RP762 v17
KOZAN HEPP
SER-ER ENERJI ELEKTRIK URETIM
A.S.
REPORTING FORM FOR LAND
ACQUISITION
REPORTING FORM FOR LAND ACQUISITION
SER-ER ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş.
1. Information About Project
Name &Location of Sub-project
KOZAN HEPP located in Kozan village,
committed to Adana province.
Project Sponsor
SER-ER ENERJİ ELEKTRİK ÜRETİM A.Ş.
4,365,106 USD
2 unit*2.335 MW/unit=4.67 MW
Pre-permission from Ministry of Environment
and Forest For Construction Facilities HEPP
Building Lands Belongs to General Directorate
of State Hydraulic Works.
Project Cost
Installed Generation Capacity
Key Dates of Implementation
General Information
The Project was built at the downstream of
KOZAN dam and it utilizes the stream of the
dam. It’s over the Ceyhan river basin. KOZAN
HEPP has been constructed by General
Directorate of State Hydraulic Works for the
purpose of irrigation and flood protection. All of
the land which the project is built on belongs to
General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works.
Hydraulic energy is converted into electrical
energy by the help of 2 x 2.335MW Francis
turbines.
2.Inventory of Land & Assets Acquired from Private Owners
Name of Owners/land user
No land is acquired from prom private owners.
Project Component: Area(s) / plots(s) acquired (ha)
-
Owner’s/user’s total land holding (ha); % taken for project.
Land use: pasture, agriculture, residence, etc.
-
Inventory of any structures or other fixed or productive assets
(wells, fences, trees, field crops, etc) affected.
-
Indicate if land was rented or informally used by another party.
-
Indicate if non-owner users had assets, trees, crops, etc affected
-
Indicate if land-based activity is primary source of income for
owner or land user.
Compensation paid.
-
Dates delivered.
-
Impact on income of owner.
-
-
2.1. Inventory of Land & Assets Acquired from Private Owners (completely volunteer purchased)
Name of Owners/land user
No land is acquired from private owners.
Project Component: Area(s) / plots(s) acquired (ha)
-
Owner’s/user’s total land holding (ha); % taken for project.
Land use: pasture, agriculture, residence, etc.
-
Inventory of any structures or other fixed or productive assets
(wells, fences, trees, field crops, etc) affected.
-
Indicate if land was rented or informally used by another party.
-
Indicate if non-owner users had assets, trees, crops, etc affected
-
Indicate if land-based activity is primary source of income for
owner or land user.
Compensation paid.
-
Dates delivered.
-
Impact on income of owner.
-
-
3.Inventory of Public, Community, or State Land Acquired
Land parcels / plots acquired (ha).
Land type / land use: Forest, commons for grazing, other.
Ownership: State, community, other.
4.696 m2
Forest
State. No structure or other fixed assets.
Structures or other fixed assets.
Compensation, land transfer, or other measures to mitigate
impacts on land users. Specify measures and dates of delivery.
Not applicable for this project. Land belongs to
Government.
4.Public Awareness, Consultations, and Communication
In order to exchange views and give information on the possible effects of the project a public meeting was
arrenged on 11 July 2010 in Durmuş village. Also during the consultation the owners of the land users were
informed about areas that would be taken both from the private owners and government. There were no concerns
raised at the meeting. Because the land users have no economical and social loss.
5.Status of Land Acquisition
Pending Court decision
Completed
On-going
Follow-up
X
6.Other Measures or Assistance provided (beyond cash compensation)
Beneficiary(s)
Relocation assistance
Alternative Land
Livelihood restoration measures
-
Summary of impact addressed
-
7.Identification of Vulnerable People
Beneficiary
Method of identification
-
Assistance or other measures provided.
-
8.Grievance Redress
Mechanism(s) made available for project-affected persons to
register grievances or complaints.
It was announced that project affected persons (if
any) could register complaints to the construction
site manager directly or by the village headman.
Up to now no complaints were received.
No affected people.
Were affected people made aware of grievance redress
mechanism? If so, when and where?
Was the grievance redress mechanism easy to access and free of Yes.
cost to affected parties?
Was an independent third party engaged in facilitating
The village headman.
grievance redress. E.g.: community leaders, NGOs, or other
mutually-respected independent parties.