nd
ed w
hic
h w
ors
ened
the
co
nd
itio
n
of th
e liv
esto
ck.
44
No
L
and
ow
ne
r V
illag
e
Typ
e o
f a
ssi
sta
nc
e
Ass
ista
nc
e d
eliv
ere
d
Up
da
te a
s o
f Ju
ne
201
9
12
M
V 1
2
Sim
ata
nia
ri
Liv
esto
ck s
eed (
200
ch
icke
n),
vitam
in &
an
imal fe
ed, n
et
3 M
ar
201
6
Th
e l
an
d o
wn
er
did
no
t in
tensiv
ely
tre
at
the
liv
esto
ck
beca
use
so
metim
es the
lan
d o
wn
er
go
es o
uts
ide o
f th
e
vill
age for
a p
eri
od o
f tim
e to v
isit h
er
ch
ildre
n. T
hus, th
e
livesto
ck is
a
ban
do
ned.
Som
e of
the liv
esto
ck w
ere
consum
ed a
nd
som
e w
ere
die
d.
Lack o
f goo
d t
reatm
ent
an
d s
eriou
sn
ess in m
ain
tain
ing
as w
ell
run
nin
g t
he
assis
tance
.
13
M
V 1
3
Janji
Nato
gu
1 u
nit o
f ha
nd tra
cto
r fo
r fa
rmin
g
activity
22 M
ar
20
16
Th
e h
and
tra
cto
r h
as b
een
used a
nd h
as a
su
bsta
ntia
l im
pa
ct
on
the
La
nd o
wn
er’
s l
and
pro
ductivity b
ecause
the
la
nd
ow
ner
ca
n
cultiv
ate
a
wid
er
lan
d
wh
ich
is
resu
lted
in
in
cre
asin
g cro
ps an
d im
pro
ve
th
eir fa
mily
in
com
e.
So
metim
es,
it is a
lso r
ente
d t
o o
ther
pe
ople
in
th
e v
illag
e,
withou
t any p
aym
en
t/ in
ce
ntive
.
14
M
V 1
4
Sim
ata
nia
ri
Liv
esto
ck s
ee
d (
200
ch
icke
n),
vitam
in &
an
imal fe
ed, n
et
3 M
ar
201
6
Only
50%
of th
e liv
esto
ck r
em
ain
ed w
hile
th
e o
ther
50%
d
ied.
CS
R t
ea
m a
dvis
ed t
he
lan
d o
wn
er
to im
pro
ve
he
r fa
rmin
g
techn
iques.
Rem
ain
ing
liv
esto
ck
were
n
ot
tre
ate
d in
tensiv
ely
an
d la
ck o
f w
illin
gn
ess to im
pro
ve
th
e
cond
itio
n o
f th
e b
reed
ing p
lace.
So
me
has b
een s
old
a
nd r
em
ain
ing liv
esto
ck d
ied.
Lack o
f goo
d t
reatm
ent
an
d s
eriou
sn
ess in m
ain
tain
ing
as w
ell
run
nin
g t
he
assis
tance
.
15
M
V 1
5
Sim
ata
nia
ri
Liv
esto
ck s
eed (
200
0 g
old
fis
h
seed),
an
imal fe
ed &
net
3 M
ar
201
6
Aro
un
d 4
0%
of
the s
ee
d d
ied
, an
d t
he r
em
ain
ing f
ish
seed
was n
ot in
tensiv
ely
tre
ate
d a
nd
die
d. La
nd o
wner’
s
reasonin
gs a
re s
om
e w
ere
eate
n b
y o
the
r an
ima
l a
nd
som
e w
ere
carr
ied a
wa
y d
urin
g t
he
overf
low
of w
ate
r in
th
e p
ond
. A
ll ha
s b
ee
n s
old
, bu
t th
e la
nd o
wn
er
refu
se
d
to info
rm t
he
weig
ht
of h
er
fish b
ein
g s
old
.
45
No
L
and
ow
ne
r V
illag
e
Typ
e o
f a
ssi
sta
nc
e
Ass
ista
nc
e d
eliv
ere
d
Up
da
te a
s o
f Ju
ne
201
9
Lack o
f goo
d t
reatm
ent
an
d s
eriou
sn
ess in m
ain
tain
ing
as w
ell
run
nin
g t
he
assis
tance
.
16
M
V 1
6
Sib
ag
and
ing
M
ate
rials
, C
ookin
g e
qu
ipm
ent
an
d w
are
s to o
pe
n c
off
ee s
hop
ne
ar
19 F
eb
20
16
Th
e s
ma
ll co
ffee
sho
p c
on
ditio
n i
s n
ot
ma
inta
ined,
the
roof a
nd th
e w
all
are
bro
ke
n. T
he
la
nd
ow
ner
requ
este
d
add
itio
na
l a
ssis
tance
in t
he
form
ta
rpau
lin a
nd
2 w
ate
r p
ipes.
The
la
nd o
wn
er
did
not
routine
ly o
pe
n t
he c
off
ee
shop
an
d it
has b
ee
n c
lose
d.
L
ack o
f serio
usne
ss i
n m
ain
tain
ing
as w
ell
run
nin
g t
he
assis
tance.
17
M
V 1
7
Lum
ban
Jaean
M
ate
rials
for
op
en
ing s
ma
ll coffee s
hop
S
ep
t 20
16
Th
e c
off
ee
sh
op
has b
ee
n r
unnin
g w
ell
for
the
last
on
e
year
sin
ce the
location
is v
ery
str
ate
gic
, n
ea
r th
e P
roje
ct
location.
It h
as h
elp
ed to
im
pro
ve the
fa
mily
’s inco
me.
H
ow
ever,
sin
ce t
he c
om
ple
tion
of co
nstr
uctio
n p
ha
se in
NIL
a
rea,
incom
e
from
th
e
coff
ee
sho
p
has
be
en
decre
asin
g. T
he
coffe
e s
ho
p h
as b
een
clo
sed
.
46
Tab
le 1
1 V
erif
icat
ion
Mat
rix
for
BP
S S
tan
dar
d o
f L
ivin
g o
f th
e 17
Mo
st V
uln
erab
le G
rou
p
No
. L
O N
ame
V
illa
ge
B
PS
Sta
nd
ard
of
Liv
ing
Ind
icat
or
To
tal
Cat
ego
ry
Rem
ark
K
1
K2
K
3
K4
K
5
K6
K
7
K8
K
9
K10
K
11
K
12
K13
K
14
1
MV
1
Sila
ngkitan
g
- -
1
1
- -
- -
1
- -
- -
1
4
No
t P
oor
2
MV
2
Sila
ngkitan
g
- -
1
- -
1
-
-
1
- 3
N
ot P
oor
3
MV
3
Sila
ngkitan
g
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
0
No
t P
oor
Moved
to B
ata
m
4
MV
4
Sig
uru
ng
-gu
rung
- -
1
- -
1
- -
- -
- -
- -
2
No
t P
oor
5
MV
5
Sig
uru
ng
-gu
rung
- -
1
- -
- -
- -
- -
1
- -
2
No
t P
oor
6
MV
6
Sig
uru
ng
-gu
rung
- -
1
- -
- -
- 1
- -
- -
- 2
N
ot P
oor
7
MV
7
Jan
ji N
ato
gu
- -
1
- -
- -
- 1
- -
- -
- 2
N
ot P
oor
Pa
sse
d a
way
8
MV
8
Sib
agand
ing
- -
- -
- -
- 1
- -
- -
- -
1
No
t P
oor
9
MV
9
Lu
mban
Ja
ean
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
0
No
t P
oor
10
MV
10
Lu
mban
Ja
ean
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
0
No
t P
oor
Pa
sse
d a
way
11
MV
11
Lu
mban
Ja
ean
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
0
No
t P
oor
12
MV
12
Sim
ata
nia
ri
- -
1
- -
1
- 1
1
-
1
- 1
6
No
t P
oor
Pa
sse
d a
way
13
MV
13
Jan
ji N
ato
gu
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
0
No
t P
oor
14
MV
14
Sim
ata
nia
ri
- -
1
- -
- -
1
1
- -
- -
1
4
No
t P
oor
15
MV
15
Sim
ata
nia
ri
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
0
No
t P
oor
16
MV
16
Sib
agand
ing
- -
1
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- 1
N
ot P
oor
17
MV
17
Lu
mban
Ja
ean
- -
1
- -
- -
1
- 1
-
- -
1
4
No
t P
oor
47
4.3. EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
As part of the LRP components, employment opportunity was prioritized for the land
owners based on their skill and capability. However, the Project also opened the
opportunity for non-land owners from the affected villages and the villages surrounding
the project area.
IPP 2015 identified that there was high expectation related to employment opportunities
addressed by local communities. IPP reports 50% of total job seekers in the districts were
unemployed. Given most of locals’ education level was high school graduate and low
competency level, SOL employment opportunities offered unskilled workers position for
locals to fill in.
Figure 3 shows number of workers employed by SOL and its contractors in 2015 – 2017.
Figure 3 Workers employed by SOL and its contractors
From the figure above, it shows that the peak period of workers absorption was in the 1st
semester of 2017. Based on USU field data collection 2017, SOL also employed locals
for skilled position as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4 Employment Position for Locals
114
847 811
1,772
123
1,016
1,906
3,045
195
802
1,888
2,885
234
1,139
1,927
3,300
306
703
2,655
3,664
312 303 485
1,100
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
SO
L
HA
L
HD
EC
To
tal
SO
L
HA
L
HD
EC
To
tal
SO
L
HA
L
HD
EC
To
tal
SO
L
HA
L
HD
EC
To
tal
SO
L
HA
L
HD
EC
To
tal
SO
L
HA
L
HD
EC
To
tal
Semester - 1 Semester - 2 Semester - 1 Semester - 2 Semester - 1 Semester - 2
2015 2016 2017
Skilled
80
32%
Unskilled
167
68%
48
Following SOL’s principle of equal opportunity and treatment in employment, SOL also
offered the same opportunities for women to work with SOL. In 2014 - 2018, woman
comprised 30% - 45 % of total unskilled labour for services. The substantial number of
local woman workers indicates that the Batak women in the project area are not limited
by culture to work only in the domestic or agricultural sector, but they are also given the
opportunity by their family to work in the project. Figure 5 presents workers composition
based on gender.
Figure 5 Unskilled workers by gender (2014-2018)
USU recognized that SOL Project development increased the local employment
opportunities. Based on respondent data collection, Table 10 presents the USU analysis
on employment status.
Table 12 Respondents’ Employment Status
Category Employment Experiences Amount Percentage
Land Owner
Employed by SOL 26 15.9
No longer employed by SOL 75 45.7
Do not work with / not employed by SOL 62 38.4
Sub total 163 100
Non-land owner Employed by SOL 66 22.2
No longer employed by SOL 79 27
49
Category Employment Experiences Amount Percentage
Do not work with / not employed by SOL 149 50.9
Sub total 294 100
Total Land owner + Non-land owner 457
Source: USU social survey, 2017
As part of SOL commitments in RP, the affected land owners are prioritized to have
employment opportunities in SOL, its contractors or sub-contractors. The monthly income
is ranged in three and four million rupiah (IDR 3,000,000 – 4,000,000) for unskilled and
semi-skilled workers. This salary income is higher than the Regional minimum wage at
Regency level which amounted to IDR 2,100,000.
Average working duration for skill and semi-skilled workers in the project is from 6 months
– 3 years during 2015 – 2017. The employment opportunities and income generated by
the local labours and also workers from outside of the area residing in the area during the
project construction phase triggered the growth of economic condition in the area. Money
circulation within Pahae area and North Tapanuli region is high and used for purchasing
goods and providing services related with project, resulting in the growth of the
businesses of the local vendors, such as food catering, accommodation/housing rental,
transportation services, travel services, material and equipment supply, etc. There is high
velocity of money and expanding economy, which has helped improve the economic
condition of the communities as a whole. The employment opportunities provided by SOL
helped improve the economic condition not only of the land owners but also local
community as well.
With regard to assisting the most vulnerable group, SOL employed seven (7) people (see
discussion in Section 4.2). SOL is to evaluate the remaining five of most vulnerable who
currently are not employed by SOL to be included in the ongoing and future ISP.
4.4. INTEGRATED SOCIAL PROGRAM
This section elaborates the implementation of ISP since 2015 -2018. ISP was designed
as part of the Project social management plans to address and mitigate the adverse
impacts of Project activities, in particularly related to land acquisition process. Besides,
ISP also contains social activities to enhance the positive benefits of Project and to
establish community development program.
In developing ISP, SOL consulted with key stakeholders such as local communities, in
particularly the IPs, government, education and health services and NGOs. Community
expectations and needs were identified while at the same time communities (IPs)
resources and capacities were observed. SOL recognized that communities’ contribution
would increase the ownership of the program and sustain the implementation.
ISP was intended to be a targeted, effective, community-driven and sustainable program.
To achieve these objectives, a comprehensive planning was prepared.
50
ISP focuses on five main social concerns: agricultural/livelihood restoration,
education,
health,
infrastructure improvement, and
culture, art and religion.
SOL introduced multiple programs and initiatives to ensure the five main social concerns are
equally covered. As part of LRP implementation, ISP also includes program focusing on most
vulnerable group. Targeted beneficiaries include: land owners, non-land owners, women,
children, elderly people and poor families.
Figure 6 shows the general process taken on community development and ISP.
Figure 6 Program Planning Process
ISP activities implementation in 2015 – 2018 are summarized in table 11 below.
Need Analysis of villages
(Juni - Agustus 2014)
•Meeting with stakeholders in Pahae Julu & Pahae Jae
•Study of each village RPJMDes (Village Long Term Development Plan) document
•Coordination with Local Government to syncronize ISP and government programs
•Meeting with stakeholders in the village
Planning and program design
(Sept - Dec 2014)
• Specific programs, targets, budgets and schedules
• Management approval process
Informationa Sharing session
(Jan 2015)
•The community affected
•Local government
•Relevant stakeholders
Implementation
(Feb 2015 -present)
•Coordination with village head, community, local government
•Implementation of the program
•Monitoring and reporting
•Evaluation
51
Tab
le 1
3 S
um
mar
y o
f IS
P i
mp
lem
enta
tio
n in
201
5 –
2018
Fo
cus
Pro
gra
m
Yea
r N
o.
Act
ivit
y
Are
a/V
illa
ges
B
ene
fici
ari
es
T
ota
l U
nit
L
O
No
n-
LO
Ag
ricu
ltu
re/
Liv
elih
oo
d
Res
tora
tio
n
2015
1
Tra
inin
g fo
r org
anic
com
post an
d a
nim
al fe
ed a
nd
assis
tan
ce f
or
1
un
it o
f o
rgan
ic fe
rtili
zer
and a
nim
al fe
ed m
achin
e p
rocessor
to
ea
ch v
illag
e
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
vill
ages
11
11
2
Assis
tan
ce for
PK
K m
em
bers
(un
ifo
rm)
NIL
(S
ima
tania
ri)
wo
men
35
35
2016
3
Drivin
g s
kill
tra
inin
g for
Sim
ata
nia
ri Y
outh
org
an
ization
NIL
(S
imata
nia
ri)
You
th
10
10
4
Ele
ctr
icity in
sta
llatio
n –
skill
tra
inin
g
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illag
es (
SIL
& N
IL)
You
th
23
23
5
Non
-ric
e m
ate
ria
l cu
lina
ry –
Skill
tra
inin
g
SIL
(6 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
NIL
(5 a
ffecte
d v
illa
ge
s +
2 n
on
affe
cte
d v
illages)
wo
men
65
65
6
Sew
ing -
Skill
tra
inin
g
SIL
(P
ard
om
uan
Na
ing
go
lan)
wo
men
8
8
7
Assis
tan
ce –
coo
kin
g to
ols
fo
r P
KK
gro
up
SIL
(S
ilan
gkitan
g a
nd
S
iguru
ngg
uru
ng)
wo
men
20
20
8
Assis
tan
ce –
pro
vis
ion o
f un
iform
fo
r P
KK
gro
ups
SIL
(S
ilan
gkitan
g,
Pard
om
uan
Na
ing
go
lan
) N
IL (
Lum
ba
n J
ae
an
)
wo
men
20
20
9
Assis
tan
ce for
most vu
lne
rable
la
nd o
wne
rs
SIL
(S
iguru
nggu
rung
, S
ilangkita
ng
)
NIL
(Janji
Nato
gu, S
ibag
an
din
g,
Lum
ba
n J
ae
an
, S
ima
tan
iari
)
Lan
d o
wn
ers
1
7
0
17
2017
Fis
h f
arm
ing
10
Assessm
en
t n
ew
Farm
ers
' gro
ups in fis
h fa
rmin
g a
ctivity
(co
mm
itm
ent,
wo
rk p
lan, econom
ic a
na
lysis
an
d its
lo
ca
tion)
SIL
(P
ard
am
ean
Na
ing
go
lan
and
Pard
om
ua
n N
ain
gg
ola
n)
Fa
rmers
' gro
up
2
2
11
Inte
nsiv
e tra
inin
g fo
r e
ffe
ctive a
nd
effic
ient
fish fa
rmin
g &
dis
trib
utio
n o
f fish
bre
eds, fish fee
d a
nd too
ls/e
qu
ipm
ent.
Farm
ers
’ g
roup
mem
bers
2
5
1
5
3
52
Fo
cus
Pro
gra
m
Yea
r N
o.
Act
ivit
y
Are
a/V
illa
ges
B
ene
fici
ari
es
T
ota
l U
nit
L
O
No
n-
LO
W
om
en
gro
up
12
Assis
tan
ce –
don
ation
of
co
okin
g u
tensils
fo
r w
om
en’s
gro
up
(PK
K)
SIL
(P
ard
om
uan
Na
ing
go
lan)
NIL
(O
nan
Hasa
ng
) w
om
en
40
40
2018
Pig
Gro
win
g &
Pig
Bre
edin
g
13
Assessm
en
t n
ew
Farm
ers
' gro
ups in p
ig g
row
ing a
ctivity
(econom
ic a
naly
sis
and
its
loca
tio
n)
SIL
(S
iguru
ng
-guru
ng,
Pard
am
ea
n N
ain
gg
ola
n)
NIL
(S
imata
nia
ri, Lum
ban
Ja
ean,
Sito
lu O
mpu
, O
na
ng
Ha
sa
ng
)
Fa
rmers
' gro
up
6
6
14
Tra
inin
g o
n p
ig f
arm
ing
an
d p
ig b
reedin
g, d
istr
ibu
tion
of pig
lets
an
d s
win
e, m
edic
ines, co
rn s
eed
s a
nd
pig
fee
d
Farm
ers
’ g
roup
me
mb
er
52
86
138
Du
ck
Far
min
g
15
Assessm
en
t n
ew
Farm
ers
' gro
up in d
uck fa
rmin
g a
ctivity
(co
mm
itm
ent
and w
ork
pla
n, econ
om
ic a
naly
sis
and its
location)
NIL
(O
nan
Hasa
ng
) F
arm
ers
' gro
up
1
1
16
Tra
inin
g o
n d
uck fa
rmin
g (
duck e
gg p
roduction
), d
istr
ibutio
n o
f du
cks, m
edic
ines, veg
eta
ble
s s
eed, a
nd
pig
fe
ed
, m
onito
rin
g
Farm
ers
’ g
roup
mem
bers
2
10
12
Cro
p D
ive
rsif
ica
tio
n
17
Assessm
en
t n
ew
Farm
ers
' gro
ups in c
rop d
ive
rsific
ation
activity
(co
mm
itm
ent
and w
ork
pla
n, econ
om
ic a
naly
sis
and its
location)
NIL
(Janji
Nato
gu)
Fa
rmers
' gro
up
1
1
18
Tra
inin
g o
n c
rop d
ive
rsific
ation, d
istr
ibu
tion
of vegeta
ble
se
eds,
fert
ilize
r, p
esticid
es a
nd
sp
rayers
and
monito
ring
Farm
ers
’ g
roup
mem
bers
2
5
7
Mic
ro-c
red
it
19
Assessm
en
t n
ew
wom
en' g
roup in
mic
ro c
redit o
n m
em
be
rs
com
mitm
ent a
nd
wo
rkpla
n in r
un
nin
g m
icro
cre
dit a
ctivity
NIL
(Janji
Nato
gu)
Fa
rmers
' gro
up
1
1
20
Tra
inin
g o
n f
ina
ncia
l m
an
ag
em
ent an
d b
ookkee
pin
g, dis
trib
utio
n o
f re
volv
ing
fund
assis
tance a
nd
monito
rin
g
Farm
ers
’ g
roup
me
mb
er
8
19
27
Bak
ery
21
Assessm
en
t n
ew
yo
uth
-girls
' gro
up in b
akery
makin
g a
ctivity
(co
mm
itm
ent,
wo
rkpla
n,
eco
nom
ic a
naly
sis
and its
mark
et
po
ten
tia
l)
SIL
(S
ilan
gkitan
g a
nd
S
iguru
ngg
uru
ng)
Wom
en y
ou
th
gro
up
1
1
53
Fo
cus
Pro
gra
m
Yea
r N
o.
Act
ivit
y
Are
a/V
illa
ges
B
ene
fici
ari
es
T
ota
l U
nit
L
O
No
n-
LO
22
Tra
inin
g o
n b
akery
and
pa
str
y m
akin
g, dis
trib
utio
n o
f bakery
in
gre
die
nts
, to
ols
, a
nd
sta
rter
fund
assis
tan
ce a
nd m
onito
ring
Wom
en y
ou
th
gro
up m
em
be
rs
3
5
8
Han
dic
raft
36
Assessm
en
t n
ew
wom
en' g
roup in
han
dic
raft
makin
g a
ctivity
(co
mm
itm
ent,
wo
rkpla
n,
eco
nom
ic a
naly
sis
and its
mark
et
po
ten
tia
l)
NIL
(S
ibaga
ndin
g)
Wom
en
1
1
37
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f m
ate
rials
an
d too
ls a
ssis
tance
3
7
7
38
Mo
nitoring
on
han
dic
raft
makin
g a
ctivity
Fis
h f
arm
ing
39
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f fe
ed f
ish for
fish b
reedin
g a
ctivity
SIL
(P
ard
om
uan
Na
ing
go
lan
and
Pard
am
ea
n N
ain
gg
ola
n)
Fa
rmers
' gro
up
2
2
40
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f fe
ed m
akin
g m
achin
e
41
Pote
ntial m
ark
et ana
lysis
& b
uild
ing
mark
eting
netw
ork
with F
ish
O
ffic
e o
f N
ort
h T
apan
uli
dis
tric
t in
fis
h b
reedin
g a
ctivity
Farm
ers
’ g
roup
mem
bers
2
51
53
42
Fir
st ha
rve
st in
fis
h f
arm
ing
Ed
uca
tio
n
2015
-
2018
1
Eng
lish c
ou
rse for
ele
men
tary
scho
ol an
d junio
r hig
h s
ch
ool
stu
de
nts
S
IL (
10
ele
men
tary
scho
ols
and
2 junio
r hig
h s
ch
ool)
stu
den
ts
75
0
750
2
Assis
tan
ce for
stu
den
ts w
ith b
est achie
ve
men
ts
Paha
e J
ae &
Pa
hae J
ulu
Sub
-dis
tric
ts
stu
den
ts
92
1
921
3
Rep
air
of S
D J
an
ji N
ato
gu
– c
eili
ngs, ch
air
s a
nd
cla
ss p
art
itio
n
NIL
(Janji
Nato
gu)
stu
de
nts
&
teach
ers
85
85
4
Evalu
ation
mee
ting
on E
nglis
h c
ou
rse w
ith E
ducation O
ffic
e in
Sub
-dis
tric
t and
Co
urs
e Im
ple
men
ter
SIL
& N
IL
Head
maste
rs a
nd
SO
L C
SR
te
am
34
34
2016
5
Assis
tan
ce for
two s
cho
ols
(S
MP
N 3
Pah
ae
Ju
lu a
nd S
D Inpre
s
Jan
ji N
ato
gu
) –
mate
rial fo
r re
pa
inting
th
e s
choo
l build
ing
NIL
(Lum
ba
n J
ae
an
an
d J
anji
Na
togu
) stu
de
nts
&
teach
ers
43
0
430
2017
6
Rep
air
of 2
5 u
nits d
esks –
Lum
ba
n J
ae
an
Ele
me
nta
ry s
choo
ls
NIL
(Lum
ba
n J
ae
an
) stu
de
nts
&
teach
ers
25
0
250
7
Assis
tan
ce for
the r
epa
ir o
f bro
ke
n d
esks ±
20-u
nit d
esks
NIL
(H
uta
bara
t)
stu
de
nts
&
teach
ers
12
0
120
2018
8
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f scho
lars
hip
for
un
ive
rsity s
tud
en
ts
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
un
ive
rsity
stu
den
ts
4
6
10
9
Ceili
ng r
epa
ir for
1 c
lass r
oom
in S
D J
anji
Nato
gu
Ja
nji
Nato
gu
stu
den
ts
95
95
54
Fo
cus
Pro
gra
m
Yea
r N
o.
Act
ivit
y
Are
a/V
illa
ges
B
ene
fici
ari
es
T
ota
l U
nit
L
O
No
n-
LO
10
Inte
rnsh
ip -
socio
log
y s
tud
en
ts o
f N
ort
h S
um
ate
ra U
niv
ers
ity
No
rth T
apa
nuli
un
ive
rsity
stu
den
ts
14
14
11
Assis
tan
ce-
dis
trib
ution
of cem
en
t (4
tons)
to S
MP
N 2
Pu
rba T
ua
to c
on
str
uct d
rain
age
Purb
atu
a S
ub
-dis
tric
t stu
den
ts
27
0
270
12
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f E
nglis
h d
ictio
nary
(jo
int effo
rt w
ith
Halli
bu
rton)
SIL
& N
IL
stu
den
ts
75
0
750
13
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f d
esks a
nd
table
s t
o t
wo e
lem
en
tary
schools
N
IL (
Sim
ata
nia
ri)
SIL
(P
ard
am
ean
Na
ing
go
lan)
stu
den
ts
22
6
226
14
Dis
trib
utio
n o
f D
eskto
p o
f Ju
nio
r H
igh
scho
ol M
Ts A
l F
alla
h 2
units
de
skto
ps a
nd 1
unit s
erv
er
T
aru
tun
g
stu
den
ts
65
65
Hea
lth
2015
-
2018
1
Assis
tan
ce for
Posya
nd
u L
an
sia
/ eld
erly a
ctivity (
vitam
in a
nd
nu
trio
us fo
od
)
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
Eld
erly p
eo
ple
24
6
246
2015
-
2017
2
Con
tin
ua
tion
of a
ssis
tance for
str
eng
thenin
g P
osyandu
Balit
a/
un
de
r-5 c
hild
ren a
ctivity (
vitam
ins a
nd n
utr
itio
na
l fo
od)
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
und
er-
5 c
hild
ren
45
0
450
2017
3
Assis
tan
ce for
Posya
nd
u L
an
sia
– p
rovis
ion
of 2
un
its o
f ta
pe f
or
“Se
na
m P
osyandu
La
nsia
” activity
Sim
ata
nia
ri a
nd J
an
ji N
ato
gu
Eld
erly p
eople
65
65
4
Assis
tan
ce for
Posya
nd
u L
an
sia
mem
be
rs –
dis
trib
ution
of
un
ifo
rm
for
“Sen
am
la
nsia
” activity
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
Eld
erly p
eople
24
6
246
5
Fre
e m
ed
ica
tion
S
IL &
NIL
(11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
co
mm
unitie
s
2,7
84
2,7
84
2018
6
Me
dic
al che
ck-u
p (
Cho
leste
rol, d
iabe
tic,
urid a
cid
) fo
r e
lde
rly
pe
op
le
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
Eld
erly p
eo
ple
24
6
246
7
Con
str
uction
of com
mu
nal se
ptic ta
nk
NIL
(S
imata
nia
ri)
hou
seh
old
s
49
49
8
He
alth s
em
ina
r o
n H
ypert
ensio
n &
Dia
betic (
NIL
are
a)
&T
ube
rculo
sis
(S
IL a
rea
) att
ende
d b
y 1
05 H
ealth c
ad
res
SIL
& N
IL (
11 a
ffe
cte
d v
illages)
posyan
du
ca
dre
s
10
5
105
9
Assis
tan
ce to d
isable
d p
ers
ons (
whe
elc
ha
irs,
wa
lkin
g a
id,
and
nu
tritio
us food
)
SIL
& N
IL (
11
affe
cte
d v
illages)
dis
able
d p
ers
ons
43
43
Infr
astr
uct
ure
Im
pro
vem
ent
2015
1
Impro
vem
en
t o
f w
ood
en
bridge
(R
am
bin
g B
ari
ng
in)
- access to
fa
rmin
g a
rea
s.
Sig
uru
ng-g
uru
ng
Farm
ers
± 1
58
± 1
58
2
Rep
air
of d
am
aged
irr
igation b
ody (
Am
bar)
P
ard
am
ea
n N
ain
gg
ola
n
Farm
ers
± 1
38
± 1
38
55
Fo
cus
Pro
gra
m
Yea
r N
o.
Act
ivit
y
Are
a/V
illa
ges
B
ene
fici
ari
es
T
ota
l U
nit
L
O
No
n-
LO
3
Incre
ase
th
e c
lea
n w
ate
r dis
cha
rge s
upply
P
ard
om
ua
n N
ain
gg
ola
n
hou
seh
old
s
±21
8
±218
4
Impro
vem
en
t o
f path
way to S
D (
Pri
mary
Sch
oo
l) a
t S
i R
ia-R
ia S
ub
Vill
ag
e.
Sio
pa
t B
ahal
hou
seh
old
s
± 9
8
± 9
8
5
Impro
vem
en
t o
f ir
rig
atio
n d
rain
ag
e a
t P
an
dahana
n S
ira s
ub
vill
age
Sila
ngkita
ng
Farm
ers
± 9
3
± 9
3
6
Impro
vem
en
t o
f dam
ag
ed
acce
ss r
oa
d to the v
illag
e:
8 s
eve
re
po
ints
Sito
lu O
mpu
co
mm
unitie
s
± 1
57
± 1
57
2016
7
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
su
pply
S
imata
nia
ri
hou
seh
old
s
± 1
08
± 1
08
8
Impro
vem
en
t o
f A
ek S
aba
-Saba
irr
igatio
n c
hann
el
Ja
nji
Nato
gu
hou
seh
old
s
± 1
13
± 1
13
9
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
and
co
nstr
uctio
n o
f 2 u
nits o
f pe
rman
en
t/con
cre
te w
ate
r ta
nk a
t th
e v
illage
Lum
ba
n J
ae
an
hou
seh
old
s
±11
2
±1
12
10
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
and
co
nstr
uctio
n o
f 2 u
nits o
f pe
rman
en
t/con
cre
te w
ate
r ta
nk
Sib
ag
an
din
g
hou
seh
old
s
± 1
03
± 1
03
11
Rep
air
of p
ad
dy f
ield
co
ncre
te irr
iga
tion c
hann
el (±
20 m
) P
ard
om
ua
n N
ain
gg
ola
n
Farm
ers
± 1
02
± 1
02
12
Rep
air
of p
ad
dy f
ield
co
ncre
te irr
iga
tion c
hann
el (±
100 m
) P
ard
am
ea
n N
ain
gg
ola
n
Farm
ers
± 7
8
± 7
8
13
Impro
vem
en
t o
f vill
age a
ccess r
oa
d (
5 p
oin
ts)
Sito
lu O
mpu
co
mm
unitie
s
± 6
36
± 6
36
14
Insta
llatio
n o
f 2 u
nits o
f str
eet lig
ht
Pard
om
ua
n N
ain
gg
ola
n
co
mm
unitie
s
± 1
04
6
± 1
046
2017
15
Assis
tan
ce to r
epa
ir s
om
e d
am
aged f
acili
ties a
t S
imata
nia
ri
Ele
men
tary
Scho
ol (S
D)
Sim
ata
nia
ri
stu
den
ts
± 8
5
± 8
5
16
Assis
tan
ce for
the im
pro
vem
ent
of en
tran
ce
access a
t P
uske
sm
as
Pah
ae
Ju
lu (
NIL
) S
ub
dis
tric
t
On
an H
asa
ng
(N
IL)
Loca
l co
mm
unitie
s
Local co
mm
unitie
s in
Pa
hae
Ju
lu s
ub
dis
tric
t
56
Fo
cus
Pro
gra
m
Yea
r N
o.
Act
ivit
y
Are
a/V
illa
ges
B
ene
fici
ari
es
T
ota
l U
nit
L
O
No
n-
LO
17
Assis
tan
ce to r
epa
ir d
oo
rs a
nd b
uild
ing r
epain
tin
g o
f ele
me
nta
ry
schoo
l S
ibag
an
din
g
stu
den
ts
19
7
197
18
Rep
air
of b
rid
ge
in H
uta
Dangir s
ub v
illage
Sila
ngkita
ng
co
mm
unitie
s
± 1
13
± 1
13
19
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
and
co
nstr
uctio
n o
f pe
rmanen
t/concre
te w
ate
r ta
nk a
t th
e s
ourc
e a
nd a
t th
e v
illage
S
iguru
ng-g
uru
ng
hou
seh
old
s
± 8
3
± 8
3
20
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
and
co
nstr
uctio
n o
f pe
rmanen
t/concre
te w
ate
r ta
nk a
t th
e s
ourc
e a
nd a
t th
e v
illage
S
iOp
at B
aha
l hou
seh
old
s
± 1
33
± 1
33
21
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
fo
r tw
o e
lem
en
tary
schoo
ls in S
IL a
rea
Sila
ngkita
ng &
Sig
uru
ng-g
uru
ng
stu
den
ts
± 2
53
± 2
53
2018
22
Rep
air
of access r
oa
d t
o H
uta
julu
sub
vill
age
(± 2
00
m)
Sim
ata
nia
ri
hou
seh
old
s
± 3
5
± 3
5
23
Rep
air
of access r
oa
d t
o L
iang S
ing
a s
ub
vill
age (
± 2
00 m
) P
ard
om
ua
n N
ain
gg
ola
n
hou
seh
old
s
± 3
0
± 3
0
24
Cle
an w
ate
r pip
ing
in
Janji
Nato
gu
vill
ag
e (
± 2
,5 k
m)
Ja
nji
Nato
gu
hou
seh
old
s
± 1
50
± 1
50
Cu
ltu
re,
Art
&
Rel
igio
n
2015
-
2019
1
Don
ation
- C
hristm
as c
ele
bra
tio
n e
ve
nts
, M
osqu
es a
nd r
elig
ious
eve
nts
/ a
ctivitie
s
Paha
e J
ae, P
ahae J
ulu
, S
imangu
mba
n,
Purb
a T
ua S
ub
-dis
tric
ts
Local co
mm
unitie
s,
Churc
he
s, M
osq
ues
2
Don
ation
/co
ntr
ibu
tio
n o
n C
onstr
uction o
f chu
rch
es a
nd m
osque
s
SIL
& N
IL
C
hu
rch
es &
Mosqu
es
3
Don
ation
/co
ntr
ibu
tio
n o
n local co
mm
unitie
s’ activitie
s &
pro
posa
ls
rela
ted w
ith n
atio
na
l an
d local e
vents
Paha
e J
ae, P
ahae J
ulu
, S
imangu
mba
n,
Purb
a T
ua S
ub
dis
tric
ts &
No
rth
Tap
an
uli
Dis
tric
t
Local co
mm
unitie
s’ org
aniz
atio
ns, Lo
ca
l com
munitie
s
4
Don
ation
/co
ntr
ibu
tio
n for
Bata
k d
ance “
Tort
or
Tum
ba”
festiva
l in
P
ah
ae
are
a in
20
16
4 s
ub d
istr
icts
(P
ahae J
ulu
, P
aha
e J
ae, S
iman
gu
mba
n,
Purb
a T
ua)
5
Don
ation
/co
ntr
ibu
tio
n o
n F
estival of
Bata
k C
ultu
re &
Ulo
s e
ve
nt
in
Nort
h T
ap
an
uli
in 2
01
8
No
rth T
apa
nuli
Dis
tric
t
Lo
cal C
om
munitie
s
57
Detailed ISP implementation
a. Agricultural and Livelihood Restoration
In 2015 -2016, program implemented under the agricultural and livelihood restoration
involved 11 villages and included agricultural training for organic composting and animal
feed processing, women skill training (sewing and culinary), driving skill and electrical
installation training for youth groups.
In the second semester of 2017 - 2018, the focus was to develop farmers’ groups in the
affected villages with the following activities:
Table 14 Farmers' groups and type of activities
No Type of activities Farmers
Group Area/Villages
1 Pig breeding/growing 8
SIL: Silangkitang, Sigurung-gurung (2
groups), Pardamean Nainggolan, Sitolu
Ompu
NIL: Simataniari, Lumban Jaean, Onan
Hasang
2 Fish farming/breeding 2 Pardamean Nainggolan
3 Crop diversification 1 Janji Natogu
4 Women’s group Micro credit 1 Janji Natogu
5 Pastry/bakery making (female
youth group) 1 Silangkitang
6 Handy craft making 1 Sibaganding
Total 15
During 2017-2018, there were 15 farmers’ groups assisted by SOL. The assistance includes
intensive training, livestock breeds, seedlings, materials and tools, marketing network analysis
and facilitation.
Out of 15 farmer groups, 2 groups of fish farming succeeded and gained income from the
activity. These 2 groups further continued the program with very minimum reliance on SOL
because they were appropriately equipped with fish feed machine to minimize expense. The
livelihood of the group members was found improved.
SOL also facilitated the groups to sustainably cooperate with the North Tapanuli Fishery
Office. Despite of the achievement, SOL continues monitoring these two groups and making
them as a model for other groups (both existing and new groups).
The remaining livelihood restoration programs such as pig breeding and growing, crop
diversification, women’s micro credit group and youth pastry group are being monitored and
will be evaluated by end of 2019.
Table 15 summarizes the number of land owners involved in the activities under the
agricultural and livelihood restoration program.
58
Table 15 Agricultural and livelihood restoration activities with number of land owners and non- land owners
No. Group Name Village Women Men Total of
Member
Land
Owner
1 Maju Ikan Lestari Pardamean Nainggolan 10 0 10 0
2 Maju Jaya Pardomuan Nainggolan 4 0 4 2
3 Sitolu Ompu Sitolu Ompu 19 1 20 0
4 Ranto Panjang Pardamean Nainggolan 10 2 12 12
5 Muda Mandiri Sigurunggurung 18 1 19 2
6 Beta Maju Silangkitang 20 4 24 17
7 IMSS - Bakery Silangkitang-Sigurunggurung 0 7 7 3
8 Ramosdo Sigurunggurung 1 32 33 0
9 Dos Roha Simataniari 1 25 26 15
10 Lumban Jaean Lumban Jaean 0 31 31 25
11 Makmur Onan Hasang 8 0 8 2
12 Sinur Onan Hasang 7 0 7 0
13 UP2K Janji Natogu 0 26 26 8
14 Diversifikasi Tanaman Janji Natogu 0 7 7 2
15 Keranjinan Tangan Sibaganding 0 8 8 3
Total 98 144 242 91
Figure 7 Fish farming initial harvest in Pardamean Nainggolan village
59
b. Education
Three major programs implemented for education to date include:
1. Free English course
There were about 750 students (elementary and junior high school) from 11 affected
villages in SIL & NIL participated in this program. The program has been running since
2015. SOL engaged an English course institution for this program. The course was
conducted twice a week in 12 locations. Positive feedback was coming across from
the students and the teachers in the last three years. The program was closely
monitored and evaluation at semi-annual basis was conducted involving the schools,
the English course institution and SOL’s team. Given the positive impacts and the
coverage of program, SOL keeps this as an annual program in the ongoing ISP while
conducting evaluation to improve the program.
2. Scholarship for university students
In 2018, SOL started a scholarship program and distributed assistance to 10 selected
university students with best achievement from poor family. Out of 10 students, 5 are
children of land owners. Two students graduated this year (2019) and the other eight
will be evaluated based on the study result whether the scholarship be continued the
following year.
3. Assistances for schools in affected villages to include supplies such as desks and
repair of damaged school facilities. The assistance was implemented based on
assessment and in coordination with the Local Government to avoid overlapping with
any similar government program.
c. Health
Health program implemented in 2015 - 2018 targeted the vulnerable groups such as elderly
people, women and poor households. The program covered distribution of vitamins and
additional nutritional food for elderly (in 11 villages) by village midwives. There were ± 250
elderly people participated in the program on a regular basis (weekly or monthly) depending
on the village schedule.
SOL also distributed assistance for construction of communal septic tank in Simataniari
village (involving 49 poor households). This program was conducted in cooperation with
the Health Office of Pahae Julu district. The village is now rated to have 100% coverage of
household with septic tank by the District Health Office.
Other program was free medication “Pengobatan Gratis” in 11 affected villages as defined
in IPP. The program was conducted in 2017 and will be repeated in 2019.
d. Infrastructure improvement
Main activities in infrastructure improvement are presented in Table 16.
60
Table 16 Infrastructure Improvement Program (2015-2018)
No Type of infrastructure Village Coverage
1 Clean water piping Simataniari, Lumban Jaean,
Sibaganding, Sigurung-gurung,
SiOpat Bahal, Janji Natogu,
70%–100% household in
the village, 560 – 801
households.
2 Irrigation Silangkitang, Pardamean
Nainggolan, Pardomuan
Nainggolan, Janji Natogu
30 %-70% farmers in the
village, 24– 58 farmers
3 Bridge Silangkitang, Sigurung-gurung 40% - 70% household in
the village, 141– 247
households
4 Access road to sub village Simataniari, Pardomuan
Nainggolan, Sitolu Ompu,
20%- 50% household in
the village, 103 – 259
households
All of the above activities were selected based on priorities and had been consulted with
head of villages and the local government. SOL also conducted prior assessment to ensure
that no overlap with government program.
The infrastructure improvement program gave positive impacts to the village, especially the
clean water piping, as it helps increasing clean water supply to the village. In this regard,
the program also supported the improvement of sanitation and health condition of local
Indigenous communities. Figure 8 shows sample of program activities in photographs.
Figure 8 Clean water piping in Lumban Jaean village, 2016
61
e. Religious, Art and Culture
During 2015-2018 the program covered:
Donation and contribution to support local communities’ social and cultural
events/festivals at the village, district and regency level.
Support for churches’ and mosques’ activities surrounding the Project areas; such as
Christmas celebration and Moslem’s festive.
Support and donation for Batak art and culture such as Batak ethnic instrument festival
and other programs proposed by local communities.
ISP implementation was closely monitored through community consultations and direct
observation. SOL regularly reported the ISP monitoring result to ADB.
Appendix C and Appendix D present the summary of ISP implementation across five main
concerns covering the short and mid-term.
4.5. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGAMENT
This sub section focuses on the implemented activities related to stakeholder engagement.
Stakeholder engagement is an important part of the social management plan and SOL has
been intensively conducted the engagement with project related stakeholders since the start
of the project.
Activities carried out on stakeholder engagement throughout the early stage of the project to
date are explained in the following sections.
4.5.1. Identification of Stakeholders
Stakeholders are defined as people or entities that are affected or may have interest in
the Project. SOL identified the key stakeholders through a stakeholder analysis process
at the beginning of the Project. The key stakeholders directly affected by the Project
activities were:
Project affected communities
Village heads from six villages in Pahae Jae district
Village heads from five villages in Pahae Julu district
Representatives of Local Government (sub district and regency)
Community leaders from eleven villages
Religious leaders from eleven villages
Youth leaders from eleven villages
4.5.2. Stakeholder Consultation
To date SOL has undertaken consultation in a culturally sensitive manner using both
Indonesian and Batak languages to conduct meetings with all the Project affected
communities. Consultation activities were conducted, where possible, in a venue closest
to the local communities.
62
Meeting participants consisted of Batak men, women and youth who were given equal
opportunities to voice their concerns and expectations during the question and answer
sessions. SOL has maintained the stakeholder’s engagement through close
communication with the villagers and coordination with the local governments and
contractors. ER Team conducted village monthly meeting to collect community aspirations
and feedback against the program implementation. Other than that, ER Team also initiated
coordination meeting with main contractors or sub-contractors to discuss communities’
concerns related to project construction and conducted ad-hoc meeting coordination with
related government agencies.
Table 17 presents the community participation in village monthly meeting over 2015 - 2018.
Table 17 Community Participation in Village Meeting 2015 – 2018
No Village
Village Monthly Meeting Attendance/Year based on Gender
2015 2016 2017 2018
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
1 Silangkitang 121 80 13 21 38 31 0 0
2 Sigurung-gurung 134 45 20 22 27 16 24 10
3 Pardamean Nainggolan
81 45 31 85 60 38 12 3
4 Pardomuan Nainggolan
103 96 36 31 92 49 44 14
5 Siopat Bahal 34 33 21 5 34 19 50 24
6 Sitolu Ompu 54 4 11 2 53 12 18 2
7 Simataniari 163 137 13 5 31 20 25 3
8 Lumban Jaean 71 70 8 20 14 13 0 0
9 Sibaganding 142 81 31 60 25 22 12 5
10 Onan Hasang 51 88 7 41 26 24 43 27
11 Janji Natogu 62 42 49 30 101 70 81 22
Total 1,016 721 240 322 501 314 309 110
Source: SOL Data, 2019
Appendix E shows the summary of consultation and socialization conducted by SOL
related to land acquisition process in 2015–2018.
4.5.3. Women Participation
SOL promoted gender empowerment through the LRP implementation and various
engagement. Women were encouraged to voice up concerns and were asked to
participate in meetings and program implementation.
63
SOL gave priorities to female headed household (among elderly and household with
disabled person) to enhance their livelihoods. LRP provided some benefits for women as
they can participate through livestock raising opportunity, crop diversification and micro
credit support. Women empowerment also took place in the facilitation of Family Welfare
Empowerment (PKK) program in each affected village.
Figure 9 and 10 show female participation in LRP implementation program based on SOL
ISP/CSR data 2019.
Figure 9 Female Participation in LRP Implementation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
3328
8
0 0
12
0
91
0 0
27
7
0
7
Male Female
64
Figure 10 Female Participation in LRP (Percentage)
The data shows that women participation in the LRP activities is 62% and it is higher than
men’s involvement. Two main activities where women participation is high are pig farming
and micro credit. This is because pig farming in the affected villages is mainly done by
women who are considered generally more patient than men in treating the pigs and
maintaining the activities. They greatly value pig farming as part of their investment most
relevant to their cultural context, especially because pig is traditionally always required in
any big or small Batak cultural events or feasts. The market value for pig is quite high
because while the demand is considered high in North Tapanuli area, most of the supply
comes from other areas. Therefore, when the program was introduced and socialized,
there were many women interested in taking part.
For employment, women were provided equal opportunity to take part in the project. Figure
5 in section 4.3 shows that during the construction period 2014 - 2018, woman comprised
30% - 68% of the total unskilled labour for services.
Given this percentage, number of female workers during the construction phase has met
the committed development indicator, which states that women comprise at least 30% of
the total unskilled labour for services during construction phase in 2014-2018 (ref. section
4.3).
4.6. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION
This sub-section will focus on the Information Disclosure activities conducted by SOL.
ADB SPS states that consultation and participation are central to the achievement of the
objective. In this regard, SOL was required to ensure that all relevant information related
to Project would be shared with the affected people and communicated to stakeholders.
SOL conducted activities to disclose project information, including LRP activities, to the
local communities and related stakeholders since the beginning of the project construction
activities using various forms.
To disclose information about project activities, SOL also used the following forms:
direct communication:
38%
62%Male
Female
65
1. verbal face to face communication on informal and formal meetings with key
stakeholders
2. Village monthly meeting – started in 2015 to date.
indirect communication- notification through the establishment of Information
Education Consultation (IEC) materials
The IEC materials were prepared in the form of brochures/leaflets, location maps,
information boards, pictures/photos and video presentations. These materials were found
to be:
culturally appropriate and effective: the materials were presented in a language
understood by the local communities (Indonesian and Batak language)
clear and understood by the communities: materials were presented in a simple
structured format
placed at location easily accessible to the affected people and general public
For example, during the land acquisition process; the IEC material covered the following
terms:
Measurement of losses
Detailed asset valuations
Entitlements and special allowance for income restoration
Grievance procedures
Timing of payment
Displacement schedule
SOL conducted intensive communication with key stakeholders along Project stages.
Appendix F shows the multiple communication media established by SOL.
Appendix G describes the consultation and participation meeting conducted by SOL to
disseminate information related to RP and LRP over the years.
4.7. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM
At the time of the review, there is no outstanding issue related to compensation and land
acquisition. SOL established a timely and effective Grievance Mechanism at the early
stage of the project that includes clear steps to redress potential issues, dispute and
complaints from community. Grievances were flagged up through verbal or written
channels such as:
by mail addressed directly to SOL;
through village apparatus who then submitted to SOL;
through the ER team members who also lived in the affected villages;
village monthly meetings.
Hotline number
66
SOL grievance mechanism is presented in Figure 11. All process was well followed and
implemented.
Figure 11 SOL Grievance Redress Mechanism
With regards to resolving concerns related to land acquisition, SOL set the priority on the
following order:
First priority: grievances directly affecting Project development, such as
grievance concerning land plots within Project site
Second priority: grievances related to significant impacts on the community
Third priority: grievances with insufficient or unclear evidence or
documentation that require clarification and further investigation
Fourth priority: grievances with no supporting evidence or documentation
In 2015, SOL created a grievance log to document and monitor all the grievances reported
by local communities or related stakeholders. The grievance log recorded all the
submitted grievances and process of the settlement up to the close out status. Update on
67
the status of grievances was also reported in the SSMR submitted to ADB every
semester.
Types of grievances recorded in the log are categorized as follows:
1. Environment: Grievances related to impact of project activities during construction
such as dust, siltation, landslide, water overflow, noise, etc.
2. Social: Community grievances on matters such as request for access to communities’
plantation area, contractors’ and sub contractors’ issue with local vendors, etc.
3. Labor: Grievances raised mainly regarding issues on labor within contractors and sub-
contractors such as salary payment, contract, job vacancy, etc.
It was confirmed that there was no unresolved or outstanding grievance related to land
acquisition or resettlement plan. Figure 12 shows the grievance log in 2015 – 2018.
Figure 12 SOL Grievance Log 2015 – 2018
Overall, during 2015-2018, the grievance mechanism was implemented and managed well
by the Project. Procedure on the grievance mechanism was followed and implemented
carefully in handling the grievances received by the project. Nevertheless, based on social
survey result conducted by USU, there were issues related to the delays in the settlement
of some of the grievances particularly for cases related to the impact of Project
construction activities involving the contractors and sub-contractors. It was revealed that
more time was required for coordination and decision making requiring technical solution
which involved not only SOL, but also the contractors or sub- contractors.
It is acknowledged that individual complainant may have different standard of satisfaction
and a high level of expectation towards SOL. With regard to the satisfaction of
complainants to the solution provided, SOL appeared to make its best effort to respond
and offer most feasible solution based on the agreement with the complainants. The
solutions being offered mostly based on the technical justification and analysis.
202
28
7
0
50
100
150
200
250
Environment Social Labor
Grievance Type
68
5. MONITORING PROCESS
Monitoring provides the basis to assess the overall success of the land acquisition
program, resettlement and livelihood restoration plan. Monitoring is also useful to measure
the effectiveness of various processes. To get a balanced result, monitoring mechanism
is based on both internal and external monitoring, these two processes run simultaneously.
5.1. INTERNAL MONITORING
The internal monitoring process on social program activities was made part of daily
activities of the CSR and ER Team. The internal monitoring was intrinsically linked to the
progress of overall social management plan covering ISP implementation including LRP,
stakeholder engagement and grievance redress mechanism.
The SOL ER & CSR team at site followed and implemented the monitoring procedures.
They collected information through regular visits (monthly and quarterly basis), village
meeting (monthly basis) and grievance monitoring (daily basis).
The internal monitoring reports were prepared by SOL CSR & ER team led by the
responsible manager. The monitoring reports were submitted to multiple concerned
parties such as:
ADB- every semester via the SSMR
Local government- every semester and annual basis
PGE- Quarterly
Appendix H shows sample of monitoring reports submitted to concerned parties.
5.2. EXTERNAL MONITORING
In addition to the internal monitoring process, an assessment conducted by external
expert is beneficial to give independent observation and measurement against the
program implementation. The external monitoring for the Project was undertaken by:
1. Lenders: ADB, JBIC, EPFIs
2. Lenders Environmental and Social Consultant (LESC)
3. PT PGE
4. EBTKE
5. North Tapanuli Local government (PEMDA)
Other than that, SOL also received spot checks from related regulators such as the Local
Parliament (North Tapanuli and Provincial DPRD). Although not all external parties issued
official reports or memorandum following the spot checks, SOL usually received verbal
feedback or comments that triggered immediate corrective actions. Appendix I presents
the spot checks in 2015 – 2018.
RP 2015 indicates that the external monitoring needs to focus on the assessment of
compliance with social commitments contained in Indonesian legislation and applicable
69
international standards. The external monitor is to carry out a socio-economic survey
every two years from the start date of RP implementation and base the assessment on:
Process indicators, to measure the effectiveness of process and identify areas of
improvements
Outcome indicators, to assess the effectiveness of RP/LRP and changes occurred
to communities’ standard of living
SOL engaged USU to conduct the external monitor in 2017. The socio-economic survey
results are taken into account during the preparation and establishment of this RCR.
As part of the external monitoring activity, ADB has been conducting regular visit since
2013 -to date to monitor the implementation of environmental and social safeguards as
committed by SOL. Table 18 shows monitoring activity carried out by ADB team in 2013-
1st semester 2019.
70
T
able
18
AD
B E
nvi
ron
men
tal &
So
cial
Tea
m S
ite
Vis
it
in 2
015
-201
9
No
D
ate
A
DB
Socia
l te
am
H
igh
lights
of m
on
itori
ng r
esult
Impro
ve
me
nt
in t
he
im
ple
me
nta
tio
n
1
5th -
9th M
ay 2
013
In
dira
Sim
bolo
n,
Jo
yce M
unsa
yac,
Marife
P,
ER
M (
Ad
is N
. R
)
As p
art
of th
e p
rep
ara
tion
fo
r th
e s
tart
ing o
f th
e
Pro
ject, S
OL
was r
eq
uire
d t
o:
1.
To
accom
mo
da
te a
nd r
esp
onde
d t
o A
DB
’s
inp
uts
and
com
ments
in
the f
inaliz
ation
of
socia
l d
ocum
enta
tio
n
requ
ire
me
nt
for
the
Pro
ject
wh
ich w
as c
onsis
ted o
f S
SC
AR
, R
P
& IP
P.
2.
To
con
duct
socia
lization o
n P
roje
ct
activity
inclu
din
g
lan
d
acqu
isitio
n
&
gri
evance
me
cha
nis
m
to
land
ow
ne
rs
an
d
local
com
mu
nitie
s in th
e a
ffecte
d v
illa
ges.
1.
Re
qu
ired
socia
l do
cu
men
tations h
ad
add
ressed
the in
puts
an
d c
om
ments
fro
m
the m
issio
n. A
ll docu
men
ts h
ad b
ee
n
su
bm
itte
d a
nd
ap
pro
ved b
y A
DB
.
2.
Socia
lizatio
n h
ad b
ee
n c
on
du
cte
d a
s
require
d b
y A
DB
an
d it
has b
een
co
ntin
ued
to d
ate
as p
art
of
sta
keho
lders
’
eng
age
men
t activity.
2
1st –
5th S
ept
20
14
In
dira
Sim
bolo
n,
Jo
yce M
unsa
yac,
Iris
h A
guila
r
1.
SO
L t
o im
pro
ve s
takeh
old
er
en
gage
me
nt at
the
vill
age le
ve
l.
2.
Impro
vem
en
t of
grieva
nce
m
echan
ism
imp
lem
enta
tion
pa
rtic
ula
rly o
n t
he
im
pact
of
contr
acto
rs/s
ubcontr
acto
rs’ w
ork
.
3.
SO
L
to
incre
ase
its
sta
ff
capacity
for
impro
ve
d
sta
keh
old
er
en
ga
ge
me
nt
an
d
effective
IS
P
mo
nitori
ng
an
d
imp
lem
enta
tion
.
1.
Vill
age
Month
ly
me
etin
g
has
be
en
co
nducte
d
in
11
aff
ecte
d
vill
ages
an
d
ann
ounce
ment
boa
rds
we
re
insta
lled
in
th
e v
illage
s.
2.
SO
L h
ad t
ake
n the lea
d b
etw
een t
he m
ain
co
ntr
acto
r a
nd
sub-c
on
tracto
r to
sett
le t
he
outs
tan
din
g
gri
evan
ces.
Mon
itori
ng
was
don
e in
tensiv
ely
, a
nd im
ple
men
tatio
n of
grie
van
ce
mech
an
ism
wa
s im
pro
ve
d.
3.
CS
R an
d E
R te
am
w
ere
esta
blis
he
d to
im
ple
ment
an
d
monitor
the
im
ple
menta
tion
of
sta
keh
old
ers
’ eng
age
men
t an
d I
SP
activitie
s.
3
9th –
12
th M
arc
h 2
015
In
dira
Sim
bolo
n,
Jo
cely
n M
, M
ari
fe P
1.
Ide
ntification o
f vu
lnera
ble
land o
wn
ers
ha
d
not
ye
t b
een
fin
aliz
ed
b
y
SO
L
and
th
e
1. M
ost
vu
lnera
ble
la
nd
ow
ne
rs
iden
tifie
d
and
pre
para
tion
inclu
din
g a
sse
ssm
ent
for
the a
ssis
tance p
rog
ram
wa
s d
one.
71
live
lihood
re
sto
ration
pro
gra
m
to
be
imp
lem
ente
d.
2.
Work
ing e
mp
loym
en
t to
b
e pri
ori
tized
for
affecte
d lan
d o
wn
ers
.
3.
Som
e d
ela
ys i
n s
ettlin
g g
rie
van
ces r
ais
ed
by loca
l com
mun
itie
s.
2. E
mp
loym
en
t fo
r la
nd
ow
ne
rs
were
prio
ritized e
ith
er
in S
OL
, contr
acto
rs a
nd
su
b-c
ontr
acto
rs.
3. S
OL
had
im
pro
ve
d
the
m
on
itori
ng
w
ith
co
ntr
acto
rs &
subco
ntr
acto
rs t
o s
ett
le t
he
grie
van
ces
in
acco
rdan
ce
with
the
tim
elin
e.
4
2n
d -
7th A
ug
20
15
In
dira
Sim
bolo
n,
Jo
cely
n M
1.
Te
chn
ica
l so
lution
to
b
e
imp
lem
ente
d
in
respond
ing
to
som
e
of
co
mm
unitie
s’
grievances o
n P
roje
ct activitie
s im
pa
cts
.
2.
Grievance
s
on
d
ust,
tr
affic
, H
2S
odour/
sm
ell,
silt
ed w
ate
r, a
cce
ss t
o f
arm
ing
lan
d.
1.
Te
chn
ica
l so
lutio
n
has
be
en
imp
lem
ente
d
an
d
inclu
de
d
as
part
o
f
grievance
settle
me
nt.
2.
Grieva
nce
s h
ad bee
n fo
llow
ed u
p a
nd
settle
d.
Grieva
nce
ha
nd
ling s
yste
m h
ad
been
im
pro
ved.
5
29
th M
arc
h –
1st A
pri
l
2016
Indira
Sim
bolo
n,
Jo
cely
n M
1.
Occu
patio
nal h
ea
lth, sa
fety
and
issues to
be
addre
ssed a
nd
rectified
.
2.
2
majo
r grieva
nces;
da
mag
ed
fa
rmla
nds
belo
w N
IL P
ow
er
Pla
nt a
nd fa
rmla
nds a
t S
IL
are
a.
3.
Work
ers
an
d
lab
our
wo
rkin
g
co
nditio
n
issue
s
such
as
com
ple
tene
ss
of
basic
lab
our
docu
me
nts
, w
ork
ers
’
accom
mo
dation
whic
h
were
m
ain
ly
on
HD
EC
and
its
sub
-co
ntr
acto
rs.
1.Issues h
ad
bee
n a
ddre
ssed a
nd f
ollo
we
d
up w
ith
co
ntr
acto
rs &
su
bcontr
acto
rs.
2. G
rie
van
ces h
ad
be
en
sett
led
with
aff
ecte
d
lan
d
ow
ners
an
d
techn
ical
solu
tio
n
was
undert
aken a
s a
dvis
ed b
y A
DB
tea
m.
3.
Lab
our
issu
es
had
bee
n
rectifie
d
by
HD
EC
a
nd
inte
nsiv
e
mon
itori
ng
w
as
cond
ucte
d b
y S
OL
to e
nsure
th
e c
om
plia
nce
aga
inst
Indo
nesia
la
bour
law
an
d I
LO
core
Labo
ur
sta
ndard
.
Based o
n r
ecom
mend
atio
n fro
m the M
issio
n
lab
our
Au
dit w
as cond
ucte
d b
y G
old
er
in
Aug
ust 2
016 b
ased o
n t
he
72
6
5th –
8th D
ec 2
01
6
Indira
Sim
bolo
n,
Jo
cely
n M
1.
Concern
s
fro
m
the
fam
ily
of
arr
este
d
work
ers
wh
o w
ere
in
vo
lved in the
rio
t in
cid
ent
on 1
5th O
cto
ber
201
6 t
o b
e c
on
sid
ere
d a
nd
se
ttle
d b
y S
OL.
2.
Sta
tus
and
u
pd
ate
s
on
outs
tand
ing
grievance
s.
3.
ISP
im
ple
me
nta
tio
n u
pdate
1.
Issues w
ith the a
rreste
d w
ork
ers
had b
ee
n
well
acco
mm
oda
ted b
y S
OL i
n c
oopera
tio
n
with
th
e
polic
e,
com
mu
nity
eld
ers
an
d
work
ers
’ fa
mily
as
advis
ed
an
d
recom
me
nde
d b
y t
he
Mis
sio
n.
2.
Outs
tand
ing
gri
evances h
ad
be
en s
ett
led.
3.
ISP
activitie
s
in
20
16
had
be
en
imp
lem
ente
d a
s p
lan
ned a
nd targ
ete
d in
th
e
IPP
do
cu
men
t.
7
26
th M
arc
h –
1st A
pri
l
2017
LE
SC
(Ja
cob
s)
-
Ang
el M
an
em
bu
,
Do
rney B
urg
dorf
1.
To
ed
ucate
com
mun
ity
on
em
erg
ency
even
ts th
at m
ay im
pa
ct th
em
an
d to
co
nd
uct
more
fr
eq
ue
nt
socia
lizatio
ns
with
the
com
mu
nity
espe
cia
lly
duri
ng
th
e
constr
uction p
ha
se.
2.
Inte
nsiv
e m
on
ito
ring o
n t
he
im
ple
menta
tio
n
of
live
lihoo
d r
esto
ration p
rogra
m s
hou
ld b
e
done
reg
ula
rly.
3.
To
in
clu
de
cultura
l e
nh
an
cem
en
t an
d
gend
er
em
pow
erm
ent in
th
e IS
P a
ctivitie
s.
1.
Socia
lizatio
n
frequ
ency
ha
d
be
en
impro
ve
d
an
d
subje
ct
on
em
erg
ency
events
had
bee
n
dis
cu
ssed
with
lo
cal
co
mm
unitie
s
durin
g
vill
ag
e
mo
nth
ly
meeting
.
2.
Inte
nsiv
e
mon
itori
ng
has
be
en
do
ne
regula
rly.
3.
Pro
gra
m f
or
cultura
l e
nha
ncem
en
t in
th
e
mid
-term
ha
s
be
en
co
vere
d
in
the
co
nsu
lta
tio
n
an
d
part
icip
ation
activitie
s.
Fem
ale
pa
rtic
ipa
tio
n
ha
s
be
en
encoura
ged
in
th
e I
SP
activitie
s a
nd
it
is
part
of
gen
de
r e
mp
ow
erm
ent p
rogra
m.
8
26
th F
eb
– 1
st M
arc
h
2018
Indira
Sim
bolo
n,
Iris
h A
guila
r,
LE
SC
(Ja
cob
s)
-
Do
rney B
urg
dorf
1.
SO
L t
o d
evelo
p c
onsis
tent
messag
e f
or
the
local co
mm
unitie
s i
n r
egard
to e
mplo
ym
ent
opport
un
itie
s
duri
ng
o
pera
tio
n
an
d
main
ten
ance p
hase
.
2.
Successfu
l liv
elih
ood
resto
ratio
n
pro
gra
m
shou
ld b
e d
up
lica
ted
to
th
e e
xte
nt
feasib
le
in S
IL &
NIL
.
3.
Reco
rds
on
vita
l sta
tistics
of
an
d
part
icip
ation o
f w
om
en a
nd
rele
vant
gro
ups
1.
Info
rmation d
issem
inatio
n o
n e
mp
loym
ent
are
b
ein
g
do
ne
th
rou
gh
vill
ag
e
mon
thly
me
etin
g,
vill
ag
e a
nn
ounce
me
nt
bo
ard
an
d
com
mu
nic
atio
n thro
ugh
he
ad o
f vill
ag
es.
2.
Successfu
l pilo
t pro
gra
ms
ha
d
be
en
socia
lized
to lo
ca
l com
mun
itie
s in
SIL
& N
IL.
Th
ere
were
so
me
farm
ers
’ gro
ups tha
t w
ere
inte
reste
d t
o d
uplic
ate
the
pro
gra
m.
73
in v
ari
ous IS
P p
rogra
m inclu
din
g v
uln
era
ble
lan
d o
wn
ers
’ w
ho a
re b
en
efitt
ing f
rom
th
e
live
lihood
pro
gra
ms
to
be
upd
ate
d
an
d
mon
itore
d.
3.
Re
cord
s h
as b
een u
pdate
d a
nd r
eflecte
d
in t
he S
SM
R in 2
018
to d
ate
.
9
24
th F
eb -1
st
Marc
h
2019
Indira
Sim
bolo
n,
Marife
P,
LE
SC
(Ja
cob
s)
-
Ang
el M
an
em
bu
1.
Overa
ll pro
gre
ss
note
d in
th
e d
eliv
ery
of
CS
R
activitie
s,
but
there
is
ro
om
fo
r
impro
ve
me
nt.
2.
Tra
nsitio
n fr
om
constr
uctio
n to
o
pera
tio
ns
phase
pose
new
ch
alle
nges to
com
mun
itie
s:
job
s, d
imin
ishin
g e
cono
mic
activitie
s.
3.
SO
L
to
con
tin
ue
dia
log
ue
w
ith
the
local
gove
rnm
ent
to e
nsu
re th
at
port
ion of
the
pro
du
ction b
on
us w
ill be a
llocate
d to
th
e
deve
lopm
ent
of th
e S
OL a
ffe
cte
d a
reas.
4.
Ensure
th
at
co
mp
liance o
n la
bor
law
a
nd
Com
pany
Re
gu
latio
n
Polic
y
is
als
o
cascade
d to
contr
acto
rs a
nd s
ub
con
tracto
rs
in t
he o
pera
tio
n a
nd m
ain
tenance p
hase.
1.
Imp
rovem
ent
will
be
do
ne
based o
n th
e
recom
me
nd
atio
ns.
2.
This
find
ing
w
ill
be
consid
ere
d
in
the
live
liho
od r
esto
ration
pro
gra
m i
n t
he n
ext
pha
se.
3.
Co
ntin
uous c
oord
inatio
n w
ill b
e c
arr
ied o
ut
with
loca
l govern
me
nt
and
rela
ted
sta
kehold
ers
.
4.
Socia
lizatio
n
to
con
tracto
rs
and
sub
-
co
ntr
acto
rs
in
the
o
pera
tion
a
nd
main
ten
an
ce
ph
ase
is
con
tinu
ously
und
ert
aken.
74
SOL understands that a Resettlement Completion Audit is expected following the receipt
of this RCR. SOL considers that the RCR review result can be treated as an independent
external evaluation whether SOL complies with the international standard requirements,
particularly ADB SPS related to resettlement plan. Corrective actions will refer to the
Resettlement Completion Audit evaluation results.
6. ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION
Based on the implementation of RP/LRP, the commitments agreed by SOL were assessed
and evaluated with the details as follows:
1. Compensation and benefits a. Replacement cost paid
Replacement cost for land and plants/crops has been paid to all land owners as
agreed. The replacement cost was above the market price (ref. section 3.4) and
some land owners were using the replacement cost to purchase new land.
b. Assets replaced
During the land acquisition, there was no permanent structure/building affected.
c. Payment to be done prior to manifestation of impact
Payment for the required land was completed before the construction work. For the
WJP and road 5 the payment was undertaken in early 2015, while for the T/L
facilities it started after February 2014 (Ref. section 3.5).
d. Shifting allowance / other benefits paid
Payment for shifting allowance is required when there is permanent structure /
building acquired by the Project. However, as stated in point b above, there was
no permanent structure / building affected, thus no shifting allowance was paid.
2. Livelihood / income restoration a. Income restored to 100% of immediate pre-Project level
Based on the survey conducted by USU in 2017 and ERM in 2014, data shows
that some of the land owners were better off after their land was acquired by the
Project, while most of the affected land owners have more or less the same level
of income before and after the Project. Thus, it is concluded that income of the land
owners is restored to 100% of immediate pre-project level.
b. Secure employment for impacted persons
Employment were prioritised and provided to the affected land owners particularly
for the most vulnerable group. As explained in section 4.2, out of 12 most
vulnerable land owners who did not manage the assistance program for livelihood
restoration sustainably, there were seven (7) land owners who already worked for
the Project. Out of 41 poor land owners as identified by USU in the social survey,
75
there were 16 that were working in the Project either with SOL or Contractors &
sub-contractors, five (5) are currently still working in the Project. During the
construction phase, the affected land owners were given priorities for employment
based on their skill and capability.
c. Training / Skill Building
Agricultural and skill training were part of the ISP program being implemented since
2015 – to date. Agricultural training activities consisted of making of organic
fertilizer and animal feed, livestock breeding/growing, crop diversification, fish
farming, etc. Skill training sessions implemented were driving training for youth
group, bakery for female youth group, sewing for women’s group (ref. Appendix C).
The outcomes resulted from the trainings programs are:
1. Participants are able to apply new knowledge and techniques in their farming
activities.
2. Farmers’ group members who were serious and committed in the program
have improved income and continue the activity as they deem it is potential to
be developed.
3. Youth group and women group members are having new skills to be used as
source of income. They have gained additional income by doing this group
activity.
d. Loans / Micro Credits
Micro credit program has been implemented through a revolving fund mechanism
since 2018 to date. There were two groups of women involved in this program
namely women’s group in Janji Natogu village and in Lumban Jaean village with
30 & 13 members respectively. Total number of women participated in this program
is 43, of whom 13 are affected land owners. Aside from the assistance provided,
the micro-credit program also included the book keeping and household financial
management training to the two groups.
e. Help with small enterprise development
In the assistance program for most vulnerable land owners, there were 4 land
owners provided with assistance to develop small household business, to start a
coffee shop (warung) individually. For farmers’ group assisted by SOL through ISP,
the farmers developed their agriculture & production through market facilitation and
analysis for fish breeds, duck’ egg, vegetables and piglets. This activity was
expected to be expanded in the long run to become small enterprises, which will
help the economy of each member.
3. Assets
There was no physical displacement or house relocation taken place, and thus, no
legal title issued for relocated houses. Compensation cost for temporary structure was
paid. No outstanding issues.
4. Resettlement Site and Social Infrastructure a. Improved Housing
76
b. All common Infrastructure & amenities in place
c. Reasonable integration with host community
There was no physical displacement or house relocation taken place during the
Project; there was no new resettlement site needing newly built common
infrastructures ISP is well implemented in close consultation with local communities.
5. Grievance Mechanism
a. Functional Grievance Mechanism implemented
Grievance mechanism was implemented and managed well by the Project. The
mechanism was well functioning and maintained to address the grievances related
with project activities.
b. Online tracking system for grievances available
Grievance log was created during the construction phase in 2015 to date to record
all grievances received from local communities and updates were regularly
distributed to related department internally.
6. Monitoring & Documentation a. Established monitoring mechanism in place and duly implemented
During land acquisition activity, internally SOL established a land acquisition team
and ER team who conducted weekly and monthly monitoring on the activity
progress. External monitoring was conducted by ADB and LESC from 2015 to date,
ERM in 2014-205, USU for social aspect of AMDAL in 2016 -2018 and social
survey in 2017.
b. Results on internal as well as external monitoring disclosed
Findings and results from the internal and monitoring result were submitted to the
management and related department in the Project to be used as references for
evaluation and improvement.
Improvement and actions taken based on the monitoring were reported & disclosed
in the SSMR submitted to ADB per semester.
c. Documentation unit established
SOL established a documentation unit known as documentation center in Jakarta
and at the site. The documentation unit for land acquisition was handled by the
land acquisition team. The procedure for documentation for land acquisition was
established and implemented by the responsible unit throughout land acquisition
process.
7. Institutional Support
a. Resettlement Implementation Unit was established by SOL, consisting of:
- LA team
- Legal Team
77
- Notary
- ER team.
This resettlement implementation unit was explained in the SSCAR document and
applied in the land acquisition process for the RP as well. Implementation of
RP/LRP was also supported by the following institutions:
- Local government Offices of North Tapanuli such as agricultural office,
education office, health office and Regency office;
- National Land Agency (BPN);
- Sub district office and village administration.
b. Adequate infrastructure and resources provided to the unit
Required infrastructure and resources such as office, electronics and
communication equipment, vehicles and resources were made available and
adequate to support the resettlement implementation unit.
8. RP/LRP Budget a. Adequate budget as estimated in the RP/LRP set aside.
The budget estimated for RP/LRP was IDR 200,000,000. While LRP budget for
NIL E-1 as explained in the Supplementary Land acquisition Plan, the budget is
included in the ISP annual budget since the affected villages are already included
in the implementation of ISP since 2015 to date.
As shown in appendix B, ISP budget spending for 2015 - 2019:
2015 – 2017 : ± IDR 800,000,000 per annum 2018 : ± IDR 2 Milliard 2019 : ±IDR 2,5 Milliard (ongoing)
The first phase of ISP (2015-2017) was already delivered and completed. The ISP
is still being implemented (second phase) and will be continued throughout the
project as committed in the IPP document.
b. There are no pending actions related with RP/LRP activities that would require
provisions for additional budget.
Referring to the elaborated discussion as presented in above sections, SOL confirmed
that:
Land acquisition process for power plant facilities and transmission lines were
complete.
Payment of compensation for lost assets (crops, loss of land, loss of structures,
moving allowance and other benefits) were properly settled and completely paid
(ref. Appendix B regarding total spending on RP/LRP).
Completion of resettlement entitlements and livelihood restoration are adequately
described in Section 3 and Section 4, together with related Appendices as the
evidence of the program implementation.
78
No outstanding claims, disputes or grievances related to RP/LRP implementation
being left unattended and unresolved (ref. Section 4.7).
No physical displacement was undertaken. Instead, SOL developed an LRP
following the economic displacement and carefully identified the most vulnerable
group (ref. Section 4). Restoration of social networks and evidence of integration
with the host communities were adequately presented in the IPP/ISP.
Land acquisition process was conducted through Location permit mechanism via
direct negotiation and an agreed price with land owners. The entire process of land
acquisition was conducted by SOL while the local government’s role was to
facilitate and to monitor the process. With regards to disclosure of information, SOL
followed the requirements as defined in the IPP (ref. Section 4.6).
The internal monitoring was conducted intensively by SOL through multiple
monitoring systems and intrinsically linked to the progress of ISP. SOL ER Team
collected information through regular visits (monthly and quarterly basis), village
meeting (monthly basis) and grievance monitoring (daily basis). The monitoring
results were also reported to concerned parties on regular basis (ref. Section 5.1).
The external monitoring was conducted by USU in 2017 resulting in Social Survey
report. The socio-economic survey results are taken into account and further
verified and strengthened during the preparation and establishment of this RCR.
SOL expects that RCA to be conducted following the receipt of this RCR.
SOL also observed some opportunities for improvement to ensure continuation and
sustainable RP/LRP implementation related to:
Most vulnerable group
13 out of 17 people categorized as most vulnerable have not managed to continue
the assistance program provided by SOL.
5 out of these 13 people are currently not employed by or do not work for SOL or
its contractors. SOL is to further evaluate these people to be included in the
ongoing and future ISP and LRP program.
Poor land owners (based on USU social survey)
Based merely on income analysis, USU indicated that 41 out of 163 land owners
(25.77%) lived below the poverty line. This conclusion was found to be made
without taking into account the standards of living indicators. The Indonesia
standard categorizes people living below poverty line if they embrace at least 9 of
14 indicators defined by BPS.
SOL further verification of the 41 affected households against the BPS standard of
living indicators shows that not a single household embraces nine BPS indicators
at once. This supports the conclusion that no household can be categorized as
living below the poverty line:
- Five (5) households embraces 1 BPS indicator
- 18 households embrace 2 BPS indicators
79
- 14 households embrace 3 BPS indicators
- Two (2) households embrace 4 BPS indicators
- Two (2) households embrace 5 BPS indicators
Further verification and analysis were also made to measure poverty of the affected land
owners based on both income and expenses. The result indicates that, based on income
and expenses, there are only 11 land owners who are considered poor or living below
poverty line. However, based on the said BPS standard of living indicators, the 11 land
owners are not considered poor.
Similar to the approach proposed for the most vulnerable group, SOL is to consider to
further evaluate these 11 people to be included in the ongoing ISP and future ISP.
80
7. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION
a. Conclusion
Table 19 presents SOL commitments and conclusion of the RP/LRP evaluation status.
The Table is developed based on the ADB’s suggested format for evaluating the RP/LRP
commitments.
Table 19 SOL RP/LRP Commitments Evaluation Status
No. Commitments Details of Commitments Achievement
Rating Remarks (Gaps identified)
1 Compensation &
Benefits
o Replacement cost paid;
o Lost assets replaced;
o Payment to be done prior to
manifestation of impact;
o Shifting allowance/other benefits
paid.
√ Fully Met
Compensation amount
adequate and at
replacement value and paid
out prior to the manifestation
of impact. All payment
completed. No outstanding
issues
2 Livelihood/Income
Restoration
o Income restored to 100% of
immediate pre-Project level;
o Secure employment for impacted
persons;
o Training/Skill Building;
o Loans/Micro-credits;
o Help with small enterprise
development;
√ Fully Met
Income restored. LRP
program implemented. To
sustain the program
particularly the income
restoration, SOL is to
consider including the
remaining most vulnerable
group and poor land owners
(based on USU SS). No
outstanding issues.
3 Assets
o Legal titles issued for houses;
o Other assets like cowsheds,
house furniture, farm equipment’s
(as relevant) given to eligible
families;
√ Fully Met
No physical relocation taken
place, no need for issuance
of legal title for houses.
Compensation payment with
total amount of IDR
400,020,300 for temporary
structures were completed.
No outstanding issues
3
Resettlement Site
and Social
Infrastructure
o Improved Housing;
o All common Infrastructure &
amenities in place;
o Reasonable integration with host
community.
√ Fully Met
No physical displacement
taken place; no new
resettlement site created.
ISP well implemented in
close consultation with host
communities. No outstanding
issues
4 Grievance
Mechanism
o Functional GM system
implemented; √ Fully Met
Grievance Redress
Mechanism established and
well functioned. No
outstanding grievances
81
No. Commitments Details of Commitments Achievement
Rating Remarks (Gaps identified)
o Online tracking system for
grievances available.
related to RP/LRP. No
outstanding issues
5 Monitoring &
Documentation
o Established monitoring
mechanism in place and duly
implemented;
o Results on internal as well as
external monitoring disclosed
o Documentation unit established.
√ Fully Met
Internal monitoring
conducted intensively (ref.
Section 5.1). As part of
regular monitoring, the
implementation of the
RP/LRP was reported in the
SSMR 2015-2018 and was
disclosed on the web.
External monitoring was
conducted by USU. The
RCR will be disclosed on the
web. An RCA is expected
following the receipt of the
RCR. No outstanding issues
6 Institutional
Support
o Establish Resettlement
Implementation Unit to
support/facilitate R&R;
o Provide adequate infrastructure
and resources to the unit;
√ Fully Met
A Resettlement Unit was
established, supported by
the ER Team and CSR
Team. Budget for
institutional support was
provided adequately.
IPP/ISP program well
implemented and monitored.
No outstanding issues
7 RP/LRP Budget
o Set aside the budget as
estimated in the RP/LRP;
o Provision for additional budget to
complete any pending actions
√ Fully Met
RP/LRP budget allocated as
part of ISP in 2015-2019 with
total amount of ± IDR
6,900,000,000. Total
spending was well
monitored, evaluated and
reported (ref. Appendix B),
No outstanding issues
b. Recommendations Based on the review and evaluation result, below are the recommendations that need
to be considered and assessed:
1. Livelihood restoration & ISP
a. SOL to conduct further assessment on 5 of most vulnerable land owners which
were based on ERM social survey and 11 land owners based on social survey
conducted by USU to be included in the LRP program as part of the ISP.
82
b. Conduct an evaluation of assistance program that has been implemented for
the 17 most vulnerable land owners. Evaluation results to be used as
references and lesson learnt prior to the implementation of the next LRP activity
to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency so that benefits from the program
could be maximised for the targeted land owners and sustainable.
2. Grievance mechanism
a. Improving the timeline for grievances settlement to avoid delays.
b. Provide training for ER team to improve their skill and knowledge in grievance
handling and communication system.
c. Assess the improvement required for the establishment of online tracking
grievance system internally.
3. Documentation
Review of all monitoring results and ensure good filing system of all
documentations related with land acquisitions, stakeholder’s engagement and
ISP/LRP activities reports.
4. External monitoring
Evaluate the performance of external consultants that will be required for the next
ISP implementation monitoring such as USU and other related consultants.
External consultant’s role is important to obtain objective feedback and inputs on
ISP/LRP implementation process.
c. Corrective Action Plan and/or Recommended Actions for Improvement
There are no outstanding issues related to land acquisition and livelihood restoration.
As such, no corrective actions required. However, in terms of livelihood improvement,
there are some recommendations for strengthening the implementation of the ongoing
ISP and preparation of the future ISP. Table 20 provides Recommended Actions for
Improvement to assist SOL in strengthening the implementation of the ongoing ISP
and the preparation of the future ISP, the continuation of the GRM and monitoring
activities.
83
Tab
le 2
0 R
eco
mm
end
ed A
ctio
ns
for
Imp
rove
men
t
No
Issu
es/T
op
ics
Rec
om
men
ded
Act
ion
s T
imel
ines
E
stim
ated
Bu
dg
et
(US
D)
Res
po
nsi
ble
Dep
t (P
IC)
Rem
arks
1
Liv
elih
oo
d
resto
ration &
IS
P
1.
Co
nd
uct
assessm
en
t on 5
of
most
vuln
era
ble
la
nd
ow
ne
rs w
hic
h w
ere
based
on
ER
M s
ocia
l su
rvey a
nd
11 la
nd
ow
ners
ba
sed
on
socia
l su
rvey c
ond
ucte
d b
y
US
U t
o d
ete
rmin
e w
he
ther
the
gro
up
s n
eed
to
be
inclu
ded
in th
e L
RP
or
no
t.
De
c 2
01
9/J
an
ua
ry
202
0
30
0
CS
R
2.
Eva
lua
te th
e a
ssis
tance
pro
gra
ms th
at
ha
ve
be
en
imple
men
ted
fo
r th
e 1
7 m
ost vuln
era
ble
land o
wne
rs.
De
c 2
01
9/J
an
ua
ry
202
0
200
CS
R
3.
Im
ple
me
nt
LR
P fo
r th
e m
ost
vuln
era
ble
g
roup in
poin
t #
1
base
d
on
the
asse
ssm
ent
result
and
evalu
ation
re
sult in
poin
t # 2
.
Q1
202
0
650
0
CS
R
Will
be
part
of IS
P
bud
get in
2020
2
Grie
vance
mecha
nis
m
1.
Re
gu
lar
mon
ito
r o
f th
e g
rievance’s
reso
lution s
tatu
s
We
ekly
N
/A
ER
2.
Pro
vid
e
train
ing
on
grievan
ce
mecha
nis
m
for
ER
team
mem
bers
(in
house tra
inin
g a
nd
/or
exte
rnal)
1st S
em
este
r 2020
550
HR
W
ill b
e p
art
of H
R
tra
inin
g b
ud
ge
t
3.
Co
nd
uct
refr
eshm
en
t tr
ain
ing
on
grievance
mecha
nis
m fo
r all
ER
te
am
m
em
bers
and
re
late
d
dep
art
ments
1st S
em
este
r 2020
300
ER
3
Do
cu
me
nta
tion
1.
Pro
vid
e
tra
inin
g
on
g
ood
pra
ctice
rela
ted
to
adm
inis
tra
tive
fili
ng/d
ocum
enta
tio
n s
yste
m
1st a
nd 2
nd s
em
este
r 2
02
0
120
0
HR
W
ill b
e p
art
of H
R
tra
inin
g b
ud
ge
t
2.
Esta
blis
h t
he
mecha
nis
m f
or
docum
en
tation
pra
ctice
rela
ted
to
socia
l pro
gra
m a
ctivitie
s
De
c 2
019
/Ja
nuary
2020
N/A
E
R
3.
Re
gu
larly m
on
itor
the c
om
ple
tion
of
docum
enta
tion
of
activitie
s
rela
ted
to
land
a
cq
uis
itio
n,
sta
keh
old
er
enga
ge
me
nt
an
d I
SP
im
ple
men
tation
Mo
nth
ly
N/A
E
R
84
4
Exte
rna
l
mon
ito
rin
g
Eva
lua
te t
he
perf
orm
an
ce o
f e
xte
rnal
consultan
ts t
ha
t
will
be
requ
ired
for
the
next
ISP
im
ple
menta
tion
mon
ito
rin
g s
uch
as U
SU
an
d o
ther
rela
ted
co
nsultants
.
De
c 2
01
9/J
an
ua
ry
202
0
N/A
C
SR
85
APPENDICES
86
Appendix A. Land acquisition process in photographs
No Documentation
Activity
1
Survey and identification of land owners for SIL 1 – SIL 3 location, 15 September 2015
2
Socialization and negotiation with some land owners for T-Line ROW, 25 September 2014
3
Confirmation on width and number of plants for NIL E -1, 12 July 2016
87
No Documentation
Activity
4
Checking of documentation and legal letter of land ownership for T-Line ROW, 26 September 2014
5
Meeting preparation for compensation payment for T-Line ROW, 29 September 2014
6
Compensation payment for land and plants for SIL 1-SIL 3, 19 November 2015
88
Appendix B. Budget and Total spending for T-line, WJP 1, Road 5 & NIL E-1
Payment (IDR) ±
No Location
Plants Land Structure/Building
1 RoW 8,546,519,000
2,030,966,250
400,020,300
2 Tower Foundation 2,286,008,300
2,678,840,000
-
3 Access Road 5 & WJP 1N 6,170,060,500
12,101,830,000
-
4 NIL E-1 2,673,183,900
3,545,290,000
-
Sub total 19,675,771,700
20,356,926,250 400,020,300
Total LA (1+2+3)
40,432,718,250
4 ISP annual budget (incl. LRP 2015-2017)
2,400,000,000 (2015-2017: 800,000,000/Annum)
5 ISP budget 2018 (incl. LRP)
± 2,000,000,000
6 ISP budget 2019 (incl. LRP) - ongoing
± 2,500,000,000
89
Appendix C. ISP implementation 2015-2016
90
Appendix D. ISP implementation 2016-2018
91
92
93
94
95
Appendix E. Summary of consultation/socialization on land acquisition (2015 – 2018)
No. Date Activities # of Participants
Attendees Male Female
1 20-Feb-14 Land and plants compensation for Tower Footprint in SIL and NIL Area
61 23 SOL staff, Notary, Head of Village Sibaganding, Lumban Jaean, Simataniari, Hutabarat, Simanampang, Lontung Dolok, Elders, Kapolsek, Danramil, Camat Pahae
Julu & Land Owners
2 21-Feb-14 Land and plants compensation for Tower Footprint in NIL Area
64 18 SOL staff, Notary, Head of Village Simanampang, Sitolu Ama, Silangkitang,
Sigurung-gurung, Elders, Kapolsek, Danramil, Camat Pahae Julu/Pahae Jae &
Land Owners
3 25-Sep-14 Socialization ROW in Sitolu Ama 19 6 SOL Staff, Head Village Sitolu Ama, Elders & Land Owners
4 26-Sep-14 Socialization ROW in Simanampang & Hutabarat
51 13 SOL Staff, Head of Village Hutabarat, Simanampang, Elders & Land Owners
5 29-Sep-14 Socialization ROW in Onan Hasang & Lontung Dolok
30 - SOL Staff, Head of Village Onan Hasang, Lontung Dolok, Camat Pahae Julu, Elders &
Land Owners
6 30-Sep-14 Socialization ROW in Sibaganding, Lumban Jaean & Simataniari
40 5 SOL Staff, Head of Village Sibaganding, Lumban Jaean, Simataniari, Camat Pahae
Julu, Elders & Land Owners
7 1-Oct-14 Socialization ROW in Silangkitang & Sigurung-gurung
76 6 SOL Staff, Head of Village Silangkitang, Sigurung-gurung, Camat Pahae Jae, Elders
& Land Owners
8 22-Oct-14 Payment Compensation ROW in Silangkitang, Sigurung-gurung & Sitolu Ama
98 31 SOL Staff, Head of Village Sigurung-gurung, Sitolu Ama, Camat Pahae Jae, Notary,
Elders & Land Owners
9 23-Oct-14 Payment Compensation ROW in Hutabarat & Simanampang
49 74 SOL Staff, Head of Village Hutabarat, Simanampang, Camat, Kapolsek Pahae
Julu, Notary, Elders & Land Owners
10 9-Dec-14 Payment additional land Access Road-5 31 4 SOL Staff, Notary, Head Village Lumban Jaean, Sibaganding, Elders, Camat Pahae
Julu/Staff and Land Owners
11 15-Jun-15 Socializations for LA to widen the drainage for rrainage expansion in Aek Accimun & Siangir located under NIL Powerplant
12 3 SOL Staff, Head of Village Simataniari, Elders & Land Owners
12 5-Oct-15 Socialization for Land Acquiring Brine Injection Line SIL-1 to SIL-3
40 10 SOL Staff, Head of Village Silangkitang, Pardamean, Pardomuan, elders & Land
Owners
13 21-Oct-15 Negotiated socializations the price of the land Brine Injections Line SIL 1 – SIL 3
40 16 SOL Staff, Head of Village Silangkitang, Pardamean, Pardomuan, Camat Pahae Jae, Elders & Land Owners
14 19-Nov-15 Land acquisition payment for brine injection line SIL-1 to SIL-3
64 21 SOL Staff, Finance, BNI, Notary, Security, Police, Head of Village Pardamean, Pardomuan, Camat, Danramil & Kapolsek Pahae Jae, elders & Land Owners
15 22-Dec-15 Payment T-Line ROW Sigurung-gurung 21 15 SOL Staff, Head Village Sigurung-gurung, Silangkitang, Sitolu Ama, Legal SOL,Sekcam & Kapolsek Pahae Jae
16 29-Dec-15 LA payment for drainage expansion in Aek Accimun & Siangir located under NIL Powerplant
20 13 SOL Staff, Notary, Head Village Simataniari, Elders & Land Owners
96
No. Date Activities # of Participants
Attendees Male Female
17 5-Feb-16 Socialization negociated additional ROW at Sigurung-gurng
7 3 SOL Staff, Head Village Sigurung-gurung, Camat Pahae Jae/Staff, elders & Land Owners
18 23-Feb-16 Payment Additional brine injection SIL-1 to SIL-2 and ROW Compensation
19 4 SOL Staff, Notary, Head of Village Silangkitang, Sigurung-gurung, Camat Pahae Jae, Security, Police, team BNI, elders & Land Owners
19 17-Jun-16 Socialization on land acquisition drainage OHC at Partali Julu Tarutung
- 11 SOL Staff, Head of Village & Land Owners
20 19-Jul-16 LA payment for grievance technical solution in Pancur Tombak under NIL powerplant
16 3 SOL Staff, Head Village Simataniari, Camat, Notary, Security, Police & Land Owners
21 2-Aug-16 Socialization on land acquisition for NIL E-1 Location
57 13 SOL Staff, Head Village Onan Hasang , Janji Natogu, Camat/Staff, Satpol PP, Sekdes, Elders & Land Owners
22 6-Sep-16 Socialization and signing of nominative list for land and crops (NIL E-1 LA)
44 10 SOL Staff, Head Village Onan Hasang , Janji Natogu, Camat/Staff, Satpol PP, Sekdes, Elders & Land Owners
23 12&13 Dec-2017
LA payment for the construction of drainage in Nahumarpe located under WJR-2 - technical solution for grievance
32 3 SOL Staff, Notary, Police, Security, Elders & Land Owners
24 5-Feb-18 Socialization to land owners in Nahumarpe area affected by Fumarole manifestation- located under WJR-2, technical solution for grievance
8 1 SOL Staff & Land Owners
25 22-Feb-18 Signing of land nominative list - Nahumarpe area affected by Fumarole manifestation- located under WJR-2LA fumarole WJR-2, technical solution for grievance
14 3 SOL Staff, Head Village Lumban Jaean, Sibaganding, Elders & Land Owners
26 1-Mar-18 LA payment for land owners in Nahumarpe area affected by Fumarole manifestation- located under WJR-2
16 3 SOL Staff, Notary, Head Village Lumban Jaean, Security, Police, Elders & Land Owners
Total 859 302
97
Appendix F. Communication Media used by SOL
Announcement board in Simataniari village (NIL)
Leaflet – Sarulla Project
98
99
Video presentation – Introduction to Geothermal Power for children
100
Appendix G. Consultation and participation meeting on RP and LRP
The list is taken from SSMR 2015 -2018, section K.
No Activities Date /Time
Venue Attendees Description Documentations
1. Socialization on steam
blow test at NIL-1 &
danger of high voltage
electricity to small
warung owners &
Farmers around NIL-1
area
January
12,
2 pm
HDEC
Office Warung owners,
Farmers around
NIL-1 area,
(± 13,
Male:10, Female:3)
-Explanation on:
a. steam blow test blow test
activities which will conducted by
HDEC on January 13, 2018 and
some noise as well as steam that
will appear because of this activity
b. The danger of high voltage
electricity during this activity.
c. The local communities not to be
near or doing activities close to
the venting pipes.
2.
Socialization on the construction work at NIL E-1 well pad
January 26,
10 am
Janji Natogu Village
SOL’s team ( ER, HSE, Construction), PT Dyfco Energy and Baktya Utama, Janji Natogu Local communities USPIKA (Sub District Head of Offices), Head Villages (Jnaji Natogu & Onan Hasang) (±250,
Male: 145, Female:105).
Explanation on:
a. Plan for the commencement
of construction work activity
at NIL E-1 location which
included access road,
installation of pipe line from
Hamilton bridge to Batang
Toru river
b. Priorities for local workers’
recruitment and engaging
local vendors based on their
skill & capabilities
c. Potential impacts
3. Village Monthly Meeting at Sigurung-gurung
January 22, 04 pm
Head of Village House
SOL ER & HSE,
CSR team, Local
Communities,
USPIKA (Sub
District Head of
Offices) & Head
Village
(±18
Male: 9
Female:9)
-Explanation on current Project activities update
-Discussion on employment
issues including reduction of
workers
-Discussion on CSR program to
be implemented in 2018
101
No Activities Date /Time
Venue Attendees Description Documentations
4.
Village Monthly Meeting at Janji Natogu
January 23,
4 pm
Head of
Village
House
SOL ER & CSR,
Local Communities
& Head Village
(± 49
Male:30
Female:19)
-Explanation on current Project activities update in NIL E-1 location
-Discussion on employment
issues including reduction of
workers
-Discussion on CSR program to
be implemented in 2018
5.
Village Monthly Meeting at Pardomuan Nainggolan
January 24,
4 pm
Head of
Village
House
SOL ER & CSR,
Local Communities,
USPIKA (Sub
District Head of
Offices) & Head
Village
(±33
Male:14
Female:19)
-Explanation on current Project activities update
-Discussion on employment
issues including reduction of
workers
-Discussion on CSR program to
be implemented in 2018
6. Meeting & discussion on fumarole manifestation at Nahumarpe, under WJR-2 location
Feb 5,
4 pm
NIL
Office
SOL
SOL’ s ER &
Construction team,
land owners
(±10
Male:9,
Female:1).
-Explanation on fumarole
manifestation at Nahumarpe as
normal occurrence in geothermal
location.
-Discussion on grievance raised
by affected land owners due to
this occurrence. Technical
solutions are being discussed by
SOL and some of the alternatives
considered are to acquire the
affected land since they are no
longer could be cultivated and
installation of sediment pond in
the land.
7. Socialization & negotiation on land acquisition at Nahumarpe location
Feb 22, SOL
Office
NIL
SOL ER & LA
team, affected land
owners, Head of
village
(± 33
Male: 27
Female; 6)
-Explanation on land acquisition
process and schedule
-Negotiation on land price and
crops
8. Village Monthly Meeting at Simanampang
April 23,
4 pm
Head of
Village
House
SOL ER & CSR,
Local Communities,
USPIKA (Sub
District Head of
Offices) & Head
Village
(± 30
Male:10
Female:20)
- Explanation on current Project activities updates
-Discussion on CSR program
102
No Activities Date /Time
Venue Attendees Description Documentations
9. Socialization on steam blow test at NIL-3
April 30,
9 am
NIL-3 SOL ER & HSE
team, Warung
owners and farmers
who cultivate land
surrounding NIL-3
location, & workers
Explanation on steam blow test
blow test activities and some
noise as well as steam that will
appear because of this activity at
NIL-3.
103
Appendix H. Sample Report to External Parties
Quarterly report to Pertamina Geothermal Energy (PGE) – Cover
Semi-annual report to Local Government (Cover)
104
Appendix I. Spot checks in 2015-2018
No. Date Activities # of Participants
Attendees Male Female
1 13-May-17 DPR meeting with Bupati Taput & SOL and then visit to Powerplant (Parlindungan Purba)
20 - SOL's staff, DPR Pusat (Parlindungan Purba), Bupati & Staff, Security, Police & Journalist.
2 24-Jul-17 SOL's meeting with commission-D DPRD (Parliament) Sumut
43 4
SOL's staff, Staff Komisi D DPRD Provsu, Bupati Taput/Staff, Dinas Energi dan sumber daya mineral provsu,Lindup Sumut, PMPHI-SU
3 18-May-18 Meeting with MEMR (Ministry of Mineral Resources) team regarding National vital object (Obvitnas)
10 - SOL Staff & and Obvitnas team
4 30-Jan-19 Commission-B DPRD visit to Project 17 2 SOL's staff, Kehutanan & Commission-B DPRD ProvSu.
5 13-May-17 Meeting with DPRD of North Tapanuli No
Information No
information
Poltak Pakpahan (Chairman), and Parliament Members, Local Governments (Finance Dept, Education Dept, Environment Dept,etc), SOL (Donny T, Industan Sitompul, and Rangga Ahmad)
Total 90 6