Phase 2: Route Refinement Stakeholder Engagement
in Greece West
1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
THIS REPORT
This report presents the stakeholder engagement process undertaken as part of the route
refinement process of the Trans Adriatic Pipeline Project (TAP) in Greece.
The route refinement process was undertaken between October 2010 and April 2011 and
included three main field trips to the study area: in November and December 2010 and
February 2011 as part of the route appraisal fieldwork, and in July 2011 to disclose the
preferred pipeline route to national, regional and local authority stakeholders.
The SEP (Greece) has been divided into six phases, each with slightly different objectives
for consultation and engagement. Table 1.1 summarises the phases of the SEP Greece and
the progress to date.
Table 1.1 Phases of the SEP Greece and Progress to Date
Engagement Phase
Phase 1: pre-Scoping
Phase 2: Route Refinement (alternative route selection)
Phase 3: ESIA Scoping
Phase 4: Main ESIA
Phase 5: ESIA Finalization and Disclosure
Phase 6: Ongoing Engagement
Status
Compete
Complete
Planned
Planned
Planned
Planned
As presented in Table 1.1, the route refinement process is the second phase of consultation
for the TAP Project in Greece. The first phase involved high level consultation with
national authorities, and phases 3 to 5 will be conducted during scoping, the main ESIA
and ESIA disclosure.
1.2
OBJECTIVES OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT DURING ROUTE SELECTION
The overall objectives of stakeholder engagement during the route refinement process
were to introduce the proposed project to stakeholders and gather information pertinent
to the route selection process.
The information collected was used to complement and verify information obtained from a
desktop study and included the identification of social, environmental and cultural
sensitivities and the level of support or opposition from stakeholders towards the project.
The specific objectives of Route Refinement Stakeholder Engagement are the following:
Stage 1: Notification to Authorities and Engagement with Key Stakeholders (November 2010 –
February 2011)
•
Introduce the work of the Project team.
•
Explain TAP’s sustainability and stakeholder engagement approach.
•
Provide an overview of the field work.
•
Check completeness of the stakeholder groups identified.
•
Request their support during implementation of field activities.
•
Gain an understanding of the local population (local administration, demographics,
presence of vulnerable groups, land use, livelihoods, etc. and any specific issues at the local
level).
•
Discuss key issues and answer stakeholder questions to the extent possible at this
stage of development of the Project.
Stage 2: Verification Activities (July 2011)
•
Inform about the preferred route.
•
Validate the results of the route refinement report with the administrations and
communities affected by the selected base case.
•
Disclose the results of the assessment with stakeholders.
•
Discuss any concerns stakeholders have about the preferred route.
1.3
STUDY AREA
The TAP pipeline will commence in Greece near Thessaloniki1 and head west to the
boarder of Albania. The pipeline will then cross Albania and the Adriatic Sea and end
in Italy. Within Greece, it will run from Thessaloniki to the Greek-Albanian border in
the municipality of Kastoria. The Alternative Route Selection Appraisal of the two main
alternatives under consideration crosses two administrative regions in Greece which are
outlined below and shown in Figure 1.1:
• Central Macedonia at the eastern end; and
• Western Macedonia up to the Albanian border.
Figure 1.1
1
Route Refinement Study Area
Please note that at the time this report was developed, TAP had not yet decided to expand the project further to
the Greek-Turkish border in the East.
At the beginning of the route refinement process (end of 2010) the two regions were
administered through a number of prefectures and municipalities. However, political
and administrative changes in Greece resulted in the prefectures being repealed and
the number of municipalities reduced. This was achieved by merging and altering the
existing boundaries. This process was referred to as Kallikratis and took effect as of
January 2011. The regional boundaries remained unaffected by these changes.
2
APPROACH TO ROUTE REFINEMENT ENGAGEMENT
2.1
KEY CONSIDERATIONS
In preparing our approach to stakeholder engagement during the alternative route
selection process (Phase Two), the following factors were considered:
•
Geographic context: a 2 km corridor from each route alternative was used as the study
area and defined the administrative divisions to be engaged as well as the settlements close
to the route. The alternative corridors cross two Regions and 14 municipalities.
•
Stage of the Project: As this is an alternatives assessment process, not all
municipalities/settlements located in the 2 km corridor will be finally affected by the
project. It was therefore considered necessary to design the consultation process such that
expectations and / or apprehension at the community level were not unnecessarily raised.
•
Level of activity in the field: Several specialists undertook activities in the local area at
the same time during the field surveys. It was therefore necessary to ensure that the
relevant authorities were aware and were supportive of this activity.
•
Compliance with EBRD Standards: Engagement activities were undertaken in line and
compliance with EBRD standards and TAP’s corporate requirements.
•
Missing or unreliable data from the desktop study: Available information was collected
and considered during the desktop study. Missing information or information from
unreliable sources was noted and verified where possible by contacting relevant
stakeholders and/ or consulting local subcontractors.
2.2
STAKEHOLDER IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITISATION
According to EBRD definition, stakeholders are individuals or groups that are (i) affected
or likely to be affected (both directly and indirectly) by the Project (“affected parties”) or
(ii) may have an interest in the Project (“other interested parties”).
In view of the objectives of each phase of the engagement it is then important to define
what level of engagement is appropriate for each group in that specific phase. These
stakeholders are identified based on their likely interest in and influence over the project
within at the specific phase.
The list of stakeholders to be contacted during route refinement was detailed in the Action
Plan for Route Refinement field activities and is summarized in the following paragraphs.
3
STAGE 1: NOTIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES AND ENGAGEMENT WITH
KEY STAKEHOLDERS
3.1
OVERVIEW
Stage 1 stakeholder engagement initially focused on the national, regional and prefecture
level. It was then extended to all municipalities and to a sample of settlements within the
route alternatives corridor.
The following information was disclosed to all stakeholders met:
• Presentation of TAP, its stakeholders and commitment to high international standards
and EBRD requirements.
• Overall stakeholder engagement and ESIA process schedule.
• Objectives, study area and timing of the route refinement.
The disclosure was supported by a presentation, which was distributed to the participants
at the meetings. The maps of the route alternatives at scale 1:100,000 and 1:25,000 were
shown and analysed with the participants.
Figure 3.1
Meeting with Stakeholders - Molocha Settlement
3.2
LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT
3.2.1
National Level Stakeholders
The set of national level stakeholders engaged during route refinement is listed in Table
3.1.
The engagement was initiated through a written communication to inform stakeholders
about TAP project its status and the plan for fieldwork and to request data for the
baseline studies, where applicable. A meeting was organized with most of these
organizations between November and December 2010.
Table 3.1
National Level Stakeholders
Stakeholder
Group(s)
Departments/
Position
Ministry of
Environment, Energy
& Climate Change
Ministry of Defence
Ministry of Culture
Deputy Minister for Energy issues
Ministry of Regional
Development and
Competitiveness Ministry of
Infrastructure, Transport and
Networks
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs
Public Power
Corporation
Egnatia Highway
S.A.
Regulatory Authority for
Energy
DESFA - Natural
Gas System Operator
Engagement
Informed
Met
Director of Prehistoric and Classical
Antiquities.
Department of Large Projects
29th Ephorate of Prehistoric & Classical
Antiquities – Florina
30th Ephorate of Prehistoric & Classical
Antiquities - Eani
16th Ephorate of Byzantine Antiquities –
Kastoria
General Secretary of Investments
General Secretary
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Secretary General for International Economic√
Relations & Development Cooperation
Mines Engineering and Development
√
Department
Mining area Dirachiou 89
Mining area Kifissou
PPC Lignite Centre of West
Macedonia - Ptolemaida
High Voltage Power Lines Department
√
Thessaloniki Department
√
√
Managing Director
Technical Departments (identified by the
Managing Director)
√
√
√
√
Stakeholder
Group(s)
Departments/ Position
Inspectorate of Mines
North Greece
Director of Inspectorate of
Mines North
Greece and Engineers
(Thessaloniki)
Institute of
Geological and
Mineral Exploration
3.2.2
Engagement
Informed
Met
√
√
√
Regional and Municipal Authorities
After an administrative reform that entered into force in January 2011 and is referred to
as Kallikratis, Greek public administration was reorganised under two main levels:
regions and municipalities. The intermediate administrative level between regions and
municipalities, that was called prefectures, was repealed by the reform. The
reorganisation and redistribution of roles and responsibilities between the remaining
administrative levels is still on-going.
When TAP started to engage with the administrative units in November 2010,
prefectures were still in place. It was decided to include them in the stakeholder
engagement program in order to gather the baseline data that they held before they were
repealed.
The following table lists the regions and municipalities crossed by the route and
respective municipal capital cities. It also indicates the corresponding regional entities
names, which were prefectures before Kallikratis. These were all included in the route
refinement stakeholder engagement program carried out between October 2010 and
February 2011.
Table 3.2
Regions and Municipalities in the Study Area
Region
Regional Entity
(ex Prefectures)
Thessaloniki
Imathia
Central Macedonia
Pella
Kozani
West Macedonia Region
Kastoria
Florina
Municipalities
Capital City
Chalkidona
Alexandreia
Veroia
Naousa
Edessa
Skydra
Pella
Kozani
Voio
Eordea
Kastoria
Orestida
Nestorio
Amyntaio
Koufalia
Alexandreia
Veroia
Naousa
Edessa
Skydra
Giannitsa
Kozani
Siatista
Ptolemaida
Kastoria
Argos Orestiko
Nestorio
Amyntaio
In addition, the Regional Development Agency of West Macedonia (ANKO)
was met and informed about the project.
3.2.3
Settlements
A sample of settlements was engaged during the field survey in February 2011 to
introduce the project to the local community and collect community level socio-economic
baseline along the different alternatives and potential re- routings.
The guiding criteria used to identify settlements within the 2 km study corridor that were
visited were:
•
distance from the corridor centreline: the settlements within a 500 m corridor
were prioritized; and
•
distribution of settlements along the whole route in order to provide a broadly
representative understanding of the whole study area crossed by all alternatives sections
considered.
Meetings were held with heads of settlement in each of the settlements listed in Table 3.3.
Based on the interviews with settlement heads, settlement profiles were compiled.
Table 3.3
List of Villages Engaged by Municipality
Municipality
Municipality Capital
Chalkidona
Alexandreia
Amyntaio
Koufalia
Alexandreia
Amyntaio
Edessa
Eordea
Kastoria
Edessa
Ptolemaida
Kastoria
Kozani
Kozani
Naousa
Nestorio
Naousa
Nestorio
Orestidos
Argos Orestiko
Pella
Skydra
Veroia
Giannitsa
Skydra
Veroia
Voio
Siatista
Stakeholder Engagement at
Village level
Sklithron
Xinon Neron
Anatolikon
Chiliodendron
Klesoura
Akontion (not interviewed
but visited, abandoned
village)
Voskoxwrion
Agios Charalampos
Kalamia
Mavrodendrion
Polla Nera
Dipotamia
Pentavrissos
Militsa
Ammoudara
Aspron
Palea Likogianni
Patris
Aliakmon
Mikrokastron
Molocha
3.2.4
NGOs
Three environmental NGOs were engaged and informed about the project as key
informants on the environmental and biodiversity values of the area and of the
sensitivity of the communities towards new developments.
Arcturos was identified as the major NGO operating in the area, the Hellenic
Ornithological Society is a key informant for data on the natural environment and the
Club of Friends of the Environment was indicated and invited by the Municipality in
Kastoria.
A wider NGO engagement is foreseen in the subsequent phases of the disclosure and
consultation.
3.3
CONSULTATION OUTCOMES
Generally municipalities engaged indicated that they would welcome the pipeline
through their municipality in order to realise potential benefits associated with the
project. In particular expectations were expressed about compensation for land
easement and acquisition and the possibility to receive and use gas in the region.
A thorough consultation mainly with the Public Power Corporation was dedicated to
addressing the issue of lignite mines and their potential crossing (see Figure 3.3). It was
confirmed that the selected alternatives are not interfering with areas of development
of lignite mines.
A summary of the main local issues collected along the different alternatives is
provided in Figure 3.3 which also locates these issues on the map.
The issues identified during stakeholder engagement feed into the route refinement
process and ESIA studies and will be addressed through re- routing or identification of
appropriate mitigation measures, subject to further consultations and disclosure.
A summary of the issues identified and actions to be undertaken to follow up is
provided in Table 3.4.
Table 3.4
Main Issues Identified during Route Refinement Stakeholder Engagement
Issue Description
Issue
Stakeholder
Group
Proposed Follow up
Action
Underground irrigation
channels Alexandreia
The agricultural area of Alexandreia is
served by a vast irrigation system,
installed 1-2.5 m below ground level
functioning between April and
October.
Alexandreia
Municipality
Take into account the
irrigation system and its
seasonality for
construction and
reinstatement planning to
minimize interference.
Include in route
refinement reporting.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Information shared with
technical team to include
in route refinement
reporting if appropriate.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Wind farms on Vermio
mountain
A large wind farm project is proposed
by ENTEKA – ACCIONA on the peaks
of Vermio (at heights up to 2400 m).
The estimated location for the
proposed 528MW wind farm has been
identified between the city of Kato
Gramatikon and southwards towards
the city of Kato Vermion.
Industrial park planned A 200 ha industrial park has been
and road in construction discussed for the area south of PollaNera.
The road Naousa – Veroia – Patrida –
Skydra has been partially constructed
(till Patrida) while another part
remains in blueprints. Project ran out
of financing several years ago and is
viewed as unlikely to continue soon.
Wind farm projects and Wind farm projects are planned in the
urban expansion at
Municipality of Veroia (Altenative S0),
Veroia
directly along Section 11. Expansion of
Veroia has occurred (Sections 11 and
12). As such re-routings 5 and 6 are
considered a good alternative to avoid
conflict.
Crossing of PerdikkasFurther urbanization is planned along
Ptolemaida road
the road Perdikkas-Ptolemaida
(Alternative N2) north of Ptolemaida.
No urban plans are available for the
area but according to the Greek Law
the land along national roads is
considered “constructible”.
Wind farms at
A windfarm project is being discussed
Anatolikon
for the area along the ridge near the
village of Anatolikon (Alternative N1).
The EIA was not yet submitted.
District heating
Kozani is heated by district heating
from power plants north of the
pipeline- three pipes cross under the
road and the intended pipeline route.
Edessa
Municipality
Skydra
Further evaluate plans
for industiral
development through
ESIA. Follow up with
municipalities for road
route plans.
Information shared with
technical team to include
in route refinement
reporting if appropriate.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Eordea
Municipality
Include in route
refinement reporting.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Anatolikon
Village, Eordea
Municipality
Verify position and stage
of development of the
project during ESIA
studies.
Information shared with
technical team to include
in route refinement
reporting if appropriate.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Kozani
Municipality
Issue Description
Issue
Industrial area
DrepanonMavrodenndrion
An industrial area is planned along the
road between Drepanon and
Mavrodendrion on the Alternative S0.
Army camps
Army camps are located at
Mavrodendrion village (Alternative
S1) and Nea Nikopolis village
(Alternateive S0) in the municipality of
Kozani.
Underground water pipe Underground pipes bringing water
from a dam in the southwest to the
city of Siatistra and other major
population centres in the municipality
cross both southern pipeline routes.
Underground irrigation An underground irrigation scheme
scheme
was indicated in the area between the
village of Molocha and the river
Aliakmonas.
Water supply reservoir
Underground water pipes from a
Pentalofos
reservoir in Pentaolofos (south west
from the study area) supply Siatista,
Aliakmon, Mikrokastron and others in
the area crossing Alternative S0.
Stakeholder
Group
Include in route
refinement reporting.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Mavrodendrion
village, Nea
Nikopolis
Village
Further evaluate through
ESIA. Continue
communication with the
military on potential
military sites along the
route.
Consider this information
Voio
Municipality
in technical reports.
Obtain the route plans of
the water pipes at a later
project stage.
Molocha Village Located on S1Alternative.
Siatista town,
Aliakmon
village,
Mikrokastron
village
Cultural heritage
findings
Potential archaeological findings
directly on the Alternative S0 corridor
between Pentavrissos and Ipsilo.
Orestida
Municipality
Mink farms
Approximately four mink farms are
located along Section 2 of the route.
These are an important source of
employment and income for villages
in the area. Minks are reportedly
sensitive to noise and could be
impacted during construction
activities.
Municipalities officials identified
several potential archaeological sites,
including one along S0 near
Pentavrissos that is not on the existing
CH map.
Kastoria
Municipality
Cultural heritage sites
Proposed Follow up
Action
Information shared with
technical team to include
in route refinement
reporting if appropriate.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Information shared with
cultural heritage team.
to include in route
refinement reporting if
appropriate. Further
evaluate through ESIA.
Further evaluate through
ESIA.
Information shared with
cultural heritage team to
include in route
refinement reporting if
appropriate.