This environmental and social monitoring report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
Environmental and Social Monitoring Report
Project Number: 48325-001 Annual Report 2015–2016 August 2020
Philippines: 150 MW Burgos Wind Farm Project (Annex C – M, Appendix 1)
Prepared by EDC- Burgos Wind Power Corporation for the Asian Development Bank.
GRIEVANCE RECEIPT GRIEVANCE INFORMATIONREMARKS/PROPOSED
RESOLUTION UPDATES DATE OF RESOLUTION STATUSDATE OF
ENTRY NAME/ORGANIZATION ADDRESS CONTACT INFORMATION CATEGORY CLASSIFICATION DETAILS
July 28, 2016 Lydia Palencia Ablan, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
A. Land Acquisition 20. Document Handling and Processing
SPA not yet returned to the complainant
Provide a copy of the SPA as the original was never obtained by the Land Acquisition Team
Copy of the SPA already provided
July 29, 2016 Closed
Sept. 14, 2016 Corazon Ragual San Isidro, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
A. Land Acquisition 15. Payments and Compensation (Processing)
No amount received yet for the payment adjustment of tower location (Tower 104)
Request for payment submitted to Jun Anave for approval.
outsanding
Annex D - 2016 Grievance Log
ESMS Manual • Environmental Policy needs to be incorporated into the ESMS manual. It should be concise and bespoke to the
EBWPC Project.
• Organisation chart – an organization chart should be included in the manual. It is important that it includes the
roles of EBWPC staff including defining all responsibilities for the different sections of the ESMS. Additional
information about the parent company and group structure above the EBWPC Project is no necessary.
• An additional page should be included after the org chart which names the individuals responsible for the different
aspects of the ESMS. This approach will allow these names to be updated easily without impacting the entirety of
the ESMS.
• Consistency of the names used in the org chart of each position needs to be check throughout the ESMS.
• Comments made by ERM in 2015 regarding the ESMS need to be double checked against the document and should
be incorporated if they have not already.
• The ESMS manual should include a review schedule and this review should be allocated to an appropriate person to
complete and identify the person required to review it. (suggest this is done annually by EBWPC site staff
MP1
Stakeholder
Engagement
• The Stakeholder engagement schedule can be updated. Tasks from 2015 that have been completed can be
removed.
• An annual schedule plan should include frequencies of consultation, stakeholders involved and aims for the meeting
• Check if the schedule of stakeholder engagement in MP1 is consistent with what EBWPC will do on an annual basis.
• Consider to conduct a CSR report twice a year and ensure that livelihood restoration plan is in progress (should be
included in the annual schedule plan).
MP2 Shadow
Flicker
• This MP seems fit for purpose.
• EBWPC needs to check that the approach is manageable
• Need to include review schedule and responsible person.
MP3Grievance
Mechanism
• EBWPC needs to check whether grievances related to the Project Construction can be closed out.
• EBWPC should maintain a grievance form and record any complainants by the road patrol inspectors.
• EBWPC should continue monitor all the land acquisition court cases and update the information accordingly
MP4
Hazardous
Waste
Management
• Need to assess the practicality of the frequency of the reporting requirements stated in MP4. Weekly inventories
were not being submitted. The amount of waste being generated may not be significant enough to justify this
frequency and could be revised
• Non-conformance regarding waste storage seem to be repetitive and related to segregation of oil based waste
Annex E - ERM Summary of Findings
(filters and absorbents). MP4 and its annexes could be revisited and revised to include a mechanism to disseminate
the required waste management procedures with contractors as well as including measures to address non-
conformances going forward.
• MP4 should be redrafted to reflect the way in which the forms included within are stored by EBWPC.
MP5 Flora and
Fauna
• No flora/fauna and fire related incidents in 2016.
• Suggest EBWPC to show the checking explicitly in the road inspection record form.
• No IECs have been conducted since September 2015.
• Suggest EBWPC to organize one IECs at the end of 2016 and publicize updates if there are any.
MP6
Reinstatement
• Most of the planting actions have been completed. Photos have been attached for each replanting site.
• EBWPC should monitor the progress of replanting. Suggest EBWPC to conduct a quarter inspection and ensure the
replantation is in progress.
• A standard monitoring checklist should be established to give guidance to inspectors in assessing the performance
of the replantation.
MP7 Bird and
Bat Strikes
• Evidence of bird and bat strikes have been recorded in MP7F1.
• Frequency and species type are below the thresholds stated in MP7 that would trigger the need for further
investigation.
• This MP appears to be well implemented and does not require amendment.
MP8 Noise • ERM has provided an new approach to noise monitoring which should be documented in MP8
• Also the analysis of the data collected should be set out in MP8 including the use of the new template for preparing
the raw noise data for validation.
• MP8 need s to be updated accordingly
• A revision schedule for the noise monitoring MP should be included. An annual review of the techniques and
equipment would be suitable to ensure the approach remains fit for purpose.
MP9 Security • MP9 needs to be updated to reflect the current situation. Some of the target dates for the construction and
electrification of guard posts were not met. Reportedly these tasks have been modified due to changes in site
requirements and the MP needs to be revised.
• The entirety of MP9 needs to be updated to reflect the ‘on the ground’ security activities.
• Reporting frequencies could be amended if it is felt that current levels are no longer adding value – i.e. overly
frequent with limited pertinent information.
• Details of where reports relating to security can be found should be noted in the MP
MP10 Traffic • MP10 should be updated to reflect impending changes to the on-site rules regarding speed limits.
• Otherwise there is evidence of MP10 having been implemented in full with a good understanding demonstrated
by the EBWPC staff on its requirements
• Review frequency and responsibility should be included.
MP11 H&S • Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the requirements of MP11
• Records are available of all activities states in the MP
• The MP may benefit from being updated with explicit details of the day to day and month to month activities
relating to H&S issues. Having been written prior to operation it is generic in places. A rewrite stating the activities
carried out, their purpose and their frequency would demonstrate that the MP is a live document and has evolved
as the project has progressed.
MP12
Emergency
Preparedness
• Albeit emergency preparedness shows plans in place for various unforeseen events (bomb scare, fire, earthquake)
the MP may benefit from a programme of rehearsal for emergency procedures to demonstrate that the responsible
persons are well prepared in the event of an emergency.
• The rehearsal programme should be commensurate with the likelihood of the emergency event.
• Records should be maintained to demonstrate that emergency preparedness is practiced on site.
The following ESAP table includes ERM’s findings on EBWPC’s implementation of the ESAP.
No. Action Description Legislative
Requirement
/ Standard /
Best Practice
Required
Completion
Date
Documentation/
Indicator of
Completion
Responsible
Group / Person
ERM’s Implementation Monitoring – as of end 2016
EBWPC’s Progress ERM’s Assessment of ESAP Implementation and
Recommendation
1. Establishment of compliance monitoring team
1.1 EBWPC should appoint and
maintain an on-site personnel
responsible for overseeing
occupational health and safety
(OH&S) programs; personnel
will report directly to the Site
Manager
IFC PS1, DOE
requirement
For October
2014 and
ongoing
throughout
construction
and operation
Responsibilities assigned
Responsible person in place
OH&S programs being implemented
EDC Project
Management to
appoint the
Safety Officer.
Site Manager to
manage the
Safety Officer’s
activities.
A compliance monitoring team (CMT) has been arranged by EBWPC.
The Site Manager provides local management of the CMT. The
Business Unit Head oversees the team from the headquarters in
Manila. Refer to Annex B1 and B2.
On the EDC level, various departments support site-based
employees. These departments ensure that best practices are
implemented across all EDC project sites.
The following personnel and teams are responsible for OH&S and are
based at the Project site:
The Safety Officer is responsible for managing daily operational
activities, safe-work practices, safety programs, and standards.
As the substation has already been energized, the Safety Officer is
supported by two (2) full-time staff at the sub-station construction
site.
The Owner’s Engineer has safety personnel who manage audits
on the site.
The EPC contractors (Vestas for the wind farm and Alstom for the
substation), and their subcontractor (First Balfour) also have H&S
personnel. The H&S personnel are also responsible for
environmental management.
ERM met with the Owner’s Engineer and the EBWPC Safety Officer
and discussed on work schedule and activities undertaken.
Whilst PB is providing the Owner’s Engineer Services during
construction, the EDC Corporate level H&S management system is
currently being applied by EBWPC. Monthly safety reports are
produced by the Owner’s Engineer. OH&S is a topic in the weekly
meeting.
Achieved October 2014
The ESAP requirement is considered to be achieved.
A Safety Officer with a support team has been
working on the Project since construction
commenced.
ERM has recommended that a clear OH&S program
(including auditing and reporting) is implemented by
EBWPC as part of the EMS. Refer to ESAP action
13.1.
Annex F - Updated ESAP Matrix
1.2 EBWPC should appoint and
maintain an on-site personnel
responsible for overseeing
environmental and social
compliance/monitoring
programs; personnel will
report directly to the site
manager
Pollution Control officer to have
been appointed, and any
training needs to have been
identified and planned.
Pollution Control Officer to be
instated at the Project site and be
undertaken work related to the
pollution control; ensuring that
environmental measures are
considered during site clearance
and decommissioning; carrying
out environmental
monitoring/appointing
contractors to do this; preparing
a monthly environmental
report’.
IFC PS1,
DENR
requirement,
Good
Practice
31 March
2015*
Responsibilities assigned
Responsible person in place
EDC Project
Management to
appoint the
personnel’s
Site Manager to
manage the
Personnel’s
activities.
The overall management structure is as described for 1.1.
The following personnel and teams are responsible for overseeing
environmental and social compliance/monitoring program, and are
based at the Project site:
The Safety Officer also currently undertakes the Pollution
Control Officer role, and manages the monitoring of air, water,
noise, and waste.
The Forester oversees program implementation and reporting
on flora, fauna, and afforestation/ reforestation.
The Community Relations Officer liaises with the local
communities on issues related to the Project.
On the EDC level, various Manila-based departments support site- based employees. These departments ensure that best practices are
implemented across all EDC project sites:
The Manila-based Environmental Management Department
(EMD) provides guidance in the environmental monitoring.
The Watershed Management Department (WMD) provides
guidance on forestry activities.
The Corporate and Social Responsibility Department (CSRD)
and the Public Relations Department provide advice on
communicating the stakeholders, and on the communication
plan to implement the various programs, respectively.
The persons responsible for managing OH&S issues for the Owner’s
Engineer, EPC contractors and subcontractors are also responsible for
environmental monitoring/ pollution control.
During March 2015, a full-time Pollution Control Officer (PCO) was
appointed at the Project site but resigned during June 2015.
By September 2015, EWBPC had appointed a new Safety Officer
(Allan Lopez), and according to his CV, he is already a Trained PCO.
EBWPC advised that Allan will be responsible for all HSE
management.
Achieved March 2015/Re-achieved in September
2015
EBWPC has appointed a Safety Officer who is also a
Trained PCO.
2. Noise monitoring plan and mitigation program
2.1 To manage construction noise
levels and minimize disturbance
to nearby households, during
construction EBWPC should
limit the construction work
schedule from 6 AM to 7 PM for
the wind farm, and two (2) shifts
from 7 AM to 12 AM (midnight)
for the substation;
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, DENR
Standards
October 2014 Compliance of monitored noise levels with DENR and IFC standards
Minimal complaints from stakeholders
Daily construction work schedule; verification from Owner’s Engineer.
Conformance to action plan verified by project management inspection
Pollution Control
Officer, to check
construction
works are not
been undertaken,
and to liaise with
the contractors.
Construction activities undertaken from January to March 2015,
included works at the substation and reinstatement works at areas
cleared for the wind farm development.
Since the substation has already been energized, night-time
construction works are no longer undertaken; construction work is
undertaken between the agreed hours of 7 AM and 12 AM.
Operation of the wind farm is 24 hours per day and therefore the
substation controlled room is manned throughout the night.
The substation is located in the central part of the wind farm and the
nearest receptors are located approximately 750 m to the south east
and south west.
Achieved November 2014
Based on discussion with the Contractors and the OE,
ERM is satisfied that night-time construction works
are no longer undertaken.
The construction daily reports were requested from
EBWPC and during March 2015, the timesheets for
November 2014 to January 2015 were provided to
ERM. The timesheets show the working hours for
construction workers. Based on the timesheets most
construction workers finished work between 5 pm
and 7 pm.
2.2 To manage construction noise
levels and minimize disturbance
to nearby households, EBWPC
should implement a Traffic
Management Plan during
construction.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, DENR
Standards
October 2014 Traffic Management Plan, including monitoring records
Compliance of monitored noise levels with DENR and IFC standards
Site Manager, to
check traffic
management
plan has been
implemented.
Safety Manager
to implement the
traffic
management
plan.
The Traffic Management Plan is proposed in Section 15.12 and
Appendix I of the ESIA.
Appendix I of the ESIA includes First Balfour’s preliminary traffic
management plan, and updated versions were provided to ERM for
review: First Issue (2013), and Second Issue (2014). The scope of
First Balfour’s Traffic Management Plan applies to:
Access roads leading to and from all project activity areas.
Roads utilized for personnel, materials and equipment
operation and transport.
Access roads for construction.
During ERM’s site visit, it was noted that traffic is generally well
managed around the Project site, with the 20 km/hr speed limit
applied by vehicles on the access roads, however, there are no signs
to remind drivers of the speed limit.
Achieved December 2014
A Traffic Management Plan is in place and is implemented by First Balfour, and monitored by the
OE. In general any non-compliance is identified by
the Owner’s Engineer, and First Balfour is
responsible for any corrective action(s).
2.3 To manage construction noise levels and minimize disturbance to nearby households, EBWPC should conduct noise monitoring at impact areas and submit the results to the Financing Parties (Independent Monitoring Consultant to review the noise monitoring methodology and observe the monitoring).
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, DENR
Standards
October 2014 Compliance of monitored noise levels with DENR and IFC standards
Minimal complaints from stakeholders
Conformance to action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager, to
check that
monitoring has
been undertaken.
Pollution Control
Officer.
Pollution Control
Officer to
undertake the
monitoring.
Based on ERM’s limited informal interviews with the stakeholders in
the local community, since civil works in the wind farm area were
completed, construction noise is not considered to be a concern
The substation is located in the central part of the wind farm and the
nearest receptors are located approximately 750 m to the south east
and south west.
Noise monitoring is undertaken on a monthly basis by EBWPC,
however, as the wind farm is already operating, reference should be
made to 2.5 on operation noise. The ESIA identifies the construction
noise limit to be 60 dBA, but does not specify where this applies.
The IFC EHS Guidelines do not specify any construction specific
noise limits.
Achieved January 2015
EBWPC has implemented ERM’s October 2014
recommendations for the reporting (i.e. including
date/time of the monitoring, wind speed and any
observations made of noise sources).
Since the Project is already operating with minimal
construction activity at the substation site only
(which is not near any noise sensitive receptors), the
recommendations in 2.5 should apply, and ERM does
not have any specific recommendations for
construction noise monitoring.
2.4 During operation, EBWPC
should carry out stakeholder
engagement which includes
Information, Education, and
Communication (IEC) campaign
on noise to local communities
and officials in the barangays
affected by the wind farm.
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
drafted in accordance with
ESIA/IFC PS. Stakeholder
engagement commenced at
communities around the wind
farm. Thereafter, stakeholders
engaged in accordance with the
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4
30 April 2015* Stakeholder engagement records on noise.
Completion of IEC and grievance mechanism communicated.
Site Manager to
check on
progress of the
stakeholder
engagement.
Site Manager and
Community
Relations Officer
to undertake the
stakeholder
engagement.
EDC Public
Relations
Department to
provide the IEC
materials.
Based on PB’s due diligence reports and discussion with EBWPC,
stakeholder engagement was previously limited. When
commissioning and testing of the Project commenced in October
2014, no stakeholder engagement has been undertaken to
communicate the “start-up” of the WTGs.
EBWPC’s progress on stakeholder engagement is presented in ESAP
requirement 6.1. This ESAP requirement concerns IEC on
operational noise.
During December 2014, IEC materials were provided to ERM for
review, and ERM reviewed the IEC materials in terms of information,
education and disclosure of noise impacts. It is understood that
EBWPC carried out IEC with the barangay officials in December 2014,
however, ERM has requested that EBWPC revise some of the
materials for further IEC activities.
In December 2014, EBWPC advised that IEC activities and full
stakeholder engagement has been delayed because:
Achieved June 2015
EBWPC has conducted stakeholder engagement and
IEC on noise with affected persons and their
representatives.
The 2nd draft of the Stakeholder Engagement Plan
was provided to ERM in September 2015 with most
of ERM’s initial comments addressed. ERM has
provided some minor comments on the plan in
previous report, but this ESAP requirement is
considered to be achieved.
Plan. i. During November 2014, the Energy Regulatory Commission
(ERC) Certificate of Compliance (related to the commercial
operation of the project and the Feed-in-Tariff (FiT) had still not
been secured, and EDC was concerned about “the political risk of
these requirements and the competitive race for FiT;
ii. February is fiesta time for Burgos and doing the IEC during this
festive occasion will strategically reach out to a larger group of
stakeholders; and
iii. More time will be given in developing IEC materials ensuring
them to be more effective.”
EBWPC started IEC activities in February 2015, and the activities
have involved the following:
i. Manned Burgos Wind Project information tent at the Burgos
Fiesta in February 2015;
ii. Revision of project information leaflets, and making these
available at barangay halls in April-May 2015;
iii. Leaflet and IEC on noise at Project Disaster Preparedness
Orientation, which was held from 1 to 8 June in 11 barangays (4
hours in each barangay). It was attended by Barangay Officials,
Barangay Health Workers and community residents (min 25
persons/max 50 persons);
iv. During May and June 2015, a HH survey/discussion with 30
households which are closest to the wind farm (including in
Saoit). EBWPC carried out the household survey/discussion
using guide questions on shadow flicker and noise. The survey
covered 30 households in the barangays of Saoit, Poblacion and
Nagsurot.
2.5 During operation, EBWPC should monitor noise levels during operation of wind turbines and conduct mitigating measures, as necessary. The following actions are identified
i. Conduct monthly validation noise monitoring and compare the results with the applicable standards.
ii. Based on the noise monitoring results and any grievances, consider if mitigation is required (e.g. engineering controls and resettlement), and implement is accordingly.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, IFC PS5
(if necessary),
DENR
Standard
30 April 2015*
Timetable for
any mitigation
(if required),
to be
determined
later.
Noise monitoring reports.
Compliance with noise standards of DENR and IFC
Mitigating measures implemented, as applicable
Status report provided to Financing Parties.
Site Manager, to
check that
monitoring has
been undertaken.
Pollution Control
Officer to
undertake the
monitoring.
In accordance with ERM’s scope of work, the noise monitoring
methodology has been reviewed by ERM. Undertaking the noise
monitoring is not part of ERM’s scope of work.
From December 2014 to March 2015, ERM provided support to
EBWPC to develop the operational noise methodology.
EBWPC has purchased an IFC compliant sound level meter and
anemometer and on 14 and 15 April 2015, the noise equipment
supplier provided training to EBWPC site-based employees on noise
monitoring. From 27 to 30 April 2015, ERM witnessed the noise
monitoring being undertaken by EBWPC and was satisfied with the
methodology and the equipment. Recommendations were made for
alternative noise monitoring locations which are more representative
of the impacts to the noise sensitive receivers.
The noise results and discussion on the noise monitoring results are
presented in Annex B3 and discussed in Annex E). Notably, the
monitoring results for the operation stage are generally lower than
Substantially Achieved in January 2016
EBWPC has taken steps towards implementation
EBWPC has undertaken noise monitoring with IFC-
compliant equipment. The preliminary results show
that the night time noise monitoring results at N2 still
occasionally exceeded the noise limits in the IFC EHS
Guidelines for Wind Energy. However, considering
new baseline and monitoring method (to exclude
abnormal background noise from the raw data
(review of noise monitoring record sheet and noise
monitoring raw data indicate that these exceedance
were largely due to the background noise such as dog
barking, insects, waves and rapidly approaching
vehicles from the surrounding of the noise monitoring
stations. This kind of background noise can be
during construction.
Since start-up of the WTGs (in October 2014), the operation of the
WTGs has been curtailed due to NGCP’s pending completion of the
upgrade of the transmission line (this is now expected to be
completed by late 2015/early 20162015). According to EBWPC, as
the NPC has been significantly delayed which is impacting on
revenue, additional resources have been provided to NPC by EBWPC
and other wind farm operators in Ilocos Norte so that the
transmission line can be completed. EBWPC has advised that the
curtailment is impacting on noise levels and ERM has requested data
from Vestas on this.
Grievances in relation to operational noise (particularly at night-time)
were reported at receptors in Barangay Saoit in November 2014; this
is consistent with the predicted night-time exceedance in the ESIA.
No grievances or issues were identified in the household survey/IEC
discussion in May and June 2015 and there are considered to be no
on-going grievances.
extracted by screening of raw data of noise
measurement (to be strictly verified with the noise
monitoring record form during the measurement)
so as to better reflect the actual noise contribution
from the WTGs. Likewise if abnormal noise from
the WTGs are detected during the noise
measurement, it shall be noted on the noise
monitoring record form so that the noise level can
be verified after the measurement.) has been
established, it is considered to be achieved and
monthly noise monitoring in the new stations (N1-
2015 to N7-2015) shall continue.
After further observations and monitoring,
EBWPC made adjustments to the timing of the
data collection to be consistent with the wind
conditions during the baseline period (low wind
conditions), resulting to no exceedance recorded
starting 4Q 2018.
2.6 In coordination with the
stakeholders, EBPWC should
establish a grievance mechanism
(Grievance Management
Procedure) for affected
communities.
Communicate grievance
mechanism to stakeholders and
determine if any revisions are
required for the grievance
mechanism.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, IFC PS5
(if necessary),
DENR
Standard
30 April 2015* Grievance mechanism, which has been implemented.
Grievances being recorded.
Stakeholders aware of the grievance mechanism.
Grievances with regards to noise are identified and addressed.
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the grievance
mechanism.
Community
Relations Officer
to implement the
grievance
mechanism.
The grievance mechanism includes contact method for stakeholders
to comment, lodge grievances or ask questions in person, by email,
by phone or by SMS. EBWPC has communicated the grievance
mechanism – refer to 6.2.
By September 2015, EWBPC had displayed the poster describing the
grievance mechanism in the 29 barangay halls where the wind farm
and the transmission line are located.
Achieved June 2015
EBWPC has communicated the grievance mechanism
to affected persons and their representatives.
2.7 EBWPC should implement a
Traffic Management Plan (for
Project-related traffic) for during
operation of the Wind Farm.
The Traffic Management Plan
should include the public roads.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, DENR
Standards
March 2015 Traffic Management Plan, including monitoring records
Compliance of monitored noise levels with DENR and IFC standards
Site Manager, to
check traffic
management
plan has been
implemented.
Safety Manager
to implement the
traffic
management
plan.
A Traffic Management Plan has been prepared by EBWPC and
included in the draft ESMS (MP 9). The plan is considered to be
implemented on site.
Achieved June 2015
ERM considers that the plan is acceptable and is
being implemented.
ERM is satisfied that the Traffic Management Plan
has been upgraded and is being implemented.
There is one further minor recommendation that the
map should include the traffic management measures
and traffic signs. However, this is a very minor
suggestion for improvement and EBWPC's better
implementation of the plan.
3. Shadow flicker monitoring plan and mitigation program
3.1 EBWPC should conduct
stakeholder engagement
through an Information,
Education, and Communication
(IEC) campaign on shadow
flicker to local communities and
officials in the barangays
affected by the wind farm.
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
drafted in accordance with
ESIA/IFC PS. Stakeholder
engagement commenced at
communities around the wind
farm. Thereafter, stakeholders
engaged in accordance with the
Plan.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, IFC PS5
(if necessary),
Good
Practice
30 April 2015* Stakeholder engagement records on noise.
Completion of IEC and grievance mechanism communicated.
Site Manager to
check on
progress of the
stakeholder
engagement.
Site Manager and
Community
Relations Officer
to undertake the
stakeholder
engagement.
EDC Public
Relations
Department to
provide the IEC
materials.
Based on PB’s due diligence reports and discussion with EBWPC,
stakeholder engagement was previously limited. When
commissioning and testing of the Project commenced in October
2014, no stakeholder engagement has been undertaken to
communicate the “start-up” of the WTGs.
EBWPC’s progress on stakeholder engagement is presented in ESAP
requirement 6.1. This ESAP requirement concerns IEC on shadow
flicker.
During December 2014, IEC materials were provided to ERM for
review, and ERM reviewed the IEC materials in terms of information,
education and disclosure of shadow flicker impacts. It is
understood that EBWPC carried out IEC with the barangay officials
in December 2014, however, ERM has requested that EBWPC revise
some of the materials for further IEC activities.
In December 2014, EBWPC advised that IEC activities and full
stakeholder engagement has been delayed because:
i. During November 2014, the Energy Regulatory Commission
(ERC) Certificate of Compliance (related to the commercial
operation of the project and the Feed-in-Tariff (FiT) had still not
been secured, and EDC was concerned about “the political risk of
these requirements and the competitive race for FiT;
ii. February is fiesta time for Burgos and doing the IEC during this
festive occasion will strategically reach out to a larger group of
stakeholders; and
iii. More time will be given in developing IEC materials ensuring
them to be more effective.”
EBWPC started IEC activities in February 2015, and the activities
have involved the following:
i. Manned Burgos Wind Project information tent at the Burgos
Fiesta in February 2015;
ii. Revision of project information leaflets, and making these
available at barangay halls in April-May 2015;
iii. Leaflet and IEC on shadow flicker at Project Disaster
Preparedness Orientation, which was held from 1 to 8 June in 11
barangays (4 hours in each barangay). It was attended by
Barangay Officials, Barangay Health Workers and community
residents (min 25 persons/max 50 persons);
iv. During May and June 2015, a HH survey/discussion with 30
households which are closest to the wind farm (including in
Saoit). EBWPC carried out the household survey/discussion
using guide questions on shadow flicker and noise. The
survey covered 30 households in the barangays of Saoit,
Poblacion and Nagsurot.
Achieved in October 2015
EBWPC has conducted stakeholder engagement and
IEC on shadow flicker with affected persons and their
representatives.
3.2 EBWPC should consider the
effects of shadow flicker on
nearby properties. The
following actions are identified:
i. Carry out adequate stakeholder engagement should be undertaken to communicate what shadow flicker is, and to collect data on which properties are affected, and any health concerns (e.g. epilepsy, headaches etc.). Ensure the 19 households are included in the stakeholder engagement (women should also be included as they spend more time at home).
ii. Establish if there are any grievances related to shadow flicker.
iii. If necessary, implement mitigation, and conduct validation monitoring based on the results of the shadow- flicker modelling; and
iv. If necessary, undertake impact assessment and prepare a resettlement plan and implement mitigation through engineering controls and resettlement.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, IFC PS5
(if necessary),
Good
Practice
May 2015#
Timetable for
any mitigation
(if required),
to be
determined
later.
Compliance with IFC
standards Completion of
IEC and establishment
of grievance mechanism
Mitigating measures
implemented, as applicable
Status report provided to
Financing Parties
Site Manager, to
check on
implementation
of the action.
Pollution Control
Officer and
Community
Relations Officer
EBWPC has not carried out a reassessment of the shadow flicker
impact which was carried out as part of the ESIA.
EBWPC has advised that in the event of any grievances, as a first
step, it is intended to provide curtains through the stakeholder
engagement for people who may be affected by shadow flicker.
Based on ERM’s limited interviews, shadow flicker does affect certain
properties and sunrise, but unlike the noise, the Affected Persons
were not particularly concerned with the impact.
Summary of EBWPC’s progress:
i. With reference to ESAP requirement 3.1, IEC commenced during
Dec 2014, and involved barangay captains. EBWPC advised that
this will be completed by carrying out an IEC and a survey at the
19 households which were previously determined to be possibly
affected by shadow flicker. The household survey was
rescheduled for April 2015 and was undertaken in May and June
2015.
ii. EBWPC advised that based on the household survey results and
discussion with local communities, there are no current grievances
related to shadow flicker. It was found that in the summer time, 7
out of the 30 households surveyed are impacted by shadow flicker
for a maximum of 1 hour per day (i.e. at sunrise), however, it is not
considered to be a nuisance. IEC materials on shadow flicker and
details of the grievance mechanism are available are available in
the barangay offices.
iii. No current requirement for mitigation has been established.
A procedure for monitoring shadow flicker has been included in the
Draft ESMS (MP 2). The procedure outlines what to do in the event
that a grievance on shadow flicker is received and possible mitigation
options. The plan has taken in to account ERM’s previous
recommendations on what to do if a grievance is received.
EBWPC advised that they will revisit the community in the next dry
(summer) season to determine if shadow flicker is an issue and if
mitigation is required.
Achieved June 2015
Since the Project is already operating, the
reassessment (i.e. modelling) of the potential impact
of shadow flicker is considered to less beneficial, and
that EBWPC should focus efforts on IEC and
determining if there are any grievances .
i and ii – The survey determined that there are no
current grievances related to shadow flicker.
iii and iv. No assessment currently required.
It is suggested that the Community Relations Officer
form a close rapport with the community in Saoit
which are closest to the WTG, so that any questions
on shadow flicker can be answered, without a
grievance being triggered. Records of stakeholder
engagement should be maintained.
3.3 In coordination with the
stakeholders, EBPWC should
establish a grievance mechanism
(Grievance Management
Procedure) for affected
communities.
Communicate grievance
mechanism to stakeholders and
determine if any revisions are
required for the grievance
mechanism.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, IFC PS5
(if necessary),
Good
Practice
30 April 2015* Grievance mechanism, which has been implemented.
Grievances being recorded.
Stakeholders aware of the grievance mechanism.
Grievances on shadow flicker are identified and addressed.
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the grievance
mechanism.
Community Relations Officer to implement the grievance mechanism
The grievance mechanism includes contact method for stakeholders
to comment, lodge grievances or ask questions in person, by email,
by phone or by SMS. EBWPC has communicated the grievance
mechanism – refer to 6.2.
By September 2015, EWBPC had displayed the poster describing the grievance mechanism in the 29 barangay halls where the wind farm and the transmission line are located.
Achieved June 2015
EBWPC has communicated the grievance mechanism
to affected persons and their representatives.
4. Flora, fauna and biodiversity
4.1 During the construction phase,
EBWPC should ensure minimal
removal of vegetation for wind
farm and transmission towers
areas, and minimize loss of
species, habitat, and habitat
fragmentation by conducting the
following:
i. Limit clearing activities
and cutting of trees at
designated construction
areas only.
ii. If further tree cutting is
required, secure tree
cutting permits prior to
cutting of trees;
iii. Implement alternatives to
tree cutting, if possible,
such as tree pruning or
removal branches;
iv. Avoid cutting of critical
species such as the Bantigue
trees along the coast of the
project. If cannot be
avoided, such trees will be
earth-balled. If cutting, the
same species will be planted
as replacement following
the 1:100 ratio of DENR;
v. Maintain safe zones by
avoiding critical habitats
such as the Kapurpurawan
coastal area;
vi. Protect ecosystems/
habitats which are not
affected by site clearing by
maintaining the natural
vegetation;
vii. Prepare terminal report for
submission to DENR on
project compliance with
tree cutting permit (TCP)
conditions and
implementation of
reforestation program.
viii. Report to be accepted by
DENR.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS6, DENR
requirements,
Good practice
i. to vi - to be
completed by
October 2014
vii - to be
completed by
November
2014
viii - to be
completed by
January 2015
Compliance with conditions stipulated in the FLAg permits
DENR approved terminal report.
Conformance with action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the action.
Forester to liaise
with the
contractors and
implement the
action, including
preparation of
the terminal
report.
Since tree cutting activities are not being undertaken and are already
complete, this action is generally not relevant to current site activities.
i. Clearing and cutting of trees appears to have only being
undertaken in the location of the WTGs, laydown areas and
access roads.
ii. EBWPC advised that further tree cutting for the Burgos Wind
Project is not required.
iii. EBWPC advised that no tree cutting was undertaken from
October 2014 to March 2015; no tree cutting was being
undertaken during ERM’s site visit.
iv. The Bantigue trees remain along the jetty area, and trees outside
of this area have not been disturbed. Based on ERM’s
discussion with EBWPC and the contractors, no Bantigue trees
were cut during October 2014 to March 2015.
v. Natural vegetation is not disturbed in the Kapurpurawan
coastal area;
vi. Vegetation has only been disturbed in existing cleared areas.
vii. The EBWPC Forester submitted the Terminal Report to the
DENR in December 2014, and this was provided to ERM in
March 2015.
iii. A meeting with CENRO-Bangui to discuss the draft terminal
reports for Flag areas was held on 28th April. No document
approving the terminal reports was issued by DENR.
Achieved June 2015
EBWPC should ensure on-going compliance with the
following: Protect ecosystems/ habitats which are not
affected by site clearing by maintaining the natural
vegetation. There is a potential for non-compliance
should previously undisturbed areas of land in the
wind farm development area be cleared for the solar
project. EBWPC has advised that no new areas land
will be disturbed and solar panels will only be
installed on previously cleared land.
i to vii are considered to be complete.
iv. On 8 July 2015, ERM visited the CENRO officer in
Bangui and discussed the reinstatement of the Project
site with CENRO Officer Mr. Victor Dabalos. Mr.
Dabalos advised that the reinstatement works had
been accepted by the composite team and that the
Terminal Report was a high quality report that
should be replicated by other wind farm operators in
the area. The only recommendation for further
reinstatement works was that focus should be on
planting flora species which are indigenous to the
area so that they are more likely to withstand the
harsh conditions (i.e. little or no topsoil; rocky
subsurface material; presence of grazing animals;
limited water; and hot dry windy season; wet rainy
season).
4.2 During the operation phase,
EBWPC should ensure minimal
removal of vegetation in the
wind farm and transmission
towers by:
i. Implementing forest
protection activities, by
monitoring illegal logging
and poaching activities.
ii. Include for management of
any further tree cutting
activities in the EMMP/
EMS (refer to the measures
in 4.1).
IFC PS3, IFC
PS6, DENR
requirements,
Good practice
i. January
2015 – plan
to be in
place
February
2015 –
training to
be
conducted
ii.January
2015 – EMP
to be in
place.
October
2015 – EMS
to be in
place.
Compliance with conditions stipulated in the FLAg permits
Conformance with action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager
check on
implementation
of the action.
Forester to draft
and implement
the illegal
logging
monitoring plan.
Security Team to
undertake
monitoring.
The draft ESMS has been provided to ERM and this includes a
procedure for protection of flora and fauna and implementation of
conservation measures (MP 5).
The procedure includes a methodology for monitoring and reporting
illegal logging and poaching activities (section 3.1).
EBWPC has advised that no further tree cutting will be carried out.
First Balfour has a procedure for tree pruning/trimming. The
procedure involves getting permission of the land owner to prune the
tree. No reference is made to pruning of trees in the forest land.
Achieved June 2015
The draft ESMS incorporates a procedure which
includes a methodology for monitoring and reporting
illegal logging and poaching activities
4.3 EBPWC should ensure
implementation of a properly
managed reinstatement program
which mitigates impacts related
to landscape change/ loss of
species and habitat/habitat
fragmentation, carry out the
following:
i. In coordination with the
responsible contractors,
produce and implement a
Reinstatement Plan which
includes landscaping and
tree planting at disturbed
areas
ii. Use native species in re-
vegetation activities and
avoid introduction of
invasive alien species;
IFC PS3, IFC
PS6, DENR
requirements,
Good practice
November
2014 -
Reinstatement
Plan to be
finalized.
Ongoing re-
instatement
until early
2015.
(Maintenance
will be
continuous all
throughout
project life)
Reinstatement Plan.
Compliance with conditions stipulated in the FLAg and ECC.
Conformance with action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the action and
coordinate with
the contractors.
Forester and
Pollution Control
Officer to carry
out monitoring of
the
implementation/
contractor
progress.
The following summarizes the progress:
- October 2014: Reinstatement activities for the wind farm area has
been undertaken by First Balfour, and monitored by the Owner’s
Engineer. EBWPC advised that a Reinstatement Plan had been
drafted by First Balfour, but was pending approval by the Owner’s
Engineer and EBWPC. Teams of local people from the local
communities had been hired to carry out the reinstatement (e.g.
preparing the ground, planting seeds and watering the ground).
Coconut matting is being used for stabilization of the earth. The
former construction areas include bare earth, disturbed natural
drainage, exposed slopes, steep slopes, scars in the rock face, and
loose spoil material.
- November 2014: EBPWC has advised that an overall Project
reinstatement plan will not be prepared as the approval process
will take too long for the works to commence. Instead EBWPC’s Owner’s Engineer will provide punchlists of works to be
completed for each WTG area. The preparation of the
punchlists commenced in late November.
Achieved December 2016.
EBWPC has taken steps towards
implementation
A total of 145 slopes or sites in five (5) sections are
identified as reinstatement and revegetation area on
the Plan. As of December 2015, 88 of these locations
(60.7%) were inspected with completion. EBWPC
is recommended to continue the reinstatement and
revegetation programme and update the
Reinstatement/Revegetation Plan on quarterly
basis until end of 2016.
Reinstatement and revegetation programme
continued until end 2016, satisfying the
requirements above.
ii. Protect ecosystems/habitats which are not affected by site clearing by maintaining the natural vegetation;
iii. Maintain safe zones by avoiding critical habitats such as the Kapurpurawan coastal area;
iv. Protect ecosystems/habitats which are not affected by site clearing by maintaining the natural vegetation.
Contractors to
implement the
reinstatement
plan.
- December 2014: EBWPC has provided the punchlists of the areas
which are targeted for rehabilitation to ERM for 1-31 December
2014 for review. The Owner’s Engineer is preparing the
monitoring the implementation of the punchlists to ensure that the
items are closed out.
- March 2015: The Owner’s Engineer confirmed that the final
outstanding punch list items have now been handed over to
EBWPC. The Construction Manager (Edwin Dela Fuente) is
assigned to monitor the reinstatement works. DENR Composite
Team (including CENRO, PENRO, Region 1 and LGUs) is doing
periodic inspection to monitor the rehabilitation works and, if
necessary, provide recommendations for improvement. EBWPC
advised that the DENR team inspected the reinstatement works on
3-4 March 2015. At the time of writing this report, the comments
from the DENR on the reinstatement works were not available.
- April 2015 onwards: The terminal report was accepted by DENR.
EBWPC will assess if any further requirements for revegetation are
required after the rainy season. It is expected that the rains will
have a positive impact on the vegetation at the site.
- September 2015: It is clear that EBWPC has been undertaken
reinstatement works, and has prepared the plans to meet DENR
requirements. However, ERM considers that a detailed
Reinstatement/Re-vegetation Plan should be prepared to clearly
indicate what will be undertaken on site and to meet IFC
requirements.
- EBWPC has checklists which indicate outstanding works
identified by the Owner’s Engineer. The Rehabilitation and Re-
greening Plan provides a high-level program of activities and no
drawings/maps are included.
- EBWPC should provide a proper Re-vegetation Plan for works going forward. The reinstatement/revegetation works should be related to the approximate 75 hectares of land which was cleared
for the project as shown in Figure 1 Land Cover Map in the 2014
Flora and Fauna Monitoring Report (Pastor L. Malabrigo and Rolly C. Urriza) and also the off-site compensatory planting. It is
important to have an understanding of how EBWPC is intending
for the cleared areas to look after the reinstatement/revegetation
compared to the current appearance. ERM is not expecting the
cleared areas to be fully vegetated, but rather, the procedures in
place for the initial vegetation and then monitoring by EBWPC of
the natural vegetation succession. The revegetation should be
sufficient to prevent erosion and should use suitable plant species.
In September 2015, ERM notes that the reinstatement/revegetation
procedures and documentation requirements have been improved,
however, we have some further recommendations. The
recommendations were implemented in January 2016.
4.4 EBWPC should minimize loss of
species, habitat, and habitat
fragmentation by conducting the
following:
i. Implement biodiversity
offsets as part of the
reforestation program;
ii. Draft a Reforestation Plan;
iii. DENR-Region 1 provide
confirmation that the
Reforestation Plan is
acceptable;
iv. Implement the Reforestation
Plan.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS6, DENR
requirements,
Good practice
December
2014 –
Reforestation
Plan to be
available
Compliance with conditions stipulated in the forestry permits (FLAg, tree cutting permits)
Conformance with action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the action.
Forester to carry
out monitoring of
the
implementation/
contractor
progress.
Contractors to
implement the
reforestation plan
During December 2014, the Rehabilitation and Re-greening Plan was
provided to ERM for review. In summary:
i. Biodiversity off-sets in the plan include areas of public land that
will be identified for planting with indigenous tree species
(locally indigenous species targeted). EBWPC’s commitment is
100 trees to be planted for every tree that was cut/removed, for
the Project. This equates to a maximum of 1,121,300 trees (based
on the permits), with an 80% survival rate after 3 years of
maintenance. In addition, as part of EBWPC’s Tree for the
Future program, threatened/endangered species will be planted.
Terminal reports for three (3) TCPs for private lands were
approved and endorsed by CENRO-Bangui to DENR Region 1.
Meeting with CENRO-Bangui to discuss the draft terminal
reports for Flag areas are set on 28 April.
ii. The Reforestation/Rehabilitation and Re-greening Plan has been
prepared by EBWPC’s Forester.
iii. The plan has been approved by DENR as confirmed by ERM’s
discussion with the Bangui CENRO Officer in July 2015.
iv. In general, EBWPC has started to implement the plan.
Achieved June 2015
Monitoring of the reforestation efforts/
compensatory planting should be undertaken by
EBWPC. It is recommended that this is included
in the Re-vegetation Plan.
4.5 EBWPC should minimize loss of
species, and implement
measures for threatened species,
by carrying out the following::
i. Develop and implement mitigating measures for each identified threatened species (in the ESIA: 18 flora and 7 fauna)
ii. Conduct an IEC Campaign to raise general awareness about threatened species of flora and fauna among members of the community.
iii. Conduct environmental awareness training on the threatened species of flora and fauna among the contractors and the security staff
IFC PS3, IFC
PS6, DENR
requirements,
Good practice
May 2015# Mitigating measures available.
Mitigation measures implemented.
IEC records. Training
materials and attendance.
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the action.
Forester to carry
out training and
implement the
action.
Community
Relations Officer
to undertake the
IEC with
assistance from
the Forester.
EBWPC advised that for the threatened flora species, a survey of the
boundary for the vegetated areas not affected during construction
was conducted. This is so an updated baseline map that will be
used in planning and setting control measures can be developed.
The 2014 Flora and Fauna Monitoring Report (Pastor L. Malabrigo
and Rolly C. Urriza) was provided to ERM.
Summary of progress:
i. EBWPC’s proposed mitigation for the threatened species is in line
with RA 9147: Wildlife Resources Conservation and Protection Act
and is presented in the IEC materials (Protected Species at the Burgos
Wind Farm and Transmission Lines).
i. Can be considered as complete: Awareness of threatened species of
trees is raised through the planting of trees at schools (as referred to
in the Terminal Reports).
ii. Environmental awareness training is proposed as part of the
induction. The materials were provided to ERM for review and
ERM found the information to be very well presented and detailed.
Achieved June 2015
IEC materials on protected species are referenced in
the Draft ESMS in Procedure MP 5 Section 3.4).
ERM has made specific comments on the ESMS in
Annex C. Considering that snakes have been
unnecessarily killed by workers, snakes should be
specifically referred to in the IEC.
ERM considers that there are opportunities for IEC in
the communities/schools for raising environmental
awareness of threatened species of fauna (e.g.
through a project tourist office or through school
visits), however, these can be developed later in the
life cycle of the project (i.e. 2015-2016).
4.6 During operation, EBWPC
should monitor bird/bat strikes
by carrying out the following:
i. Put a procedure in place and conduct regular monitoring for evidence of bird and bat strikes and retrieve for identification.
ii. Include in the procedure for increased frequency of monitoring during the migratory season; and
ii. Include in the monitoring procedure for review of records, and in the event of high frequency of bird/bat strikes, conduct a fauna study.
IFC PS6,
Good
practice
i. February
2015
ii. February
2015
iii. February
2015
Bird Monitoring Procedure;
Training records;
Monitoring records
Conformance with action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the action.
Forester to carry
out training and
implement the
action. Security
Team (foot
patrols and
security guard) to
undertake the
monitoring.
Forester to
review the
results.
i. In February 2015, EBWPC started monitoring and maintaining
records of bird and bat strikes, and EBWPC commented that this
is undertaken daily with the aid of security personnel. Records
of incidents of bird/bat strikes incident are available.
Identification is being done by the National Museum together
with its ID certification. The procedure and protocol will be
formally approved following the document control system that
will be developed through the ESMS.
ii. The Draft ESMS includes a procedure for bird and bat-kill
monitoring (MP 7 Bird and Bat and Other Monitoring Procedure).
The procedure includes for daily monitoring but a schedule of
which WTGs will be visited is not provided.
iii. Section 7of the procedure included for review of the records and
sets a strike frequency level for action to be taken.
Achieved September 2015
ERM comments that the procedure is adequate and
that the monitoring records are good.
5. Climate Change Adaptation
5.1 For the operation phase, EBWPC
should develop a procedure and
schedule (which takes in to
account contractor
responsibilities) to ensure that
an annual assessment of the
structural integrity of wind
turbines, transmission towers,
substation, and other support
facilities is undertaken.
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, Good
practice
Overall
procedure and
Schedule to be
advised by
March 2015
Structural assessment schedule
Structural assessment records
Site Manager to
liaise with O&M
contractors to
ensure that an
adequate
assessment
procedure is in
place and that
this is
undertaken.
Vestas advised that an annual structural integrity assessment has
been scheduled for the WTGs. ERM reviewed the schedule for 2015
and found that all WTGs are to be inspected by December 2015.
A maintenance schedule for provided for inspection and
maintenance of the substation equipment.
First Balfour will be responsible for the O&M of the transmission line
and advised that an annual assessment will be undertaken. An
organization chart and detailed maintenance manual was provided
but the schedule was not provided to ERM for review.
A procedure and checklist for undertaking structural assessment
inspections has been incorporated in to the ESMS (MP 6
Reinstatement and Maintenance). EBWPC is responsible for
identifying required works. As of September 2015, EBWPC
advised that the contract for maintenance of the balance of plant is
pending (i.e. roads, jetty and drains).
Achieved September 2015
The Civil Works Maintenance Contract, of which the
scope of maintenance work included the structural
assessment) was signed in 29 January 2016 between
EBWPC and IPM Construction & Development
Corporation (IPM).
It is recommended that the schedule for the annual
assessment is undertaken by December each year
(the first assessment should be completed by
December 2016).
5.2 Put measures in place so that
during the operation phase,
upgrade work/reinforcements,
repairs, or other mitigating
measures are undertaken as
necessary to ensure the
adaptability of the facilities to
extreme weather events
IFC PS3, IFC
PS4, Good
practice
January 2015 Completed upgrading of installations (if necessary)
Site Manager to
liaise with O&M
contractors to
ensure that an
adequate
assessment
procedure is in
place and that
this is
undertaken.
The design of the WTGs, substation and transmission line considered
extreme weather events.
Vestas has a response plan in place to carry out visual checks of the
WTGs following typhoons and other extreme weather events. The
WTGs are fitted with alarms in the event that any faults are recorded
and this can be monitored remotely.
The Maintenance Manual for the Transmission Line identified that
extreme weather can affect the transmission line, but does not
described checking/maintenance measures to be undertaken to
prevent these.
A procedure and checklist for undertaking structural assessment
inspections has been incorporated in to the ESMS (MP 6 Reinstatement
and Maintenance). EBWPC is responsible for identifying required
works. As of September 2015, EBWPC advised that the contract for
maintenance of the balance of plant is pending (i.e. roads, jetty and
drains).
Achieved September 2015
ERM has checked the implementation of the
ESMS Procedure MP6 in December 2015.
6. Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Grievance Mechanism
6.1 EBWPC should develop and
implement a continuing
Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
EBWPC should engage with the
community through a formal
engagement process and set out
in the Stakeholder Engagement
Plan.
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
drafted in accordance with
ESIA/IFC PS. Stakeholder
engagement commenced at
communities around the wind
farm. Thereafter, stakeholders
engaged in accordance with the
Plan.
IFC PS1 30 April 2015* Stakeholder Engagement Plan available
Records to show that Stakeholder Engagement Plan has been communicated to all Stakeholders
Records of Stakeholder Engagement Plan measures that are implemented
Enhanced social acceptability (e.g. lesser number of valid grievances over time)
Greater awareness of the Project by stakeholders.
Site Manager to
check on
progress of the
stakeholder
engagement.
Site Manager and
Community
Relations Officer
to undertake the
stakeholder
engagement.
EDC Public
Relations
Department to
provide the IEC
materials.
Prior to construction, EBWPC carried out IEC activities in the
communities around the wind farm. However, the IEC was not been
formalized as a plan and all stakeholder engagement was not
recorded.
In June 2015, the draft ESMS was provided which includes the
Stakeholder Engagement Plan as procedure MP 1.
The draft procedure includes the following:-
Introduction (still to be completed)
Identification of specific requirements from legislation, ESIA
etc (still to be completed)
Methodology (i.e. steps for implementing the plan), includes:
identifying stakeholders and preparing a database and
grievance mechanism.
Records (i.e. stakeholder log).
ERM provided some recommendations on the Stakeholder
Engagement Plan and these were subsequently addressed by
EBWPC.
Achieved September 2014
The requirements related to the Stakeholder
Engagement Plan are considered to be achieved. ERM
will make some minor comments on the content
of the Stakeholder Engagement Plan, for example, in
relation to vulnerable groups.
EBWPC should continue to implement the
Stakeholder Engagement Plan throughout operation.
6.2 In coordination with the
stakeholders, EBWPC should
establish a grievance mechanism
(Grievance Management
Procedure) for affected
communities and workers
IFC PS1,
Good
practice
September 2014
– Grievance
Mechanism to
be drafted.
November 2014
– All EBWPC
staff to receive
training is how
to record any
grievances
received.
November and
December 2014
– Grievance
mechanism to
be
communicated
to stakeholders
(it should be
communicated
to the
communities
nearest the
wind farm
first).
December 2014
– Contractors
and
subcontractors
also to have a
grievance
mechanism in
place (for
affected
communities)
Grievance Mechanism available
Communicatio n records available
Grievance Procedure implemented
Hit rate on the number of complaints that were addressed
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the grievance
mechanism.
Community
Relations Officer
to implement the
grievance
mechanism.
October 2014: EBWPC provided the grievance mechanism to ERM for
review. EBWPC had displayed posters at the municipal halls in the
municipalities where the Project is located (e.g. Burgos and the
municipalities affected by the transmission line), see Annex B4. Since
stakeholder engagement had not been undertaken recently with all
stakeholders, the grievance mechanism had not been communicated
to all of the stakeholders (including the Affected Persons). The
stakeholders were not involved in the design of the grievance
mechanism. EBWPC advised that staff (including security
personnel) received informal training on how to record grievances in
September 2014.
November 2014: The grievance mechanism was communicated to
Barangay Captains and Municipal Officials at the training seminar.
The Barangay Captains are the first point of contact for the Affected
Persons.
EDC has a policy and mechanism for worker grievances which is
applicable to all subsidiary companies including EBWPC. The draft
ESMS includes a procedure for worker grievances (MP 3).
The community grievance mechanism is combined with the shadow
flicker management plan in MP 2. Further information on
grievances is provided in 13.3. In general, ERM considers that
EBWPC has a good relationship with local stakeholders, and the
Community Relations Officer follows up on grievances that are
received.
Achieved June 2015
The draft ESMS includes the relevant procedures.
ERM is satisfied that the community grievance
mechanism is being implemented.
7. Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for the Transmission Line and Jetty
7.1 EBWPC should prepare a
focused Environmental and
Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
or similar studies for the
transmission line route and the
jetty used in delivering wind
turbine parts
IFC PS1,
Good
practice
May 2015# Completed ESIA which determines the likely impacts which occurred during construction of these facilities; and identifies the potential impacts which will occur during operation.
Relevant Applicable Standards identified in the ESIA.
EMMP prepared on the basis of the findings of the ESIA.
EDC EMD to
liaise with
environmental
consultants for
undertaking the
ESIA.
GHD was appointed to carry out the ESIA. It is understood that
GHD will be on site during November to carry out the related
studies.
EBWPC provided the scope of works for the ESIA and ERM notes
that:
“Both the TL and the Jetty Burgos Wind Project components will be covered
in this ESIA study. The ESIA aims to determine impacts resulting from the
implementation of construction activities for the TL Project and the Jetty,
and discuss potential impacts and management programs during operation
and decommissioning, as may be applicable, of both components.
Considering that any preconstruction environmental information is absent,
the determination of impacts resulting from the construction activities
would be based on secondary data from verified anecdotal accounts if
possible, and a comparison of existing and pre-construction conditions that
could be reasonably ascertained.”
During March 2015, EBWPC advised ERM that the draft ESIA has
been provided by GHD and is being reviewed by EBWPC, following
the review by EBWPC, it will be finalized.
The Draft ESIA was provided to ERM in June 2015.
As of September 2015, the outstanding works are considered to be:
- As per issue #12, to mitigate the impact of loss of more than 10% of their land, a Livelihood Restoration Plan (LRP) for the 49 landowners will be prepared by EBWPC. ERM has not yet seen the LRP.
- As per issue #13, the Stakeholder Engagement Plant should be updated to reflect the stakeholder engagement at the occupants of the structures within 30 m of the transmission line.
- As per issue #17, the determination of “if necessary” should be clarified (i.e. what is the trigger for mitigation implementation?).
Section 16 of the ESIA should be revised so that it is consistent with the other sections of the ESIA.
ERM has provided specific comments on the draft ESIA, and EBWPC’s environmental consultant (GHD) has responded to the comments. The action is considered as achieved in June 2015.
Achieved June 2015
7.2 EBWPC should execute an
environmental monitoring and
mitigation plan (EMMP), as
necessary, for the transmission
line and jetty
IFC PS1,
Good
practice
May 2015# Compliance with applicable DENR and IFC standards
Site Manager to
ensure the plan is
prepared and
implemented.
Forester,
Pollution Control
Officer,
Community
Relations Officer
and Security
Officer to
implement the
plan, as
appropriate.
The Draft ESIA was provided to ERM in June 2015. The ESMP from
the ESIA has been integrated in to the ESMS as MP13.
Achieved September 2015
8. Hazardous Waste Management
8.1 During construction, EBWPC
should ensure that
contractors/subcontractors are
properly handling, storing, and
disposing hazardous wastes
such as used oil, used batteries,
and other Petroleum Fuel, Oil,
and Lubricants (POL) by:
i. Conducting weekly inspection of the on-site storage facilities, to check compliance of the facility with regulatory requirements including secondary containment and safety equipment (i.e. spill kits, fire extinguishers, eye wash);
ii. Conduct weekly water quality monitoring at 4 downstream locations for oil and grease to ensure that no wastes are spilled into nearby waters/drains, and transported downstream; and
iii. Verify that contractors/sub- contractors are disposing hazardous wastes through an accredited transporter and disposal facility by end of the construction period or when on-site storage facilities fill up, whichever is sooner.
iv. To ensure that contaminated soils and concrete are removed from the Delta area and treated/disposed as hazardous waste.
IFC PS3,
DENR
requirements,
Good practice
i. October to
December
2014.
ii. October to
December
2014.
iii. November
2014
iv. November
2014
Compliance with applicable DENR and IFC standards
Weekly water quality monitoring results
Waste transfer/dispos al invoice and documentation.
Photographs of decommissioni ng of Delta area.
Waste invoice documentation for contaminated material from Delta area.
Site Manager to
check on
implementation
of the action and
coordinate with
the contractors.
Pollution Control
Officer to
undertake water
quality
monitoring and
review results.
Pollution Control
Officer to carry
out weekly
inspection for
monitoring of the
implementation/
contractor
progress
i. During construction, the monitoring of waste disposal is
undertaken as part of the weekly EHS site walkover by the
Owner’s Engineer. First Balfour maintains a weekly inventory
of the hazardous waste stored on the construction site. Weekly
monitoring is proposed to be undertaken in the ESMS MP 4
Section 5.3.7, however, the ESMS is not currently in only in draft
version and not implemented. ERM previously found that
hazardous wastes were not stored correctly by the contractors;
however, the situation was subsequently rectified. Refer to
Annex B5.
During December 2014, EBWPC provided a photographic EHS
site walkover reports, however weekly walkover reports for the
hazardous waste areas was not provided – the latest report was
dated 24 Nov 2014. No updated information was provided in
March 2015, however, EBWPC recommended that this will be
undertaken by the newly appointed PCO.
ii. EBWPC advised the water monitoring for 4 downstream
locations, however, parameters tested did not include oil and
grease (refer to Annex B6). The water samples are taken by
the Safety Officer (who is currently undertaking the Pollution
Control Officer’s duties) and transferred by overnight courier to
EDC’s EMD Analytical Laboratory Department for testing for
total suspended sediments (TSS) and total dissolved solids
(TDS).
iii. EBWPC provided First Balfour’s Hazardous Waste Registration
for review. First Balfour’s Hazardous Waste Management Plan
indicates that licensed hazardous waste transporters will be
used. In March 2015, EBWPC provided Waste Treatment
Certificates from a large waste consignment of oil drums to
ERM for review.
iv. ERM previously identified that the concrete in the secondary
containment for the above ground diesel-oil tank and in the
used oil store in the Delta area was contaminated with diesel-
oil. Refer to Annex B5. Decommissioning of the tank was
undertaken in January 2015. Following decommissioning and
removal of the oil tank, EBWPC forwarded photos showing the
exposed soil under the tank. EBWPC advised that there were
no signs of oil contamination.
Achieved in October 2015 (please refer to 8.2
below)
Progress made during construction, procedures
developed as part of ESMS by September 2015
i. EBWPC has developed a procedure as part of
the ESMS for weekly inspection of the waste
storage areas by EBWPC’s PCO and for records
to be maintained.
ii. ERM is satisfied that the water quality
monitoring is undertaken.
iii. EBWPC has developed a procedure as part of
the ESMS for weekly inspection of the waste
storage areas by EBWPC’s PCO and for
records to be maintained.
iv. Records of the contractor’s hazardous waste
management (i.e. licences of transporters,
transfer documents and disposal permits) are
retained by EBWPC.
v. No oil staining was visible on the photographs
emailed to ERM, however, ERM advised that
this is not the most appropriate method to
verify that there is not any oil contamination.
Following removal of an oil tank, it is
recommended for soil samples to be taken and
tested in a laboratory.
Comments on EBWPC’s draft ESMS Hazardous
Waste Management Procedure (MP 4) are made in
previous report.
8.2 EBWPC should develop and
implement a Hazardous Waste
Management Plan for the
operation phase which includes
IFC PS3,
DENR
requirements,
Good
31 March
2015*
Hazardous Waste Management Plan available
Site Manager to
ensure that the
plan is prepared
and
Hazardous waste procedure (MP 4) has been drafted as part of the
ESMS. MP 4 references the relevant legislation in the Philippines
and the IFC EHS Guidelines.
Achieved in October 2015.
ERM is satisfied that there is now a good procedure
in place.
the following:
i. Identification of an on-site hazardous waste storage facility;
ii. Construction of an on-site hazardous waste storage facility based on regulatory and safety requirements; and
iii. Identification of accredited transporters and disposal facility
practice and communicated / cascaded
Compliance with applicable DENR and IFC standards
implemented,
and liaise with
contractors.
Pollution Control
Officer to prepare
and implement
the plan.
Pollution Control
Officer to
monitor
EBWPC’s and the
contractors’ compliance with
the plan.
i and ii. The onsite hazardous waste management storage is located at
the substation. The facility was inspected by ERM in September 2015
and is considered acceptable to meet regulatory and safety
requirements. Secondary containment is provided.
iii. The procedure includes a checklist for identifying accredited
transporters and disposal facility.
8.3 EBWPC should organize removal of the above ground storage tank (AST) diesel oil that is no longer in use and is located at the EBWPC tempacil (office compound) at Saoit.
IFC PS3,
DENR
requirements,
Good practice
June 2015# Removal of AST.
Photos of decommissioni ng and AST removed.
Documentation from Petron.
Site Manager to
ensure that the
plan is prepared
and
implemented.
Pollution Control
Officer to
coordinate with
Petron and
organize removal
of the AST.
ERM identified that a redundant AST is located at the EBWPC
tempacil (office compound) at Saoit. The tank is a single skinned
tank, the volume of any remaining diesel oil cannot be established,
and the AST does not have any secondary containment.
It is understood that the tank has not been used for some time and
decommissioning and removal needs to be coordinated with Petron.
The tank should be properly decommissioned and removed to avoid
pollution of surrounding soil and groundwater due to tank failure
and/or vandalism. Tanks which are not in use have the tendency to
rust, which can lead to tank failure.
During March 2015, EBWPC forwarded ERM correspondence
indicating attempts to contact Petron for removal of the AST.
Attempts to contact the correct person at Petron had failed.
During ERM’s visit in July 2015, it was found that the AST had been
removed. Refer to Annex B5.
Achieved June 2015
The AST has been removed. EBWPC advised that
Petron had removed the AST.
9. Environmental Management Plan for the Decommissioning Plan of the Batching Plant
9.1 EBPWC should minimize
environmental impact during
decommissioning of the
batching plant by:
i. Check the site for loose materials, raw materials and litter. These should be disposed or secured.
ii. Prepare a decommissioning plan for this facility.
iii. Removing all remaining materials prior to
IFC PS3,
DENR
requiremen
ts, Good
practice
i. November
2014.
ii. January 2015
iii. March 2015
iv. March 2015
v. March 2015
vi. March 2015
to June 2015
Compliance with applicable DENR and IFC standards
Site Manager to
ensure the plan is
prepared and
implemented.
Community
Relations Officer
to communicate
to nearby
households on
the
decommissioning
works.
i. No loose materials or litter are present at the plant.
ii. The Method Statement for Decommissioning the Batching Plant
and the Risk Analysis for Safety were provided to ERM for
review. EBWPC advised that other aspects of the
decommissioning plan are being written by EDC’s Environment Monitoring Department., however, these were not provided to
ERM for review.
iii to v. EBWPC advised that the decommissioning has already been
undertaken but no documentation is available since this was not
provided by First Balfour (the employee responsible for this is
already working on another project and is now on medical leave).
vi… Note yet started, however, EBWPC advised that this area may
Considered as achieved in June 2015
Due to the low risk to the environment/human
health now associated with this ESAP requirement,
ERM recommends that it can be closed.
decommissioning of the facility;
iv. Ensure through inspection the contractor’s proper storage, handling, and disposal of unused materials, hazardous wastes, and general refuse;
v. During the decommissioning works, conduct air quality and noise level monitoring to check impacts at nearby households; and
vi. Re-instate the area through landscaping and tree planting
now be developed with solar panels, and may not be reinstated.
Note: The concrete batching plant is located near WTG27 and the
closest receptors (with reference to the ESIA) are: R18 to the south;
R19 east; R21 north; and R14 west.
The works associated with i to v are generally considered
completed, but since no documentation is available, ERM is
unable to ascertain the environmental monitoring and
management measures which were undertaken during the
decommissioning works.
ERM visited the site of the batching plant in March 2015, and
noted that all materials had been removed but reinstatement had
not yet started. EBWPC advised that no landscaping will be
undertaken since solar panels will installed on this land.
ERM recommended that the documentation should be obtained
from First Balfour and the environmental management and
monitoring which were put in place during decommissioning of
the plant should be advised. EBWPC has advised that they have
attempted to obtain the documentation without success.
10. Security Management Plan
10.1 EBWPC should develop and
implement a Security
Management Plan to ensure the
safety of local communities,
pasture famers and tourists from
the Project (to include potential
WTG breakage and also prevent
vandalism and property damage
of WTGs)
IFC PS1,
Good
practi
ce
4Q 2014 or
prior to
operations
phase
Security Management Plan available and communicated / cascaded
Security Procedure implemented
Number of incidents of people injury at restricted area
Number of incidents of vandalism and property damage of WTGs
Site Manager to
ensure the plan is
prepared and
implemented.
Security Officer
to implement the
plan. Safety
Officer, Security
Officer and
Community
Relations Officer
to provide inputs
to the plan
A security management procedure has been developed as part of the
ESMS (MP 9).
The security management procedure includes the wind farm and
solar farm area.
Achieved June 2015
Comments on EBWPC’s draft ESMS Security
Management Procedure (MP 9) are made in previous
report.
11. Water Extraction Plan
11.1 EBWPC/its contractors should
purchase water for construction
needs
IFC PS3,
Good
practice
August 2015# Invoices for water purchases.
Conformance with action plan verified by project management inspection
Site Manager to
ensure that the
permits are
obtained by the
contractors.
EBWPC and its contractor, First Balfour, advised that water is being
abstracted from Pusuak Spring. In the Philippines, a license from
the NWRB is required in advance of abstraction of surface or
groundwater. The Contractor has reportedly obtained permission
from the local farming association but has not obtained a license from
the NWRB. In order to obtain a water permit from the NWRB, a
community resolution is required to be obtained through the
municipal government.
In October/November 2014, 97.23 m3 per day of water was abstracted
for dust suppression, construction at the substation site, watering the
seedlings during reinstatement, and for the standby fire-fighting
truck.
EBWPC advised ERM that the following has occurred since the
abstraction of water without an NWRB-issued license was first
identified as an issue in July 2014:
August 2014 – Prepared initial application to NWRB.
September 2013 – Realized that there was not enough time to
apply for a license before the end of construction.
October 2014 – Researched purchasing options but the nearest
water districts (e.g. Pasuquin) advised that they do not have the
capacity to provide water purchasing. Application made to
NWRB for the water permit for operation (refer below). EBWPC
advised that the remaining construction water
requirement is 97.23 m3 per day which is mainly for
reinstatement works.
March and June 2015- Abstraction of water is ongoing.
September 2015 – Abstraction of water is on-going from a well
in the Municipality of Pasuquin, but the water requirement is
much less since there are limited construction works remaining
and the substation.
Considered as Achieved in October 2015.
EBWPC has demonstrated their best effort to secure
a water permit from the responsible NWRB.
Application letters and fees were well documented.
11.2 EBWPC should secure water
rights permits from the National
Water Resources Board (NWRB)
for the water supply needs
during the operation phase.
EBWPC to check on progress of
the “Municipal Resolution” and
obtain permit from NWRB.
IFC PS3,
NWRB
requirements,
Good practice
August 2015# Issuance of water rights permit
Site Manager to
ensure that the
permit is
obtained and to
liaise with the
Municipal Board.
ERM understands that water requirements during the operation
stage will be 3 m3 per day (based on 30 people and for domestic use),
in addition to a 85 m3 standby fire-fighting water tank whereby the
water is changed on an annual basis. No water will be required for
operation process activities (i.e. for power generation). The fire
water tank (capacity 85 m3) will be filled and only refilled when
cleaned (i.e. once every year), or used (i.e. in case of fire). The
abstracted water will be used for domestic activities (e.g. toilet
flushing and hand washing).
Considered as Achieved in October 2015.
EBWPC has demonstrated their best effort to secure a
water permit from the responsible NWRB.
Application letters and fees were well documented
In November 2014, EBWPC attempted to apply for the permit from
NWRB but was advised that in addition to the Mayor of Burgos
(whereby permission had already been obtained), permission had
also be obtained from the Municipal Board (i.e. the Mayor, the Vice
Mayor and the Councillors). EBWPC attempted to apply the
relevant permissions, known as a “Municipal Resolution”. EBWPC
advised that as part of the reviewing the application, the Municipal
Board will hold various meetings with the various stakeholders
In December 2014, EBWPC advised that the water rights permit was
not considered by the Municipal Board, and that EBWPC was
liaising with the board for it to be discussed in January 2015. ERM
requested a further update in March 2015, but EBWPC advised that
no further information was available.
In July 2015, found that the water was being abstracted from First
Balfour’s site in the Municipality of Pasuquin. EBWPC advised that
following discussion and numerous follow-up by EBWPC with the
relevant LGUs, it is not possible to obtain the water permit for the
following reasons:
NWRB is responsible for assigning water rights, but the
Municipal Resolution for water abstractions is the
responsibility of the LGUs.
The LGU has advised that it has not issued a Municipal
Resolution for abstraction of groundwater from
wells/springs before and that EBWPC should proceed with
the abstraction (as this is what all other companies/domestic
users do in the municipality).
The LGU has reportedly indicated that proceeding with the
permit is not a priority right now as their focus is in driving
decisions with more popular feedback from the community.
EBWPC advised that water-saving measures will be further
investigated and implemented during operation (e.g. environmental
awareness training, low-flush toilets, the shower may be
removed/only allowed to be used in emergency situation).
In September 2015, ERM discussed the situation with the EBWPC and
the representative from the Financing Parties. Based on the
information from EBWPC, the water permit cannot be obtained in the
short/mid-term. ERM advised that EBWPC should provide the water
permit application for review and also retain this documentation in
case of future dispute by NWRB or the LGUs. EWBPC provided a
copy of the water permit application which had been submitted to
NWRB to ERM (no received receipt had been obtained). EBWPC
provided a copy of the letters to the Burgos LGU; the letters were
dated 28 November 2014 and a received receipt had been obtained.
12. Community Health and Safety
12.1 EBWPC should provide and
install fencing for the
transmission towers at the
Davila National High School
and Ilocos Norte Agricultural
College to prevent civilians /
students from potential injuries
IFC PS4,
Good
practice
30 June 2015* Completion of fence
Photos of fence construction and completed.
Site Manager to
ensure than fence
is constructed.
Community
Relations Officer
to coordinate
with
school/college
and contractors
EBWPC advised that the fencing work is currently at the planning
stage. The following implementation plan was provided to ERM:
Tower 027 and 028 (Davila National High School)
Tower 083 (Ilocos Norte Agricultural College) – note these are the old
tower numbers.
Schedule advised in March 2015:
1. Invitation to Bid Jan. 5-23
2. Review of Proposals Jan. 26 - Feb. 6 3. Awarding of project to local contractor April
4. Signing of Contracts April
5. Safety Orientation May
6. Construction phase May
7. Turn-over to Dep-Ed June
In June 2015, EBWPC advised that the contract had not yet been
finalised as the negotiations took longer than expected. The target
date for the contract signing was advised as September, with work
completion by November 2015.
In September 2015, EBWPC advised that the contract had still not
been signed because a competitive quotation could not be obtained.
Following discussion with ERM and the representative of the
Financing Parties, EBWPC confirmed that the work would be
completed before 31 December 2015.
In October 2015 the fenced were constructed around the towers in
concern. ERM witnessed the completion in the January 2016 site
visit.
Achieved in October 2015.
13. Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS)
13.1 EBWPC should develop and
implement an EMS which
includes ESIA mitigating
measures and compliance to
local regulations, IFC
Performance Standards and IFC
EHS Guidelines
To align with the IFC PS, the
EMS should include OH&S and
community health and safety.
IFC PS1,
Good
practice
March to April
2015 – Initial
project planning
May to June
2015 – EMS
planning
June to
November 2015
–
Implementation
November to
December 2015
– Checking and
corrective
action.
January 2016 –
Management
review*
(EBWPC to
provide
progress reports
in line with key
deliverables)
EMS available and communicated / cascaded
EMS implemented
EDC Head Office
and Site Manager
to ensure that the
EMS is
implemented.
EDC EMD
responsible for
guidance.
EBWPC
Compliance
Team responsible
for its
implementation.
EBWPC advised that they would like advice from ERM on this
action. ERM gave a presentation to Manila-based EDC staff and the
EBWPC compliance team on 17 November 2014. The presentation
included the requirements of the IFC PS on ESMS.
In November 2014, an ESMS implementation plan was advised which
in summary includes the following:
March to April 2015 – Initial project planning
May to June 2015 – EMS planning
June to November 2015 – Implementation
November to December 2015 – Checking and corrective action.
January 2016 – Management review
EBWPC advised that it intends to implement an ISO 14001 certified
EMS at the site. This would meet the requirements on PS1 which
requires that, the EMS should include documents and mechanism for:
• Policy
• Identification of risks and impacts
• Management programs
• Organizational capacity and competency
• Emergency preparedness and response
• Stakeholder engagement
• Monitoring and review
ESMS training was held at the Project site with site staff on 21-22
April 2015.
The draft ESMS was provided to ERM for review in June 2015 and an updated ESMS was provided in September 2015. ERM anticipates that with the support from EDC’s Environmental Management Department (EMD), an adequate EMS can be implemented for the project. Further support may be required from ERM to guide the EMD on the requirements of the IFC EHS Guidelines and IFC PS.
ERM recommends that EBWPC ensures that the mitigation and monitoring measures that were proposed in the ESIA are being implemented in advance of the implementation of the EMS, which may take some time to develop. These measures should be implemented from the start of operation.
The mitigation and management measures in the ESIA and ECC for both the construction and operation stages should be implemented by EBWPC.
Comments on EBWPC’s draft ESMS were made in previous report.
Considered as Achieved in January 2016
EBWPC is recommended to continuously improve and review the effectiveness of the ESMS throughout the operation period.
13.2 The EMS shall be extended to
cover social impacts and
mitigation (i.e. implement an
ESMS).
IFC PS1,
Good
practice
March to April
2015 – Initial
project planning
May to June
2015 – EMS
planning
June to
November 2015
–
Implementation
November to
December 2015
– Checking and
corrective
action.
January 2016 –
Management
review*
(EBWPC to
provide
progress reports
in line with key
deliverables)
ESMS available and communicated / cascaded
ESMS implemented
EDC Head Office
and Site Manager
to ensure that the
ESMS is
implemented.
EDC EMD
responsible for
guidance.
EBWPC
Compliance
Team responsible
for its
implementation.
Refer to 13.1 Considered as Achieved in January 2016
EBWPC is recommended to continuously improve
and review the effectiveness of the ESMS
throughout the operation period.
13.3 EBWPC should ensure that all
contractors appointed for the
operation stage have an EMS
which is consistent with the
requirements of the ESIA,
Equator Principles, legislation
applicable in the Philippines,
IFC PS and IFC EHS Guidelines
(this includes a grievance
mechanism for workers and the
community).
IFC PS1 March 2015 Contractors EMS and records
Site Manager to
liaise with
contractors to
ensure that this is
undertaken.
Vestas and First Balfour have an EMS which is developed in
accordance with ISO 14001 and ISO 18001. The ESMS incorporates a
grievance mechanism for the workers, but any grievances from the
community are to be directed to EBWPC, and EBWPC’s grievance
mechanism will be triggered. First Balfour and Vestas have specific
EHS plans for working on the Burgos Wind Project. The grievance
mechanism is communicated to contractors and the Community
Relations Officer is familiar to the contractors. It is acknowledged
that at least two (2) community grievances have been reported by the
contractors to the Community Relations Officer, who then follows up
on the grievances in accordance with EBWPC’s policy.
Sub-contractors will be required to comply with EBWPC’s ESMS.
Achieved in June 2015
The current contractors have an EMS and a
procedure for worker grievances. Grievances from
the community are to be directed to EBWPC to be
dealt with by EBWPC’s grievance mechanism.
13.4 EBWPC to implement the
EMMP from the ESIA for the
wind farm.
IFC PS1 31 March 2015* EMMP Records Program
Site Manager to
ensure that the
EMMP is
implemented.
Pollution Control
Officer and
Safety Officer
responsible for its
implementation.
Based on the initial visit, the EMMP is generally being implemented.
The EMMP is included in the draft ESMS.
Achieved in June 2015
14. Labour
14.1 Before the end of construction,
EBWPC should formulate a
Demobilization Plan to
determine how many of the
direct/indirect employees can be
retained for the operation stage
IFC PS2 February 2015 Demobilization Plan to
Employment numbers/ records for construction/o peration
Site In accordance with Performance Standard 2, it is recommended that,
where appropriate, existing skilled and unskilled employees are
retained for the operation and maintenance (O&M) of the Project.
EBWPC provided a plan which indicates the number of people
employed directly or indirectly through contracts for construction
and operation. EBWPC advised that all workers are engaged either
directly by EBWPC or its contractors and hold a short-term contract
of employment.
The majority of construction workers have already demobilized to
other construction projects.
Considered as achieved
ERM suggests that since the majority of construction
workers have already demobilized, and there are no
apparent issues regarding construction workers, that
this ESAP requirement is considered complete.
14.2 Either the EDC policy should be
updated to specifically refer to
EBWPC, or EBPWC should
develop its own policy for
to include reference to:
Employees’ rights under
national labour and
employment law; and
Non-discrimination and
equal opportunity.
IFC PS2 July 2015# EDC/EBWPC HR policy
EDC Human
Resources
department
In September 2015, EBWPC provided the Environmental and Social
Policy which had been developed specifically for the Project.
The relevant commitments made in the policy are:
Respect human rights, including employees’ rights under
national labour and employment law, and the rights of
affected communities;
Carry out activities consistent with the intent of ensuring
legally permissible equal opportunity, fair treatment, and
non-discrimination in relation to recruitment and hiring,
compensation, working conditions and terms of employment
for our workers; and
Provide a healthful and safe workplace for our people and
promote their physical well-being.
Achieved in September 2015
14.3 All new workers to have
contracts in place prior to
commencement, setting out
working conditions, terms of
employment and EHS
responsibilities. Workers
grievance mechanism to be
included in the ESMS.
IFC PS2 July 2015# Employment contracts
Site Manager and
EDC Human
Resources
department
EBWPC provided an example EBWPC employee contract and
advised that all employees, whether temporary or permanent have
contracts in place before commencing employment.
The working place and conditions are clearly set out in the contract.
Employees are required to work a 40 hour week and are paid twice
per month.
Achieved in June 2015
ERM comments that the contract includes a non-
competition clause requiring that upon leaving
employment, the employee cannot work for a
company in the same industry in the Philippines for a
period of one (1) year. Whilst there are no specific
requirements in the IFC standards regarding such
clauses, ERM comments that the contractual
requirement is quite stringent which may not be
considered reasonable.
15. External Reporting and Disclosure
15.1 To better align with the PS, the
Stakeholder Engagement Plan
and Grievance Mechanism
should be communicated
through the ongoing stakeholder
engagement (for the life of the
project). Other information
should be disclosed as required
by the PS.
IFC PS1 July 2015# Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Stakeholder Engagement Records
Site Manager to
check on
progress of the
stakeholder
engagement.
Site Manager and
Community
Relations Officer
to undertake the
stakeholder
engagement.
EDC Public
Relations
Department to
provide the IEC
materials.
In October 2014, the grievance mechanism was communicated to the
community by displaying posters on the grievance mechanism at the
municipal halls in the municipalities where the Project is located.
Revised photos were displayed in September 2015.
During December 2014, ERM discussed the Stakeholder Engagement
Plan with EBWPC and the updates that are required.
Monthly/quarterly updates on the Project are provided to the
investors.
In September 2015, EBWPC provided the final draft Stakeholder
engagement plan to ERM. ERM found that it included for on-going
stakeholder engagement with the communities, LGUs and local
NGO/CSOs.
January 2016: EBWPC provided the draft for the 2016 Stakeholder
Engagement Plan to ERM. It included an on-going stakeholder
engagement with the Lot Owers, vulnerable households to noise
and shadow flickers, local CSO/NGOs, vulnerable TL lot owners,
barangay and municipal officials.
Achieved in September 2015
The Stakeholder Engagement Plan includes for on-
going stakeholder engagement and disclosure with
the communities and NGO/CSOs.
16. Actions Required by the ADB
16.1 Formal establishment of the grievance mechanism and a wider dissemination (in the barangays) of the grievance mechanism, including contacts, timelines for grievance redressal etc.
Disseminate grievance to community residents & stakeholders, including those affected by the transmission line.
ADB’s SPS December 2015 A poster with details of the grievance mechanism is available in all barangays covered by the project.
Community Relations Officer to disseminate grievance to community residents & stakeholders through barangay officials
Site Manager, to check that action has been undertaken.
October 2014: EBWPC provided the grievance mechanism to ERM for review. EBWPC had displayed posters at the municipal halls in the municipalities where the Project is located (e.g. Burgos and the municipalities affected by the transmission line), see Annex B4. Since
stakeholder engagement had not been undertaken recently with all stakeholders, the grievance mechanism had not been communicated to all of the stakeholders (including the Affected Persons). The stakeholders were not involved in the design of the grievance mechanism. EBWPC advised that staff (including security personnel)
received informal training on how to record grievances in September 2014.
November 2014 EBWPC presented the grievance mechanism to Municipal LGU Officials and Barangay Captains at a training seminar held at a nearby hotel on from 19-21 November 2014
February 2015: EBWPC manned a tent (in addition to hosting other activities) at the Burgos Fiesta in order to communicate information on the Project. EBWPC also handed out IEC flyers, which included grievance mechanism details.
December 2015: EBWPC posted posters with details of the mechanism in 20 Barangays.
Achieved in December 2015
The community grievance mechanism has been implemented.
EBWPC provided a list of complainant’s information and follow-up action from the community stated from February 2014 and a sample of poster they presented to the community.
EBWPC should update the status of the each case and identify repeated issues and to seek for LNT & FBL feedback mechanism.
16.2 Barangay level consultations to identify and resolve any outstanding issues on land procurement, including temporary impacts during construction
Organize barangay level consultations for both wind farm and transmission line
ADB’s SPS December 2015 Records and evidence of barangay level consultations
Community Relations Officer to conduct a random household survey for barangays covered by the Transmission Line
Site Manager, to check that action has been undertaken.
December 2014 - EBWPC carried out stakeholder engagement with the barangay officials of the host barangays for the wind farm.
November 2015- December 2015: EWPC carried out stakeholder
engagement with the barangay officials of the host barangays for the
Wind Farm.
January 2016: EBWPC drafted a stakeholder engagement plan for the
year 2016 which includes on-going stakeholder engagement activities
and disclosure with the communities and NGO/CSOs.
Achieved in 2016
The Stakeholder Engagement Plan has been completed and includes on-going stakeholder engagement and disclosure with the communities and NGO/CSOs.
16.3 For all landowners with outstanding issues, provision of legal support to the landowners from EBWPC is required.
ADB’s SPS Ongoing support
Description of legal support provided to landowners
Status of lease registration including list of outstanding issues and monitoring records for closure
Perfected land documents will be proof that the landowners were able to have access to legal support
Land Team August 2012: EBWPC has developed a methodology and strategy for
land acquisition and generated a land use instrument report for both
registered and non-registered land.
November 2015: EBWPC generated the land updates for both the
Transmission line and Wind farm.
Achieved
Legal support has been continuously provided to the landowners.
16.4 Socio-economic survey of 33 households with material impact
ADB’s SPS June 2015 Socioeconomic survey
Presentation of results
Community Relations Officer to undertake the survey.
Site Manager, to check that action has been undertaken.
Survey is already done. Achieved in October 2015
16.5 Action plan in consultation with BABA on measures to be taken up for communal pasture lands.
Prepare socio-economic profile of BABA members
Planning workshop with BABA
ADB’s SPS September 2015 Consultation/workshop records.
Socio-economic profile of BABA members.
Plan agreed by BABA.
Community Relations Officer to undertake consultation with BABA and prepare the plan.
BABA to provide input to the plan.
Site Manager, to check that action has been undertaken.
A survey among BABA members was already done. Ongoing communication with BABA.
Achieved in July 2015
The Stakeholder Engagement Plan includes on-going stakeholder engagement and disclosure with the communities and NGO/CSOs.
EBWPC has also provided the socioeconomic profile of BABA and a sample of activity report dated on 10 July 2015.
16.6 Information disclosure and continued stakeholder engagement through implementation of the IEC plan of EDC.
Organize barangay level consultations
ADB’s SPS December 2015 Consultation/
workshop records.
Updated IEC plan
Community Relations Officer to conduct a random household survey for barangays covered by the Transmission Line
Site Manager, to check that action has been undertaken.
November 2014 - EBWPC presented the grievance mechanism to Municipal LGU Officials and Barangay Captains at a training seminar held at a nearby hotel on from 19-21 November 2014
December 2014 - EBWPC carried out stakeholder engagement with the barangay officials of the host barangays for the wind farm
February 2015 - EBWPC manned a tent (in addition to hosting other activities) at the Burgos Fiesta in order to communicate information on the Project. From 26-28 February 2015. EBWPC set-up an exhibition in Burgos Municipal Hall to raise the awareness on the Burgos Wind Farm.
Stakeholder engagement plan was completed as part of the ESMS.
Achieved in 2016
Records of IEC campaign and
consultation/workshops were
received.
16.7 Implementation of livelihood restoration measures to land owners affected more than 10%, including prioritization in employment opportunities, skills and capacity development training etc.
ADB’s SPS October 2015 – September 2016
Data on livelihoods
Livelihood Restoration Plan
Community Relations Officer to determine, plan and implement livelihood restoration measures.
Site Manager, to check that action has been undertaken.
Survey is already done and achieved on October 2015.
January 2016: A draft for the livelihood restoration plan is made including the proposed activities, timeframe and performance standards.
A set of household survey questions was received. The questions covered the topics of socio-economic, health and social issues.
EBWPC provided the profile of 49 TL LOT owners with the additional
information on the status or whereabouts of each of the lot-owners.
EBWPC drafted a livelihood restoration plan from February to
October 2016. It is suggested to provide a performance standard for the
proposed activities.
Achieved in 2016
Cattle dispersal was implemented and accepted by the affected lot owners. Ongoing monitoring is being done during operational phase.
* Date revised in accordance with EBWPC’s email to the Financing Parties on 18 February 2015.
# Date revised in accordance with EBWPC’s email to the Financing Parties on 14 May 2015
The following colour code has been applied in order to track the progress of EBWPC’s implementation of the ESAP: White: New action/recommendation and cannot be assessed based on current information.
Green: Completed and no further action is required.
Yellow: Completed to a certain extent, however, ERM recommends further improvement before this requirement is closed out.
Orange: On-going or partially complete but not requiring immediate action.
Pink: EBWPC has made progress in implementing the ESAP requirement, but the target date will not be met – a revised date for compliance needs to be agreed with the Financing Parties.
Red: Requires immediate action to be compliant with the terms of the loan.
No. Land Owners Location Tower No. of
Tower
Tower
Area
Total Area
(sq.m.)
Affected
Area
Significance of
ImpactSurvey Respondent
Relationship to
the LO
Result of Shortlisting
(Meeting with ROW
Patrols)
Final Validation Findings
(Face-to-face Interview with Target
Households)
For Consideration to
Livelihood Assistance
Program
1 Pedro Bumagat Brgy. Ablan,
Burgos
009 1 225.00 1,264.00 17.80% 10-49% Lydia B. Palencia Daughter Farmer, grandchildren
living with the couple
Owner of the lot is already dead,
Lydia (Pedro Bumagat's) is already
sickly, Arnulfo (husband) is
dependent on farming, limited
financial assitance from daughter
who works as an employee in a
small BPO company in Laoag City. 2
grandchildren is living with them.
*Per capita income: 2, 783
Yes
2 Isaias Aguada San Isidro,
Pasuquin
085 1 77.00 405.00 19.01% 10-49% Damaso Aguada Son Farmer, children have no
stable jobs
Lot owner is already dead; the
tenant is dependent on farming;
working family members have
unstable jobs as construction
workers, farmers and ambulant
vegetable vendors. They are all 9 in
the family with 4 school-aged
children
*Per capita income: 575 37
Yes
3 Onnagan, Tomasa San Isidro,
Pasuquin
087 1 108.00 1,080.00 10.00% 10-49% Godofredo Onnagan Tenant Farmer, children are
unemployed
Lot owner is already dead, tenant is
fully dependent on farming and is
unable to send 4 children to college.
Children have unstable jobs
*Per capita income: 2, 730
Yes
4 Sps. Antolin &
Milagros Vila
Ngabangab,
Pasuquin
088 1 225.00 957.00 23.51% 10-49% Antolin Vila LO Dependent on farming No other source of income aside
from farming, child is also a farmer
and an ocassional construction
laborer
*Per capita income: 918
Yes
5 Alfredo Cacal Corocor, Bacarra 102 1 124.00 207.00 59.90% 50-100% Wenceslao Cacal Tenant Dependent on farming Lot owner owns vast expanse of
farmlands. The tenant is dependent
on farming, wife washes clothes for
additional income, 2 children are
unemployed
*Per capita income: 2, 000
Yes
6 Reynalda S. BanciprCabaruan, Bacarra 107 38.00 305.00 12.46% 10-49% Reynalda S. Bancipra Lo owner no regular source of
income (labandera); no
children; 50+ yrs old
Washes clothes to earn a living,
husband is fully dependent on
farming a small parcel of land
*Per capita income: 666.67
Yes
Annex G - TL Lot Owners Validation
7 Carmen Cadiente Sangil, Bacarra 115 160.69 1,166.00 13.78% 10-49% Rolly Respicio Tenant Tenant, no other source of
income
Lot owner's family is well-to-do.
Tenant is dependent on farming, his
partner sells vegetables as an
additional source of income, with 3
school-aged children
* Per capita income: 2, 550
Yes
8 Adolfo & Vicenta
Lazaro
Vira, Laoag City 120 1 235.00 1,793.00 13.11% 10-49% Dante Corpuz tenant is Dante Corpuz;
farmer
Tenant is farming several hectares
of land producing over 50 sacks of
rice per cropping season (net
produce), owns 1 tractor; a jeepney
and tricycle operator
*Per capita income: 15, 250
No
9 Jose Castillo Barit, Laoag City 122 1 440.00 1,412.00 31.16% 10-49% Decy Barroga Tenant Castillo is based in San
Nicolas; tenant is farmerThe lot owner operates several
businesses in San Nicolas. Tenant
has no other source of income aside
from farming a small parcel of land.
Living with his mother who is
already very old and sickly
*Per capita income: 1, 500
Yes
10 Josefino Figuracion Tenant Tenant is a farmerLot owner owns several hectares of
land. Tenant is a farmer fully
dependent on farming as a source
of livelihood, wife works as a
janitress at Laoag City Hall, son is
unemployed
Per capita income: 9, 111
Yes
11 Roger Domingo Traffic aid and a farmer Lot owner owns several hectares of
land. Tenant works as a traffic aid,
wife works as an ocassional
household helper, washes clothes
and a manicurist/pedicurist, with 3
school-aged children
*Per capita income: 2 138
Yes
2,859.00 15.42% 10-49%Anacleto Pasion Barit, Laoag City 124 &
'124A
2 441.00
* Per capita income is based on the 2015 per capita income of Ilocos Norte which is Php13, 096
No.Name of
BeneficiaryBarangay
Baseline
Household
Income
Number of
Dispersed
Cattle
Date of Awarding
Total Number
of Calf
Produced
Total Number
of Cattles Sold
Total Number of
Cattle at
Present
Total Income Derived
from Sales of CattleAdditional Remarks
1 Arnulfo Palencia Ablan Php13, 916 1 August 11, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
2 Godofredo
Onnagan
Tabungao, Pasuquin Php16, 380 1 June 04, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
3 Damaso Aguada San Isidro, Pasuquin Php5, 178 1 July 25, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
4 Antolin Vila Ngabangab,
Pasuquin
Php2, 755 1 July 12, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
5 Rolly Respicio Sangil, Bacarra Php12, 750 1 July 11, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
6 Wenceslao Cacal Corocor, Bacarra Php8, 000 1 August 11, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
7 Reynalda
Bancipra
#10, Bacarra Php1, 333 1 August 11, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
8 Josefino
Figuracion
Barit, Laoag City 27, 333 1 August 11, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
9 Roger Domingo Barit, Laoag City 12, 833 1 November 16, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
10 Decy Barroga Barit, Laoag City Php3, 000 1 August 19, 2016 0 0 1 none yet No issues encountered by the
beneficiary.
2016 LIVELIHOOD MONITORING (CATTLE DISPERSAL)
Annex I - 2016 TL Livelihood Monitoring
Ref. No.
DATE PLACE COMPANY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE
CONTACT PERSON/ ORGANIZATION
AGENDA
1 01/5-6/2016 Brgy. Hall - Bayog, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
Debbie Sabarre/Jansen Chano
PCWS Conduct PWSRIA
2 01/07-08/2016 Brgy. Hall - Bobon, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
Debbie Sabarre/Jansen Chano
PCWS Conduct PWSRIA
3 01/19-20/2016 Burgos Wind Farm Jansen Chano PCWS Conduct Feasibility Study4 1/16/2016 EDC Burgos TenFacil Debbie Sabarre/Jansen
ChanoRoger Abad Consultation Meeting with
emphasis on the feedlot project5 1/26/2016 Palalay Hotel Conference
RoomDebbie Sabarre/Jansen Chano
GRI Team Administer GRI tool
6 1/19/2016 Paayas Brgy Hall Jansen Chano Arvin Tarun/PB Conduct PWSRIA7 1/20/2016 Burgos Wind Farm Jansen Chano Lyn Capistrano/PCWS Conduct of assessment and
technical works for the water project of EDC
8 1/21/2016 Burgos Municipal Hall Jansen Chano Lyn Capistrano/PCWS Meeting on the status of Bira Spring
9 1/22/2016 Paayas Brgy. Hall Jansen Chano Lyn Capistrano/PCWS PWSRIA10 2/1/2016 EBWPC Temfacil Jansen Chano/Col. Bani
CabanayanEngr. Minerva Pascua Meeting with Kapurpurawan
Vendors11 2/1/2016 MAO Office Jansen Chano Cheryl Ruguian/OIC Meeting in preparation for the
Burgos Town Fiesta12 2/12/2016 Municipal Operations Office
of 4Ps PasuquinJansen Chano/Deborah G. Sabarre
Cynthia Pascua/PDO II Deliver requested assistance for 4Ps Concert for a Cause
13 March 04, 2016 Nagsanga, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
Jansen Chano Brgy. Captain IEC on the Burgos Wind Power Project, Community Health and Safety and the Grievance Mechanism
14 March 04, 2016 Poblacion 2, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
Jansen Chano Brgy. Captain IEC on the Burgos Wind Power Project, Community Health and Safety and the Grievance Mechanism
15 March 11, 2016 Salpad, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
Jansen Chano Brgy. Captain IEC on the Burgos Wind Power Project, Community Health and Safety and the Grievance Mechanism
Annex J - 2016 Stakeholder Engagement Record
16 March 11, 2016 Sulbec, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
Jansen Chano Brgy. Captain IEC on the Burgos Wind Power Project, Community Health and Safety and the Grievance Mechanism
17 April 06, 2016 Poblacion, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Jeogie Jimenez Concultation on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
18 April 08, 2016 Vira, Laoag City Jansen Chano Brgy. Captain IEC on the Burgos Wind Power Project, Community Health and Safety and the Grievance Mechanism
19 April 12, 2016 Poblacion, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Joegie Jimenez Public Hearing for Burgos 4 WPP
20 April 12, 2016 Saoit, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Glen Joy Gervacio Council Presentation of the Burgos 4 WPP
21 April 15, 2016 Nagsurot, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Aprilia Aleta Concultation on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
22 April 19, 2016 Bobon,Burgs, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Joel Tesoro Concultation on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
23 April 19, 2016 Paayas,Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Arvin Tarun Concultation on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
24 April 19, 2016 Buduan, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Edwin Sallutan Concultation on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
25 April 22, 2016 Agaga, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Jameson Rabago Concultation on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
26 April 24, 2016 Nagsurot, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
AprillaAleta Public Hearing for Burgos 4 WPP
27 April 26, 2016 CENRO Bangui Jansen Chano/Rosalyn Casil Victor Dabalos Deliver requested assistance for the Regional Youth Camp
28 April 28, 2016 Bangui Municipal Hall Jansen Chano Tourism Office Deliver requested assistance for their Municipal Fiesta
29 April 29, 2016 Buduan, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Edwin Sallutan Public Hearing on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
30 May 02, 2016 Davila, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano
PB Attend Brgy. Fiesta
31 May 03, 2016 Pagali, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Christopher Lopez Council Presentation of the Burgos 4 WPP
32 May 03, 2016 Davila, Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Council Presentation of the Burgos 3 WPP
33 May 06, 2016 Agaga, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Jameson Rabago Council presentation on the Burgos 4 Wind Power Project
34 May 24, 2016 Tanap, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Judy Garcia Council presentation on the Burgos 3 WPP
35 June 07, 2016 Bayog, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
PB Rodel Dalo Public Hearing on the Burgos 3 and 4 Wind Power Project
36 June 10, 2016 Graciano's Cove, Bayog, Burgos, Ilocos Norte
CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
LMB President LMB Presentation of the Burgos 3 and 4 WPP
37 June 18, 2016 EDC Wind Farm Deborah Sabarre/Amadeo Palacpac/Jansen Chano
Marlyn Bumagat Joint Tree Planting Activity
38 Jun. 25, 2016 Tanap, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Judy Garcia Public Hearing on the Burgos3 WPP
39 Jun. 26, 2016 Pagali, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Christopher Lopez Public Hearing on the Burgos 4 WPP
40 July 5, 2016 Ablan, Burgos, Ilocos Norte CGA/Sherylie Basuil/Jansen Chano
Celerino Abad Council Presentation of the Burgos 4 WPP
41 Jul. 7, 2016 Brgys. Corocor, Cabusligan, Pasngal and Cabulalaan, Bacarra, Ilocos Norte
Jansen Chano/ROW Patrols PBs Deliver requested assistance (monoblock chairs)
42 July 21-22, 2016 Palalay Hotel Conference Room
Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano
ASOG TeamLGU
Conduct CCA-DRR Training
43 Jul. 28, 2016 Brgys. Tabungao, Sangil, Pungto and Ngabangab, Bacarra, Ilocos Norte and Brgy. Ablan, Burgos Ilocos Norte
Jansen Chano ROW Patrols Administer Economic Profiling to TL Lot owners who are beneficiaries of EDC'c Livelihood Assistance
44 Aug. 5, 2016 Red Cross HQ Jansen Chano Haydie Manalili Meeting with Red Cross on the planned CBDRR Training to 11 Brgys. of Burgos, Ilocos Norte
45 Aug. 10, 2016 PDRRM Office Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano/Justin Aliganga
Michael Benito Meeting with PDRRMC Officials for the proposed training to all MDRRMC point persons in the entire province
46 Aug. 11, 2016 Bacarra and Laoag City, Ilocos Norte
Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano
BABA Members, ROW Patrols
Inspect cattle to be purchased for EDC Livelihood support to TL Lot owners and BABA
47 Aug. 24-26, 2016 Palalay Hotel Function Room
Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano
LGU Officials of 4 barangays (Tanap, Nagsurot, Ablan and Buduan)
Community-based Disaster Risk and Management Training
48 Sept. 1-3, 2016 Palalay Hotel Function Room
Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano
LGU Officials of 7 barangays (Saoit, Bobon, Agaga, Bayog, Paayas, Pagali and Poblacion))
Community-based Disaster Risk and Management Training
49 Sept. 9, 2016 Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office
Jansen Chano Cynthia Pascua/PDO II Meeting for the planned engagement of MSWD Office and EDC
50 Sept. 15, 2016 Municipal Conference Room Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano/Bani Cabanayan/Rosalyn Arucan
SB Members, Vice Mayor Cresente Garcia and other LGU Staff
Wind Farm Tourism Project
51 Sept. 16, 2016 Bacarra, Ilocos Norte Deborah Sabarre/Jansen Chano
BABA Members, ROW Patrols
Meeting on the status of livelihood project with BABA, improvement activities for the feedlot, scouting for a possible livestock to be purchased
52 October 7, 2016 EBWPC Temfacil Josephine Garcia/BHW Federated President
FGD
53 November 11, 2016 Municipal Conference Hall DOE Info Drive54 December 19, 2016 Saoit, Burgos, Ilocos Norte Jansen Chano Glen Joy Gervacio Deliver requested Assistance55 December 19, 2016 Tanap, Burgos, Ilocos Norte Jansen Chano Judy Garcia Deliver requested Assistance
ANNEXES - 02
Table G- 2. Day-time noise level monitoring (LAeq, LA90, dBA)
January 2016
N1-2015 52.1 51.2 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 51.5 44.9 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 57.3 51.4 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 39.5 36.4 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 46.0 43.8 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 39.6 35.5 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 43.9 42.6 55 46.4 49.4
February 2016
N1-2015 52.7 50.6 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 50.4 48.9 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 50.5 48.3 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 47.0 45.4 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 43.0 40.9 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 38.5 34.5 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 42.1 39.5 55 46.4 49.4
March 2016
N1-2015 57.7 56.2 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 58.4 56.9 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 45.5 43.2 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 44.7 42.4 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 39.1 35.7 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 38.4 34.1 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 44.4 41.1 55 46.4 49.4
April 2016
N1-2015 48.5 46 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 47.9 46.3 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 51.8 45.1 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 44.3 43.8 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 57.4 48.1 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 55.2 44.2 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 46.4 48.2 55 46.4 49.4
May 2016
N1-2015 51.9 49.6 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 50.1 46.6 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 48.6 44.3 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 46.3 42 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 45.4 43.4 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 46.7 43.1 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 53.8 50.8 55 46.4 49.4
June 2016
N1-2015 58.6 55.3 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 57.4 56 55 47.9 50.9
Annex L - Noise Data Results
N3-2015 48.2 45.8 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 49.2 45.8 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 46.5 43.9 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 50.4 44.5 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 52.4 47.5 55 46.4 49.4
July 2016
N1-2015 53.9 61.5 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 52.4 51 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 51.5 48 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 48.1 45.3 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 49.1 47.4 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 46.6 43.4 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 52.7 50 55 46.4 49.4
August 2016
N1-2015 64.4 61.3 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 62.4 60.4 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 55.4 54.2 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 55 53.8 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 55.7 52.4 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 57.9 56.8 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 53.7 52.2 55 46.4 49.4
September 2016
N1-2015 43.7 42.4 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 46.4 45 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 41.8 39 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 41 37.8 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 41.9 40 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 39.4 35.8 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 44.1 41.9 55 46.4 49.4
October 2016
N1-2015 45.1 43.3 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 46.4 44.0 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 42.2 40.1 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 43.6 41.4 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 41.7 39.1 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 36.9 - 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 43.0 40.3 55 46.4 49.4
November 2016
N1-2015 54.2 53.0 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 49.6 47.8 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 45.1 42.8 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 46.7 44.9 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 49.6 47.7 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 45.0 42.8 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 53.1 51.7 55 46.4 49.4
December 2016
N1-2015 61 56.6 55 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 58.8 57.9 55 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 52.2 50.4 55 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 52.6 50.8 55 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 52.6 48.5 55 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 53.5 51.7 55 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 55.4 54 55 46.4 49.4
*The shaded values are the measurements which exceeded the IFC guideline OR the baseline +3 value for
the monitoring period noise level
Table G-3: Nighttime Noise Level Monitoring (LAeq, LA90, dBA)
Station Noise Level
LAeq
Noise Level
LA90
IFC Guidelines
Value
Baseline
Noise Level
Baseline
+ 3 Levels
January 2016
N1-2015 51.3 50.0 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 56.1 52.6 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 44.2 43.4 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 49.2 47.8 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 43.3 41.4 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 46.3 42.4 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 46.2 45.2 45 52.8 55.8
February 2016
N1-2015 52.0 50.5 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 55.2 53.9 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 51.3 47.0 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 55.5 53.9 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 40.7 39.7 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 41.7 40.6 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 43.0 41.9 45 52.8 55.8
March 2016
N1-2015 54.7 53.7 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 57.2 56.4 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 54.0 51.7 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 52.1 50.8 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 40.2 38.6 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 38.9 36.9 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 57.0 59.9 45 52.8 55.8
April 2016
N1-2015 50.5 49.4 45 51.9 54.9
Station Noise Level
LAeq
Noise Level
LA90
IFC Guidelines
Value
Baseline
Noise Level
Baseline
+ 3 Levels
N2-2015 65.3 64.5 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 65.3 62.2 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 67.4 65.8 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 55.4 52.9 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 50.3 49.6 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 52.2 50.8 45 52.8 55.8
May 2016
N1-2015 47.5 44.3 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 55.4 54.0 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 46.1 45.3 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 49.2 48.5 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 43.1 41.5 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 51.1 50.1 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 54.0 53.0 45 52.8 55.8
June 2016
N1-2015 56.0 53.4 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 59.9 58.4 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 64.4 56.3 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 59.6 58.1 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 52.8 49.3 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 61.0 54.8 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 60.0 57.7 45 52.8 55.8
July 2016
N1-2015 65.1 63.4 45 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 67.2 64.4 45 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 58.3 55.7 45 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 76 73.2 45 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 56.5 54.1 45 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 56.9 58.7 45 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 62.3 58.6 45 46.4 49.4
August 2016
N1-2015 56 54 45 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 73 67 45 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 65.8 62.9 45 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 63.9 61.1 45 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 58.7 52.4 45 57.4 60.4
N6-2015 55 52.1 45 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 No data gathered 45 46.4 49.4
September 2016
N1-2015 48.1 45.3 45 48.7 51.7
N2-2015 51.6 48.6 45 47.9 50.9
N3-2015 50.6 48.6 45 51.8 54.8
N4-2015 50.1 48.3 45 44.3 47.3
N5-2015 43.7 42.4 45 57.4 60.4
Station Noise Level
LAeq
Noise Level
LA90
IFC Guidelines
Value
Baseline
Noise Level
Baseline
+ 3 Levels
N6-2015 43.7 42.9 45 55.2 58.2
N7-2015 51.6 49.6 45 46.4 49.4
October 2016
N1-2015 57.1 55.0 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 61.1 60.8 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 52.6 52.4 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 62.5 61.8 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 53.1 50.4 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 47.9 46.2 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 54.4 52.0 45 52.8 55.8
November 2016
N1-2015 57.9 56.2 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 58.1 56.6 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 52.3 51.4 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 51.4 57.1 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 39.3 37.4 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 48.2 47.3 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 49.2 43.1 45 52.8 55.8
December 2016
N1-2015 51.9 50.8 45 51.9 54.9
N2-2015 54.8 53.7 45 49.2 52.2
N3-2015 49.4 48.0 45 59.5 62.5
N4-2015 50.0 48.6 45 57.4 60.4
N5-2015 52.3 48.6 45 49.7 52.7
N6-2015 51.5 50.3 45 59.5 62.5
N7-2015 55.6 54.2 45 52.8 55.8
*The shaded values are the measurements which exceeded the IFC guideline OR the baseline +3 value
for the monitoring period noise level
Figure G- 2. Daytime Noise Level vs Standards, LAeq (dBA)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
N1-2015 N2-2015 N3-2015 N4-2015 N5-2015 N6-2015 N7-2015
Daytime Noise Level LAeq (dBA)
Baseline
IFC Values
Baseline +
DecibelsJan-18
Feb-18
Mar-18
Apr-18
May-18
Jun-18
Jul-18
Aug-18
Sep-18
Oct-18
Nov-18
Dec-18
Figure G-3. Nighttime Noise Level vs Standards, LAeq (dBA)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
N1-2015 N2-2015 N3-2015 N4-2015 N5-2015 N6-2015 N7-2015
Nigthtime Noise Level LAeq (dBA)
Baseline
IFC Values
Baseline +
DecibelsJan-18
Feb-18
Mar-18
Apr-18
May-18
Jun-18
Jul-18
Aug-18
Sep-18
Oct-18
Nov-18
Dec-18
ANNEXES – 03
Table G-4 Summary of observed sources of noise (January 2016).
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: January 08, 2016 / Time: 10:22 AM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded was the crashing waves Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• Chicken sound
• Dog barking
• motorcycle passing nearby
Date: January 08, 2016 /Time: 23:17 PM
The most dominant source of the noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
N2 Date: January 08, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded
is continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• Chicken sound
• Cow sound
• Sound from cutting of trees activity
Date: January 08, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of
noise recorded was the crickets sound
N3 Date: January 11, 2016/Time: 10:09 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded
was the sound from Kubota in operation near the station
Other sources;
• Chirping Birds
• Rustling leaves
• Sounds from flowing water
• Chicken sound
• Person talking nearby
• Motorcycle passing nearby
Date: January 11, 2016 /Time: 23:09 PM
The most dominant source of sound recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• Sounds from flowing water
• Dog’s barked
N4 Date: January 11, 2016/Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• Vehicle passing nearby
• Motorcycle passing nearby
• Dogs barking
• Chicken sound
Date: January 11, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM
The most dominant source of sounds recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• Dogs barking
• Chicken sound
N5 Date: January 13, 2016 /Time: 12:14 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• Rustling leaves
• Motorcycle passing nearby
• Goat sound
• Cow sound
Date: January 16, 2016 /Time: 00:33 PM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• Dogs barking
Annex M - Noise Observation
N6 Date: January 13, 2016 /Time: 10:15 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the birds chirping Other sources;
• Rustling leaves
Date: January 15, 2016 /Time: 23:19 PM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was cricket’s sounds
N7 Date: January , 2016 /Time: 09:02 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• Chicken’s sound
Date: January 15, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was the cricket’s sound
Other sources
• Chicken sound
• Dog’s barked
Table G-4 Summary of observed sources of noise (February 2016).
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: February 09, 2016 / Time: 10:29 AM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded was the crashing waves Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• Chicken sound
• Dog barking
• Motorcycle passing nearby
Date: February 09, 2016 /Time: 23:17 PM
The most dominant source of the noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
N2 Date: February 09, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound
recorded is continuous chirping birds
Date: February 09, 2016/Time: 22:01 PM The most dominant source of
noise recorded was the crickets sound
N3 Date: February 10, 2016/Time: 10:08 AM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was chirping birds. Other sources;
• Chirping Birds
• Rustling leaves
• Chicken sound
• Goat sound
Date: February 10, 2016 /Time: 23:09 PM
The most dominant source of sound recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• Frog sound
• Dog’s barking
N4 Date: February 10, 2016/Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• Vehicle passing nearby
• Motorcycle passing nearby
• Dogs barking
• Chicken sound
Date: February 10, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM
The most dominant source of sounds recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• Frog sound
• Dog sound
• Motorcycle passing nearby
N5 Date: February 12, 2016 /Time: 12:02 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• Rustling leaves
• Motorcycle passing nearby
• Sound from the house construction
• Cow sound
• Sound from house repair
Date: February 13, 2016 /Time: 00:38 AM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
N6 Date: February 12, 2016 /Time: 10:14 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the birds chirping Other sources;
• Rustling leaves
• Vehicle passing nearby
Date: February 12, 2016 /Time: 23:19 PM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was cricket’s sounds
N7 Date: February 12 , 2016 /Time: 09:01 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• Chicken’s sound
• Dogs barking
• Motorcycle passing nearby
Date: February 12, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was the cricket’s sound
Other sources
• Dog’s barked
• Truck brake sound
Table G-4 Summary of observed sources of noise (March 2016).
Station Daytime Night time
N1 Date: March 02, 2016 / Time: 10:35 AM The most dominant source of the noise recorded
was the crashing waves Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
Date: March 02, 2016 /Time: 23:19 PM The most dominant source of the
noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: March 02, 2016 /Time: 09:02 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded is
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• Dog’s barked
Date: March 02, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
N3 Date: March 04, 2016/Time: 10:24 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
Date: March 04, 2016 /Time: 23:09 PM The most dominant source of sound
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Goat’s sound
• Motorcycle passed by
recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
• Rustling leaves
N4 Date: March 04, 2016/Time: 12:19 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
Date: March 04, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of sounds
recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
N5 Date: March 04, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: March 07, 2016 /Time: 23:20 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N6 Date: March 07, 2016 /Time: 10:14 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• Gocko sounds
Date: March 07, 2016 /Time: 22:09 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was cricket’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
N7 Date: March 07, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: March 08, 2016 /Time: 22:06 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the cricket’s sound Other sources
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
• Dog’s barked
Table G-4 Summary of observed sources of noise (April 2016).
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: April 05, 2016 / Time: 10:16 AM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded was the crashing waves Other sources;
• birds chirping
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
• airplane sound
Date: April 05, 2016 /Time: 23:17 PM The most dominant source of the
noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: April 05, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded is
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
Date: April 05, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the Frog and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: April 06, 2016/Time: 10:08 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded
was continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Dog’s barked
• Goat’s sound
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: April 06, 2016 /Time: 23:11 PM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sounds (not in operation)
• Dog’s barked
N4 Date: April 06, 2016/Time: 09:00 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Motorcycle and vehicle passed by 50 meters away
• chicken sound
Date: April 06, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of sounds
recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( not in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
N5 Date: April 08, 2016 /Time: 12:06 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: April 09, 2016 /Time: 00:35 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
N6 Date: April 08, 2016 /Time: 10:17 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Vehicle passed by
Date: April 08, 2016 /Time: 23:16 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was cricket’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
• Gecko sound
N7 Date: April 08, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping
Date: April 08, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Gecko sound
Other sources
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
• Dog’s barked
• Chicken’s sound
Table G-5 Summary of observed sources of noise (May 2016).
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: May 11, 2016 / Time: 10:16 AM
• The most dominant source of the noise recorded was the birds chirping
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
Date: May 12, 2016 /Time: 23:16 PM The most dominant source of the
noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: May 11, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Date: May 12, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: May 13, 2016/Time: 10:08 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Sound from videoke
Date: May 17, 2016 /Time: 23:08 PM The most dominant source of
sound recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
N4 Date: May 13, 2016/Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded were
chainsaw in operation and sound from videoke Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
• duck sound
• motorcycle passed by
Date: May 17, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of
sounds recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
• Dog’s barked
N5 Date: May 18, 2016 /Time: 11:59 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: May 21, 2016 /Time: 23:20 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sound ( in
operation)
N6 Date: May 18, 2016 /Time: 10:13 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: May 20, 2016 /Time: 22:09 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was cricket’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chirping birds
N7 Date: May 18, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• People talking
Date: May 20, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the cricket’s sound Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Frog’s sound
Table G-6. Summary of observed sources of noise (June 2016).
Station Daytime Night time
N1 Date: June 13, 2016 / Time: 10:19 AM The most dominant source of the noise recorded was the
crashing waves Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
• people shouting and talking near the station
Date: June 13, 2016 /Time: 23:26 PM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: June 13, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded is continuous
chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Date: June 13, 2016/Time: 22:01 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: June 15, 2016/Time: 10:15 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was continuous
birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Rustling leaves
• Dog’s barked
Date: June 15, 2016 /Time: 23:11 PM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound and Frog’s sound
Other sources:
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
N4 Date: June 15, 2016/Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was continuous
chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
Date: June 15, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of sounds
recorded was the continuous crickets sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
• Frog’s sound
N5 Date: June 17, 2016 /Time: 12:40 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Thunder storm sound
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: June 24, 2016 /Time: 00:43 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous cricket’s and frog’s sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N6 Date: June 17, 2016 /Time: 22:16 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the cricket’s
sound and cicada sounds Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation) Vehicle passing by
Date: June 24, 2016 /Time: 23:22 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was cricket’s and frog’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N7 Date: June 17, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: June 24, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the cricket’s sound and frog’s sound Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Table G-9. Summary of observed sources of noise (July 2016).
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: July 29, 2016 / Time: 12:02 PM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded was the bird chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
Date: July 31, 2016 /Time: 02:08 PAM The most dominant source of the
noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
N2 Date: July 28, 2016 /Time: 13:25 PM The most dominant source of sound recorded is
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
•
Date: July 28, 2016/Time: 12:33 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: July 28, 2016/Time: 14:39 PM The most dominant source of sound recorded
was continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Dog’s barked
• Goat’s sound
• People talking
Date: July 31, 2016 /Time: 02:08 AM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound and crashing waves
Other sources:
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
N4 Date: July 28, 2016/Time: 13:48 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Motorcycle and vehicle passed by 50 meters away
• chicken sound
Date: July 28, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of sounds
recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
• Frog’s sound
• Dog’s barking
N5 Date: July 29, 2016 /Time: 12:34 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling grasses
• Cow’s sound
Date: July 31, 2016 /Time: 12:41 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Frog’s sound
N6 Date: July 28, 2016 /Time: 10:33 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Cicada sounds
Date: July 30, 2016 /Time: 23:23 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was cricket’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
• Gecko sound
N7 Date: July 29, 2016 /Time: 09:08 AM Date: July 30, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM
The most dominant source of noise recorded was the continuous birds chirping
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
The most dominant source of noise recorded was the cricket’s sound
Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Frog’s sound
Table G-10 Summary of observed sources of noise (August 2016)
Station Daytime Night time
N1 Date: August 03, 2016 / Time: 14:36 PM
• The most dominant source of the noise recorded was the birds chirping and crashing waves
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
Date: August 03, 2016 /Time: 23:25 PM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chirping birds
N2 Date: August 03, 2016 /Time: 13:12 PM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was continuous chirping birds
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Tractor sound 100 meters away
Date: August 03, 2016/Time: 22:02 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Frog’s sound
N3 Date: August 03, 2016/Time: 10:19 AM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was continuous birds chirping
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Sound from videoke
Date: August 04, 2016 /Time: 22:49 PM The most dominant source of sound recorded
was the continuous cricket’s sound Other sources:
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
N4 Date: August 03, , 2016/Time: 09:07 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded were chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Tractor sounds 25 meters away
• Chicken sound
• Dog’s barked
Date: August 05, 2016 /Time: 12:01 AM The most dominant source of sounds recorded
was the continuous crickets sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
• Frog’s sound
• Motorcycle passed by 25 meters away
N5 Date: August 05, 2016 /Time: 12:03 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: August 05, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous cricket’s sound Other sources;
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
N6 Date: August 05, 2016 /Time: 10:14 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Gecko sound
• Cicada sound
Date: August 05, 2016 /Time: 23:17 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was cricket’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Frog’s sound
N7 Date: August 05, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the continuous birds chirping
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
No data gathered
Table G-11. Summary of observed sources of noise (September 2016).
Station Daytime Night time
N1 Date: September 08, 2016 / Time: 09:12 AM The most dominant source of the noise recorded was the
crashing waves Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
• people shouting and talking near the station
Date: September 08, 2016 /Time: 23:20 PM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded was crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: September 08, 2016 /Time: 10:30 AM Date: September 08, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM
The most dominant source of sound recorded is continuous chirping birds
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken sounds
The most dominant source of noise recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: September 08, 2016, 2016/Time: 09:12 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was continuous
birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
• Goat sound
• People talking
Date: September 23, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound Other sources:
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
N4 Date: September 08, 2016/Time: 02:41 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was continuous
chirping birds and ricemill in operation near the station Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 25 meters away
•
Date: September 23, 2016 /Time: 23:13 PM The most dominant source of sounds
recorded was the continuous crickets sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
N5 Date: September 09, 2016 /Time: 12:21PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: September 10, 2016 /Time: 00:43 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous cricket’s sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N6 Date: September 09, 2016 /Time: 10:26 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the chirping
birds Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Date: September 09, 2016 /Time: 23:28 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was cricket’s sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N7 Date: September 09, 2016 /Time: 09:01 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: September 09, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the cricket’s sound and frog’s sound Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Table G-12. Summary of observed sources of noise (October 2016).
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: October 10, 2016 / Time: 12:08 PM The most dominant source of the noise recorded
was the crashing waves Other sources;
• birds chirping
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• motorcycle passed by 50 meters away
• airplane sound
Date: October 24, 2016 /Time: 23:18PM The most dominant source of the
noise recorded continuous crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: October 10, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
crashing waves Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Chirping birds
• Dog’s barked
• Motorcycle passed by
• Sounds from a radio
Date: October 24, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was the Frog and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: October 11, 2016/Time: 13:38 PM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Sounds from talking people
• Dog’s barked
• People shouting
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: October 25, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of
sound recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• Frog’s sound
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
• Frog’s sound
N4 Date: October 10, 2016/Time: 09:01 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
• Motorcycle and vehicle passed by 50 meters away
• Cow’s sound
Date: October 25, 2016 /Time: 23:10 PM The most dominant source of
sounds recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( not in operation)
• Frog’s sound
• Dog’s barked
N5 Date: October 11, 2016 /Time: 12:17 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Date: October 27, 2016 /Time: 00:59 AM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N6 Date: October 11, 2016 /Time: 10:18 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: October 26, 2016 /Time: 23:26 PM The most dominant source of noise
recorded was cricket’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N7 Date: October 11, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
Date: October 26, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise
Table G-13. Summary of observed sources of noise (November 2016).
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
• Vehicle passed by
• Sounds from cutting wood
recorded was the cricket’s sound Other sources
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Station
Daytime Night time
N1 Date: November 08, 2016 / Time: 13:16 PM The most dominant source of the noise recorded
was the crashing waves Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chirping birds
Date: November 15, 2016 /Time: 23:23PM The most dominant source of the
noise recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: November 08, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
continuous chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
Date: November 15, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of
noise recorded was the crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
N3 Date: November 08, 2016/Time: 10:10 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken sounds
Date: November 21, 2016 /Time: 22:00PM The most dominant source of
sound recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources:
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
N4 Date: November 08, 2016/Time: 11:18 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
continuous bird chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Motorcycle passed by
• Chicken sound
Date: November 21, 2016 /Time: 22:00PM The most dominant source of
sounds recorded was the continuous crickets sound
Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
N5 Date: November 15, 2016 /Time: 12:10 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
Date: November 23, 2016 /Time: 00:52AM The most dominant source of
noise recorded was continuous cricket’s sound
Other sources;
Table G-14 Summary of observed sources of noise (December 2016).
Station Daytime Night time
N1 Date: December 06, 2016 / Time: 10:22 AM The most dominant source of the noise recorded was the
crashing waves Other sources;
• Chirping birds
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: December 12, 2016 /Time: 23:18 PM The most dominant source of the noise
recorded were crashing waves and crickets sound
Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N2 Date: December 06, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded is continuous
chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
Date: December 12, 2016/Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the continuous crickets sound Other source;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
N3 Date: December 06, 2016/Time: 10:15 AM The most dominant source of sound recorded was continuous
birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Chicken’s sound
• Rustling leaves
Date: December 13, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of sound
recorded was the continuous cricket’s sound Other sources:
• WTG humming sounds (in operation)
• Dog’s barked
• Gecko sound
• Motorcycle passed by
• Rustling leaves
• WTG humming sound ( not in operation)
N6 Date: November 15, 2016 /Time: 10:15 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: November 06, 2016 /Time: 22:09 PM The most dominant source of
noise recorded was cricket’s sounds
Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
N7 Date: November 15, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was
the continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
• Motorcycle passed by
Date: November 22, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of
noise recorded was the cricket’s sound
Other sources
• WTG humming sound (not in operation)
N4 Date: December 06, 2016/Time: 13:32 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was continuous
chirping birds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves
Date: December 13, 2016 /Time: 23:07 PM The most dominant source of sounds
recorded was the continuous crickets sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sounds ( in operation)
N5 Date: December 07, 2016 /Time: 12:19 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
Date: December 15, 2016 /Time: 00:39 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was continuous cricket’s sound Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
N6 Date: December 07, 2016 /Time: 22:23 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the cricket’s
sound and cicada sounds Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation) Vehicle passing by
Date: December 14, 2016 /Time: 23:19 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was cricket’s and frog’s sounds Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
N7 Date: December 07, 2016 /Time: 09:00 AM The most dominant source of noise recorded was the
continuous birds chirping Other sources;
• WTG humming sound ( in operation)
• Rustling leaves
Date: December 14, 2016 /Time: 22:00 PM The most dominant source of noise recorded
was the cricket’s sound Other sources
• WTG humming sound (in operation)
• Rustling leaves