World Bank Document · EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project requires the...

RP-58VOL. 2

Songo Songo

Gas-to-Electricity Project

Resettlement Plan

Addendum

November 30, 2000

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

TransCanada

801-7th Avenue S.W.P.O. Box 2535, Station M

Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 3P7

By courierNovember 30, 2000

The World Bank1818 H Street, N.W.'Washington, DC20433 USA

Attention: Karen RasmussenSenior Financial Analyst

Dear ,s.lRasmussen:

Re: Sonao Soneo Gas-to-Electricity Project - Resettlement Plan Addendum

On behalf of the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania (GOT), the Ministry of:Energy and Minerals (MEM), and the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation(TPDC), OTC is pleased to submit to The World Bank the final version of theResettlement Plan Addendum for the Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project.

You will recall that OTC met with World Bank environmental representatives in'Washington on February 18, 1999 to discuss the Bank's requirements for updating theResettlement Plan. At that meeting, it was agreed that, on behalf of TPDC, OTC wouldprepare an Addendum to the December 1997 Resettlement Programme & Plan thatwould:

* Describe how OTC implemented the Wayleave Acquisition Program (WLAP);* Describe how OTC resolved disputes relating to the WLAP compensation process;* Outline a procedure and schedule for conducting follow-up socio-economic studies

to monitor the implementation of the resettlement process;l Discuss the establishment of a monitoring group to report independently on the

resettlement process and its impact on those being resettled; andUpdate the costs of installing basic infrastructure in the two resettlement areas.

The attached Addendum satisfies these requirements. In addition, the Addendum alsoaddresses the comments of the Bank's social environmental expert, Cyprian Fisiy, whichwere contained in your e-mail of July 13, 2000. In this regard, particular reference shouldbe made to sections 3.3 (h), 4.3, 4.4 and 5.

TransCanada PipeLines Limited

of 2

Please note that the Addendum is designed to supplement the December 1997Resettlement Programme & Plan, which is also attached, and that both documentstogether comprise the Resettlement Plan.

I would draw your attention to the fact that the total cost of both the infrastructuredevelopment and socio-economic monitoring programs is approximately US$ 2.2million. It is our understanding that this cost is within the range of funding availablefrom the Bank for this work.

The attached submission concludes TransCanada's commitments with regard topreparing the Resettlement Plan. We trust that you will find it satisfactory.

In conclusion, we wish all project stakeholders a speedy and successful path to FinancialClosing.

Yours sincerely,

t2C Corey GouletProject Director

CG/pl

Att.

cc: Cyprian Fisiy, The World BankPatrick Rutabanzibwa, MEMBashir Mrindoko, MEMCharles Omujuni, MEMMwara Shoo, MEMYona Killagane, TPDCHalfani Halfani, TPDCGabriel Bujulu, TPDCE. Mwingira, TPDCHelen Wilson, AES Sirocco LimitedDavid Wilson, AES Sirocco LimitedDon MacPhail, PanAfrican Energy U.K., Ltd.Jim McCardle, SongasDorah Swai, SongasPatrick Leys, TransCanada International

TRANSMITTAL TransCanadaInternational

801-7'h Avenue S.W.P.O. Box 2535 Station M

Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 2N6

Writer's Direct Tel: (403) 290-6354Writer's Direct Fax: (403) 290-7661

Date: November 30, 2000

To: See distribution below

From: Patrick Leys

Subject: Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project - Resettlement Plan

Please find attached copies of the above Resettlement Plan, which has beendistributed by courier as follows:

Documents

Resettlement I Resettlement PlanDistribution | Programme & Plan Addendum Total Sets

(December 1997) (November 30, 2000)

The World Bank __ 3 of eachKaren Rasmussen 2 2Cyprian Fisiy 1 1

TPDC _ _ _ 5 of each

Yona S. Killagane 2 , 2Halfani R. Halfani 1 1Gabriel Bujulu 1 | 1E. Mwingira 1 I 1

MEM 4 of Dec. 1997

____________________ ________________ ___________ 5 of N ov. 2000Patrick Rutabanzibwa 1 2Bashir Mrindoko 1 1Charles Omujuni 1 1Mwara Shoo 1 1

AES j 3 of eachHelen Wilson 2 1 2David Wilson 1 1

Ocelot 2 of eachDon MacPhail 2 2

Page 1 of 2

TRANSMITTAL TransCanadaInternational

DocumentsResettlement Resettlement Plan

Progamm & lan AddendumDistribution Programme & Plan Total Sets(December 1997) I (November 30, 2000)

TCI . . 2 of Nov. 2000Patrick Leys i 2

Songas 3 of Nov. 2000Jim McCardle 2 _

Dorah Swai 1 |

With best regards,

Patrick LeysProject Coordinator

Page 2 of 2

Songo Songo

Gas-to-Electricity Project

Resettlement Plan

Addendum

November 30, 2000

Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project Resettlement Plan Addendum

Prepared for: TPDC and the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania

By: OTC801 - 7" Avenue SWP.O. Box 2535, Station MCalgary, AlbertaCanadaT2P 3P7

Attn: Corey GouletProject Director

Tel. (403) 290-6048Fax: (403) 290-7522

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOTLast printed 11/30/00


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paqe

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .... 1

1. BACKGROUND ... 3

2. OTC WAYLEAVE ACQUISITION PROGRAM ................................................... 42.1. Planning .................................................... 52.2. Mobilization & Preparations ................................................... 6

2.2.1. Organizational Structure & Personnel ................................................... 62.3. Field Operations ................................................... 8

2.3.1. Front-end Team (FET) ................................................... 92.3.2. Payment Team (PT) ................................................... 112.3.3. Logistics Team (LT) ................................................... 142.3.4. Coordination Between Field & Dar es Salaam Office ....................................... 15

2.4. Program Completion ................................................... 152.5. Allocation of Resettlement Plots .................................................... 152.6. Program Hand-over to TPDC ................................................... 15

3. FINALISATION OF WLAP BY TPDC .................................................... 173.1. Additional Resettlement Requirements ............................................ 17

3.1.1. Background .................................................... 173.1.2. Problems Noted ................................................... 173.1.3. Action Taken to Address the Problems ................................................... 18

3.2. TPDC's Payment Procedures .................................................... 183.3. TPDC's Actions to Finalize the WLAP ................................................... 193.4. Current Status of WLAP ................................................... 203.5. Outstanding Tasks to Finalize the WLAP .......................................... 21

4. LEGAL ISSUES ..................................................... 224.1. Legal Process ................................................... 224.2. Disputes .................................................... 224.3. OTC's Dispute Resolution Process ................................................... 234.4. TPDC's Dispute Resolution Process ................................................... 254.5. Legal Process For Acquiring the Wayleave ......................................... 27

5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT- BROAD FRAMEWORK . . ................................................. 29

(continued ...)

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page i of iiLast printed 11/30/00


TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Page

6. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PROGRAM . ................................................................ 316.1. Introduction ................................................................. 316.2. Previous Socio-economic Assessments ................................................................. 316.3. Objectives & Scope of Socio-economic Assessment Program . . 326.4. Assessment Plan - Wayleave & Resettlement Areas .................................................... 33

6.4.1. Phase 1 - Socio-economic Assessment Before Construction .......................... 336.4.2. Phase 2 - Monitoring During Pipeline Construction & Resettlement

Infrastructure Development ................................................................. 356.4.3. Phase 3 - Monitoring After Construction & Resettlement Infrastructure

Development ................................................................. 356.5. Program Management ................................................................. 36

6.5.1. Resettlement Plan Monitoring Committee ........................................................ 366.6. Estimated Schedule & Budget ................................................................. 37

6.6.1. Schedule - Socio-economic Reports ................................................................ 38

7. INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM ................................................................. 397.1. Introduction ................................................................. 397.2. Preparing the Urban Resettlement Sites ................................................................. 397.3. Developing the Infrastructure Proposals ................................................................. 407.4. Program Management ................................................................. 417.5. Kinyerezi Infrastructure ................................................................. 41

7.5.1. Road Improvement ................................................................. 417.5.2. Water Supply ................................................................. 427.5.3. Electricity Service ................................................................. 43

7.6. Sala Sala Infrastructure ................................................................. 437.6.1. Road Improvement ................................................................. 447.6.2. Water Supply ................................................................. 447.6.3. Electricity Service ................................................................. 45

7.7. Infrastructure Cost Estimate ................................................................. 46

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page ii of iiLast printed 11/30/00


GLOSSARY OF TERMS & ABBREVIATIONS

AES - AES Sirocco Limnited (a subsidiary of The AES Corporation)

CEEST - Centre for Energy, Environment, Science and Technology

DCC - Dar es Salaam City Commission

GOT - Government of the United Republic of Tanzania

MEM - Ministry of Energy and Minerals

MOL - Ministry of Lands and Human Settlements Development

OTC - Ocelot & TransCanada PipeLines (A Joint Venture)

Songas - A limited corporation to be established in Tanzania to operate theSongo Songo Project facilities

TANESCO - Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited

TPDC - Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation

Tsh - Tanzanian Shillings

TTCL - Tanzania Telecommunications Company Ltd.

UCLAS - University College of Lands & Architectural Studies (formerly theArdhi Institute)

WB - The World Bank

WLAP - Wayleave Acquisition Program

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOTLast printed 11/30/00


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project requires the construction of a natural gaspipeline and related facilities. This addendum updates the Government of the UnitedRepublic of Tanzania's (GOT) plan for compensating and resettling householdsdirectly affected by the overland portion of the pipeline. The addendum is designed tosupplement the report entitled, Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project ResettlementProgramme & Plan (December 1997), which Ocelot and TransCanada (OTC)prepared on behalf of the GOT. It is intended that the original plan and the addendumbe read sequentially, and that together they constitute the "Resettlement Plan" for theproject.

The most important consideration in planning the pipeline corridor was minimizinghuman resettlement. From the point where the marine pipeline comes ashore on themainland to the outskirts of Dar es Salaam (a distance of approximately 200kilometers), only 33 households had to be relocated. Moreover, even though thepipeline traverses much of the city of Dar es Salaam, only 155 households needed tobe relocated from the pipeline corridor in the urban areas. This low number wasachieved by routing the pipeline for 20 kilometers within the local power utility'swayleaves. A total of 2,945 households have been affected by the project, of which98% have been compensated.

Two resettlement sites were selected for the 155 families that required relocationfrom the pipeline corridor in the Dar es Salaam area - Kinyerezi in the South of Dares Salaam and Sala Sala in the North. Both of these sites were unplanned settlements.Complete town plans have been developed and the project has surveyed both sites.The Ministry of Lands and Human Settlements Development (MOL) and the Dar esSalaam City Commission (DCC) have approved these town plans. Together, thesetwo planned communities constitute a significant asset to the urban area of Dar esSalaam.

Less intensive resettlement was required along the rural section of the wayleave.Here, displacees were those who were left with less than half an acre untouched afterthe creation of the gas pipeline wayleave of 60 meters. All 33 such households havealready participated in the selection of alternative rural sites and have relocated.

This addendum focuses on four issues: (i) the implementation of the wayleaveacquisition program; (ii) the mechanism used to resolve disputes; (iii) the socio-economic assessment program designed to monitor the implementation of theresettlement process; and (iv) the infrastructure to be installed in the two resettlementareas.

With respect to the acquisition of the wayleave, a list was prepared of thosehouseholds affected. Compensation was calculated by determining the value ofimprovements to the land according to a schedule of market rates approved by theGOT. Where households were left with less than half an acre after the acquisition of

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page 1 of 46Last printed 11/30/00


the wayleave, they were allocated alternative plots of land. The acquisition programincluded specialized groups to handle community relations, property surveying,accounting, banking, and dispute resolution.

OTC's Dispute Resolution Group dealt with two kinds of disputes during thecompensation process: disputes between local residents and disputes with the project.To the greatest extent possible, the Dispute Resolution Group acted as mediators andat all times was sensitive to local customs and culture. All disputes among localresidents were resolved peacefully and, in cases of dispute with the project, thedisputing party was advised how to file a complaint in the legal system.

With regard to socio-economic assessment, the program will monitor theimplementation of the resettlement process. Specifically, the program will establishan independent monitoring group, gather baseline data, evaluate the data, and monitorthe movement and relocation of displacees both during and after construction of theproject facilities. This program is estimated to cost approximately US$116,000.

Finally, this addendum addresses the installation of infrastructure in the tworesettlement areas. A relatively small proportion of the 310 urban households that hadto be relocated (155 from the pipeline wayleave and another 155 from within the tworesettlement areas) would have experienced a reduction in the level of communityinfrastructure relative to their former neighbourhoods. The nature and extent ofinfrastructure contained in this proposal will allow new residents to enjoy a level ofservice that is at least equivalent to that enjoyed in their former neighbourhoods. Inaddition, the proposed infrastructure represents a significant improvement in the levelof infrastructure for a much greater number of families already living in thesecommunities. The cost of installing this infrastructure is estimated at approximatelyUS$2.1 million.

Consequently, the total cost of the Resettlement Plan is estimated at approximatelyUSS2.2 million.



1. BACKGROUND

In April 1995, the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC)commissioned the University College of Lands and Architectural Studies (UCLAS),fornerly the Ardhi Institute, to survey the route that had been proposed for the SongoSongo gas pipeline and to conduct land use and socio-economic studies. Consultantsfrom UCLAS, including land surveyors, town planners, environmental engineers,sociologists and property valuers carried out this work. UCLAS presented their finalreports to TPDC in April 1996. These reports and results served as the baselineinformation and data.

Between May 1996 and February 1997, TPDC and OTC audited UCLAS's work inorder to ensure the fair and equitable treatment of all those affected by the project. InMarch 1997, TPDC and the Ministry of Energy and Minerals (MEM) requested thatOTC provide project management services to complete the wayleave acquisitionprogram (WLAP), and in particular, the compensation process.

Starting on August 11, 1997, OTC began field operations for the compensationprocess and this process continued until January 31, 1998. Following the allocation ofresettlement plots, responsibility for finalizing the WLAP was handed over to TPDCon May 1, 1998. At that time, 87% of the 2,945 people listed in the compensationschedules had been paid.



2. OTC WAYLEAVE ACQUISITION PROGRAM

During the planning stages of the WLAP, OTC sought to combine its experience ofsimilar right-of-way acquisition programs in Canada and elsewhere, with Tanzanianexpertise and knowledge of local laws and customs. The program that was developedreflected that.approach and was the foundation for its success. The following chart,Figure 2. 1, describes the organizational structure of the program and its process.

Figure 2.1 - Wayleave Acquisition Program Structure

Mobilization & Preparation* Train staffr Establish teamsC Arrange logistical support

Field Operations• Front-end Team* Payment Team* Logistics Team

Front-end Team Pavment Team Logistics Team

Community Relations Group Accounting Group - Logistical support* Locate villages * Ensure legal documents - Camp security* Hold public meetings signed * Communications* Explain payment process * Issue payment cheque

Property Survey Group Banking Group* Collect survey data * Accept cheque* Verify property boundaries * Open account

- * Advance cash

Dispute Resolution Group* Meet disputing parties* Document dispute* Assess disputed property

Completion Phase* Second pass to clean up outstanding payments* Wrap up operations* Prepare final reports

Allocation of Resettlement Plots|

Hand Program Over to TPDC* TPDC to finalize outstanding payment



OTC implemented the wayleave acquisition program in six stages. These stages,along with the implementation schedule for each stage, are listed in the table below.Descriptions of the activities involved in each stage are provided in subsequentsections.

Table 2.1 - WLAP Implementation Schedule

Stage Activity Timing

1 Planning March 1, 1997 July 14, 1997

2 Mobilization & Preparations July 15,1997 ~ August 10, 1997

3 Field Operations August 11, 1997 ~ Dec. 16,1997

4 Program Completion January 5, 1998 ~ January 31, 1998

5 Allocation of Resettlement Plots February 1, 1998 - March 15,1999

6 Hand Program Over to TPDC March 16, 1998 April 30, 1998

2.1. Planning

During the formative stages of the WLAP under UCLAS, a list was prepared ofthose households affected by the pipeline wayleave. Following governmentregulations, compensation was calculated by determining the value ofimprovements to the land according to a schedule of market rates approved bythe GOT. These rates stipulate the values of various kinds of houses and otherstructures, as well as crops and fruit trees. Where households were left with lessthan half an acre after the acquisition of the wayleave, they were allocatedalternative plots of land.

Once OTC assumed responsibility for the WLAP, plans were made whichincluded making all necessary preparations prior to beginning field activities. Inorder to ensure all those affected by the project were treated fairly and equally,OTC engaged the services of a local company, Construction ServicesConsultants Ltd., to audit the compensation data that was compiled by UCLAS.The audit identified some errors and inconsistencies, which OTC remediedduring the implementation of the WLAP.

Other work carried out during the planning phase included developing aprogram plan, reviewing all data, developing field procedures and rules,establishing a schedule, identifying resource requirements, coordinating withthe Government and district authorities to ensure the smooth implementation ofthe program, and developing a budget estimate for the program.



2.2. Mobilization & Preparations

The required resources were mobilized for recruiting, briefing and training staff.Seminars were organized to acquaint personnel with the program activities,field procedures, field safety regulations and field operations managementstrategies. Final preparations for starting field operations were made during thisstage. Before mobilizing staff, a timetable of compensation activities was sentto all villages along the wayleave to advise residents of the schedule forcompensation activities in their areas.

2.2.1. Organizational Structure & Personnel

A team of professionals, predominantly Tanzanian, implemented theprogram. The team comprised senior executives, project managers, afield operations manager, accountants, bankers, sociologist,environmental specialist, land surveyors, property valuers, state securitypolice, wildlife rangers, government officials and local leaders.

The program was managed and implemented at three levels - steeringcommittee, management team and field team - as illustrated in Figure2.2 on the next page.



Figure 2.2 - OTC Wayleave Acquisition Program (WLAP) Organizational Chart

Steering Committee* MEM - Chair* TPDC* TANESCO* OTC* Songas

Project Manager Support(OTC) suLegal

Management Team * AccountingProject Team Leader * Survey

(OTC) * TPDC________________ ----- ~ ~~~~~~- 1--- - ------ - - ------------ ~~

Field Team JrpProject Fiei Laer|

Field Execution TeamD oitc em(T

_7 .- *Camp Supervisorl~~~ ~~~~~~~ l-*Transportation

Front-end Team (FETPayment Team (PT -* AccommodationFront-end Team (FET) Pavrnent Team (PT) * Kitchen and mess

Community Relations Group Accounting Group -Courier* Socio-economist x 1 * Accountant x 2 * Camp Security* Public Relations x 1 , Assistant x 2 __Camp_Secuty

* Environmentalist x 1 Banking Group* Banker (Marketing) x 2 * Bank Manager x 1* Property Valuer x 1 * Bank Clerk x 2

Property Survey Group Dispute Resolution Group* Land Surveyor x 8 o Independent Valuer x 1

Support * District Land Officer x 1e Security Police x 2 Support• Game dcoutl x Security Police x 4

A functional description of each level shown in Figure 2.2 is provided below.

The Steering Committee

The Steering Committee comprised representatives of MEM, TPDC,TANESCO, OTC and Songas. The committee met weekly and waschaired by MEM. The Steering Committee was primarily responsible fordirecting the overall program, liaising with senior government



authorities, and addressing key issues that arose during theimplementation of the program.

Management Team

The management team comprised the project manager and project teamleader as well as functional support such as legal, accounting andadministrative support. The management team was stationed at Ubungoin Dar es Salaam. The main function of the management team was tomanage and control the WLAP, ensuring that it was implementedsmoothly, on schedule and according to budget.

Field Team

Field activities were under the day-to-day management and direction ofthe field team leader. The field team comprised 78 personnel working intwo divisions: field execution and logistical support.

The field execution division comprised two main groups, the Front-endTeam (FET) and the Payment Team (PT). The Front-end Team wasfurther divided into the Community Relations Group and the PropertySurvey Group while the Payment Team included Accounting, Banking,and Dispute Resolution groups. The function of each group is describedin detail below.

The Logistics Team provided general support to the field executiondivision ensuring the smooth operation of all field activities. Logisticalsupport included transportation, full board camp-style accommodationand communications.

2.3. Field Operations

Field operations started at Somanga Funga, the southern-most village along theland portion of the wayleave. All field team personnel were accommodated in acamp established close to where the work was to be conducted. As the workprogressed northward along the wayleave, the camp was relocated periodicallyin order to minimize the distance between the camp and the work site.

The teams carried out the field operations, each focusing on specific tasks. Thefield team closely coordinated field activities with local leaders. Beforebeginning field activities in a new area, OTC met with local leaders and eldersin order to seek their guidance regarding the culture and customs of the area,and other matters of concern to the community.



2.3.1. Front-end Team (FET)

To ensure that the payment process was implemented smoothly andefficiently, the FET always traveled one or two days ahead of the PT.The FET reconnoitered the area and made preparations for the PT. TheFET comprised two groups, the Community Relations Group and theProperty Survey Group.

2.3.1.1. Community Relations Group

The Community Relations Group was responsible for organizingmeetings in each village along the wayleave in order to inform localresidents of the land acquisition and compensation processes. TheCommunity Relations Group was responsible for:

* Locating the villages and meeting with village leaders and elders toexplain the land acquisition program;

* Selecting an appropriate location for use as the local payment center;

* Holding public meetings with the villagers to provide a forum torespond to their questions;

* Explaining how payments would be made;

* Explaining the role of the Tanzania Postal Bank in the paymentprocess, including how the banking system works and the benefits ofusing a bank to manage finances;

* Explaining the methodology used to calculate compensation values;

* Explaining the process established to assist in resolving disputesduring the payment process. This included explaining the legal rightsof residents and providing them with general guidelines on how tofile a dispute in the legal system;

* Providing general information regarding the process of gas pipelineconstruction, including what is to be expected during construction,as well as health and safety issues and employment opportunities;

* Providing general guidelines conceming the safe operation of a gaspipeline; and

* Discussing general social and socio-economic issues with respect toproject activities during the construction phase, including gender,cultural and health issues such as the risk of sexually transmitteddisease.

The community relations group also spent time discussing special orindividual concerns, especially among women and the aged.



Community RelationsGroup holding a publicmeeting for localresidents (1997)

2.3.1.2. Property Survey Group

The Property Survey Group was responsible for documenting the detailsof the farm plots and other properties along the wayleave for whichcompensation was to be paid. The survey work was accomplishedthrough the use of Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment. Thisactivity required the survey team to accompany each landowner to theproperty that was to be acquired, where survey details were obtained andother physical features identified. Once the survey details had beencollected, the landowner was photographed and issued with an identity



card. Later, the landowner presented the identity card at the paymentcentre as proof that field surveyors had verified his or her property.

The property survey data collected by the survey group wassubsequently used to produce drawings showing the exact location ofeach property compensated along the wayleave route.

F 2M

Property Survey Groupat work using GPSequipment (1997)

2.3.2. Payment Team (PT)

The Payment Team comprised three groups: the Accounting Group, theBanking Group and the Dispute Resolution Group. All groupscomprising the PT worked closely, and in constant contact, with the FETto ensure the smooth operation of the program. The PT's primaryobjective was to make payments, on location, to the villagers along thewayleave. All payments were made by cheque issued by the AccountingGroup. Full banking services were made available on location for thosevillagers who wished to deposit their compensation cheques with thebank. Special arrangements were made so that a savings account couldbe opened using the compensation cheque and an immediate withdrawalcould be made up to a certain limit as outlined in Section 2.3.2.2.

2.3.2.1. Accounting Group

The Accounting Group was responsible for issuing payment chequesand ensuring that all legal documents were signed. At the paymentcentre, the Accounting Group received those landowners whoseproperties had been verified by the Survey Group, and gave thelandowners a final briefing on the payment process.

Following the briefing, the Accounting Group called the propertyowners in, one at a time, to go through the documentation, explain thetotal amount of compensation, the cheque payment and bankingprocesses, and the legal forms to be signed.



In the presence of the village leader, the Accounting Group confirmedthat the property owner was satisfied with the amount of compensationand was willing to proceed with the payment process. However, if theproperty owner showed signs of dissatisfaction with the amount ofcompensation, he/she was referred to the Dispute Resolution Group.Similarly, the property owner was referred to the Dispute ResolutionGroup in cases where reports were received indicating a possible disputeover the property in question, or where family complaints had beenreceived concerning the sharing of the compensation. The DisputeResolution Group was charged with assessing and resolving the disputebefore any payment could be effected. This process is discussed in detailin the section below.

In those cases where payment was to be made, the Accounting Group:

* Photographed the property owner using a Polaroid camera, whichproduced four photographs. Two photographs were for legaldocument records and the remaining two were for the bankingprocess;

* Ensured the property owner signed all legal documents;

* Ensured the village leader signed all legal documents as a witness tothe transaction; and

* Made out a cheque in the name of the property owner in the amountrecorded in the payment schedules.

After the payment cheque had been given to the property owner, thefunction of the Accounting Group with respect to the property ownerwas complete. At that point, the property owner was directed to the nextdesk to deposit the cheque with the Banking Group if he/she so desired.

Accounting Groupmaking compensation

: n $ (payments to landowners(1997)



2.3.2.2. Banking Group - Tanzania Postal Bank

OTC took the initiative to have bank representatives on the team in orderto provide immediate banking services to areas where such services areunavailable.

The Kariakoo branch of the Tanzania Postal Bank provided field-banking services. The Banking Group was equipped to provide full basicbanking services on location. The Banking Group's role was to:

* Accept the cheque and two photographs from those property ownerswho wished to use the banking services;

* Open a bank account as directed by the property owner;

* Issue a bank passbook to the property owner;

* Provide a cash advance to the property owner in the amount of up toTsh 10,000 in rural areas and Tsh 50,000 in urban areas; and

* Explain how the bank account works and where further deposits andwithdrawals could be made. The Banking Group also took theopportunity to explain the timing and frequency of future fieldbanking operations.

Moreover, when requested, the Banking Group also assisted families insplitting the compensation money among family members. In suchcases, the Tanzania Postal Bank opened separate accounts, as directedby the family.

In those cases where people could not reach the payment centre due toillness, old age or handicap, special arrangements were made to providethem with their compensation either at home or in hospital.

Note that the costs of photographs and paperwork were borne by theproject as a service to the community.

2.3.2.3. Dispute Resolution Group

The Dispute Resolution Group consisted of an independent propertyvaluer and the district land officer. The team was stationed at thepayment centre to address any dispute that might arise. Depending onthe nature of the dispute, legal counsel and a sociologist were availablefor technical consultation and to assist in resolving the dispute.

Details of the dispute resolution process employed by OTC's field teamare provided in Section 4.3.



details of a dispute(1997)

2.3.3. Logistics Team (LT)

A local company, Wild Footprints, provided all logistical supportservices. The Logistics Team provided all the support needed by thefield execution team to ensure that all field activities could be carried outsmoothly. The Logistics Team provided:

• camp facilities and support staff;

• transportation as required;

• radio communications;

* camp security; and

* resource and supplies management.

Camp facilities forWLAP staff (1997)



2.3.4. Coordination Between Field & Dar es Salaam Office

The field team leader was responsible for managing and coordinating allfield activities and communicating with the program management officein Dar es Salaam.

At the end of each workday, the field team leader compiled activity andfinancial reports for dispatch the following day to the programmanagement office. A courier service operated daily between the fieldcamp office and the program management office in Dar es Salaamcarrying documentation, supplies and relief personnel.

2.4. Program Completion

After completing the first phase of payments along the wayleave, a secondphase was planned, which was termed "program completion." This secondphase was designed to clean up outstanding payments as much as possible bycontacting those who had failed to show up during the first phase or, in cases ofdeceased persons, the appointed heir to the estate.

The second phase was planned as a minor operation in comparison to the firstphase with a minimum number of field personnel deployed. Field operationswere carried out from three centres, Ikwiriri, Mkuranga and Dar es Salaam. TheField Team Leader, the Accounting Group and the Banking Group implementedthe second phase, which required no survey work. The Public Relations Groupand the Dispute Resolution Group were put on stand-by, but no disputes wereencountered during the completion phase.

2.5. Allocation of Resettlement Plots

The MOL, in coordination with TPDC and OTC. allocated resettlement plots tothe displacees. This work involved preparing and issuing letters of offer to thedisplacees and showing them the physical location of the new plots. A letter ofoffer is a legal document, which grants the right to own a particular parcel ofland. (The process is described in greater detail in Section 4. 1, Legal Process.)Those resettled from both the wayleave and from within the resettlement areaswere issued letters of offer, which gave them the right to own the newlyallocated resettlement plots.

After issuing the letters of offer, field surveyors took each individual to the fieldto show him/her where the new plot was physically located.

2.6. Program Hand-over to TPDC

In April 1998, upon completion of the second phase, final reports were preparedto wrap up the operation. On May I" 1998, all land acquisition operations werehanded over to TPDC for completion. At the time responsibility for the WLAP



was handed over to TPDC, 87% of the 2,945 families listed in the compensationschedules had been paid. Activities carried out by TPDC after May 1S' 1998 aredescribed in more detail in Section 3.



3. FINALISATION OF WLAP BY TPDC

Between May 1998 and May 2000, TPDC continued to finalize the WLAP by makingpayments to the remaining 13% of landowners (385 of them) who had failed to showup during the first two phases. Note: other WLAP statistics can be found inSection 3.4.

Moreover, in June 1998, it came to light that UCLAS had overlooked some people inthe Kinyerezi resettlement area when resettlement plots were being allocated duringthe early stages of the resettlement planning. This problem is described in more detailbelow.

3.1. Additional Resettlement Requirements

3.1.1. Background

When planning the resettlement areas, UCLAS attempted to displace asfew people as possible. The philosophy was to accommodate within theproposed resettlement areas those people who already owned landwithin the area. To this end, UCLAS negotiated with landowners in theresettlement areas to determine how many plots would be retained byeach landowner and, consequently, the resulting number of plots thatcould be acquired by the project for resettlement of others.

This approach worked well for landowners with large farms from whichseveral plots could be generated. For example in the Sala Salaresettlement area, where farms are reasonably large, this approach wassuccessful.

However, in the Kinyerezi resettlement area, where farms are smallerand the population density is higher, this approach presented seriousproblems.

3.1.2. Problems Noted

An October 1997 report prepared by the MOL noted that in some cases,several related families (e.g. father and wives, adult son and family,adult daughter and family) owned and occupied a small parcel of land.In these cases, the parcel of land produced fewer surveyed plots than thenumber of families currently living on it. Under the new land ownershipsystem, a surveyed plot can only be assigned to one family, so it becameclear that each family on the original parcel of land must also beassigned a new resettlement plot.



In addition, in January 1998, OTC surveyors proposed diverting thepipeline route in order. to avoid two gravesites in Kinyerezi. Thisdiversion affected nine families, three of which were allocated plotsimmediately. However, the remaining six families needed to beallocated new, surveyed plots.

Finally, in June 1998, it was brought to TPDC's attention that in theKinyerezi resettlement area, 68 eligible individuals and families had notbeen allocated plots when alternative resettlement plots were beingallocated during the initial stages of the Resettlement Plan. These caseshappened to fall entirely within public areas, such as road reserves, andinitially it was thought that such cases would be addressed during theconstruction phase of the infrastructure program.

3.1.3. Action Taken to Address the Problems

After assessing the situation, TPDC concluded that it was necessary toacquire a significant amount of additional land. In coordination with theDCC and the MOL, TPDC selected an area west/south-west of theKinyerezi resettlement area for planning and the acquisition ofadditional plots.

The number of additional plots had to be sufficient to accommodate notonly those families who: a) were crowded onto a small parcel of land,b) were affected by the diversion of the pipeline route, or c) hadpreviously been overlooked, but also those families who resided in thenew area to be acquired who also were entitled to new plots for similarreasons.

Through this process, TPDC determined that 150 additional plots wouldhave to be acquired in order to accommodate these families, all from theKinyerezi area. In November 1998, TPDC started to acquire theadditional plots, and this task was completed in November 1999.

3.2. TPDC's Payment Procedures

TPDC used the same payment procedures that OTC used during its mop-upoperations or "completion phase." The same personnel, except for the projectmanager and project accountant, implemented the payment procedures. Bankingservices were provided as before and field surveyors verified properties beforepayment was made.

Since TPDC was trying to reach those individuals who failed to show up duringthe first two phases, no public meetings were necessary and no camp serviceswere required.



The survey team identified landowners' properties, collected survey data,photographed the landowners, and issued identification cards.

At the payment centre, the Payment Team and accountant received the twophotographs from the landowner, ensured that the landowner signed the legaldocuments and the Land Form 23 (LF23), issued the payment cheque, andsigned the accounting books.

Finally, the Banking Group opened an account for the landowner and providedother banking services as required.

3.3. TPDC's Actions to Finalize the WLAP

TPDC has been working to effect payment to all remaining landowners, bothalong the wayleave and in the resettlement areas, who did not presentthemselves to receive compensation payments during the main phases of theWLAP under OTC. This work, along with each task's respective timeline, isdescribed below:

a) Paid compensation to 210 landowners (September 15rh 1998 -November15 1998);

b) Worked to effect payment to as many as possible of the remaining 175landowners who did not present themselves to receive compensationpayments (February 1999 - May 2000). Note that as of May 2000, 116landowners have been paid, while 59 remain outstanding;

c) Prepared LFs 23 for 87 new claims in Kinyerezi and obtained the necessaryapproval signatures. Note that these claims include those who relinquishedtheir land for new plots (June 15th 1998 - August 30th 1998);

d) Obtained approval signatures for LFs 23 for new claims in Kilwa Districtthat earlier were postponed due to El-Nifio rains (August 4th 1998- August10 t 1998);

e) As directed by the Steering Committee, reviewed the valuation reportsrelating to the new Kinyerezi claims so as to ensure that the valuationassessment parameters employed by Knight Frank, Property ValuationConsultant, were consistent with those of UCLAS (July 15'h 1998 -July30 1998);

f) Made compensation payments to the 64 outstanding revaluation cases in theKinyerezi & Sala Sala resettlement areas. During the main phase of theWLAP, OTC noted that the crop rates used by UCLAS in the tworesettlement areas were lower than those used along the wayleave. OTCsought direction from the Steering Committee, which directed OTC to

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page 19 of 46La st printed 11/30/00


compute the difference and pay the compensation as a separate, revaluationpayment (September 15'h 1998 - November 15th 1998);

g) Made compensation payments to new claims in Kilwa District. Thisexercise combined making payment to those remaining landowners whofailed to turn up during the main phase of WLAP under OTC, andcompensating Songo Songo Island residents (October 4th 1998 - October10 th 1998);

h) Resolved 53 Kinyerezi complaints. These complainants asserted thatcompensation was either insufficient or that some of their property, such ashouses and crops, had not been recorded. Consequently, UCLAS conducteda detailed assessment of each complaint and deternined that only four werevalid. A report was written and presented to the Steering Committee fordirection. The report included the remarks of the valuer (UCLAS), as wellas the field notes. Subsequently, a meeting was held at Kinyerezi PrimarySchool on October I9 th 1998, bringing together the 53 complainants, IlalaDistrict Commissioner from the MOL, Ilala District Land officers, WardExecutive officers, TPDC officials, as well as Songas, UCLAS and MEMrepresentatives, and local leaders. This meeting was actually the latest in aseries of meetings held in Kinyerezi concerning the project. During themeeting, residents were briefed about the existing land laws, as well asproperty valuation procedures and guidelines. As a result of the meeting, acommon understanding of the criteria used to value property was achieved.Later, letters were sent to each complainant advising them as to whether ornot their claim was valid. Those whose claims were judged invalid weregiven reasons as to why their claim was disqualified. Similarly, those whoseclaims were found to be valid were so informed and a valuer was sent toreassess their claims on-site, after which they were paid accordingly. Notethat none of the cases was referred to the police or a court of law. Instead,local leaders, the Ward Executive Officer, TPDC and the SteeringCommittee, and an independent valuer resolved all cases. Now, all 53complainants accept and respect the decisions reached; and

i) ShoWed those receiving letters of offer the location and boundaries of theirresettlement plots (September 1 5 th 1998 - May 2000).

3.4. Current Status of WLAP

A total of 343 households will be relocated by the project, as summarized inTable 3.1 below. Of this total, 188 households were relocated because thepipeline corridor directly affected a significant portion of their property. Theremaining 155 households were relocated within their communities becausenew town plans were imposed on previously unplanned communities.



Table 3.1 - Households Relocated by the Project

Number of Number ofHouseholds Households Total Number

Location Relocated from Relocated Within the of Householdsthe Wayleave Resettlement Areas Relocated

Rural 33 0 33

. Kinyerezi: 73 : 149 222Urban y 7 310

Sala Sala 82 6 88

Total 188 155 343

All 33 rural households that were relocated have already resettled on their newplots that were allocated to them by the project in collaboration with the MOLand the respective village governments.

Newly surveyed plots have been acquired for all 310 households in the urbanareas. The project and MOL are currently in the process of assigning plots toeach household; this process is about 50% complete.

In addition to those households that needed to be relocated, the pipeline corridoraffected another 2,602 households in some way. As described in other sectionsof this report, the impact of the project on each household was assessed and asof May 2000, 98% of all households affected had been compensated.

It is noted that 132 households have come forward since the main compensationprogram was completed with claims that the project has affected theirproperties. These claims are being investigated.

3.5. Outstanding Tasks to Finalize the WLAP

The following tasks are either underway or are planned to be completed beforeconstruction of the infrastructure begins:

a) Complete compensation payments to those with outstanding, valid claims;

b) Monitor the wayleave to ensure that there is no encroachment;

c) Assign plots to those outstanding displacees and show them the physicallocations of their plots in the resettlement areas; and

d) Assess the legitimacy of the 132 claims that have been filed as of May 2000and all others that might be filed.



4. LEGAL ISSUES

OTC undertook much research, preparation and due diligence to ensure that theWLAP was implemented fairly and legally. Data compiled by others was audited foraccuracy and uniformity of application, and a local lawyer (O). Kesaria),knowledgeable in land acquisition matters, was hired to ensure the program wasimplemented as smoothly as possible.

The following is an overview of the Tanzanian legal process, supplied by the locallawyer, which OTC followed in order to acquire the wayleave for the pipeline.

4.1. Legal Process

Based upon the data compiled by UCLAS, Land Forms 23 were prepared foreach Region, District and village affected by the wayleave. The Lad Form 23contains details of each individual landowner, a description of the land inquestion and the amount of compensation payable. A District Land Officersigns the form, which is then countersigned by the District and RegionalCommnissioners. The District Land Officer certifies that the individualconcerned has been informed of his rights, in the presence of the CustomaryLand Authority or the Chairperson of the Village Development Cornmittee. Theindividual concerned has a choice of continuing to occupy the land orsurrendering his/her right and title over the land and all developments and cropsthereon, and to be paid compensation in the amount specified on the form.

4.2. Disputes

Tanzanian law incorporates specific procedures and processes for resolvingdisputes, to which the WLAP is subject. This section provides an overview ofthat process.

In case of dispute regarding valuation or compensation payable, the individualconcerned would apply to the Chief Government Valuer to determine thecorrect level of compensation based on the scale prescribed. If the individualconcerned were dissatisfied with the finding of the Chief Government Valuer, itwould be open to him/her to seek redress in a court of law. Court proceedingswould be filed in a Resident Magistrate's Court in the District in which theindividual resides. The amount of compensation detennined by UCLAS wouldbe paid into an escrow account pending final determination of the court process.It was agreed that so long as monies were deposited in an escrow account, theMinister for Lands and Human Settlements Development would proceed togrant the wayleave notwithstanding any unresolved cases pending in court. Theclaimant would be entitled, subject to a means test, to legal aid to assist him/herprosecute a claim in court.



In cases involving dispute of title or ownership, the parties concerned wereadvised to refer the matter to a court of law to determine who was the rightfulowner of the land and therefore entitled to receive payment of thecompensation. In the event, the amount of compensation would be paid intocourt and the court in turn would pay out the monies to the person adjudged tobe the rightful owner.

4.3. OTC's Dispute Resolution Process

OTC established a Dispute Resolution Group to help resolve disputes in aprofessional, arrn's length manner.

The Dispute Resolution Group, consisting of an independent property valuer,the local District Land Officer, a sociologist and legal counsel, was establishedto deal with all disputes that might arise during the compensation process. Greateffort was exerted to resolve disputes among residents, family members andneighbours. The exception was where a dispute was already before a court oflaw. OTC encountered two instances where disputes between relatives werebefore a court of law. In these cases, the Dispute Resolution Group was unableto bring the disputing parties together to resolve the dispute. In both cases, thecourt issued judgements.

OTC established the following process to resolve disputes during theimplementation of the WLAP. When a dispute was identified, the DisputeResolution Group was called in to meet with the disputing party or parties. TheDispute Resolution Group interviewed the disputing parties in the presence oflocal leaders, neighbours, "ten-cell" leaders, and Village and Ward ExecutiveOfficers, in order to document the details of the dispute. Disputes wereclassified under either category (I) or (II), as described below.

(I) Disputes Between Local Residents

Disputes between local residents (relatives, neighbours, etc.) were handled withextreme sensitivity. Disputes of this nature included families failing to agree onhow to split the compensation money, inheritance conflict, property boundaryconflicts and other family members demanding a share of the compensationmoney.

In coordination with local leaders, community elders and members of familiesrelated to the disputing parties, the Dispute Resolution Group acted as mediatorsand arranged a neutral environment for the disputing parties to meet and discusstheir conflict. This approach was successful; all disputes among local residentswere resolved peacefully.



(II) Dispute with the Project

Disputes of this nature included property owners who were dissatisfied with theamount of compensation, as well as those who claimed that their properties,which were located on the wayleave, were not valued during the initialvaluation exercise. In such cases, the following resolution process was used:

a) The Dispute Resolution Group compiled and documented details of thedispute. If necessary, and in the presence of the disputing parties,neighbours and local leaders, the group physically measured the disputedproperty, reassessed the value of the property, and interviewed local leadersand neighbours in relation to the dispute;

b) The disputing party was asked to sign the field assessment report preparedby the independent valuer. By signing the report, the disputing partysignified his/her agreement with the re-valuation assessment of the disputedproperty and the comments and statements obtained from local leaders andneighbours. One local leader, "ten-cell" leader or Village Executive Officeralso signed the field report in the presence of the disputing; party, as awitness;

c) Upon completion of the field report, the Dispute Resolution Group reviewedprevious valuation field reports for the property under dispute, and prepareda final report detailing the findings of the assessment and givingrecommendations;

d) The final report was submitted to the field team leader for review andapproval;

e) After approval was granted, the Dispute Resolution Group arranged ameeting with the disputing parties to discuss the re-valuation assessment andthe findings of the final report. Two possible scenarios could emerge andboth are described below:

i) Previous valuation consistent with the re-valuation assessment - NoError Identified.

In this case, the Dispute Resolution Group would go through the finalreport item by item with the disputing party, in the presence of localleaders, to demonstrate that the original valuation was consistent withthe re-valuation assessment. The group would explain to ithe disputingparty the valuation regulations, procedures and methodology, as well asthe rates used to determine the value of the property.

If the disputing party was satisfied and agreed with the results of the re-valuation assessment, then the dispute was considered resolved.



However, if the disputing party disagreed with the results of the re-valuation assessment, the Dispute Resolution Group referred the disputeto the Commissioner for Lands for further investigation and resolution.At this point, the group also advised the disputing party of his/her rightto file the dispute in a court of law for legal adjudication should theefforts of the Commissioner for Lands fail to resolve the dispute.

In addition, the Dispute Resolution Group advised the disputing party ofall the steps necessary to file the complaint in the legal system. The keysteps are as follows:

* Report the complaint to the village and ward offices;

* Obtain letters from the village and ward leaders documenting detailsof the dispute; and

* Take the letters to the Primary Court to file the complaint officially.

Once filed, the Primary Court would have jurisdiction over, and wouldbe responsible for resolving, the dispute.

ii) Previous valuation inconsistent with re-valuation assessment - ErrorIdentified.

In such cases, the Dispute Resolution Group advised the disputing partyof the errors noted and of the correction measures to be taken. Theinformation obtained during the re-valuation assessment was used todetermine the revised compensation value for the disputed property.Corrections to the compensation schedules were made and the disputingparty was paid the correct amount.

4.4. TPDC's Dispute Resolution Process

TPDC followed the same dispute resolution procedures that were adopted forthe WLAP, and integrated them with their own institutions and processes.TPDC minimized costs by having the WLAP Steering Committee review andassess disputes before engaging any outside consultants such as surveyors andproperty valuators.

TPDC's first task was to categorize a dispute as follows:

a) Complaints - these involved those customers who had receivedcompensation payments, but who objected to the amount of compensation,the methodology used to value assets, or the count of crops, buildings, etc;

b) Valuation withheld - this situation occurred in those cases whereirregularities were noted during valuation field surveys, or in those casesrelated to the widening of Morogoro Road; and



c) New claims - these involve individuals whose names did not appear on theLF23 forms but whose lands appear to lie along the proposed wayleave.Some of these people claim to have been absent during the main valuationphase in 1997, while others are concerned that their land might have beenaffected by the project wayleave.

Having. identified the nature of a dispute, TPDC set in motion their disputeresolution process. This process was followed throughout the WLAP and is thesame process that TPDC will use to resolve the 132 disputes that remainoutstanding. The process is summarized graphically in Figure 4.1 below.

Figure 4.1 - TPDC's Dispute Resolution Process

Complainant _

Complainant Complaint, claim or disputesatisfied

Claim Village Executive TPDC informs4 rejected Officer complainant of the

outcome

Complainant Claim forwarded ifComplainant jde aidissatisfied Judged vahd

IF~~~~~~~~~~

TPDC reviews cases and refersthem to various bodies as required Feedback to TPDC

| Courtof Law | | Police | | Ward Executive IndependnCourt of Law Police ~~~Officer Vle

The above dispute resolution process can be described as follows:

a) The complainant lodges a complaint by writing a letter to TPDC outliningthe nature of the dispute and submitting the letter to his/her local leader, theVillage Executive Officer;

b) The Village Executive Officer assesses the authenticity of the complaint andeither rejects it or, if judged authentic, forwards the complaint to TPDC forconsideration;

Pirepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page 26 of 46Last printed 11/30/00


c) If the complainant is dissatisfied with the decision of the Village ExecutiveOfficer, he/she can submit the complaint directly to TPDC or MEM;

d) TPDC identifies the nature of the dispute or claim;

e) TPDC meets with and interviews the disputing party(ies) in the presence oflocal leaders, neighbours, ten-cell leaders and the Village or Ward ExecutiveOfficer and documents the details of the dispute or claim;

f) TPDC assesses the claim and refers it to one of the following institutions orindividuals for resolution:

* A court of law - to determine the legal owner of the land or to sort outlegal issues;

* The police - to investigate those cases where fraud is suspected;

* The Ward Executive Officer - to resolve amicably disputes amongfamily members; or

- An independent valuer - to determine accurately the value of theproperties in question. This would occur in cases where either the TPDCteam determined that revaluation was required (and the WLAP SteeringCommittee approved payment), or where any of the other disputeresolution mechanisms concluded that revaluation was required. Suchcases might include new claims where landowners were absent duringthe main property valuation exercise, as well as disputes over valuation.

On average disputes were resolved within one to two months, but occasionallytook longer for complicated cases especially if resources were scarce. Claimswere compared to the valuation field sheets, and sometimes site verification wasconducted. Such site verification was always conducted where the claim wasnew. TPDC informed claimants by letter of the judgements, and if dissatisfiedwith the judgement, claimants could always appeal the judgement to eitherTPDC or MEM.

4.5. Legal Process For Acquiring the Wayleave

The Minister for Lands and Human Settlements Development ("the grantor")grants the wayleave to TPDC ("the grantee") so that the latter can arrange tohave the gas pipeline constructed and laid along the "servient" land.

The wayleave is granted under the provisions of Sections 4(1)(a) and (e) of theLand Acquisition Act, Act No. 47 of 1967. The grantor has to be satisfied thatthe servient land is required for Government use, general public use or aGovernment scheme.

A list of landowners and their respective lands and development is prepared,and compensations are paid against deeds of surrender/transfer of the right and


Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project Resentlement Plan Addendum

title in the land and developments. All compensation and surrender documentsare submitted to the MOL.

Upon being satisfied that all affected individuals have been adequatelycompensated, the Minister applies to the President for the issue and publicationof a Land Acquisition Notice. Such notice was published in the Gazette onMarch 19' 1999, and allowed a statutory six-week waiting perliod for anyperson who claims an interest over the land to present his claim, along withsupporting documents, to the MOL. At the expiry of the notice period, thewayleave grant is completed and registered.

The wayleave for the Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project pipeline wasofficially granted to TPDC on May 3d 1999.



5. IMPACT ASSESSMENT - BROAD FRAMEWORK

Unlike regional infrastructure development projects such as hydroelectric powerdams and highways, which can displace and require the relocation of significantnumbers of people, a small-diameter pipeline such as the Songo Sonlgo pipelineaffects relatively few people and leaves little if any impact after construct.ion.

To put the potential impact in perspective, the total amount of land acquired for theright-of-way, or wayleave, is only 12.3 km2 (the rural wayleave is 60 m wide' x187 km long and the urban wayleave is 30 m wide x 36 km long). Moreover, thepipeline route was chosen carefully in order to minimize the impact on localresidents. Most of the wayleave traverses land that is either unpopulatecl or sparselypopulated, and even where the wayleave enters the peri-urban areas of DaLr es Salaam,it passes through areas of low-density industrial development and mo,stly followsexisting power line rights-of-way.

From a construction perspective, the rminimum width required for installing a pipelineis 20 m, while 30 m allows more room for the equipment to maneuver aLnd affords agreater margin for safety. In this light, a 60 m-wide wayleave provides ample roomnot only to store equipment and materials, but also for construction traffic to travel inboth directions. This is advantageous because it minimizes the need for access roads.The contractor can deliver the majority of equipment and materials right onto thewayleave using existing public roads, and then transport such equipment andmaterials along the wayleave itself thereby niinimizing the impact on local residents.The only location where access roads may be needed is in the south, where there arefew existing roads to intersect the wayleave. Fortunately, most of this area isunpopulated and therefore any potential impact will be minimal.

In some other parts of the world, the "perrnanent" 20 m-wide wayleave issupplemented by a 10-m "temporary" wayleave to facilitate construction activities. Inlight of the GOT decision to set the wayleave width at 60 in, no suchperrnanent/temporary distinction is necessary for the Songo Songo pipeline.

It is important to note that the contractor will be motivated to limit the impact of off-wayleave construction activities on local residents because he will be responsible forpaying compensation during construction. Consequently. pipeline contractors usuallyprefer to get onto the wayleave as quickly as possible where compensation hasalready been paid and where the equipment poses no danger to the public. The natureof the terrain and the small diameter of the Songo Songo pipeline suggest that therewill be very little additional land required by the contractor off-wayleave. Should

The GOT requested that the project acquire a 60 m-wide wayleave. The GOT wanted a multi-line corridorcapable of supporting potential future regional infrastructure such as a second gas pipeline, a waterpipeline, electrical power line, or a fibreoptic communications cable. The GOT considered it prudent toacquire the 60 m-wide wayleave during the initial wayleave acquisition program because that wouldeliminate the complications and costs of acquiring additional land in the future.

PFrepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page 29 of 46Last printed 11/30/00


there be a need for any equipment yards, staging areas or quarries, the contractor willbe required to purchase or lease such lands from the owners at local market rates.

Since pipeline construction techniques are highly standardized internationally,pipeline construction contractors are normally assigned full responsibility for definingthe details of equipment, technique, logistics and schedule. The contractor's planswill be assessed according to the construction design and performance standardsspecified by Songas in the bid documents. It is anticipated that the contractor is likelyto use two or three spreads. Two spreads would install most of the land-basedpipeline, while perhaps a third, specialized spread would be dedicated to handlingcrossings of roads and rivers.2 In all likelihood, the crossing spread would also installthe pipeline in the urban areas where there is less room to maneuver.

By its nature, an operating pipeline has minimal, though important, restrictions onland use. The primary goal is to protect the pipeline from all disturbance, includingnatural forces as well as accidental or purposeful human contact.. By meeting thisgoal, the pipeline operator is able to protect the health and safety of those who liveand work on or near the pipeline, and the environment.

In order to mitigate erosion and maintain the integrity of the pipeline, Songas likelywill encourage local residents to continue farming along the wayleave by growingcrops with shallow roots. In addition, Songas will consider employing local residentsto patrol the wayleave not only to prevent encroachment, but also to prevent thewayleave being used as a pathway. It is critical that the wayleave not become apathway or roadway because this would result in rapid erosion similar to that which isnow problematic for the Tazama oil pipeline.

As a general principle, no buildings will be allowed on the wayleave, both to protectthe buried pipe from disturbance, and to prevent reoccupation of the wayleave.Similarly, Songas will be alert to all activities near the wayleave with potential todisturb the pipe: excavations, movement of heavy equipment, or the creation of newtrails or roads.

2 The pipeline bid documents have been crafted to ensure that the contractor has sufficient equipment for atleast two spreads.


Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project Resettlement Plain Addendum

6. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

6.1. Introduction

As the Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project resumes active development,socio-economic information concerning those displaced by the project must beupdated, and monitoring plans developed to ensure that the Resettlement Plandoes not disadvantage those displaced.

6.2. Previous Socio-economic Assessments

Three socio-economic assessments of significance have been prepared to date inrelation to the Songo Songo Project. The information gathered through theseassessments was incorporated in Rev. 1 of the Songo Songo ResettlementProgramme and Plan that was issued in December 1997. The three assessmentsare summarized below:

a) Land Uses, Socio-economic Activities and Implications for the PipelineCorridor andfor Community Assistance, August 1995

In May 1995, the Ardhi Institute of Dar es Salaam (subsequentlyincorporated into the University of Dar es Salaam and renamed UniversityCollege of Lands & Architectural Studies (UCLAS)) began a pipelinecorridor mapping survey. Ardhi conducted field investigations and mappingbetween May and July 1995, and collected information concerning land use,land use patterns and physical landmarks, and mapped the information.Socio-economic surveys also were undertaken with the intention ofidentifying potentially-affected households, developing nmeasures forpipeline protection and identifying the potential for electrification of theresettlement areas. The data was collected through meetings with localcommunity leaders and residents and through the use of a socio-economicquestionnaire.

The report identifies general and detailed land uses, available services,household activities and general occupations of residents within a one-kilometer wayleave corridor, and villages and residents encountered withina 60-meter wayleave. Family attributes and income levels were notdetermined. The report made various recommendations concerningresidential land use practices, resident relocation, disruption, and potentialfor water and electrical services, which are reflected in this ResettlementPlan.

b) Pipeline Socio-economic Update, August 1997

This report, prepared by the Centre for Energy, Environment. Science andTechnology (CEEST) included a review and an update of socio-economic



data on communities in the vicinity of the wayleave, and assessment ofinformation needs and local concerns. The study also evaluated projecteffects and opportunities that might arise during construction and operationof the pipeline.

c) Songo Songo Island Socio-economic Survey

During 1997, a socio-economic specialist from the University of Dar esSalaam was commissioned to carry out a series of surveys on Songo SongoIsland. In part, the studies were designed to support the implementation ofthe well servicing and testing program on Songo Songo Island. The studiescollected and analyzed socio-economic information for the communities onSongo Songo Island, evaluated project-related issues of concern to thecommunity, and recommended measures to manage and enhance the long-term effects of the project on the Island community.

6.3. Objectives & Scope of Socio-economic Assessment Program

The objectives and scope of the resettlement socio-economic assessmentprogram are to:

D identify, develop, coordinate and monitor socio-economic issues andrequirements associated with the resettlement plan;

* obtain socio-economic and socio-cultural baseline data concerning residentsof both the wayleave and resettlement areas who are affected by the project;

* conduct socio-economic surveys and studies to supplement existinginformnation so that accurate information is used as the basis forimplementing and monitoring the resettlement plan;

* evaluate and provide potential socio-economic mitigative measures andmonitoring plans concerning affected area residents and wayleavedisplacees;

* ensure that the Resettlement Plan incorporates applicable regional, nationaland international requirements and standards, with a clear understanding andappreciation of HS&E issues;

* provide a focus for wayleave community and NGO communication; and

* meet the requirements of the GOT and The World Bank.

The objectives will be accomplished through the implementation of SongasHS&E policies and the use of Tanzanian socio-economic expertise andresources.



6.4. Assessment Plan - Wayleave & Resettlement Areas

In order to address the requirements of World Bank Operational Directive 4.30,Involuntary Resettlement, a detailed socio-economic assessment and monitoring

program has been prepared.

The program is structured in three Phases:

Phase 1 Socio-economic Assessment Before Construction

This phase comprises program preparation and the collectionand evaluation of baseline data;

Phase 2 Monitoring During Construction & ResettlemenitInfrastructure Development

Songas, on behalf of the GOT, will monitor the socio-economic performance based on the information obtainedduring Phase 1. This monitoring process will last throughoutthe construction period; and,

Phase 3 Monitoring After Construction & ResettlementInfrastructure Development

Songas will monitor the socio-economic perforrnance of theResettlement Plan for three years after the pipeline facilitieshave been constructed and commissioned.

The following sections provide detailed descriptions of the activities involved ineach phase.

6.4.1. Phase 1 - Socio-economic Assessment Before Construction

Prepare Socio-economic Assessment

* Evaluate current socio-economic and socio-cultural documentation,most recent statistical information, and interview Songo Songoproject joint development partners, regional and district communitydevelopment staff for recent information and project changes;

* Review information concerning the wayleave and resetitlement areas,existing environmental and socio-economic information, as well asGOT and World Bank requirements and procedures;

* Evaluate the regional, institutional, NGO and/or Government'sability to assist wayleave and resettlement area residents in mattersrelated to socio-economic issues, relocation and development;

* Undertake reconnaissances of the pipeline wayleave andresettlement areas and report findings for each of rural and urbanresidents, and displacees;



* Review and adjust the framework and processes for obtaining therequired socio-economic baseline data, and develop a socio-economic information collection protocol or questionnaire;

* Assess the requirements for a socio-economic/community affairsprogram for the Resettlement Plan;

* Re-establish the Songo Songo Project Health, Safety & EnvironmentLiaison Group to assist in developing and monitoring the program,as well as identifying mitigating issues; and

* Hold quarterly meetings with the HS&E Liaison Group afterpresenting the Socio-economic Assessment Report.

Collect Socio-economic Baseline Data

* Gather baseline socio-economic and cultural information on bothwayleave and resettlement area displacees, while simultaneouslyconducting a community information program;

* Baseline socio-cultural information to be collected will include landownership, government setting, cultural and sacred areas, andconumunity support infrastructure. This information will be obtainedfrom existing sources supplemented by field investigations wherenecessary;

* Baseline socio-economic information concerning displacees shallinclude the following: family characteristics; current familyemployment, income and assets; resettlement compensation receivedand retained (where possible); and, the potential for resettlement ofsquatters affected by the wayleave and/or resettlement areas; and

* Gather baseline data on the relocation of displacees and/or theirintent to relocate, and displacees' expectations of assistance from theproject, Government, or family or village resources.

Evaluate Information

* Analyze and evaluate the socio-economic baseline information andissues raised during contact with the communities;

* Develop resettlement area community structure schematics(statistical profiles and sectoral maps);

* Evaluate the socio-cultural and socio-economic impacts of theResettlement Plan on those displaced from the wayleave andresettlement areas (i.e., none, short-term, long-term, residual orirreversible);

* Evaluate opportunities for the provision of local services andbusiness development;



* Develop measures to mitigate the negative impacts of theResettlement Plan;

* Prepare socio-economic issues, impact and mitigation lists;

* Meet with the project HS&E Liaison Group to present for reviewand discussion the socio-economic findings and evaluation; and

* Review and adjust the proposed monitoring program to capture thekey socio-economic issues and information.

6.4.2. Phase 2 - Monitoring During Pipeline Construction & ResettlementInfrastructure Development

* During construction of the project facilities, review and monitor themovement and relocation of the wayleave and resettlement areadisplacees;

* During development of infrastructure in the resettlemnent areas,monitor the movement and relocation of the wayleave andresettlement area displacees;

* Meet quarterly with the project HS&E Monitoring Group to reviewand discuss:

- Progress and updates with respect to the monitoring plan;

- Project construction issues;

- Resettlement development plans and significant issues;

- EMP plans and issues; and

- National, regional and local issues that may affect resettlementarea activities and the Songo Songo Project in general.

* Once construction of the project facilities is complete, prepare aResettlement Plan monitoring report for review by Songas, GOT andthe project HS&E Monitoring Group; and

* Submit the monitoring report for review to the GOT, WVorld Bank,Songas and other Songo Songo project stakeholders.

6.4.3. Phase 3 - Monitoring After Construction & Resettlement InfrastructureDevelopment

* Maintain a socio-economic database of displacees and key contacts;

* Visit the Kinyerezi and Sala Sala resettlement areas quarterly toassess the integration of wayleave displacees into the comimunity;

* Discuss resettlement plans and programs quarterly with staff fromthe Regional and District Commissions, Tanzania Electric Supply

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT P'age 35 of 46Last printed 11/30/00


Company Limited (TANESCO) and TPDC, in order to identify keysocio-cultural and environmental issues;

* Within one year of completing the construction of the pipeline,conduct interviews with the wayleave and resettlement areadisplacees and complete a questionnaire designed to obtain theircurrent socio-economic characteristics and attitudes;

* Compare current socio-economic issues and plans with the baselineinformation collected in 2000, and identify and bring to the attentionof the management of Songas, any significant issues and potentialmitigative options;

* Conduct semi-annual meetings with the project HS&E LiaisonGroup to discuss plans for monitoring resettlement and evaluatingfindings and key issues;

* Within one year of completing the construction of the pipeline andthereafter annually, prepare a monitoring report on the ResettlementPlan for review by Songas, GOT and the project HS&E LiaisonGroup; and

* Submit monitoring reports for review to the GOT, World Bank,Songas and other Songo Songo project stakeholders.

6.5. Program Management

AES Sirocco Limited (AES) - the company that has assumed TransCanada'sinterest in the Songo Songo project - will develop a project management teambased in Dar es Salaam to manage the socio-economic assessment program. Themanagement team, which will include environmental and socio-economicmanagement and technical staff, will manage the program in consultation withTPDC. At the request of AES and TPDC, Songas will make available an HS&EAdvisor, HS&E Coordinator and Community Affairs Coordinator to assist inthe implementation of the program, as required.

6.5.1. Resettlement Plan Monitoring Committee

Songas will establish an HS&E Liaison Group to provide advice to theproject on a range of environmental and social issues. It is proposed thatthis HS&E Liaison Group function as the Monitoring Committee for theResettlement Plan. In that role, the Monitoring Committee will reviewand comment on the implementation of the Resettlement Plan.

The Monitoring Committee will hold its first meeting prior to FinancialClosing, in order to establish the Committee's terms of reference,mandate, information requirements and meeting schedule. It isanticipated that the Committee will meet quarterly during projectplanning, and construction and semi-annually thereafter.



The Monitoring Committee will comprise senior designates of:

* MEM;

* TPDC;

* TANESCO;

* DCC;

* MOL;

* Office of the Vice-President, Environment Department;

* National Environment Management Council (NEMC); and

* Songas.

6.6. Estimated Schedule & Budget

It should be noted that the schedule for the socio-economic assessmnent programis based on the Financial Closing date. If the Financial Closing date changes,the timelines for all phases associated with the socio-economic assessmentprogram will move accordingly. In summary, the socio-economic assessmentprogram is scheduled to begin 30 days prior to Financial Closing (refer to thetable on the next page for an overview of the schedule broken down by task).

The proposed program includes three phases as shown in the table below. Notethat the monitoring period of three years after construction of the projectfacilities is required under World Bank O.D. 4.30, Involuntary Resettlement.

Table 6.1 below shows a total estimated budget of US$116,050 to complete theprogram, with the cost of the Pre-Construction Phase estimated at ULJS$64,450. Itis also estimated that the Phase 1 Socio-econornic Assessment Report will becompleted and submitted for review two months after Financial Closing.

Prepared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page 37 of 46L-ast printed 11/30/00


Table 6.1 - Estimated Budget - Socio-economic Assessment

Estimated Estimated Estimated EstimatedActivity Person Labour Expense Total Budget

Days (USS) (US$) (USS)

Phase 1 Socio-economic Assessment Before Construction

Prepare for Socio-economic 37 13,800 7,800 21,600Assessment

Collect Socio-economic Baseline 75 21,750 3,500 25,250Information

Evaluate & Synthesize Socio- 56 16,600 1,000 17,600economic Information

Sub-total Phase 1 168 52,150 12,300 64,450

Phase 2 Monitoring During Pipeline Construction & Resettlement InirastructureDevelopment

Monitor Resettlement 89 25,800 I 2,000 27,800

Phase 3 Monitoring After Construction & Resettlement Infrastructure Development

Monitor Resettlement Post- 71 20,400 3,400 23,800construction

TOTAL 328 98,350 17,700 116,050

6.6.1. Schedule - Socio-economic Reports

During the implementation of the socio-economic assessment andresettlement area monitoring program, a number of reports will beprepared for submission to, and review by, AES, Songas, The WorldBank, the GOT and other project stakeholders. These reports will beprepared and submitted according to the schedule outlined in Table 6.2below.

Table 6.2 - Schedule - Socio-economic Reports

Assessment/ Monitoring Reports I Completion Date

Phase 1 Socio-economic Assessment Report Financial Closing + 2 Months

Quarterly and Semi-annual Socio- Financial Closing + 6 Monthseconomic Reports to the Monitoring through 3 Years Post-FacilityCommittee Completion

Phase 2 Construction Resettlement Monitoring Completion of PipelineReport Construction + 1 Month

Phase 3 Post-construction ResettlementMonitoring Reports: _

Resettlement Monitoring Report (Year 1) Facility Completion + I Year

Resettlement Monitoring Report (Year 2) Facility Completion + 2 Years

Resettlement Monitoring Report (Year 3) Facility Completion + 3 Years



7. INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM

7.1. Introduction

In the rural areas, alternative sites were identified household by householdwithin the immediate vicinity of the original settlement. This relativelyuncomplicated procedure was not feasible in the urban context due to theshortage of land for altemative accommodation. As a result, it becamenecessary to identify resettlement areas and to make arrangements for acquiringplots for the displacees in these new planned conmmunities. Having identifiedKinyerezi and Sala Sala as resettlement areas for the urban population, planningprocedures were initiated, layout plans for both sites were prepared andapproval was obtained from both the DCC and the MOL.

Kinyerezi was set aside for displacees from Ubungo south, while Sala Sala wasearmarked for the resettlement of displacees from Ubungo north. Together,these two resettlement areas will accommodate the 310 urban householdsdisplaced by the project. The Kinyerezi resettlement area will absorb 222households from the Wards of Chamazi, Ukonga, Kinyerezi and Ubungo, whilethe Sala Sala resettlement area will absorb 88 households from the Wards ofUbungo, Kawe and Kunduchi.

Together, these two planned communities constitute a significant asset to theurban area of Dar es Salaam.

7.2. Preparing the Urban Resettlement Sites

In the preparatory work carried out to date, project field teams have beencognizant of the need to preserve, and if possible enhance, the well being ofthose being moved, as well as those already living in the host comrnunities.

Accordingly, infrastructure development schemes have been prepared for eachresettlement area that focus on developing basic infrastructure and services.These infrastructure proposals involve the construction of roads, as well as thedevelopment of water and electricity supply systems. These basic services arerequired to meet the needs of people displaced by the construction of thepipeline.

A relatively small proportion of the 310 urban households that had to berelocated would have experienced a reduction in the level of communityinfrastructure relative to their former neighbourhoods. The nature and extent ofinfrastructure proposed in this Addendum will allow new residents to enjoy alevel of service that is at least equivalent to that enjoyed in their forrnerneighbourhoods. In addition, the proposed infrastructure represents a significant



improvement in the level of infrastructure for a much greater number of familiesalready living in these communities.

The DCC will be involved in the infrastructure development process. Theinfrastructure will be developed within the context of the neighbourhood plansprepared by UCLAS for Kinyerezi and Sala Sala and approved by the DCC andthe Director of Town Planning.3 These plans provide for a range of land usesincluding residential and community areas, municipal services and facilitiessuch as primary and secondary schools, dispensaries, churches, mosques, etc., aroad network, neighborhood commercial centres, as well as open areas reservedfor cemetery sites and river valleys. Such land uses are itemnized in Drawing No.1/838/597, Kinyerezi Neighbourhood, and Drawing No. 1/811/596, Sala SalaNeighbourhood. Copies of these two drawings can be found in the Songo SongoGas-to-Electricity Project Resettlement Programme and Plan, Rev. 1, which wasissued in December 1997.

Note, however, that it is beyond the scope of this Resettlement Plan to developall such facilities. UCLAS expects that developers ultimately will acquire plotsseparately for such neighbourhood facilities by negotiating with the currentfarm owners.

7.3. Developing the Infrastructure Proposals

The infrastructure to be developed in Kinyerezi and Sala Sala has emerged froma series of field visits. Through these field visits, basic infrastructurerequirements were identified and subsequently organized according to priority.This process revealed that roads, water and electricity were of the highestpriority.

Having established the nature of infrastructure required in each resettlementarea, efforts were focused on developing the preliminary design and preparingfactored cost estimates to determine an order-of-magnitude cost for theinfrastructure program. When it was determined that this cost exceeded thelimited funding available, a decision was made to hire a Tanzanian consultingengineering firm to develop a proposal that would minimize costs yet meetWorld Bank and local infrastructure standards.

Consequently, on March 22, 2000, OTC, on behalf of the GOT and TPDC,commissioned Inter-consult Ltd. to conduct the preliminary engineering designfor road construction and water supply services for both the Kinyerezi and SalaSala resettlement areas.4 Inter-consult submitted their final report in April 2000.

3 Details on infrastructure development in the resettlement areas are available in Volume II (B) ofUCLAS's Report submitted to TPDC in March 1996.

4 With respect to electricity supply services, it was decided to use the original preliminary design and costestimates prepared by OTC, since these costs are relatively minor and it is unlikely that they will changesignificantly.



Drawing on the experience gained from similar, recent infrastructure projects,Inter-consult developed their proposal according to the following designstandards:

* Ministry of Works, Draft Design Manual, 1989;

* Ministry of Works, Pavement and Materials Manual, 1999;

* Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) Road Note 6;5

* Southern Africa Transport and Communications Commission; and

* Ministry of Water, Design Manual, 1997.

7.4. Program Management

The infrastructure development program will be managed by AES. As projectmanager, AES will install in Dar es Salaam a project management team toimplement the infrastructure program in advance of Financial Closing. Thework will be conducted in close coordination with TPDC and the DCC, usinglocal contractors and suppliers to the greatest extent possible.

The subsequent sections briefly describe the condition of the existinginfrastructure in each resettlement area, as well as the basic infrastructure that isto be developed under this proposal.

7.5. Kinyerezi Infrastructure

The basic infrastructure proposed is presented below, and reference should bemade to the attached map entitled, Kinyerezi Resettlement Area - InfrastructureProgram, June 1, 2000. The costs associated with this infrastructure, includingproject management costs, are summarized in Annex A.

7.5.1. Road Improvement

Road improvement is a priority issue for the Kinyerezi settlement. Aserviceable road system is fundamental to the wellbeing of residents,and other required community services depend on road access.

The existing link road starting at the Majumba Sita junction off Nyerereroad up to the Segerea / Kinyerezi junction (4.45 km) is an engineeredgravel road that is well maintained by the local authority (IlalaMunicipal Council). The resettlement area is 1 km beyond the Segerea /Kinyerezi junction.

5 The TRL standards are formulated for subtropical, developing countries and are therefore relevant toTanzania.



Along this 1-km stretch, the road is of substandard alignment, with nodrainage, and is about 5 m wide. The road passes through the village andis used by commuter buses ("Daladalas") to ferry passengers. The roadreserve is probably encroached. Furthermore, all the internal roadscontained in this proposal are planned along new alignments - accordingto the master plan - and do not follow existing tracks or paths.

Note that for structural design purposes, the average daily traffic wasassumed to be 200-300 vehicles per day, where it is now fewer than 50.Soil surveys must be carried out prior to construction to identify thoseareas with unsuitable soil and subsurface moisture conditions.

The proposals for improving the road network are outlined below:

a) The 1-km link road from the Segerea l Kinyerezi junction will berealigned to conform to the requirements of the local authority andthe City master plan.

b) Six (6) internal roads will be constructed to provide access to allparts of the enlarged settlement. The total length of these roads is6.3 km. The roads will have a gravel wearing course 150 mm thick,compacted, a carriageway width of 6.0 m and a shoulder width of1.5 m x 2;

c) Seven (7) culverts (2 x 900 mm) will be installed where the internalroads cross seasonal streams; and

d) Drainage systems will be installed on items (a) and (b).

7.5.2. Water Supply

Safe drinking water is a basic human need that is lacking in Kinyerezi.Currently, villagers draw water from shallow, hand-dug wells where thewater is contaminated and the supply is lirnited to the rainy season.

Originally, it was thought .that boreholes could be drilled to supplygroundwater, but according to the Ministry of Water, no aquifer exists inthe Kinyerezi area. Consequently, taking into consideration the cost ofdistribution, treatment and quality, it was decided to use the nearest Dares Salaam Water Supply and Sewerage Authority (DAWASA) watersupply main.

The nearest piped water source is a 200-mm main lying 3.6 km from theKinyerezi village. This main may not be able to supply sufficientquantities of water throughout the day all the time due to the largenumber of consumers. In recognition of this limitation, and in order todeal with a possible shortage, sufficient storage capacity has beenprovided for one day's demand, assuming all residents live in high-classdwellings.



The storage tank has been located so as to allow for distribution bygravity to all plots in the settlement. Furthermore. the distributionsystem has been designed so that consumers are no more than250-400 m from a domestic point (stand pipe).

The components of the proposed water supply system are as follows:

a) Supply (rising) main (from connection with DAWASA main):150 mm UPVC pipe, class B x 3,550 m;

b) Distribution mains:

* 100 mm diameter UPVC pipe, class B x 1,020 m;


* 50 mm diameter poly pipe, class B x 6,150 m;

c) Domestic points (stand pipes) x 29 (though 35 have been used in theestimate to accommodate changes during detailed engineering); and

d) Distribution reservoir (storage tank) x 1. The reservoir shall be madeof reinforced concrete with a capacity of 1000 mi3 . The tank shall bepartially buried and the extent of the portion above-ground shall bedetermined during the detailed design stage.

7.5.3. Electricity Service

Currently, there is no electrical service to Kinyerezi. This proposalenvisages providing basic electrical service to three points in theresettlement area. It is intended that other parties will provicle additionalservices, including hook-ups to houses, in the future as the needdevelops. The proposals for Kinyerezi are as follows:

a) 4.76 km of 33 kV high tension line along the link and internalsettlement roads to three distribution points;

b) Step-down transformer (200 kVA) x 3;

c) Substation and yard; and

d) Miscellaneous items.

7.6. Sala Sala Infrastructure

The basic infrastructure to be provided is presented below, and reference shouldbe made to the attached map entitled, Sala Sala Resettlement Area -Infrastructure Program, June 1, 2000. The costs associated with thisinfrastructure, including project management costs, are summarized inAnnex A.



7.6.1. Road Improvement

A serviceable road network is a basic priority for Sala Sala. The existinglink road from Bagamoyo Road is semi-engineered, gravel-surfaced, 5-6 m wide, with a road reserve ranging from 7-20 m. Where the roadreserve is 7 m, it is probably encroached, as it differs markedly from the20 m reserve provided for in the approved master plan. The road hasvery little gravel, and the side drains are virtually non-existent or havebeen totally silted up for lack of routine maintenance. The internal roadsdo not have any well-maintained side drains.

Note that for structural design purposes, the average daily traffic wasassumed to be 200-300 vehicles per day, where it is now fewer than 20.Soil surveys must be carried out prior to construction to identify thoseareas with unsuitable soil and subsurface moisture conditions.

The proposals for road improvement listed below represent acompromise of initial, maintenance and road user costs:

a) Link road: The existing 2.7-km road from Bagamoyo Road to thesettlement must be upgraded. This is necessary in order to link thesettlement to the rest of the city. The road will have a gravel wearingcourse 150 mm thick, compacted, with a carriageway width of 6.0 mand a shoulder width of 1.5 m x 2;

b) Two internal roads: These will be gravel roads totaling 2.8 km inlength with a wearing course 150 mm thick, compacted, acarriageway width of 6.0 m and a shoulder width of 1.5 m x 2;6

c) Two culverts (l x 600 mm and I x (2 x 900 mm)); and

d) Storm water drainage systems on items (a) and (b) to alleviateerosion.

7.6.2. Water Supply

The availability of water is one of the most important criteria for makingthe Sala Sala settlement habitable. Currently, there is no properlydesigned and constructed water supply system in the settlement. Theclosest source of water is the DAWASA Lower Ruvu supply main(1350 mm), which lies about 2 km outside the settlement.

The proposed water supply main has been selected in order to minimizethe distance to the distribution reservoir. In turn, the location and size ofthe reservoir have been determined with a view to facilitating

6 The road originally proposed by UCLAS passes through the yard of an existing construction company,and would serve the least number of people in the resettlement area. In order to serve the majority ofpeople in Sala Sala, OTC proposes to construct a second, 1. I km-long internal road. This road is shownon the Sala Sala infrastructure drawing running south from the link road at easting 520200.


Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project Resettlement PlIan Addendum

distribution by gravity and ensuring adequate pressures at the domesticpoints (stand pipes) and individual house connections. Furthermore, thedistribution system has been designed so that consumers are no morethan 250-400 m from a domestic point. All aspects of water supply areaddressed in the following package of proposals:

a) Supply (rising) main: This will convey water to the booster pumpstation and on to the storage reservoir. The supply main will be150 mm diameter UPVC pipe, class B x 3,300 m;

b) Distribution mains:




c) Domestic points (stand pipes) x 17 (though 30 have been used in theestimate to accommodate changes during detailed engin,eering);

d) Booster pump station: This must be provided becauise the waterpressure in the Lower Ruvu main is not sufficient to raise water tothe distribution reservoir, which is 90 m higher than the take-offpoint;7 and

e) Distribution reservoir (storage tank) x 1. The reservoir shall be madeof reinforced concrete with a capacity of 600 m3 , and shall be whollyburied. It is proposed that the reservoir be installed just outside theresettlement area near the Tanzania Telecommunications CompanyLtd. (1TCL) communications tower - the highest point in the area.Otherwise, the reservoir would have to elevated 15-20 m aboveground in order to be able to supply the higher elevation plots, andthis would increase the cost considerably.8

7.6.3. Electricity Service

Recently, TANESCO has brought electricity to Sala Sala by installing atransformer in the southem portion of the resettlement area. However,there is no electricity service available in the northern and westem partsof the settlement.

It is proposed that basic electrical service be brought to a central point inthe northwestern part of the resettlement area. In addition,approximately 770 m of 11 kV high-tension line must be relocated from

7 The final location of the booster pump will be determined during the detailed design stage, once the exactpressure at the take-off point is known. In addition, the specifications for the booster pump will dependon its location and the required booster height.

8 It should be noted, however, that land must be acquired in order to install the reservoir al: this location,and appropriate easements obtained to ensure access for maintenance.

F'repared by OTC on behalf of TPDC & the GOT Page 45 of 46L.ast printed 11/30/00


two separate sites so that the lines parallel the two new roads that are tobe constructed, according to the approved master plan. Additionalservices will be provided by third parties in the future as the needdevelops.

Proposals for electricity service incorporate the following:

a) 3.4 km of 1 kV high-tension line to a central point in thenorthwestern part of the resettlement area;

b) 2 km of 380 V low-tension line to the booster pump station;

c) Relocate approximately 770 m of installed 11 kV high-tension line;9

d) Step-down transformer (200 kVA);

e) Substation and yard; and

f) Miscellaneous items.

7.7. Infrastructure Cost Estimate

A summary of the costs of installing the basic infrastructure in the Kinyereziand Sala Sala resettlement areas, as outlined in this section, is provided inAnnex A.

Note that the cost estimate excludes the cost of land acquisition. The estimateassumes that all land required for the construction of roads and the installationof water and electrical supply services will be provided by TPDC. Whereadditional land must be acquired (e.g., where road reserves have beenencroached) landowners may need compensation. Such compensation willincrease the cost estimate accordingly, and the increased cost will be TPDC'sresponsibility.

Finally, it should also be noted that the cost estimate is based on a preliminarydesign report covering road construction and water supply, as well as factoredestimates relating to the supply of electricity. No detailed design has yet beenprepared, since as of the date of preparation of this addendum, the Songo SongoGas-to-Electricity Project has not reached Financial Closing. Consequently, thecost estimate constitutes the best appraisal of installation costs at this time, butis subject to change if more information comes to light andlor requirementschange.

9 The cost estimate assumes that new materials will be installed, though every attempt will be made toreuse existinc material, if possible, in order to reduce costs.


World Bank Document · EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project requires the...

Documents

Transcript of World Bank Document · EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Songo Songo Gas-to-Electricity Project requires the...